|Theme||Visible||Selectable||Appearance||Zoom Range (now: 0)|
Real-time formation evaluation with today's conventional horizontal drilling techniques is limited by the distance between the bit and resistivity measurements. Logging-while-drilling (LWD) sensors reach the formation long before wireline measurements, and so generally view it before wellbore degradation, but not before some invasion has occurred. Rapid invasion, called spurt, may mask true resistivity in some formations. The solution to this problem is to relocate logging measurements to the bit itself.
A new LWD resistivity tool improves and simplifies formation evaluation by allowing geologists to visualize and log the formation around the wellbore before mud invasion or wellbore damage has occurred. The tool is normally run as a near-bit stabilizer on a rotary bottomhole assembly or just above the motor in a steerable assembly. It makes five formation evaluation resistivity measurements and an azimuthal gamma ray measurement.
One resistivity measurement uses the bit as part of the measuring electrode to provide the earliest possible indication of a change in formation resistivity. This real-time correlation capability leads to rig time savings during searches for casing or coring points, in effect allowing immediate "geostopping." The top of a reservoir can be cored without danger of drilling up the interval first. At-the-bit resistivity also allows the fastest detection of pore pressure anomalies.
Four additional resistivity measurements are high-resolution focused electrode resistivities. One measurement uses a ring electrode to make an azimuthally averaged resistivity that is accurate up to 20,000 ohm-m. The other three use button electrodes to make azimuthal resistivity measurements that scan the borehole as the tool rotates. Together the ring and three button electrodes give four depths of investigation with identical vertical resolutions.
Conventional 2-MHz LWD resistivity measurements are limited to environments favoring induction-type settings; that is, resistive mud (i.e., fresh or oil-based mud) and conductive rock. The solution to this problem is a high-resolution, focused electrode resistivity that provides accurate Rt measurements for the first time in "laterolog" environments of high formation resistivities and salty mud. An example is carbonates, where 2-MHz tools are inherently less accurate. This high resistivity measurement has excellent vertical resolution, allowing evaluation of beds as thin as 3 in. and detection of beds as thin as 1 in. Multiple depths of investigation of the button measurements, in combination with the focused electrode resistivity measurement, allow evaluation of permeable beds from early-time invasion detection.
The array of three button electrodes provides azimuthal resistivities that scan the borehole as the tool rotates. These measurements form the basis for advanced processing and interpretation of full-bore resistivity images (see Fig. 1), introducing the potential for fracture detection, dip determination, and improved formation evaluation and characterization.
The technical leap that allows measurements to be made at the bit is a wireless telemetry system that sends data from sensors near the bit to the measurement-while-drilling (MWD) tool up to 200 ft. behind the bit, bypassing the intervening drilling tools. Data sent to the MWD system are then transmitted to the surface in real time using mud-pulse telemetry.
Resistivity at the bit is measured by attaching the tool directly to the bit and driving an alternating electric current down the collar, out through the bit, and into the formation. The current returns to the drillpipe and drill collars above the transmitter. In water-based mud, returning current is conducted from the bit, through the mud, into the formation, and back to the bottomhole assembly. In oil-based mud, which is an insulator, current returns through the inevitable but intermittent contact of the collars and stabilizers with the borehole wall, leading to a qualitative indication of resistivity. Formation resistivity is obtained by measuring the amount of current flowing into the formation from the bit and normalizing it to the transmitter voltage.
Although drilling with at-the-bit measurements is still in its infancy, petrophysical measurements near the bit provide numerous benefits for geologists, petrophysicists, and drillers and extend the range of conditions under which it is possible to measure formation resistivity accurately while drilling.
SI Metric Conversion Factors
*Conversion factor is exact.
Resistivity measurements have been used in the oil and gas exploration and production industry for many decades to provide valuable information relating to the determination of hydrocarbon saturation, which is a key petrophysical attribute required for accurately quantifying reserves and designing an appropriate field development strategy.
With the continuing integration of Logging While Drilling (LWD) and Directional Drilling processes in the past 20 years, many reservoirs around the world are being drilled and evaluated with LWD tools. Recent technology advancements in LWD Electromagnetic Wave Propagation Resistivity devices coupled with significant software enhancements provided dramatic improvements in well-placement applications in highly deviated and horizontal wells. However, LWD propagation resistivity measurements in these wells often present challenges for the petrophysicist in answering fundamental questions in relation to formation evaluation.
Typically, it is not only problematic to correlate LWD propagation resistivities to offset vertical and/or pilot resistivity data, but also difficult to deduce true formation resistivity (Rt) from the numerous multi-frequency and multi-spacing measurements available. The logs may also be affected to varying degrees by the borehole, eccentricity, shoulder beds, invasion, fractures, and anisotropy and/or dielectric effects. These effects may occur individually or in combination. Identifying these effects and correcting for them remains to be a major challenge.
This paper presents a case study where a new generation of LWD azimuthal deep resistivity tool has been utilized to drill a high angle well through a major carbonate reservoir sequence in onshore Abu Dhabi characterized as multilayered formation comprising of porous reservoir units separated by thin stylolite sub-dense.
Anisotropy inversion is discussed in identifying horizontal and vertical resistivities (Rh and Rv). Inverse forward modeling is also performed iteratively to evaluate the sensitivity of actual log responses to environmental and adjacent bed effects. The resultant resistivities of the porous units were found to be more representative than the measured values which were unusually higher being affected by the stylolitic sub-dense shoulder beds. These inverted resistivity values were then used for fluid volumetric calculations and compared against existing offset field data and production history. The results show reasonable water saturation values consistent with nearby wells. Inversion has therefore enabled considerable improvement in formation evaluation results by eliminating the shoulder bed effects on measured resistivity and providing accurate true resistivity (Rt).
Beguin, P. (Schlumberger) | Benimeli, D. (Schlumberger) | Boyd, A. (Schlumberger) | Dubourg, I. (Schlumberger) | Ferreira, A. (Schlumberger) | McDougall, A. (Schlumberger) | Rouault, G. (Schlumberger) | van der Wal, P. (Schlumberger)
Recent technology improvements in logging-while-drilling (LWD) electromagnetic wave propagation resistivity devices have provided dramatic improvements in well-placement applications. Azimuthal, deep-sensing measurements, coupled with other sensor measurements and significant software enhancements, have facilitated enhanced geosteering capabilities, which not only help maximize reservoir exposure, but also provide real-time updates of the local reservoir model.
However, LWD propagation resistivity measurements in highly deviated and horizontal holes can also present challenges to the analyst in answering fundamental questions in relation to formation evaluation. Typically, it is not only problematic to correlate LWD resistivities to offset vertical and/or pilot resistivity data, but it is also difficult to deduce true resistivity (Rt) and the flushed zone resistivity (Rxo), particularly in thin beds, from the numerous multi-frequency and multi-spacing measurements available.
This paper presents a case study from a thinly bedded offshore carbonate reservoir in Abu Dhabi. Two horizontal drains were drilled using LWD tools for the purposes of geosteering and formation evaluation. The available offset well data were from near-vertical wells, which were logged using wireline tools. The LWD propagation and laterolog resistivity measurements are compared to the offset wireline induction and laterolog resistivity measurements. Comparisons are also made between LWD propagation and laterolog resistivities acquired while drilling and while wiping after drilling. Differences between the various measurements are explored to identify the most appropriate choice of measurement in various circumstances. In light of the results, recommendations are made for data selection in future wells, with the intention of optimizing data acquisition practices for both well-placement and petrophysical evaluation.