Vous êtes sur la page 1sur 37

TAMU - Pemex

Well Control
Lesson 10
Logging While Drilling
(LWD)
2
Logging While Drilling

Sonic Travel Time
Resistivity and Conductivity
Eatons Equations (R, C, At, d
c
)
Natural Gamma Ray
Other
3
Logging While Drilling (LWD)
The parameters obtained with LWD lag
penetration by 3 to 60, depending on
the location of the tool. Some tools
have the ability to see ahead of the bit.
These are most commonly used for
Geo-steering, but can be used in
detection of abnormal pressure.
4
Logging While Drilling

Any log that infers shale porosity
can indicate the compaction state of
the rock,
and hence any abnormal pressure
associated with undercompaction.
5
Logging While Drilling
Most of the published correlations are
based on sonic and electric log data.

Density logs can also be used if
sufficient data are available.
6
Pore Pressure Gradient vs.
difference between actual and
normal sonic travel time
From Hottman and Johnson
LA Upper TX Gulf Coast
At
o
At
n
, sec/ft
g
p
,


p
s
i
/
f
t

7
Matthews and Kelly
Normal
At
o
At
n
, sec/ft
g
p
,


p
s
i
/
f
t

8
Relationships vary from area to
area and from age to age
But, the trends are
the same.
At
o
At
n
, sec/ft
g
p
,


p
s
i
/
f
t

9
Resistivity and Conductivity
The ability of rock to conduct electric
current can be used to infer porosity.
Resistivity -- ohm-m
2
/m
or ohm-m
Conductivity -- 10
-3
m/ohm-m
2

or millimhos/m
10
Resistivity and Conductivity
Rock grains, in general, are very poor
conductors.
Saline water in the pores conducts
electricity and this fact forms the basis
for inferring porosity from bulk R or C
measurements.
11
Resistivity and Conductivity
Under normal compaction, R increases
with depth.
Deviation from the normal trend
suggests abnormal pressure
12
Resistivity and Conductivity
F
R
= R
o
/R
w

F
R
= formation
resistivity factor

R
o
= resistivity of water-
saturated formation


R
w
= resistivity of pore water
13
Resistivity of formation water
R
w
reflects the dissolved salt content of
the water, and is dependant upon
temperature.



Equation shows that R
w
decreases with
increasing temperature, and
consequently, decreases with depth.
|
|
.
|

\
|
+
+
=
77 . 6 T
77 . 6 T
R R
2
1
1 w 2 w
F in are T and T where
o
2 1
14
Porosity,




m
R
aF
/ 1
= |
Porosity of water-saturated rock,
If a = 1, and m = 2, then | = F
R
-0.5
So, | = (R
o
/R
w
)
-0.5

R
w
in shales cannot be measured directly
so R
w
in a nearby sand is used instead.
R
o
would tend to increase with increasing
depth under normally pressured
conditions. See Fig. 2.63.
15
Fig. 2.63 Normal Compaction
R
o
, O
.
m
D
e
p
t
h
,


f
t

16
Example 2.20
R
w
estimated from
nearby well.
Estimate the pore
pressure at 14,188 ft
using Foster and
Whalens techinque.
So, at 14,188 ft,


F
R
= 28.24
034 . 0
96 . 0
= =
w
o
R
R
R
F
17
Transition at
~11,800
Using Eatons Gulf
Coast correlations,
o
ob
= 0.974 psi/ft or
13,819 psig at 14,188
Eq. Depth = 8,720
o
obe
= 0.937 psi/ft or
8,170 psig at 8,720
p
ne
= 0.465*8,720
= 4,055
p
p
= p
pe
+ (o
ob
- o
obe
)
= 4,055+(13,816-8,171)
= 9,703 psig
= 13.16 ppg
18
Fig. 2.65 -Hottman & Johnsons upper
Gulf Coast Relationship between
shale resistivity and pore pressure
R
n
/R
o

