Sunteți pe pagina 1din 512

Click Here To Continue

Chapter 46
Thermal Recovery
Chieh Chu, Getty Oil Co.*
Introduction
Thermal recovery generally refers to processes for recov-
ering oil from underground formations by use of heat.
The heat may be supplied externally by injecting a hot
fluid such as steam or hot water into the formations, or
it may be generated internally by combustion. In com-
bustion, the fuel is supplied by the oil in place and the
oxidant is injected into the formations in the form of air
or other oxygen-containing fluids. The most commonly
used thermal recovery processes are steam injection proc-
esses and in-situ combustion.
Two Forms of Steam Injection Processes
In principle, any hot fluid can be injected into the forma-
tions to supply the heat. The fluids used most extensively
are steam or hot water because of the general availability
and abundance of water. Hot water injection has been
found to be less efficient than steam injection and will not
be discussed here. A schematic view of the steam injec-
tion process is shown in Fig. 46.1, together with an ap-
proximate temperature distribution inside the formation.
There are two variations of steam injection processes-
steam stimulation and steam displacement.
Steam Stimulation
This method has been known as the huff n puff method,
since steam is injected intermittently and the reservoir is
allowed to produce after each injection. In this process
the main driving force for oil displacement is provided
by reservoir pressure, gravitational force, rock and fluid
expansion, and, possibly, formation compaction. In the
steam stimulation process only the part of the reservoir
adjacent to the wellbore is affected. After a number of
cycles of injection and production, the near-wellbore
region in reservoirs having little or no dip becomes so
depleted of oil that further injection of steam is futile. In
this case, wells must be drilled at very close spacing to
obtain a high oil recovery.
Now Wlih Texaco inc
Steam Displacement
This process, usually referred to as steamflood or steam-
drive, has a much higher oil recovery than steam stimu-
lation alone. Whereas steam stimulation is a one-well
operation, steamflood requires at least two wells, one
serving as the injector and the other serving as the
producer. The majority of steamflood projects use pat-
tern floods. In many cases, steam stimulation is required
at the producers when the oil is too viscous to flow be-
fore the heat from the injector arrives. Because of the high
oil recovery achievable through steamflooding, many
reservoirs that were produced by steam stimulation previ-
ously now are being steamflooded.
Three Forms of In-Situ Combustion
In-situ combustion usually is referred to as fireflood.
There are three forms of in-situ combustion processes-
dry forward combustion, reverse combustion, and wet
combustion.
Dry Forward Combustion
In the earlier days, this was the most commonly used form
of the combustion processes. It is dry because no water
is injected along with air. It is forward because combus-
tion starts at the injector and the combustion front moves
in the direction of the air flow.
Fig. 46.2 gives a schematic view of the dry forward
combustion process. The upper part of the figure shows
a typical temperature distribution along a cross section
leading from the injector at the left to the producer at the
right. Two things need to be pointed out. First, the region
near the producer is cold, at the original temperature of
the reservoir. If the unheated oil is highly viscous, it can-
not be pushed forward by the heated oil at its back that
has been made mobile by the high temperature of the com-
bustion zone. This phenomenon is called liquid block-
ing. Second, the temperature of the region in the back
of the combustion zone is high, indicating a great amount
of heat being stored in the region, not used efficiently.
46-2
I Y
Fig. 46.1-Steam injection processes.
CROSS-SECTION OF FORMATION
Fig. 46.2-Dry forward combustion
couwslIoN ZONE lnAValNa
lHlS DIRECTION
Fig. 46.3-Reverse combustion.
PETROLEUM ENGINEERING HANDBOOK
The lower part of Fig. 46.2 shows the fluid saturation
distributions inside the formation under the combustion
process. One should note the clean sand in the burned-
out region. Being able to burn the undesirable fraction
of the oil (the heavier portion) is one advantage of the
forward combustion process over the reverse combustion
process.
Reverse Combustion
Strictly speaking, it should be called dry reverse combus-
tion, because normally only air is injected, no water. A
simple example will help to explain how reverse combus-
tion works. In ordinary cigarette smoking, one ignites the
tip of the cigarette and inhales. The burning front will
travel from the tip of the cigarette toward ones mouth,
along with the air. This is forward combustion. The
cigarette also can be burned if one exhales. This way, the
burning front still moves from the tip of the cigarette
toward ones mouth, but the air flow is in the opposite
direction. This is, then, reverse combustion.
Fig. 46.3 shows the various zones inside the formation,
with the cold zone near the injector at the left and the hot
zone near the producer.3 Since the region around the
producer is hot, the problem of liquid blocking mentioned
earlier in connection with the dry forward process has
been eliminated.
In principle, there is no upper limit for oil viscosity for
the application of the reverse combustion process. How-
ever, this process is not as efficient as the dry forward
combustion because a desirable fraction of the oil (the
lighter portion) is burned and an undesirable fraction of
the oil (the heavier portion) remains in the region behind
the combustion front. Besides, spontaneous ignition could
occur at the injector.4 If this happens, the oxygen will
be used up near the injector and will not support com-
bustion near the producer. The process then reverts to for-
ward combustion.
No reverse combustion project has ever reached com-
mercial status. Nevertheless, this process should not be
written off because, in spite of the difficulties facing this
process, it could offer some hope of recovering extremely
viscous oil or tar.
Wet Combustion
The term wet combustion actually refers to wet for-
ward combustion. This process was developed to use the
heat contained behind the combustion zone. In this proc-
ess, water is injected either alternately or simultaneously
with air. Because of its high heat capacity and latent heat
of vaporization, water is capable of moving the heat be-
hind the combustion front forward, and helping to dis-
place the oil in front of the combustion zone.
Fig. 46.4 shows the temperature distributions of the wet
combustion process as the water/air ratio (WAR) in-
creases.5 The curve for WAR=0 refers to dry combus-
tion. With an increase in WAR, the high-temperature zone
behind the combustion zone shortens (WAR=moderate).
With a further increase in WAR, the combustion will be
partially quenched as shown by the curve for
WAR=large.
The wet combustion process also is known as the
COFCAW process, which is an acronym for combina-
tion of forward combustion and waterflood. This proc-
ess also can be construed as steamflood with in-situ steam
THERMAL RECOVERY
46-3
generation. It should be noted that this method cannot pre-
vent liquid blocking and its application is limited by oil
viscosity, as is the dry forward combustion.
WAR = LARGE
Historical Development
The following lists chronologically some of the major
events that occurred in the development of the thermal
recovery methods.
1931
1949
1952
1955
1958
1960
1962
A steamflood was conducted in Woodson, TX.6
A dry forward combustion proect was started in
Delaware-Childers field, OK.
J
A dry forward combustion project was conducted
in southern Oklahoma. 8
A reverse combustion project was initiated in Bel-
lamy, M0.9
The steam stimulation process was accidentally
discovered in Mene Grande Tar Sands,
Venezuela. O
Steam stimulation was started in Yorba Linda,
CA.
Wet combustion phase of a fireflood project was
started in Schoonebeek, The Netherlands. I2
Current Status
U.S. Oil Production by Enhanced Recovery Methods
The significance of the thermal recovery processes can
be seen from the April 1982 survey of the Oil and Gas
J. I3 As shown in Table 46.1, of the daily U.S. oil pro-
duction with EOR processes, 76.9% comes from steam
injection and 2.7% comes from in-situ combustion, total-
ling 79.6% obtained by thermal recovery processes. The
combustion process, although dwarfed by the steam in-
jection processes, accounts for more than double the pro-
duction of all the chemical floods combined, which
amounts to 1.2 % .
Geographical Distribution of Thermal
Recovery Projects
Potential for Incremental Recovery
Table 46.2, based largely on the 1982 survey, I3 shows
the geographical distribution of the steam injection proj-
According to Johnson et al., l5 vast energy resources ex-
ist in the tar sands in Venezuela and Colombia (1,000 to
ects in the world. Of the daily oil production from steam
injection processes, 71.7% comes from the U.S., 15.4%
1,800 billion bbl), Canada (900 billion bbl) , and the U. S .
(30 billion bbl). These tar sands should be a major target
TABLE 46.1-U.S. EOR PRODUCTION (1982)
Steam
Combustion
Total thermal
Micellarlpolymer
Polymer
Caustic
Other chemicals
Total chemicals
CO, miscible
Other gases
Total
Grand Total
BID %
288,396 76.9
10,228 2.7
- ~
298,624 79.6
902 0.2
2,587 0.7
580 0.2
340 0.1
4,409 1.2
21,953 5.9
49,962 13.3
71,915 19.2
374,948 100.0
DISTANCE ---)
Fig. 46.4-Wet combustion.
from Indonesia, 7.0% from Venezuela, and 3.0% from
Canada. In the U.S., California accounts for nearly all
the production, with small percentages coming from Loui-
siana, Arkansas, Texas, Oklahoma, and Wyoming.
The daily oil production by in-situ combustion is shown
in Table 46.3. Here, the U.S. accounts for 40.0% of the
total production, followed by Romania (26.0%), Canada
(22.1%), and Venezuela (10.8%). Of the U.S. produc-
tion, nearly one-half comes from California, one-third
from Louisiana, with the rest from Mississippi, Texas,
and Illinois.
Major Thermal Recovery Projects
The major thermal recovery projects, again based largely
on the 1982 survey, t3 are listed in Table 46.4.
Reservoirs Amenable to Thermal Recovery
Table 46.5 shows the ranges of reservoir properties in
which the technical feasibility of steamflood and tireflood
has been proven. I4
TABLE 46.2-011. PRODUCTION BY STEAM INJECTION
PROCESSES (1982)
U.S.
Arkansas
California
Louisiana
Oklahoma
Texas
Wyoming
Canada (Alberta)
Brazil
Trinidad
Venezuela
Congo
France
Germany
Indonesia
Total
B/D %
288,396 71.7
284,093
1,600
617
711
575
12,180
1,920
3,450
28,030
2,500
360
3,264
621000
402,100
3.0
0.5
0.9
7.0
0.6
0.1
0.8
15.4
100.0
46-4
PETROLEUM ENGINEERING HANDBOOK
TABLE 46.3-PRODUCTION BY IN-SITU COMBUSTION (1962) for development of thermal recovery methods, since the
results will be most rewarding if a percentage of these
resources can be tapped economically.
U.S.
California
Illinois
Kansas
Louisiana
Mississippi
Texas
Canada
Alberta
Saskatchewan
Brazil
Venezuela
Romania
Total
BID %
- -
10,228 40.0
4,873
179
2
2,940
1,300
934
5,690 22.1
150
5,540
284 1.1
2,799 10.8
6,699 26.0
- ~
25,760 100.0
TABLE 46.4-MAJOR THERMAL RECOVERY PROJECTS
Steamflood
Steam stimulation
Fireflood
Thermal
Field, Location (Operator)
Kern River, CA (Getty)
Duri, Indonesia (Caltex)
Mount Poso. CA (Shell)
San Ardo. CA (Texaco)
Tia Juana Este,
Venezuela (Maraven)
Lagunillas, Venezuela
(Maraven)
Duri, Indonesia (Caltex)
Cold Lake, Alberta (Esso)
Suplacu de Barcau,
Romania (IFPIIPCCG)
Battrum No. 1,
Saskatchewan (Mobil)
Bellevue, LA (Getty)
Jobo. Venezuela
(Lagoven)
Enhanced Oil
Production
VW
83,000
40,000
22,800
22,500
15,000
40,850
22,000
10,000
6.552
2,900
2,723
13,000
TABLE 46.5-RESERVOIRS AMENABLE TO STEAMFLOOD
AND FIREFLOOD
Depth, ft
Steamflood Fireflood
160 to 5,000 180 to 11,500
Nei pay, ft 10to1,050 4 to 150
Dip, degrees 0 to 70 0 to 45
Porositv. % 12to39 16to39
Permeability, md 70 to 10,000 40 to 10,000
011 oravitv, OAPI -21044 9.5 to 40
011 iiscosity at initial
temperature, cp
Oil saturation at start, %
OOIP at start, bbl/acre-ft
4 to 106 0.8 to lo6
15to85 30 to 94
370 to 2,230 430 to 2,550
Based on an assumed oil price of $22.OiVbbl, Lewin
and Assocs. Inc. I6 estimated that the ultimate recovery
in the U.S. by thermal recovery methods will amount to
5.6 to 7.9 billion bbl. This includes 4.0 to 6.0 billion bbl
by steamfloods and 1.6 to 1.9 billion bbl by firefloods.
Production Mechanisms
The production mechanisms in steam inection processes
have been identified by Willman et al.
14
as (1) hot water-
flood, including viscosity reduction and swelling, (2) gas
drive, (3) steam distillation, and (4) solvent extraction ef-
fect. The relative importance of these mechanisms on light
and heavy oil, represented by 37.0 and 12.2 API, respec-
tively, is given in Table 46.6.
In &floods, the above mechanisms are also important.
In addition, the breaking up of heavy oil fractions into
light oil fractions through cracking should have at least
two effects: increase in volume and more drastic reduc-
tion in viscosity. The gas drive effect also should be in-
creased because of the large amount of air injected and
combustion gas produced.
Theoretical Considerations
Surface Line and Wellbore Heat Losses
In current field practice, downbole steam generators are
still in the developmental stage. Surface steam genera-
tors are being used in almost all of the steam injection
projects. Steam from a generator normally is sent to the
injector wellhead through a surface line. Some heat will
be lost to the surrounding atmosphere by convection and
radiation. As steam travels from the wellhead through the
wellbore to the sandface at the pay zone, heat will be lost
to the overburden, mainly by conduction. The method of
calculating surface line and wellbore heat losses is dis-
cussed below.
Surface Line Heat Losses
The steam lines in most of the steam injection projects
are insulated. The heat loss from such a line, Btuihr, is:
Qr,=2ari,U,;(T, -T,,)AL, (1)
where
in
= outside radius of the insulation surface, ft,
r, = steam temperature, F,
7,, = atmospheric temperature, F, and
ti = pipe length, ft.
In the above, CT,. is the overall heat transfer coefficient
(based on inside radius of the pipe or tubing), Btu/hr-ft-
F, and can be calculated as follows.
I
-1
Uti =
1
+- h+l ) . . . . . . . . . . .
where rro is the outside radius of pipe, ft, and khin is the
thermal conductivity of insulation material, Bm/hr-sq
R-OF.
THERMAL RECOVERY
The convection heat transfer coefficient, h, Btuihr-sq
ft-F, can be calculated thus * :
h=0.75v,o~6/ril10~4, . . . . . , . . . . . . . (3)
where v,+ is the wind velocity, miihr. The radiation heat
transfer coefficient, I, normally can be neglected.
If the pipe is bare, that is, uninsulated, then J-,~ =rin
and
U,i=h. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . (4)
If the steam is superheated, T, will vary along the line
as heat is being lost to the atmosphere. When the pipe
is long, it needs to be broken up into segments and the
heat loss calculated segment by segment. In each segment,
Ts* =T,$, -Qr,lwsc,s, . . . . . . . . . . (5)
where
T.vl ,Ts2 =
steam temperatures at the beginning and
the end of the segment, F,
QrI = heat loss along the segment, Btulhr,
w,~ = mass rate of steam, lbm/hr, and
C,, = heat capacity of steam, Btu/lbm-F.
If the steam is saturated, the heat loss will cause reduc-
tion in steam quality.
I,2 =f;, -Qr,lwsLs, . . . . . . . . . . . . .(6)
where f,i and fs2 equal the steam quality at the begin-
ning and the end of the pipe segment, fraction, and L,
is the latent heat of steam, Btu/lbm.
Wellbore Heat Losses
In most of the steam injection projects, saturated steam
at a certain quality is injected into the formation. Here,
we assume a more general case in which the steam first
enters the wellbore as superheated steam, becomes satu-
rated with a gradually diminishing quality, and is further
cooled after its complete condensation into hot water.
Superheated Steam. Assume that when the depth D is
0, the temperature of the steam is T, and varies with
time. Also assume that a linear geothermal gradient ex-
ists so that
Tf=gGD+ T,,,,, . . . . . . (7)
46-5
where 7 is the temperature of the formation. Suppose
one starts with the temperature of the steam at a depth
D r , and desires to calculate the temperature at depth Dl
with the length of the depth interval AD= 02 -D 1 . Since
the formation temperature at D is g G D , + T,Y,, Ramey s
equation for the gas case I9 becomes
T(D2,r)=gcDz+T,,-gcA-AB
+[T(D,,t)-gcD, -T,,+gGA+AB]e-hDJA.
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
(8)
A is defined as
A= w~C~[khf+rtiUdit)l
. . . . . . . . . . .
. (9)
2sr,i Urikhf
and
1
B=-
778c,, . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
.(lO)
where
khf =
rtr =
ur, =
thermal conductivity of the formation,
Btu/D-ft-F,
f(r) =
inside radius of the tubing, ft,
overall heat transfer coefficient for the
annular space between inside of the
tubing and outside of the casing based
on rti, Btu/D-ft-F,
transient heat conduction time function for
earth, dimensionless, shown in Fig.
46.5,
c, = heat capacity of steam, Btu/lbm-F,
gc =
geothermal gradient, F/ft, and
T.m =
surface temperature, OF.
For t>7 days,
2Jat
f(t)=lnp -0.29, . . . . . . . . . . .
r
co
where 1y is the thermal diffusivity, sq ft/D, and rcO is the
outside radius of casing, ft.
Saturated Steam. When the steam is saturated, the well-
bore heat loss will cause changes in the steam quality
whereas the steam temperature, T, , is kept constant. If
TABLE 46.6--MECHANISMS CONTRIBUTING TO STEAM RECOVERY
Steam injectron pressure, psig
Hot waterflood recovery (Includes viscosity reduction and swelling)
Recovery from gas drive
Extra recovery from steam distillation
Recovery improvements from solventlextractton effects
Total recovery by steam
Recovery
(% Initial 011 In Place)
Torpedo Sandstone Torpedo Sandstone
Core Core
37OAPI Crude 12 2OAPI Crude
800 (52OOF) 84 (327OF) 800 (52OOF) 84 (327F)
71.0 68.7 68.7 66.0
3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0
18.9 15.6 9.3 4.9
4.7 4.6 3.0 3.7
97.6 91 .9 84.0 77.6
46-6 PETROLEUM ENGINEERING HANDBOOK
TUBING CASING
T,,
TC
c Vi to
Fig. 46.5-Transient heat conduction in an infinite radial system.
the steam quality at D isf, =f,(D t J), the steam quality
at 02 can be calculated by Satters equation*O:
fsP2J)=fs(D1 A+
AB+aD, +b-T,
AD
A
a@@ *
+- . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . (12) 2A
In Eq. 12,
A=
wJs[khf+riUhfIf)l
. . . . . . . . . . . . . .(13) 2=rli Utrkhf
and
1
B=-. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
778L,
Hot Water. For cooling of the hot water, Rameys equa-
tion for the liquid phase I9 applies. To advance from
depth D, to D2,
Wz,t)=g& +T.,, -gcA+[W,,t)-gcD,
+T,y,+g~A]e-aA. . . . . . (15)
Overall Heat Transfer Coeffkient. The temperature dis-
tribution in an annular completion is shown in Fig.
46.6. 2 To evaluate the overall heat transfer coefficient,
U,,, based on the outside tubing surface, the following
procedure developed by Willhite* can be used.
I. Select U,, based on outside tubing surface.
2. Calculate AI), as defined previously.
3. Calculate Tc. at cement/formation interface.
Tfi) +
khf
-Tf
Tcf=
rlo ulo
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
(16)
khf
At)+-
rfO (Ito
I I
CONSTANT TLYC2RAlUIIL AT
r.r,, CYLINonICAL SOURCE
BOUNOARY CONOlTlON
I I I
Fig. 46.6-Temperature distribution in an annular completion.
where Tfi =temperature of fluid, OF.
4. Calculate Tci at casing inside surface.
where
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
(17)
r-d = radius to cement/formation interface, ft,
rc( = inside radius of casing, ft,
h-e
= thermal conductivity of the cement, Btu/hr-
ft-F, and
khca
= thermal conductivity of the casing material,
Btu/hr-ft-F.
5. Estimate I for radiation and h for natural convection.
6. Calculate U,,.
.,-(&+ rr;;ez)-l. . . . . . . . . . .(18)
With commercial insulation of thickness Ar,
rlo In? rlo lncf -
um =
rto +
rto
+
rco
I
7
khin
r,(h+l)
khce
. . . . . ..1.....................
(19)
where h and I are based on insulation outside surface.
Calculations Including Pressure Changes. A more
sophisticated calculation procedure proposed by
Earlougher** includes the effect of pressure changes in-
side the wellbore. The wellbore is divided into a sequence
THERMAL RECOVERY 46-7
of depth intervals. The conditions at the bottom of each
interval are calculated, on the basis of the conditions at
the top of that interval. The procedure is as follows.
1. Calculate the pressure at the bottom of the inter-
val, ~2.
c.
;
-------
1
2
p2=pI+1.687x10-2(v,, -v,2);
rti
+6.944x10-3%Q7,
. . . . . . . . . . ,
II
; \
where
1
= specific volume of the total fluid, cu ft/lbm
(condition 1 is top of interval and 2 is
bottom),
m = length of depth interval, ft, and 6m.L Ol,rUCT .Io IwccTIo* WCLL -
Ap = frictional pressure drop over interval, psi.
Fig. 46.7-Temperature distribution in Marx-Langenheim model.
The Beggs and Brill correlation23 for two-phase flow can
be used to calculate the Ap in the above equation.
2. Calculate the heat loss over the interval.
-0.5(Tf, +Tp)], . . . . . . . . . . . . . (21)
where U, is the overall heat transfer coefficient based
on outside casing surface, Btulhr-sq ft-F.
3. Calculate the steam quality at the bottom of the in-
terval .
where H,.] and H,,.2 are the enthalpy of liquid water at
top and bottom of the interval, Btu/lbm, and L,,, and L,,*
are the latent heat of vaporization at top and bottom of
the interval, Btu/lbm.
More Recent Developments. A new model has been de-
veloped by Farouq Ali that treats wellbore heat losses
rigorously by using a grid system to represent the sur-
rounding formation. In addition, the pressure calculation
accounts for slip and the prevailing flow regime, based
on well-accepted correlations.
Analytical Models for Steam Injection
For predicting reservoir performance under steam injec-
tion processes, the usual practice is to use three-
dimensional (3D), three-phase numerical simulators.
Where the simulators are unavailable or a quick estimate
of the performance is needed, one can resort to simple
analytical methods. Usually these methods take into ac-
count the thermal aspects of the process only, without
regard to the fluid flow aspects.
Front Displacement Models
Marx-Langenheim Method. 25 Consider that heat is in-
jected into a pay zone bounded by two neighboring for-
mations. The heat-carrying fluid is supposed to advance
with a sharp front perpendicular to the boundaries of the
formation (Fig. 46.7). The heat balance gives: heat in-
jected into the pay zone equals heat loss to the overbur-
den and underlying stratum plus heat contained in the pay
zone.
The heated area at any time t can be calculated
A= QriMhao
4k,,, 2AT
(coerfc\l;;; +2Js- 1) , (23)
A
where
A = heated area at time t, sq ft,
t = time since injection, hr,
Q,; = heat injection rate, Btu/hr,
M = volumetric heat capacity of the solid
matrix containing oil and water,
Btu/cu ft-F
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
(24)
4 = porosity, fraction,
Pr&otPw =
density of rock grain, oil, water,
lbm/cu ft,
C,,C,,C, = heat capacity of rock, oil, water,
Btu/lbm-F,
S,i,Swi = initial saturation of oil, water, fraction,
h = pay thickness, ft,
a0
= overburden thermal diffusivity, sq
ft/hr,
kho = overburden thermal conductivity,
Btulhr-ft-F,
AT = Tid-Tf, F,
Tij = injection temperature, F,
Tr; = initial formation temperature, F,
TV = dimensionless time
= (;;;l,,)
1. .
(25)
46-8
and
&y=(~)tB? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
The complementary error function is:
erfcx=l-erfx=l-1S~e-B2d13, . . . . . . . . (27)
a
0
where /3 is a dummy variable.
To evaluate eDerfc ,&, one can use the following
approximation. 26
1
Let y= 1+o.3275911JtD, . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
cw
etDerfc&=0.254829592y--0.284496736y2
+1.42143741+1.453152027y4+1.061405429y5.
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
(29)
Assume that all the movable oil is displaced in the heated
area. If we assume that all the displaced oil is produced,
we can calcuate the cumulative steam/oil ratio (SOR):
F
*=
i,vt
.A0
4.275Ahr$(S,, -Sic,) . .
(30)
where
1, =
steam injection rate, B/D, cold water
equivalent,
so, =
initial oil saturation, and
s;, =
irreducible oil saturation.
Differentiation of the expression for A with t gives the
rate of expansion of the heated area. The oil displacement
rate, q(,d, in B/D, is
qod =4.275
Qrr woi -So,)
MAT I
eroerfcJt,. . . (31)
From this one can calculate the instantaneous SOR
Flo=15. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . (32)
qod
PETROLEUM ENGINEERING HANDBOOK
It can easily be shown that
Eh =i eDerfc&+2 . . . . (35)
tD
Rameys Generalization of the Marx-Langenheim
Method. The Marx-Langenheim method can be ex-
tended to the case where a series of constant injection rates
is maintained over various time periods. If the heat in-
jection rate is (Qri)i over the period O<t<r, , and (Q,,),,
over the period t,-1 <t<t,,
A=
i=rl- I
+ C [(Q,i),-(Q,i);+IlF(rD;) 3 . . (36)
i= I
where
F(tDi)=enferfCJtDi+2
J
% . . .
T
(37)
and F(~D,)=F(CD~) with i=n. The oil displacement rate
at f; depends on the heat injection rate at that time, in-
dependent of the previous heat injection rates.
Mandl-Voleks Refinement of the Marx-Langenheim
Method.28 Mandl and Volek observed that the heated
area measured in laboratory experiments tends to be lower
than that predicted by the Marx-Langenheim method af-
ter a certain critical time, t,. For t? t,.,
A= QriMhao
4kho2AT
eDerfcG+2*- 1 -dE
1
t D - t cD
-3
X
Lsfs + 3
ezDerfc tD J-
1+-
C,AT
t D - t cD
-
3J ?r t D
>I
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
t, is determined by this equation:
ecD erfc& =
1
. . . . . . . . . ,+ Lag
C,AT
The relationship between t, and t& is again
a
(38)
(39)
. (40)
The thermal (heat) efficiency, Eh, is defined as
where
Qh- = heat remaining in the heated zone, Btu,
Q;, = total heat injection, Btu, and
AhMA T
Eh = ~ . . . . . . . Q,iT
(34)
THERMAL RECOVERY 46-9
Myhill and Stegemeier used a slightly different ver-
sion of the Mandl-Volek model and calculated oil/steam
ratio (OSR) for 11 field projects. They found that the ac-
tual OSRs range from 70 to 100% of the calculated ratios.
Steam Chest Models
In contrast to the front displacement models discussed
previously, Neuman30 visualized that steam rises to the
top and grows both horizontally outward and vertically
downward. Doscher and Ghassemi3 took a view even
more drastic than Neumans. They theorized that steam
rises to the top instantly and the only direction of the steam
zone movement is vertically downward. Vogel12 fol-
lowed the same reasoning and developed the following
simple equation for thermal efficiency:
1
E,, =
. . . . . . . .
(41)
Table 46.7 compares the thermal efficiencies calculat-
ed by the Marx-Langenheim method and the Vogel
method. This table shows that the Vogel method predicts
a thermal efficiency that lies between 80 and 100% of that
calculated by the Marx-Langenheim method.
Steam Stimulation
Steam stimulation usually is carried out in a number of
cycles. Each cycle consists of three stages: steam injec-
tion, soaking, and production. The basic concept of this
process follows.
Without stimulation, the oil production rate is
O.O0708kk,h
4 oc =
(p, -p ,), . . . . . . . . (42)
.
where
4oc =
k=
k
t-0 =
PO<-
PC -
P\ , =
cold oil production rate, B/D,
absolute permeability. md,
relative permeability to oil, fraction,
cold oil viscosity, cp,
static formation pressure at external radius
r,, psia, and
bottomhole pressure, psia.
After steam injection, the oil inside the heated region,
r, < r< rh, will have a lower viscosity, p&. The hot oil
production, qoh, is:
O.O0708kk,h
qoh =
poh lnrh+poc Ink
(P, -P,), . . (43)
rw r h
TABLE 46.7-COMPARISON BETWEEN MARX-LANGENHEIM
AND VOGEL METHODS
Thermal Efficiency
Ratio
t,
Marx-Langenhelm Vogel Vogel/ML
0.01 0.930 0.900 0.967
0.1 0. 804 0. 737 0.917
1 .o 0. 556 0. 470 0. 845
10.0 0. 274 0.219 0.799
100.0 0.103 0.081 0. 787
where rh equals the radius of the heated region, ft. The
ratio between qoh and qoc is
? oh
1
-=
. . . . .
(44)
4oc
lnh lnT
poh r h r r t , I
pm l nr , l nr ,
r w r w
As the reservoir fluids are produced, energy associat-
ed with the fluids are removed from the reservoir. This
causes a reduction in rh and a reduction in temperature,
which increases PO),.
Several methods have been developed for calculating
reservoir performance under steam stimulation. One of
the methods, which has enoyed wide acceptance, is the
d
Boberg and Lantz method. 3 This method assumes a con-
stant rh, with a changing T inside the heated zone. The
method consists of the following steps.
1. Calculate the size of the heated region using the
Marx-Langenheim method.
2. Calculate the average temperature in this region.
3. Calculate the oil production rate, taking into account
the reduced oil viscosity in this region.
4. Repeat Steps 1 through 3 for succeeding cycles, by
including the residual heat left from preceding cycles.
The average temperature of the heated region is calcu-
lated by
--
T=TR+(Ts-TR)[V,Vz(l-6)-h], . . . . .(45)
where
TX
TR =
T, =
--
v,,v, =
V,,VI =
6=
average temperature of the heated region,
r,<r<rh, at any time t, F,
original reservoir temperature, F,
steam temperature at sandface injection
pressure, F,
average values of V,, V, for O< r< rh and
all hi,*
unit solution for the component conduction
problems in the r and z directions, and
energy removed with the produced fluids,
dimensionless.
The quantities s7]. and vZ can be obtained from Fig.
46.8 as functions of dimensionless time, tD. For v,.,
tD =
ao(f-ti)
2
) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
(46)
r h
These symbols have no physical connolat~on. They are amply mathemailcal symbols
46-10 PETROLEUM ENGINEERING HANDBOOK
Ij1~11[ ~lllll
!
1
I
S;:t, =
aott-I,)..- %(t-4)
7
v,:t, =-
o.j#~v;#~ /
0.01 0.1 1.0 10 1ac
Fig. 46.8--Solutions for V, and V,, single sand.
where
a, =
t=
overburden thermal diffusivity, sq ft/D,
time since start of injection for the current
cycle, D,
ti =
f-h =
For vz,
time of injection for the current cycle, D,
and
radius of region originally heated, ft.
to, DIMENSIONLESS TIME
ao(t--ti)
tD= -
2
, . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
HI
where
H, =
m~i t ( . f sLsf Hw3s - Hw~)
Wh 2WVs - TR) N,
) . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
(47)
(48)
and
m,it
= total mass of steam injected, lbm,
N, = number of sands,
H, vsJ , v~
= enthalpy, Btu/lbm, of water at steam
and reservoir temperatures, F, and
A4 = volumetric heat capacity, Btu/cu ft-F.
The energy removed with produced fluids, 6, can be
calculated thus:
where
h, = total thickness of all sands, ft,
Q, = heat removal rate at time t, BtulD,
Qr, = qoh(Hog+H,), . _ . . . . . . . . . . .
Ho,
= (5.6146M, +R,C,)@-TR), . . . . .
and
(49)
(50)
(51)
H, = 5.6146p,[F,,(hf-H~,R)tRtL,], . . (52)
where hf is the enthalpy of liquid water at T above 32F
(see steam tables), BtuAbm, H, is the enthalpy of oil
and gas based on a STB of oil, BtulSTB oil, and H,. is
the enthalpy of water carried by oil based on a STB of
oil, Btu/STB oil. Also, L, is hfK in the steam tables.
If P Mz >P s and F,, <Fwclt
F,, =0.0001356 .-!A- R,, . . . . . . . .
( >
(53)
PW-PS
bbl liquid water at 60F/STB oil.
If F,, (calculated) > F,, ,
F,, =F,,,. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . (54)
In the above,
R, = total produced GOR, scf/STB,
F
wet
= total produced WOR, STBISTB,
F,, = steam/oil ratio, STB/STB,
PW
= producing bottomhole pressure, psia, and
ps = saturated vapor pressure of water at ?,
psia.
The rate of hot oil production can be calculated thus:
qoh=FJJcAp, . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ...(M)
where FJ is the ratio of stimulated to unstimulated
productivity indexes, dimensionless,
1
FJ= , . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
(56)
EC1 tc2
Poe
and J, is the unstimulated (cold) productivity index,
STBIDlpsi,
J, =
0.ooo708kk,h
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
(57)
pot lnT
rw
If Pe is constant,
ln?
c, = rw
- . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
(58)
lnT
rw
and
ink
c*= rh
-. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
(59)
lnr,
rw
Thus Eq. 55 is identical with Eq. 43 in this case. Ifp,
is declining,
lnTk---
4
c, =
rw 2re2
,.....................
&A
(60)
rw
2
THERMAL RECOVERY 46-11
@a CP
Fig. 46.9-Correlation of steam stimulation results.
and
r h
2
, nr , - I +-
c2 =
rh 2 2re2
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . (61)
,&1
. ,
r,
2
This method of calculating oil production rate is proba-
bly the weakest part of the Boberg-Lantz method.
1. It assumes a monotone decline betweenp, andp,.
Actually, because the injected steam is at a high pressure,
there could be a high pressure ps near rh and the pres-
sure declines toward both p ,+ and pe .
2. Only the change in p0 is accounted for in changing
from cold oil productivity to hot oil productivity. Left un-
accounted for is the change in k, , which should change
with changing S,.
Based on the Boberg-Lantz method, a correlation was
developed by Boberg and West34 that allows one to es-
timate incremental OSR with known reservoir properties
(Fig. 46.9).
Numerical Simulation
The analytical models for thermal recovery processes
usually are concerned with the thermal aspects of the proc-
esses only. The fluid flow aspects are neglected. To ac-
count adequately for the fluid flow inside porous media
under a thermal recovery process, numerical simulators
will be needed. In these simulators, the reservoir is divided
into a number of blocks arranged in one, two, or three
dimensions. A detailed study is made of the reservoir by
applying fundamental equations for flow in porous me-
dia to each one of the blocks.
Numerical reservoir simulators are no substitute for
field pilots. They have several advantages, however, over
field pilots. Field conditions are irreversible. It took mil-
lions of years for the field to develop to the present state.
Once disturbed, it cannot revert to the original conditions
and start over again. Furthermore, it takes a long time,
in terms of months or even years, before the pilot results
can be evaluated. The cost for pilots is, of course, enor-
mous. In comparison, a simulated reservoir can be pro-
duced many times, each time starting at the existing state.
This can be done within a short period of time, in terms
of seconds, once the reservoir model is properly set up.
The cost for reservoir simulation is much less than that
of a pilot. However, simulated reservoirs may never dupli-
cate field performance. Modem practice is to use reser-
voir simulation to help design a pilot before launching a
large-scale field development.
Numerical models and physical models are complemen-
tary to each other. As will be detailed later, physical
models can be classified into two types: elemental models
and partially scaled models. In an elemental model, ex-
periments are conducted with actual reservoir rock and
fluids. The results can help explain various fluid flow and
heat transfer mechanisms as well as chemical reaction ki-
netics. In a partially scaled model, reservoir dimensions,
fluid properties, and rock properties are scaled for the
laboratory model so that the ratios of various forces in
the reservoir and the physical model are nearly the same.
One can only build partially scaled models because fully
scaled models are difficult or impossible to construct. One
of the advantages of a numerical model over a physical
model is that there is no scaling problem in numerical
simulation. However, in many cases, a numerical model
needs physical models to validate the formulation or to
provide necessary input data for the simulation.
Steam Injection Model
Numerical simulation models for steam injection proc-
esses have been developed by Coats et a1.35 and
Coats. 36.37 A steam injection model consists of a num-
ber of conservation equations.
1. Mass balance of Hz 0. Both water and steam are in-
cluded.
2. Mass balances of hydrocarbons. Only one equation
will be necessary for nonvolatile oil. For volatile oil, two
or more pseudocomponents will be needed to describe the
vaporization/condensation phenomenon of the oil and two
or more equations will be needed.
46-12 PETROLEUM ENGINEERING HANDBOOK
3. Energy balance. The energy balance accounts for
heat conduction, convection, vaporization/condensation
phenomenon, and heat loss from the pay zone to its adja-
cent formations. The need to include an energy balance
in the model sets the thermal recovery processes apart
from isothermal processes for oil recovery.
In addition to the conservation equations, the model
needs to include the following auxiliary equations.
1. If both water and steam coexist, temperature is the
saturated steam temperature for a given pressure. An
equation is needed to describe this relationship between
temperature and pressure.
2. The sum of saturations for the oil, water, and gas
phases equals unity.
3. The mol fractions of hydrocarbon components in the
liquid and gas phases are related through equilibrium
vaporization constants (K-values).
4. The sum of gas-phase mol fractions equals unity.
This includes steam and any volatile components of hydro-
carbons.
5. The sum of liquid-phase mol fractions for hydrocar-
bons equals unity.
In-Situ Combustion Model
Numerical simulation models have been developed by
Crookston et al., 3g Youngren, 39 Coats,40 and Grabow-
ski et a1.4 The in-situ combustion model is more com-
plicated than the model for steam injection. The
conservation equations are as follows.
1. Mass balance of H20. This equation includes the
water produced from combustion.
2. Mass balances of hydrocarbons. This includes con-
sumption of certain hydrocarbons through cracking and
combustion. It also may include the production of cer-
tain other components through cracking.
3. Mass balance of oxygen. This accounts for the con-
sumption of oxygen by combustion.
4. Mass balance of inert gas. If air is used, the conser-
vation of nitrogen should be accounted for. CO2 pro-
duced from combustion may be included in the equation
for the inert gas or be treated separately.
5. Mass balance of coke. This includes the formation
and burning of coke.
6. Energy balance. This equation now includes the heat
of reaction for the reactions involved in the in-situ com-
bustion process. These reactions may include low-
temperature oxidation of hydrocarbons, high-temperature
oxidation or burning of hydrocarbons, thermal cracking
(which produces coke and other products), and combus-
tion of coke.
This model also needs a number of auxiliary equations,
which include (1) steam/water equilibrium, (2) vapori-
zation equilibrium of hydrocarbons, (3) phase saturation
constraints, (4) mol fraction constraints, and (5) chemi-
cal stoichiometry. An example is:
Oil+a 02 -+b CO2 +c Hz0
This says that one mol of oil reacts with a mols of oxy-
gen to form b mols of CO1 and c mols of HzO.
This model also requires a chemical reaction kinetics
equation. For each reaction involved in the process, an
equation can be written to denote that the reaction rate
varies as a function of temperature and concentrations of
the various reactants. One possible form of the reaction
rate equation is the following Arrhenius equation:
w=k(C,)m(CO,)n exp
This equation says that the reaction rate, w, is propor-
tional to the concentration of oil, C, , raised to the mth
power times the concentration of oxygen, Co, , raised
to the nth power. The temperature dependence ofthe reac-
tion rate is in the given exponential form, where E is the
activation energy, the energy barrier the reactants need
to overcome before being converted to the products, R
is the gas constant, and T is the absolute temperature. The
proportionality constant, k, usually is called the pre-
exponential factor.
The models developed so far are believed to be ade-
quate as far as the formulation of the process mechanisms
is concerned. However, problems abound.
1. Artificial breakdown of the crude oil into two com-
ponents may not be sufficient to describe faithfully the
vaporization/condensation phenomena and the chemical
reactions involved in the combustion process. More com-
ponents mean more equations to be solved and hence
higher computer costs.
2. The grid size problem could be severe. A grid size
large enough for economic computation could greatly dis-
tort the temperature distributions in the simulated reser-
voir. This would lead to erroneous predictions of the
chemical reaction rates and thus of reservoir performance
under combustion.
Laboratory Experimentation
The thermal numerical models have been used widely for
screening thermal prospects, designing field projects, and
formulating production strategies. Still, we cannot com-
pletely dispense with laboratory experiments for several
reasons. First, the numerical models need data that can
be measured only experimentally. These data include rela-
tive permeabilities, chemical kinetics, adsorption of chem-
icals on rocks, etc. Second, the numerical models are valid
only when all the pertinent mechanisms are accounted for.
The currently available models cannot handle adequately
situations such as injection of chemicals along with steam,
swelling of clays, which reduces the permeability, etc.
As previously mentioned, physical models for thermal
recovery processes may be classified into two types,
namely, elemental models and partially scaled models.
The elemental models are used to study the physico-
chemical changes inside a rock-fluid system under cer-
tain sets of operating conditions and are normally zero-
dimensional (OD) or one-dimensional (1D). The partial-
ly scaled models are used to simulate the performance of
a reservoir under thermal recovery operations and are nor-
mally 3D. Although the intent is to scale every physico-
chemical change that takes place in the processes, the
models usually are partially scaled because of the extreme
difficulty in achieving full scaling.
Elemental Models
Elemental models used for steamfloodin can be exem-
plified by those used by Willman er al.
lg7
In their clas-
sic work, they used glass bead packs and natural cores
THERMAL RECOVERY 46-13
of different lengths to study the recovery of oil under hot
waterflood and steamflood at different temperatures. The
oils used included crudes of different gravities and oil
fractions.
Fireflood pots and combustion tubes are also elemen-
tal models. In another classic work, Alexander et ~1.~~
used fireflood pots (OD) to study fuel laydown and air re-
quirement, as affected by crude oil characteristics, porous
medium type, oil saturation, air flux, and time-
temperature relationships. The combustion tube (1D) used
by Showalter enabled him to delineate the temperature
profiles at various times, thus giving the combustion front
velocity. More recently, combustion tubes were used to
study the use of water along with airMA and the use of
oxygen-enriched air in combustion. 47
Partially Scaled Models
Partially scaled models have been used to simulate steam-
floods in 5/8 of a five-spot pattern, !4 of a five-spot pat-
tern, etc.48-53 Similar attempts have also been made for
tirefloods. However, it is certainly much more difficult
to include chemical kinetics along with the fluid flow and
heat transfer aspects of the combustion process.
Partially scaled models for steamfloods fall into two
types, namely, high-pressure models and vacuum or low-
pressure models.
High-Pressure Models. All experimental studies on
steamflooding had used high-pressure models until
vacuum models came along and offered an alternative ap-
proach. The scaling laws of Pujol and Boberg normally
were followed in the design. If the dimensions are scaled
down by a factor of F in the model, the steam injection
rate will be scaled down by the same factor and so will
the pressure drop between the injector and the producer.
The permeability will be scaled up by a factor of F, and
the model time will be scaled down by a factor of F*.
Because of the necessity of increasing the permeability
in the model to a great extent, reservoir rock material can-
not be used. Nevertheless, the experiments will be con-
ducted with the actual crude. Also, the steam pressure
and steam quality to be employed in the field will be used
in the model
Vacuum Models. In a small-scale physical model, the
thickness is reduced greatly as compared with that in the
field. To obtain the same gravitational effects as in the
field, the pressure drop from the injector to the producer
also must be reduced greatly. The vaporizationiconden-
sation phenomenon of water and hydrocarbons is governed
by the Clausius-Clapeyron equation, which involves
d In p, or Q/p. Thus, a decrease in the pressure drop (dp)
necessitates a corresponding decrease in the pressure (p)
itself. This is the rationale behind the vacuum-model ap-
proach developed by the Shell group as reported by
Stegemeier et al.
To see the differences between a high-pressure model
and the vacuum model, Table 46.8 has been prepared for
using both models to simulate a hypothetical field element
with a hypothetical oil. The entries for the high-pressure
models were based on the scaling laws of Pujol and
Bobergs and the entries for the vacuum model were
based on the work of Stegemeier et ~1.~~
TABLE 46.8-COMPARISON OF HIGH-PRESSURE AND
VACUUM MODELS FOR STEAMFLOODS
Length, ft
Permeabtlity,
darcies
Time
Steam rate
Pressure 1, psia
Steam quality
Oil viscosity, cp
Temperature, OF
Pressure 2. psia
Steam quality
Oil viscosity, cp
Temperature, OF
Field
229
High-Pressure Vacuum
Model Model
2 458 1,527
5 yrs 50 min 120 min
300 BID 144.7 cm3/min 263.1 cm3/min
400 400 2.70
0.80 0.80 0.082
3.0 3.0 23.6
445 445 137.5
100 100 1.24
0.80 0.80 0.108
6.3 6.3 38.2
328 328 108.9
The following observations can be made on the high-
pressure and vacuum models.
1. Neither the high-pressure model nor the vacuum
model can accurately simulate the capillary forces and the
relative permeability curves of the actual rock/fluid sys-
tem because, to obtain a very high permeability, actual
rock material is not being used.
2. The high-pressure model does not observe the
Clausius-Clapeyron equation, whereas the vacuum model
follows it to a large extent but not exactly.
3. To use the vacuum model, an oil has to be reconsti-
tuted to obtain the required oil viscosity/temperature rela-
tionship. This is completely different from the actual crude
in many physicochemical aspects, including its vapori-
zation/condensation behavior and chemical kinetics. In
contrast, a high-pressure model normally uses actual
crudes.
Field Projects
Screening Guides
In dealing with oil prospects, the first step is to find out
whether the field in question can be produced by certain
recovery methods. Screening guides are useful for this
purpose. Screening guides for steamflood and fireflood
processes have been proposed by various authors includ-
ing Farouq Ali, 57 Geffen, 58 Lewin et al., 59 Iyo-
ho, 6oChu, 61-63 and Poettmann. @ These screening guides
are listed in Table 46.9.
A perusal of the various screening guides listed in Ta-
ble 46.9 shows that some of the earlier screening guides
were quite restrictive in selecting oil prospects. Such a
guide tends to minimize the error of the second kind, that
is, the risk of excluding some undesirable prospects. In
so doing, it tends to increase the error of the first kind,
that is, the risk of missing some desirable prospects. Re-
cent changes in the price structure of the crude oil and
improved technology helped to widen the range of applica-
bility for the steamflood and fireflood processes. This is
reflected in the less restrictive screening guides developed
in more recent years. However, in minimizing the error
of the first kind (erroneous rejection), the newer guides
may possibly increase the error of the second kind (er-
roneous acceptance). This should be borne in mind when
applying these guides to oil prospects.
46-l 4 PETROLEUM ENGINEERING HANDBOOK
Firefloods
Poettmann @
Geffen58
Lewn and
Assocs.
Chu
lyohoM
Ch
TABLE 46.9--SCREENING GUIDES FOR STEAMFLOOD AND FIREFLOOD PROJECTS
Year h D 4 h
-__
1973 830 < 3,000 0.30 - 1,000 12 to 15 <I.000 0.15 to 0.22
1973 >20 <4,000 >lO >20 20.10
1976 >20 <5000 > 0.50 >I0 >I00 > 0.065
1979 30 to 400 2.500 to 5.000 >o 30 > 1,000
>0.50 10 to 20 200 to 1,000 >50 > 0.065
1993 >lO >400 >020 > 0.40 ~36 >0.06
1964 >020 >lW
1973 >lO > 500
1976 >lO > 500
1977 2022
1977
1976 5 to 50 200 to 4,500 20.20 >3W
1976 10 to 120 z 0.20
1976 >lO >500 2 0.25
1962 >0.16 >lOO
>
>O.lO
250 <45 >I00 >005 for COFCAW only
>0.50 10 to 45 >20 >0.05
r0.50 524 < 1,000 >0.13 confidence llmlts approach
> 0 27 regression analysts approach
>050 10 to40 <1,ooo >20 > 0.077 for dry combustion
Reservoir Performance
Performance Indicators Common to Both Steamfloods
and Firefloods. Sweep Efficiency. The area1 and verti-
cal sweep of the steam front or burning front has pro-
nounced influence on the economics of the steamflood or
fireflood projects. Some reported sweep efficiencies of
the steamflood and fireflood projects are given in Table
46.10. 65-81 Whereas the volumetric sweep of steamfloods
varies from 24 to 99 % , that of firefloods appears to be
lower, ranging from 14 to 60%.
TABLE 46.10-SWEEP EFFICIENCY OF STEAMFLOOD
AND FIREFLOOD PROJECTS
Field, Locatlon
(Operator)
Steamfloods
Inglewood, CA65
(Chevron-Socal)
Kern River CA66,67
(Chevro;)
Kern River, CA68-70
GeW)
Midway Sunset, CA
(Tenneco)
El Dorado, KA73
(Cities)
Deerfield, MO 74
(Esso-Humble)
Schoonebeek,The
Netherlands75
(Nederlandse)
Firefloods
South Belridge, CA76
(General Petroleum)
Within Pattern Area
(2.75 acres)
Within Total Burned Area
(7.90 acres)
Sloss, NE-
(Amoco)
South Oklahoma
(Magnolia)
Shannon Pool, WY
(Pan AmericanlCasper)
Areal Vertical Volumetric
60.0 50.0 30.0
- - 80.0
- 100.0 62.8 to 98.8
-
-
85.0
-
- 60.0 to 70.0
- <50.0
40.0 34.0
- 24.3 to 41.9
100 59.6 59.6
100 50.4 50.4
50 28 14
85 - 26
43 100 43
(>600 BIAF) (well spacings40 acres)
<lo no upper limit for reverse combustion
<45 <l.wa > 0.064 for wet combustion
<40 >lO >O.iO
Oil Recovery. Table 46.11 lists some of the reported
oil recoveries of steamflood and fireflood projects. 82-21
For the estimation of the oil recovery obtainable in a
steam injection project, the analytical methods discussed
previously can be used. As steam injection continues, the
thermal efficiency will gradually diminish and the instan-
taneous SOR will increase gradually. When this ratio
reaches a certain limit, further injection of steam will be-
come uneconomical and needs to be stopped. The cumula-
tive oil production at that time divided by the original oil
in place (OOIP) will give the oil recovery.
The oil recovery from a fireflood project can be calcu-
lated with the recognition that oil production comes from
both the burned and unburned regions (Nelson and
McNeil 122), Let Evb equal the volumetric sweep effcien-
cy of the burning front and ERu equal the recovery effi-
ciency in the unburned region. The overall oil recovery is:
>
E,b+(l-Evb)ERu, . . . . . (63)
where C,,, is the fuel content, Ibm/cu ft. In this equation,
the fuel consumed is taken to be a IOAP1 oil with a den-
sity of 62.4 lbm/cu ft.
The equation developed by Satman et al. 23 can be
used to calculate the oil recovery from a dry combustion
project.
Y=47.0 0.427S, -O.O0135h-2.196 -!-
( >
0.25
1
X,
PO
where
..__,.....,.......... ,.......
(64)
Y=
rnP +vfb
x100 . . . . . .
N
x=
i&o2
[N,,(~S,)l(l -d) . . . . . . . .
THERMAL RECOVERY
TABLE 46.11 -OIL RECOVERY OF STEAMFLOOD
AND FIREFLOOD PROJECTS
Field, Location (Operator)
Steamfloods
Smackover, AR (Phillips)e2~83
Kern River, CA (Chevronia4
Kern River, CA (Getty)68
Midway Sunset, CA (CWOD)85
Mount Poso. CA (Shell)*~87
San Ardo, CA (Texaco)
Slocum, TX (She11)89~30
Winkleman Dome, WY (Amoco)g
Tta Juana Estes, Venezuela (Maraven)g3-g5
Firefloods
Brea-Olinda, CA (Union)Q6,97
Midway Sunset, CA (Mobil)gB
Midway Sunset, CA (CWOD)99
South Belridge, CA (General Petroleum)76
South Belridge, CA (Mobil)00
Robinson, IL (Marathon)0~06
Bellevue. LA (Cities) lo7 lo8
Bellevue, LA (Getty)09~*
May Libby, LA (Sun)3
Heidelberg, MS (G$~14~5
Sloss, NE (Amoco)
Glen Hummel, TX \Sun)6,7
Gloriana, TX (Sun) l6
North Tisdale. WY (Continental)g
Suplacu de Barcau, Romania (IFPIICPPG)zo
Miga, Venezuela (Gulf)
Thermal Oil
Recovery
(Q/o OOIP)
25.7
69.9*
46.6 to 72.6
63.0*
34.6
47.5, 51.2
55.8*
28.1 *
26.3
25.1.
20.0
52.8
56.7
14.5
31.9
41.5
44.6*
68.0
22.4
14.3
31 .o
29.7
23.0
47.5
11.6
In the above equation,
ANp = cumulative incremental oil production, bbl,
Ve = fuel burned, bbl,
N = OOIP, bbl,
lar
= cumulative air injection, lo3 scf,
EQ2
= oxygen utilization efficiency, fraction, and
NV
= oil in place at start of project, bbl.
Gates and Ramey 124 developed a correlation between
oil recovery and PV burned at various initial gas satura-
tion, on the basis of field data taken from the South Bel-
ridge tireflood project 76 and laboratory combustion-tube
data. This correlation, shown in Fig. 46.10, should be
useful in predicting current oil recovery as the fireflood
proceeds.
Changes in Oil Property. At the temperatures and pres-
sures prevailing in steamfloods, no changes in the oil prop-
erty are expected to occur because of any chemical
reactions. However, the properties of the recovered oil
could have been changed as a result of steam distillation.
In firefloods, of course, oil properties change considera-
bly because of thermal cracking and combustion, as well
as steam distillation. Changes in oil property in some of
the reported steamfloods and firefloods are shown in Ta-
ble 46.12. 125~30
Performance Indicator Pertaining to Steamfloods
Only. Steam Oil Ratio (SOR). The SOR, F,, , is the most
important factor characterizing the success or failure of
a steamflood project. Its reciprocal, the OSR, F,,v, also
is used commonly. In projects where oil is used as fuel
46-15
VOLUME 8URNED %
Fig. 46.10-Estimated oil recovery vs. volume burned.
for steam generation, 1 bbl of oil normally can generate
13 to 14 bbl (cold-water equivalent) of steam. Thus, the
highest SOR that is tolerable without burning more oil
than that produced is 13 to 14. For steamflood operation,
there are other costs than fuel alone. Because of this, steam
injection is normally terminated when the instantaneous
SOR reaches the level of eight or so. Ideally the overall
SOR should be around four. This corresponds to 3 to 4
bbl of oil produced per barrel of oil burned. 13 This ideal
case is, unfortunately, not normally achievable. The SOR
of the majority of the steamflood field projects falls into
the range of 5 to 7.
The following set of regression equations developed by
Chu62 can be used to estimate the SOR with known reser-
voir and crude properties.
1. For F,>5.0 (F,, <0.20),
F,,=l/(-0.011253+0.000027790+0.0001579h
+0.5 12O$S,). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . (67)
2. For F,, ~5.0 (F,, 20.20),
F,,=18.744+0.0014530-O.O5088h-0.0008844k
-0.0005915~, - 14.79S, -O.O002938khl/~~, . (68)
where
D = depth, ft,
h = reservoir thickness, ft,
8 = dip angle, degrees,
CL0 =
oil viscosity, cp,
k = permeability, md, and
S, = oil saturation at start, fraction.
Another method of estimating F,v, has been given by
Myhill and Stegemeier, 29 based on the Mandl-Volek
model.
46-l 6
PETROLEUM ENGINEERING HANDBOOK
TABLE 46.12-CHANGES IN OIL PROPERTY IN STEAMFLOOD
AND FIREFLOOD PROJECTS
Viscositv
Field, Location
(Operator)
Steamflood
API
Temperature
(cp)
Before After
PF)
Before After
Brea, CA Z
(Shell)*
23.5 25.9
Fireflood
South Belridge, CA76
(General Petroleum)
West Newport, GAlz6
(General Crude)
12.9 14.2 07 2,700 800
120 540 200
160 120 54
15.2 20.0 60 4,585 269
100 777 71
East Venezuela
(Mene Grande)
210 32 IO
9.5 12.2
then 10.5
Kyrock, KY
(Gulf)
10.4
South Oklahomaso
(Magnolia)
15.4
14.5
20.4
Asphalt Ridge, UT13
(U.S. DOE)* *
14.2 20.3
Changes I 00 C ~ -C ,* before-21 after-28
Changes in other properf,es
Before After
Pour point. OF 140 25
Residue bolllng above 62 35
1 ,OOOOF, wf%
Performance Indicators Pertaining to Firefloods Only.
Fuel Content. Fuel content (lbm/cu ft of burned volume)
is the amount of coke available for combustion that is
deposited on the rock as a result of distillation and ther-
mal cracking. It is the most important factor influencing
the success of a fireflood project. If the fuel content is
too low, combustion cannot be self-sustained. A high fuel
content, however, means high air requirement and pow-
er cost. Besides, oil production also may suffer.
where C, is the fuel content, lbm/cu ft.
Both laboratory experiments and field projects indicate
that, for a specific reservoir, fuel content decreases as
WAR increases. However, no statistically significant
correlation was found to exist between fuel content and
WAR in the presence of widely varying reservoir prop-
erties . 63
Fuel content can be determined by laboratory tube runs.
Gates and Ramey 24 presented a comparison of the esti-
mated fuel content by use of various methods including
laboratory experiments and field project data from the
South Belridge project. 76 Their comparison shows that
fuel content determined from the tube runs can provide
reasonably good estimation of the fuel content obtaina-
ble in the field.
Air Requirement. As pointed out by Benham and Poett-
mann, 132 air requirement, a, in lo6 scf/acre-ft of burned
volume, can be calculated on the basis of stoichiometric
considerations:
(
2Fcc+l +FHC
- ctn
>
a=
FCC+1 2
x0.04356, . .(70)
0.001109(12+F~~)~~~
In the absence of experimental data, the correlation of
Showalter relating the fuel content to API gravity can
be used. Fig. 46.11 shows a comparison of the Showalter
data and field project data. 63 In addition, the following
regression equation developed by Chu6* based on data
from 17 field projects can be used to calculate the fuel
content:
C, = -0.12+0.00262h+0.0001 14k+2.23S0
+0.000242kh/p, -0.0001890-0.0000652,u0,
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
(69)
where F, is the CO2/CO ratio in produced gas and FHC
is the atomic H/C ratio. In the absence of necessary data
for Eq. 70, the Showalter correlation43 relating air re-
quirement to API gravity can be used. A comparison of
the Showalter data and field project data is given in Fig.
46.12. 63 It can be seen that all the field points fall on the
upper side of the Showalter curve. Air requirement in the
fields can exceed laboratory values because of air chan-
neling and migration. In addition, the following regres-
sion equation developed by Chu63 can be used:
a=4.72+0.03656h+9.996S3,+0.000691k. . (71)
60
210
66
90,000 2,000
120 27
5,000 800
after a month
5,000
THERMAL RECOVERY 46-17
. LABORATORY TEST
DATA BY SHOWALTER
l FIELD PROJECT DATA
.
.
.
MC
oI
10 20 30 40
Fig. 46.11-Effect of oil gravity on fuel content.
Air-Oil Ratio (AOR). This important ratio relates air
injection to oil production and usually is expressed in
terms of lo3 scf/bbl. Oil recovery comes from both the
burned and unburned regions. The AOR can be calculat-
ed thus I** :
Fm =
a
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
(72)
In the absence of Evb and ER,, , the following regression
equation developed by Chu6* based on 17 field projects
can be used.
F,, =21.45+0.0222h+0.001065k
+0.002645~, -76.76gbS,. . . . . . (73)
Besides, the correlation between oil recovery and PV
burned developed by Gates and Ramey 124 can be used
for estimating the current AOR as the fireflood proceeds.
Both laboratory experiments and field projects indicate
that, for a specific reservoir, AOR decreases as WAR in-
creases. No statistically significant correlation, however,
has been found between AOR and WAR in the presence
of widely varying reservoir properties. 63
Project Design
Design Features Common to Both Steamfloods
and Firefloods
Pattern Selection. For any oil recovery process with fluid
injection, a cardinal rule of pattern selection is that, to
achieve a balance between fluid injection and production,
25 I / I
I
. LABORATORY TEST DATA
BY SHOWALTER
O-
. FIELD PROJECT DATA
Fig. 46.12-Effect of oil gravity on air requirement.
the ratio of the number of producers to the number of in-
jectors should be equal to the ratio of well injectivity to
well productivity (Caudle et al. 133). Because of the high
mobility of air or steam compared to that of the oil, the
injectivitylproductivity ratio is high, favoring a high
producer/injector ratio. This rule generally has been fol-
lowed by the various reported steamflood and fireflood
projects. The use of inverted 13-spot, 9-spot, 7-spot, and
6-spot patterns, unconfined five-spot patterns, down-the-
center line of injectors, and single well injection has been
reported.
Aside from the injectivity/productivity ratios, other fac-
tors also should enter into consideration in pattern selec-
tion. These factors include: heat loss considerations,
utilization of existing wells, reservoir dip, difficulty in
producing hot wells, etc. Based on these and other con-
siderations, repeated five-spot patterns, updip and crest
injections and line drive also were used. The choice of
pattern or nonpattern floods in the various steamflood and
fireflood projects is shown in Table 46.13. 34-138
Completion Intervals. In most of the steamflood and fire-
flood projects, the producers usually are completed for
the entire sand interval to maximize production. The in-
jectors usually are completed at the lower third or lower
half of the interval, to minimize the override of the steam
or air. In wet combustion projects, it is advisable to com-
plete the lower part for air injection and upper part for
water injection. This is to minimize the underflow of water
as well.
Producer Bottomhole Pressure (BHP). In their study
for a steamflood, Gomaa et al. 139 found that decreasing
the producer BHP lowers the average reservoir pressure,
increases steam volume, and increases predicted oil recov-
ery. It is, therefore, important to keep the producers
pumped off all the time. Without any reason to believe
otherwise, keeping the producers pumped off should
benefit a fireflood as well as a steamflood.
46-19 PETROLEUM ENGINEERING HANDBOOK
TABLE 46.13-PATTERN TYPES OF STEAMFLOODS AND FIREFLOODS
Pattern Types
Inverted 13-spot
Inverted g-spot
Inverted 7-spot
Unconfined
inverted 5-spot
Down-the-center-line
of injectors
Single well injection
Repeated 5-spot
Updip or crest
injection
Downdip injection
Updip and downdip
injection
Line drive
Steamfloods
Slocum, TX8g,93
(Shell)
San Ardo, CA8*
(Texaco)
Yorba Linda, CA
(Shell)
Kern River, CAM
(Chevron)
Slocum, TXm.
Ti!?i!ra, Venezuela35
(Shell)
East Coalinga. CA37
Ke?%er. CAa4
(Chevron)
Kern River. CA870
( GeW
Winkleman Dome, WY .
(Pan American)
Brea, CAiz5
(Shell)
Midway Sunset, CA7.72
(Tenneco)
South Selridge, CAi3
(Mobil)
Mount Poso. CA8.87
(Shell)
Design Features Pertaining to Steamfloods Only
SteamInjection Rate. According to Chu and Trim-
ble, I40 the optimal choice of a constant steam injection
rate is relatively independent of sand thickness. As sand
thickness decreases, the total oil content in the reservoir
decreases. This calls for a lower steam rate. At the same
time, a higher steam rate is needed to compensate for the
increased percentage heat loss with a decrease in thick-
ness. These two counteracting factors result in only a small
variation in the optimal steam rate as thickness is changed
from 90 to 30 ft.
The same study with five-spot patterns shows that the
optimal choice of a constant steam rate is proportional
to the pattern size. Furthermore, varying steam rates ap-
pear to be preferable to constant steam rates. An optimal
steam rate schedule calls for a high steam rate in the ini-
tial stage and a decrease in the steam rate with time.
Firefloods
Sellevue, LA07.08
(Cities Service)
Sellevue, LA0g~2
Wty)
Silverdale, Alta. 34
(General Crude)
West Newport, CA26.27
(General Crude)
Trix-Liz, TX6~36
Gt!sf?~)ummel, TX6,7
(Sun)
Miga, Venezuela*
(Gulf)
Sloss, NE77-79
(Amoco)
Midway Sunset, CA
(Mobil)
Heidelberg, MS4,15
(Gulf)
Suplacu de Sarcau,
Romania (IPF/ICPPG)20
Steam Quality. Steam quality refers to the mass fraction
of water existing in vapor form. Gomaa et al. 39 reported
that increasing steam quality increases oil recovery vs.
time but had little effect on recovery vs. Btus injected.
This indicates that heat injection is the important param-
eter in determining steamflood performance.
Just as with steam injection rates, the optimal choice
of steam quality should be studied. High-quality steam
could cause excessive steam override. This may be reme-
died by using lower-quality steam at one stage of a
steamflood.
