VideoPoints

• ••• • •• • ••••• • •
GEOL7325 Petrophysics and Formation Evaluation - Day5 10-13-23
Help Tour
© Distribution of this video is restricted by its owner
Transcript ×
Auto highlight
Font-size
00:00 If you remember from the SP log we got the vero from the
00:10 the acoustic log, neutron and density with the density. He actually did
00:15 exercise on that one. He had homework on RW. So what are
00:21 left with an Archie equation? Need tea yet? That's what we're gonna
00:31 about today. How do we get ? And then the last thing we're
00:35 talk about, I guess tomorrow will , how do we get M and
00:39 ? How do we determine those? do we relate those to the
00:43 That's the last thing we'll have an related to that one too. Um
00:50 for some reason seem to find that a little complicated. So it's worth
00:54 it in class exercise. The in exercise we have today is on the
01:00 scan exercise. And so that's just of an iteration of several techniques,
01:05 plots, single plots RW, eight to uh to basically get the parameters
01:14 from logs, doesn't work very And you work your way around this
01:18 in the exercise we're gonna talk about . You have a hand out about
01:23 So that one's kind of fun and a little bit interesting about how that's
01:27 work. So, first thing, do we get our tea? So
01:33 the true resistivity. If you remember Archie equation, that's the one we
01:39 plug in, that's the actual activity the uh undisturbed formation where we haven't
01:47 it. So we're gonna talk a bit about basic logs, not very
01:51 . And then we basically have two of muds. We have to deal
01:55 either a high salinity mud or a conductive mud or a nonconducted mud,
02:01 have gotten more and more popular. we're gonna run lateral logs and the
02:06 conductivity muds, high salinity muds. then in fresh water, uh oil
02:11 muds, we're gonna run induction bombs we'll see why. In just a
02:16 , we'll talk a little bit about three kinds of logs, main,
02:19 logs, a little bit about uh more modern generation logs that kind of
02:25 us more detail, more detailed Oh, so that's where we're
02:35 Get rid of this, I Oh, ok. Um So we'll
02:52 with the older logs just because they're simple. This is a lot like
02:56 talked about uncompensated tools. There are generations of these tools were pretty difficult
03:03 interpret. You don't run into them . Uh At all these latter
03:10 uh at least the last 10 I know it's got the wrong
03:18 So these lateral logs you really don't into that much more even historically.
03:23 , then we'll talk about the lateral and then a logs, oil based
03:29 . Uh, actually people run uh, in gas. Why would
03:33 not put mud in a well? when would you get away with
03:38 I just told you how you needed do that not long ago. Why
03:42 needed to do it the last So in very, in tight gas
03:47 you have very lif rocks, you sometimes get away with that. The
03:52 you don't want to use a water mud is you'll get pore blockages related
03:57 that. They're water wet, you'll up with water in the pores and
04:00 you get this high skin that you . And it's really tough to remediate
04:06 good luck. In fact. So was actually kind of a big breakthrough
04:10 people were looking for basin centered et cetera, hear much about that
04:17 anyways. So here's kind of a look at the tools. Uh And
04:22 old tools are back here. These the latter logs that I was talking
04:27 , et cetera. And then we , um, to the LA
04:32 which are again the ones that we're use in conducted muds. And then
04:36 have induction logs, etcetera, kind these later generation logs, uh All
04:41 them. So they, they've had generations of all these tools the only
04:47 thing about the lateral is you can build analytical models to look at you
04:54 I would add that to the probably wouldn't add it to this
04:57 But for the engineers, I might do that. So the main difference
05:01 I've mentioned already is freshwater muds versus muds, run the wrong tool.
05:07 not gonna get very good data at . Uh Companies will run you the
05:12 tool if you ask them to. , you, you should know something
05:16 it. And then we're gonna talk 3d Trax tools and array induction
05:21 Just a lot more, just like the tools we've gone to more
05:25 uh more excitation coils, things like a little bit. This is the
05:33 of a short of a normal. this one you can see why it
05:37 be an issue. We, we actually uh we have a something that's
05:43 the current. We have a measuring and we actually are measuring the potential
05:49 the way to its purpose. And problem with it is you're getting influenced
05:53 everything that goes on all the way to the, all the way up
05:58 . I mentioned it. It's fairly but really didn't work very well.
06:05 , right, environmental effects and surrounding corrected for it was pretty tough to
06:12 this tool. So what they did uh next generation of tools is and
06:22 really don't have to worry about So I'm not gonna spend a long
06:25 on, right. What they did they moved this uh this other electrode
06:31 down to the typical that meant is you didn't get interference from all the
06:36 up to the surface. So that was a fairly big help. Uh
06:43 still, we can do better than uh help us get thinner cauc with
06:49 . Again, we're not averaging a of, a lot of what went
06:52 the way up to the surface. . No, nobody uses these
06:57 So it was pretty uh pretty broad , right? It's all pretty deep
07:04 . Wasn't very good. Yeah. a lot of problems you could very
07:11 what this note means is that in very old Russian blogs, you might
07:16 see this but they're not running them either. So how do we make
07:22 choice? And uh what it's telling is RMF versus RW. So how
07:33 is my mud versus my formation And when we have conductive mud,
07:41 is here, right? My resistivity mud filtrate is small compared to
07:46 then we can use the lateral log I mentioned. And uh when it's
07:51 resistant, we can use induction. . That's the main idea behind
07:56 that this, that, that and gonna go through in detail with why
08:00 is just a second. And what is about the tools, what the
08:05 is right. So again, more tools, right, uh which are
08:10 like this. And the only thing really interesting about this is that uh
08:18 had very high resistivity, right? uh You actually get a zone
08:23 where you can run uh the other , this is for the array induction
08:29 . Again, it's, this makes sense. Uh This charge is related
08:34 RT versus uh your uh resistivity of mud, which is really the contract
08:41 looking at the problem of these tools that the hole will interfere significantly
08:47 if we use a resistive mud for latter role or do you use uh
08:54 you can't get the current through the or in the induction log because it's
09:00 a current, right? The conductive drive it crazy duction log. See
09:06 and more interest as we go more more to oil based muds.
09:12 the main thing was, yeah. that the lateral log you actually can
09:18 , uh you can use here that's just because um I'll tell you
09:22 the geometry, you can go back look at it. This is basically
09:27 same chart. But again, it's tools. This is Schlumberger is a
09:31 induction tool and it's when there's I guess Gray induction, right?
