Reservoir Monitoring With the

Thermal Multigate Decay Log

D.F. Wyatt Jr., SPE, Welex
H.D. Smith Jr., SPE, Welex

Summary. The thermal multigate decay (TMDTM) logging system, which uses a two-exponential model to isolate borehole and
formation E effects, can be an effective device for the high-accuracy environment of monitor logging. The minimized influence of
borehole parameters on the formation sigma (E~ZRR) results in residual oil saturation (ROS) calculations that compare favorably
with expected values. The measurement of borehole parameters enables the user to determine whether proper formation flushing
has been achieved and whether borehole fluid contamination of perforated intervals presents a potential interpretation problem.
Test pit data and field results indicate that the use of flushing salinities less than approximately 70,000 ppm NaCI can result in
significant borehole effects to the observed formation decay rates. The necessary cross section corrections may induce systematic
errors into the ROS calculations that are generally larger than any increased statistical uncertainties associated with using a smaller
water salinity contrast.

Introduction
The TMD logging tool is designed to measure EFM , the macro-
scopic cross section for thermal neutron absorption in downhole
formations. For many years, instruments that measure EFM have
been used to differentiate between water and hydrocarbons in salt
water reservoirs. The ability to measure and quantify hydrocarbon
saturation behind casing has allowed pulsed neutron capture logs
to be used for a wide variety of purposes, including locating
bypassed hydrocarbons, observing the movement of hydrocarbon/
water contacts, monitoring reservoir depletion, determining ROS
in a log-inject-Iog process, and measuring the efficiency of secon-
dary and tertiary recovery projects, such as CO 2 floods.
Other pulsed neutron instruments capable of measuring EFM
have been described previously. 1-4 While the primary objective of
all these instruments is to determine EFM , significant variations in
the values measured have been caused by the methods used for data
analysis. These EFM variations have often been induced solely by
changes in borehole conditions between log runs. Borehole effects
especially need to be identified and/or minimized in monitor log-
ging applications where borehole fluids are often intentionally or
unavoidably varied between logging runs.
This paper will review the principles of operation of the TMD
logging system, the details of which have been discussed in previous
publications. 5 -7 The method of data analysis will be described, in
particular how the technique permits more borehole-insensitive, and
yet statistically highly reproducible, EFM values. The technique
also allows generation of additional logging curves that are useful
in measuring log quality, providing information concerning bore-
hole contents, and are indicative of water flow in and around the
borehole. In addition, examples will be presented that demonstrate
the use of the TMD for reservoir monitoring purposes, including
applications to log-inject-Iog and CO 2 floods.
Principles of Operation
A simplified diagram of the TMD system is shown in Fig. I. As
in previous pulsed neutron capture systems, the TMD uses a
14-MeV accelerator to create a time-dependent thermal neutron dis-
tribution in the vicinity of the borehole. By measuring the decay
rate of the gamma rays generated from the capture of the thermal
neutrons, the macroscopic cross section EFM can be obtained.
The TMD differs significantly from other systems in the method
used to determine the value of EFM . A schematic of the pulse- and
time-gating parameters of the system is shown in Fig. 2. The neu-
tron source is pulsed with a fixed repetition frequency of 1,250
bursts per second with a burst width of 60 microseconds. Gamma
rays are measured in the time between each neutron burst in six
Copyright 1987 Society of Petroleum Engineers
SPE Formation Evaluation, December 1987
separate gates that collectively span almost the entire decay from
the end of one neutron source burst until the beginning of the next.
As shown in Fig. 2, the first two gates are opened shortly after
the end of the neutron source burst and are positioned to detect
gamma rays originating from the capture of neutrons in both the
formation and the borehole. The next four gates are each progres-
sively wider and at longer delay times from the source burst. These
gates detect primarily formation events, with the last gate (Gate
6) being sufficiently delayed that 3 % or less of the counts meas-
ured in the gate are from the borehole region (unless the borehole
is badly washed out and contains neat cement in the annulus out-
side the casing).
At the end of I second of operation, the neutron generator is
turned off for 60 milliseconds to measure the background count
rate in each detector. The opening of the 55-millisecond background
gate is delayed 5 milliseconds to avoid measuring residual gamma
rays from thermal neutron capture.
The background is filtered and subtracted from the dead-time cor-
rected count rates in the six primary gates for each detector. The
resultant count rates represent points on the composite borehole plus
formation decay curves. These count rates are filtered over a short,
vertical interval of the borehole (one to several feet, depending on
filter parameters) and entered into the field computer system, which
uses the six points along the decay curve in an iterative least-squares
technique to separate the composite curve into its borehole and for-
mation decay components. 5 Fig. 3 shows the results of a calcula-
tion of the borehole plus formation components of a decay curve.
The points on the curve are experimentally measured count rates,
while the solid line represents the sum of the calculated borehole
and formation components (the two dashed lines). Fig. 4 depicts
the results of a similar calculation for different borehole and for-
mation decay rates.
The field computer calculates a formation-diffusion-corrected cap-
ture cross section, E~ZRR. Detectors near any pulsed source meas-
ure an artificially high apparent EFM caused by a spreading of the
thermal neutron cloud with time because of neutron diffusion away
from the source. At longer detector spacings, diffusion effects are
much smaller, yielding a more accurate but more statistical EFM .
The E~ZRR curve is computed in most formations from EFM-SS by
applying a EFM-based diffusion correction derived from test for-
mation data. 5 EFM-LS is also incorporated into the computation of
E~ZRR in low-R N1F (i.e., low-cp) formations, where diffusion ef-
fects are largest. The overall diffusion corrections used to obtain
E~ZRR are therefore based on EFM itself, and also on RNIF (and
hence formation porosity). Note that basic neutron transport the-
ory indicates that EFM and cp are the only two variables needed to
compute formation neutron diffusion length. In a postlogging pro-
gram, E~ZRR may be adjusted slightly for formation/borehole in-
401
 Log Presentation
The "dual exponential fit" method of data analysis used in the TMD
allows the determination of an unusually large amount of informa-
tion about the formation and the borehole environment. Because
of the large number of useful output curves generated, the field
log contains two presentations, a PRIMARY and a QUALITY log.
The PRIMARY log contains the infprmation normally needed for
DATA PREPROCESSING basic TMD interpretation. The QUALITY log presents supplemental
(1) FILTER (2) DEAD·TIME
curves that are useful in evaluating log quality and in interpreting
CORR (3) BKGND CORR
the log in unusual downhole situations.
Table I contains a complete list of the curves presented by the
GAMMA
DET
0 GAMMA/eel
SECTION