Design Features Pertaining to Fireflood Only
Dry vs. Wet Combustion. The choice between dry com-
bustion and wet combustion is an important decision to
be made in conducting a field project. Laboratory experi-
ments indicated that the use of water either simultaneously
THERMAL RECOVERY 46-19
or alternately with air does reduce the AOR, although the
oil recovery may not be improved significantly. As was
mentioned previously, a correlation between AOR and
WAR, based on data from 21 field projects, was found
to be statistically insignificant in the presence of widely
varying reservoir properties. 63
Cities Service conducted a field comparison test of dry
and wet combustion in the Bellevue field, LA, 14 in
which possible interference by variations in reservoir
properties was essentially circumvented by using two con-
tiguous patterns, one with dry combustion and another
with wet combustion. This test found that, with wet com-
bustion, the volumetric sweep was improved to a great
extent. This indirectly implies an increase in oil recov-
ery. Furthermore, the air requirement for a specific
volume of reservoir was reduced. This reduced the oper-
ating cost and improved the economics. Because of these
encouraging results, the possible advantages of using wet
combustion should be explored.
Air Injection Rate. According to Nelson and McNeil, 22
the air injection rate depends on the desired rate of ad-
vance of the burning front. A satisfactory burning rate
was stated to be 0.125 to 0.5 ft/D. In the design method
proposed by these authors, a maximum air rate is first
determined, based on the minimum burning rate of 0.125
ft/D. They recommended a time schedule such that the
air rate would be increased gradually to the maximum
rate, held at this rate for a definite period, and then re-
duced gradually to zero. The Midway Sunset, CA, proj-
ect of Chanslor-Western99 used a burning rate of 1 in./D
(0.08 ft/D). Gates and Ramey 24 found that the air rate
should provide a minimum rate of burning front advance
of 0.15 ft/D or an air flux of at least 2.15 scfihr-sq ft at
the burning front.
WAR. The reported WAR in various field projects ranged
from 0 (for dry combustion) to 2.8 bbl/103 scf. The
choice of WAR depends on water availability, quality of
the water available, well injectivity, and economic con-
siderations. Combustion tube experiments, properly de-
signed and executed, should be helpful.
Well Completion
Special well completions are needed for injectors and
producers to withstand the high temperatures in steam-
floods, and to withstand the corrosive environment as well
in firefloods.
According to Gates and Holmes, 14* wells used in
steam operations should be completed with due consid-
eration of heat loss with thermal stresses. In deep wells,
tubular goods with high qualities, such as the normalized
and tempered P-105 tubing and P-110 casing, should be
used if the tubing and casing are not free to expand. Ther-
mal stress can be minimized by the proper use of expan-
sion joints. Thermal packers should be used on steam
injection wells and deep wells undergoing cyclic steam-
ing. The cement should include a thermal strength stabiliz-
ing agent, an insulating additive and a bounding additive.
For firefloods, Gates and Holmes42 felt that steel
casing and tubing such as J-55 is suitable for injectors.
These wells can be completed with normal Portland ce-
ment, with high-temperature cement placed opposite and
about 100 ft above the pay zone. The high-temperature
cement recommended for the injectors is calcium
aluminate cement (with or without silica flour), pozzolan
cement, or API Class G cement (with 30% silica flour).
If spontaneous ignition occurs, the use of cemented and
perforated liners is required to prevent well damage re-
sulting from burnback into the borehole. The producers
should be completed to withstand relatively high temper-
atures and severe corrosion and abrasion. These authors
recommended the use of gravel-flow pack, and stainless
steel 316 for both liner and tubing opposite the pay zone.
The well completion methods for injectors and
producers in the various steamflood and fireflood proj-
ects, detailed by Chu6,63 previously, are given in Ta-
ble 46.14.
Field Facilities
Steamflood Facilities
Steam Generation and Injection. Most of the steam in-
jection projects use surface steam generators. The major
difference between oilfield steam generators and indus-
trial multitube boilers is the ability to produce steam from
saline feedwater with minimum treatment. Other features
include unattended operation, portability, weatherproof
construction, and ready accessibility for repairs. The abil-
ity to use a wide variety of fuels including lease crude
is also an important requirement. The capacity of steam
generators used in steamflood projects usually ranges from
12 to 50 X lo6 Btuihr, with 50 x lo6 Btuihr becoming the
industry standard in California.
With surface steam generators, the steam goes from the
generators to the injection wells through surface lines.
Most surface steam lines are insulated with a standard in-
sulation with aluminum housings. The steam is split into
individual injectors through a header system using chokes
to reach critical flow. This procedure requires that the
steam achieve sonic velocity, which, under one field con-
dition, 68 calls for a pressure drop of about 55 % across
the choke. The chokes are sized to each other to give the
desired flow rate into each injector. As long as the pres-
sure drop is greater than 55 X , the flow rate will be in-
dependent of the actual wellhead injection pressure.
A recent development is the use of downhole steam
generators to eliminate wellbore heat losses in deep wells.
There are two basic designs, which differ on the method
of transferring heat from the hot combustion gases to
produce steam. 43 In one design, the combustion gas
mixes directly with feed water and the resulting gas/steam
mixture is injected into the reservoir. Because of this, the
combustion process takes place at the injection pressure.
In another design, there is no direct contact between the
combustion gas and water, just as in the surface genera-
tors. The combustion gas returns to the surface to be
released after giving up much of the heat to generate
steam. A lower pressure than injection pressure can be
used in this case.
Still another new development is cogeneration of steam
and electricity. I44 The effluent gas from a combustor is
used in a gas turbine, which drives an electrical genera-
tor. The exhaust gas from the turbine is then used in steam
generators to produce steam for thermal recovery
purposes.
46-20
Injectors
Casing
Openhole or perforated
completions
Gravel packmg
Tubing
Producers
Casing
Openhole or perforated
completions
Cement
Gravel packing
Tubing
PETROLEUM ENGINEERING HANDBOOK
TABLE 46.14-WELL COMPLETION FOR STEAMFLOODS AND FIREFLOODS
Steamfloods
Grades: J-55, K-55, and N-80
Sizes: 4%, 5%, 65/8, 7, and 9% in.
Tensile prestressing of casing in deep wells
Both openhole completions with slotted lmers and
solid-string completion with jet perforations
have been reported.
Liner sizes: 4X, 5/2, or 7 in.
Perforations: l/4 or % In., one or two per foot, or
one-half per foot
Some with stamless steel wire-wrapped screens.
Class A, G, and H cement with silica flour (30 to
60% of dry cement).
Use not prevalent
Tubing insulations used in deep wells: asbestos
with calcium silicate, plus alummum radiation
sheld; or jacketed tubing with calcium silicate.
Grade: K-55
Sizes: 4%, 5%, Ss/,, 7, and 85/8 in.
Tensile prestressing of casing in deep wells
Both openhole completion with slotted liners and
solid-string completion with jet perforations
have been reported.
Liner sizes: 4/2, 4X, or 65/a in.
Slot sizes: 40, 60, or 601180 mesh
Perforations: % in., four per foot
Some with stamless steel wire-wrapped screens.
Class G and H cement with silica flour (30 to
60% of dry cement).
Use more prevalent than in injectors
Gravel size: 6/9 mesh flow-packed.
Tubing for rod pump.
Water Treatment. The feedwater treatment for steam
generation consists mainly of softening, usually through
zeolite ion exchange. Some feedwaters may require filtra-
tion and deaeration to remove iron. Still others may need
to use KC1 for control of clay swelling and chlorine to
combat bacteria. Facilities for oil removal also will be
needed if the produced water is to be reused as feedwater
for steam generation.
Fireflood Facilities
Ignition Devices. In many fields, the reservoir tempera-
ture is so high that spontaneous ignition would occur only
a few days after starting air injection. In some projects,
steam, reactive crude, or other fuels will be added to help
ignition.
Many other fields need artificial ignition devices, which
include electrical heaters, gas burners, and catalytic ig-
nition systems. The various ignition methods, including
equipment and operational data, have been discussed by
Strange. 145
Air Compressors. The air compressors can be gas en-
gine or electrical motor driven. Depending on the total
Firefloods
Grades: J-55 and K-55
Sizes: 41/z, 5%. 7, and 8% in. across the
pay zone
Perforated completion more prevalent than
openhole completion with or without liners.
Liner sizes: 3% or 5% in.
Perforations: l/4 or l / 2 in. (two or four per foot)
Use of high-temperature cement prevalent
Use not prevalent.
Tubing used for air injection or as a thermowell.
In wet combustion, various ways have been used
for injection of air and water.
Grades: H-40, J-55, and K-55
Sizes: 51/z, 7. 85/8, and 95/a in.
Openhole completion with or without slotted liners
and perforated completion are equally
prevalent.
Liner sizes: 4%, 512, or 65/8 in.
Slot sizes: 60-mesh. 0.05, 0.07, or 0.08 in.
Perforations: V2 In. (two or four per foot)
Use of high-temperature cement was reported
Use more prevalent than in Injectors.
Gravel sizes: 20/40 or 619 mesh, flow- or
pressure-packed.
Tubing for rod pump, to serve as a thermowell. or
for cooling water injection.
injection rate the compressor needs to supply and the out-
put pressure needed, the capacity of the compressors can
range from 1.0 to 20.0~ lo6 scf/D, and the power rat-
ing can range from 300 to 3,500 hp.
Monitoring and Coring Programs
Monitoring Programs
A thermal recovery project could be a complete failure
economically and still be considered a success if it could
provide useful information on the reservoir performance
under steamflood or fireflood. A properly designed
monitoring program carried out during the project and
coring programs during and after the project are impor-
tant in providing the information necessary for evaluat-
ing steamflood or fireflood performance.
The Sample, Control, and Alarm Network (SCAN) au-
tomation system installed by Getty in the Kern River
field 46 illustrates how a large steam injection operation
can be monitored. This system consists of a devoted cen-
tral computer that monitors 96 field sites. At these sites,
the production rates of more than 2,600 producers and
the operating rates of 129 steam generators are gathered.
The SCAN oerforms several functions.
THERMAL RECOVERY 46-21
1. It automatically schedules and controls well produc-
tion tests at each site.
2. It monitors results of well production tests, steam
generator operating rates, flow status, and injection sta-
tus of producers, valve positions during well tests, and
various status contact checks.
3. It sounds the alarm upon any malfunctioning at a field
site or a steam generator.
4. It reports necessary operating information routinely
on a daily, weekly, or monthly basis, and other special
reports on demand from the operator.
The Silverdale, Alta., fireflood project of Genera1
Crude 34 also uses an automatic data collection system.
Differential pressure transducers, thermocouple-amplifier
transducers, pressure transducers, and motor load trans-
ducers are used to measure and record data at each well.
These data are transmitted to a central system, which can
be interrogated and can indicate any alarm situation when
pressures, temperatures, or flow rates fall outside certain
specified ranges.
Not all thermal projects call for elaborate automatic
monitoring programs. The following program used in the
Bodcau, LA, fireflood project of Cities Service-DOE I47
typifies one needed for a small-scale pilot.
1. Gas production rates, useful for mass balance cal-
culations, were measured monthly. Monthly analysis of
the produced gas gave data for the calculation of the oxy-
gen utilization efficiency.
2. Oil and water production rates were measured at least
twice each month.
3. Flow line temperatures were measured daily. These
temperatures, in conjunction with the gas production rates,
were useful in determining the amount of quench water
needed at the producers,
4. Downhole temperature profiles were taken monthly
at the observation wells. These profiles helped to deline-
ate the development of the burned volume.
Coring Program
Drilling core holes could be very expensive, depending
on the depths of the pay zones. However, a judiciously
designed and properly executed coring program, either
during a thermal project or afterward, could provide valu-
able information on the project performance. Such a pro-
gram can give the following information: (1) residual oil
saturation (ROS) after steamflood or fireflood, (2) verti-
cal sweep of the injected steam or burned volume, (3) areal
sweep of the steam front or burning front, (4) maximum
temperature distribution, both areally and vertically, and
(5) effective permeability of the rock, and whether any
deposits formed during the process could have reduced
the flow capacity.
A typical coring program, used for postmortem evalu-
ation in the Sloss, NE, fireflood project,79 is summar-
ized next.
Core Analyses. Porosity, permeability, and oil satura-
tions were measured on each foot of the recovered cores.
Oil saturations were determined by the routine Dean-Stark
extraction and weight loss method, and the infrared ab-
sorption method.
Log Analyses. Compensated formation density and dual-
induction laterolog logs were run in the core holes to de-
termine porosity and oil saturation.
Photographs and Visual Examination. Whereas black-
and-white photographs were found to be rather useless,
ultraviolet photographs gave an excellent picture as to
where the oil was removed by the burning process. The
absence of oil also could be seen by visual examination.
In some intervals, the reddish color of the core indicated
that the core had been subjected to a temperature high
enough for iron oxidation.
Mineral Analyses of the Cores. Various minerals, in-
cluding glauconite, illite, chlorite, and kaolinite, under-
went permanent changes with the temperature increase.
The maximum temperature to which the core samples had
been exposed could be determined from the form and
color of these minerals.
Microscopic Studies. The scanning electron microscope
was used to study anhydrite formation and clay altera-
tion in the core samples, which had been subjected to high
temperatures.
Tracers
The use of tracers helped to monitor fluid movement and
interpret areal coverage in individual steamflood patterns.
According to Wagner, I48 preferred aqueous-phase or
gaseous-phase tracers include radioisotopes, salts with de-
tectable cations and anions, fluorescent dyes, and water-
soluble alcohols. Radioactive tracers include tritium,
tritiated water, and krypton-85. Other tracers include am-
monia, air, sodium nitrite, sodium bromide, and sodium
chloride.
Operational Problems and Remedies
Operational problems plaguing steamflood and fireflood
projects and their remedies, previously detailed by
Chu . 6 ,63 are summarized next.
Problems Common to Steamfloods and Firefloods
WeII Productivity. Production of the highly viscous crude
may be extremely low before the arrival of the steam front
or burning front. The production rate can be improved
by injecting light oil as a diluent, hot oil treatment, cy-
clic steam injection, or burning at the producers.
When producer temperature exceeds 250F, pump ef-
ficiency decreases to a great extent because of hot pro-
duced fluids flashing to steam or direct breakthrough of
the injected steam or flue gas. The best remedy is to plug
off the hot zone and redirect the steam or flue gas to the
oil section before entering the wellbore.
Sanding. Sanding can be severe even in steamflood proj-
ects. The remedies include the Hyperclean technique,
foamed-in tight-hole slotted liners, a sodium aluminate
sand consolidation technique, and the use of phenolic-resin
gravel packing.
In firefloods, sanding is particularly severe if the sand
is extremely unconsolidated. The erosion can be aggra-
vated further by coke particles and high gas rates. Sand-
blasting could require frequent pulling of wells and
replacement of pumps.
Emulsions. In steamfloods, emulsions sometimes can be
broken easily by chemical treatment. The problem could
46-22
t
I--
Fig. 46.13-Production history of cyclic steam stimulation, TM
sand, Huntington Beach offshore field, CA.
become severe if the emulsion is complicated with the
solids produced and with the continuously changing na-
ture of the produced fluids.
Emulsions found in fireflood projects are formed of
heavy oil, cracked light ends, quench and formation water,
solids, and possibly, corrosion products. They can become
a continual and major problem in some projects, and re-
quire expensive emulsion breakers.
Problems Plaguing Steamfloods Only
Steam Placement. The lack of control of steam place-
ment during steam stimulation is a major problem in
producers with liner completions. The use of solid string
completions will help reduce the problem.
Steam Splitting. The uneven splitting of steam in a two-
phase regime can cause significant differences in steam
quality into different injectors. This can be corrected by
modifying the layout of the steam line branching system.
TABLE 46.15--RESERVOIR ROCK AND FLUID
PROPERTY DATA, TM SAND, HUNTINGTON BEACH
OFFSHORE FIELD, CA
Depth, fl
Thickness, ft
Gross
Net
Porosity, %
Permeability, md
Oil gravity, OAPI
Reservoir temperature, OF
Reservoir pressure at start,
Oil viscosity at 12?F, cp
Oil saturation al start, %
2,000 to 2,300
115
40 to 58
35
400 to 800
12 to 15
125
wig 600 to 800
682
75
PETROLEUM ENGINEERING HANDBOOK
Problems Plaguing Firefloods Only
Poor Injectivity. Various substances can cause losses in
injectivity for the air injectors. If identifiable, these prob-
lems can be remedied by appropriate means. Injector plug-
ging by iron oxide can be reduced by injecting air into
the casing and bleeding it through the tubing. Asphaltene
buildup can be reduced by squeeze washing with
asphaltene solvent. Emulsion formed in situ can be re-
duced by emulsion breakers. Scale formation caused by
barium and strontium sulfate can be reduced by an or-
ganic phosphate. The injection of NuTriT
(trichloromethylene) and acidizing are useful in improv-
ing the injectivity.
Corrosion. Corrosion can be mild or serious and is caused
by simultaneous injection of air and water, production of
acids, sulfur, oxygen, and CO2 . Corrosion inhibitors are
needed regularly.
Exploration Hazards. To minimize explosion hazards
in the air injection system, an explosion-proof lubricant
should be used. Flushing of the interstage piping with a
nitrox solution is necessary.
Case Histories
Many thermal recovery projects have been reported in
the literature. The following describes a number of select-
ed projects and gives the reasons for their selection.
Steam Stimulation Operations
Huntington Beach, CA (Signal) 149-TypicaI Opera-
tion. The steam stimulation project was conducted in the
TM sand, in the Huntington Beach offshore field, Orange
County, CA, This project typifies the behavior of a heavy-
oil reservoir under cyclic steam stimulation. The reser-
voir properties are given in Table 46.15.
Steam injection was started in nine producers in Sept.
1964, resulting in a large increase in oil production. This
early success prompted the expansion of the project by
drilling wells on 5-acre spacing. The number of wells in-
creased from 9 in 1964 to 35 in 1969. The performance
of the steam stimulation project during the 1964-70 peri-
od is shown in Fig. 46.13. With steam stimulation and
with the almost quadrupling of the number of wells, the
oil rate increased more than lo-fold, from 125 B/D oil
in 1964 to about 1,500 B/D oil in 1970.
The performance of steam stimulation normally deteri-
orates as the number of cycles increases. As shown in
Table 46.16, the OSR changed from the range of 3 to 3.8
bbl/bbl for the first two cycles to the range of 2.4 to 2.5
bbl/bbl for the third and fourth cycles.
Fig. 46.14 shows how oil production in one well
decreases during a cycle and how it varies from one cycle
to another.
Paris Valley, CA (Husky) 50-Co-Iqjection of Gas and
Steam. A wet combustion project was initiated at Paris
Valley, which is located in Monterey County, CA. Be-
fore the arrival of the heat front, the producers were stimu-
lated with steam. A special feature that made this project
interesting was the co-injection of air and steam in three
of the stimulation cycles. The reservoir properties are
given in Table 46.17.
THERMAL RECOVERY
46-23
Fig. 46.14-011 production rate, Well J-128, Huntington Beach
offshore field.
In Table 46.18, Cycles 3 and 5 of Well 20 and Cycle
7 of Well 3 used air-steam injection. For Well 20, oil pro-
duction in Cycle 3 was 4,701 bbl while that in Cycle 2
was 2,449 bbl. Thus, with air-steam injection, oil pro-
duction increased by 92 % . A similar increase was notice-
able for Cycle 5 of Well 20 and Cycle 7 of Well 3 when
compared with their respective preceding cycles, which
used steam only.
Steamflood Projects
Kern River, CA (Getty) 68m70-Largest Steamflood.
The Kern River field is located northeast of Bakersfield,
CA, in the southeastern part of the San Joaquin Valley.
Getty Oil Co.s steam displacement operation in this field
is the largest in the world, based on a 1982 survey. l3 Ac-
cording to this survey, the thermal oil production rate was
83,000 B/D in an area of 5,070 acres.
The Kern River formation consists of a sequence of al-
ternating sand and shale members. The reservoir proper-
ties are given in Table 46.19.
The Kern River field was discovered in the late 1890s.
In the mid-1950s, bottomhole heaters were used to im-
prove the oil productivity. In Aug. 1962, a 2.5-acre nor-
mal five-spot hot waterflood was started. Results showed
that this process was technically feasible but economically
unattractive. In June 1964, the hot waterflood pilot was
converted to a steam displacement test and the number
of injectors was increased from the original 4 wells to 47
wells. Continued expansion through the years has in-
creased the number of injectors to 1,788 wells, with 2,556
producers by 1982. The original Kern project and some
later expansions are shown in Fig. 46.15. The steam dis-
placement operation was in general conducted in 2.5-acre
five-spot patterns.
Getty Oil Co.s steam displacement operation includes
many projects. For illustration purposes, the Kern proj-
ect is presented here with a map showing the well pat-
terns (Fig. 46.16) and a figure showing the injection and
TABLE 46.16-SUMMARY OF PERFORMANCE
THROUGH FOUR HUFF N PUFF CYCLES AS OF
OCTOBER 1,197O; TM SAND, HUNTINGTON BEACH
OFFSHORE FIELD, CA
Cycle 1 Cycle 2 Cycle 3 Cycle 4
Number of wells 24 18 11 4
Average cycle length,
months 14 18 15.3 14.5
Average oil recovery
per well, STB 28,900 30,900 24,650 29,225
Average quality of
steam injected, % 71.4 69.3 75.1 78.5
Average volume of
steam injected, bbl 9,590 8,130 10,190 11,760
Ratio of oil recovered
to steam injected,
STBlbbl 3 3.8 2.4 2.5
? ABLE 46.17-RESERVOIR ROCK AND FLUID
PROPERTY DATA, ANSBERRY RESERVOIR,
PARIS VALLEY FIELD, CA
Depth, R
Net thickness, ft
Dip, degrees
Porosity, %
Permeability, md
Oil gravity, OAPI
Reservoir temperature, OF
Initial pressure, psig
Saturation at start, %
Oil
Water
Oil viscosity, cp
Upper Lobe
87F 227,000
lOOoF 94,000
200F 340
800
50
15
32
3,750
10.5
a7
220
64
36
Lower Lobe
23,000
11,000
120
TABLE 46.1 &-RESPONSE TO CYCLIC AIR/STEAM
Well 20 Well 3
Steam volume,
lo3 bbl
Air volume, lo6 scf
Air/steam ratio,
scflbbl
Comparable
producing days
Oil produced, bbl
Steam/oil ratio,
bbl/bbl
Oil/steam ratio,
bbllbbl
Peak oil production
test, BID
Cycle Cycle Cycle Cycle Cycle Cycle
2 3 4 5 6 7
13.2 16.2 15.7 10.4 8.2 9.2
0 1.5 0 3.7 cl 3.6
0 91 0 355 0 394
161 161 90 90 97 97
2,449 4,701 270 503 2,375 4,203
5.4 3.4 50 21 3.5 2.2
0.19 0.29 0.02 0.05 0.29 0.45
51 81 24 38 60 141
46-24 PETROLEUM ENGINEERING HANDBOOK
TABLE 46.19--RESERVOIR ROCK AND FLUID PROPERTY
DATA, KERN RIVER FIELD, CA
Depth, ft
Thickness, ft
Dip, degrees
Porosity, %
Permeability, md
Oil gravity, OAPI
Reservoir temperature, OF
Reservoir pressure at start, psig
Oil viscosity, cp
9OoF
250F
Oil saturation at start, %
500 to 1,300
30 to 90
4
28 to 33
1,000 to 5,000
12.0 to 16.5
90
100
4,000
15
35 to 52
production history of the four-pattern pilot (Fig. 46.17).
In this project, the cumulative SOR was 3.8 bbl/bbl and
the production rate reached 100 B/D of oil per pattern.
Core hole data before and after the steamflood showed
an oil recovery of 72 % and also a very high area1 sweep
efficiency.
Brea, CA (Shell) 25-Steam Distillation Drive, Deep
Reservoir, Steeply Dipping. A steam distillation drive
was initiated in 1964 in the Brea field, which is located
about 25 miles east of Los Angeles. This project is in-
teresting because the oil is relatively light with low vis-
cosity, and the reservoir is steeply dipping at a great depth.
The reservoir properties are summarized in Table 46.20.
The dipping reservoir is seen clearly in Fig. 46.18. The
injectors are located updip, as shown in Fig. 46.19. Be-
cause of the depth, insulated tubing was used for the in-
jectors. This figure also shows the area of temperature
response and production response. The injection and pro-
duction rates are given in Table 46.20. As of Dec. 1971,
the steam rate was 1,010 B/D water and the oil rate was
230 B/D, giving an estimated SOR of 4.4 bbl/bbl.
Smackover, AR (Phillips) 82T83-Reservoir With Gas
Cap. The Smackover field is located in Ouachita County,
AR. The steamflood pilot, conducted in the Nacatoch
sand, is worth mentioning because the reservoir has a gas
cap thicker than the oil sand itself. This gas cap can be
seen readily in the log and coregraph of Sidum Well W-35
(Fig. 46.2 1). The reservoir properties are given in Table
46.21.
Fig. 46.15-Kern River field, CA.
I
I
. 312
.
. l
.
.
.
.
.
.
I .-
Fig. 46.16-Kern steam displacement project, Kern River field.
Iam
I-
,mnn
TABLE 46.20-RESERVOIR ROCK AND FLUID PROPERTY
m
m
DATA, BREA FIELD, CA
0
soan
Depth, ft 4,600 to 5,000
Gross stratigraphic thickness, ft 300 to 800 -
Ratio of net to gross sand, % 63 -
Dip, degrees 66
Porosity, O/O 22 mm
Permeabilitv. md 77 =
Oil gravity, API
Reservoir temperature, OF
Reservoir pressure at start, psi
Oil viscosity at 17YF, cp 6
Saturahon at start, %
Oil
Fig. 46.17-Injection and production history, Kern hot water and
49
Gas
steam displacement project (four patterns) Kern
18 River field.
THERMAL RECOVERY
46-25
F- 13
F- 12 F- 18 M- 15
Fig. 46.18-Cross section through the lower B sands, Brea
field.
PAODUCTI ON
RESPONSE ~
OYC
TOP f - 14 SPNO
- - - - - - - - -
- - - _
- - T- - - -
LEGEND
' I ' l NJ ECT, ON YELLS
'
PROOUCTI ON YELLS
OBSERVATI ON WELLS
Fig. 46.19-Well locations and area of temperature, tritium, and
production responses, Brea field, CA.
EST<VATED PRI VAAY
SI L WODUCTI ON
l o 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71
YEAR
Fig. 46.20-Injection and production history, Brea steam distil-
lation pilot.
WATER SATURATION, X
$
I-I 7nnn- -
Fig. 46.21-Log and coregraph, Sidum Well W-35, Smackover
field, AR.
Fig. 46.22 is a map of the lo-acre five-spot pilot, which
was later expanded to a 22-acre nine-spot pattern by add-
ing four more producers. As shown in Fig. 46.23, steam
injection started in Nov. 1964 and stopped in Oct. 1965.
The oil production continued long after steam injection
stopped. As of Aug. 1970, the additional oil produced by
steamflood was 207,000 bbl. With total steam injection
of 860,000 bbl, the cumulative SOR was 4.14 bbl/bbl.
The temperature log in Fig. 46.24 shows that steam
goes to the gas cap. It can be concluded that the increase
in oil production was not caused by frontal displacement.
Rather, the oil zone temperature increased because of con-
duction and convection from the gas cap, thus reducing
the oil viscosity and increasing the oil production.
TABLE 46.21--RESERVOIR ROCK AND FLUID PROPERTY
DATA, SMACKOVER FIELD, AR
Depth, ft
Thickness, ft
Gross
Net
Dip, degrees
Porosity, %
Permeability, md
Oil gravity, OAPI
Reservoir temperature, -F
Reservoir pressure at start, psia
Oi l viscosity, cp
6OOF
llOF
Saturation at start, %
Oil
Water
1,920
130
25
0 to 5
35
2,000
20
110
5
180
75
50
50
46-26 PETROLEUM ENGINEERING HANDBOOK
SE14 SECTION 32-ISS-15W
3
.2
.
,SA3
.6
20
.4
.9
WELL SYMBOLS:
.2
PRODUCING
00-1 WATER DISPOSAL
0%43 WATER SUPPLY
SCALE I- = 400
Fig. 46.22-Sidum steam injection pilot, Smackover field.
h 300-
n
/ - /
PRIMARY- I
0'
1964 1965 1966 1967
0
L
p7- - -
; loot- )-
E
-TOTAL PILOT
s
E
WELL
1 &VA 4
PILOT
a.
PRMAAY -
d 01
d 1966 1969 1970 1971
Fig. 46.23-injection and production history, Sidum steam in-
jection pilot, Smackover field.
DFEEpErT~
TEMPERATURE SCALE ) OF
125 150 175 200 225 250 275
Fig. 46.24-Temperature log, Sidum Well W-42, Smackover
field.
Slocum, TX (SheU)89~90-Reservoir With Water Sand.
The Slocum field is located in southern Anderson County
in northeast Texas. The steamflood project interests us
since it is conducted in an oil reservoir underlain by a
water sand, as shown in the type log (Fig. 46.25). The
reservoir properties are given in Table 46.22.
The f i el d was discovered in 1955. Only about 1% of
OOIP was produced by primary operation. A small steam-
flood pilot using a N-acre normal five-spot pattern showed
encouraging results. A full-scale seven-pattern project was
initiated in 1966-67, with 5.65acre, 13-s@ patterns (Fig.
46. 26) .
Both injectors and producers were completed a few feet
into the water sand. Steam moves horizontally through
the water layer, rises vertically into the oil layer, and dis-
places oil that had been heated and mobilized. The oil then
falls down and subsequently is swept toward the
producers. The injection and production history is shown
in Fig. 46.27.
Street Ranch, TX (Conoco) I51 -Extremely Viscous
Tar, Fracture-Assisted Steamflood. The Street Ranch
pilot was conducted in the San Miguel-4 tar sand reser-
voir located in Maverick County, TX. This pilot proved
the technical feasibility of the fracture-assisted steamflood
technology (FAST) in recovering extremely viscous heavy
oils and tars. The reservoir properties are given in Table
46.23. The pilot used a 5-acre inverted five-spot pattern.
The four producers were fractured horizontally with cold
water, steam stimulated, perforated, and resteamed. The
injector then was fractured horizontally to establish com-
munication with the producers. The pilot consisted of three
THERMAL RECOVERY 46-27
GAMMA RAY RESlSTlVlTY TABLE 46.22--RESERVOIR ROCK AND FLUID PROPERTY
DATA, SLOCUM FIELD, TX
Depth, ft
Thickness, ft
Gross
Net
Dip, degrees
Porosity, O/o
Permeability, md
Oil gravity, OAPl
Reservoir temperature, F
Initial reservoir pressure, psig
Oil viscosity, cp
60F
400F
Oil saturation at start, %
520
34
32
0 to 5
34
> 2,000
18 to 19
80
110
1,000 to 3,000
3 to 7
68
Fig. 46.25-Type log, Slocum field, TX
phases: (1) fracture preheat, (2) matrix steam injection,
and (3) heat scavenging with water injection. The tar pro-
duction and steam/tar ratio during the 3 1 -month history
are shown in Figs. 46.28 and 46.29, respectively. The
average tar production rate was 185 B/D and the cumula-
tive steam/tar ratio was 10.9 bblibbl. Postpilot core holes
showed residual tar saturations as low as 8% and an aver-
age recovery efficiency of 66 % .
Lacq Suphieur, France (Elf Aquitaine) Is2 -Carb-
onate Reservoir. The Lacq Sup&ieur field is on the north
side of the Pyrenees Mts. in southwest France. The steam-
flood pilot is unique because it was conducted in a carbo-
nated, dolomitized, and highly fractured reservoir. The
reservoir properties are given in Table 46.24.
The pilot was located in the central part of the frac-
tured limestone zone, near the top of an anticline. The
pattern area is 35 acres, defined by six old producers, as
shown in Fig. 46.30. The injector was the only one drilled
for the pilot. Steam injection started in Oct. 1977. Oil
production started to increase, only 3 months after steam
PLTTERN EXPLHIlGN 119.511
injection began. The production history is shown in Fig.
m ElGtlT PATTERN EXPINSlG IIP,PI 46.3 1. By June 1980, incremental oil production amount-
. INJECTION WELL
. THERYIL PRODUCTIGN WELL
ed to 176,000 bbl with a cumulative steam injection of
926,000 bbl. The cumulative SOR is 5.26 bblibbl. This
Fig. 46.26-Slocum thermal recovery Project.
Fig. 46.27-Injection and production history, Slocum thermal
recovery project.
TABLE 4j.23--RESERVOIR ROCK AND FLUID PROPERTY
DATA, STREET RANCH PILOT, TX
Depth, ft
Thickness, ft
Gross
Net
Dip, degrees
Porosity, %
Permeability, md
Tar gravity, API
Reservoir temperature, OF
Tar viscosity at 95OF. cp (est.)
Tar kinematic viscosity, cSt
175OF
200F
250F
300F
Pour pomt. F
Total sulfur, wt%
Initial boiling pomt, OF
Tar saturation at start, %
1,500
52
40.5
2
26.5 and 27.5
250 to 1,000
-2.0
95
20,000,000
520,000
61,000
2,900
870
170 to 180
9.5 to 11.0
500
54.7 and 38.9
46-28 PETROLEUM ENGINEERING HANDBOOK
Fig. 46.28-Tar production history, Street Ranch pilot, TX.
Fig. 46.29-Steam/tar ratios, Street Ranch pilot.
\
\ /I
2som
O-
\ /
0 loo0 ft.
v La4
Fig. 46.30-Pilot area, Lacq Sup&ieur field, France
TABLE 46.24--RESERVOIR ROCK AND FLUID PROPERTY
DATA, LACQ SUPERIEUR FIELD, FRANCE
Depth, ft 1,970 to 2,300
Thickness, ft 400
Oil gravity, OAPI 21.5
Reservoir temperature, OF 140
Reservoir pressure, psi 670
Oil viscosity at 1 40F, cp 17.5
Matrix Blocks Fissure Network
Porosity, % 12 0.5
Permeability, md 1 5,000 to 10,000
Water saturation at start. % 60 100
pilot showed that a strongly fissured reservoir can be ex-
ploited efficiently by the steamflood process, as if it were
a homogeneous reservoir. The dissociation of the car-
bonate rocks by steam apparently produced no unfavora-
ble effects. Rather, the CO2 evolved might have some
positive effect on the process efficiency.
Fireflood Projects
Suplacu de Barcau, Romania (IFP-ICPP) -Largest
Fireflood. The Suplacu de Barcau field lies in north-
western Romania. This is reportedly the largest fireflood
project in the world, producing nearly 6.563 B/D of
15.9API oil. The reservoir properties are given in Ta-
ble 46.25.
The project started with a pilot in 1964 using a 1.24-acre
inverted five-spot pattern that was later expanded into a
4.94-acre inverted nine-spot pattern. This was followed
by a semicommercial operation in the period 1967-71 with
eight 9.88-acre inverted nine-spot patterns. This opera-
tion further expanded into full commercial operation, first
retaining the nine-spot patterns with the same spacing, and
later changing to linedrive operation. The original pilot
and later expansions are shown in Fig. 46.32. Injection
wells numbered 38 in 1979 with 20 using alternate air
and water injection and the balance using straight air. The
production history is given in Fig. 46.33. The WAR was
0.089 to 0.178 bb1/103 scf. As of 1979, the air injection
rate was 63,600~ lo3 scf/D. With an oil rate of 6,563
B/D. the AOR was estimated to be 9.7 X 10 scf/bbl.
West Heidelberg, MS (G~lf)~*~-Deepest Fire-
flood. The West Heidelberg field is located in Jasper
County in eastern Mississippi. With a depth exceeding
2 miles, it is the deepest fireflood project, or the deepest
thermal project, for that matter. The Cotton Valley for-
mation has eight sands. The fireflood was conducted in
Sand No. 5. The reservoir properties are given in Table
46.26.
As shown in the structure map of Sand No. 5 (Fig.
46.34), only one injector was used, near the top of the
structure, with seven producers located downdip. The in-
jection and production history is given in Fig. 46.35. It
can be estimated from this figure that, during the period
1973-76, the average air injection rate was about
900 x lo3 scf/D whereas the average oil production rate
was about 400 B/D. This gives an AOR of only
2.25 x lo3 scfibbl.
THERMAL RECOVERY 46-29
Fig. 46.31-Production history, Lacq Superieur field.
Fig. 46.32-Suplacu de Barcau field, Romania.
Fig. 46.33-Injection and production history, Suplacu de Barcau
field.
TABLE 46.25--RESERVOIR ROCK AND FLUID PROPERTY
DATA, SUPLACU DE BARCAU FIELD, ROMANIA
Depth, ft
164 to 656
Net thickness, ft
32.8
Porosity, %
32
Permeability, md
Oil gravity, OAPI
1,722
15.9
Reservoir temperature, OF
64
Oil viscosity at 64OF, cp
Oil saturation at start, %
2,000
85
TABLE 46.26-RESERVOIR ROCK AND FLUID PROPERTY
DATA, WEST HEIDELBERG FIELD, MS
Depth, ft
Thickness, ft
Gross
Net
Dip, degrees
Porosity, %
Permeability, md
Oil gravity, OAPI
Reservoir temperature, OF
Oil viscosity at 221F, cp
Oil saturation at start. %
11,500
20 to 40
30
5to 15
16.4
;:
221
4.5
77.8
Gloriana, TX (Sun)6~118-Thinnest Reservoir Pro-
duced by a Fireflood. The Gloriana field is in Wilson
County, TX. The fireflood took place in the Poth A
Sand. It is possibly the thinnest reservoir that has ever
been produced by a fireflood. The reservoir properties
are given in Table 46.27.
The field originally was developed on 40-acre spacing.
A new well, Well 2-8, was ignited in May 1969. Well
2-5, a producer, burned out and was converted to air in-
jection in May 1971. These wells, along with other wells,
46-30
PETROLEUM ENGINEERING HANDBOOK
line
Production limit l-1 1,093 Cl
-j--y$>.)1
Fig. 46.34--Structure map of Sand No. 5, West Heidelberg field,
MS.
are shown in the isopachous map in Fig. 46.36. The in-
jection and production histories are given in Figs. 46.37
and 46.38, respectively. Air injection stopped in Dec.
1974 when the oil production rate declined to the eco-
nomic limit.
Sloss, NE (Amoco) 77-79-Wet Combustion, Tertiary
Recovery. The Sloss field is located in Kimball County,
NE. The pilot used a wet combustion process in a previ-
ously waterflooded reservoir. Here, the pay is thin and
deep, the oil is light, the viscosity is low, and the oil satu-
TABLE 46.27--RESERVOIR ROCK AND FLUID PROPERTY
DATA, GLORIANA FIELD, TX
Depth, ft
Thickness, lt
Gross
Net
Dip, degrees
Porosity, O/O
Permeability, md
Oil gravity, OAPI
Reservoir temperature, OF
Oil viscosity, cp
112F
8OOF
Oil saturation at start, %
1,600
10
4
0 to 5
35
1,000
20.8
112
70 to 150
250 to 500
58.5
ration at the start of the flood was low. The reservoir prop-
erties are given in Table 46.28.
The fireflood started in 1%7 with six 8O-acre five-spots.
Additional wells were included so that it covered 960 acres
in its final stage. The pilot area is shown in Fig. 46.39.
The injection and production data in the 4YGyear period
of its operation are given in Figs. 46.40 and 46.4 1, respec-
tively. Between Feb. 1967 and July 1971, total air injected
was 13,754X lo6 scf and water injected was
10,818 x lo3 bbl, giving a WAR of 0.79 bbl/103 scf. The
total oil production was 646,776 bbl. This gives an AOR
of 21.3~ lo3 scfibbl. The area1 sweep by the greater-
than-350F zone was 50%. Combining with a vertical
sweep of 28%, the volumetric sweep was only 14%.
Asphalt Ridge, UT (DOE) 130-Extremely Viscous
Tar, Combination Reverse/Forward Combustion. The
Northwest Asphalt Ridge deposit is located in northeast
Utah, near the city of Vernal. The fireflood conducted
Fig. 46.35-Injection and production history, West Heide,oerg field,
THERMAL RECOVERY 46-31
Fig. 46.36-lsopachous map, net oil, Poth A sand, Gloriana field, TX.
in this deposit is interesting because it attempted to use
a combination of reverse and forward combustion for the
recovery of oil from tar sands. The reservoir properties
are given in Table 46.29.
The U.S. DOE conducted two fireflood tests in the
Asphalt Ridge area. The first, conducted in 1975, dem-
onstrated the feasibility of using reverse combustion to
recover oil in the tar sand. The second tested a combina-
tion of reverse combustion and forward combustion dur-
ing the period from Aug. 1977 to Feb. 1978. The location
of the test sites and well arrangements are shown in Fig.
46.42. In both tests, the line drive was on a small area
of 120~40 ft, covering only 0.11 acres. In the second
test, several echoings of reverse and forward combustion
phases were noticed in the northwest area, as seen from
the temperature variations at observation Well 203 (Fig.
46.43). The reverse combustion phase had an areal sweep
of 95 % and vertical sweep of 9 1% , giving a volumetric
sweep of 86%. The echoing forward combustion phase
had an area1 sweep of 75 % and vertical sweep of 44 % ,
giving a volumetric sweep of only 33%. The produced
oil was of better quality than the original bitumen, with
the pour point reduced from 140 to 25F and the amount
of residue lowered from 62 to 35 wt% .
Forest Hill, TX (Air Products-Greenwich) Is3 -
Oxygen-Enriched Air. The Forest Hill field is located
in Wood County, TX. The significance of the field test
lies in the use of oxygen-enriched air for the fireflood.
The reservoir properties are given in Table 46.30.
The field was on primary production in 1964. Air in-
jection started in 1976. One of the air injectors was
switched to oxygen-enriched air in 1980. The test site is
shown in Fig. 46.44. As seen in Fig. 46.45, during a
2-year period, the oxygen concentration in the injected
gas ranged from 2 1 to 90%. The test showed that essen-
tially pure oxygen can be handled and injected safely in
a typical oilfield environment. Short of any definitive com-
parison, the test only hinted that using enriched air might
produce oil faster than using air only.
Thermal Properties
Only some selected thermal properties of the rock/fluid
systems encountered in the thermal recovery projects will
be presented briefly. A more complete compilation of
tables and figures has been included in Appendix B of
Ref. 154.
Oil Viscosities
The viscosity-temperature relationships for representative
heavy-oil deposits are shown in Fig.46.46. Oil viscosi-
ties should be measured experimentally. In the absence
of experimental data, the viscosities can be estimated by
charts (Fig. 46.47 to 46.49)55-57 and equations. Is8
Beggs and Robinson Is8 suggested the following equa-
tions for estimating viscosities of live oils. Dead-oil vis-
cosity is first calculated:
&,~=lo*-l, . . . . . . . . . . . . .(74)
where pLod equals the viscosity of dead oil (gas-free oil)
at T, cp.
py~-I.163
, . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
(75)
Y=lO, . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ..(76)
and
Z=3.0324-0.02023 yo. . . . . . . . . . . .(77)
where y0 equals the oil gravity, API, and Tis the tem-
perature, F. Live-oil viscosity is calculated next.
p=&,,dB, . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . (78)
46-32 PETROLEUM ENGINEERING HANDBOOK
OlORlANA POIW A UN11
001 AIR INUCllON VS IlYE
0
:
Fig. 46.37-GOR and air injection history, Gloriana field.
OLORIANA POlH 4 UNIT
011 PROOUCIION VI 1lMt
Fig. 46.38-011 production history, Gloriana field.
THERMAL RECOVERY 46-33
PHAS, .
\
0 PRODUCI NG WELL A I NJ ECTI ONWELL + DRY HOLE
Fig. 46.39-Sloss unit, NE.
TABLE 46.26--RESERVOIR ROCK AND FLUID PROPERTY
DATA, SLOSS FIELD, NE
Depth, ft
Net thickness, ft
Porosity, %
Permeability, md
Oil gravity, OAPI
Reservoir temperature, ' F
Reservoir pressure, psig
Oil viscosity at 200F, cp
Oil saturation al start, O/o
6,200
14.3
19.3
191
38.0
200
2,274
0. 8
2oto 40
AlRlWATER RATI OSCFl BBL
@T
AI R I NJ . PRESS. PSI
rno- nrl "" '
I
- -
i
WATER I NJ . RAl E EBI , / DAY
4cm
mo
n

.,
AIR INJ .RATE MMCFlDAY
4b
0
f
1967 1%8 1969 1970 1971 1972
Fig. 46.40-Injection history, Sloss field COFCAW pilot
WATER PROO. RATE EBl r / DAY
I
I - L -
PROD. RATE MCFl DAY
1967 1968 lW9 1970 1971
Fig. 46.41-Production history, Sloss field COFCAW pilot
TABLE 46.29-RESERVOIR ROCK AND FLUID PROPERTY
DATA, ASPHALT RIDGE FIELD, UT
Depth, ft
Net thickness, fl
Porosity, 910
Permeability, md
Saturated
Extracted
Oil gravity, OAPI
Reservoir temperature, "F
Oil viscosity at 60F, Cp
Pour point, OF
Saturations at start, %
Oil
Water
350
13.1
31.1
a5
675
14
52
> 1 ,ooo,ooo
140
65
2.4
Fig. 46.42-LETC field site, Asphalt Ridge deposit, UT.
46-34
PETROLEUM ENGINEERING HANDBOOK
TABLE 46.30-RESERVOIR ROCK AND FLUID PROPERTY
DATA, FOREST HILL FIELD, TX
Depth, ft
Net thickness, ft
Porosity, O/o
Permeability, md
Oil gravity, OAPI
Reservoir temperature, OF
Oil viscosity at 185OF, cp
Saturations at start, %
Oil
Water
4,800
15
27.7
626
10
185
1,002
64
36
Fig. 46.43-Maximum temperature vs. time, Welt 203, Asphalt
Ridge deposit.
,-- PEACE RIVER
1
LLOYDMINSTER
.IIESEnOl IEMICl,*TI,IIE
Fig. 46.46-Viscosity/temperature relationships for representa-
live heavy oil deposits.
where
A= 10.715@, + 100) -OS~, . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
(79)
Fig. 46.44-Forest Hill field, TX.
B=5.44(R,+150)-0.338, . . . . . . . . (80)
and R, :s the solution gas/oil ratio, scf/STB.
Relative Permeability Curves
Relative permeability data should be determined ex-
perimentally. In the absence of experimental data, the fol-
lowing equations may be used for rough estimation.
According to Brooks and Corey, 159
k, =(S,,,*)5, . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . (81)
k,=(1-S,*)2(1-Sw*2), . . . , . . . . . . .(82)
s *=
w
SW -Siw
) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
(83)
1 -ISi,
Fig. 46.45-Injection history, Well 32, Forest Hill field.
where Si, is the irreducible water saturation, percent.
THE RMAL RECC IVERY
AT 100. r. h ATYOSCWLnIC PRLSSURL
tom
1000
600
600
y ,oo
n 400
g 100
; 200
::
J 100 FORYULA: ABSOLUTE vIscosITY AT l00.F (Cpl* ------27, 29, 420
60 --- EXTQAPOLATED ho-ll)
60
.01 I I
! 1
IO I3
CRDE2001L CR2~ITY. &. I. *TKPF I\ONO ATzwER)PC PR&RE
60 66
Fig. 46.47-Dead oil viscosity.
lo4
10
Fig. 46.48-Universal temperature/viscosity chart.
46-35
46-36 PETROLEUM ENGINEERING HANDBOOK
.
6
7
FIN0 THE GAS-SATUR4TED VISCOSITY OF
6
A CROE OIL AvING A SOLUTION GAS/OIL RATIO OF 600
9
CU FT I BBL AN0 DEAO OIL VISCOS1TY OF I.50 CP. ALL
AT THE SAME TEMPERATURE.
PROCEOURE: LOCATE 1.50 CP ON WE DEAO OIL VISCOSITY
1
SCALE (A8SCISSA 1 AN0 GO UP VERTICALLY TO THE 600
GAS/OIL RATIO LINE. THEN GO LEFT MORIZONTALLY TO
1
REAO THE ANSWER. 0.56 CP. ON THE GAS-SATURATED
OIL VISCOSITY SCALE I OROINATE I
Fig. 46.49-Live oil viscosity.
rHERMAL RECOVERY 46-37
According to Somerton, 160 for unconsolidated sand,
Sj,=0.211+2.0x10-4T+1.1x10-6T2, _._.. (84)
where T is the temperature, F.
The effect of temperature on irreducible water satura-
tion and relative permeability of unconsolidated sands has
been studied by Poston et al. 16 Some of their results are
given in Figs. 46.50 through 46.52. The effect of tem-
perature on relative and absolute permeabilities of con-
solidated sandstones has been studied by Weinbrandt et
al. 62 Some of their results are given in Figs. 46.53
through 46.56.
PV Compressibility
The compressibility of unconsolidated, Arkosic sands was
measured by Sawabini et al. 63 Fig. 46.57 shows that the
effective PV compressibility lies in the range between
10e4 and 10m3 psi-l, about 2 to 3 orders of magnitude
higher than the normally accepted figure of IO -6 psi -I
for consolidated sandstones. In Fig. 46.57, pro is the to-
tal overburden pressure, psi, and pP is the pore pressure,
psi.
oj
#) loo Is0 200 300
TEYWIAIURE,F
Fig. 46.50-Effect of temperature on irreducible water satura-
tion, Houston sand, and natural sand.
Thermal Conductivity
Thermal behavior of unconsolidated oil sands was studied
by Somerton et al. K+J Fig. 46.58 shows how thermal
conductivity of Kern River oil sands varies with brine
saturation.
Vaporization Equilibrium
Vaporization equilibrium of an oil fraction is described
by the equilibrium vaporization constant, K, which is de-
fined as
40
30
20
s
:
CA0 IO
0
I I I I
K=x, . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
.@5)
X
50 100 IS0 200 26c 300
TEIJ~PEPATURE,~F
where y is the mol fraction in vapor phase and x is the
mol fraction in liquid phase.
Fig. 46.51-Effect of temperature on ROS, natural sand.
Poettmann and Mayland I65 in 1949 published a series
of charts on equilibrium constants of various oil fractions
with normal boiling points of 300F, 4OOF, etc., up to
1,OOOF. To illustrate how K values vary with tempera-
ture and pressure, the figure for normal boiling
point=5OOF is shown in Fig. 46.59.
More recently, L.ee ef al. 166 presented equilibrium con-
stants of oil fractions with 100F boiling ranges. For ex-
ample, Fraction 1 has the boiling range up to 3OOF,
Fraction 2 boiling between 300 and 400F, and Fraction
6 boiling above 700F. Figs. 46.60 and 46.61 show the
effects of pressure and temperature, respectively. on the
K values for these oil fractions as well as N 2, CH4, and
co*.
WATER
Chemical Kinetics
Chemical reactions taking place in an in-situ combustion
process are considered to fall into three types: (1) low-
temperature oxidation, (2) fuel deposition or coke forma-
tion, and (3) combustion. The kinetic data of these three
types of reactions reported by various authors have been
summarized in the paper by Fassihi et al. 16 and will not
be reproduced here.
0 20 40 60 80
-I
100
WATER SATURATION, L
Fig. 46.52-Water and oil relative permeability at four tempera-
tures, Houston sand, 80-cp 011.
46-38
01
1
60 loo 140 180
TEMPERATURE. F
Fig. 46.53-Effect of temperature on irreducible water satura-
tion, sandstone cores.
0:
60 100 140 180
TEMPERATURE. F
Fig. 46.54-Effect of temperature on ROS, sandstone cores.
PETROLEUM ENGINEERING HANDBOOK
I
4.
I
zsoo -
48
5.
2000 k
z 5.
;
bW.6
s
c 29
; ISOO-
iTi
H
2
l 4i
1000
I A1
5 i
l 2
5oL---l
60 100 140 180
TEMPERATURE. l F
Fig. 46.56-Effect of temperature on absolute permeability,
sandstone cores.
% to*
EFFECTIVE PiiESSURE, PSI
Fig. 46.57-Effective PV compressibility, unconsolidated Arkosic
oil sand.
oo- -
--~
20 40 60 6 100
WATER SATURATION, %
Fig. 46.55-Water and oil relative permeability at two tempera-
tures, Core 4, Boise sandstone.
THERMAL RECOVERY
hsv .0.?35-r.30~*sw +
POROSITY RANGES:
a 0.28-0.30 -
0 0.31 -0.33 ----
A 0.34 -0.37 --
BRINE SATURATION, SW
Fig. 46.56-Thermal conductivity of Kern River oil sands.
Fig. 46.59-Equilibrium vaporization constant, normal boiling
point-500F.
1000 1500 2000 2500 3000 P(rksld
1 I
PREDICTED ., ., .
EXPERIMENTAL 0, *, 0
FRACTION 6
A-A-
I A IL
&-/
5ow loo00 ISCCO zoo00
p(hPol
Fig. 46.60-Effect of pressure on equilibrium K values for Crude
A at 260%.
400
IO -
500 600 700 T(OF)
I I r
c
I-
y 0.1 -
0.01 -
&&
0 co2 -
0 cmk n/ 1 , 1 I
x0 250 3al 350 400
T(C)
Fig. 46.61-Effect of temperature on equilibrium K values of
Crude 8 at 1,514.7 psia.
46- 40 PETROLEUMENGINEERING HANDBOOK
TABLE46.31-SATURATEDSTEAMTABLE
Specific Volume, cu ftllbm Enthalpy. Btullbm
Absolute Pressure, Temperature Saturated
0.08865
14.696
50.0
100.0
150.0
200.0
250.0
300.0
400. 0
500. 0
600.0
700. 0
800. 0
900. 0
l,ooo.o
1.200.0
1,400.o
1,600.O
1,800.O
2,000.0
2,200.o
2,400.O
2,600.O
2,800.O
3,000.0
X208.2'
32018
212.00
281.02
327.82
358.43
381.80
400.97
417.35
444.60
467.01
486.20
503.08
518.21
531.95
544. 58
567. 19
587.07
604.67
621.02
635.80
649.45
662.11
673.91
684.96
695.33
705.47
0.03134
Liquid, Evaporate,
0.07171
"L
0.03428
v tg
0.016022 3,302.4
0.05073
0.016719 26.782
0.017274 8.4967
0.017740 4.4133
0.01809 2.9958
0.01839 2.2689
0.01865 1.82452
0.01889 1.52384
0.01934 1.14162
0.01975 0.90787
0.02013 0.74962
0.02050 0.63505
0.02087 0.54809
0.02123 0.47968
0.02159 0.42436
0.02232 0.34013
0.02307 0.27871
0.02387 0.23159
0.02472 0.19390
0.02565 0.16266
0.02669 0.13603
0.02790 0.11287
0.02938 0.09172
0.05078 0.00000 0.05078
Steam Properties
An abbreviated steam table68 is given in Table 46.31.
Nomenclature
a = air requirement, 106, scf/acre-ft
A = heated area at time t, sq ft, or
quantities defined by Eqs. 9 and 79
A = quantity defined by Eq. 13
B = quantities defined by Eqs. 10 and 80
B = quantity defined by Eq. 14
C, = fuel content, lbmicu ft
C,, = heat capacity of oil, Btu/lbm-F, or
concentration of oil, lbm molicu ft
C, = heat capacity of rock, Btuilbm-F
C,, = heat capacity of steam, Btuilbm-F
C,,. = heat capacity of water, Btuilbm-F
Co2 = concentration of oxygen, Ibm molicu ft
C, = quantity defined by Eqs. 58 and 60
C2 = quantity defined by Eqs. 59 and 61
D = depth, ft
E = activation energy, Btuilbm mol
Eh = thermal (heat) efficiency, fraction
Eo2 = oxygen utilization efficiency, fraction
E, = overall oil recovery
ERU
= recovery efficiency in the unburned
region, fraction
E
vh =
volumetric sweep efficiency of the
burning front, fraction
f,, = steam quality at the beginning of the
pipe segment, fraction
Saturated
Vapor,
0.10305
Vg
3,302.4
26.799
8.5140
0.08500
4.4310
3.0139
2.2873
1,84317
1.54274
1.16095
0.92762
0.76975
0.65556
0.56896
0.50091
0.44596
0.36245
0.30178
0.25545
0.21861
0.18831
0.16272
0.14076
0.12110
Saturated
Liquid,
H,
Evaporate,
L.
0.0003 1,075.5
180.17 970.3
250.2 923.9
298.5 888.6
330.6 863.4
355.5 842.8
376.1 825.0
394. 0 808. 9
424.2 780.4
449.5 755.1
471.7 732.0
491.6 710.2
509.8 689.6
526.7 669.7
542.6 650.4
571.9 613.0
598. 8 576.5
624.2 540.3
648.5 503.8
672.1 466.2
695.5 426.7
719.0 384.8
744.5 337.6
770.7 285.1
801.8 218.4
906.0 0.0
Saturated
Vapor,
H,
1,075.5
t,150.5
1,174.l
1,187.2
1,194.i
1,198.3
1,201.l
1,202.g
1,204.6
1,204.7
1,203.7
1,201.8
1,199.4
1,196.4
1,192.g
1,184.8
1,175.3
1,164.5
1,152.3
1,138.3
1,122.2
1.103.7
1,082.O
1.055.8
1,020.3
906.0
f.Yfs2 = steam quality at the end of the pipe
segment, fraction
f(t) = transient heat conduction time function
for earth, dimensionless
F
a0
= AOR
F,., = COZ/CO ratio in produced gas
F HC = atomic H/C ratio
F, = ratio of stimulated to unstimulated
productivity indices, dimensionless
F,?, = steam/oil ratio, STBiSTB
F
MAO,
= total produced WOR. STBiSTB
h = pay thickness, ft, or convection heat
transfer coefficient, Btu/hr-sq ft-F
h = convection heat transfer coefficient
based on insulation outside surface,
Btulhr-sq ft-F
hf = cnthalpy of liquid water at T above
32F, Btuilbm
h, = total thickness of all sands, ft
HO,
= enthalpy of oil and gas Btuilbm
H,, = enthalpy of water carried by oil based
on a STB of oil, Btu/STB oil
H
WR
= enthalpy of water at reservoir tempera-
ture, Btu/lbm
H,,, = enthalpy of water at steam tempera-
ture, Btu/lbm
IUI -
~ cumulative air injection, 10 scf
i, = steam injection rate, B/D
I = radiation heat transfer coefficient,
Btulhr-sq ft-F
THERMAL RECOVERY
46-41
I = radiation heat transfer coefficient based
on insulation outside surface. Btuihr-
sq ft-F
J, = unstimulated (cold) productivity Index,
STBiD-psi
k = absolute permeability, md
k = pre-exponential factor
k,,,., = thermal conductivity of the casing ma-
terial, Btu/hr-sq ft-F
k,IC.P = thermal conductivity of the cement.
Btu/hr-ft-F
k,,f = thermal conductivity of the formation,
Btu/D-ft-F
k,,;,, = thermal conductivity of insulation ma-
terial, Btuihr-ft-F
k
ho =
overburden thermal conducitivity,
Btu/hr-ft-F
k,,, = relative permeability to oil, fraction
k,,,. = relative permeability to water, fraction
K = equilibrium vaporization constant
L = pipe length, ft
L,, = latent heat of steam, Btuilbm
L,l
= latent heat of vaporization at top of
interval, Btuilbm
L,.? = latent heat of vaporization at bottom of
interval, Btuilbm
m.\,,
= total mass of steam injected, Ibm
M = volumetric heat capacity. Btuicu ft-F
N = OOIP, bbl
N, = number of sands
N.,,
= oil in place at start of project, bbl
AN.,,
= cumulative incremental oil production,
bbl
PO
= static formation pressure at external
radius, psia
PI,
= pore pressure, psi
P,~= saturated vapor pressure of water at T,
psia
P ,o
= total overburden pressure, psi
p,,, = bottomhole pressure, psia
p / = pressure at top of interval, psia
p2 = pressure at bottom of interval, psia
Ap = frictional pressure drop over interval,
psia
40
= oil displacement rate, B/D
qoC. = cold oil production rate, B/D
qnl r = hot oil production rate, B/D
Qi,, = heat remaining in heated zone, Btu
Q;, = total heat injection, Btu
Qri = heat injection rate, Btuihr
Q,., = heat loss along the segment, Btuihr
Q, = heat removal rate at time t. BtuiD
rd = radius to cement/formation interface, ft
r<.; = inside radius of casing. ft
rccr
= outside radius of casing. ft
rc,
= external radius, ft
rf,
= radius of region originally heated. ft
r in
= outside radius of insulation surface, ft
rrr
= inside radius of tubing, ft
r/,1
= outside radius of pipe. tt
r,,. = well radius, ft
R = gas constant
R,, = solution GOR. scf/STB
R, = total produced GOR. scf/STB
S,s = gas saturation, fraction
Sir, = irreducible oil saturation, fraction
S;,,. = irreducible water saturation. percent
S,, = oil saturation at start, fraction
S,; = initial oil saturation, fraction
S,,,; = initial water saturation, fraction
S,,.* = normalized water saturation, fraction
t = time since injection, hours
tc
= critical time, hours
fg = dimensionless time
t; = time of injection for the current cycle,
days
T = average temperature of the heated
region, rr,. < r< rh , at any time t,
F
T,, = atmospheric temperature, F
Td = temperature at cement/formation
interface, F
T,.; = temperature at casing inside
surface, F
Tj; = initial formation temperature, F
I$ = temperature of fluid, F
T;,,j = injection temperature, F
TR = original reservoir temperature, F
T, = steam temperature, F
T,s, = formation temperature at ground
surface, F
u
c 0
= overall heat transfer coefficient based
on outside casing surface, Btuihr-sq
fi-F
U,i = overall heat transfer coefficient based
on inside radius of pipe or tubing,
Btuihr-sq ft-F
ur, = overall heat transfer coefficient based
on outside tubing surface, Btu/D-sq
ft-F
v
t=
specific volume of total fluid, cu
ft/lbm
v,,. = wind velocity, mile/hr
FR = fuel burned, bbl
V,., V, = unit solution for component conduction
problems in the r and z directions*
v,, VT = average values of V, and V; for
O<r<rh
w = Arrhenius reaction rate
Ms
= mass rate of steam, Ibm/hr
x = mole fraction in liquid phase
X = quantity defined by Eq. 66
v = mole fraction in vapor phase
i = quantity defined by Eq. 65
(Y = thermal diffusivity, sq ft/D
QY,>
= overburnden thermal diffusivity, sq
ft/D
These symbols have no physical connotation They are simply mathemallcal symbols
46-42 PETROLEUM ENGINEERING HANDBOOK
0 = dummy variable in Eq. 27
6 = energy removed with the produced
fluids. dimensionless
8 = dip angle, degrees
P 0
= oil viscosity, cp
kLoC = cold oil viscosity, cp
p,,d = viscosity of dead oil (gas-free oil) at T,
cP
poh = hot Oil ViSCOSity, cp
Po.Pr.P,,.
= density of oil, rock grain, and water,
lbmicu ft
4 = porosity, fraction
F,, (in m3im3)=18.744+0.004767D-0.16693h
-0.89814k-0.5915~L,, - 14.79S,
-0.0009767kh. . (68)
PO
C,n (in kg/m 3, = - I .9222 + 0.137695h + 1.85029k
+35.723,, +0.012887kh
/* 0
-0.009930- 1.0444pL.. . . . (69)
Key Equations in SI Units
2Fcc + 1 + FHC
FCC +1
- cm
lx=
2 >
. . . . . . .
(70)
h=7.165v,.0~6/rin0.4. . . . . . . (3)
0.01776(12+FHc)E,~
2
p2=pI +7.816x10~r2(v,, -v,,)%
+9.806~lO-~E-Ap. . . . . . . (20)
&I I
F,,,, * =
Q,d
Ahd(S,; -sju) . . . . (30)
a (in std m3/m3)= 108.356+2.75367/~+229.4773,,
+16.073k. . . . (71)
F,,, =
[(4s,- 1:;oj a
- ELb +@,(I -E,,h)ERu
1
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
(72)
O.O005427kk,,h
4oc =
( p, - p, , , ) . . . . . . . . . . . . ( 42)
pLoc. lnL
r 111
Y=O.2639
[
0.4273, - 0. 004429h
0.25
> 1
x, . . . . ( 64)
where
x=
i&o2
W,444J1(1-~)
F,, (in m3/m3)= li -0.011253+0.000091170
+0.0005180h-0.077758
F,, (in std m3/m3)=3820.4+12.97h+192.20k
where
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
(73)
a is in std m3/m3,
A is in m2,
C, is in kg/m3,
D is in m,
F,, is in std m3 /m3,
F,, is in m3/m3,
F Jo* is in m3/m3,
h is in kJ/m2 .h*K (Eqs. 2 through 4),
h is in m,
I,~ is in std m3,
k is in pm2,
N, is in m3,
ps are in kPa,
qoc is in m/d,
Q, is in m3/h,
.
rjn IS m m,
rli IS m m,
t is in h.