09:40 Gray Induction instrument or something. I , I don't know what this one
09:45 , right? But very similar to other one just because of the way
09:48 works again later, logs similarly. the latter log for conductive portals,
09:57 want we're gonna start here uh and to motivate what's going on. And
10:02 is the idea of what an integrated factor is. So this is when
10:10 want to ask questions on because sometimes is confusion about it. What this
10:14 is the apparent resistivity that the tool reading ac A this is that's
10:21 sorry, it's the apparent conductivity, ? So that's what the tool is
10:27 . OK. This one is the in the blush zone that we've talked
10:32 , right? And there's this geometric which has to do with the depth
10:37 investigation of the tool. And then the true connectivity which is the number
10:43 want and then one minus this geometric related to that couple of things to
10:49 about this, we are adding we're basically adding a weighted connectivity of
10:56 flush zone and the true resistivity. what would that mean? When do
11:03 add connectivity for parallel or series models in series? The net resistance is
11:16 sum of the resistance, right? resistors current going through one has to
11:21 through the other one parallel model, would add the connectivity and that's because
11:26 voltages are the same for us. , we talked about uh varying models
11:33 before when we talked about permeability. you remember this immediately tells you that
11:40 tool is seeing the flush zone in with the deep zone. The true
11:49 in general for the induction log immediately , the borehole is in parallel with
11:59 formation. The plush zone is in with the herb zone. And all
12:06 layers in the formation are parallel with other to this to right, the
12:13 is the mantra. You're all asking why uh the other thing I have
12:23 a chart in this, I'm gonna back to it in a second.
12:28 ? Why is that? Because it's words, you and this is very
12:33 cartoon of how it works. We a transmitter, we have a
12:38 And what happens is it transmitter, in the borehole? All right,
12:47 the formation around the bore hole in circle around the bore like that,
12:54 ? So what that means is that you have a very conductive mud,
12:59 gonna induce all of the current in mud. So this is why it's
13:05 , right? Conducive muds are bad this tool because the plural is in
13:11 . If I have a very conductive , for a safe parallel model,
13:15 current wheel go where it's easiest to . It has a choice.
13:21 uh this thing works perfectly well. fact, the best and very resistant
13:26 . So oil based mudd, this loves it. Yeah, loves oil
13:30 mud. In the Gulf of we'd be actually uh in, in
13:36 Gulf of Mexico we actually went from high salinity muds and lateral.
13:42 you had a question. The actually, the, the current is
13:50 around the borehole. Like this vertical , the current is induced around the
13:56 . So it will go wherever it's able to go. So, if
14:01 mud is very conducive, you'll you'll have large bore hole effects.
14:05 you current in the boreal, you'll short this tool out. You have
14:10 little sensitivity to the formation. Then you can also see that near
14:18 borehole like here, draw the near borehole. Yeah, this is the
14:29 , right? This is the current the bore going something like this,
14:34 ? Like blush stone is out Yeah. And then my undisturbed zone
14:40 out here. Ok? Then my layering looks like this. So maybe
14:48 asking yourself how everything ends up in . You have to ask yourself,
14:53 there a choice right? For where current could be induced? So
14:58 we have the mud here, conducted . All of my current would be
15:02 the borehole, right? Not what want. So if I make this
15:07 resistive, then the current has no but to be induced in the
15:13 But then you would get significant amounts current kind of out here deeper,
15:19 ? Like that. And there will current induced everywhere, which is uh
15:25 us back to the previous slide that gonna go back So some of the
15:29 will be induced in the flesh some of the current will be induced
15:33 the deeper zone. Yeah, but are in parallel. Again, they
15:37 a choice. In addition, if look at the layering, you can
15:43 current in each of these layers, . So they also are in
15:49 The current has a choice of which . So that one of the big
15:54 with this tool is you will be will happen is that very conductive zones
16:01 actually dominate the response tool. That's all the current will end up.
16:06 in thin beds, typically where we high oil status, the sands will
16:12 much higher resistivity than the shales. you will tend to be more sensitive
16:17 the shales than you will the This tool really has some issues in
16:24 beds with conductive shale. We talk various ways to get around that.
16:30 what does this mean? Then what GD? I actually, if I
16:36 to plot through this for you think in here. But I I show
16:41 to you again anyway, if, , if we have the geometric factor
16:46 ver versus the percentage of the tool , uh This, this G factor
16:52 gonna look something like this and I I have this la later. But
16:59 this is telling me the G tells what percentage of the tool's response comes
17:05 a depth less than is plotted So we go from zero, which
17:12 be close to the borehole wall to 100%. So, are we clear
17:20 this what this means? Sometimes students confused. It is just an
17:28 It's an integrated geometrical factor. It's us back to my pen. It's
17:40 us what percentage of the tool So what you would like would be
17:45 a deep breeding tool for a switch or a deep reading tool, you
17:58 like this thing to look like that medium reading tool is gonna look something
18:03 that. When I drew, then shallow tool is gonna look something like
18:08 and they all go to 100% of response up here. Again, you're
18:15 to the total response of the So as you integrate the response as
18:20 function of distance away from the right, you will ultimately get 100%
18:25 the tool response. And then the is deeper eating tools we'd like to
18:30 more sensitive out here. A shallow tool. For example, this 1
18:35 of the tool response comes in a shallow distance away from the borehole
18:41 This went a little deeper and this even deeper and we'll talk about what
18:45 numbers are in a second. I I have this picture. So that's
18:51 how they work. It measures somewhere 20 Klotz to 100 and 50
18:56 there's a reason for that. they actually you're trying to get to
19:02 low frequency connectivity which is less affected what's called dielectric dispersion, right?
19:12 the connectivity will be a function of . But as you get up into
19:17 megahertz range, 10 megahertz 100 these are the tools that are now
19:23 there. They they, they are about major dielectric constants. So you
19:28 see a phase difference between the in and out of phase components. So
19:34 will hear about those, we can a couple of days talking about those
19:39 if we want. But that's one the things that I don't have time
19:45 so 20 kilohertz to 100 and 50 . So more modern tool.
19:50 that one is just cartoons, you multiple receivers, you have multiple transmitters
19:56 so you're looking both ways you're transmitting all these uh between all these transmitters
20:02 receivers. And how you actually interpret in terms of a resistivity requires people
20:09 finite element modeling. Yeah, it on the connectivity of the world,
20:14 on the goal diameter, depends on connectivity of the beds, the thickness
20:18 the beds, et cetera. All the uh major companies at least used
20:24 have somebody who did this. Uh now it's all left up. The
20:28 problem is largely considered solved. So again, you could call this
20:36 in the lock, right, multiple , multiple receivers. It's all about
20:47 to get shoulder down. So this the chart I'm looking forward to
20:51 This is my geometric factor versus diameter a distance away from the borehole
20:57 We're not gonna worry about skin Then uh we're going to define
21:04 If you remember the porosity locks, what we called our, we had
21:10 very similar. I would remember, , we, we had a fraction
21:13 the tool response that came within a depth. Uh So this isn't a
21:18 concept here, but there we use here. We use 50%. Why
21:26 that? I can tell you what guess is, but I'm not sure
21:34 get it, buddy. If you 50% for a density log, you
21:40 end up with something like one inch of investigation for the tool. So
21:45 much rather define it as 90% or get a couple inches in. I
21:51 it just spins a bunch of batter . Uh The important thing here is
21:56 50% the uh deep induction is seeing like 120 inches. It was bad
22:07 feed and a distance away from the wall. The medium induction,
22:15 it's here that's seeing something like half that 60 inches in 5 ft.