--
TMD, along with a description of the use and application of each,
with special emphasis on monitor logging features. Table 2 lists

0
MAIN PROGRAM TO EXTRACT
TWO·EXPONENTIALS the specifications of the TMD logging instrument.
~"'
ELECTRONICS
lJATA
SECTION COUNT _ _ _ OUTPUl
'lOG
<;CAlf·
,,-
\
_..)
COMPON.",'
Log Examples
= -- BH \ 'M

TIME The following log examples illustrate applications of the TMD sys-
tem to several different EOR projects. Unless otherwise indicated,
all logs were run with the standard field logging system 6 at ap-
DET" ?
0 DETECTOR
SECTION
proximately 10 ftlmin [3.048 m/min] and all log curves are dis-
oET .. 1
0 PRIMARY
LOG
QUALITY
LOG
played exactly as observed (without shifting or normalization).
--

~
GEN
DATA NEEDED PARAMPEAS TO Well A: Log-Inject-Log. An accurate and economical method for
FOR ROUTINE ESTABLISH LOG
SOl CALCULATJON AND DATA QUALITY
determining ROS before injriating EOR operations is the log-
GENERATOR
injection-log (LIL) technique. 8,9 If log data are collected immedi-
f{
HIGH VOLTAGE

~~<
SECTION
HV
SUPPLY
Fig. 1-TMD logging system.
teraction effects using the measured borehole cross sect jon, EBH. SS ,
borehole fluid salinity, casing size, and cement parameters. In gener-
al, this borehole correction is negligible unless low-salinity
( < 70,000 ppm NaCI) fluid is present in the casing or a large, fresh
cement sheath fills the casing-formation annulus. The output of this
correction is E~W, the intrinsic formation E.
The borehole capture cross section, EBH , is also computed in
real time, as are the intercepts for each component (i.e., initial values
AFM and ABH at the end of the neutron burst). These calculations
are performed for both long- and short-spaced detector data, and
the short-spaced results are displayed on the log. The calculations
of EFM are as free as possible from borehole effects because the
borehole contributions to tpe overall decay curve are essentially
"subtracted" during the data reduction process. This last feature
is particularly important in monitor and log-inject-Ipg applications,
where borehole conditions (casing fluid salinity andlor borehole
hardware) are often intentionally or unavoidably changed between
logs.
ately after andlor during flushing of a reservoir with fluids of known
properties, most interpretation parameters may be eliminated from
the analysis. The advantage of using primarily measured data in
evaluation of a reservoir is the high level of confidence afforded
the final answer. Anotqer advantage specific to the TMD is that
the minimal sensitivity of E~,eRR to borehole fluid changes reduces
the systematic borehole-induced errors common to one-exponential-
system LIL anijlysis.
Well A was drilled in 1955 in east Texas. The logged interval
was a sandi shale sequence. Primary production from the reservoir
sand of interest was from a natural waterdrive, supplemented by
waterflooding for several years in a secondary recovery phase. The
reservoir had watered out when TMD logs were run (Fig. 5) in
a LIL operation designed to evaluate the economics of a tertiary
recovery project. The reservoir sand had never been produced in
Well A, and full cores had been collected over the entire interval
when the well was drilled.
A preliminary TMD was run in Feb. 1984 before cement squeez-
ing and perforl!ting the subject sand (640 to 675 ft [195 to 206 m]).
After completion, interstitial 95,000 ppm NaCl water was produced
into a large tank for several days before a second (base) log, to
clean the perforations and also to provide a reservoir of water for
use in the LIL project. The LIL base log was run while the pro-
duced interslitial water was being reinjected into the zone of in-
terest to ensure ROS conditions during logging. No significant

NOTE: O/>4E BACKGROUND CYCLE

AFTER EACH 1250 BURSTS

TOTAL
COUNT RATE ..........