+0.00003467~ t-0.5120@,
)
P 0
/
3
v, is in m /kg,
v, is in kg/h,
ws is in kglh,
p. is in Pa.s, and
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
(67)
pot is in Pa.s.
46-43 THERMAL RECOVERY
References
I
2
3
4
5
9
IO
II
I2
13.
14.
15.
16
17.
18
19
20.
21.
22.
23.
24.
25.
26.
27.
28.
29.
30.
31.
32.
Farouq Ah. SM.: Steam Injection, Sewn&lv uncl Terrrar)
Oil Rrrw~en Processes. Interstate Oil Compact Commission, Ok-
lahoma City (Sept. 1974) Chap. 4.
McNeil. J.S. and Moss. J.T.: Oil Recovery by In-Situ Com-
bustion. Per. Ejtx. (July 19.58) B-29-B-42.
Berry. V.J. Jr. and Parrish. D.R.: A Theoretical Analysis of
Heat Flow in Reverse Combustion, Twns., AIME (1960) 219.
124-31.
Dietz, D.N. and Weijdema. J.: Reverse Combustion Seldom
Feasible. Producer.s Monrhi~ (May 1968) IO.
Smith. F.W. and Perkins, T.K.: Experimental and Numerical
Simulation Studies of the Wet Combustion Recovery Process.
J . Cdn. Pa. Tuch. (July-Sept. 1973) 44-54.
Stovall. S.L.: Recovery of Oil from Depleted Sands by Means
of Dry Steam, Oil Week/y (Aug. 13, 1934) 17-24.
Grant. B.R. and Szaaz. S.E.: Development of Underground Heat
Wave for Oil Recovery. Tram., AIME (1954) 201. 108-18.
Kuhn. C.S. and Koch, R.L.. In-Situ Combustion-Newest
Method of Increasing Oil Recovery, Oil and Grrs J . (Aug. IO,
1953) 52, 92-96, 113. 114.
Trantham. J.C. and Marx. J.W.: Bellamy Field Tests: Oil from
Tar by Counterflow Underground Burning. J . Per. Tech. (Jan.
1966) 109-15: Trm~.. AIME. 237.
Giusti. L.E.: CSV Makes Steam Soak Work in Venezuela Field,
Oil md Gas 1. (Nov. 4, 1974) 88-93.
Stokes. D.D. and Doscher. T.M.: Shell Makes a Success of
Steam Flood at Yorba Ltnda. Or/ cind Gas J . (Sept. 2. 1974)
71-76.
Dietz, D.N.: Wet Underground Combustion, State-of-the-Art,
J . Pcjr. Twh. (May 1970) 605-17: Tram., AIME. 249.
Steam Dominates Enhanced Oil Recovery. Oil crud Gw J. (April
5. 1982) 139-59.
Experts Assess Status and Outlook for Thermal, Chemical. and
CO1 Miscible Flooding Processes. J. PPI. Tech. (July 1983)
1279-92.
Johnson. L.A. Jr. rr ul.: An Echoing In-Situ Combustion Oil
Recovery Pmject in the Utah Tar Sand. J . PH. T&I (Feb. 1980)
2955304
Enhmcw/ Oil Recoined Porenrid in rhr Uniwd Srcues, Report by
Lewin and Assocs. for Office of Technology Assessment (Jan.
1978) 40-41.
Wdlman. B.T. 61 dl.: Laboratory Studies of Oil Recovery by
Steam Injectton. Truns., AIME (1961) 222. 681-90.
McAdams, W.H.: Hmt Transmission. third edttion. McGraw-Hill
Book Co. Inc., New York City (1954) 261.
Ramey. H.J. Jr.: Wellbore Heat Transmtssion. J. Pet. Tech.
(April 1962) 427-35.
Saiter. A.: Heat Losses During Flow of Steam Down a Well-
bore. J . Pe/. Tech. (July IY65) 845-5 I.
Willhite. G.P.: Overall-All Heat Transfer Coefficients in Steam
and Hot Water Injection Wells. J . Per. Trch. (May 1967) 607-15.
Earlougher. R.C. Jr.: Some Practical Considerations in the De-
stgn of Steam Injection Wells, J . Pet. Tech. (Jan. 1969) 79-86.
Beggs. H.D. and Brill. T.P.: A Study of Two-Phase Flow in
Inclined Pipes. J . Per. Tech. (May 1973) 607-14.
Farouq Ali, S.M.: A Comprehensive Wellbore Steam/Water
Flow Model or Steam Injection and Geothermal Applications.
.Soc~. Pet. En+ J . (Oct. 1981) 527-34.
Marx. J.W. and Langenheim, R N.: Reservoir Heating by Hot
Flutd Injection. Truns.. AIME (1959) 216. 312-15
Evans. J.G.: Heat Loss During the Injection of Steam lnto a
5-Spot. paper presented as term project in PNG 515. Pennsyl-
vania State U.. University Park (June 1960).
Ramey. H.J. Jr.: Discussion of Reservoir Heating of Hot Fluid
Injectton. Trms., AIME (1959) 216. 363-65.
Mandl. G. and Volek. C.W.: Heat and Masg Transport in Steam
Drive Processes. .Soc Per. Ore. J . (March 1969) S9-79.
Myhill, N.A. and Stegemeier, G:i.: Steam Drive Correlattons
and Prediction. J . Per. Ted. (Feb. 1978) 173-82.
Neurnan. C.H.: A Gravity Override Model ofSteamdrive. J .
Per. Twh. (Jan. 1985) 163-69.
Doscher. T.M. and Ghassemi. F.: The Influence ofOil Viscowy
and Thickness on the Steam Drive. J . Pd. Twh. (Feb. 1983)
291-98.
Vogel, J.V: Stmplrtied Heat Calculations for Steamlloods, J .
Per. Tech. (July 1984) 1127-36.
33.
34.
35.
36.
37.
38.
39.
40.
41.
42.
43.
44.
45.
46.
47.
48.
49.
50.
51.
52.
53.
54.
55.
56.
57.
58.
59.
60.
61.
Boberg. T.C. and Lantz, R.B.: Calculation ot the Production
Rate ofaThermally Stimulated Weli, J . Pet. Tech. (Dec. 1966)
1613-23.
Boberg, T.C. and West, R.C.C.: Correlation of Steam Stimu-
lation Performance. J . Put. Tech. (Nov. 1972) 1367-68.
Coats, K.H. et rrl.: Three-Dimensional Simulation of Steamflood-
ing, Sot. Pet. Enc. J . (Dec. 1974) 573-92.
Coats, K.H.: Simulationof Steamflooding with Diatillatton and
Solution Gas, Sot. Per. Enx. J . (Oct. 1976) 235-47.
Coats. K.H.: A Highly Implicit Steamflood Model. Sot. PC!.
Enn. J . (Oct. 1978) 369-83.
Crookston, R.B., Culham, W.E.. and Chen, W.H.: Numerical
Simulatton Model for Thermal Recovery Processes, Sot,. Per.
Eng. J.(Feb. 1979) 37-58.
Youngren, G.K.: Development and Applications of an In-Situ
Combustion Reservoir Simulator. Sot. Pet. Eng. J . (Feb. 1980)
39-5 I
Coats. K.H.: In-Situ Combustion Model, Sot. Per. En,e. J .
(Dec. 1980) 533-54.
Grabowski, J.W. era/.: A Fully Implicit General Purpose Finite-
Difference Thermal Model for In-Situ Combustion and Steam,
paper SPE 8396 presented at the 1979 SPE Annual Technical Con-
ference and Exhibition, Las Vegas, Sept. 23-26.
Alexander, I.D.. Martin, W.L., and Dew. J.N.: Factors Affect-
ing Fuel Availability and Composition During In-Situ Combua-
tion. J. Per. Tech. (Oct. 1962) 1154-64
Showalter, W.E.: Combustion-Drive Tests. Sot. Pet. Eng J .
(March 1963) 53-58.
Parrish. D.R. and Craig. F.F. Jr.: Laboratory Study of a Com-
bination of Forward Combustion and Waterflooding-The COF-
CAW Process, J. Per. Tech. (June 1969) 753-61.
Burger, J.G. and Sahuquet. B.C.: Laboratory Research on Wet
Combustion. J . Pet. Tech. (Oct. 1973) 1137-46.
Garon, A.M. and Wygal. R.J. Jr.: A Laboratory Investigation
of Firewater Flooding, Sot. Pet. En,q. J . (Dec. 1974) 537-44.
Moss. J.T. and Cady. G.V.: Laboratory Investigation of the Oxy-
gen Combustion Process for Heavy 011 Recovery, paper SPE
10706 presented at the 1982 SPE California Regional Meeting,
San Francisco, March 24-26.
Pursley, S.A.: Experimental Simulation of Thermal Recovery
Processes, Pmc,. , Heavy Oil Sympostum, Maracaibo, Venezuela
(1974).
Huygen, H.H.A.: Laboratory Steamfoods in Half of a Five-
Spot. paper SPE 6171 presented at the 1976 Annual Technical
Conference and Exhibition. New Orleans, Oct. 3-6.
Ehrlich, R.: Laboratory Investigation of Steam Displacement in
the Wabasca Grand Rapids A Sand, Oil Smds of Canada-
Venezueku 1977, CIM (1978) Special Vol.
Prats. M.: Peace River Steam Drive Scaled Model Experiments,
Oii Sands of Cmada-Ven:uc41 1977. CIM (1978) Special Vol.
Doscher, T.M. and Huane. W.: Steam-Drive Performance
Judged Quickly from Use of Physical Models. Oil and Gas J .
(Oct. 22, 1979) 52-57.
Singhal. A.K.: Physical Model Study of Inverted Seven-Spot
Steamfloods in a Pool Containing Conventional Heavy Oil, J .
C&t. Per. Tech. (July-Sept. 1980) 123-34.
Binder, G.G. era/.: Scaled-Model Tests of In-Situ Combustion
in Massive Unconsolidated Sands, Proc,. , 7th World Pet. Gong..
Mexico City (1967).
Pujol. L. and Boberg. T.C.. Scaling Accuracy of Laboratory
Steamflooding Models, paper SPE 4191 presented at the 1972
SPE California Regional Meeting. Bakersfield. Nov. 8-10.
Stegemeier. G.L., Laumbach. D.D., and Volek, C W.:
Representing Steam Processes with Vacuum Models, Sot. Pa.
Grg, J . (June 1980) 15 l-74.
Farouq Ali. S.M.: Current Status of Steam Injection as a Heavy
Oil Recovery Method. J . G/n. Per. Twh. (Jan.-March 1974)
I-15.
Geffen. T.M.: Oil Production to Expect from Known Technol-
ogy. Oil md Gas J . (May 7. 1973) 66-76.
Lewin and Assocs. Inc. : Tha Potmricrls und Eummics of En-
howecl Oil Recowr,?, Federal Energy Administration (April 1976)
Report 876122 I, 2-6.
lyoho. A.W.: Selecting Enhanced Oil Recovery Processes.
Wdd Oil (Nov. 1978) 61-64
Chu. C.: State-of-the-Art Review of Steamtlood Field Projects,
paper SPE 11733 presented at the 1983 SPE California Regional
Meeting, Ventura, March 23-25.
46-44
PETROLEUM ENGINEERING HANDBOOK
62. Chu. C.: A Study of Firetlood F~cld Protect\. J. PHI. &/I.
(Feb. 1977) 171-79.
90.
63. Chu. C. State-ot-the-Art Review of Firetlood Ftcld Prrqccth.
J . Pr,i. Tech. (J an. 1982) 19-X. 91.
Slocutn Field. ltnpm~d Oil RWO I cvy k-w/d Reporr.s. SPE ~
Richerdwn, TX (1976) 2. No I, 11%28. F.&rrlwd Oil Rccvl.-
~!:vFic/l Rqwrrs. SPE, Rtchardson. TX (1979) 5. No. 2. 291-97.
Pollock, C.B. and Buxton, T.S.: Performance of B Forward
Steamdrive Project-Nugget Reservoir, Winkleman Dome Field,
Wyommg, J . Prr. Tech. (Jan. 1969) 35+Kl.
Winkleman Dome Field. frnpwwd Oil Rec~myv Fidd Rcp~m.
SPE. Richardson, TX (1975) 1, No. I, 155-62. E!&~ric(.d Oii
R~c~nw~ Fir/d Rqxvrc, SPE. Richardson. TX (1980) 6, No. I.
41-44.
64.
65.
66.
67.
6X.
69.
70.
71.
72.
73.
74.
7s.
76.
77.
78.
79.
80.
RI.
82.
83.
84
85.
X6
Xl
xx
89
Poettmann. F.H. In-Situ Combustion: A Current Appraisal.
W&c/ Oil. Part I (April 1964). 124-28; Pan 2 (May 1963) 95-98.
Blrvina, T.R.. Ascltinc. R.J.. and Kirk, R.S.: Analyv\ ol a Steanl
Drive Protect, Inglcwood Field. California, J . Per. 7ec,i?. (Sept.
1969) Il41-50.
Blevlnb. T.R. and Billingsley. R.H.: The Ten-Pattern Stean-
flood. Kern River Fteld. California. J . Pet. lidi. (Dec. 1975).
I SOS- 14; 7i-<r,z.\. AIME, 259.
Ogleby, K.D. (I trl.: Status of the Ten-Pattern Kern Riwr Field.
California. J. Pet. T&I. (Oct. 1982) 22.51-57.
Buraell. C.G.: Steam Displacement-Kern River Field../. Fe,.
T&r. (Oct. 1970) 1225-31.
Bur\ell. C G. and Pittman, G.M.: Performance of Steam Dis-
placement in the Kern River Field, J . Per Twh. (Aus. 1975)
977-1004.
Greaser, G.R. and Shore. R.A.: Steamflood Performlmcc in the
Kern River Field. paper SPE 8834 prejented al the 19X0
SPE/DOE Symposium on Enhanced Oil Recovery. Tulsa. April
20-23.
McBean. W.N. Attrc 011 Recovery by Steam Displxcment.
paper SPE 4 170 presented at the 1972 SPE Cahforma Regional
Meetmg. Bakersfteld, Nov 8-10
Rchkopl. B.L.: Me&on Attic Steam Drive. paper SPE S85S
presented at the 1976 SPE California Regional Meetmg. Long
Beach. April X-9.
Hearn. C.L.: The El Dorado Steam Drwe-A Pilot Tertiary
Recovery Test. J . Prr. Tdx (NW 1972) 1377-84
Vnllrroy. V.V. 01 trl.: Deerfield Pilot Test of 011 Rccowry by
Steam Drive. J . Per. Td?. (July 1967) 956-64.
van DtJk. C.: Steam-Drive Projkct in the Schooneheek Field.
The Netherland>, J . PH. Ttrh. (March 1968) 295-302.
Gate\. C F. and Ratney. H.J. Jr.: Fteld Rewlts of South Bel-
ridge Thermal Recovery Experiment. frwz\. , AIME (19.58) 213.
236-44.
Parrish. D.R. rr [il.: A Tertiary COFCAW Pilot Test m the Sloss
Field, Nchra\ka. J . /<,I. 7d1. (June 1974) 667-75: Trtr,~.,.,
AlME. 257.
Pnrrihh, D.R.. Pollock. C.C.. and Craig. F.F. Jr.. Evaluation
oi COFCAW as a Tertiary Recovery Method. Slow Field. Nchraa-
ka. J . Per. T& (June 1974) 676-86: TUNIS., AIME, 257.
Buxton, T.S. and Polock. C.E.: The Sloss COFCAW PKIJeCt-
Further Evaluation of Performance During dnd After Air In,@-
tion: J . PC,! TwIi. (Dec. 1974) 1439-48: Tru,~r., AIME. 257
Mo$s. J.T.. White. P D.. and McNeil. J.S.: In-Situ Combw
twn Process-Rewlts of a Five-Well Field Experiment in South-
cm Oklahoma. Trw>\. , AIME (1959) 216. 55-64
Parrish. D.R. PI cl/.: Underground Combustion in the Shannon
Pool. Wyoming. J . Per. Tdl. (Feb. 1962) 197~205: Tr<rrl.\.
AIME. 225.
Smuh, R.V. (I cl/.: Recovery of Oil by Swam InJection in the
Smachover Field. Arkansas. J . PH. Tech. (Aug. 1973) X33-89.
Smachover Field, Irri/Jld Oil Rml~c~~ Fir/d Rep?\ ( 1075)
I. No. I. 135-43: E/rktrrtwt/ Oil Rcr~owr? r?r/tl Rqwrr\. SPE.
Richardwn. TX (1982) 8. No I. 685-88.
Kern River Field. Standard Oil Company of Caltfornla. l/w
/whew</ Oii Rrcrwc~r, Ficlrl Rqwwf,\ SPE. Richardson ~ TX ( I Y7S)
1. No I, 83-92: Dtlrtrwrcl U/i R~wwr\. Fidd Rqwm, SPE.
Richardson. TX (1980) 6. No I, 23-24.
Midway-Sunact FLeld. ChanQor-Western Oil and Development
Company . 1~~z~wwl Oil RECOIW~ /+/d Rqxwrv. SPE. Richard-
wn. TX I 1976) 2. No. 3. 445-54; E/~hmcw/ Oil Rec~~wr/~\ Ficltl
R~yom. SPE. Richardson. TX t 1082) 8. No. I. 72%32.
Stohcs. D.D (I (il.: Steam Drive a\ a Supplemental Recovery
Procchh in an Intermediate Viscosity Reservwr. Mount Paso Field.
Richardwn. TX ( 1975) I. No. 7. 277-86: &<r,iw</ Oil Rcui\~-
wv pic,/i/ Rcprw~~. SPE. Richardson. TX ( 1982) 8, No I 70 I -ll3
Travcr\c. E.F., Dethcn. A.D.. and Susteh. A.J.. San Ardrl-A
Cn\s Hl\torq of a Succci\ful Steam~lond. paper SPE I I717
orescnted at the IYX3 SPE Caliliwua Rerrwnul Mectme. Venturs.
il:rrch 73-25.
Hall. A. L. and Bowman. R W.: 0pcr;itwn and Performance o1
3 Slocum Thermdl Recover\) Protect. J . Prr. 7?c,/1. (April 1973)
402-0x.
92.
93.
94.
95
96
97
98
90
I00
IO1
102
I03
IO4
10s
106
107
IO8
IO9
I IO
I I I
I I?
I I3
I I4
I I5
Herrerd, A.J.: The M6 Steam Drive ProJect Design and Im-
plementation. J. Cdn. Per. Tee-h. (July-Sept. 1977) 62-83.
Herrera. A.J.: Steam-Drike Recovery Bemg Uxd on Lake
Mardcaibo Coastal Field. Oilcirid GN(. J . (July 17. lY78) 74-80.
Tia Juana Este Field. Marawn, S.A. , Glhowerl Oil Rrw~r~
Fwlcl Report.\, SPE. Richardson. TX (1978) 3, No 4. 751-62:
&hw&/ 011 Rwowrv Field Rqxw/r, SPE. Richardson. TX
(1982) 8. No. I? 75l-S3.
Showalter. W.E. and MacLean. M.A. Fireflood at Brea-Olinda
Field, Orange County. California. paper SPE 4763 presented
at the 1974 SPE Symposium on Improved Oil Recovery, Tulsa.
April 22-24.
Brea Oiinda Field, I*nprowd 011 Rrcrn~~r~ Fdd Rqx~rt.s, SPE,
Richardson. TX (1975) 1, No. I, IS- 18; Orhrrwcd Of/ RPCOW~!
Fiekl R~~pons. SPE, Richardson. TX (1981) 7, No. I, 407-08.
Gates. C.F. and Sklar, I.: Comhubtlon as a Primary Recocery
Process-Midway Sunset Field, J . Per. 7.cvh. (Aug. 1971)
9X1-86: Trur~s.. AIME. 251.
Counihan, T.M.: A Succes\lul In-Situ Combu\tton Pilot In the
Midway Sunset Field, California, paper SPE 6.525 prehented at
the 1977 SPE Califomta Regional Meettng, Baker\fteld, Aprtl
13-1.5
Gates. C.F.. Jung, K.D.. and Surface. R A.: In-Situ Combus-
tion in the Tulare Formation, South Belrtdge Field. Kern County.
CA, .I Per. T&. (May 1978) 798-806: Trcw\. AIME. 265.
Hewitt. C.H. and Morgan. J.T.: The Fry In-Sttu Comhu\tion
Te\t-Reservoir Characteristic\, 1. PH. TK/I. (March lY65)
337-42: Trcrn.c., AIME, 234.
Clark, G.A. e~ol.: The Fry In-Situ Combustion Test-Field Op-
erations. J . Fcr. Teds. (March 196.5) 343-47: Trcrr~s., AIME.
234
Clark. G.A. ertil.: The Fry In-Situ CombustionTest-Field Op-
erations and Performance, J . Prc Tc,rh. (March 1965) 348-53;
Trcrm., AIME. 234.
Earlougher. R.C. Jr.. Galloway, J.R . and Parsons, R.W.: Per-
formance of the Fry In-Situ Combustmn Project. J . PH. T~~c~/I.
(May 1970) 551-57.
Bleaklcy. W.B.: Fry Unit Fireflood Surwving Economic Pres-
sures.- Oil cm! Gas-J . (May 3. 1971) 92-97:
Howell. J.C. and Peterson. M.E.: The Frv In Situ Comhu\tton
ProJect Performance and Economic Statu;. paper SPE X.181
prebenled at the I979 SPE Annual Technical Confercncc and Ex-
hibttion. Las Vegas. Sept. 23-26.
Little, T.P.: Successti~l Fixflooding of the Bellewe Flcld. &r
Eng. /n/l. (Nov. 1975) 55-56.
Bellewe Field. Cities Service Oil Co.. li~,/~rrwe<l Od Re<o,-
cry FwkI Rcyxux, SPE. Rtchardson. TX (1975) 1, No. 3. 47 I-80:
.&h~~m~~d Oil Rewwr~ Fdd Rcym-r.t , SPE. Richardson. TX
(19X2) 8. No. 1. 713-15.
Cato. R.W. and Fmka. W.A.: Getty 011 Report\ Firetlood Pi-
lot is Successful Protect. O//rrm/ Gtr.c J . [Feb. 12. 19681 93-97.
Getty Expanda Bellevue Fire Flood. Oii cd Gu.\ J . (Jan 13.
lY75) 4.5-49.
Bleakley. W.B.: Getty\ Bellewe Flcld Still Goq and Grow-
ing. Prr. &g. httl. (Nov. 1978) 54-68.
Bellcvue Field, Getty Oil Co.. It,iprrwd Oil Rrcowr~ F-w/d
R~~p~rr.s, SPE, Richardson. TX ( 1976) 2. No. 2. 275-83; Orhrorw~l
Oil Rwcnvry F&d Repma. SPE, Richardwn. TX ( 1982) 8, No.
I. 717-19.
Hardy. W.C. CI tri.. In-Situ Combustion Performance in d Thm
Recervou Contatntnr: Hlrh-Gravitv 011. J . Prv. 7d1. (Feb. 1972)
_ -
IYY-208, Twz\. , AIME. 253.
Mace. C.: Deepest COnlhU~tlOn PrOJcct PrOcWtiin~ %KcehhfUi-
ly. Oil wid Gtrs J . (NW 17. 1975) 74-81.
West Hetdelherg Fxld. //n~wo,~vti U/I Rrcwc~rv Fw/r/ Rqwrrs.
SPE. Richardwn. TX (1975) I. No 2, 35 I -5Y: E!lilrrwr// Oil
Rrtnwr-v Fielrl Rqwrrs. SPE. Richardson. TX (19X0) 7. No. I.
451-54.
THERMAL RECOVERY 46.45
119.
120
121.
122.
123.
124.
125.
126.
127.
128.
129.
I so.
131.
132.
133.
134.
135.
136.
137.
138.
139.
130.
141.
142.
143.
Gadelle.C.P. (I 01.: .. Heavy Oil Recovery by In-Situ
Comhu&x-Two Field Caaca in Romania. J . PH. Tmh. ( Nov.
1981) 057-66.
Terwilllger. P.L. PI rrl.: Flretlood of the P, 2 Sand Kcscrvoir
in the Miga Field of Eastern Venezuela. J . Pet . Tech. ~. l an. 1975)
Y-14
N&on. T.W. and McNeil. J.S.: How to Engineer an In-Situ
Comhuwon Project. O! I o, r t / Cm J . (June 5. 1961) 59. No. 3.
X-65.
S&man. A.. BrIgham. W.E.. and Ramey, H.J. Jr.: In-Situ Com-
hwtion Models ior the Steam Plateau and for Fleldwde 011 Recov-
ery. DOEiETIl2056-1 I. U S. DOE (June 1981).
Gates, C.F. and Ramq, H.J. Jr.: A Method for Engmeerinp
In-Situ Combustion 011 Recoverv Proiects. J . Pc, r Td. (Feb.
I
1980) 285-94.
V&k. C.W. and Pryor. J.A.: Steam Distillation DTIVL. Brea
Field. Calilhrnia. J. Per. k/ r. (Aug. 1972) X99-906.
Burke. R.E.: Combu&n Proicct 1s Makmp a Profit. Oi/a/zd
Cm J . (Jan. 18. 1965) 44-46.-
Koch. R.L.: Practical Use of Combustion Drive at West New-
port Field. Per. Dz,q. (Jan. 1965) 72-81.
Bowman. C.H: A Two-Spot Comhustmn Recovery Project.
J Per . f dr . (Sept. 1965) 994-98.
Tewilliger. P.L.: Flrctlooding Shallow Tar Sands-A Case His-
tow. J . C&I . Per . Tdz. (Oct.-Dec. 1976) 41-4X.
J&son. L.A. ($1 cri.: An Echomp In-Situ Comhu\tmn Oil-
Recovcrv Proieci in a Utah Tar Sand. J . f cdt . TVI 11 (Feb. 1980)
295sioi . _
Perry, C.W., Hertlherg. R.H.. and Stosur. J.J.: The Status DI
Enhanced Oil Recovery in the United States, Pmt . , Tenth World
Pet. Congres. Bucharest (1980) 3. 257-66.
Benham. A.L. and Poettmann. F.H.. The Thermal Recovery
Process-An Analyhia of Laboratory Combustion Data. Trtr,r.\. ,
AIME (1958) 213, 83-85.
Caudle. B.H.. Hickman. B.M.. and Sllherberg. I.H.: Perform-
ance of the Skewed Four-Sp)t Injection Pattern. J. /cr. Twh.
(Nov. 1968) 1315-19.
Cady. G.V., Hoffman. S J.. and Scarborough, R.M. Silver-
dale Combination Thermal Drive Project, paper SPE 8904
presented at the 1980 SPE California Regional Meetmg. Los An-
geles. April 9m II
de Haan. M.J. and Schenk. L.: Pertormancc Analysis of a MaJor
Steam Drive Project m the Tin Juana Field. Western Venczw
l a. J . f cr . Td7. (Jan. 1969) I I l-19.
Texas Fireflood Looks Like a Winner. Oil crnd Gtry J . (Feb.
17. 1969) 52.
A~~Ju. B.I.: Conversion of Steam Injection to Waterllood. East
Coalinga Field. J . Per . Twh. ( Nov. 1974) 1227-32.
Gate\. C.F and Brewer. S.W.: Steam Iniection into the D and
E Zone, Tulare Formation, South Belridge Field. Kern County,
California. J. Put. TK~. (March 1975) 343-4X.
Gomaa, E.E.. Duerksen. J.H.. and Woo. P.T.: Designing a
Steamtlood Pilot in the Thick Monarch Sand of the Midwy-Sunset
Field, J . PH. Tech. (Dec. 1977) 1559-68.
Chu. C. and Trimble. A.E: Numerical Simulation ofSteam Dis-
placement-Field Performance Applications, J . f e/ . Tkh. (June
1975) 765-74.
Joseph, C. and Pusch. W.H.: A Field Comparison of Wet and
Dry Combustion, J. PC/ . Tech. (Sept. 1980) 1523-28
Gates. C.F. and Holmes, B.C.: Thermal Well Completion\ and
Operation. paper PDI I presented at the Seventh World Pet.
Cmg.. Mexico City (1967).
Fox. R.L.. Donaldwn. A.B., and Mulac, A J. Development
nf Technology for Dwnhole Steam Producti[m. paper SPE 9776
prehcnted at the 1981 SPEiDOE Joint Symposium cm Enhanced
Oil Recovery, Tulsa. April S-8.
I4.L
135.
146.
147.
148.
149.
I so.
151.
152.
153.
154.
155.
156.
157.
isx.
159.
160.
161.
162.
163.
164.
165.
166.
167.
168.
Carrawaq. P.M Kloth. T.L and Bull. A I): Co-Gcneratiirn.
A New Energy Sy\tem to Generate Both Steam and Iilectricitq .
paper SPE 9907. presented ~11 the 1081 C,~lili~rniu Regional Mcel-
1;. Bahcrsticld. March 25-26.
Strange. L.K.: Ignition: Key Phase m Comhu&on Rcwvcry.
f ci . Cr f i . ( Nov. 1964) 105-09, (Dec. 1964) Y7~106.
Shore. R.A.: The Kern River SCAN Automation System Snrw
ple. Control and Alarm Network, paper SPE 3 I73 prcscntcd at
the 1972 SPE California Regional Meeting. Baker~iield. Nov
n-10.
Bodcau In-Situ Combustion ProJect. iir\t annual report. DOE
Publications SAN-1 189-2. U.S. DOE (Sept. 1977).
Wagner. O.R.: The Use of Tracer5 in Diagnosing lntcrwcll
Reservoir Hetero~eneitics-FIleId Rcwlt\. J . f cv. Tech ( Nov.
1977) 1410-16. -
Yoelin. S.D.: The TM Sand System Stimulation Pqect. J .
Per. Tdz. (Aug 1971) 987-94.
Meldau. R.F., Shipley. R.G.. and Coats. K H : Cyclic
Gas/Steam Stimulation of Heavy-011 Wells. J . Pd. Twk. (Oct.
1981) 1990-98.
B&on, M.W. or (I/.: The Street Ranch Pilot Test ot Frnctuw
Assisted Steamflood Technology. J . PC, / . Tdz. (March 19X3)
511-21.
Sahuquet. B.C. and Ferrier. J.J.: Steam-Drive Pilot in u Frac-
turcd Carbonate Reservoir: Lacq Superieur Field. J . f vi . T~I .
(April 19X2) X73-80.
Hxjirdos. L.J.. Howard, J.V.. and Roberts. G.W.: Enhanced
Oil Recovery Through Oxygen-Enriched In-Situ Comhu\tion: Test
Results from the Forest Hill Field in Texas. J . PCI . Tdf . (June
lY83) 1061-70
Prata. M,: TIwrw/ R~w\w:~. Monograph Scrlch, SPE. Richard-
son. TX (1983) 201-38.
Beal. C.: The Viscosity of Air. Water. Natural Gas. Crude Oil
and Its Associated Gases at Oil Field Tempxzturcs and Pressures.
Twm. , AIME (1946) 165. 103.
Prfml~ur?! Pmdudon HrznrlhooX. T C. Frick (ed ) Vol. Il.
McGraw-Hill Book Co. Inc.. New York City (1962) 19-39.
Chew, J. and Connally. CA. Jr: A Vi\co\ity Correlation lix
Gas-Saturated Crude Oils. Trcins., AIME (1959) 216, 23-25.
Bcggs. H.D. and Robinson. J.R.: Estimating the Viwosity of
Crude 011 Systems. J . Per . Tech. (Sept. 1975) 1140-41.
Brooks. R.H. and Corey. A.T.: Propertics of Porous Media
Affectinfi Fluid Flow, f r w. , ASCE. lrrlratmn and Drainage\
Div. (19k6) 92. No. 1R2.
Somertan, W.H. and Udell, K.S.: Thermal and High Ternpera-
ture PropertIes of Rock-Fluid Systems. paper prerented at the
1981 OASTRA Workshop on Computer Modeling. Edmonton.
Alta.. Jan. 28-30.
Poston. S.W. CI cl/.: The Effect of Tcmperaturc on lrreduclble
Water Saturation and Relative Permeahdlty of Unconwhdatcd
Sands. .Soc Pet . Eq. J . (June 1970) 171-80.
Weinbrandt, R.M.. Ramey, H.J. Jr., and Cabs& F.J.: The Et-
tcct of Temperature on Relative and Absolute Permeahiluy of Sand-
stones. Sot . f t v. Et ?&J . (Oct. 1975) 376-X4.
Sawahini. C.T., Chilingar. G.V., and Allen. D.R.: Comprca-
slhility of Unconsolidated. Arkosic Oil Sand\. Sot. Pcl. E!I,~.
J . (April 1974) 132-38.
Somerton, W.H., Keese, J.A., and Chu. S.L.: Thermal Behavior
of Unconsolidated Oil Sands. Sot . / <, I . GI , ~. I . (Oct. 1974)
513-21.
Poettmann. F.H. and Mayland. B.J.: Equilibrium Constants li)r
High Boiling Hydrocarbon Fractions ot Varymg Characteri7dtlon
Factors. Prr. Refiner (July 1949) 101-12.
Lee. S.T. et (il.: Experim>ntal and Theoretical Studies on the
Fluid Properties Required for Simulation of Thermal Procewx
Sot . Per : Or g. J . (bet. 1981) 535-50.
Fassihl. M.R., Brigham. W.E , and Ramcy. H.J. Jr.: The Reac-
tion Kinetics of In-Situ Combustion. Sot,. Per . , ! ?I ~. J . (Aug.
1984) 408- 16.
1967 ASTM Steam Tables. ASME, New York City (1967).
General References
Blblmgraphy of Thermal Methods of Oil Rccoverg, J . C&I . Per .
T&. (April-June 1975) 55-65.
46-46 PETROLEUM ENGINEERING HANDBOOK
Crawford. P.B.: In-Situ Combustion. Se~omltrr~ trd rertilrr~
Oii R<~ow~~ Pn~w.~.w.~. Interstate Oil Compact Cummlsaion.
Oklahoma City (1974) Chap 5.
Farouq Ah. SM.: Steam tnjecrion. Set~orlllrr~~ lllld Termlr~ 011
Recovery Processes, Interstate Oil Compact Commission, OkId-
homa City (1974) Chap. 6.
Puts. M.: 77wnd Rrw~~r~, Monograph Serw SPE. Richardson.
TX (1982) 7.
7hermul Recowr~ Proces.ws, Reprint Ser~cs, SPE, Richardson, TX
(1965. 1985) 7.
7her~w~l Reuwc~~ Techniques, Reprint Series, SPE. Richardson.
TX (1972) 10.
Chapter 47
Chemical Flooding
Larry W. Lake, U. of Texas
Introduction
Chemical flooding is any isothermal EOR process whose
primary goals are to recover oil by (1) reducing the mo-
bility of the displacing agent (mobility control process),
and/or (2) lowering the oil/water interfacial tension (low-
IFT process).
These classifications do not exclude processes where
both effects are important, such as micellar/polymer (MP)
flooding, nor do they imply that other effects, such as
wettabiiity alteration, extraction, or oil swelling. are not
present.
Mobility control processes inject a low-mobility displac-
ing agent to increase volumetric and displacement sweep
efficiency. The two main techniques are (I) polymer
flooding. whereby a small amount of polymer is added
to thicken brine and (2) foam flooding, through which low
mobilities are attained by injecting a stabilized dispersion
of gas in water. Polymer or mobility buffer drives also
are used to displace micellar and high-pH slugs. Foams
have been used or proposed as driving agents for micel-
lar. solvent, and steam slugs also. For these reasons foam
tlooding could be discussed easily in the chapters on sol-
vent and thermal EOR processes; however. foam stabili-
zation requires surfactants. whose discussion belongs in
this chapter.
Low-IFT methods rely on injecting or forming in-situ
a surface-active agent (surfactant) which lowers oil/water
IFT and, ultimately. residual oil saturation (ROS). Proc-
esscs that inject the surfactant are called MP floods
because of the tendency for surfactants to form micelles
in aqueous solutions and the inevitable need to drive the
micellar solution with polymer. High-pH or alkaline proc-
esses produce a surfactant in situ, since these processes
rely on reactions with acidic components of the crude to
generate the surfactant.
This chapter is divided into sections corresponding to
mobility control and low-IFT processes. Each section be-
gins with a general discussion of how the particular mech-
anism recovers oil, followed by material on the individual
processes, and concludes with typical oil displacement re-
sults. The chapter concludes by giving comparative
screening parameters for each chemical flooding process.
Mobility Control Processes
Effect of Low Mobility on Oil Recovery
Mobility control processes are most applicable to reser-
voirs that have substantial movable oil [oil in place (OIP)
minus ROS] since they displace oil only in excess of ROS.
The mobility ratio concept illustrates how lowering the
mobility improves oil recovery.
The mobility ratio, M, between a displacing agent and
a displaced fluid is
M=hDlh,,, ._____.____................ ._.(l)
where AD is the mobility of displacing agent(s) and A,,
is the mobility of displaced fluid(s). Practical use of Eq.
1 requires specific definitions of the quantities in the
numerator and denominator and of the conditions at which
these quantities are evaluated.
For two-phase waterflooding, common specializations
of Eq. 1 are the endpoint mobility ratio, M. the average
mobility ratio, M, and the shock mobility ratio. M*. Each
definition has been used in particular applications in the
literature: M has been used to correlate areal sweep rela-
tions, M* is the most direct indicator of viscous instability,
and M is the most widely cited value in the literature
for waterfloods. Z For the special case of a piston-like
displacement all three definitions are identical. From the
general definition of Eq. I, lowering the mobility of the
displacing fluid is equivalent to lowering any of the mo-
bility ratios. This recovers oil by increasing both volu-
metric and displacement sweep efficiency.
Volumetric sweep efficiency, EV. is the PV of a reser-
voir contacted by a displacing agent div,ided by the total
PV. Et, is composed of two parts: areal, E/r, and inva-
sion (vertical) sweep efficiency, El.
47-2 PETROLEUM ENGINEERING HANDBOOK
Fig. 47.1-Schematic of polymer flooding
For more &tailed discuxsions of E,, and El XC Chaps.
30. 43. and 44 and Refs. 1 through 1 I. Both quantities
dcpcnd on throughput and on several fluid. petrophyai-
cal. and geometric factors. usually expressed as dimen-
sionlcsa groups. However. E,.( and El both increase as
Mdecrea~-i.e.. as the mobility of the displacing agent,
A,,. decreases.
When the displacement is piston-like in a homogcnc-
ous. isotropic. horizontal medium and M> I (an UI+I\YIU-
hlr mobility ratio). the displacement front forms small
perturbations. called viscous fingers. which grow dur-
ing propa@on. Such tingcrs also form when M< I. but
they are damped out by the~~~\~cl&le mobility ratio. The
growing viscous fingers can contribute substantially to
poor oil rocovcry because of large-scale bypassing. Mo-
bility control agents prevent viscous fingering cithcr in
il conventional waterflood (polymer flooding) or ah a part
of an otherwise inherently unstable EOR process.
Displacement efficiency. El, (local or microscopic
sweep cfticicncy). is the volume of oil recovered in a dis-
placement divided by the oil volume just before the dis-
placement. the displacement having maximum volumetric
sweep efficiency. The classical solution by Buckley and
Leverett can be used to describe the effect of mobility low-
ering on En. Because of the dependence on several
factors there i+ no unique correspondence between M and
El,: however. lowering M or An results in improved oil
recovery through larger Eo.
Lowering M. then. results in improved oil recovery by
increahins areal. vertical. and displacement sweep effi-
cicncics. Since it is the products of these factors that dc-
tcrminc overall oil recovery. this implies that an incrcasc
in any one may not r-csutt in a larfc overall incrcaso in
oil rccokery. particularly if one of the other efficiencies
ivcre IOU. Even with the combination of the three effi-
clcncIc\. the incremental oil recovered with ;I mobility
control process must he balanced against the additional
eupensc rcquircd to in.jcct the viscous mobility control
agent.
Polymer Flooding
Polymers have been used in oil production in three modes.
I. They have been used as near-well treatments to in-
prove the performance of waler injectors or high-watercut
producers by blocking off high-conductivity Loncs.
2. Polymers also are used as agents that may be cross-
linked in situ to plug high-conductivity zones at depth in
the reservoir. These proccsscs require that polymer be
in.jected with an inorganic metal cation. which will cross-
link subsequently injected polymer molccutes with ones
already bound to solid surfaces.
3. The other mode is use as agents to lower M or Xn.
The first mode is not truly a chemical flooding proc-
ess. since the actual oil-displacing agent is not the poly-
mer. The overwhelming majority of polymer EOR
projects have been in the third mode, which is the one
emphasized here.
Fig. 47. I is a schematic of a typical polymer flood in-
jection sequence: a preflush, usually consisting of a low-
salinity brine: an oil bank; the polymer solution itself: a
freshwater buffer to protect the polymer solution from
backside dilution; and, finally. chase or drive water. Many
times the freshwater buffer contains polymer in decreas-
ing amounts (a grading or taper) to lessen the effects ot
unfavorable mobility ratio between the chase water and
the polymer solution. Because ofthe driving nature of the
process. polymer tloods always arc performed through
separate sets of in.jection and production wells.
M is lowered in a polymer tlood by in.jecting water that
contains a high-molecular-weight. water-soluble polymer.
Since the water is usually a dilution of an oillicld brine.
interactions with salinity are important. particularly for
certain classes of polymers. Salinity in this chapter is the
total dissolved solids (TDS) content of the aqueous phase.
Typical values are shown in Fig. 47.2. Virtually all
chemical flooding propertics dcpcnd on the concentrations
ofspccific ions rather than salinity only. It is partcularly
important to monitor the aqueous phahcs total divalcnt
CHEMICAL FLOODING 47- 3
I
1,000
a0
d3
r
@ Oo
0
I
L
I
)
,oc
TOTAL DISSOLVED SOLIDS, mg/l
Fig. 47.2-Salinities from representallve oilfield brines
cation content (hardness) separately. since the latter are
usually more crltical to chemical llood properties than the
same TDS concentration. Fig. 47.2 also shows typical
brine hardncsscs.
Bccauxc of the high molecular weight ( I to 3 million
is typical) only a small amount (typically about 500 ppm)
of polJ,mer will bring about a substantial increase in water
viscosity. Furthcrmorc. several types ofpolymcrs lower
mobility by lowcring water relative pcrmcability (pcrme-
ability reduction effect) in addition to incrcaxing the water
viscosity. How polymer lowers mobility. and the inter-
actions with salinity may be qualitatively illustrated with
some di5cusslon of polymer chemistry.
Polymer Types. Several polymers have been considered
for polymer tlooding: xanthan gum, hydrolyzed poly-
acrylamide (HPAM). copolymers of acrylic acid and
acrylamide. copolymers ofacrylamide and 2-acrylamide-2
Imethyl propane sulfonatc (AM/AMPS). hydrouyethyl-
cellulose (HEC). carboxymethylhydroxycthyIccllulose
(CMHEC). polacrylamide (PAM). polyacrylic acid, flu-
can. dextran polycthylencoxide (PEO). and polyvinyl al-
cohol (PA). Only the first three have actually hccn field
tested: however. the variety of entries in this partial list-
ing emphasizes that there arc many potentially suitable
chcmlcals. some of which may prove more cfkctivc than
thoxc currently LI W~. Ncvcrthclcsj. virtually all 01 rhe
commercially attractive polymers fall into two gcncric
classes: polyacrylamidcs and poly\accharide\ (hiopolyme1
or xanthan gum ). The remainder of this discussion deals
with these cxclu\ively. Representative molecular struc-
turn\ are given in Fig. 47.3. .
POLYACRYLAMIDE
fT-J-
i
I
I 2 I
HYDROLYZED
POLYACAYLAMIDE
Fig. 47.3A-Molecular structure for partially hydrolyzed poly-
acrylamide.
Fig. 47.3B-Molecular structure for polysaccharlde jbiopolymer).
Polyacrylamides. PAMs are polymers whose mono-
meric unit is the acrylamide molecule. As used in poly-
mer flooding, PAMs have undergone partial hydrolysis.
which causes anionic (negatively charged) carboxyl
groups (-COO-) to be scattered along the chain. The
polymers are called partially hydrolyzed polyacrylamidcs
(HPAMs) for this reason. Typical degrees of hydrolysis
arc 30% or more of the acrylamide monomers: hence.
the HPAM molecule is quite negatively charged. which
accounts for many of its physical properties. The
viscosity-increasing feature of HPAM lies in its large
molecular weight. which is accentuated by the anionic
repulsion between polymer molecules and also between
segments on the same molecule. The repulsion causes the
molecule in solution to elongate or uncoil and snag on
others similarly elongated, an effect that accentuates the
mobility reduction at higher concentrations.
If the brine salinity and/or hardness arc high. however,
this repulsion is decreased greatly through ionic shield-
ing as the freely rotating carbon/carbon bonds allow the
molecule to ball up or coil. (Fig. 47.3 shows the molccu-
lar structure of hydroxyethylcellulose.) This causes a cor-
responding decrease in the effectiveness of the polymer,
since the snagging effect is rcduccd greatly. Virtually all
HPAM properties show a large sensitivity to salinity and
hardness. This is an obstacle to usiiyg,HPAM in many
reservoirs. On the other hand, HPAM 15 inexpensive. rela-
tively resistant to bacterial attack. and exhibits permea-
bility reduction.
Polysaccharides. A second major class of polyniers arc
the polysaccharidcs. which are formed from the polymers-
47-4
PETROLEUM ENGINEERING HANDBOOK
Fig. 47.4-Polymer solution viscosity vs. shear rate and polymer
concentration.
zation of saccharide molecules (Fig. 47.3). Polysaccha-
rides or biopolymers are formed from a bacterial
fermentation process. This process leaves substantial
debris in the polymer product that must be removed be-
fore the polymer is injected. I6 The polymer is also sus-
ceptible to bacterial attack after it has been introduced into
the reservoir. These disadvantages are offset by the in-
sensitivity of polysaccharide properties to brine salinity
and hardness. The origin of this insensitivity is seen in
Fig. 47.3, which shows the polysaccharide molecule to
be relatively nonionic and, therefore, free of the ionic
shielding effects of HPAM. Polysaccharides are more
branched than are HPAMs and the oxygen-ringed car-
bon bond does not rotate fully; hence, the molecule in-
creases brine viscosity by snagging and by adding a more
rigid structure to the solution. Polysaccharides do not ex-
hibit permeability reduction, however.
At the present time HPAM is less expensive per unit
amount than polysaccharides; however, when compared
on a unit amount of mobility reduction, particularly at high
salinities, the costs are close enough so that the preferred
polymer for a given application is site-specific. Histori-
cally, HPAMs have been used in about 95% of the report-
ed field polymer floods. I7 Both classes of polymers tend
to degrade chemically at elevated temperatures.
Polymer Properties. Because of the complexity of the
subject, a comprehensive treatment of polymer proper-
ties is not possible. However. qualitative trends, a few
quantitative relations and representative data are presented
on these properties: viscosity relations, non-Newtonian
effects, retention, permeability reduction, and chemical,
biological, or mechanical degradation.
Viscosity Relations and Non-Newtonian Effects. Fig.
47.4 shows polymer solution viscosity. p,,, vs. shear rate
measured in a laboratory viscometer at fixed salinity. I8
At low shear rates, p,, is independent of shear rate.
P(~,,=~,,), and the solution is a Newtonian fluid. At
higher i. p,, decreases, approaching a limiting
(p,, =p, ) value not much greater than the water vis-
cosity, p,,., at some critical high shear rate (not shown
on Fig. 47.4). A fluid whose viscosity decreases with in-
creasing ? is shear thinning. The shear thinning behavior
of the polymer solution is caused by the uncoiling and
Fig. 47.5-Polymer solution viscosity vs. shear rate at various
brine salinities.
unsnagging of the polymer chains when they are placed
in a shear flow. Below the critical shear rate the curve
is reversible.
Fig. 47.5 shows a viscosity/shear-rate plot at fixed poly-
mer concentration with variable NaCl concentration for
an AMPS polymer. I9 Note the profound sensitivity of the
viscosity to salinity: as a rule of thumb the polymer solu-
tion viscosity decreases a factor of 10 for every factor-
of-10 increase in NaCl concentration. The viscosity of
HPAM polymers and HPAM derivatives is even more
sensitive to hardness, but viscosities of polysaccharide so-
lutions are relatively insensitive to both.
The behavior in Figs. 47.4 and 47.5 is favorable be-
cause for the bulk of a reservoirs volume, P is usually
low (about 1 to 5 seconds -I), making it possible to at-
tain a design M with a minimal amount of polymer. Near
the injection wells, however, i can be quite high, which
causes the polymer injectivity to be greater than that ex-
pected on the basis of ~1 The relative magnitude of this
enhanced injectivity ef ect can be estimated once quan- P
titative definitions of shear rate in permeable media and
shear-rate/viscosity relations are given.
The polymer solution viscosity/shear-rate relationship
may be described by a power law model.
pp =K(iy , . . (2)
where K and n are the power-law coefficient and expo-
nent, respectively. Eq. 2 applies only over a limited range
of shear rates: below some low shear rate the polymer
solution viscosity is constant at pp O, and above the crit-
ical shear rate the polymer solution viscosity is also con-
stant p,O. The truncated nature of the power law is
awkward in calculations; hence, another useful relation-
ship is the Meter model. 22
PLp
O-P,, m
P p =P p m+ .
If L
c >
a~,,............
p 1%
where 01 is an empirical coefficient and > ,,? is the shear
rate at which CL,, is the average of pLr, and p,, -. As with
all polymer properties, all empirical parameters are func-
tions of salinity, hardness, and temperature.
CHEMICAL FLOODING 47-5
When applied to permeable media flow thcsc gcncral where
trends and equations continue to apply. cc,, is usually k,, = permeability to polymer solution.
called the r(17/u.~rr viscosity and the effective shear
rate. in,. .
h,, = mobility of water-rich phase. and
is based on capillary tube concepts.
h,, = mobility of polymer solution.
ic =
u ii For constant-flow-rate experiments. FR is the inverse ra-
, . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
(4)
4&G%
tio of pressure drops; for constant-pressure-drop experi-
ments, FR is the ratio of flow rates. F, is an indication
of the total mobility-lowering contribution of a polymer.
where
To describe the permeability reduction effect alone. a prl--
II,,. = superficial flux of polymer-rich (water)
mwhilit~, rcductiorl ,firctor-. F,.k , is defined as
phase.
k,,. = permeability to polymer-rich (water) phase.
S,,. = saturation of polymer-rich (water) phase.
fraction, and
$ = porosity of medium, fraction.
Polymer Retention. All polymers experience retention
on solid surfaces because of adsorption or mechanical
trapping within a permeable medium. Polymer retention
varies with polymer type, molecular weight, rock com-
position, brine salinity and hardness, flow rate, and tem-
perature. Field-measured values of retention range from
20 to 400 Ibm polymer/acre-ft bulk volume with desir-
able retention level being less than about 50 lbm/acre-ft.
Retention causes the loss of polymer from solution, which
can cause the mobility control effect to be destroyed-an
effect that is particularly pronounced at low polymer con-
centrations. Polymer retention also causes a delay in the
rate of polymer propagation.
A final definition is the residual resistctnw jirctor. FRr .
which is the mobility of a brine solution before and after
polymer injection.
Offsetting the delay caused by retention is an accelera-
tion of the polymer solution through the permeable medi-
um. which is caused by inaccessible PV (IPV). The most
common explanation for IPV is that the smaller portions
of the pore space will not allow polymer molecules to enter
because of their size. Thus, a portion of the total pore
space is uninvaded or inaccessible to polymer. and ac-
celerated polymer flow results. Large as they arc, how-
ever, most polymer molecules will fit easily into all but
the smallest pore throats. Hence, a second explanation
of IPV ih based on a wall exclusion effect whereby the
polymer molecules aggregate in the center of a narrow
channel. The polymer pore fluid layer near the wall has
a lower viscosity than the fluid in the center. which causes
an apparent fluid slip.
IPV depends on polymer molecular weight, media per-
meability, porosity, and pore size distribution, becoming
more pronounced as molecular weight increases and the
ratio of permeability to porosity (characteristic pore size)
decreases. IPV can be 30% of the total pore space or
greater,
Permeability Reduction. As mentioned previously
HPAM polymers can cause lowered mobility through a
permeability reduction effect. This phenomenon has been
described through three factors. 24 The resistuncc~,fuctor.
FR, is the ratio of the injectivity of a single-phase poly-
mer solution to that of brine flowing under the same con-
ditions:
A,,. k,,/tL,,,
FR=-=
x,, k,,cl,, .
FR,-=- . _. (7)
where A,,.,, is the mobility of water-rich phase before
polymer injection and A,,,(, is the mobility of water-rich
phase after polymer injection. F,Q is a measure of the
permanence of the permeability reduction effect caused
by the polymer solution. It is the primary measure of the
performance of a channel-blocking application of poly-
mer solutions. For many cases, F,k and FR,- are nearly
equal; however. FR is usually much larger than F,.,: be-
cause the former contains the viscosity-enhancing effect
as well as the permeability-reduction effect.
The most common measure of permeability reduction
is F,.k. Frk is sensitive to polymer type, molecular weight.
degree of hydrolysis, shear rate, and permeable media
pore structure. Polymers that have undergone even a small
amount of mechanical degradation seem to lose most of
their permeability reduction effect. For this reason.
qualitative tests based on screen factor devices are com-
mon to estimate polymer quality. F,.k has been correlat-
ed to polymer adsorption and rheological properties by
Hirasaki and Pope.
Chemical and Biological Degradation. The average
polymer molecular weight can be decreased, to the detri-
ment of the overall process, by chemical. biological, or
mechanical degradation. Chemical degradation can be
minimized by restricting polymer usage to low-
temperature applications, and by adding oxygen
scavengers (e.g., sodium sulfate or sodium sulfite) to the
polymer solution. Biological degradation can be elim-
nated by adding oxygen scavengers and biocides (e.g..
formaldehyde or isopropyl alcohol). In fact, nearly all ap-
plications contain some of these chemicals. usually in very
small quantities (see Ref. 16 or 26).
Mechanical Degradation. Mechanicaldegradation, on
the other hand, is potentially present under all applica-
tions. Mechanical degradation occurs when polymer so-
lutions are exposed to high-velocity flows. These can be
present in surface equipment (valves. orifices, pumps. or
tubing), downhole conditions (perforations or screens).
or in the sandface itself. Perforated completions. partic-
ularly, are a cause for concern. since large quantities of
47-6 PETROLEUM ENGINEERING HANDBOOK
PLACED 40. I
53000 BARRELS
ON PRODUCTION -
EARS
Fig. 47.6-Tertiary polymer flood response from North Burbank
Unit, Osage County, OK.
polymer solution arc being forced through a number of
small holes. For this reason. most polymer in,jections are
done through openhole or gravel-pack completions. Be-
cause flow velocity falls off quickly with distance from
an injector. little mechanical degradation occurs within
the reservoir itself.
All polymers mechanically degrade under high enough
flow rates. However. HPAMs are most susceptible un-
der normal operating conditions. particularly if the sa-
linity or hardness ofthe brine is large. Evidently, the ionic
coupling of these anionic molecules is relatively fragile
compared with the polysaccharide chains. Also. clonga-
tional stress is ar destructive to polymer solutions as is
shear stress, although the two generally accompany each
other. Maerker and others have correlated permanent vis-
cosity of a polymer solution loss to an elongational stretch
rate times length product. 273 On a viscosity/shear-rate
plot (purely shear flow), mechanical degradation usually
begins at shear rates greater than the minimum-viscosity
critical shear rate.
Field Results. Fig. 47.6 shows a tertiary polymer tlood-
ing field response from the North Burbank unit, Osage
County, OK. The figure shows WOR and oil rate be-
fore and immediately after polymer injection. Polymer
injection began in late 1970, which quickly arrested a
declining oil rate and an increasing WOR. The oil rate
then resumed its prepolymer decline but at a substantial-
ly higher level. The polymer oil or incremental oil recov-
ery (IOR) from a polymer flood is the difference between
the cumulative oil actually produced and that which would
have been produced by a continuing waterflood. Thus.
for a technical analysis of the project it is important to
establish a polymer flood oil rate decline and an accurate
waterflood decline rate. The IOR for North Burbank is
the shaded area in Fig. 47.6.
Table 47. I summarizes other field results on more than
250 polymer tloods on the basis of a comprehensive sur-
vcy by Manning rt rrl. I7 The table emphasizes oil recov-
cry data and screening parameters used for polymer
flooding. Approximately one-third of the statistics arc
from commercial or field-scale floods. The oil recovery
statistics in Table 47. I show average polymer tlood recov-
cries of 3.56% remaining (after watertlood) oil in place.
and 2.69 STB of IOR for each pound of polymer itljcct-
cd. with wide variations in both numbers. The large varia-
bility reflects the emerging nature of polymer tlooding
in the previous decades. Considering the STB IOR per
pound of polymer average and the average costs of crude
and polymer, it appears that polymer flooding could be
a highly attractive EOR process. However. such costs al-
ways should be compared on a discounted basis rctlcct-
ing the time value of money. which will decrease the
apparent attractlvencss of polymer flooding because of the
decreased injectivity of the polymer solutions.
Foam Flooding
Gas/liquid foams offer an alternative to polymers for
providing mobility control in chemical floods, and have
been both proposed and field tested as mobility control
agents in steamfloods.
Foams are dispersions of gas bubbles in liquids. Gas/liq-
uid dispersions are normally unstable and usually will
break in less than I second. If surfactants are added to
the liquid, however, stability is improved greatly so that
some foams can persist indefinitely. To understand foam
TABLE 47.1-POLYMER FLOOD STATISTICS
Oil recovery, O/o remaining OIP
Oil recovery, STB/lbm
Oil recovery, STBlacre-ft
Permeability variation, fraction
Mobile oil saturation, fraction
Oil viscosity, cp
Resident brine salinity,
g TDSlL
Water-to-oil mobility ratio,
dimensionless
Average polymer
concentration, ppm
Temperature, OF
Average permeability, md
Average porosity, fraction
Number of
Projects*
50
80
88
118
62
153
10
87 5.86 0.1 51.8 11.05
93 339 51 3,700 343
172 115 46 234 85
187 349 1.5 7,400 720
193 0.20 0.07 0.38 0.20
Mean Minimum Maximum
3.56 0 25.3
2.69 0 36.5
24.0 0 188.7
0.70 0.06 0.96
0.27 0.03 0.51
36 0.072 1,494
40.4 5.0 133.0
Standard
Deviation
5.63
4.86
36.65
0.19
0.12
110.2
33.4
CHEMICAL FLOODING
propertie rcqulrcc wnc ili5cusvon of surtactunts and
their classifications. Moat of the discussion applies to MP
surfact~nts 3s well.
Surfxtant Chemistq. A typical xurfactant monomet- is
composed of a nonpolar portion (lipophi1c~i.c.. having
strong affinit~~~for oil) and a polar portion (hydrophile-
i.e.. strong attmity for water): the entire monomer is an
amphtphile (has affinity for both oil and vvater) because
ofthis dual nature. Fig. 47.7 shows the molecular struc-
ture of two common surfactanta (top two panels) and il-
lustrates (lowest panel) a shorthand notation for surfactant
monomers: the monomer is represented by a tadpole
sy~dx~l with the nonpolar portion being the tail and the
polar the head. Surfactants are classified into four groups
that depend on their polar portions (see Table 47.1)3.
Anionic.s. As required by electroneutrality. the an
ionic aurfactant molecule is uncharged with an inorganic
metal cation (usually sodium) associated with the
monomer. In an aqueous solution the ~~dx~~le ioniLcs
to free cations and the anionic monomer. Anionic sur-
factants are the most common in EOR because they are
good surfactants. rclativelv resistant to retention. stable.
and relatively inexpensive.
Cationics. In this case the surfactant ~~dxulc con-
tains a cationic hydrophilc and an inorganic anion to bal-
ancc the charpc. Cationic surfactants have little use in
EOR bccausc they are adsorbed highly by the anionic sur-
faces of interstitial clays.
Nonionics. These surfactants do not form ionic
bonds, but when dissolved in aqueous solutions. they cx-
hibit surfactant properties simply by electronegativity con-
trasts betvveen their constituents. Nonionics arc much less
sensittve to high salinities than anionics or cationics.
Anzphoterics. A final class of surfactants are those
that contain aspects of two or more of the previous class-
es. For example. an amphoteric may contain both an an-
ionic group and a nonpolar group. These surfactants have
not been used in EOR.
Within any one class there is a huge variety of possible
surfactants. Fig. 47.7 illustrates differences in Iipophile
molecular weight IC t2 for the sodium dodecyl sulfate
(SDS) vs. C th for Texas No. I]. hydrophilc identity (sul-
fate vs. sulfonate), and tail branching (straight chain for
SDS vs. two tails for Texas No. 1) all within the same
class of anionic surfactants. In addition to these. there are
variations in the position ofthe hydrophile attachment and
the number of hydrophiles (monosulfonates vs. disul-
fonatcs. for example). Even small variations can change
surfactant properties drastically (e.g.. sulfates tend to be
less thermally stable than sulfonatcs). For details on the
47-7
SODIUM DODECYL SULFATE
c: c
/ \,/ \cA,i\p\cAo _ g _ o- No+
I
0
TEXAS NO.1 SULFONATE
COMMERCIAL PETROLEUM SULFONATES
0
I
R-S -O-Nat-
A
R - HYDROCARBON GROUP
(non - polar)
Fig. 47.7-Typical surfactant molecular structures
effect of structure on surfactant propertics see Refs. 31
and 32.
Most commercial surfactants contain distributions of
surfactants and surfactant types that further add to their
complexity. In the following. distinctions between sur-
factant types are ignored by simply treating the surfac-
tant as the tadpole structure of Fig. 47.7.
Foam Stability. The stability of a foam may be under-
stood by viewing the liquid film separating two gas hub-
bles in cross section as in the lower panel of Fig. 47.8. ?
The hydrophiles of the surfactant are oriented into the in-
terior of the film and the lipophiles toward the bulk gas
phase. Suppose that some external force causes the film
to thin as in the lower panel. Since capillary pressure is
inversely proportional to interfacial curvature. the pres-
sure in the thinned portion of the film is lower than in
the ad,iacent flat portion. This causes a pressure differ-
cnce within the film. liquid flow. and healing. The pres-
sure in the gas phase is assumed constant because of its
relatively low density if the foam is static. or low vis-
cosity if in motion.
Table 47.2-CLASSIFICATION OF SURFACTANTS AND EXAMPLES
4-M -eM -e+ d-
Anionics Cationics Amphoterics Nonionics
Sulfonaies Quaternary ammonium Aminocarboxyltc Alkyl-
Sulfates Pyridinum acids Alkyl-aryl
Carboxylates lmidazolrnrum Others Acyl
Phosphates Piperidinium Acylamindo-
Others Sulfononium Acylaminepolyglycol ethers
Compounds Polyol ethers
Others Alkanolamides
Others
47-a PETROLEUM ENGINEERING HANDBOOK
SURFACE
ble layer on the interior of the film boundary and the
TENSION
/I-----
_ ADSORPTION
attractive Van der Waal forces bctwccn the molecules in
/
the film. If the film becomes substantially smaller than
/
/
the equilibrium thickness. the fret energy barrier between
the repulsive and attractive contributions is breached and
/
/
the film will collapse.
/ Such thinning can be caused spontaneously by diffu-
/ I
/
J I
sion of the gas from small to large bubbles and by gravi-
C.Y.C. CONC.
ty drainage. Patton et al. reported on the rate of
3 Hii
spontaneous collapse of a large number of foams as a func-
tion of surfactant type. temperature, and pH. tl The half-
life of the foam heights reported in their static tests ranges
FlllIl
from 1 to about 45 minutes. They report that anionic sur-
factants have greater stability than nonionics. and that the
Film
0
stability of sulfonate foams is affected greatly by water
hardness. Foams were generally more unstable at high
Thlnner, Lou adrorptlon, Larger aurfece tencllon,
Contractlon
temperatures, and many could be stabilized by adding a
second surfactant.
Fig. 47.8-Upper panel shows surface tension and adsorption
of a surfactant vs. concentration. Lower panel is the
Gibbs-Marangoni effect.
External effects that may cause the foam to collapse are
the presence of a foam breaker (oil or a high clcctrolyte
concentration could do this). local heating. or contact with
a hydrophobic surface.
0 km,
= 4.41 OMCY
* k,,,
* 0.42 DARCY
0 km
0.22 DARCY
\
0
0.10
!- * A
0
0.01
60
QUA&Y OF F&i, PLRCESOf
Fig. 47.9-Effective permeability-viscosity ratio vs foam quality
for consolidated oorous media.
The upper panel in Fig. 47.8 shows that the gas/liquid
surface tension is a decreasing function of surface adsorp-
tion as required by the Gibbs theory. According to this
view the thinned portion of the film will have less specif-
ic adsorption (since the surface area is locally greater) and
greater surface tension. This locally high surface tension
also causes healing.