22:22 then you always have a shallow which is much shallower like this
22:27 So it's, it's much shallower and only seeing a few inches in
22:31 So the, so the shallow reading uh is, is meant to
22:37 be dominated by the flush zone. medium tool is meant to measure a
22:44 of the flushed and heat zone. the deep tool is a lot of
22:51 , most of the time dominated by formation. And RT, why do
22:58 wanna have those three measurements? Our invasion model involved. How many
23:10 what were they RXO depth of invasion RT how many measurements do we need
23:21 measure those three things? Great. you, you, you always run
23:28 of these logs. Fact, the trend that we'll talk about briefly is
23:33 out of the array. In, example, you get something like seven
23:38 depths of investigation for the poor. they actually can model things in much
23:43 detail. Part of that is probably amount of data you can get a
23:47 of that is computing power. It's way better back in the foot all
23:52 , right? All right. So it clear medium c something like 60
23:58 ? Which, well, I'll show in a second, it's gonna only
24:01 maybe six or eight inches and then twice that. So they're roughly factors
24:06 two that we see. How do correct again, you, uh it
24:12 make sense for conductive muds and large . This thing, that's when this
24:17 has a problem, right? The the diameter of the borehole, the
24:22 the borehole is going to influence the , the more mud you have more
24:28 , the mud, the more the . So, correcting for borehole effects
24:33 how that changes, right. Uh readings you get from the tool will
24:38 related again with, with the high mud. It's not nearly as sensitive
24:46 conducting muds get more conductive. Then shallow tool is a spirit focused
24:53 We add it to the medium and and this allows us to use a
24:58 chart. You're gonna get, you're get a chance to use some of
25:02 in a second. So we have deep medium and the SFL focus blog
25:08 pretty standard combination. The SFL is bad tool. The whole idea is
25:14 get RT because again, all of tools are influenced by the different zones
25:21 varying increase activity. We need to those effects to get a better reading
25:27 RT, which is what we want plug into Archie's equation. OK.
25:33 is a look at the SFL but they have is multiple guard electrodes,
25:38 electrodes and, and they force the to be a fairly shallow zone.
25:56 this is the SFL depth of there's several types of the SFL uh
26:01 locked eight and a 16 inch And you again, you can see
26:05 50% right. It's true for it . So it's, it's about half
26:10 the medium, right? So we 30 61 20 is the de
26:18 So, so I would ask you think about what happens if my invasion
26:24 further and further into the formation, is always dominated. The SFL is
26:31 dominated by the blush zone. the medium is the one that really
26:38 averaging over the plush zone and deep the deep is dominated by the true
26:45 , but it still is affected by . So what would happen to my
26:49 measurement as my invaded zone got deeper deeper? Here's a, here's a
27:05 at that, right? You can various ranges, right? These,
27:09 are my three tools, right? the dash curve is the deep,
27:14 medium, right? It's this dotted in between and the SFL is actually
27:20 guy out here. So which is the highest resistivity. Yeah,
27:32 Why does it read a higher We are using a fresh water
27:39 Yeah. So we are invading with our mud filtrate is high resistivity.
27:46 what will, what would happen if invasion was quite small? What what
27:50 happen is right? This thing is gonna read the flush but my medium
27:55 read close to my teeth. And as my flush zone gets larger
28:01 larger, what will happen is my will start to be dominated more and
28:06 by the flush zone. So it tend to move towards my shell.
28:13 the argument here what I'm hoping to you of is based on where the
28:19 is relative to these two, You're gonna get a pretty good idea
28:23 how, what my diameter is A . I also am gonna get a
28:28 good idea what my flush zone And then by looking at how this
28:34 , how much this is affected by invaded zone, I can correct
28:39 So it's enough measurements to allow me actually correct for invasion. Some of
28:47 , some of the how much it's can depend on the contrast between my
28:52 trade, right? And my RW . So all, all of that's
28:57 matter. So you can see, ? Uh You can get ideas so
29:02 can clearly see these are the We put a shale baseline on
29:06 I don't know if I do that . Put a shale baseline on
29:09 You can see that gee my invasion pretty minimal in the shales, which
29:14 of makes sense, right? Very permeability. And then where I get
29:19 lot of invasion are in my sands here here the same that, but
29:29 can see the invasion here. My medium is reading closer here. So
29:34 is a poorer sand. So you get some sort of idea about what
29:39 wow, what the invasion is. other thing I think is interesting,
29:46 made a mistake before. Uh Most would say I have large invasion wear
29:55 permeability or low permeability, high ferocity low ferocity. Ok. That was
30:08 , that's actually correct some of the , particularly for oil based muds.
30:14 actually is largely true for water based . However, most of them where
30:20 build a mud cake, most of models would claim the diameter of invasion
30:25 more related to the porosity than the . Why is that because it's the
30:32 cake you build up on the borehole that actually limits the permeability, limiting
30:37 rate, right? It's the lowest lower than the permeability of the
30:44 So if the mud cake is dominating low porosity for a given amount of
30:49 , it's gonna go deeper in the porosity zone than the high porosity.
30:55 is another case where models rule, ? What's my model? What's the
31:01 factor? And I know I have the mistake of using that water based
31:09 model and an oil base. And you get it completely wrong. You
31:14 at the core where you see it's is in the high permeability zone.
31:22 the higher velocity. That's because you don't build significant mud cakes in a
31:28 based mud. In fact, I bet or half the book and got
31:35 wrong. You could look at the and tell where the permeability was better
31:40 through the core. Well enough, obviously didn't, I was just looking
31:44 invasion depths of invasion on the but you could clearly see. All
31:51 . So we all know why we make three resistivity measurements. Yeah.
31:58 we know what we're trying to We're ultimately trying to get RT to
32:02 it into Archie's equation. Yeah. so how do we do that?
32:11 . Are the sands permeable? They some permeability because we are invading that's
32:21 to the spread. And you can where the mud cake is,
32:25 Mud cake forms in the sand. a pretty nice indicator of where my
32:31 is too. And we have an response. So this is how we
32:43 solve for. That. Looks right? Uh It's actually not as
32:49 tornado chart, uh actually makes some , right? Looks kind of like
32:54 tornado, right? Uh How do read this? This is actually the
32:59 of three different charts. I have measurements. I wanna determine three things
33:07 I can do that off all three those. I have the diameter of
33:11 which are these so 15, 2025 40 50 60 et cetera inches.