\~-----H----'

7~~1/
HHHI I I
GATES--- 5 6 12345 6 BACKGROUND
f4-- 8OO"S---I.....I.._-- 8OO"s "I" \)-5ms-t--l~ 55ms --+1
TIME _____

Fig. 2-TMD tool neutron bursts and time gates.

402 SPE Formation Evaluation, December 1987

 NEAR DETECTOR DECAY

NEAR DETECTOR DECAY

TIME
W
...J \ GATE
«
u
\
, 1

en W
...J
>-
a:: «
u
iir- ~ en
>-
a::
iD CALCULATED SUM OF BH AND FM «
a:: §
a:: 0
r-
~ g , \ ~ 3 COMPONENTS
en
r-
z "
\
,
""~
'" 4
iD
a::
~ 0
:J
o , ,,~ en iii
r-
U
a::
\ "~ z
:J
\
\
,
o \ IFM--.u= I~~", 0
t , , U
a::
\

I,,, = 34.6
~ 0 ~=4.1 \ 0
w g A,ftI \
, r-
Q , U
w
a:: = 84.0' , r- 0
« I."..ss w ~ ,
~ 8
Q ,
, a::
, ~
\
,
\
Z a : : = 0.67
\
,
\
\
,
NEUTRON \
BURST
, I .. = 89.2\
\

'---'----1----L-+------L-+---'-----I'I-~--ill___~-l__I--'-~ \

--'--+~c'-__II---L..........jli_~~
100 200 300. 400. 500. 600

TIME (MICROSECONDS) '---'___+--.....L._---+

100. 200. 300. \ 400. 500. 600.

TIME (MICROSECONDS)
Fig. 3-Near detector decay curves for 42% porosity fresh-
water sand and 10-in. borehole containing a cemented 7-in. Fig. 4-Decay curves for 20 0Al porosity borated saltwater sand
casing with 135,000 ppm NaCI water. and a-in. borehole containing a 7V4-in. casing with fresh water.

differences in log response were detected between the preliminary
TMD and the LIL base log TMD. The borehole geometry is illus-
trated in Fig. 5 with the TMD base log. Five log passes at \0 ft/min
[3.048 m/min] were recorded over the sand of interest. Two of these
were logged up to include a low E formation above the upper squash
packer to be used as a reference zone. The E5iZRR , R N1F , and E BH.
ss curves in Fig. 5 are mean values of the five runs, including
statistical error bands bracketing each curve to indicate the meas-
ured one-standard-deviation uncertainty in the mean of each. (The
standard deviation of the mean is the computed standard deviation
between measurements for the various runs divided by the square
root of the number of runs.) Also illustrated in the figure are the
QUALITY log curves from the first of the five passes, run at the
time the reinjection phase was initiated. From the uniform and low
value of RBHIFM' borehole conditions can be seen to be good over
the entire logged section. Note the large increase in the background
count rate in the long-spaced detector curve on the QUALITY log
above the squash packer at 490 ft [150 m]. This background in-
crease (together with an absence of high natural gamma activity)
indicates water flow vertically upward in the borehole region above
this depth, and is caused by oxygen activation. 10, I I The flow was
caused by water leaking around the squash packer and filling the
casing/tubing annulus above the packer. When this annulus filled,
the injection rate dropped from 600 BID to - 50 BID [95 m 3 /d
to - 8 m 3 /d], at which level it remained throughout the remainder
of the base log runs, The subsequent base log passes were run af-
ter the annulus filled, and this background increase was not ob-
served. Note also from Fig. 5 that there is a small increase in
background count rate extending from near the top of the perfora-
tions (640 ft [195 m]), upward to approximately 6\0 ft [186 m].
This increase is a result of a water channel outside the casing up-
ward from the perforated zone into the shaly sands above. The com-
munication into these zones was also indicated from EFM changes
subsequently observed during the LIL operation.
In the next phase of the operation, 185,000 ppm NaCI brine was
injected into the zone of interest, and TMD log passes were run
SPE Formation Evaluation, December 1987
several times during the high-salinity phase to check the status of
the flushing. The last set of five runs (made after injection of several
PV's of water over the zone) was ~rocessed similarly to the base
log data, and Fig. 6 shows the E5iZ Rand EBH-SS mean value logs
superimposed on the corresponding values from the base run, The
differences between these log values, LiE5iZRR and LiE BH-SS , are
also shown in Fig. 6, as are the standard deviations in c,u. of
LiE5iZRR and liE BH-SS' The larger statistical variations in the stan-
dard deviation curves above 570 ft [174 m] were caused by only
two passes being run above this depth. Note from EBH-SS that the
borehole now contains higher-salinity water not only below the lower
packer, but in fact all the way up the borehole across both packers
(not unexpected in view of the packer leak observed earlier). The
E¥ZRR curves indicate clearly that the zone uniformly took fluid,
but that the interval (608 to 620 ft [185 to 189 m]) above the sand
of interest also took salt water, confirming the water channel indi-
cated previously. Observe that despite the -IOO,OOO-ppm NaCI
ehan e in borehole fluid salinity, no statistically significant change
8
in EFZRR was observed in either the 500- to 600-ft [152- to 183-m]
shale or the low-sigma zone above the upper packer. This is a re-
sult of both the borehole effects reduction of the two-exponential
processin and the borehole/formation interaction 5 being mini-
e
mized (EFZRR =0 E~J) because> 70,000 ppm NaCI fluids were
used in both injection phases. It is strongly recommended that this
low-salinity cutoff be used for all LIL projects because the systematic
uncertainty associated with correcting E¥ZRR in very-low-salinity
boreholes can be much larger than any increased LiEFM statistical
uncertainty caused by using a more restricted range of flushing sa-
linities.
The ROS in the computed log, using core porosities for ¢ input
and the LiE¥ZRR curve in Fig. 6, is shown in Fig. 7. ROS's of
\0 to 20% are calculated for the zone, in good agreement with the
15 % predicted by core studies. Unfortunately, the generally low
ROS made tertiary recovery economically unattractive. It should
be mentioned that the variations in the calculated ROS arc a ftmc-
tion not only of the statistical and systematic uncertainties of the
403
 TABLE 1-TMD OUTPUT CURVES