Clearly. the surface tension at the gas/liquid interfaces
play an important role in film stability. Very low surface
tension would not be favorable; fortunately gas/liquid sur-
face tensions are rarely lower than 20 dynes/cm even with
the best foaming agents. In the absence of external forces.
the film is at an equilibrium thickness caused by a bal-
ance between the repulsion forces of the electrical dou-
Foam Physical Properties. Physically, foams arc char-
acterized by three measures.
Qua&. Foam quality, r, is the percentage of the total
(bulk) foam volume that is gas volume. The quality can
increase with increasing temperature and decreasing pres-
sure both because the gas volume can increase. and also
because gas dissolved in the bulk liquid phase can evolve
from solution. Foam qualities can bc quite high, approach-
ing 97% in many cases. A foam with quality greater than
90% is a dry foam.
Texture. This measure is the average bubble size. The
texture determines how the foam will flow through a
permeable medium. If the average bubble size is larger
than the average pore diameter. the foam flow5 as a
progression of films separating individual gas bubbles.
Given typical foam textures and pore sizes, this condi-
tion is most nearly realized in permeable flow. particu-
larly for high foam qualities.
0
Bubble Size Range. Foams with a large distribution
range are more likely to be unstable because of the gas
diffusion from large to small bubbles.
Mobility Lowering. Foams can reduce the mobility of
a gas phase drastically. Fig. 47.9 shows the steady-state
mobility of foams of differing quality in Berea cores at
three different permeabilities as a function of quality.
On the extreme right of this figure (r- 100%). the mo-
bility should approach the respective air permeability
divided by the air viscosity: this mobility is two to three
factors of 10 greater than any of the experimental points
on the figure. When r-0 the mobility should approach
the water permeability divided by CL,, Thus. the mobili-
ty of the foam is lower than that of either of its consti-
tuents alone. The mobility of the foam decreases with
increasing quality until the films between the gas bubbles
begin to break and the foam collapses (not shown on Fig.
47.9). Foams are effective in reducing the mobility at all
three permeabilities in Fig. 47.9, but the effect of foam
quality is more pronounced at the highest permeability.
This is a consequence of the contrast between the tcxturc
of the foam and the mean pore size of the mcdium.36
CHEMICAL FLOODING
The mobility reduction caused by the foam can be
viewed as an increase in a single-phase viscosity or as
a decrease in the gas-phase permeability. Representative
data of the second type are in Fig. 47.10, which shows
the gas-phase permeability, both with and without foam,
and
f
as saturation plotted against the liquid injection
rate. - Note that the foam causes a great decrease in gas
permeability at the same rate and even at the same gas
saturation compared to the nonfoaming displacement. The
analogous analysis performed on the aqueous-phase rela-
tive permeability shows that neither the gas saturation nor
the presence of the foaming agent affects the aqueous-
phase relative permeability. j8
The low foam mobilities in permeable media flow are
postulated to be caused by at least two different mecha-
nisms: (I) the formation of or the increase in a trapped
residual gas phase saturation and (2) a blocking of pore
throats caused by the gas films. From Fig. 47.10 the ef-
fect of a trapped gas saturation, which would lower the
gas mobility through a relative-permeability lowering, is
much smaller than the pore-throat-blocking effect. The
trapped gas-phase saturation effect may become impor-
tant. however, during the later stages of a displacement
where the lower pressures could cause more gas to come
out of solution.
The mobility reduction of foams, viewed as a viscosit
enhancement. has been studied in capillary tubes.
38
General observations on these data are that foams are
generally shear-thinning fluids whose power law coeffi-
cient increases with the capillary tube radius. Using the-
oretical arguments based on a Newtonian fluid and an
inviscid gas, Hirasaki and Lawson showed that the film
thickness of a single moving bubble increases as the bub-
ble velocity to the two-thirds power. 4o Since shear stress
in a capillary is inversely proportional to film thickness.
the apparent viscosity of a foam in a capillary tube
decreases with increasing velocity. Thus, the shear-
thinning effect observed in capillary tubes is actually a
consequence of the film thickening as velocity increases.
A second implication in the Hirasaki-Lawson theory is
that foam texture occupies as great an importance in de-
termining rheological behavior as does foam quality.
Field Results. Field tests of foam injection alone have
been scarce. Holm reports on the injection of an air/brine
foam into a single well in the Siggins field. Though
there was no measureable oil response, the mobility to
both air and brine were reduced significantly, and the in-
jection profile into the central well became more uniform.
Low-IFT Processes
In addition to stabilizing gas dispersions, surfactants used
in MP flooding or generated in situ can recover oil by
lowering oil/water IFT.
Lowering ROS
The basic tool for illustrating how lowering IFT reduces
ROS is the capillary desaturation curve (CDC) shown in
Fig. 47.1 I. The CDC is a plot of nonwetting- or wetting-
phase residual saturation on the y axis vs. a dimcnsion-
less ratio of viscous to local capillary forces on a logarith-
mic .Y axis. On Fig. 47.1 I, S,,,.,, is the residual oil
(assumed nonwetting), and S,,,. is the irreducible water-
(wetting)-phase saturation. The CDC has been calculat-
47-9
l.T Ii iiiiiii iiiiil
II:
-?-d---GAS PERYEABILITY
k--t+sRI
3
3
0.1
0 I 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 IO II 12 13 14
LIQUID INJECTION RATE, BARRELS PER.
DAY/ SO. FT.
Fig. 47.10-Effect of liquid flow rate and gas saturation on gas
permeability with and without foam
Fig. 47.11--Schematic capillary desaturatjon curves
ed theoretically, 4-w but the most common source of this
curve is experimental measurement. . The ratio of vis-
cous to local capillary forces is the capillary number, N,. 1
one form of which is
N,. =N ,, p ,,,/u,,.<, . (8)
For a waterflood, u,,. and p,,, are the superficial flux and
viscosity of the displacing water, and u,!(, is the IFT be-
tween the water and oil phases. For a MP flood a more
general definition is appropriate, but Eq. 8 and the CDC
can illustrate this case also.
The CDC is a nearly horizontal plateau at small N, un-
til a critical value above which both residual phase satu-
rations decrease. At a second critical N,.. the residual
phase saturations are zero and complete recovery of the
47-10 PETROLEUM ENGINEERING HANDBI 30K
Fig. 47.12-Schematic of an MP flooding process.
originally trapped phase occurs. The shape of the CDC
is determined by the pore geometry of the medium and
the wetting behavior of the two phases. The wetting phase
rcquircs a larger N,. for complete recovery. To a lesser
extent. the CDC shape is affected by the mean pore size
and pore size distribution of the medium. and the initial
saturations. Typical N, s for watertlooding are quite
small. which indicates that ROS and S,,, may be assumed
constant for this purpose (XC Fig. 47. I I). Because of the
logarithmic .Y axis. a decrease by several factors of IO in
N, is necessary IO significantly change either residual
phase saturation. Ofthc three quantities in Eq. 8 only the
IFT can be changed this drastically; a typical value for
causing good ROS reduction is in the range of IO
dyne/cm. a value that can be obtained only with a good
aurfactant.
Fig. 47.13-Schematic of the CMC
IMP Flooding
MP flooding has appeared in the technical literature un-
der many names: detergent. surfactant, low-tension. solu-
ble oil. microemulsion. and chemical flooding. There are
also several company names that imply a specific sequence
and type of injected fluids as well as the specific nature
of the oil-recovering MP slug itself. Though there are
differences among company processes. the common
aspects are more numerous and important.
An idealized version of a MP flooding sequence is in
Fig. 47.12. The process is applied invariably to tertiary
floods (those producing at high WORs) and is always im-
plemented in the drive mode (not cyclic or huff n puff).
The complete process consists of the following.
Prejlush. A volume of brine whose purpose is to change
(usually lower) the salinity and hardness of the resident
brine so that mixing with the surfactant will not cause the
loss of interfacial activity. Pretlushcs have ranged in size
from 0 to 100% of the reservoir PV. In some processes
a sacrificial agent is added to lessen the subsequent sur-
factant retention and also to precipitate divalent cation.
MP Slug. This volume. ranging from 5 to 40% PV in
field applications. contains the main oil-recovering agent.
the prituut:\~ surfactant, in concentrations ranging from I
to 20 ~0170. Several other chemicals (cosurfactants. al-
cohols. oil. polymer. biocide, and oxygen scavcnger) are
usually necessary for good oil recovery.
LJ40~i~i~ Buffeer. This fluid is a dilute solution of a
water-soluble polymer whose purpose is to drive the MP
\lug and banked-up fluids to the production wells. Much
of polymer flooding technology carries over to dcsign-
ing and implcmcnting the mobility buffer.-18
Freshwater Buffer. This i\ a volume of brine contain-
ing a concentration of polymer grading between that of
the mobility buffer at the front end and zero at the back.
The gradual concentration decrease mitigates the effect
of the unfavorable mobility ratio between the chase water
and mobility buffer.
CHEMICAL FLOODING
Chase Water. The purpose of the chase water is sirn-
ply to reduce the expense of continually injecting poly-
mer. If the mobility and freshwater buffers have been
designed properly. the MP slug will be dcplcted before
it is penetrated,by the chase water.
Surfactant Solutions. If an anionic surfactant is dissolved
in brine, the surfactant disassociates into a cation and a
monomer. If the surfactant concentration then is increased,
the lipophilic portions of the surfactant begin to associate
among themselves to form aggregates or micelIes contain-
ing several monomers each. A plot of surfactant monomer
concentration vs. total surfactant concentration (Fig.
47.13) is a curve that begins at the origin, increases with
unit slope, then levels off at the critical micelle concen-
tration (CMC). Above the CMC all further increases in
surfactant concentration cause increases only in the micelle
concentration. CMCs are typically quite small (about
10 - to IO p4 mol/L). At nearly all practical concentra-
tions for MP flooding the surfactant is predominantly in
the micellc form; hence. the name micellar/polymer flood-
ing. The representations of the micelles in Fig. 47.13 and
elsewhere are schematic. The actual micelle structures can
take on various forms, which can fluctuate with time.
When this solution contacts an oleic phase (the term
olcic indicates that this phase can contain more than
oil) the surfactant tends to accumulate at the intervening
interface. The lipophilic tail dissolves in the oleic phase,
and the hydrophilic in the aqueous phase. The accumula-
tion at the intcrfacc causes the IFT between the two phases
to lower. The extent of the IFT lowering is proportional
to the cxccss surface concentration of the surf;lctant-the
difference between the surface and bulk surfactant
concentration-from Gibbs theory. as was the case in Fig.
47.X. The surfactant itself and the attending conditions
should bc adjusted to maximize the excess surface con-
cent]-ation; however, in doing so the solubility of the sur-
tactant in the bulk oleic and aqueous phases also is
affected. Since this solubility also impinges on the mutu-
al volubility of brine and oil, which also affects IFTs,
this discussion leads naturally to the topic of surfactanti
brine/oil phase behavior. Curiously, and this is true of
many micellar properties. the surfactant concentration it-
self plays a rather minor role in what follows, compared
with the temperature. brine salinity, and hardness.
SurfactantlBrineiOil Phase Behavior. Surfactanti
hrinc/oil phase behavior is illustrated conventionally on
a ternary diagram. A ternary diagram is an equilateral
triangle whose apexes represent pure components. bound-
arlcs represent two-component mixtures, and interior rep-
resents three-component mixtures. For complicated
mixtures the three apexes must represent pseudocom-
poncnts whose composition remains constant through-
out the diagram. The pressure and temperature are also
fixed. The diagram can represent both the overall com-
position of a surfactantibrineioil mixture. and the equi-
librium composition of each phase if the mixture forms
more than one phase. Tcrnarica and their accompanying
definitions are discussed in Chap. 23.
MP phase behavior is affected strongly by the salinity
of the brine pseudocomponent. Consider the sequence of
phase diagrams (Figs. 47.14 through 47.16) as the brine
salinity is incrcaxcd. The phase behavior about to bc dc-
1
_(
I
S
WA TEf? EXTERNAL
A
EXCESS
hffCROE~LS/ON 011
I
47-11
OVERALL
0
COMPOSITtW
Fig. 47.14-Schematic of low-salinity surfactantlbrineioil phase
behavior.
scribed was presented originally by Winsor and adapted
to MP flooding later.50.5
At low brine salinity, a typical MP surfactant will ex-
hibit good aqueous (water-rich) phase solubility and poor
oleic (oil-rich) phase solubility. Thus, an overall compo-
sition near the brine/oil boundary of the ternary will split
into two phases: an e,xcess oil phase that is essentially pure
oil and a (water-external) rnicroemulsio~~phase that con-
tains brine surfactant, and some solubilized oil. The solu-
bilized oil occurs when globules of oil occupy the central
core of the swollen micelles. The tie lines within the two-
phase region have a negative slope. This type of phase
environment is called variously a Winsor Type I system.
a lower-phase microemulsion (because it is more dense
than the excess oil phase), or a Type II system. The lat-
ter terminology is adopted here-11 means that no more
than two phases can (not necessarily will) form and (-)
means that the tie lines have negative slope (Fig. 47.14).
The right plait point in such a system. PK. usually is lo-
cated quite close to the oil apex. Any overall composi-
tion above the binodal curve is single phase.
For high brine salinities (Fig. 47. IS) electrostatic forces
drastically decrease the surfactants solubility in the aque-
ous phase. An overall composition within the two-phase
Iregion now will split into an UUJ,S.\ hr-i/~c phase and an
47-12 PETROLEUM ENGINEERING HANDBOOK
SWOLLEN
MICELLE
-
Na+
Na+
NO+
COMPOSITION
Fig. 47.15-Schematic of surfactant/brine/oil high-salinity phase
behavior.
(oil-external) microemulsion phase, which contains most
of the surfactant and some solubilized brine. The brine
is solubilized through the formation of inverted swollen
micelles (Fig. 47.15) with brine globules at their cores.
The phase environment is a Winsor Type II system, an
upper-phase microemulsion, or a Type II( +) system. The
plait point, PI,. is now close to the brine apex.
The two extremes presented thus far are roughly mir-
ror images; note that the microemulsion phase is water-
continuous in the Type II( -) systems and oil-continuous
in Type II(+) systems. The induced solubility of oil in
a brine-rich phase, Type II( -). suggests an extraction
mechanism in oil recovery. Though extraction does play
some role. it is dwarfed by the IFT effect discussed later.
particularly when phase behavior at intermediate salini-
tics is considered.
At salinities between those of Figs. 47. I4 and 47.15.
there is a continuous change between Type II( -) and
II( +) systems and a third surfactant-rich phase is formed.
as shown in Fig. 47.16. An overall composition within
the three-phase region separates into excess oil and brine
phases as in the Type II(-) and II( +) environments. and
into a microemulsion phase whose composition is repre-
sented by an ;U~U~;LUU point. This environment is called
COMPOSITION
Fig. 47.16-Schematic of surfactant/brine/od phase behavior at
optimal salinity.
a Windsor Type III, a middle-phase microemulsion. or
a Type III system. Above and to the right and left of the
three-phase region are Type II( -) and II( +) lobes wherein
two phases will form as before. Below the three-phase
region there is a third two-phase region (as required by
thermodynamics) whose extent is usually so small that it
is neglected. In the three-phase region there are now
two IFTs between the microemulsion and oil, a,,,,, , and
the microemulsion and water, u,~~,,..
Fig. 47.17, a prism diagram, shows the entire progres-
sion of phase environments from Type II( -) to II( +).
The Type III region forms through the splitting of a criti-
cal tie line that lies close to the brine/oil boundary as the
salinity increases to C,, (low effective salinity limit for
Type III phase environment). 53 A second critical tie line
also splits at C,, (high effective salinity limit for Type
III phase environment) as salinity is decreased from a Type
II( +) environment. Over the Type III salinity range the
invariant point, M, migrates from near the oil apex to near
the brine apex before disappearing at the appropriate crit-
ical tie lines. The migration of the invariant point implies
essentially unlimited solubility of brine and oil in a sin-
gle phase, which has generated an Intense research in-
terest into the nature of the Type III microemulsion.
CHEMICAL FLOODING
Fig. 47.17-Prism diagram showing sequence of phase environment transition.
Several variables other than salinity can bring about the
Fig. 47.17 phase environment shifts. In general, chang-
ing any condition that enhances the surfactants oil solu-
bility will cause the shift from Type Il( -) to II( +). Some
of the more important are: (1) decreasing temperature, 5
(2) increasing surfactant molecular weight, (3) decreas-
ing tail branching, (4) decreasing oil specific
gravity55-57 and (5) increasing concentration of high-
molecular-weight alcohols. 58 Decreasing the surfactants
oil solubility will cause the reverse change. Thus, Fig.
47.17 could be redrawn with any of the above variables
(and several others) on the base of the prism with the vari-
able C,, (effective salinity) increasing in the direction of
increased oil solubility.
Nonideal Effects. In much the same manner as the ideal
gas law approximates the behavior of real gases, Fig.
47. I7 is an approximation to actual MP phase behavior.
Some of the more important nonidealities are as follows.
I. At high surfactant concentrations and/or at low
temperaturess.59 or even in the presence of pure surfac-
tants 6. phases other than those on Fig. 47.17 have been
L 3
observed. These phases tend to be high-viscosity liquid
crystals or other condensed phases. The large viscosities
are detrimental to oil recovery since they can cause local
viscous instabilities during a displacement. Frequently,
low- to medium-molecular-weight alcohols (cosolvents)
are added to MP formulations to melt these undesira-
ble viscosities. When the brine contains polymer. a con-
densed phase can be observed at low surfactant
concentration because of exclusion of the polymer from
the microemulsion phase. Cosurfactants can be used to
eliminate this polymerisurfactant incompatibility.
2. When cosurfactants are present it is frequently in-
appropriate to lump all of the chemicals into the surfac-
tant apex of the Fig. 47.17 prism. If the cosurfactants do
not partition with the primary surfactant during a displace-
ment the benefit of adding the chemical is lost; hence.
surfactanticosurfactant separation effects are important.
Efforts to account for the preferential partitioning of the
cosurfactant include a quaternary phase behavior represen-
tation and a pseudophase theory. 62.63
3. The Type III salinity limits (C,, and C,,) are func-
tions of surfactant concentration. This dependency may
be visualized by tilting the vertical triangular planes in
Fig. 47.17 about their bases. This dilution effecth.h5
forms the basis for the salinity requirement diagram de-
sign procedure. UJ The dilution effect is particularly
pronounced when the brine contains significant quanti-
ties of divalent ions.
4. The Fig. 47.17 phase-behavior shifts are specific to
the exact ionic composition of the brine. not simply to
the total salinity. For anionic surfactants. other anions in
solution have little effect on the MP phase behavior: how-
ever. cations readily cause phase-environment changes.
Divalent cations (calcium and magnesium are the most
common) are usually 5 to 20 times as potent as monova-
lent cations (usually sodium). Divalents arc usually pres-
ent in oilfield brines in smaller quantities than monovalents
as shown in Fig. 47.2, but their effect is so pronounced
that it is necessary, as a minimum. to separately account
for salinity and hardness. Nonconstant monovalentidiva-
lent ratios also will cause electrolyte interactions with clay
minerals through cation exchange. The disproportionate
effects of the salinity and hardness are accounted for by
defining a weighted sum of the monovalent and divalcnt
concentrations as an effective salinity. The C,.s in Fig.
47. I7 imply effective salinities.
Phase Behavior and IFT. Early MP flooding literature
contains considerable information about the techniques of
measuring IFTs and what causes them to be low. 6x
IFTs were found to vary with the types and concentra-
tion of surfactant, cosurfactant, electrolyte, oil, and poly-
mer and with temperature. However, in what was surely
one of the most significant advances in all of MP tech-
nology, all IFTs were shown to correlate directly with
the MP phase behavior. The correlation was proposed
originally by Healy and Reed, theoretically substantiat-
ed by Huh, 6y and since verified experimentally by sever-
al others. I. The practical benefit of this correlation is
that relatively difficult measurements of IFTs can be
largely supplanted by simple phase behavior measure-
ments. Indeed, in the recent literature, the behavior of
IFTs has been inferred by a narrower subset of phase-
behavior studies based on the solubilization parameter. hs
Fig. 47.18--Correlation of solubilization ratios with IFT.
1 4 1 1 I 1 1 I I 1 I L I I 1 I
0 0.4 0.6 1.2 I.6 2.0 2.4 2 .a 3.2
SALINITY, /o NoCI
Fig. 47.19-IFT and solubilization ratios
PETROLEUM ENGINEERING HANDBOOK
To investigate further the relation between IFTs and
phase behavior, let V,,, V,, , and V, be the volume frac-
tions of oil, brine. and surfactant in the microemulsion
phase, respectively. According to Figs. 47. I4 through
47.16, the microemulsion phase is present at all salini-
ties: hence. all three quantities are well-defined and con-
tinuous. Considering the Type II( -) behavior of Fig.
47.14, for example, V,,, V,,., and V,, are the coordinates
of the microemulsion phase composition on the binodal
curve.
Solubilization parameters between the microemulsion-
oleic phases, F,,,, , for Type II( -) and III phase behavior.
and between the microemulsion-aqueous phases. F,,,,,.. for
Type II( +) and III are defined as
F,,,,,=V,,iV, . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ..(9a)
and
F,,,,,.=l,,./l,. . . . . (9b)
The IFTs between the corresponding phases, u,,,(, and
u
,?lMr
are functions only of F,,, and F ,,,, ~. Fig. 47.18
shows a typical correlation.
The corresponding behavior of the solubilization pa-
rameters and IFTs are shown in Fig. 47.19 in a differ-
ent manner. Consider a locus at constant oil, brine, and
surfactant overall concentrations in Fig. 47. I7 but with
a variable salinity. If the nonideal effects are unimpor-
tant and the locus is at low surfactant concentration and
intermediate brine/oil ratios, (T,~(, will be defined from
low salinity up to C,,, and uInM. from C,,, to high salini-
ties. Both IFTs are the lowest in the three-phase Type
III region, between C,, and C,,, where both solubiliza-
tion parameters are also large. There is, further, a pre-
cise salinity where both IFTs are equal at values low
enough ( - 10 -3 dyne/cm) for good oil recovery. This
salinity is the optimal saliniv for this particular surfac-
tant/brine/oil combination and the common IFT is the op-
timal IFT. Optimal salinities have been defined on the
basis of equal IFTs, as in Fig. 47.19, equal solubiliza-
tion parameters, maximum oil recovery in corefloods, and
equal contact angles. 50*71~72 All definitions of optima1 sa-
linity give roughly the same value; hence, since optimal
phase behavior salinity is the same as maximum oil recov-
ery salinity, generating an interfacially active MP slug
translates into generating this optimal salinity in situ in
the presence of the surfactant material.
Generating Optimal Conditions. Historically there have
been three techniques for generating optimal conditions
in an MP displacement.
I. The MP systems optimal salinity can be raised to
that of the resident brine salinity in the candidate reser-
voir. This procedure philosophically is the most satisfy-
ing of the three design procedures given here and usually
the most difficult. Though it has been the sub.ject of in-
tensive research, surfactants that have high optimal sa-
linities that are not (at the same time) thermally unstable
at reservoir conditions, excessively retained by the solid
surfaces, or expensive have not yet been discovered. Field
successes with synthetic surfactants have demonstrated the
technical feasibility of this approach. however. 73 A scc-
CHEMICAL FLOODING 47-15
Fig. 47.20-Schematic of surfactant adsorption on metal oxide surface
ond way to make the optimal salinity of the MP formula-
tion equal to the resident brine salinity is to add
cosurfactant.
2. Resident salinity of a candidate reservoir can be lo-
wered to match the MP slugs optimal salinity. This is
the main purpose of the pretlush step illustrated in Fig.
37.12. A successful pretlush is appealing because. with
the resident salmtty lowered. the MP slug would displace
oil wherever it goes in the reservoir. Preflushes general-
ly require quite large volumes to lower the resident SB-
linity significantly owing to mixing effects and cation
exchange. 7.75 With some planning, the function of the
pretlush could be accomplished during the watertlood
preceding the MP flood.
3. The salinity gradient design attempts to dynamical-
ly lower the resident salinity to an optimum during the
displacement by sandvviching the MP slug between the
overoptimal rcsidcnt brine and an underoptimal mobility-
buffer salinity. hh.67 The \ucccss of this procedure relies
on it being necessary that only a portion of the MP slug
be in the active region for good oil rccovcry. For salinity
gradient tlonds the salinity of the mobility buffer is the
mot signiticant factor in bringing about good oil rccov
crv x The salinity gradient design has several other ad-
vanrazes in being rcstlient to design and process
unccrtaintics. in providing a favorable cnv~ironmcnt for
the polymer in the mobility buffer. minimizing retention.
and being relatively indifferent to the surfactant dilution
ctfcct.
Surfactant Retention. Surfactants are retained through
one of at least four mechanisms.
I, On metal oxide surfaces (Fig. 47.20) the surfactant
monomer will adsorb physically through hydrogen hond-
inp and micelle-like associations with the monomer tails.
and ionically bond vvith cationic surface sites (I). At
higher surtactant concentrations. C,. this association in-
clt~dc?~ tail-to-tail interactions with the solution monomers
with proportionally greater adsorption (II and Ill). At and
above the CMC (IV), the supply of monomers bccomcs
constant as does the retention (c, is the adsorbed surfac-
tant concentration).
2. In hard brines the prevalence of divalent cations
causes the formation of surfactantidivalent complexes,
which have a low solubility in brine. * Precipitation of
this surfactantidivalent complex will lead to retention.
When oil is present this effect is lessened by the surfac-
tams solubility in the oleic phase.
3. At hardness levels somewhat lower than those re-
quired for precipitation, the preferred multivalentisurfac-
tmt complex will be a monovalent cation that can
exchange chemically with cations originally bound to the
reservoir clays just as inorganic cations do.
4. In the presence of oil in a II( +) phase environment
the aurfactant will reside in the oil-external microemul-
sion phase. Because this region is above the optimal sa-
linity, the IFT is relatively large (Fig. 47.18) and this
phase and its dissolved surfactant can be trapped. A
similar phase trapping effect does not occur in the II( - )
environment because the aqueous mobility buffer misci-
bly displaces the trapped aqueous-external microemulsion
phase without permanent retention.
Most studies of surfactant retention have not made the
previously mentioned mechanistic distinctions; thercforc,
which mechanism predominates in a given application is
not obvious. All mechanisms retain more surfactant at
high salinity and hardness, which, in turn. can be attenu-
ated by adding cosurfactants. Precipitation and phase trap-
pin,g,can be eliminated by lowering the mobility buffer
salimty, at which conditions the chemical adsorption
mechanism on the reservoir clays is predominant. There-
fore. there should be some correlation of surfactant rctcn-
tion with reservoir clay content. Fig. 47.2 I is an attempt
to make this correlation by plotting laborator
2
and field
surfactant retention data against clay fraction. ) The cor-
relation is by no means perfect since it ignores variations
in MP formulation and clay type distribution as well as
salinity effects. HowevJer. the figure does capture a gener-
al trend that is useful for a first-order estimate of reten-
tion in a given reservoir.
47-16 PETROLEUM ENGINEERING HANDBOOK
0 LAB DATA
0 FIELD DATA
WEIQHT FRACTION CLAYS
Fig. 47.21-Surfactant retention and weight fraction of clays.
Fig. 47.22-MP production response from Well 12-l. Bell Creek
Pilot
Et?
0.6
0.4
h
0.2
0
0 0.2-0:4 0.6 0.8 1.0 1.2 1.4 1.6 1.8 2 0. 3.2
MOBILITY BUFFER SIZE ( VM~ 1
Recovery Efficiency vs. Mobility Buffer Size
Fig. 47.23--Recovery efficiencies from 21 MP field tests
A useful way to estimate the volume of surfactant re-
quired for an MP slug is through the dimensionless fron-
tal advance lag, FL).
1-o Pr c
FD=p----,
4 P,C,
(10)
where
FD = frontal advance lag, dimensionless,
p,. = density of rock, mass/volume rock,
p\- = density of surfactant slug, mass/volume
solution,
C, = concentration of surfactant, mass
surfactantimass solution, and
6, = retained surfactant concentration, mass
surfactant/mass rock (includes all forms
of surfactants).
F expresses the volume of surfactant retained at its in-
jected concentration as a fraction of the PV. For best sur-
factant usage, the volume of surfactant injected should
be large enough to contact all of the PV, but small enough
to prevent excessive production of the surfactant. There-
fore, the MP slug size, V,I,v, should be equal to or some-
what larger than FD.
Field Response. Fig. 47.22 shows the produced fluid
analyses of Well 12- 1 in the Bell Creek (Carter and Pow-
der River Counties, MT) MP flood. This tlood used a
high oil content MP slug preceded by a pretlush that con-
tained sodium silicate to lessen surfactant retention and
reduce divalent cation concentration. Well 12-l was a
producer in the center of a unconfined single 40-acre, five-
spot pattern. Further details on the tlood are available in
Refs. 47 and 82.
Before MP slug injection in Feb. 1979, Well 12-l was
experiencing low and declining oil cuts. MP oil response
beginning in late 1980 is superimposed on this decline,
reaching peak cuts of about 13% about 6 months later.
Note that. just as in polymer flooding, the pre-MP decline
must be clearly established for accurate evaluation of the
MP oil recovery. The surfactant is preceding the oil in
Fig. 47.22 because of an excessively large content of
water-soluble, inactive disulfonate in the MP slug. Simul-
taneous oil and surfactant production is a persistent fea-
ture of field MP floods, probably because of
heterogeneities and dispersive mixing. Other significant
features in Fig. 47.22 are the evident presence of the
pretlush preceding the MP slug, inferred from the maxima
in the pH and silicate concentrations. and the very effi-
cient removal of the calcium cations ahead of the sur-
factant.
Fig. 47.23 shows oil recovery efficiency, EK (in-
cremental oil recovered/OIP at start of MP process), from
a survey of more than 40 MP field tests correlated as a
function of mobility-buffer slug size. As of the date of
the survey there were no commercial projects reported.
Similar analyses on other process variables showed no
or weak correlation. X3 The strong correlation in Fig.
47.23 indicates the importance of mobility control in MP
design. Note also from this figure that ultimate oil
recovery efficiency averages about 30% in field tests.
CHEMICAL FLOODING
47-17
Performance Prediction. Generally. three things must
be achieved for efficient oil recovery. X4 ( I ) the MP sur-
factant slug must be propagated in an interfacially active
mode, (2) enough surfactant must be injected so that some
of it is unretained by the permeable media surfaces, and
(3) the MP displacement must be designed so that the ac-
tive surfactant sweeps a large portion of the reservoir
without excessive dissipation (because of dispersion) or
channeling.
Attaining the first goal is the result of formulation work
based on the phase-behavior concepts discussed previous-
ly. The extent to which the second and third goals are
satisfied depends on prevailing economics, which, in turn,
depends on the oil-recovering ability of the entire proc-
ess. The next few paragraphs describe a simple proce-
dure by which oil recovery and oil rate-time curves may
be estimated for an interfacially active MP process. Since
there are innumerable ways in which interfacial activity
may be lost. the procedure is most accurate for processes
that clearly satisfy the first design goal.
Recovery Efficiency. This procedure has two steps: es-
timating the recovery efficiency of an MP flood and then
proportioning this recovery according to in.jectivity and
fractional flow to give an oil rate-time curve. Space con-
siderations will limit many of the details, which may be
found in Ref. 80.
The recovery efficiency. ER, of an MP flood is the
product of a volumetric sweep efficiency, E. a displace-
ment efficiency. En, and a mobility buffer efficiency.
E MB
ER=EDEVEMB, . . . (11)
Each quantity must be calculated independently.
Displacement Efficiency. The displacement efficien-
cy of an MP flood is the ultimate (time-independent)
volume of oil displaced divided by the volume of oil con-
tacted.
S,,
ED=1 -p, . .(l2)
S
OM
where S,,, and S,,. are the ROS to an MP and water-
flood, respectively. S,,,,. must be known, but S,,, can
be obtained from a large slug (free from the effects of
surfactant retention) laboratory coreflood. Low values of
Sor
indicate successful attainment of good interfacial ac-
tivity in the MP slug. If coreflood results arent availa-
ble, S,,
may be estimated from a CDC by using a
field capillary number.
N,=0.565q~L,,y,~l(h~), .._.. ..(13)
where
N,. = capillary number, dimensionless,
q = injection/production rate,
CL 0
= oil viscosity,
h = net thickness, and
A = pattern area.
Eq. 13 is in consistent units. For screening purposes, as-
sume a controlling IFT of lop3 dyne/cm [ 1 pN/m]; the
CDC curve chosen to estimate S ,,r should be consistent,
Fig. 47.24-Relationship between MP volumetric sweep efficien-
cy, heterogeneity, and slug-size retention ratio.
as much as possible, with conditions of the candidate
reservoir.
Volumetric Sweep Efficiency. Volumetric sweep effi-
ciency, E v, is the volume of oil contacted divided by the
volume of target oil. EV is a function of MP slug size,
V ,,, , retention, FD, and heterogeneity based on the
Dykstra-Parsons coefficient, KDP. Fig. 47.24 shows this
relationship. KDP may be estimated from geologic study,
from matching the previous waterflood, or from core data
(a typical value would be 0.6). The FD is estimated from
Eq. IO on the basis of the retention level, C,, . surfactant
slug concentration, C,, porosity, and rock and fluid den-
sities. C, can come from a laboratory coreflood, Fig.
47.21 (if clay fraction is known), or by using C, =0.4
mglg as a default. L,,s and C,, are from the proposed
design.
MoKlity Buffeer Efficiency. The mobility buffer effi-
ciency, EBB, is a function of EV and KDP.
E,+,Be=0.71-0.6KDP, . . (l4a)
where EMBr is the mobility buffer efficiency extrapolated
to VM~=0 and VM~ is the mobility buffer volume, frac-
tion V,,. Eq. 14a was obtained from a numerical simu-
lation.
The recovery efficiency now may be calculated from
Eqs. 1 I through l4a. The reasonableness of the value may
be checked with Fig. 47.23.
Calculation of q,, vs. t Plot. The production function
(oil rate vs. time) is based on ER and the following proce-
dure. The dimensionless production function is assumed
to be triangular with oil production beginning at oil bank
arrival time, increasing linearly to a peak (maximum) oil
cut when the surfactant breaks through, and decreasing
linearly to sweepout time. The triangular shape is imposed
by the reservoir heterogeneity.
The first step is to calculate the dimensionless oil bank
and surfactant breakthrough times for a homogeneous lab-
oratory coreflood.
(14b)
II I I
b I
J
0 100 roe 300 400 500 WO 700
TIME. DAYS
Fig. 47.25-Comparison between predicted and observed oil
rate-ttme responses for the Sloss MP pilot.
t~,=l+F,-S,,,. , _. __ (14c)
where
t Lhh
= oil bank arrival time, dimensionless.
s ,,,, = oil bank saturation, fraction,
S,,, = initial oil saturation, fraction,
fr,,, = oil bank oil fractional flow. fraction.
f,,, = initial oil fractional flow, fraction. and
tLl\
= surfactant arrival time, dimensionless.
S,,h andf,,,, may be estimated from the oil/water relative
permeability curve as described previously in Refs. 80
and 85. or from laboratory experiment.
The second step is to correct these values for the heter-
ogeneity of the candidate reservoir by using an effective
mobility ratio. M,. where
(1%
The corrected breakthrough times are now
ttDoh =tDot,lMe . (16a)
and
tD,=tDs/Mc. (16b)
where tD(,,, is the corrected oil bank arrival time, dimen-
sionless, tlDr is the corrected surfactant arrival time.
PETROLEUM ENGINEERING HANDBOOK
dimensionloss. and the peak oil cut. ,f&. i,
M,,-M,, tl)r,h
c >
! ?
.fy,n =
tl)1
of,,--I)
,f;,,, (17)
The final step is to convert the dimensionless production
function to oil rate, yo. vs. time. t. This follows from
q,,=qf;, ---- (l&i)
and
t=V,,tD/q, . .(18b)
wheref,, is the oil cut. tD is the dimensionless time. and
.f;, and tn are any points on the triangular oil recovery
curve, which begins at (t,,/, ,f;,;). peaks at (tljA .f;,,,k).
and ends at (tn,t., 0). The dimensionless time at com-
plete sweepout, tD,,,,., is selected to make the arca un-
der thef;, -tlD curve equal to ER,
tD,,l.=tnoh +2E,$,,,.,,Jf;,,,,, (19)
A comparison of the results of this procedure with the
Sloss field MP pilot is in Fig. 47.25. Details of this match
and other matches are in the original references.
High-pH Processes
The final chemical flooding EOR process is high-pH
flooding (Fig. 47.26). As in polymer and MP flooding.
there is usually a brine preflush to precondition the reser-
voir, a finite volume of the oil-displacing chemical, a
graded mobility buffer driving agent. and the entire proc-
ess is driven by chase water. Moreover. for both high-
pH and MP flooding the oil-displacing chemical is a sur-
factant; however, for MP flooding the surfactant is in-
jected while in high-pH flooding it is generated in situ.
High-pH Chemistry
High pHs indicate large concentrations of the hydroxide
anions (OH -). The pH of an ideal aqueous solution is
defined as
pH= -log ioc, + , . . (20)
where the concentration of hydrogen ions, CH + , is in
mol/L. As the concentration of OH - is increased, the
concentration of Hi decreases, since the two con-
centrations are related through the dissociation of water,
K,,, = (
OH-)(CH+)
, . . . . . . . . . . . .
CH~O
(21)
and the water concentration is nearly constant. These con-
siderations suggest two means for introducing high pHs
into a reservoir: dissociation of a hydroxyl-containing spe-
cies or adding chemicals that preferentially bind hydro-
gen ions.
Many chemicals could be used to generate high pH. but
the most commonly used are sodium hydroxide (caustic,
NaOH). sodium orthosilicate. and sodium carbonate
(Na2C03). NaOH generates OH by dissociation: the
CHEMICAL FLOODING
47-19
Fig. 47.26-Schematic of high-pH flooding process
latter two through the formation of weakly dissociating
acids (silicic and carbonic acid, respectively) that remove
free H ions from solution. High-pH chemicals gener-
ally have been used in field applications in concentrations
ranging up to 5 wt% (in.jected pHs of 1 I to 13) and with
slug sizes up to 2O%PV. The resulting amounts of chem-
icals are quite comparable with the surfactant usage in
MP flooding: however, high-pH chemicals are substan-
tially less costly. This cost advantage must be discounted
by the historically lower oil recoveries in high-pH
flooding.
OH by itself is not a surfactant. since the absence of
a lipophilic tail makes it exclusively water-soluble. If the
crude oil contains an acidic hydrocarbon component,
HA,,. some of this, HA,,., can partition to the aqueous
phase where it can react. Xh
HA,,F-?A,;+H+. _. __ .
e-4
The exact nature of HA,, is unknown and probably highly
dependent on crude oil type. The deficiency of hydrogen
ions in the aqueous phase will cause the extent of this reac-
tion to be to the right. The anionic species A,; is a sur-
factant that can have many of the properties and enter into
most of the phenomena described above for MP flooding.
If there is no HA,, originally present in the crude. lit-
tle surfactant can be generated. A useful procedure for
characterizing crudes for their attractiveness to high-pH
flooding is through the acid number. The acid number
is the milligrams of potassium hydroxide (KOH) required
to neutralize I gram of crude oil. To make this measure-
ment, the crude is extracted with water until the acldlc
species HA is removed. The aqueous phase containing
HA,, , A,;, and H is then brought to pH=7 by adding
the KOH. For a meaningful value, the crude must be free
of acidic additives (e.g.. scale inhibitor) and acidic gases
(CO? or H?S). A good high-pH flooding crude will have
an acid number of 0.5 mgig or greater. but acid numbers
as low as 0.2 mgig may be candidates, since only a small
amount of surfactant is required to saturate oil/brine in-
terfaces. Fig. 47.27 presents a histogram of acid num-
bers based on the work of Jennings.87.8x
Displacement Mechanisms
Oil recovery mechanisms in high-pH flooding have been
attributed to eight separate phenomena. 89 This chapter
concentrates on only three: IFT lowering. wettability
reversal, and emulsion formation. The last two mecha-
nisms also are present in MP flooding but are dwarfed
by the low-IFT effect. With smaller ultimate oil recover-
ies, the distinction among effects becomes important in
high-pH flooding.
0 I 2 3 4 3
ACID INDEX INTERWL (E&Cl4 05mp. KOH/p RAf f i E)
Fig. 47.27-Histogram of acid numbers
47-20
PETROLEUM ENGINEERING HANDBOOK
1 M 0.26 wt. 46 NaCI
M 0.50 wt. % NaCI
A 1.00 wt. 16 N&I
IO
SOLUSILIZATION
Y
I-
\\
\\
z lOOr
\\
\\
E
\:
a
t
lo- -
IO- IO- IO-
WEIGHT % NaOH
IC
Fig. 47.28-IFTs for caustic/crude/brine systems
The generated surfactant, A ,, aggregates at oil/water
interfaces, which can lower IFT. 86 In general, such low-
ering is not as pronounced as in MP flooding but, under
certain conditions, can be large enough to produce good
oil recovery. Fig. 47.28 shows IFT measurements of caus-
tic solutions against Long Beach crude oil at various brine
salinities. The IFTs are sensitive to both NaOH concen-
tration and salinity, showing minima in the NaOH con-
centration range of 0.01 to 0.1 wt %. The decrease in IFT
in these experiments is limited by the spontaneous emul-
sification of the oil/water mixture when the IFT reaches
a minimum.
There are many similarities in the low-IFT effects in
MP and high-pH flooding. The data in Fig. 47.28 show
a clear resemblance to the data in the upper plot of Fig.
47.19 except they are plotted vs. NaOH concentration
(presumed proportional to A, concentration) instead of
salinity. This suggests an optimal salinity of about I .O
wt% NaCl for a 0.03 wt% NaOH solution. Indeed, the
work of Jennings et al. 87 has shown that there is an op-
timal NaOH concentration for a given salinity in oil recov-
ery experiments. Moreover, the presence of the
emulsification effect when IFTs are low is exactly what
one would expect from Fig. 47.17 at a surfactant con-
centration above the invariant point surfactant concentra-
tion. This suggests that the data in Fig. 47.28 showing
a Type II( -) phase environment at low NaOH concen-
trations are Type II(+) at high (similar to what would
be expected from the dilution effect in MP flooding). Fur-
ther work is necessary to establish the connection to MP
phase-behavior definitively, since the actual surfactant
concentration A; is likely to be much lower in a high-
pH system. However, Nelson PI a!. )( show that a cosur-
factant can increase the optimal salinity in a high-pH sys-
tem much like in MP systems.
See Chap. 28 for a discussion of wettability and its ef-
fects on petrophysical properties. Owens and Archery
showed that increasing the water wetness increased ulti-
mate oil recovery, where the wettability was reported as
decreasing the water/oil contact angle measured on
polished synthetic surfaces. This has also been shown by
others using high-pH chemicals.9.YX The increased oil
recovery is the result of two mechanisms: a relative per-
meability effect, which causes the mobility ratio of a dis-
placement to decrease, and a shifting of the CDC (see Fig.
47.1 I).
Cooke et al. 94 have reported improved oil recovery
with increased oil wetness. Other data show that oil recov-
ery is a maximum when the wettability of a permeable
medium is neither strongly water- nor oil-wet. )5 Given
the latter information, the important factor may be the
change in the wettability rather than the actual wettabili-
ty of the final state of the medium. In the original wet-
ting state of the medium, the nonwetting phase occupies
large pores and the wetting phase small pores. If the wet-
tability of a medium is reversed, there will be nonwet-
ting fluid in small pores and wetting fluid in large pores.
The resulting fluid redistribution, as the phases attempt
to return to their natural state, would make both phases
vulnerable to recovery through viscous forces.
High-pH chemicals can cause improved oil recovery
through the formation of emulsions. The emulsification
produces additional oil in at least two ways: through a
mobility ratio lowering since many of these emulsions
have a substantially increased viscosity and through
solubilization and entrainment of oil in a flowing aque-
ous stream. The first mechanism improves displacement
and volumetric sweep as do the mobility control agents
discussed previously. Local formation of highly viscous
emulsions should be discouraged, however, as these
would promote viscous fingering from the less viscous
oil-free high-pH solution. The solubilization and entrain-
ment mechanism would be more important when the IFT
between the swollen water phase and the remaining crude
is low. Fig. 47.28 shows that for certain conditions, emul-
sification and low IFTs occur simultaneously. McAuliffe
showed that emulsions injected in a core and those formed
in situ give comparable oil recoveries.96.97
Rock/Fluid Interactions
Interactions of the high-pH chemicals and the permeable
media minerals can cause excessive retardation in the
propagation of these chemicals throughout the permea-
ble medium. This chapter discusses three aspects of rock-
fluid interactions: formation of divalent/hydroxide com-
pounds, cation exchange, and mineral dissolution.
OH - ions themselves are not appreciably bound to the
solid surfaces; however, in the presence of multivalent
cations they can form hydroxyl compounds,
M +-+x(OH -)FiM(OH),,, (23)
which, being relatively insoluble, can precipitate from so-
lution. This reaction, in turn, lowers the pH of the solu-
tion, and also can cause formation damage through pore
CHEMICAL FLOODING 47-21
blockage and fines migration. The anionic surf&ant spe-
cies A,, can interact with the inorganic cations in solu-
tion just as in MP flooding; however, the interaction with
the divalent cations usually takes precedence, particular-
ly in hard brines (see Fig. 47.3) or where there are sub-
stantial quantities of soluble multivalent minerals. Because
of these interactions and those involving the surfactants
A ,;. high-pH processes are as sensitive to brine salinity
and hardness as are MP processes.
Other high-pH rock/fluid interactions are intimately as-
sociated with the clay minerals. Clays are hydrous alu-
minum/silicate compounds that occupy the smallest (less
than 2 microns) particle size in typical media. Macroscop-
ically. clays occur as segregated streaks of variable degree
of continuity throughout a typical reservoir, or as distrib-
uted clays. which can line pore walls or fill pore throats.
Distributed clays are of most concern here, since these
have quite large surface areas (15 to 40 mig clay), and
therefore can exhibit considerable reactivity. 9X Chemi-
cally, clays can take on a variety of formulas that differ
substantially in their reactivity even though the differences
in their molecular formulas are apparently minor.
The ability of a clay mineral to exchange divalent cat-
ions with an aqueous solution can drastically change the
ionic environment of a solution with which it is in con-
tact. Clays have excess negative charges caused by the
substitution of +2-valence minerals for +3-valence min-
erals within the octahedral or tetrahedral crystal lattice. 99
The cation exchange capacity, Zv, is a measure of this
excess negative charge; typical Zvs are I to 10 meqi 100 g
clay for kaolinite and 100 to 180 meq/lOO g clay for mont-
morillonite. These free anionic sites are covered with cat-
ions from the solution, each of which has a specific degree
of selectivity for the particular clay site. In general, H +
has high clay selectivity, and divalent cations are bound
more strongly than are monovalents. This means that the
anionic sites can be occupied predominantly by H+
and/or divalents even when clays are in contact with rela-
tively soft brines. Any subsequent change in the electro-
lyte environment of the contacting solution can cause the
clays to take or give up these cations with a possible
detrimental effect on high-pH (and MP) flooding.
H cations can exchange on the clay sites with the in-
jected sodium according to
clay-HfNa Sclay-NafH. .(24)
where clay represents a mineral exchange site. I) The
rcverxiblc reaction Eq. 24 will clearly cause the H con-
centration to increase with a resulting pH decline. Fig.
47.29 shows the extent of the OH - retardation caused
by cation exchange in laboratory tloods. Note that many
of the lower pHs may require more than 3 PV of fluid
in-jection to attain the injected pH.
Unlike MP flooding. high-pH chemicals can react
directly with clay minerals and the silica substrate to cause
consumption of OH ~ ions. The reactions with clays are
manifest by the elution of soluble aluminum and silica spe-
cies from core displacements. The resulting soluble
species subsequently can cause precipitates through
hydroxyl reactions as in Eq. 24. lo2 The rate of hydrox-
yl consumption from this slow reaction (cation exchange
is generally fast enough so that local equilibrium applies)
w
Fig. 47.29-Effluent histories pH from laboratory corefloods. Ex-
perimental curves are solid lines with points, theo-
retical results are dashed lines.
is determined by a dimensionless DamkGhler number,
ND,,
N,, =+k L/u,,., . . .(25)
where k is the reaction rate constant, time - , and L is
the medium length for a first-order reaction. ND, is the
ratio of the reaction rate to the bulk fluid rate. If all con-
ditions are equivalent between a laboratory experiment
and a prototype field flood, ND, clearly will be much
larger in the field than in the laboratory owing to the much
larger length scale. A larger ND, implies more reaction
relative to the residence time within the system. Thus,
it follows that the penetration distance-the distance
traveled by full-strength OH - ions-will be considera-
bly smaller in the field than in the laboratory. Bunge and
Radke, who illustrate this with several numerical calcu-
lations, caution against extrapolating laboratory-measured
values of OH - consumption to field cases unless the dis-
crepancies in ND, have been taken into account.
Field Results
High-pH field tests of articular interest include a wetta-
bility reversal test,
99
an emulsion flood,Y6 and a
polymer-driven flood. lo3 Fig. 47.30 shows the produc-
tion data from a high-pH flood conducted in the Whittier
field. 04 The crude oil was 20API with a 40-cp viscosi-
ty, and the 0.2 wt% NaOH chemical was injected as a
0.23.PV slug.
There are many features in these data that are common
to the responses of the other chemical flooding processes
in Figs. 47.6 and 47.22. The oil production rate declines
as the total fluid production increases, indicating a declin-
ing oil cut. The oil rate response to the caustic injection
is again superimposed on the waterflood decline, which
is extrapolated to estimate the IOR. (There are two water-
Hood decline curves in Fig. 47.28. one based on the ac-
tual decline and one based on computer simulation.) The
350,000 to 470,000 STB of oil produced by the caustic
injection was considered a success by the operators.
Table 47.3 shows a summary of data from complctcd
high-pH field floods. Note the wide range in reservoir
and oil characteristics and in oil saturation at the start of
the flood. IOR. expressed as a fraction of PV. ranges
from 0.0006 to 8.0. which translates into recoveries, ex-
pressed as a fraction of the OIP at the project start, that
47-22 PETROLEUM ENGINEERING HANDBOOK
TABLE 47.3-SUMMARY OF HIGH-pH FIELD TESTS
p. at
Residual Residual
Reservoir Reservoir
Temperature Temperature
Field, Location, Operator
Bradford, PA
iCP, ioF)
(Several tests by several
operators)
Southeast Texas (Exxon)
Harrisburg, NE (Amoco)
-
75 112
1.5 200
Northward-Estes, TX
(Gulf)
Singleton, NE (Sinclair)
Whittier, CA (Chevron)
2.26
15
40
115
120
Brea-Oltnda, CA (Umon) 90 135
Orcutt l-111, CA (Union) 17 to 60 140
arc comparable wjith but slightly smaller than those report-
ed from polymer floods (Table 47.1). Of equal impor-
tance is the STB of IOR produced per pound of chemical
in.jccted (0.015 to 0.43 in Table 47.3). This is substan-
tially lower than the polymer flood values; however. the
cost of the high-pH chemical is also substantially lower.
Summary
Fif. 47.3 I presents screening guides for the three major
chcmicul flooding processes presented in this chapter
bused on the work of Taber and Martin. I Though there
arc many other possible guidelines. the figure focuses on
three common reservoir parameters: oil viscosity at reser-
voir conditions. permeability. and depth. The guides are
intended as rules of thumb for candidate reservoir selcc-
tion and arc not substltutcs for detallcd reservoir eval-
uation.
Chemical flooding application usually is limited to
moderate to low oil viscosities because ofcconomics. As
the oil viscosity increases. more of the rcspcctibr: chem-
cal is rcquircd to attain food mobility control. This causes
a direct penality in chemical cost and an indirect penalty
in increased project life. Similar considerations place a
Oil
Saturation
at Project
Start
WI
Injection
Net Water
Porosity Thickness Salinity Depth
Wd ut) mm TW (ft)
60
40
watered
out
16 to 20
33 to 35
15
30
10
saline
300
1,250
5,900
64 206 36 850 3.140
40 16
- - -
(estimated)
watered out
51 30 137 fresh 1,500
hardness
(1)
Watered
- -
out
50 22.5 155 15,000 2,200
lower limit on the reservoir permeability. although in the
case of polymers used in polymer or MP flooding there
is a technical limit imposed by the inability to propagate
large molecules through very small pore spaces. Deep
reservoirs usually imply the ability to apply larger sur-
face pressures with accompanying increase in in,jcction
rates. This beneficial effect is offset by the susceptibility
of polymers to chemical degradation at elevated temper-
atures. High-pH processes arc also more reactive at high
tcmpcrature, which causes excessive consumption.
The information in Fig. 47.3 I suggest the avenues of
future development for chemical tlooding EOR processes:
( I) the development of more cost-effective chemicals such
as surfactants and polymers that are more salinity resis-
tant. have minimal retention. can be manufactured onsite.
or can be recyolcd. (2) development of more efficient de-
sign procedures such as applying MP technology to high-
pH flooding design, (3) removing technical limitations on
the use of water-soluble polymers. particularly as they
relate to temperature sensitivity, and (4) mot-c reliable pre-
diction techniques, particularly as they relate to risk esti-
mates. Each general area will continue to prompt
considerable research so that the economic viability of
chemical flooding will become commonplace.
0
1363 1964 7363 1366 7367 7363 1969 1370 ,371 1372 1971
Fig. 47.30-ProductIon response from the Whittier field high-pH flood
CHEMICAL FLOODING 47-23
TABLE 47.3~SUMMARY OF HIGH-pH FIELD TESTS (continued)
Type of
Chemical
Material
Na,CO,
Na,CO,
NaOH
NaOH
NaOH
NaOH
ortho-silicate
ortho-silicate
Acid
number
(w KOW
2.4 3.2
IOW 2.0
0.22
low
-
0.6
Chemical bbl
Concentration Ibm Recovery, incremental
Injection Slug Size chemical Fraction Oil per Ibm
(WWO) (O/o VP) (bbllbbl VP) PV Chemical
5.0
2.0
0.2
0.12
0.42
Nomenclature
A = pattern area
C,,, = low effective salinity limit
C
Cl,
= high effective salinity limit
C, = concentration of surfactant, mass
surfactantimass solution
6, = retained surfactant concentration. mass
surfactantimass rock (includes all of the
previously mentioned forms of
surfactants)
z C
= effective shear rate
e I;5
= shear rate when polymer solution viscosity
is % of high and low values, Eq. 3
EMI,
= mobility buffer efficiency
E MBC
= mobility buffer efficiency extrapolated
j;,/, = oil bank oil fractional flow, fraction
f;,, = initial oil fractional flow, fraction
flIL = peak oil cut
FD = frontal advance lag. dimensionless
F
I?,0
= solubilization ratios between the
microemulsionioleic phases
F
1,111
= solubilization ratios between the
microemulsioniaqueous phases
F,,: = permeability reduction factor
F, = resistance factor
FRI- = residual resistance factor
k,, = permeability to polymer solution
k,, = permeability to polymer-rich (water) phase
K = power-law coefficient
K IIp = Dykstra-Parsons coefficient
K,, = dissociation coefficient of water
M,, = effective mobility ratio
M* = shock mobility ratio
M" = endpoint mobility ratio
-
- - -
0.013 0.093 0.003 0.03
15 2.55 8.0 0.03
8 0.55 0.023 0.042
20 0.16 0 05 to 0.07 0.32 to 0 43
- - -
0.017 0.028 0.0006 0.015 to 0.030
OIL VISCOSITY - CENTIPOISE
AT RESERVOIR CONDITION
PERMEABILITY, md
DEPTH, FEET
Fig. 47.31-Comparative evaluation of reservoir parameters for
chemical flooding.
47-24
I, =
N, =
PI. =
P,q =
s ~
illi -
s,,i =
s I(,). =
s
0,II =
St, =
t ml/l =
t 'DO/~ =
t11\ =
t 'I).! =
I',, =
V
MB =
v,,, =
z,/ =
hi =
x(J =
A,, =
A,, =
X,,,, =
owl? =
tJ,l =
o-
cc,J -
m-
P,, -
CL\,. =
Pr =
P, =
u
,,l,i =
(-J,,rn =
u,ic, =
dimensionless time at complete sweepout
superficial flux of polymer-rich (water)
phase. Lit
superficial velocity of water phase
mobility buffer volume. fraction
MP slug size
cation exchange capacity
mobility of displaced fluid(s)
mobility of displacing agent(s)
mobility of polymer solution
mobility of water-rich phase
tnobility of water-rich phase after polymer
injection
mobility of water-rich phase before
polymer injection
apparent viscosity of polymer solution
polymer solution viscosity below some low
shear rate
polymer solution viscosity above the
critical shear rate
viscosity of the displacing water
density of rock. mass/volume rock
density of surfactant slug, mass/volume
solution
IFT between the microemulsion phase and
oil
IFT between the microemulsion phase and
water
IFT between the water and oil phases
Acknowledgments
Scvcral useful discussions with R.S. Schechter and G.A.
Pope are gratefully acknowledged.
References
4. Dyer. A.B Caudlc. B.H.. and Ertchwn. R A : Oil Productnw
r,ltcr Brcnhthrqh ah lnllucnccd hy ,Mobdity Ratio: J. PC/. kc II.
(Apnl 195-l) 27-32: T~,o/i\. AIME. 201
power-law exponent
capillary number. dimensionless
left plait-point designation
right plait-point designation
oil bank saturation, fraction
initial oil saturation. fraction
ROS to an MP flood
ROS to a waterflood
saturation of polymer-rich (water) phase
oil bank arrival time, dimensionless
corrected oil bank arrival time,
dimensionless
surfactant arrival time, dimensionless
corrected surfactant arrival time,
dimensionless
PETROLEUM ENGINEERING HANDBOOK
5. ClawJge. E.L. Predictwn (II Recwcry III Unstable Misihlc
Floodmg. Sot. PC/. F,ig. J. (Aprd 1977) 143-SS.
6. Reznik. A.A. 1 Enick. R.M.. and Punvclkcr. S B.: An Analyt-
xal Extemion otthe Dykstra-Parsons Verttcal Stratificatton DIS-
mete Solution to a Contnwous, Real-Tmw Basis. .5x. Per. Gr,q.
J. (Dec. 19X4) 64-56.
7. Dykstra. H. and Parsons. R L.: The Prediction of 011 Recov-
cry by Watertlood: Secondary Recovery of 011 m the United
State\. Bull.. API. Dallas (1950).
8. Johnson, C.E. Jr : Prediction of Oil Rccwcry by Waler Flood-
A Simplilied Graphical Treatment of the Dyk<tra~Parwns
Method. J. PH. i&. (No\ 1956) 55-56: Tranh., AIME. 207.
9. Zapata. V.J.. The Effects of Viscous Cro.raflow on Sharp Front
Displacements in Two-Layered Porous Medta. MS the\lh, U.
ol Texah, Austin (1979).
IO. Hearn. C.L.: Simulation of Stratified Waterfooding by Pwu-
do Relative Permeability Curve\. J. Per. TK/I. (July 197 I )
805-13.
I I. Dietr, D N : A Tlwrwcri~ol Approach 10 r/w Pr~hlrm o/
O~tn~rr~/~h~~ on Bdc~h~,y Erifir Wort~r. PUK. Ahad. van Weten-
whappen. Amsterdam (1953) 83-91
12. Buckley. S.E. and Lcverctt. M.S.: Mechanlvn rot FluId Di\-
placement m Sands. Tril,?\.. AlME 11942) 146. 107-16.
13. Needham. R.B.. Threlkeld. C.B.. and Gall, J W. Cwmol ot
Water Mobility Using Polymers and Multivalent Cation\. paper
SPE 4747 preented at the 1974 SPE Improwxi Oil Rectwcry Sym-
posium. Tulsa. OK. April 22-24.
14. Gash. B.H.. Griffith. T.D . and Ghan, A.F. Phaw Bchavwr
Etfccts on the Oil Displacement Mechamsms (11 Broad Equiis-
lent Weight Surlactant Systems. paper SPE 98 I2 prcww dl
the 1981 SPE Enhanced 011 Recovery Sympo\~um. Tula. OK.
April S%f.
IS. Wtllhite, G.P. and Domlnquez. J.G.: Mechanisms 01 Polymer
Retention in Porous Mcdiu. hprowd 01 Rr~o~vr) /?,I Surfuc
ran! tofd Polww Noocltriy. D.O. Shah and R.S. Schechter (cd\. ).
Academic Pres\ Inc., New Yorh City (lY77) 51 l-.55.
16. Wcllmgton. S.L.: Bwp,lymer Solutton Vtico\~ty Stabtliratton-
Polymer Degradation and Antioxidant Uw. Six.. PC,/. Etq J.
(Dec. 1983) 901-12.
17. Manmng. R.K., Pope. G.A.. and Lake. L.W.: A Technical Sw
vey of Polymer Flor,dtng Pro~ccta. Contract No.
DOEIBETCIl03?7-IO. U.S. DOE (Sept. lYX3).
18. Tsaur, K.: A Study ofPolymcr/Surfactant Interaction\ liw Micel-
lar/Polymer Floodlnp Application.. MS thwir. U. of Texaj.
Austin (1978).
IO. Martin. F.D.. Donaruma. L G . and Hatch. M J.: Develop-
mcnt ol Improved Mobllitg Control Agent\ ti,r SurtactantiPoly~
mtr Flooding. second annual report. Contract No
DOE/BC/OO047-13, U.S. DOE IOct. I9801.
20. Tinker. G.E Bowman. R.W . and Pope. G A.. Deternnnauon
of In-Smt Mobility and Wellhore Impairment From Polymer In-
jcctivity Data. .I. PH. Td. (May lY76) ~586-96.
21. Sacins. J.G.: Non-Newtonian Flow Through Porous Morct~-
al\. Ind. and Eng. Chcm I 1061)) 61. No, IO. 1X-47.
22. Meter. D.M., and Bard. R.B : Tube FIw (11. Non~Ncwn~ian
Polymer Solutions. Part\ I and 2-Lammar Flw and Rheulugl-
cd Mtxlels. A/C/,E ./. (No\. 1964) X7X-81 and 1143~50.
23. Duda. J.L.. Klaus. E.E.. and Fan. S.K.: lnllucnce oIPolynw
Molecule-W,dI Intcract~on~ on MoblIlt) Cunt~~~l. .5x. P<,r. Tory
J (Ott 1981) 613-Z
2-t. Jcnninp\. R.R., Rogers, J.H . and Wc>r. T.J Factorz Inilw
encing Moblllty Control By Polqmcr S~~lut~on\. J. /cr. TK/I.
(March 1971) 391-401. T/r,w.. AIME. 251.
7.5. Hlrasahi. G.J. and Pope. G.A : Analy\i\ of F&%x\ Intluencq
Mobility and Adwrption in the Flow OF P[,I)mcr Solution Throu:rh
Porow Media. Sor, Per. i?r,v. J. (Aug. 19741 337-46.
76. Shupc. R.D.: Chcmad Stahllity of Poly.srylamidc Polymct-\.
J. PC,/. Tdi. (Aug. I981 ) Ii 13-79.
27. Maerher. J.M.: Mechanlcul Defrnd;mon\ 01 Purtlnll) Hydra-
lyrcd Polyacrylatnidc Solutnw m Unc~n~wl~dated Porou\ ML-
dia. So. Per. k-q,. J. (Aug. lY76) 177-7-1.
2X. Sertght. R.S.: The Eltect\ ot Mechamcal Deqrdatton and Viwo~
&\IIC Behavior on In,jcctivq ~~lP~~I)acrj lam& Solutwn~. .Sfx
PC/. L-q. J. (June 19X3) J75-XS.
20. Clampttt. R.L. and Reid. T.R : An Econwmc Pol~murllwxJ
in the North But-hnnh Unit, 0+x Cwnt>. Ohlahotnn. papcl
SPE 5552 preenccd at the 1075 SPE Annual Technical ConI&-
cncc and Exhthitlon. Dallas. Scpt 7X-Oct. I.
CHEMICAL FLOODING
3 I, Gractaa. A.. (I trl.: Criterta for Structurmg Surlactant~ to Max-
imILe Solubilizatton ot Oil and Water: Part I-Commerelal Non-
hllC~. SOCK. Pet. Or,y. 1. (Oct. 1982) 743-49.
32. Bar&at. Y. <f I// : . Crttcrta for Structuring Surtactant\ to Max-
ttntzc Solubilization of 011 and Water. J. Cdlortl Irrterfirw Sri.
(1983) 92, No. 2. X-74.