G
p
,
psi/ft
19
Example 2.21
Matthews and
Kelly
Determine the transition
depth and estimate the
pore pressure at 11,500
20
Transition is at ~9,600 ft.
At 11,500 ft:
C
o
= 1,920, and
C
n
= 440
C
o
/C
n
= 1,920 / 440
= 4.36
g
p
= 0.81 psi/ft (Fig 2.66)
Example 2.21
Fig. 2.67
21
g
p
= 0.81 psi/ft

p
= 15.6 ppg
p
p
= 9,315 psig
Fig. 2.66
4.36
22
Eatons Equations
( )
( )
( )
( )
2 . 1
2 . 1
2 . 1
3
|
|
.
|

\
|
=
|
|
.
|

\
|
=
|
|
.
|

\
|
=
|
|
.
|

\
|
A
A
=
cn
co
n ob ob p
o
n
n ob ob p
n
o
n ob ob p
o
n
n ob ob p
d
d
g g g g
C
C
g g g g
R
R
g g g g
t
t
g g g g
34 . 2 . Eq
35 . 2 . Eq
36 . 2 . Eq
23
Eatons Equations
These equations differ from the earlier
correlations in that they take into
consideration the effect a variable
overburden stress may have on the
effective stress and the pore pressure.
Probably the most widely used of the
log-derived methods
Have been used over 20 years
24
Example 2.22
In an offshore Louisiana well, (R
o
/R
n
) =
0.264 in a Miocene shale at 11,494. An
integrated density log indicates an
overburden stress gradient of 0.920
psi/ft. Estimate the pore pressure.
Using Eatons technique
Using Hottman and Johnsons
25
Solution
Eaton
From Eq. 2.35,
g
p
= g
ob
- (g
ob
- g
n
)(R
o
/R
n
)
1.2
g
p
= 0.920 - (0.920 - 0.465)(0.264)
1.2

g
p
= 0.827 psi/ft
26
Solution
Hottman & Johnson
R
n
/R
o
= 1/(0.264) = 3.79
From Fig 2.65, we then get
g
p
= 0.894 psi/ft
Difference = 0.894 0.827 = 0.067 psi/ft

Answers differ by 770 psi or 1.3 ppg
27
Discussion
Actual pressure gradient was
determined to be 0.818 psi/ft!
In this example the Eaton method came
within 104 psi or 0.17 ppg equivalent
mud density of measured values
This lends some credibility to the Eaton
method.
28
Discussion

In older sediments, exponent may be
lowered to 1.0 for resistivities.
Service companies may have more
accurate numbers for exponents.
29
Natural Gamma Ray
Tools measure the natural radioactive
emissions of rock, especially from:
Potassium
Uranium
Thorium

30
Natural Gamma Ray
The K
40
isotope tends to concentrate in
shale minerals thereby leading to the
traditional use of GR to determine the
shaliness of a rock stratum.
It follows that GR intensity may be used
to infer the porosity in shales of
consistent minerology
31
Natural Gamma Ray
Pore pressure prediction using MWD is
now possible (Fig. 2.68).

Lower cps (counts per second) may
indicate higher porosity and perhaps
abnormal pressure.
32
Natural Gamma Ray
In normally pressured
shales the cps
increases with depth
Any departure from this
trend may signal a
transition into abnormal
pressure
Fig. 2.68
33
Pore pressure gradient prediction from
observed and normal Gamma Ray counts
34
Example 2.23
From table 2.17,
determine the pore
pressure gradient at
11,100 ft using
Zoellers correlation.
Use the first three
data points to
establish the normal
trend line.
35
At 11,100
N
GRn
/ N
GRo
57/42 = 1.36
From below, g
p
= 0.61 psi/ft
or 11.7 ppg
36
Effective Stress Models
Use data from MWD/LWD
Rely on the effective-stress principle as the
basis for empirical or analytical prediction
Apply log-derived petrophysical parameters
of the rock to a compaction model to
quantify effective stress
Knowing the overburden pressure, the pore
pressure can then be determined
37
Dr. Choes Kick Simulator
Take a kick
Circulate the kick out of the hole
Plot casing seat pressure vs. time
Plot surface pressure vs. time
Plot kick size vs. time
etc.