Curve
Mnemonics Description Application
Primary log
E~3RR Formation capture cross section, corrected for S w calculations
formation diffusion effects
RNIF Ratio of count rates in Gates 3 through 6 of the Porosity determination
short-spaced detector to the count rates in Gates 3
through 6 of the long-spaced detector
E BH.SS Short-spaced detector borehole cross section Determining borehole salinity or changes in salinity;
gravel-pack identification; borehole fluid contacts;
packer locations; cement tops; gas or air in the
vicinity of the borehole
(G3-6)SS and Dead time and background-corrected count rates Visual identification of gas and low-porosity
(G3-6)lS from Gates 3 through 6 for both the short-spaced intervals; response is similar to conventional
and long-spaced detector, overlain on log neutroh log count rates
Calculated formation component counts in Gate 6 Indicator of EFM data quality, borehole con'ditions,
divided by the total observed counts in Gate 6 cement thickness, washouts, residual invasion
(primary use in low·salinity borehole environments)
GR Gamma ray log Correlation, formation lithology, determination of
shale content
CCl Casing collar locator Depth correlation
Quality log
E FM•SS Formation capture cross section, short-spaced
detector (sometimes used in Lll and monitor log vs. E FM. SS overlay; indicates EFM
E FM. LS
applications because of better statistical repeatability; indicates formation diffusion effects;
repeatability) indicates proper operation of each detector
Formation capture cross section, long-spaced
detector
J
G4ERROR Fit error curve, written as Checks tool operation; checks goodness of two-
exponential fit
G4 1 G4 BH·CALC + G4 FM·CALC
ERROR = - G4 aBS

RBHIFM Ratio of borehole counts calculated for the short- Indicator of gas or air in the vicinity of the borehole.
spaced detector to the formation counts calculated Often provides caliper-like information as to hole
for the short-spaced detector size, washouts, etc., especially in saline borehole
environments. Indicates casing changes, cement
tops, gravel packs, and packers.
Count rate of the borehole component of the short- Variations reflect changes in borehole conditions;
spaced detector used in combination with R BHIFM
SS-BKG Filtered background count rates from each detector Identify upward water flow by measuring the gamma
lS-BKG rays produced from oxygen activation; also indicate
detector stability and any noise in TMD system
electronics.
EQUAL' GR, CCl Same as on PRIMARY log

measured EFM , but also of any error or inconsistency in injected

TABLE 2-TMD TOOL SPECIFICATIONS
OD, in.
Overall length, including gamma ray and CCl, ft
Pressure rating, psi
Temperature rating, OF
Source parameters
Neutron energy, MeV
Repetition rate, bursts/sec
Burst width, J1.sec
Detector parameters
Type
Dimensions: Near, in.
Far, in.
Time gates in each detector
Energy bias, keV
Surface instrumentation
Nominal logging speed, ft/min
water salinity or effective formation porosity. Total reservoir water
111/'6
flushing is also assumed in the theory. In this particular example,
-34 estimated effective porosity information from core data is the con-
15,000 trolling factor in ROS error propagation. The lack of available foot-
300 by-foot porosity data probably causes most of the variations in the
ROS curve. There is, however, adequate overall accuracy to make
14 an informed decision.
1,250 As a footnote, a final set of TMD runs was made after the well
60 had been produced long enough to allow the original interstitial water
salinity to be observed at the surface for several days, theoretically
Nal (TI)
0.75x4 removing all the 185,000 ppm NaCI brine, and hence returning the
0.75 x 6 well to base log conditions. It was expected that these data could
6 and background be used to reconfirm the above ROS values. However, the well
=60 was shut in for about 12 hours between the cessation of production
DlS/DlS IIIPlS and the TMD logging. An overlay of mean E~ERR and EBH. SS
15 to 30 curves from the original base log, the high-salinity log, and this
final log are shown in Fig. 8. Observe that the formation sigma
did not revert to its original value. Also note that the borehole sa-
linity profile did not show the original salinity either, with the bot-

404 SPE Formation Evaluation, December 1987

 PRIMARY LOG QUALITY LOG
~ _____ --=~""f~R_R_-,S"'T"O,'-"O"'EV'---__ -
00

I _~J~~~R_ G4ERROR
9~~------:-:j

I"