33. Ovcrbcek. .I. Th. G: Colloidh and Surface Chemistry. A Self-
Study SuhJect Guide. Part 2. Lyophobic Cotloids, 6lt//.. Center
for Advanced Engineermg Study and Dept. of Chemtcal Engi-
neering. Ma\sachusett\ Inst. of Technology. Camhtidge. MA
(1972).
34. Patton. J.T.. (I ol. Enhanced Oil Recovery by CO z Foam
Flooding. tinal report, Contracr No DOEiMC/O325Y-15. U.S.
DOE (April 1982)
3.5. Khan. S.A.: -The Flow of Foam Through Porous Media. MS
thests. Stanford U.. Stanford. CA (1965)
36. Fried. A.N.: The Foam-Drive Procr\\ tnr Increasing the Recov-
cry d Oil. Report of Invcstigattons 5866. U.S. Dept. of the
lnlerior (IYM))
37 Bernard. G.G. and Helm. L.W.: Effect of Foam on Pcrmea-
hihty of Porous Media to Gas. Snc. Prr. En,is. J. (Sept. 1964)
267-72: Trtrric.. AIME. 231.
38. Bernard. G. G.. H&n. L.W.. and Jacob\. W.L.. Effect of Foam
on Trapped Gas Saturation and on Pcrmcahiltty of Porous Me-
dia to Water. SIX.. Per. &. J. (Dec. 1965) 2Y5-300: Trwts..
AIME. 234.
39. Holbrook. S.T.. Patton, J.T.. and Hhu, W.: Rheology ot
Mohtltty-Control Foam\, Srx. Per Oz,q J. (June 1983) 456-60
40. Hirasaki. G.J. and Lawon. J.B.: Mechanisms of Foam Flow
in Pornw Media: Apparent Viwosity m Smooth Captllartes.
So<.. Per. Gtg, J. (April 1985) 176-90.
41. Helm. L.W.: Foam InJectton Test m the Stggtns Field. Illrnot~.
J Pet. Td?. (Dec. 1970) 1499-1508.
42. Larwn. R.G.. Scrrven. L.E , and Davts. H.T.: Percolation Thc-
ory ot Residual Phases in Porous Media. N~~tr#re (lY77) 268,
409-13.
43. Stcgemeter. G.L.: Mechanisms ot Entrapment and Mohtltra-
bon of Oil in Porous Media. hnprowtl Oil R~cowry hx Surfiw
1~111, and Polwler F/00&~. D.O. Shah and R.S. Schechter (eds )
Academic Press. New York City (1977) 55-93.
44. Mohanty, K K. and Salter. S.J.: Multiphase Flow in Porous
Media: Part 3-Oil Mobilization. Transverse Dispersion. and Wet-
tuhtlity, paper SPE 12127 presented at the 1983 SPE Annual
Technical Conference and Exhihition. San Francisco. Oct. S-8.
45. Larson. R.G.: From Molecules to Reservoirs. Problems in En-
hanced Oil Recovery. PhD dissertation. U. ofMtnnesota, Min-
neapoli\ (1980).
46. Catnilleri. D.: Micellar/Polymer Flooding Experiments and
Compartson with an Improved I-D Simulator. MS thesis. U.
of Texas, Austin (1983).
47. Helm. L.W.: Design. Performance and Evaluatton of the
Unitlood Micellar-Polymer Process-Bell Creek Field, paper
SPE I I196 prewntcd at the 1982 SPE Annual Techntcal Con-
ference and Exhibition. New Orleans. Sept. 26-29.
48. Goparty. W B Meabon. H.P.. and Milton, H.W. Jr.: Mobil-
ity Control Dc\ign for Miscible-Type Waterflood\ Using Mtcel-
Jar Solutions. J. Per. Tdz. (Feb. 1970) 141-47.
49. Wmsor. P. A, : .!Xwtr Propmrev rfAmphiphi/ic Contppo~rnrl.~. But-
terworth\. London (1954).
50. Healy. R.N.. Reed. R.L., and Stenmark. D.G.: Multiphase
Microemulston Systems. Sot. Per. Gtg. J. (June 1976) 147-60.
51. Nelw, R.C.. and Pope. G.A.: Phase Relationships tn Chem-
cat Floodtng. SM. PH. 01g. J. (Oct. 197X) 325-38.
52. Anderwn. D.F., et a/ : Interfacial Tension and Phase Behavior
tn Surfactant-Brine-Oil Systems. paper SPE SE I I. presented at
the 1976 SPE Symposium on Improved Oil Recovery. Tulsa.
March 22-24.
S3. Bennett, K.E., CI al.: Microemulsion Phase Bchavior-
Observations. Thermodynamic Essentials, Mathematical Sum-
lation. So<.. Per. &,g. J. (Dec. 1981) 747-62.
54. Scrtven. L.E.: Equilibrium Bi-Continuous Structures. M&l-
/i:atlon. So/uhi/&~tion, and Micrmvd~ion.~, K.L. Mittal (ed.).
Plenum Press. New York City (1976).
5s.
56.
57
58
s9.
60
61.
62.
63.
64.
65.
47-Z
Puerto. M.C. and Reed. R.L Three~Paratnrter Representation
of Surfactant/Oil/Brme Interaction. So<~ Per. E/II+ J. (Aug.
1983) 669-82.
Caytas. J.L. (I nl.: Modelling Crude Oils for Lo\s Intcrfact,~l
Tension. Sock. Pet. Dl,g. J. (Dec. 1976) 3Sl&S7.
Nelson. R.C.: The Effect of Live Crude on Phase Behavior and
Oil-Recovery Effictcncy of Surfactant Floodmp Systems. Si~c,.
Per. G,,y. .I. (June 1983) 501-10.
Salter. S.J.: The lntlucnce 01 Type and Amount of Alcohol on
Surfactant-Oil-Brine Phase Behavior and Propertie\. paper SPE
6X43 pwented at the 1977 SPE Annual Technical Contcrence
and Exhtbttion. Denver, Oct. 9-12.
Hcaly. R.N. and Reed, R.L.: Physrcochcmical Aspect, 01
Microemulsion Floodmg. Sot Per. Eyq. J (Oct. 1974)
49l-SOI; Twos , AIME, 257.
Salter. S.J.: Opttmizing Surfactant Molccul;tr Weight Dt\tri-
bution: 1. Sulfonatc Phase Behavior and Phy+zll Properties.
paper SPE 12036 presented at the 1983 SPE Annual Technical
Conference and Exhibition. San Franctwo. Ott 5-X.
Trushenshi. S.P.: MicelIar Flooding: Sulfonate-Polymer Intcr-
uctton. . Ir~tpr~wrl Oil Rccow Y /J) SL~I$KI~IIZ~ r~utl Po/wwr F/ad
i/)x. D.O. Shah and R.S. Schcchter (cd\.). Academrc Press. Ncb
York City (1977) 555-75.
Salter. S.J.: Selection ofPheudo~Comp,nents in Surfactant-Oil-
Brine-Alcohol Systems. paper SPE 7056 prcscnted at the 1978
SPE Improved Oil Recovery Symposium. Tulsa. OK. Aprtl
16-19.
Hirasaki. G.J.: Interpretation ofthe Change in Optimal Salmtty
with Overall Surfactant Concentration. Sot. Pcv. E/IX. J. (Dec.
1982) 971-82.
Clover. C.J. (I cl/.: Surfactant Phase Behavior and Retention
in Porous Media. Sot. Per. Eqq. J. (June 1979) 183-93.
Bourrel. M. et (I/.: Properttes of AmphiphileiOrliWater Sys-
tems at an Optrmum Formulation Ihr Phase Behavtor. paper SPE
7450 presented at the 1978 SPE Annual Tcchntcal Conterence
and Exhibition. Houston, Oct. l-4.
66. Nelson, R.C.: The Saltnity Rcqutrcment Dtagram-A Usetul
Tool in Chemical Flooding Research and Development. So<,.
PP(. 0)~. J. (April 1982) 259-70.
67. Hirasaki. G.J.. van Domwlaar, H.R.. and Nelson. R.C.: Eval-
uatton of the Salinity Gradient Concept in Surfactant Flooding.
Sk. Per. EHR. J. (June 1983) 486-500.
68. Cayias, J.L., Schechter. R.S , and Wade. W.H.: The Meas-
urement of Low lnterfnctal Tension via the Spinning Drop Tech-
nique. Ad,wrprion UI Intrrf~~ws, L.K. Mittal (ed.). Symposium
Series. ACS (1975) No. 8. 1231-39.
69. Huh, C.: Interfacial Tensions and Solubili,@ Ability of a
Microemulsion Phase that Coexists with Oil and Brine. .I Co/-
loid I~~~filcr Sci. (1979) 71. No. 2, 408~26.
70. Glinsmann, G.R.: Surfactant Flooding with Mtcroemulsions
Formed In-situ-Effect of011 Characteristtca. paper SPE 8326
presented at the 1979 SPE Annual Technical Conference and Ex-
hibition. Las Vegas. Sept. 23-26.
71. Reed, R.L. and Healy. R.N.: Some Physico-Chemical Aspects
of Mtcroemulsion Flooding, A Review. Irnprow~l 0ii RKUI~
cry hi Sur$mcrm md Po/wwr Flooding. D.O. Shah and R.S.
Schechter (eds.). Academic Press. New York City (1977)
383-438.
72. Reed. R.L. and Healy. R.N : Contact Angles for Equtlihrated
Microemulsion Systems. Ser. Pet. Erq J. (June IY84) 342-50.
73. Bragg. J.R. et al.: Loudon Surfactant Flood Pilot Teht. paper
SPE 10862 presented at the 1982 SPE Enhanced Oil Recovery
Symposium, Tulsa, April 4-7.
74. Lake, L.W. and Helfferich. F.: Catton Exchange tn Chemical
Flooding Part 2-The Effect of Dtspersion, Catton Exchange.
and PolymerISurfactant Adsorpbon in Chemical Flood Environ-
ment. Sw. Per. Ot,e. J. (Dec. 1978) 435-44.
75. Pope. G.A.. Lake, L.W., and Helffertch. F G : Catton
Exchange in Chemical Floodmg, Part I-Basic Theory Without
Dtsperston. Sot. Per. f31,q. J. (Dec. 1978) 418-34.
76. Paul. G.W. and Froning. H.R.: Salinity Effects of Mtcellar
Flooding, J. Per. Tech. (Aup. 1973) 957-58.
77. Harwell, J.H.: Surfactant Adsorption and Chromatographic
Movement with Application in Enhanced Oil Recovery. PhD
dtssertation. U. of Texas, Austin (1983).
47-26 PETROLEUM ENGINEERING HANDBOOK
79 Hill. H J. and L&c. L.W.: Cation Exchanee ,n Chcnucal Flwtl-
lng: Part .i-Experimental. So< PC/. &q. J . (Dec. 1978)
345-56.
X0. Paul. G.W. (I crl A Slmpllficd Predictive Model lor M~ccl-
IwPolymer Floodmg. paper SPE 1073.1 prewnted at the 1982
SPE Cal~fomia Resmnal Meeting. San Francwx~. March 24-26.
XI L&c. L.W.. Stock. L.G., and Lawson. J.B.: Screening E\ti-
mation of Recovery Efficiency and Chemical Reyulremcnt\ for
Chemical Fiotrding. paper SPE 706Y prtxnted at the 197X SPE
lmprovcd 011 Recover) Symposium. Tuls,~. OK. April l6- IY.
87 Aho. G.E and Bush. J.: Rc\ult\ olthe Bell Creek Unit A
MIcelIar Polymer Pilot. paper SPE I II95 prerentcd at the 1982
SPt Annual Technical Conference and Exhlhitwn. Ncu Orlcdn\.
Sept. 26-20.
Xi Lake. L W. and Pope. G.A. Statu5 of Mwllar-Polymer biekl
Tat\. Prr. G?q /n,/. (Nov. 1979) 51. 3X-60.
X4 ChIliland. H.E. and Conley. F.R.: Surrktanl Waterllwlinp.
paper presenccd xt the 1975 Sympwium on Hydnrarbon Eupk-
r&m. Drillq. and Productwn. Paris. France. Dee IO- I?.
85. Pope. G.A. The Apphcatmn of Fractlonul Flow Thcq to En-
hanccd Oil Rccorery. .%c PC,. Cr,q. ./. (June 1980, 191~205.
X6. R:lm;&ri\hnan. T.S. and Wassan. D.T : A Model for Inta%xd
Activity ol Au&c CNde Od/Caustlc System\ tar Alkdlinc Flood-
mg. S/K Per. hg. J . (Aug. 1983) 602m I?.
87. Jenning\. H.Y. Jr.. Johnxm. C.E. Jr and McAullffc. C.D.: A
Caustic Waterlloodlnp Procw for Heavy Oil\. /. PI,,. T&.
I Dee 1974) 1344-52
90 Nelson.R.C. er rrl.: .Courfact;nt-Enhanced Alhnlinc Flood-
me. paper SPE 12672 prcscntcd at the 1984 SPE Enhnnccd 011
R&very Sympowm. ?ulsa. April I5m I X.
91. Owens. W.W. and Archer. D.L.: The Effect of Rock Wetta-
hility on Oil-Water Relatwe Permeability Relationships, J . Per.
Twh. (July 1971) X73-78: kiwis.. AIME. 251.
floodmg tar Wettahility Alteration-Ev;llu;ltinF a Potential F&l
Application. J. Pcl. 7&. (Dec. 197-I) I33533.
Y4. Cooke. C.E. Jr.. Williams, R.E.. and Kolodz~e. P.A.: Oil
Recovery by Alkalme Waterflooding, J. Per. Twh. (Dec. 1974)
1344-52.
95. Lorenz. P.B.. Donaldson. EC. and Thornag. R.D: U\e ol
Centrifugal Measurcmentr of Wettahility to Predict Oil Rcco%-
cry. Bull. RI 7873. U.S. Dept. of Interior (lY741.
Y6. McAul~ffc, C.D.: Oil-in-Water Emulsions and Their Flow Prop-
erties in Porous Media. J . Pet. Tech. (June 1973) 727-33.
97. McAuliffe. C.D.: Crude-Oil-in-Water Emulww To Improve
Fluid Flaw in an 011 Reaervnir. J . Per. 7i~Ir (June 1973)
721-26.
98. Grim. R.E.: C/ov Mir~ercrir~~qv, McGraw-Hill Booh Co. Inc.. Nrw
York City (1968)
99. Brownkw. A.H. : Gwr~/~er~~rrrrv. Prentice-Hall. Inc.. Englavood
Cliffs, NJ (1979).
100. Somerton. W.H. and Rndke. C.J.: Role of Clays in the En-
hanced Recovery of Petroleum from Some California Sands.
J. PC/. Ted. (March 1983) 643-54.
101. Bunpe. A.L. and Radkc. C.J : Migratmn of Alkalme Pulvx
in Raervoir Sands. Sot. I<>/. Org. J . (Dee 19x1) 9YX~IOIZ.
102. Sydansk. R.D.: Elevuted-Temperature Castic&mdstonc In-
teraction: Implications for Improving Oil Recovery. Sot,. PO/
E/q. J . (Aug. 1982) 453-62.
103. Sloat. B. and Zlomke. D.: The Isenhnur Unit-A Unique
Polymer-Augment Alkaline Flood, paper SPE I07 Ii) praent-
ed at the 1982 SPE Enhanced Oil Recovery Symposium. Tulsa,
OK. April 4-7.
104. Grwe. D.J. and Johnson. C.E. Jr.: Field Trial of Caustic Flood-
ing Process. .I. Per. TX/I. (Dec. 1974) 1353-.5X.
105. Mayer. E.H.. (1 (I/.: Alkaline InjectIon for Enhanced Oil
Recowx-A Status Report. J . PC/. T~I. (Jun. 1983) 209-21.
106. Taher. J.J. and Martin. F.D.: Tcchmcal Screening Guidcr for
Enhanced Oil Recovery paper SPE I2069 presented at the I983
SPE Annual Technical Conference and Erhihitlon. San Francisco.
Oct. s-x.
Chapter 48
Reservoir Simulation
K.H. Coats, Scientific Software-Intercom
Introduction
Websters dictionary defines simulate as to assume the
appearance ofwithout the reality. Simulation of petroleum
reservoir performance refers to the construction and
operation of a model whose behavior assumes the ap-
pearance of actual reservoir behavior. The model itself
is either physical (for example, a laboratory sandpack)
or mathematical. A mathematical model is simply a set
of equations that, subject to certain assumptions, describes
the physical processes active in the reservoir. Although
the model itself obviously lacks the reality of the oil or
gas field, the behavior of a valid model simulates (assumes
the appearance of) that of the field.
The purpose of simulation is estimation of field per-
formance (e.g., oil recovery) under one or more produc-
ing schemes. Whereas the field can be produced only
once, at considerable expense, a model can be produced
or run many times at low expense over a short period of
time. Observation of model performance under different
producing conditions aids selection of an optimal set of
producing conditions for the reservoir.
The tools of reservoir simulation range from the in-
tuition and judgment of the engineer to complex
mathematical models requiring use of digital computers.
The question is not whether to simulate but, rather, which
tool or method to use. This chapter attempts to summarize
the evolution and current status of reservoir simulation
practice involving usage of the mathematical, computer-
ized models. The relatively modern nature of this prac-
tice is indicated by the first edition of this handbook (1962)
not including a chapter on reservoir simulation.
The nearly exponential growth in annual rate of
simulation-related publications from the mid-1960s to the
present indicates the industrys widespread acceptance of
mathematical simulation as an engineering tool. This ac-
ceptance has been and remains qualified by questioning
and improvement of accuracy in simulation model results.
Thus a significant portion of the extensive literature deals
with model (1) evaluation or validation through com-
parison of field (laboratory) and model results and (2) im-
provement by use of new techniques related to model
mathematics and representation of reservoir fluid and rock
description parameters.
The volume and increasing complexity of publications
related to the latter item preclude a detailed mathematical
description of current simulation technology in this
chapter. Rather, emphasis is given to a general descrip-
tion of reservoir simulation models, how and why they
are used, choice of different types of models for different
reservoir problems, and reliability of simulation results
in the face of model assumptions and uncertainty in reser-
voir fluid and rock description parameters. The chapter
concludes with an abbreviated description of simulation
model technology consisting of comments on a number
of highly technical publications. Various texts l-4 give
detailed descriptions of simulation technology through me
late 1970s, including finite-difference approximations,
model formulations, iterative solution techniques, and
stability analyses.
A Brief History
In a broad sense, reservoir simulation has been practiced
since the beginning of petroleum engineering in the
1930s. Before 1960, engineering calculations consisted
largely of analytical methods, $ zero-dimensional
material balances, 7,8 and one-dimensional (1 D) Buckley-
Leverett9,10 calculations.
The term simulation became common in the early
1960s, as predictive methods evolved into relatively
sophisticated computer programs. These programs
represented a major advancement because they allowed
solution of large sets of finite-difference equations describ-
ing two- and three-dimensional (2D and 3D), transient,
multiphase flow in heterogeneous porous media. This ad-
vancement was made possible by the rapid evolution of
PETROLEUM ENGINEERING HANDBOOK
I - 0 IMENSIONAL
fL3Gm
ii y
c-
x
2-DIMENSIONAL
CROSS-SECTION
(*g
Fig. 48.1-l-, 2-, and 3D grids.
large-scale, high-speed digital computer. and development
of numerical mathematical methods for solving large
systems of finite-difference equations.
During the 1960s, reservoir simulation efforts were
devoted largely to two-phase gas/water and three-phase
blackail reservoir problems. Recovery methods simulated
were limited essentially to depletion or pressure
maintenance. It was possible to develop a single simula-
tion model capable of addressing most reservoir problems
encountered. This concept of a single, general model
always has appealed to operating companies because it
significantly reduces the cost of training and usage and,
potentially, the cost of model development and
maintenance.
During tbe 1970s, the picture changed markedly. The
sharp rise in oil prices and governmental trends toward
deregulation and partial funding of field projects led to
a proliferation of enhanced-recovery processes. This led
to simulation of processes that extended beyond conven-
tional depletion and pressure maintenance to miscible
flooding, chemical flooding, CO2 injection, steam or hot-
water stimulation/flooding, and in-situ combustion. A
relatively comfortable understanding of two-component
(gas and oil) hydrocarbon behavior in simple immiscible
flow was replaced by a struggle to unravel and
characterize the physics of oil displacement under the in-
fluence of temperature, chemical agents, and complex
multicomponent phase behavior. In addition to simple
multiphase flow in porous media, simulators had to reflect
chemical absorption and degradation, emulsifying and in-
terfacial tension (IFT) reduction effects, reaction kinetics,
and other thermal effects and complex equilibrium phase
behavior. This proliferation of recovery methods in the
1970s caused a departure from the single-model concept
as individual models were developed to represent each
of these new recovery schemes.
Research during the 1970s resulted in many signifi-
cant advances in simulation model formulations and
numerical solution methods. These advances allowed
simulation of more complex recovery processes and/or
reduced computing costs through increased stability of the
formulations and efficiency of the numerical solution
methods.
General Description of Simulation Models
A number of papers-l4 present general, largely non-
mathematical discussions of reservoir simulation. Odeh
gives an excellent description of the conceptual simplici-
ty of a simulation model. He illustrates the subdivision
of a reservoir into a 2- or 3D network of gridblocks and
then shows that the simulation model equations are
basically the familiar volumetric material balance
equation7y8 written for each phase for each gridblock.
The phase flow rates between each gridblock and its two,
four, or six (in lD, 2D, or 3D cases, respectively) adja-
cent blocks are represented by Darcys law modified by
the relative permeability concept. Fig. 48.1 illustrates l-,
2-, and 3D grids representing a portion of a reservoir.
The block and its two or four neighbors are denoted by
B and N in the 1D and 2D grids. One can visualize an
interior block of the 3D grid with its six neighbors, two
on either side of the block in the n, y, and z directions.
The subsea depths to the top surface of each grid in Fig.
48.1 vary with areal position, reflecting reservoir forma-
tion dip. Reservoir properties such as permeability and
porosity, and fluid properties such as pressure,
temperature, and composition, are assumed uniform
throughout a given gridblock. However, reservoir and
fluid properties vary from one block to another; fluid
properties for each gridblock also vary with time during
the simulation period.
A simulation model is a set of partial-difference equa-
tions requiring numerical solution as opposed to a set of
partial differential equations amenable to analytical solu-
tion. Tbe reasons for this are (1) reservoir heterogeneity-
variable permeability and porosity and irregular geometry,
(2) nonlinearity of relative permeability and capillary
pressure vs. saturation relationships, and (3) nonlinearity
of fluid PVT properties as functions of pressure, composi-
tion, and temperature. The models require high-speed
digital computers because of the large amount of
arithmetic associated with the solutions.
The large amount of arithmetic performed by a simula-
tion model stems from the large number of gridblocks
representing the reservoir and from the number and com-
plexity of equations describing the oil-recovery process.
Total arithmetic or computing expense for a given model
run is at least linearly proportional to the total number
of gridblocks, N,N,N,, where N,, NY, and N, are the
numbers of gridblocks specified in the X, y and z direc-
tions , respectively.
The individual gridblocks are customarily identified by
subscripts i, j, k, where blocks are numbered i = 1,2.. .N,
in the x direction, j=1,2...N, in the y direction, and
k= 1,2.. .N, in the z direction. Most simulators use no-
flow or closed boundary conditions at the exterior bound-
aries [x=(O,LX), y=(O,L,) and z=(O,L,)] with provision
RESERVOIR SIMULATION 48-3
for aquifer influx along the areally exterior boundary. I he
nonrectangular, areal (x-y) shapes of most reservoirs are
represented by zero gridblock porosity and permeability
in the appropriate area1 portions of the x-y grid.
Preceding statements described the simulation model
as a set of equations expressing conservation of mass for
each phase for each gridblock. More precisely, the model
equations express conservation of mass of each reservoir
fluid component for each block, The number and identi-
ty of these components depend on the nature of the original
reservoir fluid and the particular oil-recovery process, as
discussed in the following. The total number of mass con-
servation equations is then N,N,N,N, where N is the
number of components necessary to describe the reser-
voir fluids.
Each conservation equation states that the mass rate of
flow into a gridblock minus the mass rate of flow out must
equal the rate of change or accumulation of mass within
the block. These N mass-balance equations (one for each
component) apply to each gridblock. The block is an open
system, in the thermodynamic sense, because of fluid flow
between the block and its six neighbors and fluid injec-
tion or production if a well is perforated in the block.
The center of gridblock (i,j,k) is located at (xi.yj,zk).
This block has six neighboring blocks (i-tl,j,k),(i,j-t 1,k)
and (i,j,kk 1). For brevity and clarity, the interblock flow
rates are written here in terms of only r-direction flow
between blocks (i- 1 ,j,k) and (i,j,k), the indices j and k
are suppressed, and the general symbol C, denotes con-
centration (mass/volume) of component I in the various
phases. The three immiscible phases (water, oil, and gas)
are denoted by subscripts w, o, and g, respectively.
The interblock flow rate of component I, according to
Darcys law modified by relative permeability, is
+%l,(ApO -y,AZ)+&@, -ysAZ) ,
1
P8
J
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
(1)
where
41 =
k=
A=
L=
k
rP =
pp =
C
IP =
APP =
YP =
Ax =
z=
component I interblock flow rate,
mass/time,
absolute permeability,
AyiAZk =cross-sectional area normal to
flow,
distance between adjacent block centers,
(AX-1 fAri)/
relative permeability to phase P
(P=w,o,g).
viscosity of phase P
concentration of component I in phase P,
mass/volume,
pressure of phase P
specific weight of phase P
X,-l -x,,
where x is p or Z, and
subsea depth, measured positively
downward.
If subscript J=1,2,3 is used to denote phases w,o,g
respectively, then Eq. 1 simplifies to
The first term in parentheses is the interblock trunsmissi-
b&y, TIJ, for flow of component I in phase J, requir-
ing evaluation here at (i- %,j,k)-i.e., between blocks
i - 1 and i. The M/L portion of T is normally calculated
as the harmonic or series-resistance mean value using
block i- 1 and block i properties. The remaining portion
of T normally is evaluated at the upstream gridblock-
i.e., the block from which the phase is flowing. Thus Eq.
2 becomes simply
representing interblock flow of component I from
gridblock i- 1 to gridblock i.
The right-hand or accumulation terms of the mass
balances are
;6
[
3
d c (SJCIJ) , . . . . . . . . . . . . . . , . .
J=l
1
(4)
where
V = grid block volume, hxi AYj AZk
6 = time difference operator, 6X=X,,+, -X,,
n = time level, t,+l =t,+At,
At = timestep,
$I = porosity, fraction, and
SJ = saturation of phase J, fraction of pore
space.
Eqs. 3 and 4 give the final form of the component I
mass-balance equation for gridblock (i,j,k) as
3
C A[TIJ(APj-r./Az)l-4p~
J=l
(5)
where q,,I is the mass rate of production of component
I from the block resulting from any well perforated in the
block and the Laplacian term of type A(TAp) is defined as
and
48-4 PETROLEUM ENGINEERING HANDBOOK
For the general case where each component is present
(soluble) in all three phases, Eq. 5 is Nequations in 3N+6
unknowns. The unknowns are 3N CIJ values, 3 phase
saturations, and 3 phase pressures. Thus an additional
2N-t 6 equations are required for a determinate or solvable
model having equal numbers of equations and unknowns. a
The N Eqs. 5 are referred to as primary equations while
the additional 2N+6 equations are denoted constraint
equations. The constraint equations are manipulated in the
model programming to eliminate 2N+6 variables
(unknowns) in terms of the remaining N (primary)
unknowns. The result is then the set of N primary Eqs.
5 in N primary unknowns. The constraint equations are
relations between unknowns pertaining only to the par-
ticular gridblock (iJ,k) to which Eqs. 5 apply. The N
primary Eqs. 5, however, involve unknowns (e.g., pi)
at the gridblock (i,j,k) and its six neighboring blocks, ow-
ing to the nature of the interblock flow terms on the left-
hand side.
The 2N+6 constraint equations are illustrated here for
the case of an isothermal, compositional model where the
N components are HZ0 and N- 1 hydrocarbon com-
ponents (e.g., methane, ethane.. .C ,). The first three con-
straints are
S,+S,+S,=l.O, . . . . . . . . . ..(6)
po -pw =Poy,(S,), . . . . . . . . . . . . (7)
and
pg -p. =P,,(S,), . . . . . . . . . . . . . . (8)
where P,, =water/oil capillary pressure and P,, =gasJ
oil capillary pressure.
These constraints express the requirement that the phase
saturations sum to unity and also eliminate the water and
gas phase pressures in terms of the unknown oil pressure
phase using capillary pressure curves. For this composi-
tional case, concentration C,J =p J x/J where pi is the mo-
lar density of phase J (moMvolume) and xIJ is mol
fraction of component I in phase J. The next three con-
straints require that the mol fractions of all components
sum to unity in each of the three phases,
N
c x[J=l.o . . . . . . . . . . . . , , . . . . .
I=1
where J=w,o,g or 1,2,3. The remaining 2N constraints
express equilibrium of each component among the three
phases,
j-r, =fr, . . . . . . . . . . . . .
(104
and
j - i , =f r , . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
( l ob)
where f I J is the fugacity of component I in phase J. These
fugacities can be expressed in terms of mol fractions and
pressure by use of an equation of state (EOS). Altemative-
ly, they can be replaced by equilibrium K-value relation-
ships (e.g., y=Kx) with K-values given as functions of
pressure or of pressure and composition.
The 2N + 6 constraint Eqs .6 through 10 are manipulated
to eliminate one-phase saturation, two-phase pressures and
2N-3 mole fractions (x,J) from the N primary Eqs. 5.
The final result is a model consisting of the N Eq. 5 in
N unknowns consisting of two saturations, one pressure,
and N-3 mole fractions. Each coeffkient or term remain-
ing in the N primary equations is then either one of the
N primary unknowns or a function of one or more of the
primary unknowns.
Types of Models
Different types of simulation models are used to describe
different mechanisms associated with different oil-
recovery processes. The most widely used types are black
oil, compositional, thermal, and chemical flood. The four
basic recovery mechanisms for recovering oil from reser-
voirs are (1) fluid expansion, (2) displacement, (3) gravity
drainage, and (4) capillary imbibition. Simple fluid ex-
pansion with pressure decline results in oil expulsion from
and subsequent flow through the porous matrix. Oil is
displaced by gas and injected or naturally encroaching
water. Gravity drainage, caused by positive (water/oil and
oil/gas) density differences, aids oil recovery by causing
upward drainage of oil from below an advancing bottom-
water drive and downward drainage from above a declin-
ing gas/oil contact. Finally, imbibition, generally normal
to the flow direction, can be an important recovery
mechanism in lateral waterfloods in heterogeneous sands
with large vertical variation of permeability.
Accommodation of compositional and the enhanced-
recovery processes in this discussion requires the addi-
tion of a fifth mechanism, oil mobilization. This loosely
defined term includes widely differing phenomena that
create or mobilize recoverable oil. Some of these
phenomena are not really distinct from the first four.
The black-oil model accounts for the four basic
mechanisms in simulation of oil recovery by natural deple-
tion or pressure maintenance (e.g., waterflooding). This
isothermal model applies to reservoirs containing immisci-
ble water, oil, and gas phases with a simple pressure-
dependent solubility of the gas component in the oil phase.
The two-component representation of the hydrocarbon
content I5 presumes constant (pressure-independent) com-
positions of the oil component and the gas component,
no volatility of the oil component in the gas phase, no
solubility of the oil and gas components in the water phase,
and no volatility of water (H20) in the oil and gas phases.
The oil component is stock-tank oil and its unit of mass
is 1 STB (1 bbl at stock-tank pressure and temperature).
The gas component is surface system gas and its unit of
mass is 1 standard cubic foot (scf). The water component
unit of mass is 1 STB. For water and gas, components
and phases are identical while the oil phase is a mixture
of the oil component and the gas component.
The number of components (N) and therefore the
number of Eqs. 5 per gridblock is three for the black-oil
model. Table 48.1 gives the definitions of component con-
centrations, CIJ, for this model. The water phase, gas
phase, and saturated oil phase, reciprocal formation
volume factors, b, (STB/RB), bR (scf/RB), and b,
(STB/RB), respectively, are given smgle-valued functions
of pressure. For undersaturated oil, b, is dependent on
RESERVOIR SIMULATION 48-5
pressure and solution gas (R, , scf/STB). As discussed
later original work in formulations6m8 led to a number
of papers 9m23 describing black-oil models during the
1960s.
The remaining model types discussed here account for
some mobilization mechanisms in addition to the four
basic recovery mechanisms. The isothermal compositional
model represents reservoir fluids by N components, in-
cluding water and N- 1 hydrocarbon components.
Generally, but not necessarily, solubilities of water in the
oil and gas phases and of hydrocarbon components in the
water phase are considered negligible. For water, then,
the concentration in Eqs. 5 is as given in Table 48.1. The
hydrocarbon component I concentration CIJ is P J X IJ , as
mentioned earlier, for J=o,g or 2,3. Gas/oil phase
equilibrium and phase densities within each gridblock are
calculated using equilibrium K-values from pressure- and
composition-dependent correlations or, more recently,
from EOSs. 25-28 Unlike the black-oil model, the com-
positional model can represent the mobilization of oil by
outright (single-contact) or dynamic (multicontact)
miscibility, oil swelling and viscosity reduction by solu-
tion of an injected nonequilibrium gas (e.g., CO,), and
stripping or vaporization of an oils lighter ends by in-
jection of a dry gas. With one exception,29 recent
papers
29-33 describing compositional models are based on
equilibrium K-values obtained from EOSs.
A thermal simulation model is a set of N conservation
equations, similar to Eq. 5, which expresses conserva-
tion of mass of H2 0 and N-2 hydrocarbon components
and conservation of energy. With energy designated as
component N, the last (I=N) of Eqs. 5 becomes the
energy balance upon addition of terms representing heat
conduction and overburden heat loss. An additional re-
quirement is the use of pJHJ for cNJ in the well and in-
terblock flow terms and p J UJ for CNJ in the right side
accumulation term. HJ and UJ are enthalpy and inter-
nal energy, respectively, energy/mole. If the in-situ com-
bustion capability is included then the mass conservation
equations include source (sink) terms represented by Ar-
rhenius reaction rate expressions for cracking and oxida-
tion of hydrocarbon components and the energy balance
includes heat of reaction terms. For the same number of
fluid components, a thermal model has one more (energy)
conservation equation than the compositional model and
one additional unknown, temperature T.
For steam-injection processes, thermal model com-
ponents are typically H 2 0, heavy (nonvolatile) and light
(solution gas or distillable) hydrocarbon components and
energy. For in-situ combustion studies, typical com-
ponents are HzO, heavy-oil component, a lighter
(distillable) oil component, solid coke, 02, CO*, N2,
and energy. Frequently CO2 and N2 are lumped as one
component to reduce computing expense. The steam tables
and/or an EOS are used to calculate liquid Hz0 (water
phase) properties and the Hz0 gas/water phase K-value
as functions of pressure and temperature. In most applica-
tions, Hz0 is assumed insoluble in the oil phase. In most
current models, the distribution of other (non-H20) com-
ponents among all phases is represented by user-provided
K-values dependent on only pressure and temperature.
Thermal simulators are applied to steam-injection or in-
situ combustion processes in heavy-oil reservoirs where
oil is mobilized primarily by (1) reduction of oil viscosi-
TABLE 48.1-DEFINITIONS OF
CONCENTRATIONS C,, FOR THE
BLACK-OIL MODEL
Phase
J =l J =2 J =3
I Component Water Oil Gas
- __ -
1 water bw 0 0
2 oil 0 bo 0
3
gas
0 b, Rs b,
ty with increased temperature, (2) distillation of in-
termediate hydrocarbon components from the oil phase
to the more mobile gas phase, and (3) cracking of the oil
phase [usually above 500F (26OC)l with subsequent
distillation. Thermal models developed from 1965 to
198234-40 generally exhibit a trend toward inclusion of
more dimensions, more components and dual capability
of steamflood and in-situ combustion.
Chemical flood models include polymer, micellar (sur-
factant), and alkaline (caustic). Polymer waterflooding im-
proves oil recovery by lowering the oil/water mobility
ratio, by reducing the effective permeability to water,
and/or by increasing water viscosity. In micellar flooding,
surfactants greatly reduce oil/water IFT, thereby solubiliz-
ing oil into the micelles and forming an oil bank. 4 The
surfactant slug and mobilized oil normally are propelled
toward the production well by a graded bank of polymer-
thickened water. The mechanisms responsible for im-
proved oil recovery in alkaline flooding are thought to
include low IFT, wettability alteration, and emulsifica-
tion. 42 Chemical flooding processes involve complicated
fluid/fluid and rock/fluid interactions such as adsorption,
ion exchange, viscous shear, and three- (or more) phase
flow. Several recent papers 43-45 describe implementation
of these complex chemical flood mechanisms in numerical
simulators.
The four types of models described above are defined
or distinguished by the recovery process and the nature
of the original reservoir fluid. Considering the nature of
the reservoir formation leads to a fifth, fractured-matrix
type of simulation model. While in theory any recovery
process can be implemented in a fractured-matrix reser-
voir, most simulation work reported to date is concerned
with black oil fracture&matrix models. Three-dimensional
models are described by Thomas et a1.6 for the three-
phase case and by Gilman and Kazemi4 for two-phase
water-oil flow. Their models consider a discontinuous ar-
ray of matrix blocks in a continuous 3D fracture network.
Flow throughout the reservoir and to the wells occurs in
the fracture system and the matrix blocks are treated as
sink/source terms in that system. Their model equations
include the set of N conservation Eqs. 6 written for each
gridblock in the fracture system. Each gridblock may con-
tain a number of similarly behaving matrix blocks.
However, additional terms are added to Eqs. 6, represent-
ing matrix-fracture flow. Also, for each gridblock addi-
tional equations are required to express mass conservation
of each component in the matrix blocks included in the
gridblock. These additional equations can be eliminated
or combined with the basic N (fracture system) flow
equations4v4 so that the final model includes only N
equations (per block) possessing interblock flow terms.
Blaskovich et a1.48 describe a fractured-matrix model
48-6
PETROLEUM ENGINEERING HANDBOOK
which allows for reservoir-wide flow through the matrix
as well as the fracture system. This extension leads to a
model including 2N equations (per block) possessing in-
terblock flow terms.
Model Input Data and Calculated Results
A simulation model requires three types of input data.
First, reservoir description data include (1) overall
geometry, (2) grid size specification, (3) permeability,
porosity, and elevation for each gridblock, and (4) relative
permeability and capillary pressure vs. saturation func-
tions or tables. Geological and petrophysical work, which
involves logs and core analyses, is necessary for Items
1 and 3. Laboratory tests on core samples yield estimates
of relative permeability and capillary pressure relation-
ships. Second, fluid PVT properties, such as formation
volume factors, solution gas or component equilibrium
K-values, and viscosities are obtained by laboratory tests.
Finally, well locations, perforated intervals, and produc-
tivity indices (PIs) must be specified. Each well must be
assigned a production (injection) rate schedule and/or a
limiting producing (injecting) pressure for use in
calculating well deliverability (injectivity).
Model output or calculated results include spatial
distributions of fluid pressure, saturations and composi-
tions, and producing GOR and WOR and injection/pro-
duction rate (for wells on injectivitylproductivity) for each
well at the end of each timestep of the computations. In-
ternal manipulation of these results gives average reser-
voir pressure and instantaneous rates and cumulative
injection/production of oil, gas, and water by well and
total field vs. time.
Current models offer various levels of visual output
display features that ease the engineers assimilation and
interpretation of simulator results. Example features are
contour maps of pressure, saturations, compositions and
temperature, concise tabular summaries of individual well
or well-group performance, and field or well timeplots
of quantities such as production rates and WORs and
GORs.
Purpose of Reservoir Simulation
Reservoir simulation is used to estimate recovery for a
given existing producing scheme (forecasting) to evaluate
the effects on recovery of altered operating conditions,
and to compare economics of different recovery methods.
Black-oil models have been widely applied to forecast oil
recovery and to estimate the effects on oil recovery of
(1) well pattern and spacing, (2) well completion inter-
vals, (3) gas and/or water coning as a function of rate,
(4) producing rate, (5) augmenting a natural water drive
by water injection and desirability of flank or peripheral
as opposed to pattern waterflooding, (6) inlill drilling, and
(7) gas vs. water vs. water-alternating-gas (WAG) in-
jection.
A few of many reported studies are briefly mentioned
here. Henderson et al.49 applied a single- (gas) phase
model to optimize the locations and numbers of wells
necessary to meet peak deliverability requirements in a
gas storage field. Mann and Johnson showed good
agreement between model-predicted and actual field per-
formance. Thomas and Driscol15 applied a black-oil
model in estimating locations of bypassed oil for the
P
ur-
pose of designing an infdl drilling plan. Two studies 2,53
report extensive results related to rate-sensitivity of
various Alberta reservoirs subjected to water-oil
displacements. Thakur ef al. 54 applied a black-oil model
to characterize (through history matching) offshore
Nigerian reservoirs and estimate incremental recovery of
waterflooding over natural depletion, with infill drilling
and removal of allowable rates.
Compositional models also are used for most of Pur-
poses 1 through 7 listed previously, but only in cases
where the black-oil assumption of constant composition
oil and gas components is invalid. Example compositional
model applications include (1) depletion of a volatile oil
or gas condensate reservoir where hydrocarbon phase
compositions and properties vary significantly with
pressure below bubble- or dewpoint, (2) injection of non-
equilibrium gas (dry or enriched) into an oil reservoir to
mobilize oil by vaporization into the more mobile gas
phase or by attainment of outright (single-contact) or
dynamic (multicontact) miscibility, and (3) injection of
CO2 into an oil reservoir to mobilize oil by stripping of
light ends, oil viscosity reduction, and oil swelling.
Compositional simulation has been performed to
estimate (1) loss of recovery caused by liquid dropout dur-
ing depletion of retrograde gas condensate reservoirs and
the reduction of this loss by full or partial cycling (rein-
jection of gas from surface facilities) and (2) effects of
pressure level, injected gas composition, and CO2 or N2
injection on oil recovery by vaporization or miscibility.
Graue and Zana55 describe application of a compositional
model in estimating Rangely (CO) field oil recovery by
CO2 injection as a function of injected composition and
pressure level. Results of compositional simulation of a
CO2 project include CO;! breakthrough time and rate and
composition of produced fluids. These are required to
design production facilities and CO2 recycling strate-
gies. 56 Modeling is also useful to optimize pattern size
and CO2 /water-injection rates to overcome the effects of
reservoir heterogeneity. 57
Thermal models are applied in reservoir studies of in-
situ combustion and are used to simulate performance of
cyclic steam simulation and steamflooding. In steam in-
jection, questions addressed by simulation relate to effects
of injected steam quality and injection rate, operating
pressure level, and inclusion of gas with the injected
steam. One question in cyclic stimulation concerns the
optimal time periods per cycle for steam injection, soak,
and production. The flooding case introduces the issues
of well pattern and spacing. A number of steam-injection
field studies using models have been published. Herrera
and HanzlikS8 compare field data and model results for
a cyclic stimulation operation. Williams59 discusses field
performance and model results for stimulation and
flooding, and Meldaum discusses field and model results
related to addition of gas to the inected steam. Gomaa
et al. 6 and Moughamian et al. 61 applied steamflood
simulation in identifying and optimizing operating
parameters in pilot and field drive operations.
Numerical simulation has been used to estimate
chemical flood performance in a reservoir environment
where the processes are very complex and many reser-
voir parameters affect the results. Chemical flood simula-
tion has been used to construct a screening algorithm for
the selection of reservoirs suitable for micellar/polymer
flooding63 and to examine competing EOR strategies-
RESERVOIR SIMULATION
48-7
e.g., CO* vs. surfactant flooding.@ For caustic65 and
polymeP applications, as well as for the micellar proc-
ess, chemical flood modeling is useful to discern control-
ling process mechanisms and to identify laboratory data
required for process description.
In recent years, simulation has been used increasingly
to estimate and compare recoveries from a given reser-
voir under alternative enhanced-recovery processes, such
as CO2 injection, thermal methods (steam injection and
in-situ combustion), and several types of chemical
flooding.
Considerations in Practical Application of
Simulation Models
This section describes the procedure followed and cer-
tain questions faced by the engineer conducting a reser-
voir simulation study. The engineer must select the
appropriate type of simulation model, select the grid net-
work, and specify rock and fluid description data. Then
the engineer must attempt to reduce or at least estimate
inaccuracies in simulation results which stem from uncer-
tain rock/fluid description data and from spatial trunca-
tion error.
Selection of Model Type
As mentioned earlier, selection of model type may de-
pend on both the nature of the original reservoir fluid and
upon the recovery process(es) to be studied. As a rough
guide, an original reservoir oil solution gas or GOR value,
R,, below 2,000 scf/STB indicates a black oil, whereas
a higher value indicates a volatile oil or retrograde gas
condensate requiring compositional treatment.
For a black-oil reservoir, a black-oil model may be used
to study natural depletion, water injection and/or
equilibrium gas injection operations. However, a com-
positional model is generally necessary to estimate
recovery by injection of dry or enriched gas, solvent, or
CO*. An exception here is the applicability of a modified
black-oil model67 in simulation of CO2 or solvent injec-
tion where outright (single-contact) miscibility occurs.
Compositional simulation is generally employed for
volatile oil reservoirs. However, a less expensive black-
oil model study is adequate for simulating above-
bubblepoint waterflooding performance. Compositional
models have generally been employed to study retrograde
gas condensate reservoirs. The compositional model is
necessary in the case of below-dewpoint cycling.
However, in some cases natural depletion or above-
dewpoint cycling can be simulated at less expense using
a black-oil model modified to account for volatility of the
oil (condensate) component in the gas phase. 6sm70
The alkaline and surfactant-flood processes generally
require use of the complex chemical flood simulation
model. However, some (augmented) black-oil models of-
fer the capability to simulate polymer and alkaline
flooding.
Selection of Model Grid
Selection of the x-y-z gridblock network involves many
factors, including available budget and the engineers
judgment and experience. For any type of model, the
arithmetic or computing expense per timestep is at least
linearly proportional to the total number of gridblocks
employed. The computing expense of a single model run
is proportional to the product of the number of gridblocks
and the number of timesteps required by the model to
cover the total time period of interest. In many cases, the
timestep size is controlled by the maximum rate of change
(overall gridblocks) in one or more calculated quantities
such as pressure and saturations. This maximum rate of
change generally occurs at or near a well or in the vicini-
ty of a flood front. A doubling of the number of gridblocks
can result approximately in a doubling of this maximum
rate of change since each gridblock is (on the average)
one-half as large. The average timestep size, then, might
decrease by a factor of two if the number of blocks were
doubled. The final result is a computing expense per
model run which can approach a proportionality to the
square of the total number of gridblocks. This indicates
the importance of selecting the smallest number of
gridblocks consistent with reservoir/well description,
recovery process characteristics, and the questions asked
regarding reservoir performance.
The number of gridblocks and resultant study computing
expense are the lowest in cases where the engineer can
justify use of a representative element of the total field
as the basis for the model study. This may be possible
in reservoirs developed with repeated well patterns, for
any recovery process-waterflooding, CO* injection,
steamflooding, etc. In such cases, the representative ele-
ment ideally should be a symmetrical element of the reser-
voir. In strict terms, this requires (1) a repeated, regular
pattern of identically completed and operated wells, (2)
a horizontal, areally homogeneous reservoir formation of
uniform thickness, and (3) areally uniform initial fluid
saturation distributions. If these conditions were met, then
questions regarding total field optimization, forecasting
and comparative evaluation of recovery processes could
be addressed inexpensively by simulation of the single pat-
tern (element).
While actual reservoirs never satisfy these conditions
exactly, representative-element simulation studies are fre-
quently performed for repeated pattern processes. In some
cases, a substantial portion of the reservoir may exhibit
only moderate areal heterogeneity and thickness variation.
Resultant variation in performance from one pattern to
another may be sufficiently small for engineering purposes
to justify scale-up of single-pattern results to total field
performance.
Representative-element simulation is often performed
where the study purpose is comparative evaluation of
alternative recovery processes as opposed to forecasting
of total field performance for a specific process and
operating scheme. The justification of single-element
simulation implied in such cases is that the resultant rank-
ing of alternative processes is unaffected by the variations
in pattern (element) properties over the field. This
justification can be and frequently is checked by repeating
the various process simulations for two or more patterns
of different properties representative of different portions
of the reservoir.
Finally, the relatively inexpensive single-element
simulation applies to design or optimization studies of a
specific recovery process operated in a repeated pattern
mode. For a repeated-pattern steamflood, single-pattern
model runs have been performed to optimize pattern
type (e.g., five-, seven- or nine-spot) and size, injected
48-8
PETROLEUM ENGINEERING HANDBOOK
steam quality and rate, well completions, etc. Occasional
publications describe single-pattern simulation studies us-
ing a one-quarter five-spot or one-quarter nine-spot as the
symmetrical element of the respective pattern. Actually,
a one-eighth five-spot or nine-spot (and xZ seven-spot)
are the smallest symmetrical elements and should be used
to minimize computing expense. 71
Currently, a major portion of the industry-wide effort
and computing expense in simulation studies is associated
with total-field forecasting of black-oil reservoir perfor-
mance under a sequence of recovery processes. Typical-
ly, the engineer must select a 3D grid for a large reservoir
with significant heterogeneity, large areal variation in dip
and thickness, irregular well locations and increasing
numbers of wells with successive development stages. The
engineer may face a several- to many-year period of
historical performance under natural depletion, frequently
with some natural water encroachment. Study objectives
may include history matching, followed by matching and
forecasting for a waterflood period, in turn followed by
forecasting for some tertiary scheme such as CO2 in-
jection.
The total number of gridblocks is the product of the
number of areal blocks, N,N,, and the number of grid
layers, N,. Different considerations enter into selection
of these two numbers of spacings. Factors indicating a
need for fine area1 grid spacing are high well density and
sharp or rapid changes (areally) in permeability, porosi-
ty, thickness, and dip. Since these factors frequently vary
over the field, thex- and y-direction grid spacings are often
nonuniform. Grid spacings generally increase toward the
downdip reservoir boundaries and increase greatly with
distance into the aquifer if the latter is present and included
in the grid.
In general, of course, the number of area1 gridblocks
required increases with the size of the reservoir and the
number of wells. However, grid spacings ranging from
very fine to very coarse may be appropriate for different
reservoirs of comparable size. The smallest numbers of
areal blocks (coarsest areal spacings) are associated with
reservoir studies limited to natural depletion and crestal
or flank gas and/or water injection. In such a case, a
coarse grid may result in a number of area1 blocks that
include two or more similar type (e.g., production) wells,
with little loss in engineering significance of the simulator
results. Large numbers of area1 blocks may be required
in cases of pattern waterfloods or enhanced recovery proc-
esses. A rough guide in this case is the need for at least
two, preferably three or more, gridblocks separating each
injection-production well pair. However, recent studies
describe estimation of pseudorelative-permeability curves,
which allow adjacent-block placement of an injectoripro-
ducer well pair. 72,73
The major factors affecting the number of grid layers
(vertical gridblocks) required are the formation stratifica-
tion, vertical communication, and total thickness. Many
reservoirs possess a number of formation layers, which
correlate from well to well over much of or all the field.
Variations of layer thickness, permeability, and porosity
may be significant areally and even greater from one layer
to another. The vertical communication (vertical
permeability) between adjacent layer-pairs may vary from
zero to very high, both areally and from one layer-pair
to another. In general, at least one grid layer should be
used for each correlatable formation layer. However,
common sense and budget constraints argue against detini-
tion of a large number of very thin grid layers. Three-
dimensional reservoir studies typically employ 4 to 12 grid
layers, and one or more of these grid layers may be a
lumped representation of several thin formation layers.
The need for subdivision of one formation layer into
two or more grid layers depends on the layer thickness
and fluid-segregation characteristics of the recovery proc-
ess and operating rates. Most recovery processes result
in moderate to severe gravity segregation of oil and in-
jected fluids; injected water or gas tend to underrun or
override oil, respectively; many steamflood projects ex-
hibit severe override of oil by the steam. A formation layer
that has significant thickness and zero to poor vertical
communication with layers above and below may exhibit
a pronounced phase segregation and require two or more
grid layers. In the idealized example of a fieldwide, pro-
nounced gravity override in a vertically homogeneous
reservoir, a variable grid spacing increasing from top to
bottom might be specified. That is, four layers of
thicknesses 5, 10,20, and 25 ft might give more accurate
results than four layers of equal 15ft thickness.
A customary approach to determining NZ involves use
of the simulation model itself in 2D cross-sectional (X-Z
slice) mode. For the particular recovery process of in-
terest, X-Z model runs are performed by using different
numbers of grid layers. Pseudorelative-permeability
curves reflecting phase segregation are calculated from
model runs performed with fine vertical grid spac-
ing. 74-76 These pseudocurves are then used in equivalent
x-z model runs using fewer grid layers to obtain coarse
(vertical) definition results similar to the fine-spacing
correct results. The fewer grid layers of the coarse
definition are then employed in the 3D reservoir study
grid. This concept of generating pseudocurves for coarse
vertical grids that reproduce vertical fine-grid results (us-
ing rock or laboratory relative permeabilities) has been
extended to the areal spacing problem, 72.75 as mentioned
earlier.
Obviously, a minimum computing expense follows from
use of a single grid layer representing the entire forma-
tion thickness. This results in a 2D X-Y area1 grid as op-
posed to a 3D grid and occasionally is justified in the two
extremes of a very high vertical permeability and a layered
formation with zero vertical permeability. Pseudorelative
permeability and capillary pressure curves are discussed
for the former case in papers describing the vertical
equilibrium (VE) concept21,77 and for the latter case by
Hearn. 78
Specification of Reservoir Rock and
Fluid Description Data
Geological and petrophysical work based on logs and core
analyses yields maps of structure, net dh, and w1 products
for each of the several reservoir layers. The kh and +h
data often are augmented or modified by results of
drillstem, pressure buildup, and pulse tests. For each
layer, the engineer can overlay his area1 x-y grid spacing
network on these maps and read off the values of subsea
depth, I#& and kh at the center of each gridblock. These
values along with gross thickness of each block are then
transposed to a data file in a format compatible with that
RESERVOIR SIMULATION
48-9
required by the simulation model. Current research ef-
fort is directed toward developing computer programs that
accept digitized core analysis, log and geological data,
the selected grid network, and, through mapping and in-
terpolation techniques, automatically prepare the simula-
tion input data file.
Laboratory core analysis work includes measurement
of relative-permeability, k,., and capillary-pressure, P,,
curves for a number of field cores. Variations in rock
lithology may result in different sets of k, and P, curves
for different layers and/or different areal portions of the
reservoir. Most simulation models allow multiple sets of
such data in tabular form with assignment of each set to
a user-specified layer/portion of the reservoir. If the rock
water/oil (gas/oil) capillary pressure values are small, the
water/oil (gas/oil) transition zone in the reservoir may be
a very small fraction of total formation thickness. In such
cases, pseudocapillary-pressure curve(s) should be
used. l7
For black-oil studies, laboratory tests are performed to
determine gas compressibility factor and saturated oil and
gas viscosities vs. pressure. Differential and/or constant-
composition expansion tests on oil samples yield the
saturated oil pressure-dependent formation volume fac-
tor, B, (RB/STB), and solution gas, R, (scf/STB). The
resulting oil and associated gas properties vs. pressure
are entered in the data file in tabular form compatible with
simulator input requirements. For gas condensate deple-
tion studies, constant-volume and constantcomposition
expansion tests yield the required pressure-dependent liq-
uid content, CL (STB/scf), and condensate density values.
A wide variety of laboratory tests are performed for
compositional model studies that involve injection of a
nonequilibrium fluid (dry or enriched gas, CO?, N2,
etc.). Swelling tests yield relative volumes, saturation
pressures, and equilibrium phase compositions for each
of a sequence of mixtures of, say, 1 mole of original reser-
voir oil and injected fluid. 79 Various single- and
multicontact tests may be augmented by ID corefloods
and/or slim-tube displacements. Orr et al. 8o*81 discuss
a variety of C02-oil laboratory tests. Much of the
laboratory PVT test data must be processed to yield cor-
relations or a calibrated EOSs2-85 for simulator input re-
quirements.
History Matching
In most simulation studies, reservoirs have some period
of historical performance data that include WOR, GOR,
individual phase rates and cumulatives, and pressure
measurements by well. Ideally, periodic (e.g., monthly),
accurate measurements of all these data would be recorded
and available for all wells. In the typical case, many of
these data are unrecorded or unavailable and some of the
reported values may be of questionable accuracy.
The reservoir description based on log and core analysis
data reflects a very small (volumetric) sampling of the
reservoir. The historical reservoir-performance data
reflect the reservoir description, and its impact on
pressure/fluid movement behavior, on a much larger
scale. The previously mentioned geological and
petrophysical work yields an initial reservoir description.
History matching yields a refinement of that description,
which improves agreement between model results and
observed reservoir behavior. The history-match phase of
the simulation study entails a sequence of model runs in
which input reservoir description parameters are altered
to improve this agreement. This is a trial-and-error pro-
cedure frequently requiring considerable engineering
judgment and experience. The description parameters ob-
tained from the geological/petrophysical work often are
used to establish legitimate ranges of parameter variation
in the history-match model runs.
This history-match phase can consume half or more of
the total simulation study (match plus prediction) com-
puting effort and expense, depending on the length of the
history period, complexity of the reservoir, and amount
of available performance data.
Refs. 86 through 90 describe methods and applications
of inverse simulation or automatic history matching. This
concept requires user-specification of a finite set of reser-
voir description parameters to be determined (e.g., zonal
permeability, porosity values), a finite set of observed
reservoir performance data to be matched, and a regres-
sion procedure coded interactively with the simulator. A
single computer submittal is then performed, which in turn
executes many model history runs. The regression pro-
cedure automatically varies description-parameter values
from run to run to determine that set of description-
parameter values that maximize agreement between model
results and the set of observed data. This concept is
especially appealing to the engineers who have experi-
enced the frequently high frustration levels associated with
trial-and-error matching of complex reservoir behavior.
However, to date the trial-and-error procedure still
predominates with isolated successes reported with
automatic history matching. Two factors complicating the
latter approach are (1) the expense of the required single
computer submittal can be very large, (2) the a priori
choice of description parameters (or zonation) can be dif-
ficult, subjective, and lead to a questionable reservoir
description.
Validity of Simulation Results
Uncertainties or errors in simulation model results may
arise from (1) questionable assumptions or mechanisms
not represented in the differential form of the model, (2)
spatial and time truncation error introduced by replace-
ment of the model differential equations by finite-
difference approximations, and (3) inadequately known
reservoir rock and/or fluid description data. In addition,
the exact solution of the difference equations is not at-
tained because of round-off error introduced by the finite
word length of the computer. Round-off error is general-
ly negligible compared with errors from the other three
sources. With some exceptions, the above sources of er-
ror are listed in order of increasing importance. However,
successful history matching can reverse the importance
of the second and third sources.
Comparisons of model and laboratory experiment
results can indicate model validity in the absence of the
Uncertainty 3 above. Several such comparisons show
good model-experiment agreement for gas/oil sys-
tems,91,92 water/oil coning,93 and fractured-matrix im-
bibition. 94
Model Assumptions
An assumption common to many black-oil models is com-
plete re-solution of free gas in accordance with the
48-I 0 PETROLEUM ENGINEERING HANDBOOK
saturated R,(p) curve during repressurization. This may
be a poor assumption in a case where gridblock thickness
is large and gas/oil gravity (vertical) segregation is pro-
nounced. Prior to repressurization in a given block, the
free gas may exist as a high gas saturation in only the up-
per portion of the block. This contradicts its representa-
tion in the model as a lower saturation distributed
throughout the entire block volume. In the segregated
state, the gas will redissolve only in the lower or residual
oil saturation in the upper, gas-occupied portion of the
block volume. However, the model will allow re-solution
in the entire blocks oil volume. Pressure hysteresis in
the R,(p) curve has been used to cope with this problem;
an alternative remedy where the computing budget per-
mits is the use of more grid layers.
An assumption common in early black-oil models was
that the reservoir oil obeyed a single pair of B,(p) and
R,(p) curves. Some black-oil reservoirs exhibit a signifi-
cant variation of oil API gravity and PVT behavior with
depth or with depth and areal location. In some such cases,
this variation can be represented in a black-oil model by
simply allowing initial solution gas R, to vary with depth
in the undersaturated oil column, retaining a single set
of B,(p) and R,(p) curves. In other cases, multiple sets
of these curves and two oil components are necessary and
the single oil-type assumption in a black-oil model can
lead to appreciable error.
Mechanisms or phenomena that are significant in some
reservoirs and may not be represented in the model in-
clude compaction, hysteresis in wetting and nonwetting
relative permeabilities, and interlayer wellbore crossflow.
The latter is a particularly difficult modeling problem and
the subject of continuing research. A production well com-
pleted in a number of layers may exhibit production from
some layers and, simultaneously, injection (backflow or
recirculation) into others. Factors that promote this
possibility are low-pressure drawdown (high PI and/or
low rate) and poor vertical communication between the
reservoir layers in the vicinity of the well. A rigorous
treatment of this problem requires modeling of wellbore
multiphase hydraulics and phase segregation combined
with calculation of correct phase mixtures for the layers
undergoing injection.
Spatial Truncation Error
Spatial and time truncation error theoretically can be
reduced to any desired low level by sufficiently reducing
gridblock dimensions and timestep size. However, the
resultant increased number of blocks and timesteps fre-
quently lead to prohibitive computer expense and memory
storage requirements.
Time truncation error is generally insignificant. In most
applications timestep size is restricted by considerations
other than time truncation error, such as model stability,
frequencies of printout, and frequencies of changes in well
data (rates, completions, new wells, etc.). In any given
case, the level of time truncation error can be estimated
by repeating a run or portion of a run with a smaller (or
larger) timestep. Insensitivity of results to timestep size
indicates low-time truncation error.
Spatial truncation error appears in the forms of
numerical dispersion, grid-orientation effects, and error
in calculated well WOR and GOR values. Spatial trunca-
tion error can be expressed in mathematical terms through
complex manipulation of the model differential equations
and Taylor series expansions. In simpler terms, this er-
ror can be viewed as a consequence of replacing the
physical continuum (reservoir formation) by a 3D network
of mixing cells (gridblocks). This consequence is the con-
tradictory requirements that any variable value (pressure,
saturation, temperature, concentration) simultaneously
represents the value at the grid point (e.g. block center)
and the entire blocks volumetric average value. This re-
quirement is not met (1) during a frontal displacement as
a sharp front enters the gridblock, (2) when gravity forces
result in phase segregation within the blocks thickness,
and/or (3) when area1 cusping or coning causes sharp
localized saturation gradients within the block volume.
Numerical dispersion generally appears as falsely
smeared spatial gradients of water saturation in
waterflooding, temperature in steamflooding, solvent in
miscible flooding, and chemical agent in chemical
flooding. This excessive smearing occurs primarily in the
areal (X or y) directions and, if uncontrolled, results in
too early calculated breakthrough times of water (heat,
solvent, etc.) at production wells. This numerical disper-
sion generally increases with increasing areal gridblock
size (AX and AJJ). Lantz95 quantitatively related the dif-
ference equation truncation error term to an artificial,
second-order diffusion term in the differential equation.
The engineer can anticipate possibly significant
numerical dispersion effects in simulating two types of
miscible displacement. The first type is slug or bank, as
opposed to continuous, injection of solvent or CO?.
Numerical dispersion erodes the calculated solvent con-
centration within the bank. If miscibility requires
maintenance of solvent bank integrity or a certain solvent
peak concentration, then this numerical dispersion can
result in a calculated (false) loss of miscibility. The sec-
ond type is multicontact miscibility For continuous sol-
vent injection in 1D simulations, several studies 3X97
report the need for 100 to 300 gridblocks to reduce the
effect of numerical dispersion on miscible front velocity.
Kyte and Berry 75 describe control of numerical disper-
sion in simulation of waterflooding through large area1
gridblocks. They use pseudorelative-permeability curves
obtained from detailed (fine-grid) cross-sectional simula-
tions. Harpole and Hearn98 used their method in a 3D
black-oil study. To date, steamflood simulation general-
ly has been confined to pattern studies for which a suffi-
cient number of gridblocks between unlike wells is used
to minimize numerical dispersion effects. Killough et
al. 73 describe their reduction of numerical dispersion in
a stratified, heterogeneous, repeated pattern black-oil
reservoir study. They performed fine-grid, 3D single-
pattern simulations and then used regression to determine
pseudorelative permeabilities for a 2 x 2 four-block area1
grid representation of the pattern. Agreement between the
3D fine-grid results and four-block pattern results was
good enough to allow fieldwide simulation by use of the
latter coarse, areal definition. Several recent papers99-01
describe local grid refinement, the method of character-
istics, and other methods to reduce numerical dispersion
effects.
