NivaarExam PrepOfficial exam papers ↗

24-Pet-B1 Natural Gas Engineering · May 2014

Question 11 of 12: Recoverable Oil from ISF/Sonic and CNL/FDC Logs

Nivaar worked solution (AI-drafted; not reviewed by a licensed engineer)

Notes on this paper

National Exams, 98-Pet-B1, Well Logging and Formation Evaluation — May 2014, 3 hours, closed book (calculators permitted), 12 questions, all marked, 100 marks total.

Reference texts: Bassiouni, Theory, Measurement, and Interpretation of Well Logs (SPE Textbook Series Vol. 4); Asquith & Krygowski, Basic Well Log Analysis, 2nd ed. (AAPG); Ellis & Singer, Well Logging for Earth Scientists, 2nd ed.; Schlumberger, Log Interpretation Charts / Log Interpretation Principles and Applications.

Question 11: Recoverable Oil from ISF/Sonic and CNL/FDC Logs (20 marks)

Question text not reproduced: the examination questions are © Engineers and Geoscientists BC. Open the official past paper (linked at the top of this page) to read the question, then follow the worked solution below.

Given. Rw=0.05 Ω·m at formation temperature; ISF/sonic log (SP, IL/SFL resistivity, transit time, Fig. 11.26) and CNL/FDC log (caliper/GR, φCNL/φFDC, Fig. 11.27) over 6900–7000 ft; A=40 acres, FR=35% (recovery factor), Bo=1.25 RB/STB, n=2 (saturation exponent, formula sheet).

Find. (a) Oil/water contact, if any. (b) Σφihi(So)i over the productive interval. (c) Recoverable oil, NR.

Approach. Put both figures on one depth scale from their printed 6900 ft and 7000 ft ticks; use the GR and the neutron–density separation to pick sand from shale, the deep induction to pick the resistive (hydrocarbon-bearing) part of the sand, and the two porosity curves (averaged, as the question instructs) for φ. Convert each pay zone's Rt to So via Humble + Archie, sum φh(So), and scale by the volumetric recoverable-oil formula from the attachment.

[Figure not reproduced: Caliper/gamma-ray, resistivity and porosity tracks of Figs. 11.26 and 11.27 over 6880-6955 ft. See the official exam paper or the cited reference text.]

The pay interval as printed, 6880–6955 ft, assembled from Fig. 11.27 (caliper/GR and porosity, source page 13) and Fig. 11.26 (resistivity, source page 12) on a common depth scale tied to the printed 6900 ft and 7000 ft ticks; depth lines every 5 ft are added. The GR drop, the resistivity rise and the convergence of the two porosity curves all start together at ≈6899 ft and all end together at ≈6932 ft.

(a) Oil/water contact

Reading Figs. 11.26 and 11.27 together against the printed 6900 ft and 7000 ft depth ticks:

No oil/water contact can be picked on these logs. An OWC is a resistivity break at constant lithology and porosity; here the resistivity collapse at 6932–6934 ft coincides exactly with the GR rise to shale values and with the neutron–density curves separating, so the base of the hydrocarbon column is a lithologic (shale) boundary at ≈6932 ft, not a fluid contact. The sands below that shale do read wet (Rt ≈ 1 Ω·m, of the same order as their own Ro), but they are separate, shalier sand bodies beneath a shale break and therefore cannot define a contact for the sand above. Base of pay is taken at ≈6932 ft.

(b) Σφihi(So)i

Net pay is the clean, resistive part of the 6902–6932 ft sand; the shalier, low-resistivity streak at 6922–6927 ft is excluded as non-pay. Porosity is the arithmetic mean of φCNL and φFDC, as the question instructs, and both curves read 29–33 p.u. throughout the pay, so a single φ = 0.31 is used for both intervals; Rt is the plateau deep-induction reading, ≈7 Ω·m in each.

ZoneInterval (ft)hi (ft)φi = avg(φCNL,φFDC)Rt,i (Ω·m)
1 (main pay sand)6902–69222031%≈ 7
— (shaly streak, non-pay)6922–6927——≈ 2
2 (lower pay sand)6927–6932531%≈ 7
  1. Formation resistivity factor and So, via Humble's correlation and Archie (n=2), using Rw=0.05 Ω·m directly (already at formation temperature): $$F=\frac{0.62}{\phi^{2.15}},\qquad R_o=F R_w,\qquad S_w=\sqrt{\frac{R_o}{R_t}},\qquad S_o=1-S_w$$ With φ=0.31 in both zones: F=0.62/0.312.15=7.69; Ro=(7.69)(0.05)=0.385 Ω·m; Sw=√(0.385/7)=0.234; $\boxed{S_o=0.766}$ in each.
  2. Sum φihi(So)i over the two pay zones (the shaly streak and everything below the 6932 ft shale contribute zero net oil pay): $$\sum \phi_i h_i (S_o)_i = (0.31)(20)(0.766)+(0.31)(5)(0.766)=4.75+1.19=\boxed{5.94\ \text{ft}}$$

(c) Recoverable oil

  1. Volumetric recoverable-oil formula (formula sheet), with FR already a fractional recovery factor: $$N_R = 7758\,\frac{A\,F_R}{B_o}\sum h_i\phi_i(S_o)_i = 7758\times\frac{(40)(0.35)}{1.25}\times 5.94$$ $$N_R = 7758\times 11.2\times 5.94 = \boxed{516{,}000\ \text{STB}\approx 0.52\ \text{MMSTB}}$$
QuantityResult
Oil/water contactNone visible; base of pay is the shale at ≈ 6932 ft
Net pay thickness25 ft (20 ft + 5 ft)
Average porosity over the pay31%
So (both zones)0.766
Σφihi(So)i5.94 ft
Recoverable oil, NR≈ 516,000 STB (≈ 0.52 MMSTB)
Check: the two figures are analog logs whose only printed depth labels are 6900 ft and 7000 ft, so every depth quoted here comes from linear interpolation between those two ticks (±1–2 ft), and the zone values are readings: φ ±2 p.u., Rt ±30% (the deep curve ranges 5–11 Ω·m across the pay). Treat NR as an order-of-magnitude volumetric: taking the whole 6902–6932 ft interval as one 30-ft zone at Rt≈6 Ω·m instead gives Σφh(So) = 6.95 ft and NR ≈ 0.60 MMSTB, so the defensible answer is 0.5–0.6 MMSTB. What does NOT move with the reading tolerance is the zonation: the resistive sand is a single body between shales at 6899 ft and 6932 ft, and nothing below 6934 ft reads above 1.8 Ω·m.