0--------
eel 20()Y1

Is-~- STO, OEV _--,

• - - - - - R_'L' _____ j ____ G(3-6JlS - - - 0
'00050000
8 EM + ST",O-"O-""EV,,-,---,3h30000=-----'G"-"I:30-6'-"')~S"CS-__o
400 h f-T---r----+---,----,-r---,:-i
•
:

i\
\0
~BH-SS...j
'~

'(
'.,

f--:----+--cDI----+-I\ "'"
G(3-6)LS~
(
I

It
Fig. 5-Base log-Well A.

tom of the perforated zone having a higher Ew than was originally
present. The interval above the bottom packer still contained the
high-salinity water, and (not shown) the interval above the upper
packer indicated a mixed salinity similar to that at the bottom of
the well. Because of this borehole contamination of the formation
across the perforations during logging, the last set of TMD data
could not be used to reconfirm the ROS calculated from the earlier
runs. This type of problem has probably been the cause of variable
results in many prior pulsed neutron LIL studies. Without bore-
hole indicators that are capable of clearly detecting and identifying
potential causes of formation sigma anomalies, a number of these
earlier studies were probably based on interpretatioll of logs af-
fected by borehole contamination or channeling.
Well B: CO 2 Flood Monitoring. Well B was drilled in the Loui-
siana gulf coast during the 1960's. The reservoir is a clean,
homogeneous, high-porosity sandstone completely developed and
bounded in all directions. In 1983, a pilot CO 2 flood was
designed 12 to evaluate the feasibility of this type of EaR project
in the area. Material-balance calculations showed the reservoir
nearing primary depletion, l11aking it a good candidate for a CO 2
flood.
After reworking the project wells in 1984, TMD base logs (Fig.
9) were run using the five-pass technique. Soon after, CO 2 injec-
tion was begun at the gas/oil contact in an updip injection wel\.
Approximately 6 months later, the tirst monitor logs were run (Fig.
10). At 3-ll)onth intervals, monitor logs were rerun to check the
flood status (Figs. 11 and 12; quality logs omitted). Fig. 13 shows
the base log and the latest monitor log with their oil/water contacts
marked.
By comparing subsequent monitor logs, the oil/water contact can
be seell to be moving down as CO 2 injection continues. Dissolved
CO 2 in the upper portion of each monitor log oil bank can be seen
froll) the RNIF curve as a decrease in the log value from one mon-
itor run to the next. Increased CO 2 can also be seen as a decrease
in EFM relative to thllt with pure oil prC&cnt (100% C02 vs. 100%
oil saturation would result in a 7-c.u. decrease in EFM ). Increased
scparation of the near anq far detector count rate curves is also an

SPE Formation Evaluation, December 1987 405

 o - STD.
- - -DEV.
- - -(<lIBH-")
- - - - -26
<lIBH-" +STD. DEV.
-75

alBN-SS
75 - - - - - - - - -15 ROS
eo 0 ,
<lIBH-" - STD. DEV.
7S -75
lBH-SS - SALT

~BH-SS - BASI: STD. DEV. (<lI'~")

'0 -10 5

~Oft ~-~~-~--+---~---~

o
o
o
o
o
o
o
1"to---++-'+--1 5•• ft r---'~----t-1+--+---"''7-I o

Fig. 7-Computer-assisted log analysis-Well A.

IBH-ss - FINAL
260--------80: 60 00

IBH-ss-sALTPHASE
2ecf-----------80-:- 80- - - - - - - - - -!~~R-RSALT
- - - - PHASE
- - - - - - - - - - - -00-