Pronounced grid-orientation effects have been noted in
simulation of adverse mobility ratio floods with models
incorporating the commonly used five-point difference
scheme and single-point upstream weighting. The value
RESERVOIR SIMULATION 48-l 1
5-POINT
---------
g-POINT
.
A
/
\
/ \
i 2 3
PARALLEL-\
/
GRID
\
r-7
-DIAGONAL
/
GRID
/
.
3 INJECTION WELL
. PRODUCTION WELL
Fig. 48.3-Nine-spot grids
Fig. 48.2-Five-point and nine-point difference schemes
of the coefficient krJCIJIpJ in Eq. 2 obviously affects
the interblock Darcy flow rate from gridblock i-Z to block
i. Intuition might dictate evaluation of this coefficient at
some average of variable values (pressure, saturations,
etc.) in the two blocks. However, considerations of stabili-
ty and numerical dispersion frequently have led to its
evaluation at conditions existing in the block from which
the flow occurs-i.e., the upstream block. This is referred
to as single-point upstream weighting. The five-point dif-
ference scheme is reflected in the form of terms of type
A(7Ap) in Eq. 5 for the case of 2D flow. These terms
represent the interblock Darcy flow rates in the mass
balance equation for each gridblock. The solid arrows of
Fig. 48.2 illustrate these flow rates between the gridblock
and each of its four neighbors.
A strong rid-orientation effect was first reported by
Todd et al. for highly adverse mobility waterfloods
and later observed for pattern steamfloods. lo3 An area1
grid with the usual perpendicular x and y axes may be
placed over a five-spot pattern with the x axis either
parallel to or at a 45 angle to the line connecting the in-
jector to a producer (Fig. 48.3). These parallel and
diagonal grids lo2 can result in markedly different
calculated shapes of the water or steam front and the
breakthrough times. This difference was reduced by the
nine-point finite difference formulation described by
Yanosik and McCracken, to4 illustrated by the four ex-
tra dashed-line diagonal flow terms in Fig. 48.2. The nine-
point scheme has been programmed into many simulators
treating adverse mobility ratio waterfloods, steamfloods,
and CO2 solvent displacements.
As an example of this grid orientation effect, Fig. 48.3
shows a 3-acre nine-spot steamflood pattern with the
diagonal grid and 45-shifted parallel grid. This pattern
has three types of wells-labeled 1 (injector), 2 (near pro-
ducer), and 3 (far producer). Reservoir formation and
fluid properties and well rates used in the simulation model
are reported elsewhere. l4 The calculated results in Table
48.2 show the pronounced effect of grid orientation on
steam breakthrough times calculated by use of the five-
point difference scheme. Obviously, steam should arrive
at the near producer, Well 2, before it reaches the far pro-
ducer, Well 3. The parallel grid with the five-point scheme
actually gives breakthrough at Well 3 at 117 days, before
breakthrough at Well 2 (204 days). Table 48.2 shows that
the nine-point difference scheme virtually eliminates the
effect of grid orientation for this problem. Figure 48.4
uses parallel and diagonal grids to show calculated steam-
front shapes at 80 days for the two different schemes. The
difference between the nine-point fronts for two grids is
small and about equal to the error of manual interpolation.
A two-point, upstream weighting method lo2 was pro-
posed to reduce both numerical dispersion and grid-
orientation effects. Abou-Kassem and Aziz lot discuss this
and other methods 1oe-108 for reducing the orientation ef-
fect. They conclude that the nine-point scheme is the most
effective in reducing steamflood grid-orientation effects.
Two studies105-09 show very significant reduction of
grid-orientation effects in pattern steamflood simulation
results when areally homogeneous, square grids (AX=
Ay=constant) are used with the Yanosik and McCracken
nine-point scheme. However, the effects persist for a non-
square, uniform grid (Ax=2Ay)09 and the latter scheme
yields physically unreasonable results for the cases of
heterogeneity and nonuniform grids where AX (or Ay)
varies with x (y). The latter shortcoming is addressed by
several recent papers110112 that propose new or altered
nine-point schemes. Frauenthal et al. I3 describe a
modified five-point difference scheme and Pruess et
al. It4 present a seven-point, hexagonal gridblock scheme
for reducing grid-orientation effects.
The engineer can anticipate possibly significant grid-
orientation effects in simulating single- or repeated-
pattern, adverse mobility ratio displacements. Preliminary
areal, single-pattern model runs allow estimation of the
level of such effects and the need for use of a nine-point
scheme or other remedy.
The discussion and references cited obviously indicate
the current concern regarding effects of numerical-
dispersion and grid-orientation effects on the validity of
48-12
GRID DIFFERENCE-SCHEME
PARALLEL 5-POINT
---
DIAGONAL 5-POINT
----
EITHER g-POINT
TIME-80 DAYS
0 INJECTOR
l PRODUCER
Fig. 48.4-Calculated shape of steamflood front in a nine-spot
pattern.
simulation results. However, these numerical effects are
not serious in many simulation studies. Numerical-
dispersion effects are generally demonstrated as smear-
ing of theoretically sharp fronts in l- or 2D horizontal
displacements in homogeneous formations. Actual reser-
voir behavior frequently reflects strong gravity effects
such as a gas or solvent override or a water underrun.
These gravity effects combined with reservoir structure
(areal variation in dip angle) can have an influence on fluid
movement patterns, which dominates the numerical ef-
fects just discussed. In addition, reservoir heterogeneity
can play the same relatively dominant role as gravity
forces. In highly stratified or layered reservoirs, the dif-
ferent rates of travel of injected fluid through different
layers can dominate the numerical dispersion effect at the
leading edges of the individual layer displacement fronts.
Finally, a given level of numerical-dispersion or grid-
orientation effect is acceptable if its impact on calculated
reservoir performance is inconsequential in an engineer-
ing sense-i.e., in light of the questions being asked.
The model itself often can be used to estimate the level
of these numerical errors and the degree of their accepta-
bility. Before selecting the full study grid, preliminary
model runs using grids of varying coarseness can be per-
formed for a representative cross-section or 3D portion
TABLE 48.2-CALCULATED STEAM BREAKTHROUGH
TIMES (DAYS) FOR A NINE-SPOT PATTERN
Well 2 Well 3
Diagonal Parallel Diagonal Parallel
Five-point 47.0 204 1,400 117
Nine-point 87.7 75.5 900 1,000
PETROLEUM ENGINEERING HANDBOOK
of the reservoir. The results can be helpful in selecting
the coarsest grid spacing compatible with acceptably low
numerical dispersion.
In fieldwide simulation, spatial truncation error may af-
fect calculated values of well productivity, wellbore pro-
ducing pressure, and WOR and GOR. Without special
measures, the model calculates the well behavior with only
the gridblocks average values of pressure, saturations,
etc. However, the actual well behavior may reflect near-
well coning, liquid dropout, or gas evolution effects. The
dimensions of this near-well region may be two orders
of magnitude smaller than the areal block dimensions (b,
Ay). Thus the blocks average conditions may provide a
poor basis for calculating well behavior. This problem
can be significant for a well completed throughout for-
mation thickness and even more significant for a partial-
ly penetrating well.
The simplest remedy to this problem is applicable in
some cases where good vertical communication results
in a high degree of vertical phase segregation. In this case,
well pseudorelative-permeability curves have been
used. 15,16 These curves reflect the location of the com-
pletion interval and relate well behavior to average block
conditions. A more complicated approach requires use of
multivariable correlations relating well WOR and GOR
to average block conditions. g118 These correlations are
developed from a number of single-well r-z (radial-depth)
model runs with fine grid spacing near the wellbore. The
most rigorous treatment of this problem incorporates in-
dividual 1D radial or 2D ~-2 simulations for each well
simultaneously within the fieldwide 3D simulation. 19,120
Again, in any given case, the model itself can be used
to estimate the severity of this problem through com-
parison of single-well, r-z and representative 3D (portion
of reservoir) model results.
Uncertain Reservoir Description Data
Errors in reservoir description data clearly contribute to
errors in simulation model results. Since the description
data are never exactly known, one might infer that model
results are necessarily erroneous and unreliable. A number
of considerations contribute, in contradiction of this in-
ference, to model results being widely used to select and
to design oil-recovery processes and to forecast oil
recovery.
Accurate determination of all reservoir description data
is not necessary for reliability of model results. The re-
quired accuracy of any description parameter is propor-
tional to its influence on computed results (reservoir
performance). The simulation model should be used to
perform preliminary sensitivity runs to determine which
description data are important. Expense and effort should
then be concentrated on obtaining or refining only those
sensitive description data. The particular parameters
found to be important will vary from study to study,
depending on the nature of the reservoir, the recovery
process(es) of interest, and study objectives or questions.
For example, if computed oil recovery is insensitive to
wide variations in the gas relative-permeability curve, then
the accuracy of this curve might deserve little attention.
In a case where the gravity drainage mechanism is domi-
nant, the oil relative-permeability curve at low and
midrange oil saturations has a large effect on oil recovery
and deserves effort of definition. Gas viscosity, relative
RESERVOIR SIMULATION 48-13
permeability, and capillary pressure may play virtually
no role and their accuracies are irrelevant. All phase
relative permeabilities may be unimportant in a natural
or flank waterflood of a relatively clean, thick high-relief
sand where gravity forces are dominant with pronounced
phase segregation. Only relative-permeability curve end-
points may be important in such cases. However, thinner
sand or stratification, lower permeability and/or higher
rates can increase the importance of water and oil relative-
permeability curve shapes. While capillary pressure is
unimportant in many reservoir studies, it can provide the
dominant, cross-imbibition, mechanism in waterflooding
thin, heterogeneous water-wet sands.
In some studies, the engineer is less concerned with the
absolute accuracies of both model results and description
data than with the sensitivity of calculated results to varia-
tions in those data. An example is a study performed to
compare oil recoveries under alternative recovery proc-
esses. Model runs performed for each process, with reser-
voir description data varied over estimated ranges of
uncertainty, may yield substantially invariant process
rankings and incremental oil recovery differences. If so,
any significant history-matching effort may be un-
necessary and the only concern regarding accuracy of
description data should be the estimated ranges of uncer-
tainty. Another example is a design study of a given
recovery process performed to optimize pattern type and
size, well completions, and rates. Model runs, as just
described, may show that minimal history-match and/or
laboratory efforts for reservoir description are necessary
to meet the study objective.
As previously mentioned, reservoir description data are
altered through history matching to improve agreement
between model results and reservoir performance data.
Frequently, the study objectives involve estimation of
reservoir performance under displacement conditions not
present or recovery processes not active during the his-
tory period. In such cases, some description parameters
that significantly influence future performance may not
be reflected in the historical performance. An example
is a heavy-oil reservoir that was produced for nearly 40
years under natural depletion with no water drive. Solu-
tion gas was very low and interstitial water saturation was
immobile. A 50% water cut developed in time as a large
pressure decline caused water mobility through water ex-
pansion and porosity reduction. Performance data includ-
ed WOR, GOR, and pressure data for a number of wells.
The only description parameters influencing these data
were formation permeability, compressibility, critical gas
saturation, water relative permeability at saturations slight-
ly above SwC, and gas relative permeability at saturations
slightly above S,,. The history-match effort gave a good
match of performance with a unique set of these parameter
values. However, it provided no information regarding
the full-range relative-permeability curves necessary to
estimate oil recovery under waterflood and steam stimu-
lation or flooding. Laboratory relative-permeability meas-
urements and waterflood and thermal pilots were
conducted in this case.
Laboratory work and well pressure testing can be per-
formed to estimate values of some reservoir description
parameters that are not reflected in performance data.
These parameters, together with others determined by
history matching, can be used in model runs to estimate
oil recovery under the various alternative recovery
schemes within the study scope. Field pilot tests then may
be planned for one or more of the recovery processes,
subject to the model results and engineering judgment.
Argument has persisted for years regarding uniqueness
of the reservoir description obtained by history matching.
A thorough treatment of this question requires length and
mathematical complexity beyond the scope of this chapter.
Any such treatment requires careful definition of terms.
For example, define a reservoir description as a bounded
set of m numbers {Xi} representing selected zonal
permeabilities and porosities and parameters characteriz-
ing relative permeability curves. Let the sets of N numbers
{dj*}, {dj} represent observed and model calculated per-
formance data where dj=dj(x, ,x2.,.x,). If N>m, each
xi affects one or more dj, and the d. are independent .
functions of {Xi} (in a mathematics i sense undefined
here), then with rare exceptions a unique set of parameter
values {Xi} will minimize the difference between the
observed and calculated data. An altered zonation gives
a physically different parameter set {ii}. Again, a unique
set of values of {ai} generally will minimize the dif-
ference between observed and calculated data. However,
for this two-parameter set experiment, comparable
matches of observed data would allow a claim of non-
uniqueness.
As a practical matter, study budget and time constraints
prevent exhaustive trials of different parameter sets and
even limit the number of model runs with different com-
binations of parameter values within a given set. General-
ly, difficulty encountered in a history-match effort is that
of finding any reasonable description that gives good
agreement with history. The effort rarely ends with dif-
ficulty in selecting among significantly different reservoir
descriptions that give comparably good matches. In any
event, the pertinent question regarding reservoir-
description data is not related to correctness or uniqueness
in an absolute sense. The pertinent question concerns the
engineering significance of variations in parameter values
within ranges of uncertainty. As discussed previously, the
model itself is useful in estimating this significance.
Simulation Technology
Simulation technology can be divided roughly into the
categories of model definition, model formulation, solu-
tion techniques, and special techniques related to
numerical dispersion control, viscous fingering, and grid-
orientation effects. Model definition includes specifica-
tion of the problem (process) addressed, component iden-
tities, mass transport laws or expressions, fluid PVT and
rock property relationships and, finally, the set of finite-
difference equations expressing conservation of mass for
each gridblock. These equations are generally nonlinear.
Before they can be solved for pressures, saturations, etc.,
they must be linearized and manipulated into a set of
simultaneous linear algebraic equations. The term for-
mulation refers to these manipulations and the final form
of this set of linearized equations. In a general sense, this
set of equations can be expressed in the matrix form Ap = b
where A is a very sparse, banded Nb xN~ matrix and the
known t, and unknown e are column vectors of dimen-
sion Nb . A rapidly expanding portion of the simulation
literature describes increasingly efficient, iterative solu-
tion techniques for this problem.
48-14 PETROLEUM ENGINEERING HANDBOOK
Model Formulations
In 1959, Douglas et al. I6 proposed leap-ffog and
simultaneous formulations for incompressible 2D two-
phase flow. During 1960-69 a number of authors21-24
described two- and three-phase, 2D and 3D black-oil
models based on this simultaneous formulation. In 1960,
Stone and Garder I8 and Sheldon et al. I7 introduced the
concept of eliminating saturation derivatives among the
black-oil model equations to obtain a sin le difference
equation in pressure. Fagin and Stewart 1$ in 1966 and
Breitenbach et al. *O in 1968 described three-phase black-
oil models based on this implicit-pressureiexplicit-
saturation (IMPES) formulation. The IMPES formulation
is explicit in saturation and composition in that relative
permeabilities and concentrations are expressed explicit-
ly in the interblock flow terms. Solution of the pressure
equations over the grid is followed by an explicit updating
of phase saturations and compositions in each gridblock.
than does IMPES. For each gridblock, the adaptive im-
plicit method internally senses (without user intervention)
which dependent variables (e.g., saturations, pressure,
mole fractions) require implicit dating for stability. For
most practical reservoir problems this results in one equa-
tion per gridblock for a major fraction of the grid and an
overall average number of equations per block con-
siderably less than N. Thus the method can attain the
stability of the implicit formulation with considerably less
computing expense. Also, computer storage requirements
are reduced significantly. Future implementations of this
formulation may contribute to increased model reliabili-
ty (stability) and efficiency in simulations of all types of
recovery processes.
In 1969, Blair and Weinaug12 published a fully im-
plicit formulation which expresses all terms in the inter-
block flow and well production expressions implicitly.
This requires simultaneous solution of all N model equa-
tions. A number of later papers describe implementation
of the implicit formulation in black-oil, * composi-
tional 3 and thermal 39 models.
In 1970, MacDonald23 improved the stability of the
IMPES method for the two-phase water/oil case by
following the pressure equation solution with solution of
a water-saturation equation over the grid using implicit
(new-time-level or end-of-timestep) values of relative
permeabilities in the interblock flow terms. Spillette et
al. 124 extended this concept to the three-phase case and
called the formulation sequential.
Single-well coning studies generally involve radial grid
spacings, resulting in very small gridblocks near the well
and large throughput ratios. For these studies, the IMPES
formulation is unsuitable, and the implicit formulation is
generally the most efficient. ** For field-scale, 3D black-
oil studies, the overall computing time is frequently less
with the sequential than with the IMPES or implicit for-
mulation. The typical black-oil simulator applied today
in 1 ,OOO- or more gridblock, field-scale studies is an IM-
PES model with a user-specified option of sequential solu-
tion. Smaller black-oil studies and preliminary cross-
sectional, coning, and sensitivity studies associated with
the large problems frequently employ the implicit formula-
tion. Recent thermal models involve implicit formulations.
With one exception 3 recent compositional models29-33
are based on the IMPES formulation.
The IMPES formulation can become unstable if the
volumetric flow through a gridblock in a timestep exceeds
a small fraction of the block PV. The more stable sequen-
tial formulation remains stable to much larger ratios of
gridblock volumetric throughput/PV. The tolerable
throughput ratio for the implicit formulation is significant-
ly larger than that of the sequential method. Arithmetic
(or computing cost) per timestep and timestep size both
increase from IMPES to sequential to implicit formula-
tions. Since the total cost of simulating a given time period
is proportional to the product of arithmetic per timestep
and timestep size, all three formulations are used widely
today.
The popular IMPES and more recent implicit formula-
tions are illustrated here for the case of 3D two-phase flow
of water and undersaturated oil. This illustration is in the
form of the Newton-Raphson procedure, which Blair and
Weinaug l2 used in describing their implicit formulation.
For clarity, rock compressibility, gravity, and capillary
pressure are neglected, and phase (component) produc-
tion rates are fixed, independent of pressure and satura-
tions. The terms explicit and implicit refer to the time level
of evaluation for variables or terms in the left side, in-
terblock flow terms of Eqs. 5. Explicit dating denotes
evaluation at the beginning of the timestep, t, (level n),
while implicit dating denotes evaluation at the end of the
timestep, t,+i (level n+ 1). The implicit formulation of
Eq. 5, then, appears for each gridblock as
The sequential formulation can fail to preserve material
balances in some problems where adjacent
Q
ridblock com-
positions differ greatly. 25 Meijerink * described a
stabilized IMPES formulation, which improves the stabili-
ty of IMPES to a lesser extent than the sequential method
but reduces material balance error in regions of steep com-
position gradients.
=f(S,,p)=O . . . . ., . . . . . . . . . . . . (lla)
and
Thomas and Thurnau 127 describe an adaptive implicit
formulation, which allows different levels of implicitness
in different gridblocks. These various levels may change
with timestep number and with iteration number within
a given timestep. As previously mentioned, the implicit
formulation 12 requires simultaneous solution of N equa-
tions for each block over the entire grid. The correspond-
ing arithmetic effort of solution is proportional to N3.
Since N= 1 for IMPES, the implicit formulation obviously
requires considerably more computing time per timestep
A(T,Ap)-qpo
-+,S, -@Jo),1
=g(S,,p)=O, . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . (llb)
where
T = interblock transmissibility,
p = pressure,
qpp = production rate of phase P, oil or water
VP = PV of gridblock,
RESERVOIR SIMULATION
48-I 5
Atp = timestep
bp = reciprocal formation volume factor of
phase P, ST vol/res vol,
Sp = saturation of phase P, and
f, g = function of.
Gridblock indices ij, and k on all terms are suppressed
for clarity. All terms at time level n are known from the
previous timesteps calculations. The absence of time level
subscript denotes the implicit level, n + 1. Thus all terms
T,,T,,b,,b,,S,,S,,p in Eq. 11 represent unknown
values at time level n + 1, For all Nb gridblocks, Eqs. 11
are ~Nz. eouations in the 2Nh unknowns
~s,ikniYltPi,kn+I
11 a;k two e&rations
}. For a particular gridblock, Eqs.
in the 14 unknowns consisting of
(S,,p) pairs in the block and its six neighbors. Thesesix
neighbor pairs are introduced by the Laplacian interblock
flow terms. Oil saturations are not additional unknowns
since S, =I-S,; the transmissibilities T and reciprocal
formation volume factors (b) are functions of S ,,, and p.
Application of the well-known Newton-Raphson itera-
tive procedure to Eq. 11 gives
and
f6p=o . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
(124
b? p
g(s,,p)=g(sppf)+ - W,
( 1
ls
6S, w
Wb)
where P is iteration number, superscript P denotes evalua-
tion at (S&), hp=p+ -pp, and S,f,,pp approach the
desired S, ,p values as 4 increases. The terms containing
derivatives are actually sums of seven terms because of
the previously mentioned functional dependence on
neighboring block unknowns. Substituting from Eqs. 11
into Eqs. 12, performing the differentiation and rearrang-
ing the result gives
A(7-p11A&S,)+A(TP,2A8p)-
VP
-b&E,
AI
P
- pt(S,bc,)Y6P+f(S~,PY)=O .
and
A(TpZ, A6S,)+A(Tp*2A6p)+
VP
-b,ySS,
At
P
--
At (S,b,c,)pGp+g(S~,pe)=O, .
or in condensed matrix form,
A(Tc)-Cc+B=O, . . . . . . .
(134
(13b)
. (14)
where T and C are 2 X 2 matrices and P and R are 2 X 1 -
column vectors:
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
(15)
The coefficients Tll , TzI arise from saturation deriva-
tives of relative permeabilities in the transmissibilities.
The C matrix elements are obvious upon inspection of
Eqs. 13 (e.g., c,* = VplA,(S,b,c,). The compressibil-
ities (c, ,c,) appear through the definition c = (1 ib)dbidp.
Eq. 14 written for all gridblocks is a set of Nb linear
parabolic difference equations in the Nt, unknowns
{Pi,.,k}. Following solution by a direct or iterative tech-
nique, the new iterates are calculated as S,$+ =S$+
6Sw ,P
p+ =pp+Gp. Coefficients are recalculated at
1+1
(SK, .p
I ) for all blocks and Eq. 14 is solved again.
These outer or Newton iterations are continued until the
maximum values over the grid of { I AS,,, I , I Sp I } are less
than some prescribed tolerances. The term inner itera-
tions refers to iterations performed by an iterative solu-
tion technique in solving Eq. 14 for a given Newton
iteration.
The IMPES formulation treats transmissibilities ex-
plicitly SO that the first terms in Eqs. 11 are A(T, Ap)
and A(T,,Ap), where T,, and T,, are calculated from
known saturations at time level n. This results, upon ap-
plication of Eq. 12, in zero values for transmissibility
derivatives with respect to neighboring block saturations
and Eq. 16 replaces Eq. 13:
-z(S b ,+ ,c,)6p+f(S$,,pp)=0.. .(16a)
and
A(T,,Asp) + %b$S,
-~(S,b,c,)6p+g(S&pp)=0. . . (16b)
The single saturation unknown, 6S,, can be eliminated
by multiplying Eqs. 16a and 16b by B,fz and BJ, respec-
tively, and adding to obtain
B,$ A(T,.,A&p) + B,PA(T,,,A&p)
-J$S ,L,cM.+SSUcO)E~p+B~~fY+BljigY=O,. (17)
where B is the formation volume factor, l/b.
This is a set of Nb single or scalar, linear parabolic dif-
ference equations in the Nb pressure unknowns {Gp+ }
As described before, a number of outer or Newton itera-
tions are performed with pressure updated and coefficients
48-16 PETROLEUM ENGINEERING HANDBOOK
recalculated after each iteration. After convergence,
saturation S, is explicitly calculated, block by block,
from Eq. 1 la (with T,, in the first term). Eq. 17 can be
written more simply for the section to follow as
A(TAGp)-c++r=O, . . . . . . (18)
where T, 6p,c, and r are scalars.
Solution Techniques
Eq. 18 written for all Nb gridblocks can be expressed in
matrix form as
AP=b, . . _ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . (19)
where A is a nonsymmetric, sparse Nb xN~ matrix and
& is the Nb x 1 column vector (Sp Uk ) . Direct solution
(Gaussian elimination) or iterative methods can be used
to solve Eq. 19. The arithmetic effort required in direct
solution strongly depends on the pattern of nonzero
elements in the A matrix. This pattern in turn depends
upon the particular linear ordering or numbering of the
Nb gridblocks. An ordering is simply a one-to-one cor-
respondence between a linear index m = 1,2 . Nh and the
gridblock indices {ij,k}, i= 1,2. . .N,, j=1,2,. . .N,,
k = 1,2. . NZ . Here the term natural ordering denotes
numbering the blocks consecutively first in the shortest
direction, then in the next shortest direction, and finally
in the longest direction. For example, if N, >N, > N,,
then
m=k+(j-l)N,+(i-l)NYN,. . . . . . . (20)
Breitenbach et al., 29 Peaceman, and others illustrate
the diagonal-band form of the A matrix and minimum
direct solution effort which result from this natural
ordering.
The half bandwidth of the A matrix is N,N, and the
arithmetic effort (number of multiplications) of direct solu-
tion is roughly proportional to Nb(NyN,)*. Iterative
methods require an arithmetic effort roughly proportional
to Nb. Thus increasing problem size, Nh, renders
iterative solution increasingly preferable to direct solu-
tion. For large problems, computer storage requirement
is also significantly less for iterative than direct solution.
Price and Coats I30 described reduced bandwidth direct
solution methods based on diagonal (D2) and alternate-
diagonal (D4) gridblock orderings. For certain test prob-
lems and iterative methods, they showed a D4
direct/iterative work ratio less than unity for half band-
widths up to about 30. Compared with natural ordering,
D4 ordering can reduce direct solution computational ef-
fort by factors up to four and six for the 2D and 3D cases,
respectively. Woo et al. 13 described other techniques
that take advantage of matrix sparsity to reduce direct
solution effort. In spite of these advancements in direct
solution, iterative methods remain preferable for large
reservoir studies.
solution must be performed for tridiagonal matrices in
LSOR and pentadiagonal matrices in planar SOR. As the
block size is increased the arithmetic work per iteration
increases because of the increased arithmetic associated
with this direct solution within each block. However, con-
vergence rate generally increases and the total number
of iterations correspondingly decreases with increasing
block size. To some extent, optimal block size can be
determined by mathematical analysis 33,134 of this
tradeoff between work per iteration and number of itera-
tions. The SOR methods remain popular because of ease
of coding, low computer storage requirement and
automatic determination of the optimum value of the single
iteration parameter. Varga ~4 describes the power method
for this parameter determination and Breitenbach et al. 129
illustrate its application.
In 1971, Watts135 presented an additive correction
method which improves LSOR convergence rate in highly
anisotropic problems. A highly anisotropic problem is one
where, throughout the grid, transmissibibties in one direc-
tion are much
B
reater than those in other direction(s). Set-
tari and Aziz 6 extended Watts method to other iterative
solution techniques.
Alternating-direction iterative methods (ADI) were
developed for 2D by Peaceman and Rachford 137 in 1955
and for 3D by Douglas and Rachford 38 in 1956. These
methods were widely used in simulation throughout the
1960s and into the 1970s. The AD1 methods require a
sequence or set of iteration parameters. While mathe-
matical analysis yields an optimal parameter set for cer-
tain cases, 1,137 actual reservoir cases frequently require
some trial-and-error effort.
In 1968, Stone 139 described the strongly-implicit pro-
cedure (SIP); Weinstein et al. t4 described SIP in 3D.
Again, a set of iteration parameters is required. Parameter
estimation methods associated with AD1 have proved
useful for SIP * but, again, some trial-and-error effort is
required or beneficial in man reservoir studies.
A number of studiest29~136~15~141 compare direct solu-
tion, LSOR, ADI, and SIP methods for a variety of test
and reservoir problems. There is no simple answer to
which method is best. The ranking of the methods is
problem-dependent in that it depends on the range of varia-
tion in coefficient (transmissibility) values in the A matrix
and the pattern (e.g., highly anisotropic), if any, of their
variation. In general, the more difficult reservoir problems
have a very large range from the smaller to larger
transmissibilities and this large ratio is not uniformly
associated with a particular direction throughout the grid.
SIP became widely used throughout the 1970s and re-
mains in use today because it frequently outperforms the
other methods in these difficult cases.
A new class or type of iterative methods is the subject
of a number of papers4-50 published since the mid
1970s. Basically, the methods involve approximate fac-
torization of the A matrix into an LU product, followed
by an iterative sequence
Successive-overreluxation (SOR) iterative methods
described bv Young 132,33 have been used in simulators
wpk+ -pk)=rk, , . . . . . . . . .
(21)
from the early 1960s. Block SOR (BSOR) methods, in-
cluding line (LSOR), two-line, and planar SOR, have
where
proved especially popular. The BSOR methods require
L = a lower triangular matrix (all entries Pii =0
direct solution within each block, which means that direct
for j>i),
RESERVOIR SIMULATION
V = an upper triangular matrix (all entries uii
= 0 forj<i),
k = iterate number, and
rk = b-Apk.
Convergence is accelerated by the conjugate gradi-
ent
3
14 orthomin, 143 or other techniques. Because of the
sparse, banded nature of the lower and upper triangular
matrices L and V, the arithmetic work per iteration of
solving Eq. 21 is a very small fraction of that required
in direct solution of the original problem, Eq. 19.
These new methods seem very attractive in that they
require no iteration parameter and are more robust than
previous methods. That is, they generally exhibit fast or
reasonable convergence rates, even for difficult reservoir
problems where older methods fail or converge slowly.
Two studies 148,50 showed convergence for the difficult
thermal (steamflood) problem where negative transmis-
sibilities can occur. 15 The interested reader should con-
sult the reference sections of Refs. 141 through 150 for
a number of equally good papers dealing with these new
iterative methods.
Code Vectorization
The computational speed, storage, and vectorization
capabilities of computer hardware have increased sharp-
ly in the past few years. As an example, the Cray-I S com-
puter provides up to 4,000,OOO decimal-words of storage,
compared with a typically available 100,000 words on
most machines used until 1975. Recently introduced com-
puters offer sharp increases in computational speeds and
speed/cost ratios. In addition, vector processing
capabilities of Control Data Corp. and Cray supercom-
puters significantly increase the efficiency of simulators
coded to use this vectorization.
This increased machine size, speed, and vector process-
ing contribute to the feasibility of larger reservoir studies.
Until the middle 1970s, most black-oil studies involved
grids of 3,000 or fewer blocks. In 1980, Mrosovsky et
al. 15* described a Prudhoe Bay field study with more
than 16,000 active gridblocks. Studies on the supercom-
puters with grids of more than 30,000 blocks have been
performed recently.
The vector-processing capability has had a strong im-
pact on simulation technology. The resultant increase in
feasible study size has spurred the development of new,
faster iterative solution techniques. Several papers 52-56
describe the contribution of code vectorization to reduced
computing expense and the need to develop or redesign
model code to take advantage of the vectorization.
Nomenclature
A = a nonsymmetric, sparse Nb x Nh matrix
A = Ay,AZk =cross-sectional area normal to
flow
bp = reciprocal formation volume factor of
phase P, ST vol/res vol
C = 2x2 matrix
C,J = concentration of component I in phase J
C,p = concentration of component I in phase P
CNJ = concentration of component N in phase .I
f,J = fugacity of component I in phase J
48-17
HJ = enthalpy, energy/mole
k
rP =
relative permeability to phase P (P=w,o,g)
L= a lower triangular matrix (all entries e,=O
L=
forj>i), see Eq. 21
distance between adjacent block centers,
m=
Nb =
N, =
N, =
N, =
n=
P=
P
ego =
P
two =
9I =
(AT~-~ +Ax;)/2, see Eq. 1
1, 2. _ .Nb, linear index
total number of gridblocks, N,N,N,
number of gridblocks in x direction
number of gridblocks in y direction
number of gridblocks in z direction
time level, t n+, =t, +A\t
Nbxl column vector {6pijk}, see Eq. 19
gas/oil capillary pressure
water/oil capillary pressure
component I interblock flow rate,
mass/time
qpi =
mass rate of production of component I
qpp =
production rate of phase P (water or oil)
R= 2 X 1 column vector
s,, = critical gas saturation
SJ = saturation of phase J
s
WC =
critical water saturation
T= interblock transmissibility and T=2 x 2
matrix
TN =
interblock transmissibility for flow of
component I in phase .I
T,, = oil transmissibility at time level 12
T
wn
= water transmissibility at time level n
V = an upper triangular matrix (all entries
uij=O forj<i)
UJ = internal energy, energy/mole
I/ = grid block volume, hi A!J kzk
Ax = xi-1 -Xi, where x is p or Z
x/J = mol fraction of component I in phase J
yp = specific weight of phase P
6 = time difference operator, 6X=X,+, -X,
pp = viscosity of phase P
Subscripts
i, j, k = gridblock indices
J = w,o,g or 1,2,3,
n = step number
Superscripts
k = iteration number
P = iteration number
References
1. Peaceman, D.W. : Fundamenta1.s of Numerical Reservoir Simula-
tion, Elsevier Scientific Pub. Co., New York City (1977).
2. Criehlow, H.G.: Modem Reservoir Engineering-A Simulation Ap-
proach, Prentice-Hall, Inc., Englewood Cliffs, NJ (1977).
3. Aziz, K. and Set&i, A.: Petroleum Reservorr Simulation. Applied
Science Publishers, London (1979).
4. Thomas, G.W.: Principles of Hydrocarbon Reservoir Simulation,
second edition, Intl. Human Resources Dev. Corp.. Boston (1982).
5. Muskat, M.: The Flow of Homogeneous Fluids Through Porous
Media, J.W. Edwards, Inc., Ann Arbor, MI (1946).
6. Muskat, M,: Physical Properties ofOil Production, McGraw-Hill
Book Co. Inc., New York City (1949)
48-18 PETROLEUM ENGINEERING HANDBOOK
7. Muskat, M.: The Production Histories of Producing Gas-Drive
Reservoirs, J. Applied fhys. (1945) 16, 147.
8. Katz, D.L.: Methods of Estimating Oil and Gas Reserves,
Trans., AIME (1936) 118, 18-32.
9. Buckley, S.E. and Leverett, M.C.: Mechanism of Fluid Displace-
ment in Sands, Trans., AIME (1942) 146, 107-17.
10. Welge, H.J.: A Simplified Method for Computing Oil Recoveries
by Gas or Water Drive, Trams, AIME (1952) 195, 91-98.
11. Odeh, A.S.: Reservoir Simulation-What Is It? J. Pet. Tech.
(Nov. 1969) 1383-88.
12. Staggs, H.M. and Herbeck, E.F.: Reservoir Simulation
Models-An Engineering Overview, J. Pet. Tech. (Dec. 1971)
1428-36.
13. ODell, P.M.: Numerical Reservoir Simulation: Review and State
of the Art, paper presented at the 1974 National AIChE Meeting,
Tulsa, OK, March 11-13.
14. Coats, K.H.: Reservoir Simulation: State of the Art, J. Per.
Tech. (Aug. 1982) 1633-42.
15. Craft, B.C. and Hawkins, M.F. Jr.: Applied Petroleum Reservoir
Engineering, Prentice-Hall, Inc., Englewood Cliffs, NJ (1959).
16. Douglas, I. Jr., Peaceman, D.W., and Rachford, H-H., Jr.: A
Method for Calculating Multi-Dimensional Immiscible Displace-
ment, Trans., AIME (1959) 216, 297-308.
17. Sheldon. J.W.. Harris. C.D.. and Bavlv, D.: A Method for
GeneralReservoir Behavior Simulation dn Digital Computers,
paper SPE 1521-G presented at the 1960 SPE Annual Meeting,
benver. Oct. 2-5. -
18. Stone, H.L. and Garder, A.O. Jr.: Analysis of Gas-Cap or
Dissolved-Gas Drive Reservoirs, Sac. Pet. Eng. J. (June 1961)
92-104; Trans., AIME, 222.
19. Fagin, R.G. and Stewart, C.H. Jr.: A New Approach to the Two-
Dimensional Multiphase Reservoir Simulator, Sot. Per. Eng. J.
(June 1966) 175-82; Trans., AIME, 237.
20. Breitenbach, E.A., Thumau, D.H., and Van Poolen, H. K.: The
Fluid Flow Simulation Equations, paper SPE 2020 presented at
the 1968 SPE Symposium on Numerical Simulation of Reservoir
Performance, Dallas. April 22-23.
21. Coats, K.H. etal.: Simulation ofThree-Dimensional. Two-Phase
Flow in Oil and Gas Reservoirs, Sot. Pet. Eng. J. (Dec. 1967)
377-88; Trans., AIME, 240.
22. Peery, J.H. and Herron, E.H. Jr.: Three-Phase Reservoir Simula-
tion, J. Pet. Tech. (Feb. 1969) 21 l-20; Trans., AIME, 246.
23. Snvder. L.J.: Two-Phase Reservoir Flow Calculations. Sot.
Pe;. Eng. J. (June 1969) 170-82.
24. Sheffield, M.: Three-Phase Fluid Flow Including Gravitational,
Viscous and Capillary Forces, Sot. Pet. Eng. 2. (June 1969)
255-69, Trans., AIME, 246.
25. Zudkevitch, D. and Joffe, J.: Correlation and Prediction of Vapor-
Liquid Equilibria with the Redlich-Kwong Equation of State,
AlChE J. (Jan. 1970) 16, 112-19.
26. Soave, G.: Chem. Eng. Sci. (1972) 27, 1197.
27. Peng, D.Y. and Robinson, D.B.: A New Two-Constant Equa-
tion of State, Ind. Eng. Chem. Fund. (1976) 15, 59.
28. Martin, J.J.: Cubic Equations of State-Which? Ind. Eng. Chem.
Fund. (May 1979) 18, 81.
29. Kazemi, H., Vestal, C.R., and Shank, G.D.: An Efficient
Multicomponent Numerical Simulator, Sot. Per. Eng. J. (Oct.
1978) 355-68.
30. Fussell, L.T. and Fussell, D.D.: An Iterative Technique for Com-
positional Reservoir Models, Sot. Pet. Eng. J. (Aug. 1979)
211-20.
31. Coats, K.H.: A Equation of State Compositional Model, Sot
Per. Eng. J. (Oct. 1980) 363-76.
32. Nghiem, L.X., Fong, D.K., and Aziz, K.: Compositional Model-
ing With an Equation of State, Sot. Pet. Eng. J. (Dec. 1981)
688-98.
33. Young, L.C. and Stephenson, R.E.: A Generalized Composi-
tional Approach for Reservoir Simulation, Sot. Pet. Eng. J. (Oct.
1983) 727-42.
34. Gottfried, B.S.: A Mathematical Model ofThermal Oil Recovery
m Linear Systems. Sot. Pet. Eng. J. (Sept. 1965) 196-210;
Trans., AIME, 234.
35. Shutler, N.D.: Numerical Three-Phase Model of the Two-
Dimensional Steamflood Process, Sot. Pet. Eng. J. (Dec. 1970)
405-17; Trans., AIME, 249.
36. Weinstein, H.G., Wheeler, J.A., and Woods. E.G. : Numerical
Model for Thermal process, Sot. Pet. Eng. J. (Feb. 1977) 65-78;
Trans., AIME, 263.
37. Crcokston. H.B., Culham, W.E., and Chen, W.H.: A Numerical
Simulation Model for Thermal Recovery Processes, Sac. Pet.
Eng. J. (Feb. 1979) 37-58; Trans., AIME, 267.
38. Youngren, G.K.: Development and Application of an In-Situ
Combustion Reservoir Simulator, Sot. Pet. Eng. J. (Feb. 1980)
39-5 1.
39. Coats, K.H.: In-Situ Combustion Model, Sot. Pet. Eng. .I. (Dec.
1980) 533-53.
40. Hwang, M.K., Jines, W.R., and Odeh, A..%: An In-Situ Com-
bustion Process Simulator With a Moving-Front Representation,
Sot. Pet. Eng. J. (April 1982) 271-79.
41. Gogarty, W.B.: Status of Surfactant or Micellar Methods, J.
Pet. Tech. (Jan. 1976) 93-102.
42. Johnson, C.E. Jr.: Status of Caustic and Emulsion Methods,
J. Pet. Tech. (Jan. 1976) 85-92.
43. Pope, G.A. and Nelson, R.C.: A Chemical Flooding Composi-
tional Simulator, Sot. Pet. Eng. J. (Oct. 1978) 339-54.
44. Todd, M.R. and Chase, CA.: A Numerical Simulator for Predict-
ing Chemical Flood Performance, Proc., Fifth SPE Symposium
on Reservoir Simulation (1979) 161-74.
45. Fleming, P.D. III, Thomas, C.P., and Winter, W .K.: Formula-
tion of a General Multiphase, Multicomponent Chemical Flood
Model, Sot. Per. Eng. J. (Feb. 1981) 63-76.
46. Thomas, L.K., Dixon, T.N., and Pierson, R.G.: Fractured Reser-
voir Simulation, Sot. Pet. Eng. J. (Feb. 1983) 42-54.
47. Gilman, J.R. and Kazemi, H.: Improvements in Simulation of
Naturally Fractured Reservoirs, Sot. Pet. Eng. J. (Aug. 1983)
659-707.
48. Blaskovich, F.T. er al.: A Multicomponent Isothermal System
for Efficient Reservoir Simulation, paper SPE 11480 presented
at the 1983 SPE Middle East Oil Show, Manama, March 14-17.
49. Henderson, J.H.. Dempsey, J.R. and Tyler, J.C.: Use of
Numerical Models to Develop and Operate Gas Storage Reser-
voirs, J. Pet. Tech. (Nov. 1969) 1239-46.
50. Mann, L.D. and Johnson, G.A.: Predicted Results of Numeric
Grid Models Compared With Actual Field Performance. J. Pet.
Tech. (Nov. 1970) 1390-98.
51. Thomas, J.E. and Driscoll, V.J.: A Modeling Approach for Op-
timizing Waterflood Performance, Slaughter Field Chickenwire
Pattern, J. Pet. Tech. (July 1973) 757-63.
52. A Study of the Sensitivity of Oil Recovery to Production Rate.
Proc., Alberta Energy Resources Conservation Board, No. 75 11
(Feb. 1974) Schedule 1, Shell Canada Ltd.
53. Stright, D.H. Jr.. Bennion, D. W., and Aziz, K.: Influence of
Production Rate on the Recovery of Oil From Horizontal
Waterfloods, J. Pet. Tech. (May 1975) 555-63.
54. Thakur, G.C., et al. : G-2 and G-3 Reservoux, Delta South Field,
Nigeria: Part 2-Simulation of Water Injection, J. Pet. Tech.
(Jan. 1982) 148-58.
55. Graue, D.J. and Zana, E.T.: Studv of a Possible CO? Flood
in Rangely Field, Colorado, J. Pet.Tech. (July 1981) 1~12-18.
56. Bloomquist, C.W., Fuller, K.L., and Moranville, M.B.: Miscible
Gas Enhanced Oil Recovery Economics and the Effects of the
Windfall Profit Tax, paper SPE 10274 presented at the 1981 SPE
Annual Technical Coifeience and Exhibition, San Antonio, Oct.
5-7.
57. Todd, M.R., Cobb, W.M., and McCarter, E.D. : CO2 Flood
Performance Evaluation for the Cornell Unit, Wasson San Andres
Field, J. Pet. Tech. (Oct. 1982) 1583-90.
58. Herrera, J.Q. and Hanzlik, E.J.: Steam Stimulation History Match
ofMultiwel1 Pattern in the Sl-B Zone, Cat Canyon Field, paper
SPE 7969 presented at the 1979 California Regional Meeting, Ven-
tura, April 18-20.
59. Williams, R.L.: Steamflood Pilot Design for a Massive, Steep-
ly Dipping Reservoir, paper SPE 10321 presented at the 1981
SPE Annual Technical Conference and Exhibition, San Antonio,
Oct. 5-7.
60. Meldau. R. F., Shipley, R.G., and Coats, K.H .: Cyclic Gas/Steam
Stimulation of Heavy-Oil Wells, J. Pet. Tech. (Oct. 1981)
1990-98.
61. Gomaa, E.E., Duerksen, J.H., and Woo, P.T.: Designing a
Steamflood Pilot in the Thick Monarch Sand of the Midway-Sunset
Field, J. Per. Tech. (Dec. 1977) 1559-68.
62. Moughamian, J.M., et al. : Simulation and Design of Steam Drive
in a Vertical Reservoir, J. Per. Tech. (July 1982) 1546-54.
63. Selection of Reservoirs Amenable to Micellar Flooding, First
Annual Report, Dept. of Energy (Dec. 1980) BC/OOO48-20.
64 Fayers, F.J., Hawes, R.I., and Mathews, J.D.: Some Aspects
RESERVOIR SIMULATION 48-19
of the Potential Application of Surfactants or CO2 as EOR Proc-
essesinNorth Sea Reservoirs, J. Per. Tech. (Sept. 1981) 1617-27.
65. dezabala, E.F., er al.: A Chemical Theory for Linear Alkaline
Flooding, Sot. Pet. Eng. J. (April 1982) 245-58.
66. Patton, J.T., Coats, K.H., and Colegrove, G.T.: Prediction of
Polymer Flood Performance, Sot. Per. Eng. J. (March 1971)
72-84; Trans., AIME, 251.
67. Todd, M.R. and Longstaff, W.J.: The Development. Testing,
and Application of a Numerical Simulator for Predicting Misci-
ble Flood Performance, J. Per. Tech. (July 1972) 874-82; Trans.,
AIME, 253.
68. Cook, R.E., Jacoby, R.H., and Ramesh, A.B.: A Beta-Type
Reservoir Simulator for Approximating Compositional Effects Dur-
ing Gas Injection, Sot. Per . Eng. J. (Oct. 1974) 471-81.
69. Patton, J.T., Coats, K.H., and Spence, K.: Carbon Dioxide Well
Simulation: Part I-A Parametric Study, J. Per. Tech. (Aug.
1982) 1798-1804.
70. Coats, K.H.: Simulation of Gas Condensate Reservoir Perfor-
mance, paper SPE 10512 presented at the 1982 SPE Reservoir
Simulation Symposium, New Orleans, Feb. 1-3.
71. Coats, K.H.: Simulation of l/8 Five-/Nine-Spot Patterns, Sot.
Pet. Eng. J. (Dec. 1982) 902.
72. Killough, I.E., et al.: The Kuparek River Field: A Regression
Approach to Pseudorelative Permeabilities, paper SPE 1053 1,
presented at the 1982 SPE Symposium on Reservoir Simulation,
New Orleans, Feb. 1-3.
73. Killough, I.E., er al.: The Prudhoe Bay Field: Simulation of a
COIIIpleX ReSeNOir, Proc., Intl. Petroleum Exhibition and
Technical Symposium, Beijing (1982) 777-94.
74. Jacks, H.H., Smith, O.E., and Mattax, C.C. : The Modeling of
a Three-Dimensional Reservoir With a Two-Dimensional Reser-
voir Simulator-The Use of Dynamic Pseudo Functions, Sot.
Pef. Eng. J. (June 1973) 175-85.
75. Kyte, J.R. and Berry, D.W.: New Pseudo Functions to Control
Numerical Dispersion, Sot. Pet. Eng. J. (Aug. 1975) 269-76.
76. Killough, J.E. and Foster. H.P. Jr.: Reservoir Simulation of the
Empire Abe Field: The Use of Pseudos in a Multilayered System.
Sot. Per. Ert~. J. (Oct. 1979) 279-88.
77. Coats, K.H., Dempsey. J.R.. and Henderson, J.H.: The Use of
Vertical Equihbrrum in Two-Dimensional Simulation of Three-
Dimensional Reservoir Performance, Sot. Per. Enx. J. (March
1971) 63-71; Trans.. AIME, 251.
78. Hear, C.L.: Simulation of Stratified Waterflooding by Pseudo
Relative Permeability Curves, J. Per. Trch. (July 1971) 80-13.
79. Simon. R., Rosman. A.. and Zana. ET.: Phase-Behavior Proper-
ties of CO*-Reservoir Oil System, Sot. Pet. Eng. J. (Feb. 1978)
20-26.
80. Orr, F.M. and Silva, M.K.: Equilibrium Phase Compositions
of CO 2 /Hydrocarbon Mixtures-Part 1: Measurement by a Con-
tinuous Multiple-Contact Experiment, Sot. Per. Eng. J. (April
1983) 272-80.
81. Orr, F.M., Silva, M.K., and Lien, C.: Equilibrium Phase Com-
positions of CO2iCrude Oil Mixtures-Part 2: Comparison of Con-
tinuous Multiple-Contact and Slim-Tube Displacement Tests, Sot.
Pet. Eng. J. (April 1983) 281-91.
82. Katz, D.L. and Firoozabadi, A.. Predicting Phase Behavior of
Condensate/Crude-Oil Systems Using Methane Interaction Coef-
ficients, J. Pet. Tech. (Nov. 1978) 1649-55; Trans., AIME, 265.
83. Yarborough, L.: Application of a Generalized Equation of State
to Petroleum Reservoir Fluids, Equations of St&e in Engineer-
ing, Advances in Chemisrgv Series, K.C. Chao and R.L. Robn-
son (eds.), American Chemical Society, Washington, D.C. (1979).
182, 385-435.
84. Whitson, C.H. and Tarp, S.B.:
Evaluating Constant-Volume
Depletion Data, J. Per. Tech. (March 1983) 610-20.
85. Coats, K.H. and Smart. G.T.: Application of a Regression-Based
EOS PVT Program to Laboratory Data, paper SPE 11197,
presented at the 1982 SPE Annual Technical Conference and EX-
hibition, New Orleans, Sept. 26-29.
86. Coats, K.H., Dempsey, J.R., and Henderson, J.H.: A New
Technique for Determining Reservoir Description from Field Per-
formance Data, Sot. Pet. Eng. J. (March 1970) 66-74; Trans.,
AIME, 249.
87. Thomas, L.K. and Hellurns, L.J.: A Nonlinear Automatic History
Matching Technique for Reservoir Simulation Models, Sot. Pet.
Eng. J. (Dec. 1972) 508-14; Trans.. AIME, 253.
88. Wasserman, M.L., Emanuel, A.S., and Seinfeld, J.H.: Prac-
tical Application of Optimal-Control Theory to History-Matching
Multiphase Simulator Models, Sot. Pet. Eng. J. (Aug. 1975)
347-55; Trans., AIME, 259.
89. Bobcrg, T.C., et al.: Application of Inverse Simulation to a Com-
plex Multireservoir System, J. Pet. Tech. (July 1974) 801-08;
Trans., AIME, 257.
90. Watson, A.T., et al. : History Matching Two-Phase Petroleum
Reservoirs, Sot. Per. Eng. J. (Dec. 1980) 521-32.
91. Blair, P.M. and Peaceman, D.W.: An Experimental Verifica-
tion of a Two-Dimensional Technique for Computing Performance
of Gas-Drive Reservoirs, Sot. Pet. Eng. J. (March 1963) 19-27;
Trans., AIME, 228.
92. Ridings, R.L., et al. : Experimental and Calculated Behavior of
Dissolved-Gas-Drive Systems, Sot. Pet. Eng. J. (March 1963)
41-48; Trans., AIME, 228.
93. Mungan, N.: A Theoretical and Experimental Coning Study,
Sot. Pet. Eng. J. (June 1975) 247-54: Trans., AIME, 259.
94. Kazemi, H. and Merrill, L.S.: Numerical Simulation of Water
Imbibition in Fractured Cores, Sot. Per. Eng. J. (June 1979)
175-82.
95. Lantz, R.B.: Quantitative Evaluation of Numerical Diffusion
(Truncation Error), Sm. Pet. Eng. J. (Sept. 1971) 315-20:
Trans., AJME. 251.
96. Van-Quy, N., Simandoux, P., and Corteville. I.: A Numerical
Study of Diphasic Multicomponent Flow, Sot. Pet. Eflg. J. (April
1972) 171-84; Trans., AIME, 253.
97. Fussell, D.D., Shelton, J.L., and Griffith, J.D. : Effect of Rich
Gas Composition on Multiple-Contact Miscible Displacement-
A Cell-to-Cell Flash Model Study, Sot. Per. Eng. J. (Dec. 1976)
310-16; Trans., AIME, 261.
98. Harpole, K.J. and Heam, C.L.: The Role of Numerical Simula-
tion in Reservoir Management of a West Texas Carbonate Reser-
voir, froc., Intl. Exhibition and Technical Symposium. Beijing
(1982) 759-76.
99. Heinemann, Z.E., et al.: Using Local Grid Refinement in a
Multiple-Application Reservoir Simulator, Proc., SPE Sym-
posium on Reservoir Simulation, San Francisco (1983) 205-18.
100. Ewing, R.E., Russell, T.F., and Wheeler, M.F.: Simulation of
Miscible Displacement Using Mixed Methods and a Modified
Method of Characteristics, Proc., SPE Symposium on Reser-
voir Simulation, San Francisco (1983) 71-82.
101. Carr, A.H. and Christie, M.A.: Controlling Numerical Diffu-
sion in Reservoir Simulation Using Flux-Corrected Transport.
Proc., SPE Symposium on Reservoir Simulation, San Francisco
(1983) 25-32.
102. Todd, M.R., ODell, P.M., and Hirasaki, G.J.: Methods for In-
creased Accuracy in Numerical Reservoir Simulators, Sot. Pet.
Eng. J. (Dec. 1972) 515-30; Trans.. AIME, 253.
103. Coats, K.H., et al.: Three-Dimensional Simulation of
Steamflooding, Sot. Pet. Eng. J. (Dec. 1974) 573-92; Trans.,
AIME, 257.
104 Yanosik, J.L. and McCracken, T.A.: A Nine-Point, Finite-
Difference Reservoir Simulator for Realistic Prediction of Adverse
Mobility Ratio Displacements, Sot. Pet. Eng. J. (Aug. 1979)
253-62; Trans., AIME, 267.
105. Abou-Kassem, J.H. and Aziz. K.: Grid Orientation During Steam
Displacement, paper SPE 10497 presented at the 1982 SPE Sym-
posium on Reservoir Simulation, New Orleans, Feb. 1-3.
106 Holloway, C.C., Thomas, L.K., and Pierson, R.G.: Reduction
of Grid Orientation Effects in Reservoir Simulation, paper SPE
5522 presented at the 1975 SPE Annual Technical Conference and
Exhibition, Dallas, Sept. 28-Oct. 1.
107. Robertson, G.E. and Woo, P.T.: Grid-Orientation Effects and
the Use of Orthogonal Curvilinear Coordinates tn Reservon Simula-
tion, Sot. Pet. Eng. J. (Feb. 1978) 13-19.
108. Vinsome, P.K.W. and Au, A.D.K.: One Approach to the Grid
Orientation Problem in Reservoir Simulation, paper SPE 8247
presented at the 1979 SPE Annual Technical Conference and Ex-
hibition, Las Vegas, Sept. 23-26.
109. Coats, K.H. and Ramesh, A.B.: Effects of Grid Type and Dif-
ference Scheme on Pattern Steamflood Simulation Results, paper
SPE 11079 presented at the 1982 SPE Annual Technical Conference
and Exhibition, New Orleans, Sept. 26-29.
110. Bet-tiger, W.I. and Padmanabhan. L.: Finite-Difference Soh-
tions to Grid Orientation Problems Using IMPES, paper SPE
12250 presented at the 1983 SPE Symposium on Reservoir Simula-
tion, San Francisco, Nov. 16-18.
111. Shah, P.C.: A Nine-Point Finite Difference Gperator for Reduc-
tion of the Grid Orientation Effect, paper SPE 12251 presented
48-20 PETROLEUM ENGINEERING HANDBOOK
at the 1983 SPE Symposium on Reservoir Simulation, San Fran-
cisco, Nov. 16-18.
112. Coats, K.H. and Modine, A.D.: A Consistent Method for
Calculating Transmissibilities in Nine-Point Difference Equations,
paper SPE 12248 presented at the 1983 SPE Symposium on Reser-
voir Simulation, San Francisco, Nov. 16-18.
113. Frauenthal, J.C., Towler. B.F., and diFranco, R.: Reduction
of Grid-Orientation Effects in Reservoir Simulation By Generalized
Upstream Weighting, paper SPE 11593 presented at the 1983
SPE Symposium on Reservoir Simulation, San Francisco, Nov.
16-18.
114. Pruess, K. and Bodvarsson, G.S.: A Seven-Point Finite-
Difference Method for Improved Grid Orientation Performance
in Pattern Steamfloods, paper SPE 12252 presented at the 1983
SPE Symposium on Reservoir Simulation, San Francisco, Nov.
16-18.
115. Emmanuel, A.S. and Cook, G.W.: Pseudo-Relative Permeability
for Well Modeling, Sm. Pet. Eng. J. (Feb. 1974) 7-9.
116. Chappelear, J.E. and Hirasaki, G.J.: A Model of Oil-Water Con-
ing for Two-Dimensional, Area1 Reservoir Simulation, Sot. Per.
Eng. J. (April 1976) 65-72; Trans., AIME, 261.
117. Woods, E.G. and Khurana, A.K.: Pseudofunctions for Water
Coning in a Three-Dimensional Reservoir Simulator, Sot. Pet.
Enn. J. (Aun. 1977) 251-62.
118. Ad&gton, D.V.: An Approach to Gas-Coning Correlations for
a Large Grid Cell Reservoir Simulator, J. Pet. Tech. (Nov. 1981)
2267-74.
119. Akbar, A.M., Arnold, M.D., and Harvey, A.H.: Numerical
Simulation of Individual Wells in a Field Simulation Model, Sot.
Pet. Eng. J. (Aug. 1974) 315-20.
120. Mrosovsky. I. and Ridings, R.L.: Two-Dimensional Radial Treat-
ment of Wells Within a Three-Dimensional Reservoir Model,
Sot. Pet. Eng J. (April 1974) 127-31.
121. Blair, P.M. and Weinaug, C.F.: Solution of Two-Phase Flow
Problems Using lmphcit Difference Equations, Sot. Per. Eng.
J. (Dec. 1969) 417-24; Trans., AIME, 246.
122. Bansal, P.P. et a[.: A Strongly Coupled, Fully Implicit. Three-
Dimensional, Three-Phase Reservoir Simulator, paper SPE 8329
presented at the 1979 SPE Annual Technical Conference and Ex-
hibition, Las Vegas, Sept. 23-26.
123. MacDonald, R.C. and Coats, K.H.: Methods for Numerical
Simulation of Water and Gas Coning, Ser. Pet. Eng. J. (Dec.
1970) 425-36; Trans., AIME, 249.
124. Spillette. A.G.. Hill&ad. J.G., and Stone, H.L.: A High-Stabilitv
Sequential-Solution Approach to Reservoir Simulation,-paper SPE
4542 presented at the SPE 1973 Annual Meeting, Las Vegas, Sept.
30-Oct. 3.
125. Coats, K.H.: A Highly Implicit Steamflood Model, Sot. Pet.
Eng. J. (Oct. 1978) 369-83.
126. Meijerink, J.A.: A New Stabilized Method for Use in IMPES-
Type Numerical Reservoir Simulators, paper SPE 5247 presented
at the 1974 SPE Annual Meeting, Houston, Oct. 6-9.
127. Thomas, G.W. and Thumau, D.H.: Reservoir Simulation Us-
ing an Adaptive implicit Method, Sot. Pet. Eng. J. (Oct. 1983)
759-68.
128. Trimble, R.H. and McDonald, A.E.: A Strongly Coupled, Ful-
ly implicit, Three-Dimensional, Three-Phase Well Coning Model,
Sot. Pet. Eng. J. (Aug. 1981) 454-58.
129. Breitenbach, E.A., Thurnau, D.H., and Van Poollen, H.K.: Solu-
tion of the Immiscible Fluid Flow Simulation Equations, Sot.
Per. Eng. J. (June 1969) 155-69.
130. Price H.S. and Coats, K.H.: Direct Methods in Reservoir Simula-
tion, Sot. Pet. Eng. J. (June 1974) 295-308; Trans., AIME, 257.
13 I, Woo, P.T., Roberts, S.J., and Gustavson, F.G.: Apphcation of
Sparse Matrix Techniques in Reservoir Simulation, Sparse Matrix
Computations, J.R Bunch and D.E. Rose (eds.), Academic Press
Inc.; Washington, D.C. (1976) 427-38.
132. Young, D.M.: The Numerical Solution of Elliptic and Parabolic
Partial Differential Equations, Survey ofNumerical Analysis, J.
Todd (ed.), McGraw-Hill Book Co. Inc., New York City (1963)
380-438.
135. Watts, J.W : An Iterative Matrix Solution Method Suitable for
Anisotropic Problems, Sot. Per. Eng. J. (March 1971) 47-5 I;
Trans., AIME, 251.
136. Settari, A. and Aziz, K.: A Generalization of the Additive Cor-
rection Methods for the lterative Solution of Matrix Equations,
Sm. Ind. Appl. Math. J. Number Analysis (1973) 10, 506-21.
137. Peaceman, D.W. and Rachford, H.H.: The Numerical Solution
of Parabolic and Elliptic Differential Equations, Sot. Ind. Appi.
Math. J. (1955) 3, 28-41.
138. Douglas, J. and Rachford, H.H.: On the Numerical Solution of
Heat Conduction Problems in Two and Three Space Variables,
Trans., American Math. Sot. (1956) 82, 421-39.
139. Stone, H.L.: Iterative Solution of lmpliclt Approximation of
Multidimensional Partial Differential Equations, Sot. Ind. Appl.
Math. J. Number Analysis (1968) 5, 530-58.
140. Weinstein, H.G.. Stone, H.L., and Kwan. T.V.: Iterative Pro-
cedure for Solution of Systems of Parabolic and Elliptic Equations
in Three Dimensions, IEC Fundamentals (1969) 8, 281-87.
141. Watts, J.W. III: A Conjugate Gradient-Truncated Direct Method
for the Iterative Solution of the Reservoir Simulation Pressure Equa-
tion, Sot. Per. Eng. J. (June 1981) 345-53.
142. Hestenes, M.R. and Stiefel, E.: Methods of Conjugate Gradients
for Solving Linear Systems, J. of Research (1952) 49, 509-36.
143. Concus, P. and Golub, G.H.: A Generalized Conjugate Gradient
Method for Nonsymmetric Systems of Linear Equations, Report
STAN-CS-76-535, Stanford U.. Stanford, CA (Jan. 1976).
144. Vinsome, P.K.W.: Orthomin, an Iterative Method for Solving
Sparse Banded Sets of Simultaneous Linear Equations. paper SPE
5729 presented at the 1976 SPE Symposium on Numerical Simula-
tion of Reservoir Performance, Los Angeles, Feb. 19-20.
145. Meijerink, J.A. and Van Der Worst, H.A.: An Iterative Solu-
tion Method for Linear Systems of Which the Coefficient Matrix
is a Symmetric M-Matrix, Math. of Camp. (Jan. 1977) 148-62.
146. Kershaw, D.S.: The Incomplete Cholesky-Conjugate Gradient
Method for the Iterative Solution of Systems of Linear Equations,
J. Compt. Physics (1978) 26, 43-65.
147. Young, D.M. and Jea. N.C.: Generalized Conjugate Gradient
Acceleration of Nonsymmetric Iterative Methods, Linear
Algebraic Applicarions (1980) 34, 159-94.
148. Tan, T.B.S. and Letkeman, J.P.: Application of D4 Ordering
and Minimization in an Effective Partial Matrix Inverse Iterative
Method, paper SPE 10493 presented at the 1982 SPE Symposium
on Reservoir Simulation, New Orleans, Feb. 1-3.
149. Behie, A. and Forsyth, P.A.: Practical Considerations for In-
complete Factorization Methods in Reservoir Simulation. paper
SPE 12263 presented at the 1983 SPE Symposium on Reservoir
Simulation, San Francisco, Nov. 16-18.
150. Wallis, J.R.: Incomplete Gaussian Elimination as a Precondi-
tioning for Generalized Conjugate Gradient Acceleration, paper
SPE 12265 presented at the 1983 SPE Symposium on Reservoir
Simulation, San Francisco, Nov. 16-18.
151. Coats, K.H.: Reservoir Simulation: A General Model Formula-
tion and Associated Physical/Numerical Sources of Instability,
Bounaivy and Interior Layers-Computational and Asymptotic
Methods, J.J. Miller (ed.), Boole Press, Dublin (1980) 62-76.
152. Mrosovsky, I., Wong, J.Y., and Lampe. H.W.: Construction
of a Large Field Simulator on a Vector Computer, J. Pet. Tech.
(Dec. 1980) 2253-64.
153. Woo, P.T.: Application of Array Processor to Sparse Elimina-
tion, Proc., paper SPE 7674 presented at the 1979 SPE Sym-
posium on Reservoir Simulation, Denver, Jan. 31-Feb. 2.