33:19 the vertical dash lines. OK? have the RXO two RT, which
33:25 these numbers here. So that's uh two, factor 357, et
33:32 And then we have basically the ratio RT two R deep, which are
33:37 finally dotted curves. Sometimes it's nice have these charts actually in color,
33:44 them easier to read, right? how do we use them, these
33:49 the measurements we're making here. We , the deep, the medium,
33:53 deep. And so we enter this , right? We take our medium
33:59 by the bar deep and then we that here. And so what,
34:03 do you see? Right? As ratio of medium deep gets bigger,
34:08 diameter of invasion is getting bigger. . Right. And so as we
34:16 , right, pretty much what's gonna is you're gonna move RSFL isn't gonna
34:21 because you're always reading it the flush . So what what will happen is
34:27 ratio of RSFL to RT? at least for a while, I
34:31 relatively constant, you just move across chart. OK? And then what
34:35 happen is right? My ratio, medium, what's gonna happen? Like
34:39 said uh um to that, Because because my my medium will be
34:47 my shallow, right? Um So actually be moving that way as they
34:54 my diameter invasion is gonna go up , as I have. So
34:59 let's take an example. We just those ratios. We finally do curs
35:08 deep and we simply solve for our , we have a deep breathing measurement
35:14 have, but once we get the off the chart, it gives us
35:19 number, we have the deep So it's trivial to calculate what RT
35:26 . Everybody see how to do Let me put my cursor somewhere,
35:32 put my cursor right here. That means that I feel my medium
35:37 deep with 1.3 my ratio of my shallow to my feet plus and this
35:44 something like five. Is that what I get? Is I get a
35:50 of RT to RD right on So that means whatever my deep reading
35:58 , let's say it was 100 you , say it was 10,
36:02 That my true art which is 0.5 long. Anybody see that, what
36:15 my diameter invasion be at that point in between 40 50? And it's
36:24 to me, so it would be inches, something like that.
36:31 And yeah, and then what what would be, what would be
36:41 RXO two RT? If I landed , it would be something halfway between
36:48 and 10, 8.5, 8, like that. All I'm doing is
36:53 between the uh equal value lines on chart. I have three charts laid
36:59 top of each other. Good What happens if it lies out
37:16 If you have some sort of maybe the mud was too conducted,
37:22 et cetera, right? Something like , that the tool response isn't matching
37:26 tornado chart. That's a bit of issue. In principle all of these
37:31 , my diameter invasion has gotten pretty , right? A diameter invasion.
37:37 got something like 100 inches So we're getting close to where we're dating
37:43 the 50% of the deep reading So you're, you're getting to where
37:49 really can't keep all these things There's no solution. We don't get
37:55 resolution. Ultimately. If it gets enough, my medium, it's gonna
38:00 equal to my right. My, medium is gonna read equal to my
38:06 , right. My invasion is far . So I don't have a difference
38:10 the measures to allow me to discriminate look for the correction. Sorry,
38:29 , what's R IP that, that's deep breathing. That's what the tool
38:36 . What I'm looking for is RT is that theoretical number, the true
38:42 . So we've removed the effects of invaded zone on my resistivity response.
38:49 deep is a deep reading tool if can go back to that. So
39:01 is the response of my shallow, all of these, right? You're
39:08 in with these three measurements, you a shallow reading, you have a
39:12 reading and you have a deep reading the Dutch and be right. It's
39:18 this reading. The medium is this and the shallow is this read.
39:25 literally all three of these are all of those are tool measurements.
39:36 Is that OK or not? I the medium of the logs, I
39:45 the deep off the logs. I the shallow, off the logs and
39:50 I just form these ratios. That me a point on the chart that
39:54 me to interpolate between the various, , between the various lines or what
40:01 really is, right? Or what diameter really is and, or what
40:07 , uh RT really is ready to on, that comes up in exercises
40:18 homework, et cetera. All So what's going on with the newer
40:24 logs, uh, anything worth doing worth overdo? You actually don't get
40:29 very squared, this perfect uh invasion . You can actually, if you
40:35 mobile oil, you can get an tank and things like that. But
40:39 people would like to look for right? An idea what the mobility
40:44 the oil. And so these new , right, the array induction,
40:48 the the array induction actually is high . You have six steps of
40:56 you can get down to a right? You don't have to assume
40:59 step profile that we have, So you, you can, um
41:04 can get RT then out of It's pretty complex because you have all
41:09 things and you can, you can plot right, invasion, invasion and
41:19 profiles. Uh You, you actually see maybe a bank of oil that
41:26 moving, they charge a lot of for that, but I suppose it's
41:31 it. So I mentioned uh what's problem with these things with an induction
41:37 and thin vetted reservoir? Again, happens is you're more conductive, uh
41:42 will be more sensitive to the then you will be the sands.
41:49 they're high resistivity, most of the is gonna end up. So
41:53 you will uh these models are in and I'm really not interested in my
42:00 of my shad. I would much know the resistivity of the sand.
42:05 , uh this was called the Triax , right? That shell worked early
42:12 this on, on this tool and , rather than inducing a current around
42:18 four hole this way, in they induce a current around the bore
42:22 vertically. Now, what happens is sands are in series with each
42:29 And so it's gonna be more sensitive the more resistive player. Yeah,
42:35 they're in series. So between you actually, that's the next slide
42:43 like that. Between these two measurements can get right, you can get
42:48 uh net growth as well as a in the sands and the shale that
42:57 just to prove to you that real , you don't need to see
43:01 right? Seeing it all the right? Thin beds, there could
43:04 a lot of oil, you can pretty high productivity. These interbedded sands
43:09 , you know, in the they could be hundreds of militaries.
43:13 again, geo pressure, so the that I knew a couple of gentlemen
43:18 left Shell retired from Shell formed a company and within just a few years
43:25 millionaires by taking overrides on additional oil found, right? It really was
43:30 combining geology with combining with combining uh interpretation of the law. So they're
43:41 pretty smart guys. So this is idea between that Triax tool is you're
43:49 measure a connectivity, you're gonna measure resistivity, right? So between these
43:56 , you can get these are you can measure a horizontal connectivity,
44:01 measure a vertical resistivity and you have what's called a closure equation,
44:07 It's just that constraint. The my shale and my sand have to
44:11 up to everything. So I have equations. I have three unknowns.