I BH- ss - BASI Ii~l-\It. . AL

60. ~------------------oo

ff------t--t-~-1 6 •• ft r-----1"(----t---=:O""....+-----":,.J •
~~~ r----+---''''''....j.=---+-----j
.:~
600 ft
FINAL~ ¥;
), .,._.::<:J>
SALT-+:: : -- p
',I ..".~
~ \ r(
.~~

I
BASE

' +!-'
BASE:
.\
:;

Fig. 6-0verlay of base and salt-phase logs-Well A. Fig. 8-0verlay of base, salt-phase, and final logs-Well A.

indication of increased CO 2 saturation in the oil. Observe that in
all the logs, the bottom 10 ft [3.048 m] of the oil bank does not
appear to contain significant dissolved CO 2 ,
After the last monitor run was made, CO 2 injection was halted
and field gas was injected to displace the CO 2 and to maintain
movement of the oil bank downdip. Initial oil production tests were
anticipated to begin in the near future.
The primary reason the TMD was chosen to monitor this flood
was the availability of borehole indicators. In a monitoring pro-
gram where changes in log response are to be attributed to changes
in reservoir characteristics, identification of changes in the bore-
hole environment is critical. While the two-exponential model used
by the TMD can account for most downhole borehole changes with
little or no influence on the log, the ability to identify potential prob-
lems caused by hardware changes or deterioration, or by very-Iow-
salinity borehole fluids, can be invaluable. The packers located at
318 to 328 and 418 to 428 ft [97 to 100 and 127 to 130 m] (Figs.
10 through 13) can be identified by the reduced count rates and
increases in E BH-SS ' The EBH-SS and RNIF anomaly at 288 to 304
ft [88 to 93 m] is caused by a fiberglass-to-steel-tubing crossover
assembly in the borehole. Both of the packers, the tubing and cross-
over assembly, and a gravel pack between the packers were placed
in the borehole after the base lOAwas run bl)t before the flood was
started. Note how well the Ep,e
curve repeats from the base log,
without a gravel pack, to the monitor runs, with the gravel pack
in place. The EBH-SS curve is different as a result of changes in
the borehole environment between logging runs and can be used
to evaluate the gravel pack integrity, at least on a qualitative basis.
In the upper section, 328 to 350 ft [100 to 107 m], very little gravel
is present. In the vicinity of the perforations in the bottom of the
interval, 398 to 418 ft [121 to 127 m], gravel-pack quality is also
lower. These indi~ations of missing gravel can be seen on the
EBH-SS curve as increases in the log value as a result of high-sigma
brine filling the casing/tubing annulus instead of low-sigma grav-
el. A reduction in the value of EQUAL below 1.0 «Figs. 10 through
12) is another indication of the gravel-packed zone. This change
in EQUAL is caused by the slow decay of neutrons in the gravel in
and around the borehole, which results in the presence of borehole
counts in even the late-measurement time gates. Because EQUAL
is the fraction of the total counts in Gate 6 (see Fig. 2) from the

406 SPE Formation Evaluation, December 1987

 (PRE-GRAVEL PACK)
PRIMARY LOG
00 ..
,\,COlR
"
Fig. 9-Base log-Well B.
formation component alone, EQUAL will be reduced because of
these borehole-related counts.
The TMD can be seen to be a viable tool in the monitoring of
CO 2 floods as evidenced by this example. Flood results and more
detailed data analyses should be released for publication by the oper-
ating company at the termination of the project.
Well C: LIL. Well C is a sand/shale sequence located in the Okla-
homa panhandle. This field has been on waterflood for approxi-
mately 17 years, with multiple water sources. The well was drilled
in 1983, and after production tests were run, it was determined that
this well was near ROS.
A LIL project was initiated to determine the feasibility of the tech-
nique in this field. In Spring 1985, LIL operations began. The well
was flowed until a high-quality water sample could be obtained,
the analysis of which showed a salinity of approximately 48,000
ppm NaCI. A base TMD log, consisting of five passes at 10 ft/min
[3.048 Jll/minJ, was run before high-salinity water injection_ The
formation was t!jen flushed with 160,000 ppm NaCl brine, replacing
SPE Formation Evaluation. December 1987
QUALITY LOG
G4
"9 - - - - - UROJ.
- - - - - - --1
eel
GAMMA SS-BKG AIH'TIHSS
f-----'c-----=,f------c'-1 400 II fI+---+--+H---+-~"---1
the movable pore fluids. Monitor TMD logs were run during the
injection phase to determine when flushing was complete. A final
set of TMD logs during injection was then obtained.
To aid in the data reduction, a statistical analysis program was
run on the TMD log data to average the multiple passes and to com-
pute the mean and standard deviation of the mean for the various
log curves. Fig. 14A illustrates a mUltiple-pass presentation of the
preflush TMD log data with the mean log values banded by their
standard deviations. Also plotted are the standard deviations of the
means for the major log curves. The first track contains a curve
(NUM-FILES in Fig. 14A) that denotes the number of log passes
usedJo compute the mean and standard-deviation values. Note the