154. Nolen, J.S., Kuba, D.W., and Kasic, M.J. Jr.: Application of
Vector Processors to Solve Finite Difference Equations, Sot. Pet.
Eng. J. (Aug. 1981) 447-53.
155. Calahan, D.A.: Performance of Linear Algebra Codes on the
CRAY-I, Sot. Pet. Eng. J. (Oct. 1981) 558-64.
156. Killough, J.E. and Levesque, J.M.: Reservoir Simulation and
the In-House Vector Processor: Experience for the First Year,
paper SPE 10521 presented at the 1982 SPE Symposium on Reser-
voir Simulation, New Orleans, Feb. 1-3.
133. Young, D.M : Iterative Solution of Large Linear Systems.
Academic Press Inc., Washington, D.C. (1971).
General Reference
134. Varga, R.S.: Matrix I&rat& Analysis, Prentice-Hall, Inc., Mattox. C.C. and Dalton, R.L.: Rescwoir Simtdariort. Monograph Ser-
Englewood Cliffs, N.J. (1962) 322. ies. SPE, Dallas: to be published in 1986.
Chapter 49
Electrical Logging
M.P. Tixier, Consulting Engineer *
Fundamentals
Well logging is an operation involving a continuous
recording of depth vs. some characteristic datum of the
formations penetrated by a borehole. The record is called
a log. In addition, a magnetic tape is usually made.
Many types of well logs are recorded by appropriate
downhole instruments called sondes, lowered into the
wellbore on the end of a cable. The winch of the logging
cable is generally brought to the well on a special log-
ging truck (Fig. 49. l), which also carries the recorders,
power sources, and auxiliary equipment. The parameters
being logged are measured in situ as the sonde is moved
along the borehole. The resulting signals from the sonde
are transmitted through electrical conductors in the cable
to the surface, where the continuous recording, or log, is
made.
Electrical logging is an important branch of well log-
ging. Essentially, it is the recording, in uncased sections
ofa borehole,of the resistivities (or their reciprocals, the
conductivities) of the subsurface formations, generally
along with the sponfaneous potentials (SP) generated in
the borehole.
Electrical logging has been accepted as one of the most
efficient tools in oil and gas exploration and production.
When a hole has been drilled, or at intervals during the
drilling, an electrical survey is run to obtain quickly and
economically a complete record of the formations
penetrated. This recording is of immediate value for
geological correlation of the strata and detection and
evaluation of possibly productive horizons. The informa-
tion derived from the electrical logs may at the same time
be supplemented by sidewall samples of the formations
taken from the wall of the hole or by still other types of
borehole investigations that can be performed by using
additional wireline equipment available for use with the
logging truck [deviation surveys, caliper (hole-diameter)
surveys, dipmeter surveys, temperature surveys,
radioactivity (gamma ray, density, neutron, and nuclear
Authors of rhe orlglnal chapler on this top!c in the 1962 edltion included fhts author.
Ii G Doll, M. MarIm. and F Segesman.
spectrometry) surveys, acoustic surveys, wireline forma-
tion tester, etc.].
As explained later, several types of resistivity-
measuring systems are used that have been designed to
obtain the greatest possible information under diverse
conditions-e.g., conventional devices (normals and
laterals), induction log (IL), Laterolog (LL),
microresistivity devices, and electromagnetic propaga-
tion logs. Table 49.1 gives the service company
nomenclature for various logging tools.
The typical appearance of a standard electrical log is
illustrated in Fig. 49.2. The left track of the log contains
the SP curve. The middle track contains a l&in. short
normal (shallow-investigation resistivity curve), record-
ed on both regular and amplified sensitivity scales as
solid curves, and a 64-in. normal (medium-investigation
resistivity curve, dashed curve). The right track contains
an 1%ft 8-in. lateral (deep-investigation curve).
Logs recorded with other combinations of resistivity-
measuring devices have a similar general appearance,
although the corresponding devices differ in principle
and performance. Microresistivity logs generally include
a microcaliper curve (hole-diameter recording), which is
useful in the location of permeable zones. Of late, four-
logarithmic tracks are often replacing the two-arithmetic
track mentioned previously.
The curves are recorded on the most appropriate of
several available sensitivity scales. The usual depths of
scales are 2 in. = 100 ft (regular) and 5 in.=100 ft
(detail). Less frequently a scale of 1 in. = 100 ft is used.
For cases where great detail is involved, as in microlog-
ging and dipmeter logging, special expanded scales are
available. In many parts of the world, metric depth
scales are used instead of English scales.
Earth Resistivities
Formation resistivities are important clues to probable
lithology and fluid content. With a few exceptions that
are rare in oilfield practice, such as metallic sulfides and
49-2
PETROLEUM ENGINEERING HANDBOOK
CONTROL
CABLE TENSION
MEASUREMENT
graphite, dry rocks are very good insulators but, when
their pores are impregnated with water, they conduct
electric current. Subsurface formations in general have
finite measurable resistivities because of the water con-
tained in their pores or adsorbed on their interstitial clay.
Formation resistivity also depends on the shape and the
interconnection of the pore spaces occupied by the
water. These depend on the formation lithology and, in
the case of reservoir rocks, on the presence of noncon-
ductive oil or gas.
Units of Resistivity and Conductivity. In electrical log-
ging, the resistivity is usually measured. An exception is
induction logging, in which the conductivity is recorded
along with its reciprocal, the resistivity. Measurements
made with electromagnetic propagation are discussed
later.
Fig. 49-l-Setup for wireline logging operations in wells
(schematic).
The resistivity (specific resistance) of a substance to
the flow of electrical current, at any given temperature,
is the resistance measured between opposite faces of a
unit cube of that substance. In electrical-logging work,
TABLE 49.1-SERVICE COMPANY NOMENCLATURE
Schlumberger Gearhart
Electrical Log Electrical Lag
Induction Electric Log (IEL) Induction Electric Log
Induction Spherically Focused Log (ISF)
Dual Induction Spherically Focused Log Dual Induction-Laterolog
Laterolog.3 (LL3)
Dual Laterolog
Microlog (ML)
Microlaterolog (MLL)
Proximity Log (PL)
Microspherically Focused Log (MSFL)
Borehole Compensated Sonic Log
Long Spaced Sonic Log
Cement Bond/Variable Density Log
Gamma Ray Neutron
Sidewall Neutron Porosity Log
Compensated Neutron Log (CNL)
Thermal Neutron Decay Time Log
Dual Spacing TDT
Compensated Formation Density Log
Litho-Density Log
High Resolution Dipmeter
Formation Interval Tester
Repeat Formation Tester
Sidewall Sampler
Electromagnetic Propagation Log
Bore Hole Geometry Tool
Ultra Long Spacing Electric Log
Natural Gamma Ray Spectrometry
General Spectroscopy Tool
Well Seismic Tool
Fracture Identification Log
Laterolog-3
Dual Laterolog
Micro Electrrc Log
Microlaterolog
Sorehole Compensated Sonic Log
Sonic Cement Bond System
Gamma Ray Neutron
Sidewall Neutron Porosity Log
Compensated Neutron Log
Compensated Density Log
Four Electrode Dipmeter
Selective Formation Tester
Sidewall Core Gun
X-Y Caliber
Fracture Detection Log
Dresser Atlas
Electrolog
Induction Electrolog
Dual Induction Focused Log
Focused Log
Dual Laterolog
Minilog
Microlaterolog
Proximity Log
Sorehole Compensated Sonic Log
Long Spacing BHC Acoustilog
Acoustic Cement Bond Log
Gamma Ray Neutron
Sidewall Epithermal Neutron Log
Compensated Neutron Log
Neutron Lrfetime Log
Dual Detector Neutron
Compensated Densilog
Diplog
Formation Tester
Formation Multi Tester
Corgun
Caliper Log
Spectralog
Carbon/Oxygen Log
Welex
Electric Log
Induction Electric Log
Dual Induction Log
Guard Log
Dual Guardlog
Contact Log
F,R,, Log
Acoustic Velocrty Log
Microseismogram
Gamma Ray Neutron
Srdewall Neutron Log
Dual Spaced Neutron Log
Density Log
Diplog
Formation Tester
Sidewall Coring
Caliper Log
ELECTRICAL LOGGING 49-3
the meter was chosen as the unit of length; so the unit of
resistivity is taken as the (Q.m)/m, or more simply, the
ohm-meter, 52.m.
Since conductivity is the reciprocal of resistivity
(C=lIR), a possible unit of conductivity would be
l/(Q.m), or G/m. However, since this unit would
necessitate extensive use of decimal fractions, a unit
one-thousandth as large, the millimho/meter (mu/m), is
employed. Thus, formations having resistivities of 10,
100, or 1,000 Q*rn have conductivities of 100, 10, or 1
mu/m, respectively.
Dependence of Water Resistivity on Salinity and
Temperature. The resistivity of an electrolytic solution
decreases as the amount of chemicals therein increases.
At any given temperature the electrical conductivity of a
formation water or a drilling mud will depend on the
concentration and nature of the dissolved chemicals.
In most cases the predominant solute is sodium
chloride (NaCl); therefore, the NaCl conversion chart
(Fig. 49.3) may generally be used to obtain resistivity
from concentration. If other chemicals are present in
relatively large amounts, it is possible to convert the con-
centrations of such chemicals into equivalent concentra-
tions of NaCl to find the resistivity. To make the conver-
sion, apply the appropriate multipliers given in Table
49.2 for the concentration of each separate ion [in parts
per million (ppm) or (m 3 /m 3 ) by weight, or in grains per
gallon (gr/gal) or (kg/m)], and add the products. Note
that concentrations expressed in milligrams per liter
(mg/L) and in ppm may be appreciably different at high
concentrations. Below about 50,000 ppm, however,
measurements at room temperature in the two units may
be used interchangeably without serious error.
CONCENTRATION
tt f
t LATERAL
Fig. 49.2-Typical electrical log.
G/G-
RESISTIVITY OF SOLUTION OHM-METERS
Fig. 49.3~Resistivity vs. concentration for NaCl solutions at various temperatures.
49-4 PETROLEUM ENGINEERING HANDBOOK
The resistivity of an electrolytic solution decreases as
its temperature increases. This is of great importance,
since temperature in the earth increases with depth.
Before the resistivity of the drilling mud (measured at
surface temperature) can be compared with that of a for-
mation (measured at a much higher temperature in a deep
well) the resistivities must be converted to values that
would have been observed at a common temperature.
The temperature conversion is accomplished by means
of Fig. 49.3, which shows for NaCl solutions the effects
of both salinity and temperature on resistivity . Downhole
temperatures may be estimated from a so-called bot-
tomhole temperature (BHT) obtained by means of a
maximum-reading thermometer inserted in the body of
the sonde.
Resistivities of Formation Waters. Formation waters
can vary remarkably with geographic location, depth,
and geological age. Shallow groundwaters are usually
fresh (not saline), with resistivities sometimes exceeding
20 to 50 !l. m at room temperature. They also may con-
tain appreciable amounts of calcium and magnesium
salts, which make them hard. At great depths, forma-
tion waters generally tend to be more saline. In deep
wells, formation-water resistivities sometimes may cor-
respond to complete saturation (0.014 O.rn at 200F).
A knowledge of R,. , the formation-water resistivity. is
important in electrical-log interpretation. R,, may be ob-
tained from the readings of the SP curve (Eq. 9) or from
resistivity measurements on samples of formation water
recovered from production or in drillstem tests. It also
may be estimated from measurements of the resistivity of
the permeable formations of interest when they are 100%
water-saturated, Ro, if the porosity or formation factor is
known (Eqs. 1 and 2). R, may be computed, as has been
explained, from analyses of formation waters. Resistivi-
ty of formation waters is discussed further in Chap. 24.
Mud, Mudcake, and Mud-Filtrate Resistivities.
Resistivities of the mud, R,, the mudcake, R,, , and the
mud filtrate, R,,,f, are all important in log interpretation.
R, is obtained by direct measurement on a mud sample.
R,,,f and R, are obtained by direct measurements on
filtrate and mudcakes pressed from a sample of the mud,
or they can be estimated from average statistical data on
the basis of mud resistivity. 2-4 Correction for the varia-
tion of these resistivities with temperature is made by use
of Fig. 49.3.
Formation Resistivity Factor. If R. is the resistivity of
a clean (nonshaly) formation completely saturated with
water of resistivity R,, the ratio Ro/R, will be a con-
stant that depends on the lithologic structure of the for-
TABLE 49.2-CONVERSIONS FOR CATIONS AND ANIONS
Cations Anions
Na 1.0 Cl 1.0
Ca 0.95 so4 0.5
WI 2.0 co3 1.26
HCO, 0.27
mation and not on the resistivity, R,, of the saturating
water. This constant is the formation resistivity factor,
FR, commonly called formation factor.
Ro
FR=- R, . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
.(I)
Dependence of Formation Factor on Porosity and
Lithology. The formation factor, F, , of a clean forma-
tion can be related to its porosity, 6. by an empirical for-
mula of the form F~=alc$'?', where a and m are con-
stants. The exponent m, sometimes called the cementa-
tion exponent or factor, varies with the lithology.
In the construction of many graphs for log interpreta-
tion, 2 the Humble formula proposed by Winsauer et
a1.5 has been generally adopted:
0.62
FR= ~2.,5 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . I . . .
(2)
An early formula proposed by Archie, which fits par-
ticularly well for consolidated formations such as hard
sandstones and limestones, is
FR=L.
4J2
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ...(3)
Limestones often contain vugs, interconnected with
fissures, which add their porosity to that of the matrix.
When the vugs and fissures are spaced closely, com-
pared with the spacings of the resistivity-measuring
devices, Eq. 3 often can be used as in the case of sand-
stones or limestones with only granular porosity. Never-
theless, it is sometimes advisable to use values of m
greater than two as required to fit local observations.
Shaly (Dirty) Formations. Shales and clays are
themselves porous and are generally impregnated with
mineralized water. Therefore, they have appreciable
conductivity, which is enhanced by ion-exchange con-
duction through the shale matrix. (This shale conduction
is sometimes, though not quite properly, referred to as
resulting from conductive solids. ) On the other hand,
the size of the shale pores is so small that practically no
movement of fluid is possible. Accordingly, shale,
whether deposited in thin laminations or dispersed in the
interstices of the sand, contributes to the conductivity of
the formation without contributing to its effective
porosity.
The relation between formation resistivity and porosity
becomes more complex for shaly formations than for
clean formations. Because of the additional shale con-
ductance, the ratio of formation resistivity to water
resistivity (i.e., the formation factor) is not constant
when the resistivity of the impregnating water changes. 6
Nevertheless, if the shale content is not too great, ex-
perimental observations show that for low enough values
of water resistivity this ratio is almost constant, as
though the conductance of the shale were then negligible
in comparison with that of the water; and a limiting for-
mation factor is found, which is related approximately to
the effective porosity in the same way as the formation
factor of a clean sand.
ELECTRICAL LOGGING
49-5
Relation Between Formation Resistivity and Satura-
tion. When a part of the pore space is occupied by an in-
sulating material such as oil or gas, the resistivity of the
rock, R,, is greater than the resistivity that it has when
100% water-bearing, R,. The resistivity of such rock is
a function of the fraction of the PV occupied by water.
For substantially clean formations, the water satura-
tion, S,, is related to R, (resistivity of formation con-
taining hydrocarbons and formation water, with a water
saturation S,) and R,J (resistivity of same formation
when 100% saturated with the same water) b an em-
pirical relation known as the Archie equation.
7
l/II
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
(4)
Empirically determined values of n range between 1.7
and 2.2, depending on the type of formation. Experience
shows that n =2 should give a sufficiently good approx-
imation. Then, combining Eqs. 4 and 1 gives
SW=(+) 1/i =(F) I/?. . . . . . . . . . . .
The ratio RJR0 is sometimes designated as the resistivi-
ty index, 1~; accordingly, S, =(ZR) -I.
The relation between formation resistivity and water
saturation is more complex when the formations contain
some shale or clay because of the additional conductance
resulting from the interstitial shale. sv9
Ranges of Resistivity-Formation Classifications.
Clays and shales are porous, practically impervious for-
mations and are often very uniform throughout their
mass. Their resistivity is comparatively low and prac-
tically constant over wide intervals. Compact and imper-
vious rocks, such as gypsum, anhydrite, dense
calcareous formations, or certain kinds of coal, are
highly resistive because of their very small interstitial
water content.
Resistivities of porous and permeable formations, such
as sands, vary widely, depending on their lithology and
fluid content. In electrical logging it is convenient to
classify reservoir rocks as follows.
Soft Forma&ions. These formations are chiefly poorly
consolidated sand/shale series. The porosity of the sands
is intergranular and exceeds 20%. Resistivities range
from 0.3 !2* m for saltwater-bearing sands to several fl. m
for oil-saturated sands.
Intermediate Formations. These are chiefly
moderately consolidated sandstones but frequently
limestones and/or dolomites. Reservoir porosity is
generally intergranular, ranging from about 15 to 20 % .
The reservoir formations are interbedded with shales and
very often with tight rocks. Resistivities range from 1 to
about 100 Q-m.
Hard Formations. These are chiefly limestones andior
dolomites, and also consolidated sandstones. They con-
sist mostly of tight rocks containing porous and
permeable zones, and shale streaks. The porosity of
reservoirs is less than 15 % . Most often, the porous and
permeable zones contain fissures and vugs. Resistivity
range is from 2 to 3 Q. m to several hundred. For the
completely tight formations, such as salt and anhydrite,
the resistivity may be practically infinite.
Anisotropy. In many sedimentary strata, the mineral
grains have a flat or plate-like shape with an orientation
parallel to the sedimentation. Current travels with great
facility along the water-filled interstices, which are
mostly parallel to the stratification. These strata,
therefore, do not possess the same resistivity in all direc-
tions. Such microscopic anisotropy is observed mostly in
shales.
Moreover, in electrical logging, the distance between
electrodes or coils on the measuring devices is great
enough that the volume of formation involved in the
measurements very often includes sequences of interbed-
ded resistive and conductive streaks. Since current flows
more easily along the beds than perpendicular to them,
the formation has macroscopic anisotropy.
Both kinds of anisotropy may add their respective ef-
fects to influence the apparent resistivity. The
longitudinal, or horizontal, resistivity , RH, measured
along the bedding planes is always less than the transver-
sal, or vertical (perpendicular) resistivity, Rv.
Resistivity-measuring devices whose readings are not
appreciably affected by the borehole [the deep induction
log (IM), and under certain conditions, the laterolog
(LL), and the long lateral when the ratio RHIR, is low
or moderate] will read RH. Because of the borehole ef-
fect, the short-spacing-electrode devices usually read
values greater than RH. lo
Distribution of Fluids and Resistivities in Permeable
Formations Invaded by Mud Filtrate. Inasmuch as the
hydrostatic pressure of the mud is usually maintained
greater than the natural pressure of the formations, mud
filtrate (forced into the permeable beds) displaces the
original formation fluids in the region close to the
borehole. Solid materials from the mud deposited on the
wall of the hole form a mudcake, which tends to impede
and reduce further infiltration.
The thickness and the nature of the mudcake depend
on the kind of mud and on the drilling conditions rather
than on the formations. The thickness, h,,,,, is usually
between /s and 1 in. For water-based muds the mudcake
resistivity, R,, , is about equal to one or two times the
mud resistivity, R,. In some oil-emulsion muds, R,,
may be somewhat greater.
Fig. 49.4a represents a schematic cross section of an
oil-bearing permeable bed penetrated by a borehole. Fig.
49.4b and 49.4~ show the corresponding radial distribu-
tion of fluids in formation and resistivities.
As indicated in Fig. 49.4a, the zones of different
resistivity may be divided into the drilling mud within
the borehole (of resistivity R,); the mudcake R,,, the
flushed zone R,,; a transition zone; in some cases an
annulus. R, (present only in certain oil- or gas-
bearing formations); and the uncontaminated zone (of
resistivity R,). The invaded zone (of average
resistivity, Ri) includes the flushed zone and the transi-
tion zone.
I nvaded Zone. This zone is behind and close to the
wall of the hole; it is believed that most of the original
interstitial fluids have been flushed out by the mud
49-6 PETROLEUM ENGINEERING HANDBOOK
rANNULU5 (Ran)
MUD CAKE (Rnxl
t k--HOLE WALL
Fig. 49.4-a. Horizontal section through a
permeable oil-bearing bed
(S, < 60%); b. radial distribu-
tion of fluids in formation
(qualitative); c. radial distribu-
tion of resistivities.
filtrate. This flushed zone, of resistivity R,,, is con-
sidered to extend, under usual conditions of invasion, at
least 3 in. from the wall. Exceptions to this rule can
occur.
If the bed is water bearing, the pores in the flushed
zone are completely filled with the mud filtrate, and for
clean formations R,, is nearly equal to F,R,f; FR being
the formation factor and R mf the mud-filtrate resistivity
If the bed is oil bearing, the flushed zone contains
some residual oil saturation, S,, . From Eq. 5, S,, , the
water saturation in the flushed zone is
%
or
FRRtnf
R,,=T, . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
s
x0
where S,=l-S,,.
Beyond the region of maximum flushing, R,, , there is
a more or less extended transition region, the nature of
which depends on the characteristics of the formation,
the speed of invasion, and the hydrocarbon content. The
invaded zone includes the flushed zone and the part of
the transition zone invaded by filtrate. In the case of
water-bearing sands and oil-bearing sands of high water
saturation, the invaded zone extends up to the uncon-
taminated zone, R,.
There can be no exact definition of the depth of the in-
vaded zone, but it is convenient to introduce a factor di,
called the electrically equivalent diameter of inva-
sion, corresponding to an average invaded zone of
resistivity Ri , which has the same effect as the actual in-
vaded zone on measurements made in the borehole. The
depth of invasion is variable. It depends on the plastering
properties of the mud, pressure differences between the
mud column and the formation, time elapsed since the
formation was drilled, porosity of the formation, propor-
tion and nature of the fluids (water, oil, gas) present in
the pores, reaction of any interstitial clays with the mud
filtrate, etc.
All other conditions being the same, the greater the
porosity, the smaller the depth of invasion. With usual
muds, di seldom exceeds 2dh (dh =hole diameter) in
high-porosity sands, but it may exceed 5dh and even
1Odh in low-porosity formations such as consolidated
sandstones or limestones. In some cases, invasion can be
extremely shallow in very permeable formations and in
gas-bearing formations.
In very permeable beds, when there is an appreciable
difference between the specific gravities of the mud
filtrate and the salt-laden interstitial water, gravity-
segregation effects may occur, with the fresher filtrate
tending to accumulate at the top boundary of the bed,
resulting in a decrease in the depth of invasion in the
lower part of the bed. I
In fissured formations, the permeability is quite often
enormous because of the fissures-much greater than the
permeability of the matrix material surrounding them.
Suppose that a formation is composed of a porous but
relatively impermeable material, broken by networks of
roughly parallel fissures. Mud filtrate penetrates the
fissures easily and deeply, driving out much of the
original fluids (oil and formation water). On the other
hand, the matrix itself may be penetrated hardly at all by
the filtrate. Since the l%.sures constitute a small part of
the total PV, only a vety small portion of the total
original fluids is displaced. As a result, R, is little dif-
ferent from R,, and the ratio R,IR,,f is no longer
representative of the formation factor.
Annulus. When the formation contains hydrocarbons,
the process of invasion is complex. The distribution of
fluids is then affected by the two-phase permeabilities,
relative densities (gravities) and viscosities of the fluids,
capillary forces, etc.
When the initial water saturation is low (less than
about 50%), one important feature is the existence of an
annular region just inside the uncontaminated zone, con-
taining mainly formation water and some residual oil.
This annulus is explained as follows. The mud filtrate
penetrates the formation radially, sweeping the
removable oil and formation water ahead of it. For large
oil saturation, the relative permeability to oil is ap-
preciably greater than that to water. Therefore, the oil
moves faster, leaving a zone (the annulus) enriched in
formation water behind it.
It seems likely that, because of the effects of diffusion,
capillary pressure, gravity, etc., the existence of a well-
defined annulus is a transitory phenomenon. Field log
experience nevertheless seems to show that the annulus
does very often exist at the time the logs are run. Com-
putations have shown that the presence of the annulus
has a practically negligible effect on the response of the
devices with electrodes (normals, laterals, and
laterolog) It may have an effect on the induction log, but
this can be taken care of for practical purposes by means
of appropriate interpretation charts. 2
ELECTRICAL LOGGING 49-7
Uncontaminated Zone. For clean formations, from
Eq. 5,
R,=
FRR,
s,2. . . . . . . . . . . . . I . .
In the usual case, R,,,f is 10 to 25 times as large as R w.
Thus, comparing Eqs. 6 and 7 with usual values of S,
and S,, ,
R,, even in oil-bearing formations, is often less
than R,, as represented in Fig. 49.4~.
Apparent Resistivity. Since any resistivity measure-
ment is affected in some degree by the resistivities of all
the media in the immediate vicinity of the sonde (i.e.,
mud, different parts of the formation that vary in
resistivity, adjacent formations if the bed measured is
thin), any given device records an apparent resistivity.
Each resistivity device is calibrated so that when the
sonde is in a homogeneous medium (or in some other
condition appropriate to practice, specified for the par-
ticular device) the apparent resistivity reading is equal to
the actual resistivity.
Requirements for and Types of Resistivity Devices.
Inspection of basic relations in Eqs. 1, 2, 5, and 6 shows
that a determination of S, and 4 requires a knowledge of
R, and R,, (or R i, in certain cases where R,, is not easi-
ly determined). Thus, for the reservoir-evaluation prob-
lem, it is necessary to have resistivity-measuring devices
with different depths of investigation to obtain values in-
dicative of the resistivities of the invaded zone and the
uncontaminated zone. The readings of the deep- and
shallow-investigation curves may often be used to cor-
rect each other, through correction charts or departure
curves, to obtain better values of R, and Ri
Another function of resistivity recording is to provide
an accurate definition of bed boundaries, particularly of
permeable beds. Finally, it is desirable that the readings
not be influenced by the effect of the mud column or, in
case of thin beds, by the adjacent formations.
These requirements are only partly satisfied with the
conventional resistivity devices. The introduction of
microdevices and focused devices has brought about an
appreciable improvement.
Currently used resistivity devices may be classified in
two categories.
1. Macrodevices, which derive their reading from
about 10 to 100 cu ft of material around the sonde (useful
for R, and Ri evaluation), and include unfocused-
electrode devices, focused-electrode devices, and induc-
tion logging devices.
2. Microdevices (also called wall-resistivity devices),
which derive their readings from a few cubic inches of
material behind or close to the wall of the hole. Since the
electrodes are mounted on an insulating rubber pad
pressed against the wall of the hole, measurements are
affected only marginally by the mud column.
Microdevices arc of unfocused and focused types.
Resistivity devices that have electrodes may be used in
holes filled with water or water-based drilling mud,
which provides the electrical contact necessary between
electrodes and formation. The induction log can also be
used in empty holes or in holes filled with nonconductive
oil-based mud. The various resistivity devices are
described later.
Spontaneous Potential (SP) Log
The SP log is a record of the naturally occurring poten-
tials in the mud at different depths in a borehole. The
measurement is made in uncased holes containing water-
based or oil-emulsion muds between an exploratory elec-
trode on the sonde in the borehole and a stationary
reference electrode at the surface.
Usually the SP curve (Fig. 49.2) consists of a more or
less straight baseline (corresponding to the shales) hav-
ing excursions or peaks to the left (opposite the
permeable strata). The shapes and the amplitudes of the
excursions may be different, according to the forma-
tions, but there is no definite correspondence between
the magnitudes of the excursions and the values of
permeability or porosity of the formation.
The principal uses of the SP curve are to (1) detect the
permeable beds, (2) locate their boundaries (except when
the formations are too resistive), (3) correlate such beds,
and (4) obtain good values for R,, the formation-water
resistivity.
Origin of the SP. The character of the potentials
measured in the mud results from ohmic drops produced
by the flow of SP currents through the mud resistance. If
the mud is extremely conductive, these ohmic drops may
be insignificant, and the variations in the SP curve may
be too small to be useful.*
The SP currents flow as a result of electromotive
forces (EMFs) existing within the formations or at the
boundaries between formations and mud. One
phenomenon that could cause an EMF to appear across
the mudcake opposite a permeable bed is electrofiltra-
hon. The mud filtrate, in being forced through the mud-
cake, would tend to produce an EMF, positive in the
direction of flow. According to experiments, I2 the EMF
across the mudcake may be quite sizable, but there is
also an electrotiltration EMF generated across the adja-
cent shales. Thus, the net effect of electrotiltration in
causing variations of SP is small and in most cases
negligible for all practical purposes-a conclusion
verified by field experience.**
Most important ate the EMFs of electrochemical
origin, which occur at the contacts between the drilling
mud (or its filtrate) and the formation water, in the pores
of the permeable beds, and across the adjacent shales. I6
In a clean sand lying between shale beds, all penetrated
by a borehole containing conductive (water-based) mud,
the total electrochemical EMF, E,, is produced in the
chain (Fig. 49.5): Mud/mud filtrate/formation water/
shale/mud. The EMF of the junction, mud/mud filtrate,
is taken to be practically nil because, although the
resistivities of the mud and its filtrate may differ, their
electrochemical activities should be the same.
The part of the chain consisting of formation
water/shale/mud gives rise to the shale-membrane
EMF, Em. The part mud ftltrateiformation water
gives rise to the liquid-junction EMF, EJ . For NaCl
(monovalent-ion) solutions, at 75F,
E,=59log,+
amf
*In such acase the gamma ray log. which distinguishesshales from nonshale beds,
IS sometimes recorded as a subslltute for the SP
Further information on the electrof~ltralion EMF, or streaming potential, may be
found in Refs. 13 through 15.
49-8
PETROLEUM ENGINEERING HANDBOOK
MUD
I-t
INVADED
ZONE
Fig. 49.5--Schematic representation of
electrochemical chain and
SP current path at boundary
between permeable bed and
adjacent shale.
and
where a, and a,f are the chemical activities of the for-
mation water and mud filtrate, respectively (at 75 F),
and EM and EJ are in millivolts. The total E, is the sum
of E,+, and E,:
E,=K, log,,% . . . . . . . . , . . . . . . . . . . . (8)
Umf
where K, is the electrochemical coefficient and is equal
to 71 at 75F.
Eq. 8 is general, provided that both formation water
and mud filtrate are essentially NaCl solutions of any
concentration. The values of K, are directly proportional
to the absolute temperature. Thus, at 150F the coeffi-
cient K, in Eq. 8 becomes 81 instead of 71, and at 300F
it becomes 101 (see Fig. 49.6).
From Eq. 8, in the usual case of a, greater than a,,f,
E, is positive. However, if a,f is greater than a,, cor-
responding to mud mom saline than formation water,
then E, is negative and the SP deflections corresponding
to permeable beds are then reversed on the log.
Effect of Invasion on Generation of the EMF. In the
explanation of the electrochemical potential, it has been
assumed that no shale-type potential is created by the
mudcake. In the normal case, mud filtrate bathes both
sides of the mudcake and no shale-type potential can
arise. In some formations, there is only a little filtrate
behind the mudcake. Such small amount of filtrate will
be contaminated easily by the formation water. In this
case, one face of the mudcake is wetted by the filtrate in
the hole, the other face by contaminated filtrate of dif-
ferent activity. This will give rise to a shale-type poten-
tial of the same polarity as the main shale potential, and
the SP curve will be decreased. This explains the
decreasing of the SP curve with time in very highly
permeable beds. I7 The filtrate is evacuated by gravity
STATIC SP (mvl
0
Fig. 49.6--R, determination from the SP. The inset chart of true
R, vs. R, applies to formation waters of average
composition.
segregating forces and the formation fluids tend to come
back toward the hole with time.
Conversely, an increase in SP with time is observed
often in low-permeability water-bearing formations.
Very little filtrate invades the formation in a freshly
drilled hole and the filtrate is contaminated by the forma-.
tion water. As the invasion proceeds, more and more
filtrate goes into the formation and the mudcake is wet-
ted on both faces by the mud filtrate. When the mudcake
does not contribute any shale-type potential, the SP
curve, recorded on the front of a thick permeable sand, is
said to be fully developed.
Effect of Interstitial Shales on the SP. Increasing
amounts of shale or clay in a permeable bed effectively
result in a reduction of the SP curve. At the limit, for
100% shaliness, E, becomes zero; that is, the sand is
then all shale and indistinguishable from the surrounding
shales.
The presence of oil in a shaly sand tends to enhance
the effect of the shale. All other conditions being the
same, the total E, of a shaly sand will be smaller if oil
bearing than if water bearing.
The effect of interstitial shale is also greater in low-
porosity formations. In these cases, only a small amount
of shale reduces the SP deflection appreciably. Con-
versely, the E, of shaly water-bearing sands of high
porosity remains practically equal to the E, of a clean
sand, as long as the shale content is reasonably
low-i.e., does not exceed a few percent.
ELECTRICAL LOGGING 49-9
Geometric Effect Influencing the SP Curve
Circulation of the SP Current, The various EMFs add
their effects to generate the SP currents, which follow
the paths represented schematically in Fig. 49.7 (right)
by solid lines. Each current line encircles the junction of
mud, invaded zone, and uncontaminated zone. In the
usual case where the formation waters are saltier than the
mud, E, is positive and the current circulates in the
direction of the arrows. The potential of a point in the
mud column opposite the sand is negative with respect to
one opposite the shale.
Along its path, the SP current forces its way through a
series of resistances, both in the ground and in the mud.
Along a closed line of current flow, the total of the
ohmic-potential drops is necessarily equal to the
algebraic sum of the EMFs encountered. Moreover, the
total potential drop is divided between the different for-
mations and the mud in proportion to the resistance of
the path through each respective medium.
Static SP (Clean Formations) and Pseudostatic SP
(Shaly Formations). It is convenient to use an idealized
representation in which the SP current is prevented from
flowing by means of insulating plugs placed across hole
and invaded zones, as shown in Fig. 49.7a (right).
Under these conditions, a plot of the potential in the mud
column would appear as the dashed cross-hatched curve
on the left of Fig. 49.7a, with a maximum negative
deflection opposite the permeable bed equal to the
algebraic sum of all the EMFs of various origins. This is
the maximum SP that could be measured. It is therefore
convenient to use this theoretical value as a reference. In
the case of a clean sand, it is called the static SP, ESp. If
the sand is shaly, it is called the pseudostatic SP. Epsp.
For given values of the activities of mud and formation
water, the pseudostatic SP of a shaly sand is smaller than
the static SP of a clean sand. The ratio E,rplEsp is
called the reduction factor or ratio and is designated by
the symbol (Y sp.
The SP log records only that portion of the potential
drop occurring in the mud. When the bed is sufficiently
thick the amplitude of the SP deflection approaches the
static SP (or EpsP in case of shaly formations), hccause
then the resistance offered to the current by the bed itself
is negligible compared with the resistance of the path
through the mud in the borehole.
Factors Influencing the Shape and Amplitude of SP
Deflections. As seen in Fig. 49.7b, the current circulates
in the hole not only opposite the permeable formation but
also a short distance beyond its boundaries. As a result,
although on the static SP diagram the boundaries of a
permeable bed are indicated by sharp breaks, those on
the actual SP curve show a more gradual change in
potential. An analysis of the circulation of the current
shows that, for uniform resistivity in the formations, the
bed boundaries are located at the inflection points on the
SP log. This fact provides a means of determining the
thickness of a bed from the SP log.
Both the shape of the SP deflection and its relative
amplitude (in fractional parts of the Essp or EpsP) are in-
fluenced by four factors, which determine the conditions
for the circulation of SP currents: (1) bed thickness, (2)
resistivities of the bed, the adjacent formations, and the
------ STATIC SP DIAGRAM--POTENTIAL IN MUD
WHEN SP CURRENTS ARE PREVENTED
FROM FLOWING.
:SP LOG-POTENTIAL IN MUD WHEN SP
CURRENTS ARE FLOWING.
Fig. 49.7-a. Static SP diagram (left) that would be
observed in hole when current IS prevented
from flowing by means of insulating plugs
(right); b. actual SP diagram (solid curve,
left) and schematic representation of SP
current distribution in and around perme-
able bed (right).
mud, (3) borehole diameter, and (4) depth of invasion.
All other factors remaining the same, a change of the
total EMFs affects the amplitude but does not modify
the general shape of the SP log.
Influence of Mud Resistivity and Hole Diameter. The
mud resistivity has a predominant influence on the SP
curve. If the mud is of about the same degree of salinity
as the formation water, electrochemical EMFs are
small. If the mud is more saline than the formation
water, the SP may be reversed (sand deflections toward
the positive side of the log). Moreover, the lower the
mud resistivity (compared with the formation resistivity)
the broader the deflection above and below the
permeable bed and, because the ohmic drops in the mud
are decreased, the smaller the amplitude of the
deflection.
An increase in hole diameter acts approximately like
an increase in the ratio of formation resistivity to mud
resistivity. It tends to round off the deflections on the SP
log and reduce the amplitude of the deflections opposite
thin beds. A decrease in hole diameter has the same ef-
fect as a decrease in the ratio of formation resistivity to
mud resistivity.
The SP log would also be influenced by a lack of
homogeneity of the mud-a change in salinity of the mud
49-10 PETROLEUM ENGINEERING HANDBOOK
SCHEMATIC REPRESENTATION SCHEMATIC
OF FORMATIONS AND SPLOG DISTRIBUTION
OF SP CURRENTS
m SHALE (IMPERVIOUS AND COMPARATIVELY
CONDUCTIVE 1
the permeable sections. In between, they flow through
the mud rather than through resistive sections close to the
borehole, because of the large resistances the latter paths
offer. However, within the formation at a distance from
the borehole, where the paths through the resistive beds
have larger cross sections and hence lower resistances,
the SP currents can complete their circuits from
permeable beds to shale. They cannot return to the mud
through adjacent permeable beds because there they en-
counter EMFs opposing them.
Opposite a given resistive bed, the SP current in the
mud column remains essentially constant along the
borehole. This means that the potential drop per unit
fzl
COMPACT FORMATON
length of hole is also constant,-thus giving g constant
(VERY HIGH RESISTIVITY)
slope on the SP log as shown by the straight-line portions
m
PERMEABLE
(COMPARATIVELY CONOUCTIVE 1
of the SP in Fig. 49.8. At the level of each conductive
bed, some SP current will enter or leave the mud col-
Fig. 49.8-SP phenomena in highly resis-
tive formations (schematic).
at a certain level would result in an SP baseline shift at
that level. However, it has been found in practice that
such changes in salinity are rare.
Effect of Invasion. Permeable beds in general arc invad-
ed by mud filtrate. Because the boundary between mud
filtrate and interstitial water is somewhere inside the for-
mation, a fraction of the SP current flows directly from
the shale into the invaded zone, without penetrating the
mud column. As a result, the presence of the invaded
zone has an effect on the SP log similar to that of an in-
crease in hole diameter.
SP in Soft Formations. Theory and field experience
have shown that the amplitude of the SP deflection is
practically equal to the static SP (of a clean sand) or to
the pseudostatic SP (of a shaly sand) when the permeable
beds are thick and the resistivities of the formations are
not too great compared with that of the mud. Moreover,
the SP curves define the boundaries of the bed with great
accuracy. The amplitude of the deflection is less than the
static SP or pseudostatic SP for thin beds, and the thinner
the bed, the smaller the deflection.
On the other hand, when the resistivity of the forma-
tion, R,, is considerably greater than that of the mud,
R,, the SP curves are rounded off, the boundaries are
marked less accurately, and all other conditions being
the same, the amplitude of the peak is less than when the
ratio R,I R, is close to unity.
For the case of shaly sands, the SP curve may also be
affected by the presence of oil. A change in the
magnitude of the SP deflection occurs very often when
passing an oil/water contact in a shaly sand. This change
is not a positive criterion for the detection of oil because
the same effect would be obtained if the salinity of the
interstitial water were reduced or if the percentage of
shale were increased.
umn, thus modifying the slope of the SP log. For in-
stance, the slope of the SP log changes at the level of the
permeable bed, P2, because part of the current leaves the
hole and flows into the bed. *
As a general rule, in hard formations the permeable
beds are characterized on the SP log by slope changes or
curvatures that are convex toward the negative side of
the log. Shales are characterized by curvatures that are
convex toward the positive side of the log. Highly
resistive beds correspond to essentially straight parts of
the SP log.
Determination of Static SP (SSP). The SP deflection is
measured with respect to the shale baseline, a reference
line which can generally be traced along the extreme
positive edges of the SP curve. Usually the shale line is
straight and vertical. *
In any given well, since the mud salinity is constant
and the interstitial waters may tend to be constant, there
is often a definite tendency for the maximum SP deflec-
tions to be the same for the same types of permeable for-
mations at comparable depths. Thus, it is usually possi-
ble to draw, parallel to the shale line, a sand line on the
log along the maximum negative deflections of the clean
sands of sufficient thickness.
It is very likely that, for all the beds where the SP
peaks reach the sand line, (1) the formation-water
resistivity is practically the same, (2) the beds are vir-
tually free from shaly material, and (3) the amplitude of
the deflection is equal to the SSP. For thin beds in cases
where the SSP cannot be determined as above (or for a
thin shaly sand), the SP reading from the log must be
corrected by means of appropriate charts in order to ob-
tain the Essp or Epsp. 2
Determination of R, from SSP
Since the variations of electrotiltration potential from
sand to shale can generally be neglected, the SSP is taken
in practice as equal to the corresponding value of -EC as
long as the SP is fully developed.
It is convenient to replace Eq. 8 by
SP in Hard Formations. Hard formations are highly
resistive except for permeable beds, whether oil- or
water-bearing, and shales, which are impervious. The
R
Essp =-Kc log+ . . . . . . . . . . .
R
. (9)
we
SP currents generated by the different EMFs flow into
field experience has shown that in certa#n regions there may be shifts of the shale
the hole out of the shale sections and out of the hole into
line. Sometimes rhese shifts are found systemattcatty at the ?.ame places in the
geologlcal column and can be used as markers.
ELECTRICAL LOGGING
where R, is an equivalent formation-water resistivity .
The computation of R, is given in the chart of Fig.
49.6, and R, is derived from R, by means of the aux-
iliary chart at the lower right of Fig. 49.6. The solid
curves on this auxiliary chart correspond to highly saline
formation waters, where the presence of salts different
from NaCl is negligible in practice. They are derived
from the known activity/resistivity relationships for pure
NaCl solutions. The dashed curves correspond to forma-
tion waters of low salinity, where the presence of other
salts (calcium and magnesium chlorides, sulfates, and
bicarbonates) have an important bearing on the activity
values. These curves are derived from empirical obser-
vations and cover formation waters of average composi-
tion. I9 Note that, for intermediate salinities (0.08<
R, ~0.3 at 75F), the value of R,, is practically equal
to R,.
The mud filtrate is taken here as an NaCl solution, and
this is generally done in practice, except for muds con-
taining gypsum, CaC12, or NaOH. In such cases, the
determination of R, from the SP curve requires the
measurement of the activity of the mud. A field instru-
ment is provided for this purpose.
Resistivity Logging Devices*
A general classification of the types of rcsistivity logging
devices was given previously.
Electrical Survey (ES). During the first 25 years of log-
ging practice, the standard ES (Fig. 49.2) usually includ-
ed, in addition to the SP, three conventional (unfocused)
resistivity curves; namely, a short normal curve
(distance between electrodes A and M is 16 in.), a long
normal (AM=64 in.) or a short lateral (distance be-
tween electrodes and A and 0 is 6 to 9 ft), and a stan-
dard lateral (AO= 18 ft, 8 in. in general), all recorded
simultaneously. In some regions, such as the Permian
basin (west Texas and New Mexico), the short-normal
spacing was reduced to 10 in., and the limestone sonde
was recorded instead of the long normal. The ES log is
rarely run today, but it was the standard log for many
decades.
Induction-Electrical Surveys (IES) (Figs. 49.9 and
49.10). The simultaneous recording of induction (con-
ductivity and resistivity) curves, 16-in. normal, and SP
curve, is a good combination for the logging of fonna-
tions of low to moderate resistivities in fresh muds. Of
late, the 16-in. normal has been replaced by a focused
electrode system, and two induction logs of different in-
vestigations may also replace the single induction.
Focused Electrode Devices. In wells drilled with very
saline mud, or in high resistivity formations, a laterolog
or dual laterolog is used with a gamma ray tool. Fullest
benefit of these combinations usually is derived if a
microresistivity survey is also run. Microresistivity
surveys generally include a microcaliper curve (hole-
diameter recording) (see Figs. 49.9 and 49.10). To avoid
multiple runs, many of the above devices are combined
with porosity logs-acoustic, density, and neutron logs.
These porosity logs are discussed in other chapters.
See Table 46.6 for the names of the various service companies 1ools.
49-l 1
l
Bed Thxkncrr, Feel
1 1 I 1
I 2 3456 6 IO 20 30 4050
.2F-----
------+ 1
Bed Thdner!, Feet 1
2 3 4 56 6 IO 20 M 4050
Fig. 49.9-Shoulder-bed corrections, LLS (top) and LLD
(bottom).
LATLROLOG
Flg. 49.10-Principle of Delaware effect.
49-12 PETROLEUM ENGINEERING HANDBOOK
GENERATOR METER
T-- - A
POINT
Fig. 49.11 -Normal device
(schematic).
GENERATOR METER GENERATOR METER
AMX LATERAL
(01
BAM LATERAL
(b)
Fig. 49.12-Lateral device (schematic).
R.-
0 2 4 6 8 IO
Fig. 49.13-Laboratory curves for normal
sonde of spacing AM =2d
through uninvaded beds
more resistive than adjacent
formations.
Conventional Resistivity Devices
During the first quarter century of well logging, the only
electrical surveys available were the conventional
resistivity logs plus the SP. Thousands of them were run
each year in holes drilled all over the world. Since then,
new logging methods have been developed to measure
values much closer to R, and R,, which are the values
sought. Nevertheless, the conventional ES (consisting of
SP, 16-in. normal, 64-m. normal, and 18-ft 8-in. lateral)
still is being run in some parts of the world. For this
reason, and also because new information can often be
obtained by reinterpreting old ES logs, this chapter in-
cludes discussion on the principles and responses of the
ES measurements.
Principles: Normal and Lateral Devices. In conven-
tional resistivity logging a current of known intensity is
sent between two electrodes, A and B (A on the sonde, B
on the sonde or at the surface), and the resulting potential
difference is measured between other electrodes M and
N. The apparent resistivity is proportional to the
measured potential difference.
For normal devices, the distance AM is small (1 to 6
ft) compared with MN, MB, and BN. In practice N or B
may be placed in the hole at a large distance above A and
M (Fig. 49.11). The voltage measured is practically the
potential of M (because of current from A), referred to
an infinitely distant Point. The distance AM of a normal
device is its spacing. The point of measurement is mid-
way between A and M.
For lateral devices, measuring electrodes M and N are
close to each other and located several feet below current
electrode A. Current-return electrode B is at a great
distance above A or at the surface. The voltage measured
is approximately equal to the potential gradient at the
point of measurement 0, midway between M and N.
The distance A0 is the spacing of the lateral device. The
two arrangements shown in Fig. 49.12 (in which current
and measuring electrodes are interchanged) are
equivalent as regards measured potentials (and
resistivities),
Curve Shapes-Laboratory Results. Fig. 49.13 shows
laboratory curves from a normal device for
homogeneous resistive layers between adjacent beds of
low resistivity. The curves are symmetrical with respect
to the center planes of the layers. The same curves are
recorded if M is above A instead of, as in the figure, A
above M.
The upper part of Fig. 49.13 shows a resistive bed
thicker than the spacing (bed thickness, h, is 6dh ; spac-
ing AM is 2dh ; where dh is the hole diameter). At the
boundaries of the bed the curve tends to be rounded off
owing to the influence of the borehole. Moreover, the in-
dicated bed thickness (distance between the inflection
points P and P) is less than the actual thickness. Normal
curves tend to show resistive beds thinner than they ac-
tually are (and conductive beds thicker than they actually
are) by an amount equal to the spacing AM. The error in
picking the boundaries of thick resistive beds is small for
short-spacing normals, which is one reason for the re-
cording of a short normal.
As shown in the lower part of Fig. 49.13, for a
resistive layer thinner than the spacing, the curve shows
ELECTRICAL LOGGING
49-13
R.-
01 5 io 15 20
I U-\REFLECTIOIN PEAK
Fig. 49.14-Laboratory curves for lateral
sonde of spacing A0 = 1 Id
through uninvaded beds
more resistive than adjacent
formations.
a depression opposite the layer with two symmetrical
small peaks, c and d, on either side. The main disadvan-
tage of the normal device is that beds thinner than the
spacing, no matter how resistive they may be, appear on
the log as being conductive.
Fig. 49.14 shows similar curves for a lateral. The
lateral curves are markedly dissymmetrical, and their
features are more complex. Again the transitions in the
curves at the boundaries have been rounded off by the ef-
fect of the borehole. When the bed is thicker than the
spacing, the upper boundary of the bed is not well de-
fined on the lateral curve, and, as a whole, the bed ap-
pears as being displaced downward by a distance equal
to the spacing AO.
In the lower part of Fig. 49.14 the lateral indicates a
resistive layer thinner than the spacing by a sharp peak of
relatively low apparent resistivity. Below the layer is a
low-resistivity blind zone, followed by a reflection
peak at a distance A0 below the bottom boundary of
the layer. The blind zone is recorded when the resistive
streak is located between the current electrode and the
measuring electrodes.
The lateral is useful for the location of thin, highly
resistive streaks, although interpretation may be difficult
if several resistive streaks are close together. A lower
streak located in the blind zone of an upper resistive
streak may be missed, and the reflection peaks may be
mistaken for actual resistive streaks in the formation. For
a resistive layer of thickness approximately equal to the
spacing (cnticul rhickness), the lateral is almost com-
pletely flattened.
Similar generalizations are possible for lateral curves
recorded for beds more conductive than the surrounding
formations. Whether the layer is thick or thin, the shape
of the curve is dissymmetrical and the anomalies are
spread downward, outside the bottom boundaries. The
apparent increase of bed thickness is roughly equal to
AO.
Normals and Laterals in Hard Formations. Fig.
Fig. 49.15--Responses of normals and
laterals in hard formations
(qualitative).
49.15 shows schematically the behavior of the normals
and laterals in thick, highly resistive formations contain-
ing porous or shaly (that is, more conductive) zones. In a
highly resistive formation most of the current from elec-
trode A flows up or down the borehole, dividing in in-
verse proportion to the resistances of the two paths,
which are determined mostly by the resistance of the
mud column in the hole between the current electrode
and the nearest conductive beds. At the conductive beds,
depending on their thickness and conductivity, the cur-
rent has low-resistance paths from the hole. The lopsided
appearance of the normal and lateral curves is ex-
plainable in terms of the unequal division of current
flowing up and down the hole.
The normal, for example, has M and N above the cur-
rent electrode. The voltage measured is the ohmic poten-
tial drop in the hole resulting fmm current flowing in the
mud between M and N. When the device is near the bot-
tom of a resistive bed, most of the current flows down to
the conductive bed just below, and there is little potential
drop between M and N because the current up is small.
When the device has moved farther up in the bed, the
current down decreases because the resistance of that
path has increased. Also, since the resistance of the up-
ward path has decreased, the current up increases.
Therefore, the potential drop between M and N increases
as the device moves upward until electrode N reaches the
next conductive bed, where the upward current is
diverted from the hole. Above that level the normal
reading decreases.
The explanation of the shape of the lateral curve is
similar. The direction of the lopsidedness for either
device depends on whether the measuring electrodes are
above or below the current electrode. The depressions
read on the curves opposite the conductive beds are
smooth and, in the case of the lateral, much broadened
and displaced downward. Accurate determinations of
bed boundaries from the curves are practically
impossible.
49-14 PETROLEUM ENGINEERING HANDBOOK
GENERATOR METER
Fig. 49.16-Limestone sonde
(schematic).
Limestone Sonde. Four current electrodes (A, A, B,
and B), connected as shown in Fig. 49.16 by insulated
wires of negligible resistance, are symmetrically ar-
ranged so that AB=AB. A measuring electrode, M, is
placed in the middle of the device. Depths are measured
from electrode M. In practice AM = AM =30 or 3.5 in.,
and AB =AB =4 or 5 in. The device is therefore a sym-
metrical double lateral.
Opposite a thick, highly resistive layer (upper part of
Fig. 49.17) practically all the flow of current is confined
to the spaces between A and B and between A and B.
No current flows from B or B, up or down the hole away
from the device. Hence, from Ohms law, B and B are
at zero potential. Similarly M is at the same potential as
A and A.
The potential of M is, therefore, equal to the potential
drop in the mud, because of the flow of current, between
A and B (or A or B). As long as all the electrodes of the
devices are opposite the resistive formation this potential
difference is dependent only on hole size and mud
resistivity; if these are constant, a constant apparent
resistivity is recorded.
If the device is located just above a conductive streak
(as in the lower part of Fig. 49.17), the streak is effec-
tively a low resistance connecting adjacent portions of
the device to points at zem potential. Part of the current
now flows in the paths indicated by the arrows, and the
potential of electrode M is correspondingly decreased.
The conductive streak is indicated on the log by a
relatively sharp, symmetrical depression.
The limestone sonde gives clearer and simpler logs in
hard formations, but measurements with the limestone
sonde arc strongly affected by the mud column. When
the formations are much more resistive than the mud, the
readings are appreciably lower than the formation
resistivities.
Application of Conventional Resistivity Logs. The
three devices that are generally recorded in the conven-
tional electrical log (16-in. normal, 64in. normal, and
18-ft, 8-in. lateral) were designed to provide the most
complete information with a system of nonfocused
macmdevices.
Fig. 49.17-Principle of limestone sonde
(schematic).
The short normal is well adapted for bed definition,
boundary determination, and correlation of formations of
low or moderate resistivities (sand-shale series). The
lateral generally shows sharp peaks at the level of thin
resistive beds, but the definition of these beds is often
obscured by blind zones and spurious peaks.
The precision of the normal and lateral curves for bed
definition is limited in hard formations and is quite poor
when salty muds are used. Somewhat better resolution is
obtained with the limestone sonde. In all cases, forma-
tion delineation is more detailed and accurate with the IL
and focused devices (LL) and with the microdevices. In
hard formations the 16-in. normal and the limestone
sonde can provide an approximation to the value of Ri
and hence an approach for formation factor evaluation.
The capabilities of the conventional tools for the deter-
mination of R, are discussed later in this chapter.
Induction Logging
The IL was first developed to measure formation
rcsistivity in boreholes containing oil-based muds. O
Electrode devices do not work in these nonconductive
muds, and attempts to use wall-scratcher electrodes
proved unsatisfactory. Experience soon demonstrated
that the induction tools had many advantages over the
conventional ES for logging wells drilled with water-
based muds _ 2
Induction logging devices are focused to minimize the
influence of the borehole and of the surrounding forma-
tions. They are designed for deep investigation and
reduction of the influence of the invaded zone.
Principle
Practical induction sondes include a system of several
transmitter and receiver coils. However, the principle
can be understood by considering a sonde with only one
transmitter coil and one receiver coil (Fig. 49.18).
High-frequency AC of constant intensity is sent
through the transmitter coil. The alternating magnetic
field thus created induces secondary currents in the for-
mations. These currents flow in circular ground-loop
paths coaxial with the transmitter coil. These ground-
loop currents, in turn, create magnetic fields that induce
ELECTRICAL LOGGING
signals in the receiver coil. The induced receiver signals
are essentially proportional to the conductivity of the for-
mations. Any signal produced by direct coupling of
transmitter and receiver coils is balanced out by the
measuring circuits.
The IL operates to advantage when the borehole fluid
is an insulator-even air or gas. But when properly
designed the tool also will work very well when the
borehole contains conductive mud, provided that the
mud is not too salty, the formations are not too resistive,
and the borehole diameter is not too large.
Equipment
Four types of induction equipment are now in use.
1. The 6FF40 IES tool includes a six-coil induction
device of 40-in. normal spacing, a 16-in. normal, and an
SP electrode. The induction array provides the greatest
lateral depth of investigation presently available with in-
duction tools.
2. The 6FF28 IES is a small-diameter (2% in.) tool
for use in slim holes. It is a scaled-down version of the
6FF40, having a 28-in. coil spacing, and incorporates a
standard 16-in. normal and an SP.
3. The Dual Induction-Laterolog 8 (DILTM) or
Spherically Focused Log (SFL) system uses a deep-
reading induction device (ID, similar to the 6FF40), a
medium induction device (IM), an LL8 (or an SFL), and
an SP electrode. The IM device has vertical resolution
similar to that of the 6FF40 tool but about half the depth
of investigation. It is much more affected by large hole
diameters and/or salty muds. The DIL log, with its three
focused resistivity readings of different depths of in-
vestigation, is superior to the IES log for determination
of R, and R, in extreme ranges of invasion depths and
in cases of annulus.
4. The ISF/Sonic combination incorporates an ID
measurement similar to that from the 6FF40 tool, the
new ISF log, an SP curve that may be electronically cor-
rected for noise, a borehole compensated (BHC) sonic
log, and an optional gamma ray curve. Of late, the BHC
sonic tool can be replaced in this tool string by a com-
bination neutron/density device.
Log Presentation and Scales
The SP and/or gamma my curve are recorded in Track 1
for all tools; they can be recorded simultaneously with
ISFisonic equipment. A gamma ray curve may also be
run with 6FF40 or DIL equipment.
Fig. 49.19 illustrates the standard IES presentation.
The induction conductivity curve is sometimes recorded
over both Tracks 2 and 3. The linear scale is in
millimhos per meter (mu/m), increasing to the left. In
Track 2 both the 16-in. normal and the reciprocated in-
duction curves are recorded on the conventional linear
rcsistivity scale.
The DIL introduced the logarithmic grid for resistivity
presentations. The current form is the log-linear grid
shown in Fig. 49.20. In this, the resistivity curves on the
detail log (5 in. I100 ft) have a split 4-decade logarithmic
scale. On the correlation log (1 or 2 in./100 fi), the scale
is linear. This presentation offers several advantages
over the other alternatives. The detail log has good
readability in low resistivities, a wide range without
backup traces, and the ease of reading resistivity ratios
Fig. 49.18-Induction-logging equipment
(schematic).
SPONTANEOUS POl ENl I Al $ Rt Sl SI l Vl r Y CONDUCl I VI l Y
ml l l l vol t r
:
ohm, m' m m, l l , mhos m . $&
I .
?*
--
--
Fig. 49.19-Induction-electrical log presentation.
49-16 PETROLEUM ENGINEERING HANDBOOK
SPOHl ANt OUI POI t Nl l Al
mi l l i vol t s
: ::::,:
i lid :
.-.- _ _-*.
~~
j-r.
+
L!-8 _: * :.;..:
.:.
v; 1,
)>+.h i
:..
3-N -!
__::..
:
: :
t-.
,:. :
:: :
::I
j y;*
: ::
+-
~
:..::
: 7:
I.. ::
77
,,.I
:1..:
,:: :
+:.::
:. :
Fig. 49.21~ISFkonic presentation.
Fig. 49.20-Dual Induction Laterolog 8 presentation.
if it were from a homogeneous medium. A secondary
skin-effect correction may be required when the media
surrounding the sonde are not of uniform conductivity.
Such corrections are incorporated in various interpreta-
tion charts.
directly from the logarithmic scale. The linear scale is
more easily correlated with earlier logs. This format has
gained acceptance as the standard for resistivity logs.
The ISF log in combination with the sonic log requires
a modification of this grid usage because Track 3 is
needed for the sonic At curve. The grid selected is shown
in Fig. 49.21.
Skin Effect
In very conductive formations the induced secondary
currents are large, and their magnetic fields are impor-
tant. The magnetic fields of their ground loops induce
additional EMFs in other ground loops. This interaction
between the loops causes a reduction of the conductivity
signal recorded by the induction log. This signal reduc-
tion is known as skin effect.
Induction logs usually are automatically corrected for
skin effect during recording. The correction is based on
the magnitude of the uncorrected tool response treated as
Geometrical Factor
When conductivities are not high, skin effect may be
neglected, and the response of induction logs can be
described in terms of conductivities and geometrical
factors of the volumes surrounding the tool. The
geometrical factor, G, of a volume having a specific
geometrical orientation with the sonde is simply the frac-
tion of the total signal that would originate with that
volume in an infinite homogeneous medium. For com-
putation of geometrical factor to be practical, it is
necessary to assume that the volumes conform to sym-
metry of revolution about the sonde.
The magnitude of the signal in conductivity units is the
product of the geometrical factor and the conductivity of
the material, and the total signal sensed by the tool is the
ELECTRICAL LOGGING
INTEGRATED RADIAL GEOMETRICAL FACTOR
49-17
I
0
W
0
Fig.
0.6
-No Skin Effect
----Skin Effect Included: Case of
-0 40 00 120 160 200 240 280 320 360
DIAMETER OF INVADED ZONE di (in.)
49.22-Geometrical factor. Dashed curve includes skin effect under conditions shown, for the
ILd device.
sum of these products for all volumes within range
(which extends to infinity, but can be circumscribed to
practical limits). Since the Gs add up to unity by defini-
tion, this can be stated:
CtL=CtG, +C2G2+C3G3...+CNGN, . . . (10)
where C and G refer to the zones of differing conductivi-
ty and N is the total number of such zones.
The chief significance of this concept is the fact that a
volume of space defined only by its geometry relative to
the sonde has a fixed and computable geometrical factor.
This permits the construction of mathematically sound
correction charts to account for the effects of borehole
mud, the invaded zone, and adjacent beds on the R,
measurement, providing symmetry of revolution exists. 2
These charts incorporate the secondary skin effect cor-
rection mentioned above.
Invasion Effects
Fig. 49.4 illustrates an invaded formation. It includes
volumes having several conductivities, C,, C,, Ci,
and C, (corresponding to R,, R,,, Ri, and R,). The
total conductivity signal, CT, received from this zone by
the induction tool is
C,=C,G,+C,G,+CiGi+C,G,. . . . . . .(ll)
If the zone were infinitely thick, this would be the only
signal received, and CT = C,L. If the tool is a 6FF40, the
hole size moderate, and the mud relatively fresh, the
borehole signal is negligible, and the C,, and Ci zones
can be merged into one for this example.
If a moderate diameter of invasion, say 65 in., is
assumed, Fig. 49.22 reveals that the geometrical factor
of all material within the 65in. diameter is 0.2. If R,r, is
taken equal to 4 R,, then C,, =C,/4, and the induction
tool response is
C,=C,G,,+W,,
=(C,/4) (0.2)+C,(O.S),
=0.85 C,.
In the same conditions, but using salty mud so that
R,, =R,i4, the response is
GIL =4 C,(O.2) + C, (0.8),
=1.6 C,,
which illustrates the conductivity-seeking character-
istic of the induction devices, and shows why they must
be used with discretion in salt-mud environments. As a
rule of thumb, R, should be less than about 2.5 R,, and
di (diameter of invaded zone) no greater than 100 in. for
satisfactory R, determination from 6FF40-type induction
logs.
Annulus
In oil-bearing formations of low S, and high permeabili-
ty, an annulus of low resistivity , R, , may exist between
the flushed zone, R,,, and the virgin formation. When
R, is greater than R,, R,, is less than R,, and the ef-
fects of the two on the induction log tend to cancel.
However, the high conductivity of the annulus has more
effect in medium invasion ranges (2dh < di < 4 or 5dh),
and it may cause a single ID to read resistivities lower
than either R,, or R, . The DIL 8 tool is often capable of
detecting the presence of annuli, since in these cir-
cumstances the IM measurement reads lower than either
the LL8 or the ID values,
Thin Bed Corrections
The skin-effect correction accomplished automatically in
the induction tools assumes infinitely thick beds. Skin
effect in thin beds may require additional corrections,
and these are provided in Ref. 2.
49-1 a PETROLEUM ENGINEERING HANDBOOK
Fig. 49.23-Schematic of focusing-electrode devices.
Borehole Corrections
Conductivity signals from the mud can be evaluated us-
ing geometrical factors. Chart Rcor-4 (Ref. 2) gives cor-
rections for the various induction tools and standoffs. On
the basis of bit size the nominal borehole signal is
sometimes removed from the recorded log. When the
hole signal is significant, log headings should always be
consulted to ascertain whether this was done. This
precaution applies most frequently to the IM measure-
ment of the DIL tool.
For hole diameters in the range of 7 to 13 in. there is
an uncertainty of about f0.0003 on the geometrical fac-
tor of the borehole for the 6FF40 sonde. This results
from several factors, including diameter and shape of the
borehole, mudcake thickness, standoff, and sonde tilt.
To preclude the possibility of cumulative errors ex-
ceeding 20% of the 6FF40 reading, the tool should not
be used where the resistivity to be measured is greater
than about 500 R,.