44:16 I can solve for my resistivity of shale. My resistivity of my
44:23 I can solve for my thicknesses, ? Just if I know one
44:27 I can obviously get the other Uh I always thought this would catch
44:32 if you suspected that you don't find tool being run very much. For
44:39 reason, it it used to be of expensive to run it and thin
44:46 that may well be worth it every built one on one. So I
44:52 the first one we work to do , right, induction logs. What
44:58 we learn about induction logs? This a new topic. But what did
45:03 learn about induction log? What was keyword we think of parallel? Everything's
45:14 parallel, right? Layers are in with each other. The for is
45:21 parallel with flush stone in parallel with deep resistivity. Therefore, our geometric
45:28 is expressed in terms of connectivity, connectivity model. You're adding the weighted
45:37 of the uh as a how sensitive is right, as a function of
45:42 away from the for. All And then see how we interpret
45:48 et cetera. We talked a little about next, we're gonna talk about
45:53 latter O lock am I doing for ? Notice how this is different,
46:03 different about this? This is the for the geometric factor. Again,
46:15 other one was in terms of This one's written in terms of
46:22 Are we gonna think parallel about this ? We're gonna think series, I'll
46:30 you the geometry of the tool and it works in a second as to
46:35 ? So here the apparent resistivity is to a weighted resistivity in the flesh
46:42 uh and weighted opposed to the true , right? It works in conductive
46:50 . Why is this because the borehole in series with the blush zone which
46:56 in series with the deep zone and layers are all in series with each
47:04 . For this tool, everything's in immediately that leads you to this very
47:12 to what we had before, So the more conducted the mud,
47:18 more this likes it, the less induction, remember those charts we looked
47:24 , right? You wanna use induction in persistive muds. You wanna use
47:29 lateral log and conduct, we have flush zone and again, third
47:36 that's my log response. So basically this is, these are called guard
47:42 . And you have actually a electrodes where we literally are injecting or forcing
47:49 into the formation, right? We're inducing a current around the bore
47:55 We are injecting current into them through mud into the formation. So you
48:03 see, right? And do I to draw it if I put on
48:07 ? Right. Oh So I got bo down here like down the ear
48:36 like undisturbed zone out here. Thing we're injecting current, go back to
48:43 pointer or injecting current in this There is no choice. It goes
48:53 one of them and has to go the others, right? Therefore,
48:57 mud is in series with my flush and series with my unsured zone.
49:05 it's resistivity that will add here, productivity. Yeah. If I shut
49:11 one, if I use this in oil based mud, I get no
49:14 into the form, right? Can't through the but you want to use
49:21 more conductive, the more you use pattern. And then what happens
49:25 Right? I think I draw this but is this current gets injected and
49:34 got to come back here and come to the tool. So all of
49:38 different layers here, right? They up basically in series with each other
49:44 . So everything's in series. It . Is that OK with everybody?
50:00 . So I, I set up potential. I and I have,
50:04 have what are called guard electrodes. what new pictures are. And means
50:11 have, they set up a potential to the one I'm forcing the current
50:16 . So I don't let the current back this way to the tool.
50:20 I force the current go into the . It's just because of how I
50:25 up the potential of the different is it called the guard electrodes on
50:31 or whatever. You often do this a laboratory measurement or to, to
50:37 up guard electrodes, keep the current going places you don't want it to
50:45 . OK. So big difference. are we gonna use this again?
50:51 you're thinking series, do we want resist a mudd for this tool?
50:58 , they want to conduct his money the picture here, right? So
51:05 is a look at it again. happens? And deep induction forces the
51:09 a long ways away. You don't , not induction the lateral log
51:15 right later, log deep, it the current to go deeply into the
51:19 before you've let it back to the that shallow, lets it go back
51:23 quickly, right? And then we a microsphere, MS fl microsphere focus
51:29 , which is again, my Right. So again, I want
51:32 measurements and I want three measurements because have three things to determine.
51:40 How are we gonna do that? kind of charts are we gonna
51:46 Spine and ribs chart? What was spine and ribs charged to catch students
51:56 a lot on this one? B and R chart we used for
52:00 ferocity tools to correct for mud cake charts. We are using for the
52:07 tools to interpret for the deep uh reads, it divide and the diameter
52:13 a OK. The tornado chart doesn't like the spine and rips chart in
52:20 sense. Right? And again, again, we have the same set
52:24 . We, we have a, have a current electrode, we have
52:27 measurement electrodes and then we have these electrodes, right? Don't allow
52:34 So these are all fairly close these . Here's a look at my,
52:39 , my distance away from the This is my geometric factor just like
52:45 did. And if you look we define it to be 50% and
52:50 might be somewhere around 100 inches or , just like to be the,
52:55 medium is for some reason, it's a shallow here, right? It's
53:02 something like 25 30 inches and I a set bell is quite shallow.
53:09 if we look at this tool I think we wanna go on the
53:13 on this thing, a lot of here, do we have any permeability
53:22 these sands? Are they invaded? , curves are separated. OK.
53:31 when we're in our shales, we get much separation right from here,
53:37 fairly close. So this is my , this is my medium comparable to
53:42 medium and this is mine was So what happens what happens to my
53:51 when I've invaded? RXO here, curve is lower resistivity. Therefore,
54:04 is exactly the opposite invasion profile and induction. Yeah. So you can
54:12 at this and say uh probably use right mud here right here. They
54:18 the conductive mud when you invade, the activity, right? And so
54:24 , exactly the same logic as depending on where my medium is relative
54:28 my, my shallow and my deep ? To tell me something about how
54:33 I invaded. Um And also will me how to correct the shallow and
54:39 deep or that invaded zone. So you, you gonna do exactly
54:45 same thing, right? Reverse the of which I showed you or anything
54:55 chart. See it looks different kind tornado than the other one.
54:59 it's basically the same idea, the curves uh overlaying each other.
55:05 you you just plot the ratio the ratio of the medium that you
55:11 the ratio of the shallow in And you can read off the three
55:17 like we did before you do get to do this on exam.
55:23 by the way, you get to on a whole, it's interpreted the
55:33 way for RT. Why did we RT? Yeah, plug into Archie's
55:43 . That's the reason we plug into at the deep breeding tool at the
55:49 tool at the shallow tool of the value for this invasion profile. Look
55:56 what the resistivity is beyond the invaded , which is 99.9% of our revenue
56:06 on. You're over there and you problems. All right. So the
56:17 later log is very much like my log, a higher resolution, more
56:22 of investigation, we can get even resolution. You don't have to assume
56:27 step profile like we've talked about But the inversion right, fairly
56:35 The only real way to do this a specific circumstance is somebody's gotta pick
56:40 boundaries to have shoulder bed effects and these kind of things going on.
56:44 people need their running finite elements models actually be involved over the brain.
56:53 then you literally can model for the saturation as a function of distance away
57:00 the moral, which gives you a good idea of mobile oil. So
57:07 you're actually gonna do in the exercise we're gonna do in not a whole
57:12 time. Uh We're gonna have a look hydrocarbon indicator. We have a
57:17 in a flush zone use Archie What do we use for the end
57:29 ? 27, this, this value one half just came out of the
57:34 being too, right? So the filtrates because we are assuming that we've
57:40 replaced RW with RMF in the flesh , you in bed it enough.
57:45 then if I get my T freeze , right? I would have RW
57:49 our T if I'm willing to make assumption that my flush zone saturation,
57:56 is equal to my deep saturation to power, I can plug that
58:02 right to get what my saturation right? If I have this
58:07 I'm gonna can solve for what it . Think it's trivial. What happens
58:13 RMF is equal to RW said that term goes away and what a
58:27 that's an assumption. So that's the lecture here or hour in. So
58:37 can take a 10 minute break And then we're gonna talk about uh
58:43 methods of interpreting uh using resistivity this kind of uh circular calculation.