low EFM-SS standard deviations (- 0.1 c.u.) in the zone of interest
(194 to 227 ft [59 to 69 m]). Fig. 14B shows similar TMD curves
computed from logs run dllring and after the high-salinity fluid-
injection phase_ To facilitate log comparison, Fig. IS illustrates
overlays of the mean before and after flush EBH-SS curves and
(borehole-corrected) EFM-SS curves. Note the higher EBH-SS values
in the well below the packer (75 to 82 ft [23 to 25 m]), continuing
407
 (AFTER GRAVEL PACK)
PRIMARY LOG
Fig. 10-First monitor log-Well B.
down through the bottom of the perforations at 227 ft [69 m]. This
indicates that the higher-salinity fluid after flushing is present in
the borehole. and hence also the formation, across the entire zone
of interest as desired. Also observe that the higher-salinity fluid
does not extend above the packer (verifying packer integrity), and
has not had time to mix with the lower-salinity fluid in the bore-
hole below the perforated interval. The initial log pass made during
the saltwater injection phase was not included in the Fig. 14B data
because EBH-55 showed that the borehole fluid opposite the bottom
9 ft [2.7 m] of perforations was still the original lower-salinity water
and not the saltwater flush fluid (see Fig. 15).
The base EFM-55 was normalized -1 c.u. (consistent with our
Y5pCJtRR to E1fJ charts 5) using formations above the zone of interest
to correct for the change in the decay rate of the formation caused
by the very-low-salinity (48,000 ppm NaCl) borehole fluid. As dis-
cussed earlier, it is highly recommended that the low-salinity flush
be at least 70,000 ppm NaCI to avoid having to make this type of
correction. A shift of -1 C.u. is generally 20 to 30% of the LlEFM
408
QUALITY LOG
______ _ItM:.Ls__ ________ _
observed in the flood, causing an undue margin for uncertainty to
be introduced into the interpretation.
The openhole logs were analyzed with a computer-assisted log
interpretation system 13 to compute effective porosity and litholo-
gy. The openhole interpretation, along with base and final TMD
log E~':tJ data, were entered into the TMD analysis program for
a final evaluation. Fig. 16 shows the answer product whose results
agreed quite well with supporting field data. Core data from an offset
well (Fig. 17) correlate to both the porosity and lithology in the
computed interpretation. ROS's of 35 to 40% can be seen across
the zone of interest. This ROS agrees closely with that predicted
from openhole logs, core-flushing studies, and single-well tracers
used in this well and in correlative zones in other wells in the field.
The encouraging results of this test are resulting in an extensive
field evaluation of ROS using the TMD in a LIL program. A CO 2
flood to recover the remaining oil is planned to begin when eco-
nomic conditions improve because ROS appears high enough to
justify tertiary recovery.
SPE l'ormation Evaluation, December 1987
 PRIMARY LOG PRIMARY LOG

Fig. 11-Second monitor log-Well B. Fig. 12-Third monitor log-Well B.

Conclusions ~lZRR = diffusion-corrected formation capture cross

The TMD logging system, which uses a two-exponential model to section, c.u.
isolate borehole and formation ~ effects, can be an effective device ~~r:tT = true (intrinsic) formation capture cross section,
for use in both LIL and monitor loggi~ Krojects. The minimized c.u.
influence of borehole parameters on ~pZ R results in ROS calcu- ~FM-LS = formation capture cross section measured in long-
lations that compare favorably with expected values. The simulta- spaced detector, c.u.
neous measurement of borehole parameters enables the user to ~FM-SS = formation cross section measured in short-spaced
determine whether the desired downhole flushing is being achieved, detector, c.u.
and whether borehole fluid contamination of perforated intervals
~QUAL = calculated formation counts divided by measured
presents a potential interpretation problem.
From both test pit data 5 and field results, we have concluded total counts in Gate 6
that all flushing salinities in LIL projects should exceed approxi- ~w = water capture cross section, c.u.
mately 70,000 ppm NaC!. If this is not done, significant borehole- tJ.~BH-SS = change in borehole capture cross section measured
related corrections to the observed formation decay rates (~ji.eRR in short -spaced detector, c. u.
values) must be made before tJ.~ji.eRR-based ROS computations. tJ.~FM = change in formation capture cross section, c.u.
These corrections induce potential systematic errors into the cal- tJ.~lZRR = change in corrected formation capture cross
culations, which in general are larger than any increased statistical section, c.u.
uncertainties in ROS associated with using a smaller water-salinity cf> = porosity
contrast.
Acknowledgments
Nomenclature
We thank the oil companies for permission to present the log ex-
ABH = intercept for borehole count-rate component amples and supporting data used in this paper.
AFM = intercept for formation count-rate component
RBHIFM = ratio of borehole counts to formation counts in References
