NivaarExam PrepOfficial exam papers ↗

24-Pet-B1 Natural Gas Engineering · December 2019

Question 7 of 10: Neutron-Density Porosity and Sxo in a Gas Sand

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

Notes on this paper

National Examinations, 17-Pet-B1, Well Logging and Formation Evaluation — December 2019, 3 hours, closed book (Casio or Sharp approved calculators permitted), 10 questions, all marked.

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 7: Neutron-Density Porosity and Sxo in a Gas Sand (15 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.

QuantityValue
Apparent neutron porosity, φN (sandstone matrix)5%
Bulk density, ρb2.0 g/cm³
Matrix (sandstone) density, ρma2.65 g/cm³ (printed on the attachment chart, source p.13)
Mud-filtrate density, ρmf (fresh mud)1.00 g/cm³ (printed on the attachment chart, source p.13)
Gas density, ρg0 g/cm³ (printed on the attachment chart, source p.13 — the exam’s own “low density” gas)

Find. True porosity φ and flushed-zone filtrate saturation Sxo, both without and with the neutron excavation-effect correction.

Approach. Nothing here needs to be assumed. The attachment reproduces BOTH the φD–φN gas crossplot (source p.13, carrying true-porosity and Sxo contours and an annotation box reading ρmf=1, ρg=0, ρma=2.65 g/cm³) and the formula sheet (source p.12), which prints the two relations this question is built on:

$$\phi=\frac{\rho_{ma}-\rho_b+\phi_N}{\rho_{ma}},\qquad \phi_N=\phi\,S_{xo}$$

Part (i) is those two lines evaluated directly. Part (ii) re-solves the same pair with the Segesman–Liu excavation term added to the neutron response, which is exactly how the printed chart is constructed — so part (ii) can equally be read straight off the attachment.

  1. Apparent density porosity from ρb (the chart entry point). $$\phi_{D}=\frac{\rho_{ma}-\rho_b}{\rho_{ma}-\rho_{mf}}=\frac{2.65-2.0}{2.65-1.00}=\frac{0.65}{1.65}=\boxed{39.4\%}$$ Against φN=5% that is a 34 p.u. separation — the classic neutron-density gas crossover — and the point (φN, φD) = (5, 39.4) is where the attachment chart is entered.
  2. WITHOUT the excavation effect: the formula sheet in one line. With ρg=0 the three-component density mixing law $\rho_b=(1-\phi)\rho_{ma}+\phi S_{xo}\rho_{mf}+\phi(1-S_{xo})\rho_g$ collapses to $\rho_b=\rho_{ma}-\phi\rho_{ma}+\phi S_{xo}$, and because $\phi S_{xo}$ IS the neutron reading, no iteration is needed: $$\phi=\frac{\rho_{ma}-\rho_b+\phi_N}{\rho_{ma}}=\frac{2.65-2.00+0.05}{2.65}=\frac{0.70}{2.65}=\boxed{26.4\%}$$ $$S_{xo}=\frac{\phi_N}{\phi}=\frac{0.05}{0.2642}=\boxed{18.9\%}$$
  3. WITH the excavation effect: what the correction actually is. Replacing liquid-filled pore volume with gas removes far more hydrogen than simple volumetric mixing allows for, so the neutron tool reads LOWER than $\phi S_{xo}$ by the Segesman–Liu excavation term: $$\phi_N=\phi S_{xo}-\Delta\phi_{ex},\qquad \Delta\phi_{ex}=\left(2\phi^2S_{xo}+0.04\phi\right)\left(1-S_{xo}\right)$$ The density leg picks up the companion electron-density effect: a gas of true density $\rho_g$ is seen by the density tool as an APPARENT density $\rho_{g,a}=1.335\rho_g-0.188$, i.e. $-0.19$ g/cm³ for the chart’s $\rho_g=0$, so $$\phi_D=\frac{\phi\left[\rho_{ma}-S_{xo}\rho_{mf}-(1-S_{xo})\rho_{g,a}\right]}{\rho_{ma}-\rho_{mf}}=\frac{\phi\left(2.84-1.19\,S_{xo}\right)}{1.65}$$
  4. Solve the pair for φ and Sxo. Two equations, two unknowns, with $\phi_D=0.3939$ and $\phi_N=0.05$. Eliminating Sxo between them and solving by bisection: $$\phi=\boxed{26.6\%},\qquad S_{xo}=\boxed{33.3\%}$$
  5. Cross-check against the printed chart. The same two equations reproduce the attachment’s own contours: along the φD=39.4 p.u. row the Sxo=10/20/30/40/50% curves compute to φN=0.50/2.20/4.24/6.71/9.71 p.u. against 0.49/2.18/4.29/6.80/9.81 p.u. read from the printed chart, and the φ=30% true-porosity contour to 12.0 p.u. against 11.8 p.u. read from the chart. Entering the chart at (5, 39.4) therefore lands between its 30% and 40% Sxo curves and just above its 25% porosity contour — a direct chart read of φ about 26–27% and Sxo about 33%, matching the algebra.
QuantityWithout excavation effectWith excavation effect
True porosity, φ26.4%26.6%
Flushed-zone filtrate saturation, Sxo18.9%33.3%
Check: ρma=2.65, ρmf=1 and ρg=0 g/cm³ are printed in the annotation box on the attachment chart (source p.13) — none of them is assumed, and the chart itself IS reproduced in this paper. The excavation coefficients and the apparent-gas-density relation are the standard Segesman–Liu and electron-density forms; they are used here because they reproduce the exam’s own printed contours to better than 0.5 p.u. (step 5), not as a free assumption. Note the lesson the two cases teach: true porosity barely moves (26.4% to 26.6%) while Sxo nearly doubles (18.9% to 33.3%), because the excavation term removes apparent neutron porosity that would otherwise be booked as filtrate.