Logging and Log Interpretation - Neutron Log Correction Charts for Borehole Conditions and Bed Thickness

An experimental setup is described whereby the responses of Neutron logging instruments have been determined opposite formations of different porosities and under various borehole conditions. The results of these tests are presented in several charts which show how the Neutron log is affected by the following factors: hole diameter, casing, cement, salinity and weight of drilling mud, and position of logging tool with respect to the wall of the hole. The responses in the case of empty holes are also shown. A chart is furthermore presented which shows the shapes of the Neutron log, as a function of logging speed and time constant, at the boundaries between two formations with different porosities. These were derived mathematically using as a basis laboratory determination of the shape of the curve under static conditions, i.e. at very low logging speed. Corrections for the readings made opposite thin beds are given by these computations. The correction is found negligible under usual logging conditions for beds thicker than about 4 ft. INTRODUCTION The Neutron log is used in borehole surveys both for the delineation of porous formations and for the quantitative estimation of their porosities.1,2,3,4,5 It is common practice to calibrate the response of the Neutron log in terms of porosity values for each given geological unit by means of empirical comparisons between the deflections of the neutron curve and the porosity values given by the core analysis in a sufficient number of wells. Usually, the plots of the porosity values vs Neutron log deflections show a definite trend. It is therefore possible to trace an average line across the plotted points. This average line constitutes a calibration curve which can be used to evaluate the porosities from the Neutron logs in the other wells drilled in the same region. Futhermore, when the porosity values are plotted on a logarithmic scale and the Neutron log deflections on a linear scale, the calibration curve is practically a straight line. Accordingly the calibration curves are often determined by simply tracing a straight line between two points corresponding to two widely different porosities. Different choices are made for these two points, depending on local conditions. For example, one point will be defined by plotting the deflection of the Neutron curve opposite a formation known to be very tight, for which an average porosity value of 1 or 2 per cent is assumed. The other point may correspond to shale sections, to which a porosity of around 40 per cent is ascribed. The information provided by the eletrical logs — in particular the Laterolog, Limestone log or Micro-Latero-log — is also very often a help in the calibration of the Neutron logs. Empirical approaches such as these make possible the derivation of fairly reliable porosity values from the Neutron logs in many cases, at least in open holes and in essentially clean formations. There are, however, several causes of uncertainty which may sometimes entail appreciable errors. On the one hand, the Neutron log readings are influenced by the borehole conditions: hole diameter, presence or absence of casing and cement, presence or absence of drilling mud, characteristics of the mud, and position of the logging instrument with respect to the wall of the hole. The amplitudes of the curves opposite thin beds are furthermore atfected by the bed thickness,