Page 111 - Well Logging and Formation Evaluation
P. 111

Advanced Log Interpretation Techniques     101

               In many field static models currently being developed, all the net sand,
            porosity, and permeability are input from each well in the form of logs
            and geostatistics applied to determine the fieldwide averages, sometimes
            also using stochastic approaches (e.g., regarding the distribution of sand
            bodies). In this case the sampling part of the above becomes redundant.
            Such models will typically be upscaled for reservoir simulation.  The
            saturations will then be initialized using a saturation/height function
            (supplied by the petrophysicist).
               Sometimes it is the case that the whole model is completely wrong; for
            instance, based on one sample, the reservoir is assumed to be oil filled
            when in fact there is a gas column occupying most of the reservoir. In this
            case the “uncertainties” presented are obviously meaningless. It is rec-
            ommended that these eventualities be considered up front and, if neces-
            sary, completely separate scenarios built up, within which the theories
            presented above can still be applied.

               Exercise 5.5. Error Analysis


            1. Copy the GR, density, and deep resistivity values from the top of the
               log to the OWC (oil/water contact) into a spreadsheet. For the purposes
               of this exercise, treat this as a single zone.
            2. Use Monte Carlo analyses to determine the error in net/gross, poros-
               ity, and saturation for the averages derived in this well.



                            5.9 BOREHOLE CORRECTIONS

               I do not wish to cover this topic in any great detail. All the contractors
            provide borehole, shoulder-bed, and invasion correction charts for their
            tools, which can be applied as appropriate.
               I would like to make a few remarks about resistivity tools. Modeling
            of resistivity tools using analytical approaches or finite element modeling
            is extremely complicated. In fact no one has yet successfully modeled the
            combined effects of the borehole, invasion, and multiple dipping beds on
            the induction tool.
               Chart books treat each of these effects separately. Hence there is one
            chart for the borehole size/salinity, another for invasion, and another for
            (horizontal) shoulder-bed effects. Some software is available for handling
            dipping beds, but these programs usually assume no borehole or invasion.
            In reality, all these effects combine to produce a response that is extremely
   106   107   108   109   110   111   112   113   114   115   116