short -spaced detector I. Youmans, A.H. et al.: "Neutron Lifetime, A New Nuclear Log," JPT
RN/F = ratio of Gates 3 through 6 counts for near vs. far (March 1964) 319-28.
detectors 2. Dewan, J.T. et al.: "Thermal Neutron Decay Time Logging Using Dual
Detection," Trans .. paper P presented at the 1973 SPWLA Annual Log-
~BH-SS = borehole capture cross section measured in short- ging Symposium, Lafayette, LA, May 6-9.
spaced detector, c.u. 3. Hall, J.E. et al.: "A New Thermal Neutron Decay Logging System-
~FM = formation capture cross section, c.u. TDTTM_M," JPT (Jan. 1982) 199-207.

SPE Formation Evaluation, December 1987 409

 BASE LOG MONITOR LOG
__ - - - _I!M~U - --eD

t05- - _~.AI-_ - - ii 10,_ _C""Cl'----___ • - _GJ3:6Jl~ - - -0

GAMMA

,,
(
': ~ ;
-
2. I=- ".
'.
; (I>
.:d
:
.00. RN/F~ (

/
~
"
'p" >
'< T -
\(;. ss ..•.•
p
----,/
<'
~

Fig. l3-Base and fourth monitor log comparison-Well B.

IFM-ss • STD. DEY. IFM ss - STD. DEY.

10 10
STD. DEY. IIBH-ss) IFM-SS STD. DEV.llBH-ss)
0- - - - - - - - ----so 70- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -10 0----- -------50 70- - - - - - - - - - - -IFM-SS
- - - - - - - - - - - - - -to
lBH-SS +STD. DEY. I ...,-ss +STD, DEY. IBH-SS +STD. DEV. IFM'ss +STD. DEV.
10 10 10
"" 60 "" 60
IBH-55
260-----------80- AN F +STD. DEY. IBH-SS RNiF +STD. DEV.
• 3 2'eO-----------ecr
"" IBH-55 - STD. DEY. P- ______ AJ"/f _____ _ IBH-SS - STD. DEV.
60
• 3 260 80
i - - - - _FtNLf - - - - - 3"
STD. DEY. IAN F) AN F • STD. DEY. AN F STD. DEV. R!:iLE - STD. DEV.
1 p- •
NUM·FILES
0---------15
STD. DEY IIFM-ss)
0------------5.0 NUM-FILS
0--------"'15
STD. DEY. (r
FM
0------------5.0
-,,)

? I,
-< \_-:.(
'~i2: ~~
~
....!.

13- <\'l.:
~
[b :
I

: 100 ft
lj > i
( :!r-:2'(. ~Jt ~
I
I >-
I
I
I .. ' p,.
~ I ~
~
I

~
<:
I
:::>
l-NUM'FILES~ .. -'~
~
I ''-~~.
I
I ~~,
I
I
I
I
: IBH-ss-t!
I
I
I I .~
"-STD~ DEV. (IFM-SS)'
I I
~STD. DEV. (11'1»

Fig. l4A-Preflush primary log-Well C. Fig. 14B-Postflush primary log-Well C.

410 SPE Formation Evaluation, December 1987

 0" ~
STD. DEV. IlIlsH-ss)
- - - - - - - - - - -20 I.FlII-55 BEFORE
70

IIlsH-SS + STD. DEV.

75 -75

dIsH-5S
75 - - - - - - - --75
IIlBH-SS - STD. DEV.
-75
IIl'M -55 +STD. DEV.
7S 10 -10

iloI.FM-SS
10- - - - - - - - - - - :,0 l:l!"J-BEFORE ROS
60 01
ISH-55 BEFORE 111:,. -SS - STD. DEV. STD. DEV. 11I1:,M-ss)
'60 60 10 -105

200ft
oO'I---~+--+-----R~-+-------.il.-
o
o
o
o

Fig. 16-Computer-assisted log analysis-Well C.

TOTAL WATER
% PORE SPACE

GAMMA RAY PERMEABILITY <--~PO",RO=S~ITV~-< Oil SATURATION

RADIATION INCREASE- MILLtDARCle$ PERCENT % PORE SPACE

Fig. 15-0verlay of before and after flush logs-Well C.

5,
4. Randall, R.R. et al.: "PDK-l00 Log Examples in the Gulf Coast,"
IJ~Sw
Trans., paper XX presented at the 1985 SPWLA Annual Logging Sym-
posium, Dallas, June 17-20.
5. Schultz, W.E. et al.: "Experimental Basis for a New Borehole Cor-
rected Pulsed Neutron Capture Logging System (TMD)," Trans., paper
< 11
CC presented at the 1983 SPWLA Annual Logging Symposium, Cal-
gary, Alta., June 27-30.
6. Smith, H.D. Jr., Arnold, D.M., and Peelman, H.E.: "Applications
of a New Borehole Corrected Pulsed Neutron Capture Logging Sys- Fig. 17-Core data-Well C.
tem (TMD)," Trans., paper DD presented at the 1983 SPWLA Annu-
al Logging Symposium, Calgary, Alta., June 27-30.
7. Buchanan, J.e. et al.: "Applications of TMD Pulsed Neutron Logs 13. Ruhovets, N.: "Methods to Determine Porosity, Clay Content and Mode
in Unusual bownhole Logging Environments," Trans., paper KKK of Distribution in Gas Bearing Shaly Sand Reservoirs," Trans., SAID
presented at the 1984 SPWLA Annual Logging Symposium, New ninth International Formation Evaluation Symposium, Paris, France
Orleans, June 10-13. (Oct. 24-26, 1984).
8. Fertl, W.H.: "Determination of Residual Oil Saturation from Geophys-
ical Well Logs in Tertiary Recovery Projects," Proc., DvG lIDGMK
Symposium, K61n, West Germany (1977).
SI Metric Conversion Factors
9. Richardson, J .E. et al.: "Methods for Determining Residual Oil Satu- ft x 3.048* E-Ol m
ration with Pulsed Neutron Capture Logs," JPT(May 1973) 593-604. OF (OF -32)/\.8 °C
10. Lamb, G. and Webber, G.: "Measurements of Water Flow in Deviated in. x 2.54* E+OO em
Production Wells by Oxygen Activation Logging," Trans., paper Z psi x 6.894 757 E+OO kPa
presented at the 1983 SPWLA Annual Logging Symposium, Calgary,
Alta., June 27-30.
11. Smith, H.D. Jr.: "Use of Oxygen Activation on the TMD Pulsed Neu- ·Conversion factor is exact. SPEFE
tron Capture Logging System to Measure Water Flow in Producing
Wells," Welex Technical Memorandum, Houston (March 8, 1984).
12. Moore, J.S.: "Design, Installation, and Early Operation of the Tim- Original SPE manuscript received for review March 17. 1986. Paper accepted for publica-
tion May 18,1987. Revised manuscript received March 13, 1987. Paper (SPE 14137) first
balier Bay S-2B(RA)SU Gravity-Stable, Miscible CO 2-Injection Proj- presented at the 1986 SPE International Meeting on Petroleum Engineering held in Beijing,
ect," SPEPE (Sept. 1986) 369-78. March 17-20.

SPE Formation Evaluation, December 1987 411