58:50 we get done explaining what a pic , what a plot is, et
58:55 , then you're gonna get a chance build them yourself. You gonna get
58:59 zone and square some logs and then those numbers to calculate saturations. And
59:07 can actually look for flush saturation. take 10 to 15 minute break.
59:18 right. So now we're gonna work an exercise uh, you're gonna get
59:21 chance to zone and square some artificial . I think it's been handed out
59:26 the exercise. And we're gonna ask question, what do we do to
59:32 Archie's equation? Even if we don't a good set of coordinate to get
59:37 the parameters. Right. So, need RW, again, we found
59:42 how to get that from an right. We don't have any water
59:46 . We're not able to look anything . And so how do we determine
59:50 we need porosity? Even if we have uh two or three lithograph
59:56 Uh Li Aden and uh and a log. And we need M and
60:02 usually I know CC is one. M and N however, can be
60:07 problematic. That's the next thing we're go, actually go through is uh
60:12 does M and N relate to Right. And are we in a
60:18 ? Are we in a classic, cetera? All of those? Maybe
60:21 don't. Yeah, that's me Sequels . So we're gonna talk about two
60:27 kinds of plots basically what's common between plots and you're gonna zone at square
60:33 to get your read activities and you're make these plots. So you should
60:37 a piece of Hingle paper. If , we'll get you one, you
60:40 have a, a uh log log that puts that in it. We'll
60:48 . OK. Uh And we can those two types of paper. When
60:53 reason, when we think our resistivity constant, uh if we have an
60:57 matrix value, which is kind of and uh at least some 100% water
61:04 , that's what allows us to get w right. Uh And then,
61:10 we're not gonna worry about Shay which is uh what we're gonna do
61:15 we get em and n we're gonna at the sand analysis, the wax
61:19 Smith's equation basically where we're gonna spend of our time motivating how to do
61:25 . I have found that recently. don't know how to analyze Shay
61:32 It's worth spending your time. uh we're gonna solve for porosity for
61:37 Hingle plot. Uh We're gonna assume is equal to one. And so
61:43 what happens is you take the root your resistivity data, right? This
61:49 what Hingle paper is doing for And so it linearize what it does
61:54 linearize Archie equation. OK? And then your data should plot on straight
62:01 on the Hingle paper. Yeah. I'll show you how to do
62:06 I'll go through step by step on you, how you do that,
62:09 ? And you can go through and on Hingle paper, you can extrapolate
62:15 nice thing about it is you can Archie's equation to a porosity of zero
62:21 me is always quite remarkable. Pro may not be as weird as pro
62:28 , but people do it both So when we do that, we
62:32 get a matrix value for something like uh uh matrix travel time, we
62:38 get a AAA matrix density. Uh we can also use it to get
62:44 oil, which will be the second of this exercise. You should have
62:48 Os. So the one thing you to realize, you have to have
62:52 correct Ingle paper. Are we taking square root, the 11.8 root,
62:58 cetera, right? Et cetera. , and that the paper is doing
63:02 route for you, right? if you have gas effects, this
63:07 gonna be a problem. So you look at neutron density variable lit are
63:12 screw this up. You're basically assuming and M are consonants are WS constant
63:18 the. So we are on the paper with the underlining, we're gonna
63:23 ferocity or something proportional to ferocity. we're gonna take versus the resistivity RT
63:34 the minus one over M root Ingle . Does that for you? This
63:41 a look at Hingle paper, And this is not a log scale
63:46 . This is one over M root . So you, you simply plot
63:51 on this paper. What, what , what your RT is and
63:55 it will linearize the equation for What happens is then you can extrapolate
64:01 to a proxy of zero and any dependent effect is gonna go away because
64:07 have zero porosity there. That's the idea. So you could, if
64:11 , if you didn't plot ferocity, you were plotting this versus uh a
64:16 time, what you would get would a matrix, travel time at zero
64:22 , et cetera. It's assuming wily it works. All right. So
64:26 gonna make this plot, I'll help with it. Various saturations on this
64:31 . What will happen is my resistivity the smallest when I have no
64:36 So wet zones will plot appear along single line. And then other data
64:41 plot down here. And we can solve for various saturations interpolate between the
64:48 just by drawing lines on this And it's, it's basically we just
64:53 whatever this line plots, we plot , it's gonna have a different slope
64:57 we just take, right. Uh , if my saturation is 50% and
65:03 equals two, this will be down factor of four. For example,
65:09 , uh we can do other things . So I'll, I'll show you
65:14 to do that. And then the thing which you're gonna do is on
65:20 plot, you can make a Hingle for your Rx OS as well as
65:25 RT S right, your decrease you then compare those plots. And
65:32 you have movable oil, what you'll is the right. If you have
65:37 oil, you'll find that the resistivity drop and you can take like I
65:46 you at the end of the you can calculate what the movable oil
65:51 , how much movable oil we You have those two reactivity curves.
65:56 have an RXO curve and you have deep breath activity curve in the
66:01 So you'll be able to do It's pretty easy just to overlay the
66:05 spots, hold them up to the , you can see which one,
66:09 ? And then how much they pretty , you can see these things,
66:14 ? These guys up here where my saturation is one, they aren't moving
66:19 much. Yeah. So I have movable oil and here at higher resistivity
66:24 moving further. I have more movable . Yeah. Would that movable
66:33 would that remaining saturation be what I get when I did a water
66:37 So, right, because it's, that you're basically invading at a much
66:42 rate than you would produce oil in field or you would have water
66:48 So it's an indication of movable but it's not quantitative. Yeah,
66:54 , we'll build that plot together. one is the picket plot here,
66:58 can linearize the equation by taking the of both sides, right. So
67:03 we plot the data on a log plot, we again get the equation
67:07 a straight line, my slope would right M and my intercept.
67:14 assume a is equal to one, intercept when fro is equal to
67:19 this term goes away. Right? then my log of RT will equal
67:23 log of RW. Right. So could directly read from the intercept on
67:29 picket plot the water SAN, I'll you how to do that too.
67:35 . And again, what, what is as I have a water
67:39 less than one, I will have that are parallel to that. And
67:44 we'll, we'll draw those on the also. OK. So we're gonna
67:48 log log paper, we're gonna plot versus RT, right? And then
67:53 will take a look at the We'll take a look at the intercept
67:56 get RW and yeah. So this a look at what a typical plot
68:05 look like. Again, my lowest , my lowest resistivity is gonna be
68:10 water saturation 100% and parallel lines will varying water saturations I can draw on
68:19 and I can take off of these simply interpolate between these lines to get
68:23 water saturate. Picking plots are actually commonly done. Uh You get RW
68:29 particular, well, we get RW particularly to get m difficult thing.
68:34 have to have core data basically to it. And this is a way
68:38 get it. If I have the kind of data, what you're gonna
68:42 is this works in plastics. Both these plots will work reasonably well in
68:47 plastic, they're not gonna work reasonably in a carpet. Next thing we're
68:53 explore is why, why that is is much more variable than a carbonate
69:00 it is in plastic. For one of the assumptions, well,
69:06 this ranging in certainties isn't important. , the one other thing for this
69:12 , the, the, the other I want to go to go through
69:17 what an RW A calculation is. everybody already understands that I talked about
69:26 a little bit clear to everybody what RW A calculation is or should I
69:33 through it again? You're much more to get started on the side.
