Académique Documents
Professionnel Documents
Culture Documents
268280; 12 FIGURES
ABSTRACT
INTRODUCTION
Manuscript received by the Editor January 29, 1999, revised manuscript received January 18, 2004.
Consultant, Golden, CO, USA.
2004 Society of Petrophysicists and Well Log Analysts. All rights reserved.
1
268
PETROPHYSICS
May-June 2004
PETROPHYSICS
269
Shier
PETROPHYSICS
May-June 2004
Histograms
Crossplots
A more or less linear trend on a crossplot typically represents various mixtures of two lithologic components. In a
pure limestone, a linear trend on a neutron/density crossplot
represents various mixtures of calcite and fluid-filled pore
space. In shales, a linear trend on the neutron/gamma ray
crossplot may represent a mixture of clay and silt.
If the type well includes all proportions of the lithologic
components and a linear trend is established, then points
from a well with only a limited lithologic mixture will fall
on the trend when normalized. However, crossplot users
PETROPHYSICS
271
Shier
In a correlated interval, all data from all wells are combined into one large composite histogram. Analysis of this
composite histogram, based on a statistical Normal Distribution, yields an envelope into which the means of the
individual wells must fit. For example, it may be decided
that the envelope consists of 75% of the area under the Normal Curve. The dimension of this envelope is considered a
measurement of the real geological changes among the
wells. If the mean of an individual well does not fall within
the envelope, the data are adjusted so that they do fall
within the envelope. In some cases, similar adjustments
272
PETROPHYSICS
May-June 2004
FIG. 7 Bubble map of residuals from a trend surface. Residuals appear to be randomly distributed, indicating that the trend
surface is a valid indication of the regional pattern.
May-June 2004
FIG. 8 Bubble map of residuals from a trend surface. Residuals are clumped. Clumps may reflect different vintages of data,
structural patterns, or other factors.
PETROPHYSICS
273
Shier
The best reference lithology for sonic curves is a regionally distributed rock that is resistant to hole damage or
enlargement during drilling. In thick clastic sequences, this
is usually a hard, silty shale. In carbonate sequences, it is a
tight limestone, tight dolomite, or an anhydrite.
Apparently, even the earliest sonic tools had highly
accurate clocks. Hence, well-to-well differences between
Wmax and Wmin are rare. Such differences, when observed,
are usually due to incorrect scaling of logs in the field or in
the digitizing of blueline prints. As a result, normalization
of sonic curves is a matter of shifting the curve without
changing the scaling factor. As many as 40% of early
uncompensated sonic curves require shifting by 2 to 5 ms/ft
in the normalization process. Any errors in compensated
sonic curves are usually small when compared to shale
damage effects, compaction effects, and editing problems
such as cycle skips and noise spikes. Frequently these
effects masquerade as normalization problems. As a rule of
thumb, if more than 5% of compensated sonic curves
appear to need adjustment in the normalization process, the
normalization is probably in error. These errors can be
accounted for and eliminated by considering other sources
such as compaction and shale damage.
In Gulf Coast Tertiary sequences, compensated sonic
curves usually require no changes in the normalization process to obtain valid values for formation evaluation in the
sandstones. However, shales are of equal importance in the
creation of accurate synthetic seismic curves. In most wells,
the sonic curve shows significant formation damage (sonic
values that are too high) in the associated shales. The
amount of formation damage is directly related to the
silt/clay ratio in a shale bed, with formation damage
PETROPHYSICS
May-June 2004
PETROPHYSICS
275
Shier
PETROPHYSICS
May-June 2004
May-June 2004
fairly high. The recommendation is to avoid using uranium-enriched shales like the Woodford in the Permian and
Anadarko basins for two reasons: First, many of these
shales have more local variations than casual observation
would suggest. Second, tool response in these beds will
depend on which detector was usedthe early low-efficiency Geiger-Mueller counter or the later high-efficiency
scintillator. For more ideas on dealing with difficult clastic
sequences, see the Guidelines section below.
Although there is an industry standard for the gamma ray
curve, as a practical matter, it is not possible to establish
exactly what this should be based on the usual data at hand.
For the gamma ray curve, the correct response is one that
is consistent with its neighbors and gives a reasonable volume of shale interpretation for the various types of rocks. In
other words, the gamma ray scale is relative to the other
wells in the project, not absolute. Most gamma ray
normalizations require only a scale change. Zero API units
is frequently correct, whether or not values in the shale
range require adjustment. The increasing inaccuracy of
gamma ray values with higher radioactivity is supported by
data from the Dakota formation in the southern Powder
R i v e r b a s i n o f Wyo mi n g . F i g u r e 1 0 sh o w s t h e
unnormalized gamma ray values for the Dakota channel
facies in 638 wells. Figure 11 shows the unnormalized
gamma ray values for the associated regional marine shales
for the same wells.
Of all the instrument responses, the gamma ray curve is
the most likely to be normalized using a trend surface
because clay minerals and the clay/silt mix in shales vary
according to their source rocks, distance from the sediment
PETROPHYSICS
277
Shier
Resistivity curves
The purpose of curve normalization is to remove systematic inaccuracies, not to remove genuine lithologic anoma278
PETROPHYSICS
May-June 2004
Software considerations
PETROPHYSICS
279
Shier
Approximately 20% of neutron, density, and uncompensated sonic curves require normalization before a dataset is
consistent enough to produce reliable results in batch-processed log analysis. Virtually all SP, gamma ray, and
GNT-type neutron curves require normalization. Reasons
for the need for normalization include miscalibrated instruments, instruments of different design, varying borehole
effect, and other factors. Curve normalization is accomplished using a standard linear equation. The most critical
part of the normalization process is determination of reasonable curve values at various points in a study area, taking into account any stratigraphic or compaction trends.
Techniques that combine data from multiple wells into one
histogram or crossplot tend to blur any real stratigraphic
and/or fluid differences across the area. Also, these methods may not highlight incorrect data if they are present in
the majority of the wells in the study.
Normalization is best regarded as a process that reduces
systematic noise within the dataset. The noise contains
some random elements, including the statistical nature of
the nuclear tools and small changes in the rocks. A major
challenge in normalization work is the recognition of which
data inconsistencies are systematic (and correctable) and
which are random (and better left alone). Not all curves can
be handled in the same way. Each curve has its own optimum set of normalization techniques.
280
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
PETROPHYSICS
May-June 2004