Reservoir Engineering - General - The Meaning of the Triple Value in Noncapillary Buckley-Leveret...

AII evaluation is made of the acoustic velocity log for measurement of formation porosity. Plots of field-observer1 velocities vs core-measured porosities of sandstones and limestotnes with inter intergranular porosity show that the velocity log gives a useful measure of porotity, in agreement with published data. A new method of plotting electrical and velocity log data makes it easier to recognize hydrocarbon-water coritnct~ from log darn and to make serni-quantitative estinlates of hydrocarbon saturation. Two examples of this interpretation technique are given. This paper also discusses the various factors that affect acoustic velocity and shows how corrections can be made for some of these factors. INTRODUCTION Although the continuous velocity log was developed primarily as an aid to seismic interpretation, it is finding widespread use for measurement of porosity. The purpose of this paper is to evaluate this use of the log. Results are presented for the velocity-porosity relationship in many sandstones and one limestone. Practical applications of porosity values derived from the velocity log to improve interpretation of electrical surveys are presented. Various parameters which affect velocity in porous media are considered. Porosity, composition, cementa-tion, pressure difference (overburden pressure minus fluid pressure), fluid saturation, and wellability are discussed. Some of the ideas are opinions based on general considerations of well logging problems while others are supported by published data and our own observations. Major conclusions from these studies arc given in the body of the paper and detailed discussions of some of the various factors affecting porosity are given in the Appendix. POROSITY Sandstones The primary factor affecting the velocity of sound in porous media is porosity. Wyllie, et al,1 have reported a time average equation for the relationship between velocity and porosity.* This has found considerable acceptance in the industry. Other relationships between velocity and porosity have been proposed, none of which are entirely satisfactory. It is doubtful that any one relationship will completely describe all situations. We have tried an empirical relationship based on correlating log velocities with core-measured porosities. Measured porosities were averaged over a depth interval equal to the spacing used in recording the velocity logs. The depth range for the information used was from 2,000 to 12,000 ft. Velocity measurements were normalized for the effects of depth and overburden pressure. A detailed discussion of the basis for this normalization is given in the Appendix. The change is usually insignificant and when working with individual formations it can be neglected. All velocity measurements were normalized to a depth of 10,000 ft. The velocity-porosity data for sandstones in Fig. 1 came from 20 wells scattered throughout the Mid-Continent and Gulf Coast areas. The scatter of the data points is attributed to three causes: 1. There is no theoretical basis for expecting an exact velocity vs porosity relationship and it is not possible to correct precisely for the effects of such factors as impurities, grain shape, manner of cementation, etc. Some of these factors are discussed in the Appendix. 2. Porosities measured by core analysis are not necessarily representative of what the velocity log "sees". 3. Inaccuracies appear in the velocity log reading. This is particularly true of velocities from one-receiver logging tools.*" A linear-time curve (time-average equation) is plotted in Fig. 1 along with the best straight line through the points. Velocities used for the linear-time curves were 19,500 ft/sec for the matrix velocity (zero porosity) and 5,500 ft/sec for fluid velocity. For clean sandstones with velocities greater than 10,000 ft/sec, there is little difference between the velocity-porosity and the time-porosity curves. Both curves are well within the scatter of data points. The data points in Fig. 1 were restricted primarily to clean sandstones, using the SP and/or gamma-ray logs as clues to the lithology. Where a lithologic de-