69:40 much of a response. It's just look at the plot on paper.
69:47 actually like this is this is basically exercise what you're gonna do with
69:52 So what I, what I want show you so that should have been
69:56 out. You're welcome to read So it basically goes through in
70:00 basically what the Ingle plot is, a pick a plot, what an
70:04 A calculation is just quickly. We'll about art about the Yankees, which
70:13 at the top of it with an A. So RW A is simply
70:18 can't see it. I keep doing . I don't know. Yeah.
70:33 , because I, I fixed So what you're gonna apply WW what
70:42 gonna plot, you're gonna do this up here, this RW A will
71:03 in the M RT, you're simply do that calculation. What that is
71:08 Archie's equation assuming the water saturation is . OK. So what happens if
71:14 have oil, what's gonna happen to ? RW A if the water saturation
71:20 not one, is that resistivity is to be larger, right? The
71:24 will make it more resistive. And you're gonna do all these calculations.
71:30 it does is it takes out the dependence, right? You're, you're
71:35 gonna look for the lowest values and , even if the porosity is varying
71:41 long as RWS are constant, you get the same value for RW
71:47 So you can take and do this in each of your zones and then
71:52 will find several of them will give water activities which will be pretty close
71:57 each other. And that would be assumed RW. This is probably the
72:02 way to get RW. Yeah, you're averaging a whole bunch of data
72:08 the picket plots. You can get off of it also. But the
72:12 is you're extrapolating some data quite a ways. There can be a fairly
72:17 error in that extrapolation. So you're gonna do this calculation, you're gonna
72:22 for your lowest values, right? then you're gonna, then you're gonna
72:27 those to get our W so the thought on this is you can go
72:32 this loop refining parameters, getting things be consistent and with a computer that's
72:38 quite feasible, right? And then refine it and you basically a lot
72:42 times as long as it's relatively uh not a lot of clay,
72:47 long as it's relatively one li they do a fair job at converging on
72:53 because the whole thought is basically Archie's is valid over such a large
73:00 All the way you're extrapolating to a of zero. With the el
73:04 you're extrapolating to a porosity of one the picket plot. That to me
73:09 still remarkable that the Archie's equation works the entire range of process and find
73:17 fascinating. And it, it just about this is a difference. So
73:24 welcome to read this, but it talks about a transition zone versus
73:27 similar zones. And we had that our example of something that looked like
73:31 transition zone and then it goes through picket plot and it goes through and
73:37 what uh what, what is, is weird. And then you get
73:43 your logs and the log roll on paper. So hopefully have this,
73:48 think we're ready to go. So first thing is to zone in square
73:53 log, OK, that you have the exercise. I think you've come
73:59 with either 12 or 13 zones if doing it right? And so uh
74:04 go ahead and start doing that. welcome to work together if you'd
74:30 So remember the three rules for doing , you have to form zones wherever
74:35 changes your calculation. A couple of are a little bit tricky. I'm
74:45 sure how long this will take. we finish before the end of
74:48 I'll just start another election. We to figure out how to get
74:55 It's probably the hardest thing we're gonna . I can pretty easily spend two
75:23 doing this by the way. So may not get to do.
75:28 We're meeting here tomorrow morning, Yeah, you can find that in
76:56 , you can find this. I think mean that the answer.
77:02 , the answers to this. Uh, it should be somewhere.
77:07 might be the next day but but we're done tomorrow. But
77:14 Yeah, there is no, there no, you know, it's only
77:18 answer to TCM. Paper size. . Yeah, it will be somewhere
78:08 . Thank you. I got it else. Let me look it.
78:18 , I think I have it on phone. Yeah. How are
82:26 Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah, that's good. I've been
85:55 of being two here. That they missed one. So, all
86:09 . 12, the first one. , I don't count the shales,
86:23 ? Shells are not the zones I'm about. Maybe that's your problem.
86:29 you analyze the shales, you're welcome try that. But it's, you
86:33 get confused too. Don't count the , give a drive by contributing the
91:22 . The answer is on here. , on a slide like this is
91:30 big flag. Is there any actual ? They have a Yeah. What
91:41 the answer to you? Like your values of M and M to
91:48 I mean, they're, they're, basically here and I like to pick
91:59 five here. And the answer is value of N value rw what is
92:05 what have higher carbon bearing directly? those that they, they actually think
92:14 , there's zoning squared on this thing . So here, the way you
92:20 supposed to, to zone and squared answers for the RW A questions.
92:38 . Get that wrong. 90% of time. Oh OK. So um
93:59 Yep. Yeah, for example, I think they are actually the
94:38 This is the way it 0.3 hydrocarbon various values, the water saturation,
95:02 find the same way, very others that. And this is where the
95:20 can go through it in class If you want the answers, see
95:24 much time we have. So you're to plot the shales up doing
95:39 but you'll find that they don't fit rest of the data might get
95:45 They do plot interestingly and up in very different way than the sands.
95:51 I personally would at least your initial at this. I would leave the
95:56 on. They don't obey Archie's equation our zoning and squaring going some lines
96:12 there again. 1st, 1st draw the shale baseline on it
96:20 Yeah. So, so these are shales. So don't plot those
96:27 So the other one, you can you got 123456. This is by
96:38 way, the long for, for first one trip and that's, this
96:43 the micro lateral log. So you do, I mean, you're gonna
96:49 to do, you're gonna do that . That's, that's the one you
96:53 to look for movable oil. there you go. Do this
96:59 First. This you're supposed to figure how to do any of these.
97:24 need curiosity. You have both density might suggest which plot to do.
97:38 , I can't interpret the bulk density I have a matrix density. How
97:45 I gonna get the matrix begins with age and do the do the first
98:00 can plot bulk density directly against the with the angle? Do a pickup
98:08 . I need the para OK. don't know, you don't know that
98:19 know it could be a carbonate. be a li carbon could have a
98:28 of dolemite cement. It could have grain density of 2.72 0.5. He
98:37 that first would be my suggestion. can do whatever you want again,
98:43 could, yeah, you could do wrong first, recognize that it's
98:48 And then fix it. My grad do that all the time.
99:09 so the easiest thing for you would just be to print that file out
99:13 I gave you and then it's got answers. We can just separate it
99:16 and whatever. Right. That, , 212, sorry about that
100:13 Yeah. Mhm. Right. Do ? Yeah, you need porosity.
101:20 . Right. You don't have How are you gonna get it?
101:28 elegant way to get it? You always guess that's probably not went through
101:36 blood, right. What does a , read up on a angle
101:40 What does a angle plot? I do? OK. Well,
101:54 well, I got, is that ? Or do I need to which
101:58 get? There's one that everybody misses own in the regions and you don't
102:07 off the gamma ray. Yeah. , so for example, this
102:15 you really two zones, your calculation , your velocity is different here than
102:22 . Yeah. Even though your reactivity roughly the same, but that's two
102:28 . Good example of why you do and then put a shale baseline
102:34 glued all your shales. Pretty sure , you can count him. He's
102:41 the answer like no, these, , these are all shales. That's
102:48 shale. Yeah, I, I have put it down here. I
102:54 the, the, these are all . OK? And then I don't
103:00 . How many did you put Uh, I just said one here
103:04 one here. Um, yeah. . Ok. I think you're supposed
103:21 have 12. That's who you Sure. There's a couple that people
103:41 typically miss. Definitely. It's right around, I think 6000 people.
104:01 misses those two for some reason. , your porosity is actually quite
104:10 So you really need two sands Then there's another one in here.
104:18 a couple of zones in here. , yeah. And this looks like
104:37 zones to me. Right? And two zones here. Yeah.
104:50 that's at least a couple of It's worth swearing a lot.
104:56 A tech log for some reasons. . It doesn't let you square a
105:01 and which I find odd, you end up somewhere pretty close to 12
105:21 . Yeah. I'm sorry, why draw a shale baseline on it here
105:32 sure. And then don't, don't on your shale. Just get they
105:41 place. But you can go back do it once you're done with
105:47 Then Archie's equation does not finish Hello? Oh, yeah.
108:32 which one it wasn't for me? was for me. Ok.
108:40 Ok. I mean, all pretty . Yeah. Yeah, that's a
108:51 , isn't it? Let's put our caps on. How would we get
108:58 in the election? You can I'll give you a hint.
109:05 plot, plot to me. One the absolutely fascinating things about Archie's equate
109:13 might be alone in the universe about . But you can extrapolate Archie's equation
109:18 a fro of one, you can to get RW, you can extrapolate
109:23 to a frosty of zero to get matrix competitive value. That to me
109:29 incredible all the way from a tub water to solid rock. One equation
109:35 right to the resistivity that shouldn't doesn't work for acoustics. For
109:41 at all acoustics, you, you back to what's called the conflation of
109:46 grains and you can't go past The physics changes completely but a equation
109:52 all the way. So if you a matrix number, you extrapolate this
109:58 to laros of zero, you can't that on a picket plot, you
110:03 to infinity, right? You can't the zero on a log log plot
110:08 you can on the Hingle plot, can get to this matrix value.
110:13 if you're plotting the bulk, the the bulk, right, the bulk
110:20 on this plot, what do you at zero porosity, the matrix
110:29 So you can use the Hingle plot get your matrix density and find out
110:34 it is it whether what to use 0.7 three? If you plot plot
110:48 , it'll get to a porosity of . But you don't have to flat
110:53 it just flat the bulk density on side, you can apply anything proportional
111:02 ferocity and within the assumption of a time average that works you, is
111:28 right? I don't know. How zones did you get? 16,
111:36 , a little high average? Those , the official answer should be
111:48 A lot of people miss. You these two zones good for you because
111:54 , and your density is significantly Right? You really need to zone
111:58 two. And then there are if you look up here, this
112:04 a shale, but these two are , they have significantly different bulk densities
112:10 should give you clarity. Yeah, missed one. Yeah. One of
112:24 good things about this exercise, it zoning, right? And you,
112:28 , you zone where it changes the . So you don't zone on the
112:34 because those are, you're not using in your calculation. So this
112:56 I don't know. Yeah. OK. That would be Yeah.
116:19 . Where you with hydrocarbons or three rest or what you can say
116:38 Um Me Yeah. Yeah. The can be due to a porosity,
117:00 low porosity or a high oil And oh, that's the key to
117:12 equation. Discriminates ferocity changes in resistivity saturation changes. That's why it's
117:26 Um You mhm My my suggestion would make a fly and take a look
118:11 what happens. Make one of them one of the plots and just see
118:15 happens and then you can see how intuition holds up but yes, you
118:23 to zone it, you need to it right. Put all your resistivity
118:27 a table and then start plotting Sorry. That's, that's why we
123:51 it together. It's easy to spin wheels, right. The, you
124:05 have to do it in the order that, by the way, like
124:08 wouldn't be what I would suggest. do. A but first, so
124:17 is, it's an answer sheet. . Are you ready to play?
124:34 to the Hingle paper flat up your density on the X, your resistivity
124:43 the Y? Yeah, that That's what the logs plotted. He
125:01 out the bulk density. Oh, funny. Yeah. Just pick your
125:14 and make your plot our Hingle plots . Ok. So, right now
126:01 need to get your value or your all 12 and then make, start
126:28 . Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. . Oh, yeah. Oh.
131:20 . Yeah. Yeah. You, just gonna plant bulk density, you're
131:36 plot bulk density, not ferocity on , yeah. Right. Yeah.
132:06 . I should get one of Don't throw it away. Give it
132:15 me. Mhm. I know you to be able to get those paper
132:24 for some months. I'm not It's just, it's a nice,
132:36 father in metro physics engineer. A of reservoir engineers do petro physics,
133:01 on the company, like businesses because was there people. Ok. It's
133:15 good company in an operating company or a phd is in a lab.
133:40 money. So he gets dressed you know, it's close to
134:00 Yeah. I don't know what that . What is that? You plotting
134:12 shales too? What's on what? for one? Yeah, the minus
134:31 over you, you're making a Hingle . That's a one over M
134:36 You're taking the one over M Yeah. Sounds like you ask
135:31 Mhm. Definitely not. Right for . I think that we're meeting here
136:56 morning and I, so that, . Ok. So. Oh
143:55 Mhm. Yeah. So, I guess cool. They're all
144:15 They oil intersects there at zero I . Yeah. Bye. Well,
144:37 mean, I guess now, you , now, you know a grain
144:42 , now you can just plug it the bulk density knowing the green density
144:46 get graphic the fluid density, like said one. So I can get
144:51 and once I know the green. . But I guess got a
145:04 Yeah, what it should look Yeah, pretty close. You
145:11 you got a little bit of one point. How do we know?
145:28 . That's not a log, that's one over and root. Find this
145:37 . Yeah. Ok. So you're extrapolating back to infinite, infinite
145:52 right? Oh, hello. Yeah. Ok. So.
146:59 Mhm. Ok. So that, , that, yeah, yeah,
147:38 have a few problems you guys going to this point? These these have
148:13 , these are all wet. I don't know what those are.
148:24 got. 12. Yeah, go check your activity. So let's
148:32 . Yeah, waiting for the another always have try to figure out how
149:07 do it. They never know how get ferocity. Say try the need
149:13 major. So I would do that the data to make that. Then
149:21 can one thing of the price. . bye. Well, nobody knows
149:51 to get ferocity, calm and What? Like I said, he's
151:26 that. What did he say that ? So he wouldn't be, he
151:37
-
+