Very Resistive Formations
There is an uncertainty of about 52 mO/m on the zero of
the present induction sondes (6FF40, ID, and IM), and
consequently the resistivity error may be great as con-
ductivity approaches zero. To preclude an error of more
than 20%, the formation conductivity should be greater
than 10 mu/m (i.e., the resistivity less than 100 Q.m).
This error can sometimes be practically eliminated by
downhole calibration techniques if suitable formations
are present.
Calibration
Primary calibration is performed by placing a test loop
around the sonde. The conductive loop has a resistance,
which has been adjusted to produce a certain conductivi-
ty signal in the sonde. An additional calibration pro-
cedure has a signal produced internally in the sonde to
adjust the control-panel sensitivity for proper galvanom-
eter deflections. The zero errors of the electronics in
the equipment arc also checked and balanced out.
Calibrate tails, usually attached to the log, serve as a
record of the calibration tests made before and after the
logging run.
In some regions it is possible to check the calibration
of the IL by observing that the conductivity reading op-
posite an impervious formation of exceedir,gly high
resistivity (such as anhydrite) represents the sum of all
spurious signals. If the hole diameter is known, it is then
possible to correct the IL reading so that the range of
uncertainty is reduced and greater accuracy is obtained in
formations of practical interest.
Summary
1. The IL can be used most effectively in holes filled
with moderately conductive drilling muds, nonconduc-
tive muds, and in empty holes.
2. Vertical focusing is good, making possible reliable
evaluation of beds down to about 5 ft thick with 6FF40,
ID, and IM devices, and down to about 3% ft thick with
6FF28 tools.
3. The deep induction logs (ILd) are only moderately
affected by invasion in relatively fresh muds, and good
R, determinations are possible where R, is less than
about 2.5 R, and di is less than 100 in.
4. The three curves of the DIL give more precise
knowledge of invasion profiles and hence better R,
values in the cases of deep invasion or annulus.
5. The log-linear presentation of the DIL and other
ILs meets most log requirements better than alternative
displays.
Focused-Electrode Logs
The responses of conventional ES can be greatly affected
by the borehole and adjacent formations. These in-
fluences are minimized by a family of resistivity tools
that use focusing currents to control the path taken by the
measure current. These currents are supplied from
special electrodes on the sondes.
Equipment
The focused-electrode tools include the Latero!ogs (LL)
and SFLs. These tools are much superior to the ES
devices for large R&R, values (salt muds and/or highly
resistive formations) and for large resistivity contrasts
with adjacent beds (RJR, or R,IR,). They are much bet-
ter for resolution of thin to moderately thick beds.
Focusing-electrode systems are available wit! deep,
medium, and shallow depths of investigation.
Devices using this principle have as quantitative ap-
plications the determination of R, and of R,. The R,
tools are Laterolog 7 (LL7), Laterolog 3 (LL3), and
ELECTRICAL LOGGING
RESISTIVITY -
49-19
LATERLOG 0,0,=32=4d,A,A,=80=10d,l
AC,= 18% = 28d
Fig. 49.24--Response of Laterolog 7 and ES opposite a thin, resistive, noninvaded bed, with very-Sal-
ty mud (laboratory determination).
LLD of the deep dual laterolog. The medium-to-
shallow-reading devices, all integral with combination
tools, are Laterolog 8 (LL8) of the DIL, LLS of the
shallow dual laterolog, and the SFL of the ISFisonic
combination.
Laterolog 7. This deviceI comprises a center electrode
Ao, and three pairs of electrodes: M 1 and Mz; M 1 and
Mz; and Al and A2 (Fig. 49.23). The electrodes of
each pair are symmetrically located with respect to A0
and are connected to each other by a short-circuiting
wire.
A constant current 1, is sent through electrode Ao.
Through bucking electrodes A, and AZ, an adjustable
current is developed; the bucking current intensity is ad-
justed automatically so that the two pairs of monitoring
electrodes, M , and Mz and M , and M 2, are brought
to the same potential. The potential drop is measured
between one of the monitoring electrodes and an elec-
trode at the surface (i.e., at infinity). With a constant IO
current, this potential varies directly with formation
resistivity.
Since the potential difference between the M 1 -Mz
pair and the M I -M 2 pair is maintained at zero, no cur-
rent from A0 is flowing in the hole between M I and M 1
or between M2 and M2. Therefore, the current from
A0 must penetrate horizontally into the formations.
Fig. 49.23 shows the distribution of current lines when
the sonde is in a homogeneous medium; the sheet of
10 current, indicated by the hatched area, retains a fairly
constant thickness up to a distance from the borehole
somewhat greater than the total length A, A2 of the
sonde. Experiments have shown that the sheet of IO cur-
rent retains substantially the same shape opposite thin
resistive beds. The thickness of the IO current sheet is 32
in. (distance 0 I 02 on Fig. 49.23), and the length A I A2
of the sonde is 80 in.
Fig. 49.24 compares the curves obtained experimen-
tally opposite a thin resistive bed using the conventional
devices (16 and 64-in. normals and 18-ft, g-in. lateral)
with the corresponding LL7 recording. The conventional
devices give poor results; the LL7, in spite of difficult
conditions (RJ R,,, is 5,000), shows the bed very clearly
and reads close to R,. An SP curve may be recorded on
depth simultaneously with the LL7.
Laterolog 3
Like LL7, LL3 also uses currents from bucking elec-
trodes to focus the measuring current into a horizontal
sheet penetrating into the formation. However, as seen in
Fig. 49.23, large electrodes are used. Symmetrically
placed, on either side of the central A0 electrode, are
two very long (about 5-ft) electrodes, Al and AZ, which
are shorted to each other. A current, 10, flows from the
A0 electrode whose potential is fixed. From Al and A2
flows a bucking current, which is automatically adjusted
to maintain A, and A2 at the potential of A0 All elec-
trodes of the sonde are thus held at the same constant
potential. The magnitude of the IO current is then pro-
portional to formation conductivity.
The IO current sheet is constrained to the shaded, ap-
proximately disk-shaped area in Fig. 49.23. The
thickness, 0, 02, of the IO current sheet is usually about
12 in., much thinner than for LL7. As a result, LL3 has a
better vertical resolution and shows more detail than
LL7. Furthermore, the influences of the borehole and of
the invaded zone are slightly less.
The simultaneous recording of an SP curve is possible,
but the SP has to be displaced in depth, usually by about
25 ft, because of the large mass of metal in the sonde.
However, a gamma ray curve is normally run
simultaneously with the LL3 for lithology definition,
since the SP has very little character in the salt muds
where the LL is used. There is also available a
simultaneous LL3-neutron/gamma ray combination tool.
49-20
LLD
m
a- -
-:T---Flh
Fig. 49.25-Schemalic of the dual laterolog.
Guard-Electrode Device. In the guard-electrode
system, the surveying current flows into the adjacent for-
mations from a measuring electrode disposed between
relatively long upper and lower guard electrodes from
which current also flows. The guard electrodes tend to
confine the current from the measuring electrode to a
generally horizontal path. The measuring and guard elec-
trodes are connected through a very low impedance, as
necessary to measure the surveying current supplied to
the measuring electrode.
A resistivity value is obtained by recording the ratio of
the voltage of an electrode in the assembly (referred to a
distant point) to the current emitted from the measuring
electrode. The guard-electrode device is used mostly in
hard-rock territories for detailed bed definition, correla-
tion, and as a help in reservoir evaluation. For the deter-
mination of R, it is preferable that R,fIR, be small (less
than 4), as in the case of salty muds.
Laterolog 8. The shallow-investigation LL8 device is
recorded with small electrodes on the DIL sonde. It is
similar in principle to LL7 device except for its shorter
spacings. The thickness of the 10 current sheet is 14 in.,
and the distance between the two bucking electrodes is
somewhat less than 40 in. The current-return electrode is
located a relatively short distance from Ao. With this
configuration, the LL8 tool gives sharp vertical detail,
and the readings are more influenced by the borehole and
the invaded zone* than arc those for LL7 and LL3. The
LL8 data are recorded with the DIL on a split 4-decade
logarithmic scale.
Dual Laterolog. Since the measure current of an LL has
to traverse mud and invaded zone to reach the undis-
turbed formation, the measurement is necessarily a com-
bination of effects. With only one resistivity measure-
ment, the invasion profile and R,, had to be known or
PETROLEUM ENGINEERING HANDBOOK
Thick Beds
8 Ho
--- RX,= 0.1 Rt
- Rx0 Rt
8 20 40 60 80
Diameter d i 1 inches)
Fig. 49.26-Radial pseudogeometrical factors, fresh muds
(solid) and salty muds (dashed).
estimated in order to calculate R, . The need for a second
measurement at a different depth of investigation
resulted in the dual laterolog/gamma ray tools (Fig.
49.25).
One version of the tool records the two laterologs se-
quentially; another does it simultaneously and has added
a shallow MICROSFL (MSFL) for R,, information. Both
can record a gamma ray curve on depth, simultaneously
with the resistivity curves. An SP can also be run.
By use of effectively longer bucking electrodes and a
longer spacing, the LLD (deep latemlog) has been given
a deeper investigation than either LL7 or LL3 devices.
The LLS (shallow laterolog) uses the same electrodes in
a different manner (Fig. 49.25 right) to achieve a current
beam equal in thickness to that of LLD, 24 in., but hav-
ing a much shallower penetration. The LLS depth of in-
vestigation lies between those of the LL7 and LL8
devices (Fig. 49.26).
Spherically Focused Log. The SFL log is part of the
ISF/sonic combination, and it was developed as an im-
provement over both the 16-in. normal and the LL8 as a
short-spacing companion to the deep induction log.
Normal resistivity devices rely on the concept of equal
intensity of current radiation in all directions, as would
happen in a homogeneous isotropic medium. When the
current distribution is distorted from the spherical model,
as by the presence of a borehole, the readings must be
corrected by departure curves. The SFL device uses
focusing currents to enforce an approximately spherical
ELECTRICAL LOGGING 49-21
Fig. 49.27-Laterolog recorded on hybrid scale.
shape on the equipotential surfaces over a wide range of
wellbore variables. The borehole effect is virtually
eliminated where dh 5 10 in., yet most of the response is
from the invaded zone in all but extreme conditions.
Scales. The linear resistivity scales originally used for
LL data were poorly adapted to record the wide range of
measurements characteristic of these tools. Although
linear scales are still used occasionally, compressed
scales of either the hybrid or logarithmic type have sup-
planted the linear for quantitative work.
The hybrid scale, first used on the LL3 log, presented
linear resistivity on the first half of the grid track and
linear conductivity on the last half. Thus, one
galvanometer could record all resistivities from zero to
infinity. (See Fig. 49.27.)
The logarithmic scale was used first with the dual in-
duction tool, and it has also been adapted for the LL and
the SFL devices (Fig. 49.28). It combines readability
and detail in low msistivities with a wide range of
values, and it also offers the advantage of graphic
(quick-look) interpretations.
Influence of Wellbore Variables
These logging devices can be significantly affected by
the borehole mud, the invaded zone, and adjacent beds.
Charts Rcor-1 and Rcor-2 of Ref. 2 provide needed cor-
rections. Where only one measurement is available,
some knowledge or assumption of depth of invasion
must be used for deriving R,. Readings must be cor-
rected for borehole effect before the shoulder-bed charts
are entered. (See Figs. 49.29 and 49.9.) These figures
10
J --I
Ii
: :
. I
I I
L
: r---
I<- -L-
: :
-1. ._:

i
: :
: i I
.: ::I
. ._.~ --.:.
.: ::;f
: :
11
z; ;r;i
._._
fT ::Y
:
. .
1
7 ::::
;- .ii
i j
: :
y
.~_
<
: :
+k
::::::
::.:I :
ii:L/
:: ::: :
,:..: :
T I :-j ;
1- i
T..... -:
:1:::1:
_
I . :
T r..... f
: : :::: :
/
L.... .
:
_:..
.
! I..!
Fig. 49.29-Laterolog over same interval as Fig. 49.22, record-
ed on logarithmic scale.
Fig. 49.29--Shoulder-bed corrections, LL3 (top) and LL7
(bottom).
49-22 PETROLEUM ENGINEERING HANDBOOK
give R, /R, as a function of bed thickness, R, being the
formation waters-and (2) to provide correlation and R,,
corrected resistivity and R, the apparent resistivity cor-
determinations in conjunction with deeper-reading R,
rected for borehole effect.
devices.
Pseudogeometrical Factors
Microresistivity Devices
Geometrical factor may be defined as that fraction of the
total signal that would originate from a volume having a
specific geometrical orientation with the sonde in an in-
finite homogeneous medium.
The only well-logging devices for which this concept
is sound are the induction tools, because only with these
is the measuring geometry independent of variations in
RJ R,. However, it is useful to construct charts based
on pseudogeometrical factors for other resistivity
devices, for purposes of comparative evaluation. Such a
chart is shown in Fig. 49.26 in which the integrated
pseudogeometrical factors of progressively larger
cylinders are plotted vs. the diameters of the cylinders.
The apparent resistivity, R,, measured in a thick bed is
given approximately by
Microresistivity devices are used to measure R,,
(resistivity of the flushed zone) and to delineate
permeable beds by detecting the presence of mudcake. In
the discussion that follows, the micmlog (ML) will be
treated in considerable detail, not because of its relative
importance-the micmlaterolog (MLL), the proximity
log (PL), and the MSFL are superior tools for obtaining
R,,-but because its principle is fundamental, and it is
still the best of the three microresistivity devices for
delineating permeable-bed boundaries, hence for making
sand counts.
Measurements of R,, are important for several
reasons. When invasion is moderate to deep, knowledge
of the R, value makes possible more accurate deter-
minations of true resistivity and hence of saturation.
Also, some methods for computing saturation are
entered with the ratio RJ R,. Also, in clean formations,
a value of F may be computed from R,, and R,,f, if S,r,
is known or estimated. From F, a value for porosity may
be found.
R,=R,,G,i+R,(l-G,;), . . . . (12)
where G,; is the pseudogeometrical factor. It must be
emphasized that a pseudogeometrical factor relating to
an electrode-type resistivity device is applicable in only
one set of conditions, and therefore charts of this type are
not valid as general-purpose invaded-zone correction
charts. The most useful feature of the Fig. 49.26 chart is
its graphic comparison of the relative contribution of in-
vaded zones to the responses of the various tools.
The Delaware Effect
If both B and N electrodes are placed downhole as in
Fig. 49.10, LL data may exhibit Delaware effect* (or
gradient) in sections located just below thick noncon-
ductive beds such as anhydrite. It appears as abnormally
high resistivity for 80 ft or so below the resistive bed.
The LL3 is the only field tool now using this
arrangement.
Fig. 49.10 illustrates the effect and its causes. As B
enters the thick anhydrite, the current flow is confined to
the borehole, and if the bed is thick enough (several hun-
dred feet) practically all the current will flow in that part
of the hole below B. Then when N enters the bed, it can
no longer remain near zem potential as intended. It is ex-
posed to an increasing negative potential as it rises far-
ther from the bed boundary. This potential appears at the
surface as an increase in the resistivity measurement.
LL7 and LLD devices normally use surface electrodes
for current return. so they are not subject to Delaware ef-
feet. However, a small anti-Delaware effect has been
observed, which produces resistivities that are too low
just below the resistive beds.
To measure R, a shallow-investigation tool is
desirable, since the R,, zone may sometimes extend on-
ly a few inches beyond the hole wall. Also, the reading
should preferably not be affected by the borehole.
A sidewall-pad tool is indicated. The pad, carrying
short-spacing electrode devices, is pressed against the
mudcake, thus reducing the short-circuiting effect of the
mud. Currents from the electrodes on the pad must pass
through the mudcake to reach the R,, zone.
Microresistivity readings are more or less affected by
mudcake, depending on its resistivity, R,,, and
thickness, h,, Moreover, mudcakes can be anisotmpic,
with mudcake resistivity parallel to the borehole wall
less than that across the mudcake. Mudcake anisotropy
increases the mudcake effect on micmresistivity
readings, so that the effective, or electrical, mudcake
thickness is greater than that indicated by a caliper. The
micmresistivity tools incorporate two-arm calipers,
which show the size and condition of the borehole.
Equipment
Present equipment includes a combination tool with two
pads mounted on opposite sides. One is the ML pad, and
the other may be for either the MLL or the PL, as re-
quired by mudcake conditions. The measurements are
recorded simultaneously. The MSFL is a combination
tool, which can be run with either formation density or
dual latemlog equipment.
Conclusions Conclusions
Log Presentation Log Presentation
Resistivity devices with the focusing electrode principle Resistivity devices with the focusing electrode principle
The microresistivity logs are scaled, of course, in
The mirrnr&rtivitv lnuc nn- a-sled, of course, in
meet certain logging requirements better than other types meet certain logging requirements bette- +hon n+hpr +l~noc ~
resistivity units. When recorded by itself, the ML data itself, the ML data
now available. These requirements now available. These requirements are (1) to take
are usually recorded over Tracks 2 and 3 on a linear
measurements leading to determination measurements leading to determination of R, in condi-
resistivity scale. The microcaliper data are in Track 1.
tions for which the induction tool tions for which the induction tools are not well
The MML or PL is recorded on a four-decade
suited-i.e., R, values in excess of 100 suited-i.e., R, values in excess of 100 Q-m and/or mud
logarithmic scale on the right of the depth track (Fig.
resistivities of the same order or lower resistivities of the same order or lower than those of the
49.30). The caliper is recorded in Track 1. When the ML
So-called because 1 was ilrst observed ,n Ihe Delaware saw v, ,,,r Y So-called because 1 was ilrst observed ,n Ihe Delaware sand of the Delaware basin
data are also recorded, they are in Track 1 on a linear
(west Texas) This sand underltes a very thick anhydrite bed (west Texas) This sand underltes a very thick anhydrite bed scale. The MSFL data are also recorded on the
ELECTRICAL LOGGING
logarithmic grid. When run with the dual laterolog, it is
presented on the same film as the LL curves. With the
Compensated Formation Density (FD?) log, it must be
presented on a separate film, since the FDC log uses a
linear grid; the two logs arc normally recorded
simultaneously.
Microlog
With the microlog too1,23 two short-spacing devices
with different depths of investigation provide resistivity
measurements of a very small volume of mudcake and
formation immediately adjoining the borehole. They
readily detect the presence of any mudcake, indicating
invaded (hence permeable) formations.
Principle. Arms and springs press a rubber pad against
the hole wall. In the face of the pad are inserted three
small electrodes in line, spaced 1 in. apart. With these
electrodes a 1-X l-in. micminverse, R, Xl, and a 2-in.
micronormal, R2, are recorded simultaneously.
As drilling mud filters into the permeable formations,
mud solids accumulate on the hole wall, forming a mud-
cake. The resistivity of the mudcake is about equal to, or
slightly greater than, the resistivity of the mud. Mudcake
resistivity is usually considerably smaller than the
resistivity of the invaded zone near the borehole.
The 2-in. micronormal has a greater depth of in-
vestigation than the 1-x l-in. micminverse. It is
therefore less influenced by the mudcake and reads a
higher resistivity, producing positive curve separa-
tion. In the presence of the low-resistivity mudcake, both
devices will measure moderate resistivities, usually
ranging from about 2 to 10 times R,
I nterpretation. Positive separation in a permeable
zone is illustrated in Fig. 49.30, at Level A. The caliper
shows evidence of mudcake. However, quantitative in-
ferences of permeability are not possible from the ML
data. When no mudcake exists, for whatever reason, the
ML data may yield useful information as to borehole
condition or lithology , but the log is not quantitatively
interpretable.
Under favorable circumstances, R, values can be
derived from the ML by use of Fig. 49.31. R,, values
for this purpose can be measured directly or estimated
fmm Ref. 2, and h,, is obtained from the caliper.
Limitations of the method are (1) the ratio R,,lR,, must
be lower than about 15 (porosity more than 15%), (2)
h ,,,= must be no greater than /2 in., and (3) depth of inva-
sion has to be over about 4 in., otherwise the ML
readings are affected by R,. Eqs. 6 or 14 permit the
porosity derivation from the ML measurements. For
this, the value of S,, must be reasonably well known.
Mud Log
The ML sonde is lowered into the hole with arms closed.
Except in holes smaller than 8 in., the measuring pad
will randomly face away from the wall part of the time,
and its reading then will be determined mostly by the
mud. A recording of these readings, conveniently made
going down, serves as a mud log, on which the
lowest resistivities correspond to the upper limit of the
in-situ value of R,. This log has several potential ap-
plications, including crosschecking the surface R,
measurement, detecting mud-system changes, and iden-
tifying downhole water flows.
I
RESISTIVITY
yll, II -
49-23
RESISTIVITY
:
hrn, - r
,I 3 70 803 moo ?
Fig. 49.30-Presentation of proximity log-microlog
Ftg. 49.31-Interpretation chart for 8-in.-hole series
C microlog for which adjacent elec-
trodes are 1 in. apart. R, in designates
reading of 2-in. micronormal (AM, =2
in.) and RIx, ,, is I- by I-in. microin-
verse (AM, = 1 in., M, M, = 1 in.). Type
I hydraulic pad, noninsulated sonde.
49.24 PETROLEUM ENGINEERING HANDBOOK
Fig. 49.32-Microlaterolog pad showing electrodes (left) and
schematic current lines (right).
Microlaterolog (MLL)
Fig. 49.33-Comparative distribution of current lines of
Microlaterolog and Microlog.
On ML (Fig. 49.31) for values of RI O/R,, greater than
about 15, the curves for constant values of R,,lR,, arc
crowded; as a result, the accuracy of the determination
of R, from the ML is poor in this region. With the MLL
method, it is possible to determine R,, accurately for
higher values of R,,lR,,, provided, however, that the
mudcake thickness does not exceed X in.
Proximity Log (PL)
Principle. The MLL pad is shown in Fig. 49.32.24 A
small electrode, Ao, and three concentric circular elec-
trodes are embedded in a rubber pad applied against the
hole wall. A constant current, I,, is emitted through
electrode AO. Through the outer electrode, A I , is sent a
current automatically adjusted so that the potential dif-
ference between the two monitoring electrodes is main-
tained essentially equal to zero. The 10 current flowing
past the M 1 electrode cannot reach M2 and is forced to
flow in a beam into the formations. The current lines are
shown on the figure. The IO current near the pad forms a
narrow beam, which opens up rapidly at a few inches
from the face of the pad. The MLL reading is influenced
mostly by the formation within this narrow beam.
Principle. The proximity tool is similar in principle to
the MLL tool. The electrodes are mounted on a
somewhat wider pad, which is applied to the wall of the
borehole; the system is automatically focused by
monitoring electrodes.
Response. Pad and electrode design arc such that
isotropic mudcakes up to % in. have very little effect on
the measurements (see Chart Rxo-2 in Ref. 2). If the in-
vasion is shallow, the reading of the proximity device is
influenced by R,. The resistivity measured can be ex-
pressed as
RfL=GpiRxo+(l-Gpi)R,, . . .
Fig. 49.33 compares qualitatively the current-line
distributions of the MLL and the ML when the cor-
responding pad is applied against a permeable formation.
The greater the value of R,,lR,, the greater the tenden-
cy for the microlog 10 current to escape through the mud-
cake to reach the mud in the borehole. Consequently, for
high R,I R,, values, the readings of the ML respond
very little to variations of R,. On the contrary, all the
MLL I0 current flows into the formation and the MLL
reading will depend mostly on the value of R,,.
where G,i is the pseudogeometrical factor of the invaded
zone. The value of G,i as a function of invasion
diameter di is given in Fig. 49.34; this chart gives only
an approximate value of G,; , which in fact also depends
to some extent on the diameter of the borehole and on the
ratio R,, lR, .
If di is greater than 40 in., GpI is very close to 1 and,
accordingly, RPL will differ little from R,, . If di is less
than 40 in., R, is somewhere between R,, and R,,
usually much closer to R,, than to R, . RPL can be fairly
close to R, only if the invasion is very shallow (of course
when R,, and R, are nearly equal, the value of RPL will
depend very little on d,).
MICROSFL (MSFL)
Response. Laboratory tests have shown that the virgin This is a pad-mounted SFL device. It embodies two
formation has practically no influence on the MLL distinct advantages over other microresistivity devices:
readings if the invasion depth is more than 3 or 4 in. The (1) it is compatible with other logging tools, specifically
influence of mudcake is negligible up to h mr = % in. but
the FDC and the simultaneous dual laterology (SDL),
increases rapidly with greater thicknesses. Chart Rxo-2 which eliminates the need for a separate logging run to
in Ref. 2 gives appropriate corrections; however, if mud- obtain R, information, and (2) it responds to shallow
cakes thicker than % in. arc anticipated, the PL is prc- R, zones in the presence of mudcake. The MSFL gives
ferred for R,, determination.
good R.w
resolution in thick-mudcake conditions, but
Mud
Mud Coke
Microloterolog
Mlcrolog
ELECTRICAL LOGGING
does not require as great an invasion depth as does the
PL. This characteristic makes it useful in a wider range
of conditions than either the PL or the MLL. The effect
of mudcake on the MSFL data is shown in Ref. 2.
Principle. Spherical focusing is the shaping of the
equipotential surfaces produced by the resistivity device
to approximately spherical form. The focusing is ac-
complished by auxiliary electrodes, as in the MLL and
PL; but, instead of being forced into a narrow beam, the
measure current is merely prevented from following the
borehole mud or mudcake paths. A careful selection of
electrode spacings achieves an optimal compromise be-
tween too much and too little depth of investigation.
Conclusions
The ML permits a very accurate delineation of
permeable beds in all types of formations. It can also
provide satisfactory R,, and porosity determinations
under favorable conditions, which are (1) R,,I R,, <15,
(2) h,, c % in., and (3) depth of invasion greater than
about 4 in.
The focused microresistivity tools can provide good
R,, values under a much wider range of conditions. The
MLL is limited chiefly by mudcake thickness, but is well
adapted to salt-base muds. When h,, exceeds % in., the
PL or the MSFL log is preferable.
Uses and Interpretation of Well Logs
Bed Detection and Definition
Formations encountered in uncased boreholes may be
detected and their boundaries defined by a number of dif-
ferent logs. The SP and short-investigation curves are
most commonly used. For great detail, the microdevices
are superior-ML in fresh muds and MLL in very salty
muds. A substitute for the SP in salt muds is the gamma
ray log, which distinguishes shales from nonshale beds.
Also, the sonic and density logs could be used in all
types of formations, with any type of mud.
In holes filled with nonconductive muds, or in empty
holes, the induction, radiation, temperature, sonic (not
applicable in empty holes), and perhaps section-gauge
logs can provide useful information. Sometimes conven-
tional devices with wall scratchers, for contact with the
formation, may be run.
Porous and Permeable Beds-Sand Count. Porous
and permeable beds are of primary interest since they are
the potential oil and gas reservoirs. A sand-count deter-
mination of the total effective thickness of a permeable
section, excluding shale streaks and other impermeable
zones, can be derived from electrical logs.
Fresh Muds. The SP and microresistivity devices are
the principle curves for locating and defining permeable
beds. The SP has a good resolving power in formations
of low and moderate resistivity. In very resistive forma-
tions it can still detect shales and permeable beds, but it
cannot define their boundaries accurately. In most types
of formations the ML is best for establishing the detailed
location of the boundaries of permeable beds.
The microcaliper helps in the location of permeable
beds because it can usually detect the mudcakes. par-
ticularly if the adjacent formations are approximately at
bit size. Shales, on the other hand, generally tend to cave
I
I
\
f7
I
I
I
/
/
f
RIO R,
-- R X,,= 0 I I,
Depth of Invasion, in
Fig. 49.34-Pseudogeometrical factors, MLL and PL.
or erode more than the permeable or hard impervious
beds. Very often, and mostly in sand-shale series, the
difference between the readings of a short-investigation
and a long-investigation device is a clear indication of
the presence of a permeable bed.
Salt Muds. The combination of very salty mud with
moderate-to-high formation resistivity adversely affects
the conventional (nonfocused) devices and the SP curve.
Also, mudcakes are thin; as a consequence, the
microcaliper (or also the section gauge) is not of great
help for the detection of permeable sections but detects
clearly the caved shales. In conjunction with the LL and
MLL the gamma ray log distinguishes between shales
and nonshales, and the neutron, sonic log, and density
log provide indications of porosity.
Correlation
The process of correlating two (or more) logs in different
wells depends essentially on the similarity in shapes or
outlines of the curves (Fig. 49.35). In some regions such
correlations may be easily made for wells miles apart; in
other cases (where serious faulting, lenticular deposits,
or unconformities are present) it may be difficult to cor-
relate logs from wells only a few hundred feet apart. The
knowledge of formation dip from dipmeter determina-
tions assists in correlation.
Correlations are facilitated when the curves show
characteristic markers such as a well-known chalk or
shale section. Thin resistive beds such as lignites or
evaporites frequently furnish valuable correlation points.
For long-range correlation, the devices that investigate
large volumes of formation are best. However, when the
49-26
Fig. 49.35-Example of long-distance correlation.
pay zones are known in a field, they can be correlated in
great detail from well to well by comparing the ML or
MLL; thus, the geometry of the reservoir can be
obtained.
Investigation of Porosity
Evaluation of formation porosity from electrical logs is
based on determination of the formation factor, FR,
which is related to porosity, 4, by Eq. 2. FR can be
found from the value of R,, as determined from the ML
or MLL with Eq. 6 rewritten as
R
FR=- Rx* (S,)2, . . . . . . (14)
mf
where S,, = 1 -S,, .
To determine R, from microresistivity measurc-
merits, it is necessary that invasion be deep enough that
the measurements are not affected by the formation
resistivities beyond the flushed zone. An exceedingly
great mudcake thickness may also limit the accuracy of
the R, determination. For reliable porosity interpreta-
tion from ML data the porosity should be greater than
about 12 to 15%.
In an oil-bearing sand, the residual oil saturation
(ROS) must be surmised for use in Eq. 14. Taking a
value of 20% for the ROS would not usually entail too
great an error in most cases, at least in formations with
granular porosity and containing light oils. Greater
ROSs are frequent, however, chiefly in the cases of
highly viscous oil. Gas-bearing formations also seem to
display high residual gas saturations in the flushed zone
if the permeability is high. This is because of segregation
effects resulting from a combination of gravity and
capillary forces. Because of these residual saturations,
the ML may show water contacts.
To check the results of the microresistivity devices, or
to replace them in case they are not available, FR may be
determined as equal to RoI R,, R. being the true
resistivity of the formation at a level where it is 100%
water bearing. Extrapolation of a value of FR determined
at a water-bearing level to the oil-bearing section within
the same formation implies that the lithological
PETROLEUM ENGINEERING HANDBOOK
characteristics are approximately constant, which is not
always the case, however.
Still another approach often used in hard formations is
based on the value of Ri, the average resistivity of the in-
vaded zone estimated from the readings of the limestone
sonde or the short normal.25,26 This procedure has
proved valuable in many cases.
Other Tools for Obtaining Porosity. The sonic log, the
neutron log, and the density log are increasing in impor-
tance as auxiliaries to the electrical logs for improved
porosity determination.* In addition, with the present
sample taker, reliable determination of formation factor
and porosity are often possible from sidewall cores.
Investigation of Fluid Content
Quite often good qualitative judgments about a forma-
tion as a potential producing zone can be had by direct
visual inspection of the log. Basically such judgments
usually depend on (1) identification of a permeable for-
mation by means of the SP, mudcake indications on
microcaliper, positive separation on ML, indication of
invasion by separation between shallow- and deep-
investigation macmresistivity curves, etc., and (2) in-
dication by the deep-investigation resistivity devices that
R, in the permeable formation is appreciably larger than
the resistivity, Ro, that the formation would be expected
to have if water bearing.
When it can be assumed that there is no abrupt change
in the salinity of the formation waters, the radius of inva-
sion, etc., qualitative evaluations of saturation may be
made by comparing a porosity log with a resistivity log
over a large enough section of formations. Such a
method, in which the neutron log was the source of the
porosity data, was proposed several years ago.27 Also,
the possibility of accurate measurements of porosity with
the sonic and density logs has
29
mmpted similar
qualitative interpretation procedures.
When invasion is not too deep, so that the deep-
investigation resistivity devices read fairly close to R,,
the following procedures are applicable.
1. Sonic** transit time may be plotted vs. a deep IL
resistivity (in case of fresh muds) or vs. the LLD
resistivity (in case of salty muds). 29 By a proper choice
of scales, lines of constant resistivity index, I,, become
straight lines on the chart, as in Fig. 49.36. The line of
100% water saturation (ZR = 1) is constructed as the line
bounding the leftmost plotted points and passing through
the point corresponding to infinite resistivity and zero
sonic log porosity. Lines for other values of iR may then
be constructed. It is possible to distinguish between oil-
or gas-bearing and water-bearing zones by the relative
positions of the plotted points. For a zone to be oil- or
gas-productive the plotted point should fall appreciably
to the right of and below the line of 100% saturation.
This method is useful even if the formation-water
resistivity is not initially well known.
2. By use of porosity derived from the sonic or neutron
log and the resistivity from the deep-investigation log,
apparent values of the formation-water resistivity
The shon-interval sonic velocity log (Sony log) IS discussed I Chap. 50. The
neutron lag IS dlscusssd ln Chap. 51.
With some precautons. den%ty or newon data may be employed I place 01 90~
data in a similar crossplot technique
ELECTRICAL LOGGING
49-27
R, =R,I FR may be computed (using Eqs. 2 or 3 to ob-
tain FR). When tabulated in terms of depth, those ap-
parent values that stand definitely above the average
trend indicate the presence of hydrocarbon saturation.
This procedure is rapid and applicable in shaly sands. It
is also applicable when formation-water salinity varies
appreciably with depth, provided that the variation is
gradual and continuous.
3. The readings of a short-investigation resistivity log
should give indications of the variations in the formation
factor (and porosity). Accordingly, hydrocarbon satum-
tion can also be qualitatively determined by examining
the ratios of the readings of a short-investigation device
(such as a short normal, LLS, or PL) to those of the deep
induction log (IM) or LLD. The two sets of readings
may be used to locate points on a graphic plot, as
described previously, or to construct a continuous curve
of the ratio vs. depth. In either case the comparison is
facilitated if the logs have been recorded on a
logarithmic sensitivity scale.
The following procedure is helpful when, because of
deep invasion, the value of the true resistivity is in
doubt. The porosity from the sonic log is compared with
the porosity computed from a shallow-investigation
resistivity log (such as short normal, limestone sonde,
LLS or PL). The latter porosity is affected by any
residual oil saturation, whereas the sonic log porosity is
not. Zones where the two porosities differ should ac-
cordingly indicate potentially productive formations.
Also, in hard formations (where permeability is
generally low) a resistivity gradient (corresponding to a
saturation gradient) is observed on the logs between the
zone of lowest water saturation and the level of 100%
water saturation. The existence of this gradient is the
basis of a method for the delineation of intervals
saturated with hydrocarbons. 3o
Quantitative Interpretation*
Quantitative determinations of the hydrocarbgn satura-
tion from electrical logs are essentially determinations of
the water saturation, S,, in the uncontaminated zone.
Recalling Eq. 5
The evaluation of R, is a major step in the determina-
tion. Evaluation of FR is equivalent to an evaluation of
porosity, as already discussed. R. may be determined in
a 100% water-saturated section of the same sand or in a
lithologically similar sand.
Some interpretation procedures do not require explicit
evaluation of R, and FR . Along with a knowledge of the
SSP, or equivalently the ratio R&R,, they are based on
the ratios of readings taken with deep- and shallow-
investigation devices [e.g., R,,I R, method, induction-
electrical log (IEL) interpretation, Rocky Mountain
method]. A special approach is applied in case of shaly
formations.
Only ~omp~tatmns that can be made by hand wll be studled here Latest ~nterpreta-
ban techniques ate made by computers and are explalned under The Digital Age.
SONIC LOG TRANSIT TIME. u SECFT
SONC LOG POROSITY
(TAKING YM*,R,X 21.000 FT/SEC)
-37k-+-
F,(FOR rn: 2 1
Fig. 49.36--Qualitative method for dif-
ferentiating water-bearing
and oil- or gas-bearing
zones by plotting deep-
investigation resistivity
values against sonic-log
transit times. The ordinate
scale is proportional to
(l/R).
Determination of Rt. Conventional resistivity logs can
provide for the value of R, only for thick beds, since the
readings in general cannot be reasonably corrected for
the effect of adjacent formations. The long lateral,
because of its large radius of investigation, is practically
unaffected by the mud column and the invaded zone and
gives a good approximation of R, when the beds are
reasonably uniform over a thickness of at least 30 ft.
Such favorable conditions are seldom met in practice.
The long-normal reading usually requires a correction
for the borehole effect. This correction is sufficiently ac-
curate in fresh mud. The reading is close to R, when the
bed thickness is at least 10 to 15 ft and invasion is
shallow. The effect of deep invasion can be accounted
for, to some extent, by means of departure curves. 31,32
Correction for invasion requires the help of other devices
with shorter radii of investigation (ML and/or short nor-
mal),
which provide values of the invaded-zone
resistivity.
The advantage of the ILD and the LLD is that under
usual conditions of application their readings are practi-
cally unaffected by the mud column or by the adjacent
formations for bed thicknesses greater than about 5 to 6 ft.
The ILd, with the present technique, is appropriate for
logging in fresh mud. Its accuracy is excellent for forma-
tions reading up to 50 0-m and reasonable up to 200
n-m. Above that figure the accuracy is not so good. The
ILd gives R, when the invasion diameter does not exceed
25 to 40 in. and can be corrected for deep invasion. The
auxiliary readings are the ML and/or the short normal, or
better, the LL8 or SFL, particularly in case of con-
solidated formations.
49-28
PETROLEUM ENGINEERING HANDBOOK
The LL is the essential tool for the logging of hard for-
SATURATION DETERMINATION
mations in salty mud. It gives R, for shallow invasion
(d; less than 15 to 25 in.). Correction for invasion is
made with the help of the MLL or MSFL. The most effi-
cient way to correct for invasion and thus obtain R, is the
use of a three-log combination: (1) DIL or dual induc-
tion/SFL in fresh muds and in soft and intermediate for-
mations and (2) dual laterolog/R, in hard formations or
salty muds. The so-called butterfly or tornado charts
in Ref. 2 provide a simple procedure to ob-
tain R,.
Maximum Producible Oil Index
If the porosity, 4, of a formation is uniform and in-
tergranular, the quantities S,4 and S,$ represent the
amounts of water per unit of bulk volume present in the
pores of the flushed and uncontaminated zones, respec-
tively. The difference Y=(S,, -S,)+ is the amount of
oil per bulk volume displaced by the mud filtrate. Y is
called maximum producible oil index because it ap-
proximates the maximum amount of oil per bulk volume
producible with water drive. Y is given approximately by
the equation 29
Y=@ lh -(-+) %. . . . . . . . .
(15)
Evaluation of Y by this equation does not require a direct
knowledge of porosity, 4, formation saturation, S,, or
flushed-zone saturation, S,, (or ROS).
Ratio Methods
It is impossible, in the space available, to present all log-
interpretation techniques or to present all charts and
tabulations made up thereof. For the practicing log inter-
preter most of the charts needed are included in Ref. 2.
The R,I R, Method. For clean formations, saturations
can be computed from the empirical relationship found
by combinations Eqs. 5 and 6,
sw=sxo(~.~) A . . . . . . . . . (16)
Any method which gives correct values for R,, , R,,
R mfi and R, may be used to determine S,, provided S,,
is known or can be reasonably surmised.
The chart of Fig. 49.37 provides a convenient way for
solving Eq. 16. The ratio R&R,* is entered in abscissas
(upper scale) and the ratio RIO/R, in ordinates. From the
point so plotted, an oblique line is extended up to its in-
tersection with the edge of the chart; from this intersec-
tion, a horizontal line is drawn which gives the values of
S, for different values of S,, .
The value of S, found directly by interpolation be-
tween the two nearby oblique lines is based on the
assumption that S,, , on the average, is related to 5,
through the empirical equation S,, = a,. Within the
limits where R ,+ = R,, (i.e., R, between 0.08 and 0.3
O-m at 75F), the Essp can be entered, instead of
R&R,, using the lower grid.
Microlog Shaly-Sand Method. The amplitudes of both
the SP deflection and the resistivities are reduced by the
presence of interstitial shale in a formation. In some ex-
Rwc
Fig. 49.37-Interpretation chart for RJR, and shaly-sand
methods. (Working lines illustrate example of
Fig. 49.38).
treme cases shaly oil sands are hardly differentiated from
the adjacent shales on the logs. Furthermore, the ML
does not show much separation between the curves. In-
terpretations in shaly sands, therefore, are generally
made under comparatively unfavorable conditions. The
practical method of interpretation described hereafter is
quite approximate and is applicable only when the
amount of shaliness is not too great.*
The practical method of interpretation in shaly forma-
tions33 is based on the observations made on field logs
that in 100% water-saturated shaly sands the PSP
(pseudostatic SP) is given by
R
Epsp=-Kc log?, _.
Ro
(17)
For an interlaminated sand-shale formation containing
oil and/or gas, the PSP can be expressed by the equation
R
E PSP=-Kr. logf-201srK,. lo+, .
, 1,
where asp is the SP reduction factor and is defined as
Epp/E~p. For clean sands, asp = 1 and Eq. 18 reduces
to Eq. 17 as a special case.
According to Eq. 18 the determination of S,,, in a shaly
sand requires the knowledge of R,, , S,, , R,, E,, and
ESSP. The Essp can be determined from clean sands
reasonably close to the shaly formations considered. The
Epsp is given by the deflection of the SP curve at the
level of the bed, after correction for bed thickness, if
necessary. The value of S,,, =l -S,,, again must be
surmised.
The solution of the equation for S,,. is given by Fig.
49.37, which applies to both clean and shaly formations.
For a shaly sand, the PSP and R,,/R, are first entered in
abscissa and ordinate, respectively. This gives us the ap-
Sane other shaly-sand references are Refs. 8 and 9.
49-29 ELECTRICAL LOGGING
__- .___ L __._.._
Fig. 49.38-Shaly-sand example: induction-electrical survey and microlog-microcaliper
survey in well on Louisiana Gulf Coast. I?, = 1.45, R,, = 1.2, and R,, = 1.3 at
BHT (14OOF). d= 83/i in.
parent saturation. To find the true saturation, a line is
drawn through the origin (circled), and the point
representing the apparent saturation; and this line is ex-
tended until it intercepts the Essp or the corresponding
value of R,fI R,. The saturation at this point is treated in
the same manner as in the R,,I R, method above.
If the Essp is not known and R,%, is unobtainable, it is
not possible to determine the water saturation, S,,..
Nevertheless, plotting the ratio R,,I R, vs. PSP on Fig.
49.37 will show whether or not the sand falls on the
100% water-saturation line. If it falls some distance
below this line, there is a chance for production.
Note that in sand-shale laminations the value of S,,, is
the water saturation of the sand itself. In sands contain-
ing disseminated shale, it is the water bound by the
quartz grains and does not include the water held by the
colloids.
Example Problem 1. Fig. 49.38 shows the IEL and
the ML over a portion of a well in Jefferson Davis
Parish, LA. The shaly sand from 8,046 to 8,054 ft will
be interpreted. The mud resistivity at formation
temperature of 140F is 1.45 Q-m, R,, = 1.3 Q-m, and
R,,,,= 1.2 9-m at 140F. Bit size is 8% in.
From the IEL, the Epsp is -55 mV. The Essp (sand
at 7,830 to 7,850 ft) is - 130 mV. Thus cusp is 0.42. The
short-normal resistivity R 16 is 2.2 n-m, and the
induction-log resistivity R,L is 1.9 B-m. Invasion is
known to be quite shallow, as further substantiated by
the readings of the microlog. Therefore R,L may be
taken as equal to R,.
As shown by the positive separation on the ML, three
distinct porous intervals, A, B, and C, appear between
8,046 and 8,054 ft. The values of R,, and h,, for each
interval are found by use of Fig. 49.31. Thus, for Inter-
val A R,, is 4.0, for Interval B it is 5.6, and for Interval
C it is 6.8. The average R,, is 5.5, and for all three inter-
vals the mudcake thickness is % in. Note that the
microcaliper indicates a hole diameter of 7 3/4 in., exactly
1 in. smaller than bit size, corresponding to a %-in.
mudcake, thus verifying the h,, values from Fig. 49.3 1.
49-30 PETROLEUM ENGINEERING HANDBOOK
!jFF 40 INDUCTlOrJ - 16NORMAL
SATURATION DETERMINATION
THICK BEDS OF LOW AND MEDIUM RESISTI
I I , I
IO 2 3 4 5 6jBYlO
9 _ INTERPRET ONLY
B ~. SHOWN PERMEAbu
7 _
BY MICROLOG
6 BO NOT USE WHEN -- . ~~~
R,,/R,<~ FOR d, = 3d,
-4
q
\ -
3
* SCALES ~APPROXI MAT
K,=
70
80
90
100
NOTE NON lN;ADED WATER SANDS OF LOW RESISTIVITY WILL GIVE
THEY ARE USUALLY RECOGNIZED BY NEGATIVE SEPARATION
ON MICROLOG. IN ANY CASE NO OIL HAS BEEN FOUND BELOW
0 7 OHM
Fig. 49.39-40-in. induction log, l&in. normal interpretation chart. (Working lines il-
lustrate example of Fig. 49.40.)
All necessary data are now at hand:
R
x0
= 5.5 D-m
R,(=R,L) = 1.9 n-m
E
PSP =
-55 mV
E
SSP =
- 130 mV
asp = 0.42
normal reading must not be perturbed by the presence of
resistive streaks.
K, = (for the SP) at 140F is close to 79
R,r,I R, = 2.9, and
R.,,,lR,,,f = 4.6
The chart incorporates approximate compensation for
the presence of an annulus, assuming equal viscosities
for the oil and water and an S,, in the flushed zone of 15
to 30%. To use the chart the value of the ratio R~~IRIL
(resistivity fmm 16-in. normal divided by the IL
resistivity), corrected, if necessary, for effect of
borehole and adjacent formations, is plotted either vs.
the SSP (lower grid) entered opposite the appropriate for-
mation temperature or vs. R,fIR, (upper scale).
Fig. 49.37 is entered with R,,I R, =2.9 and PSP= -55 Points falling within the shaded area correspond to
at K, =79, locating a point on the chart. Then a line is water-bearing sands. Points falling below the shaded
drawn through this point from the origin and extended area correspond to oil saturation. Approximate saturation
until it intersects the vertical line erected at Essp =- 130 scales are provided for dj values of 3dh and 5dh. The
mV for K, =79. This intersection gives a value of S, dashed lines represent lines of equal saturation on the
equal to 43 %, assuming that S,, is 15%, which is chart. The critical saturation corresponds to S,U =60% in
reasonable. The sand was perforated from 8,046 to soft formations and 50% in consolidated sandstones.
8,050 ft and made 75 BOPD and 280,000 cu ft/D gas These may not be the correct critical saturations for
through a 7/64-in. choke. many limestones.
IEL Interpretation Method. A chart for practical inter-
pretation of fluid saturation from the readings of the IEL
combination is shown in Fig. 49.39, Ref. 2. The condi-
tions limiting valid use of the chart are: (1) the invasion
diameter di must be between 2dh and 1Odh (dh is the
hole diameter), (2) R,, must be greater than R,, which is
generally fulfilled if R,,fI R, is greater than three to live,
as for fresh muds and saline formation waters, and (3)
the beds must be fairly homogeneous-i.e., the short-
For shaly formations a construction like that used in
the shaly-sand method can be used in Fig. 49.39.
Although not rigorously correct, this procedure should
give acceptable results if the shaliness is not too great.
Since it is not always known beforehand whether the
interpretation chart (Fig. 49.39) is within its limits of ap-
plicability, it is useful to employ the value of porosity or
formation factor, when known from independent
sources, to check the results by means of Eq. 5. Details
of this porosity balance check are given in Ref. 34.
ELECTRICAL LOGGING 49-31
Fig. 49.40-Induction-electrical log and microlog-microcaliper log on a well in Young Coun-
ty, TX. I?,,, = 0.95 and R ,,,, = 0.61 at BHT (117OF). d= 7% in.
Example Problem 2. Fig. 49.40 shows part of the
induction-electrical log and ML on a well in Young
County, TX. The sand at the bottom of the figure is divid-
ed into two parts, A and B, by a thin, hard streak, as
shown on the ML. A and B will be interpreted separate-
ly. Necessary well data are R, =0.95 and R,,lf=0.61, at
BHT of 117F; hole diameter, d,, , is 7% in.
Interval A. From the induction-electrical log,
RIL=17.5 R-m, R16=32.5 R-m, SP=-95 mV, and
BHT is 117F. Applying Fig. 49.39, the ratio
R,6I R1~=32.5/17.5=1.85. The SP is -95 mV, so
the point is fixed on the chart, giving an average S, of
about 30 % .
Interval B. Here the RI L=26.0 R-m and R16=37.0
n-m. R161RI L=37.0/26.0=1.42. The SP is -90 mV at
117F. This fixes a point on Fig. 49.39, which gives a
value of S, of about 25 % . Drillstem tests on the two in-
tervals showed that the sand contained gas and distillate,
with a higher flowing pressure over Interval B.
Rocky Mountain Method. The Rocky Mountain
method* was developed for the interpretation of con-
ventional electrical logs to yield values of S, and 4 in
invaded, clean, hard formations when they are suffi-
ciently thick and homogeneous. It is necessary that the
invasion be such that the average resistivities recorded
by the short normal and the lateral (when corrected for
borehole effect) approximate the average values of Rj
ami R,,
respectively. For this to be true, the short-
normal readings should be at least 10 times the mud
resistivity. Only average values, over thick intervals, can
be obtained with this method.
Ri=
FRRwi
F, . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
(19)
where:
1. R,i is the resistivity of the water found in the invad-
ed zone. It is usually made up of filtrate and interstitial
(connate) water mixed in such proportion that
1 fw
-=-+
(1 -fw)
-, . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Rwi Rw Rnzf
(20)
wheref, is the fraction of interstitial (connate) water in
the total mixture (usually 5 to 10%).
2. Si is the water saturation in the invaded zone. It has
been found by experience that Si * =S,; so
Ri=FR,ISw. Inasmuch as R,=FR~I S,*, we obtain
S,=(RiIR,)t(RwiIR,).
Since R,I Rwi =f,+(l -f,)R,/R,,,f, it follows that
R,iI R, is a function of the SP value. The upper part of
Fig. 49.41 gives a graphical solution of the equation for
S,. The SP is entered in ordinate and the ratio RiIR, on
oblique lines. The intersection gives the abscissa S,.
The lower part of the chart is used to obtain the porosi-
ty by using the water saturation, S,, just found, with the
49-32
PETROLEUM ENGINEERING HANDBOOK
Fig. 49.41-Interpretation chart for
Rocky Mountain method.
value of R,I R,. The intersection falls on or between
oblique lines that are graduated into porosity values, ac-
cording to the Humble formula, Eq. 2. This method
should not be used in salt muds.
Electromagnetic Propagation Tool
Principle. The EPT (electromagnetic propagation
too13) measures the travel time and attenuation rate of
an electromagnetic wave through the formation near the
borehole. In addition, a caliper and a ML can also be
recorded. The tool can be combined with the gamma ray,
neutron, or density instruments.
The propagation time of water differs sharply from
those of gas, oil, or matrix rock and is, moreover, little
affected by the salinity of the water. This tool permits the
evaluation of water saturation that is relatively indepen-
dent of water resistivity (salinity) and, in fact, is most ac-
curate in the fresher waters.
Dielectric permittivity is one of the main factors deter-
mining electromagnetic propagation in a material.
Dielectric permittivity of any medium is proportional to
the electric dipole moment per unit volume. The electric
TABLE 49.3-ELECTROMAGNETIC
PROPAGATION VALUES
Relative Dielectric
Permittivity,
Gas or air 1 .o
Oil 2.2
Water 56-60
Quartz 4.7
Limestone 7.5
Dolomite 6.9
Anhydrite 6.5
Loss-Free
Propagation Time,
t,,
3.3
4.9
25-30
7.2
9.1
6.7
6.4
dipole moment is made up of one or more effects: elec-
tronic, ionic, interfacial, and dipolar. Since each of these
dominates over a certain range of the electromagnetic
spectrum, they can be separated experimentally. *
The electronic contribution results from the displace-
ment of electron clouds, and is the only one that operates
at optical frequencies. The ionic and interfacial contribu-
tions come from displacement and movement of ions,
hence arc confined to low frequencies. The dipolar con-
tribution is from permanent electric dipoles, which orient
themselves in the direction of an applied electric field.
With the exception of water, there are very few materials
abundantly found in nature that have permanent electric
dipoles. A borehole dielectric measurement in the
109-Hz frequency region, where the dipole polarization
of water dominates, should lead to a measurement of
water content that is independent of salinity.
Table 49.3 gives laboratory-measured values of propa-
gation time and dielectric permittivity (relative to air) of
typical reservoir materials.
Tool. The tools now in the field carry two transmitters
and two receivers on a wall-contact pad, configured as
shown in Figs. 49.42 and 49.43. These transmitters and
receivers must be antennas to operate as they do in the
microwave frequency range. The tool uses a differential
measurement based on the signals detected by near and
far receivers, similar in principle to the widely used
method of measuring At with a two-receiver sonic tool.
In a similar manner, the two receivers produce cancella-
tion of any effects caused by mudcake or variations in
signal coupling (so long as both receivers are affected
equally).
To reduce any error caused by sonde tilt, the EPT uses
an antenna configuration similar to the transducer array
used in a borehole-compensated sonic tool. Transmitting
antennas are placed above and below the receiver pair
and are pulsed alternately. Simple geometric considera-
tions show that if these two transmission modes arc
averaged, the first-order effects of pad tilt will be
eliminated.
The basic principle of the tool involves a surface or
lateral electromagnetic wave launched along the surface
of a conducting pad. In the absence of mudcake, the
electromagnetic wave would move along the pad face
past two receiving antennas, but in the normal borehole
case with mudcake present, propagation takes place on
the surface between mudcake and formation. The phase
shift and attenuation per unit distance along the surface
of the pad are proportional to E and C (as shown in
theory) for a plane wave.
It has been demonstrated both theoretically and ex-
perimentally that for mud cakes up to % in. the travel
time measured by the EPT is essentially the same as the
travel time in the invaded zone without any mud cake.
Above such thickness the measurement deteriorates
rapidly until the tool responds only to the mud. Limited
experience with air- and oil-based mud-filled tools in-
dicates that even very thin layers of these fluids between
the pad and the formation cause the tool to respond only
to the fluid and not the formation. This is because of the
short travel time of these fluids. The tool contains a
1 .l-GHz microwave transceiver. The transmitter is
capable of generating more than 2 W of output power
ELECTRICAL LOGGING 49-33
while the receiver can process a 0.3 pico watt (pW)
signal. This allows accurate measurements in formations
when R, approaches 0.3 a-m.
Theory. Assuming a plane wave varying sinusoidally in
time, the electric field, E, at the second receiver is given
by
E=E,,e - YL+bJt
>
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
(21)
where E, is the electric field at the first receiver; L is the
distance between the two receivers; j is the vectorial
operator fi; o is the angular frequency; t is the time
of travel of the waves over a distance L in the formation;
and y is the complex propagation factor given by
y=cY+jp, . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ..(22)
where CY is the attenuation factor (coefficient) in
neper/m, and /3 is the phase factor in rad/m.
For a lossless formation,* or=O. From Eq. 21, the
phase velocity vPO is given by
L Cd 1
Vpo=t=
-=- . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
(23)
Yo
tPo
where the subscript o indicates loss-free conditions and
tpo is the loss-free propagation time of a given medium
in ns/m.
From Maxwell s equations, it can be shown that
y. =jw& =jwtpo, . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . (24)
where is the magnetic permeability (H/m). Since most
formations of interest are nonmagnetic, of the forma-
tion is the same as that of free space (
O
=47rX 10
-7
H/m), and E is the dielectric permittivity (F/m). When
the formation is lossy, y and E are complex.
Fig. 49.42Schematic of EPT antenna
pad, showing principle of
2-receiver measurement of
*Formation with no electromagnetic energy losses
transit time.
Fig. 49.43The EPT antenna pad.
49-34 PETROLEUM ENGINEERING HANDBOOK
Squaring Eq. 22 and Eq. 24 and equating the real and
imaginary terms, we have
w2/.Loc=p2 -a?, . . . . . . . . . . . . (25)
and
wp,C=2aUp, . . . . . . . (26)
where C is the equivalent conductivity (a/m) of the
losses in the formation. Dividing Eq. 25 by w2,
p2 a2
Poe=---
w2 ,2 . . . . . . . I.. . . . . . . .
From Eq. 24, 40~=tpo2. Since filw=t,l is the travel
time in the lossy medium,
a2
tpo
2- I?--*
- tp1
w2 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . (28)
Remembering that 01 is the attenuation factor, Eq. 28 im-
plies that the actual propagation time in a conductive for-
mation is longer than that of a corresponding loss-free
formation. If the propagation wave is not a plane wave,
suitable spreading-loss corrections to the measured at-
tenuation (A,,,) are made before Eq. 28 is applied. Thus
the corrected attenuation A,. =Aiog -G,Y (dB/m) where
G,, is the geometrical spreading loss and AI,,~the re-
corded attenuation in dB/m. G,? is about 50 dB/m in air
or G,f =45.0+ 1.3r,/ +O. 18r,/. Here tp/ is the recorded
travel time in ns/m.
Interpretation. The range of travel time encountered in
the borehole in common reservoir rock varies from 6.3
ns/m for a 40-pu sandstone filled with hydrocarbons to
17.2 ns/m for a 40-pu water-filled limestone. In terms of
phase shift, this corresponds to angles between 100 and
270 when computed over a 4-cm receiver spacing.
The EPT log responds primarily to the bulk volume of
water in the formation. Since the tool has a relatively
shallow depth of investigation-about 1 to 6 in. depend-
ing on the conductivity-it normally responds to the
flushed zone of an invaded section.
Eq. 28 can be transformed into
tpo= (tJ-&) lh . . . . . . . . . . . . .
(29)
The apparent water-filled porosity (dEPT) can be derived
in a way similar to the derivation of the porosity from
sonic At. Thus
4
tpo - tpm
EPT =
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
(30)
tpwo - tpm
tpwo, the loss-free propagation time of water, varies with
the temperature and slightly with pressure and can be ob-
tained as
where T is the temperature. F. Knowledge of water
salinity is not required to obtain r,,,,.,, .
*a I neperlm and A ,~~ IS dWm Smce 3 neper = 6.666 dB, A ,og =6.66&t
The loss-free propagation time of matrix, tpm, is in-
dicated on Table 49.2. The nature of the matrix can be
determined by the knowledge of the apparent matrix den-
sity and interpolating between lithology density values.
The water saturation S,, is given by
tpo = Sxo4tpwo
+(l -Sxo)4tph f(1 -+p,, . . (31)
or
s.w =
tpo -tpm +d(tpm -tph)
, . . . . . . .
(32)
4(tp,, _ tph)
where tph is the propagation time for hydrocarbon and 4
is the porosity of the formation. Since tpm and tph are
fairly close, we can estimate S,, roughly as
S,= !-. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . (33)
4
Example Problem 3. Fig. 49.44 is an example of the
log presentation currently in use. Track 1 contains a con-
ventional caliper curve, taken from the motion of the
backup pad, and the attenuation curve, scaled in dB/m.
Tracks 2 and 3 are given to the principal measurement,
travel time (tp/), in ns/m. Track 3 also presents the signal
levels from the two receivers. The chief use of these
curves is to monitor the primary signal detection at the
receivers, which provides an indication of the relative
reliability of the log parameters at any level.
A self-evident and very real advantage may be inferred
from the 4-cm spacing between receivers; the tool has
excellent vertical resolution. The log of Fig. 49.44 ac-
tually looks overactive in spots, but its repeatability
testifies that the recording is valid. In fact, the data
recorded by the tool are too detailed for direct merging
with other logs by means of computer. Averaging
(smoothing) subroutines are thus required preliminaries
for programs using EPT data.
Example Problem 4. Fig. 49.45 shows an ISF log and
the porosity computed from density. neutron, and EPT
logs. Zone A is obviously gas bearing, as evidenced by
the neutron porosity reading much less than the density.
The EPT porosity is a little higher than the neutron
porosity and much less than the density porosity, confir-
ming the presence of hydrocarbons.
Zone B exhibits a different porosity profile. Once
again the neutron porosity is less than the density porosi-
ty, indicating the presence of some light hydrocarbons,
but now the EPT porosity is less than both neutron and
density pomsities. Since the total porosity from neutron
and density logs is roughly
$N+~D
4=-,
2
and the hydrocarbon volume is
the volume of hydrocarbons affecting the three porosity
tools is about the same for Zones A and B as determined
from the EPT data. However, there is a much stronger
light hydrocarbon effect on the neutron and density logs
in Zone A. Thus, it would be expected that Zone B con-
tains more condensate or oil than Zone A.
ELECTRICAL LOGGING
49-35
Attenuation,
dB/m
3 5oc
5n Caliper l5l
-----------w---.
i
c
-
-
e3
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Travel Time,Jt,l 1, nsec/m
Fig. 49.44-An unaveraged EPT log shows fine detail. Repeat sections (faint curves) of the attenuation
and t,, curves show excellent repeatability.
49-36
PETROLEUM ENGINEERING HANDBOOK
GAMMA RAY
I
60 +40
_----
CALIPER
________ !F:
0
0
1
I - - -
~1~0 6--w-----------
t cb EPT SAND
Fig. 49.45-ISF and EPTICNLIFDC logs.
Zone C appears to contain some residual hydrocar-
bons, since the EPT porosity is often slightly less than
the neutron and density porosities. There is a little more
hydrocarbon in the shalier bottom part of Zone C than in
the cleaner top portion.
The very top of Zone D contains oil since the EPT
measurement is much lower than the neutron and density
porosities, which read about the same. Water-bearing
zones are identified when the EPT porosity is about the
same or higher than the neutron and density porosity.
Thus, Zone E is clearly water bearing, as is the bottom
of Zones B and D.
Machine programs are available to give complete
quantitative interpretation of all these logs. This is
especially important in the study of tar sands or crude
oils where the hydrocarbon is not flushed by the mud
filtrate and where S,, is very near S, . These studies arc
also of great interest to provide values of residual oil
saturations.
The Digital Age
Before 1960, all logs were recorded in analog form on
film or paper. Magnetic tape recording was introduced in
1960 to record dipmeter. Shortly thereafter, various
other logs were also recorded on tape, thus permitting
the use of computers for various purposes. Before long,
computers were made an intrinsic part of the recording
systems on the logging trucks. This has revolutionized
the capacity for data acquisition at the wellsite. At the
same time, many computer-processed products have
become available in real time or only a short time after
logging is completed at the wellsite.
TABLE 49.4-WELLSITE ANALYSIS AVAILABLE IN REAL TIME
Generic Name Derivation Log Input Required Presentation Schlumberger Gearhart Dresser Welex
______
R... Assumes all formations contain 100% water. Simultaneous Sinale curve in R,,, R
wa
R
wa
R
*a
Computes apparent R w, R wa = R ,/F
Uses deep resistivity and shallow focused
resistivity to estimate RJR, ratio.
.._ resistivity and Track 1 on
porosity. Usually logarithmic
sonic and scale.
inductlon
Simultaneous deep Single curve in R,IRt
resistivity and Track 1
shallow focused compatibly
n=sistivity
F overlay or Derives F from a porosity curve that IS played Deep resistivity
Ro
onto logarithmic resistivity as R,. and porostty
overlay
Compatible
porosity
scales
Any combination of porosity logs with same Simultaneous
lithology assumptions to compute porosity. porosity logs
Hole volume Uses caliper logs to compute hole volume for Caliper curve-
cement calculation. preferably 2
curves at 90
such as 4.arm
dipmeter
Fracture Uses differences in adjacent pad readings &arm dipmeter
locating log from 4-arm dipmeter to infer fractures.
scaled as a
pseudo SP
curve.
Single dashed R,
curve in
Tracks 2 and
3 on
logarithmic
scale.
Coded curves in Compatible
Tracks 2 and porosity
3 with gamma scales
ray and
caliper in
Track 1.
Pips or tic Borehole
marks in volume
depth column
at every 10 cu
ftand 1OOcu
ft
Adjacent pad Fracture
Ro
F curve F Curve
Compatible Compatible Compatible
porosity porosity porosity
scales scales scales
Borehole Borehole Borehole
volume volume volume
Fracture Fracture Dipmeter
readings are
superimposed
and any
separation is
coded.
identification
109
detector
log
locahon
@I
fracture
109
ELECTRICAL LOGGING
TABLE 49.5-WELLSITE ANALYSIS AVAILABLE IN REPLAY TIME
49-37
Generic Name Derivation
Merged and Replays all logs, shifts depths and makes
depth shifted sample calculattans such as R,,, R xo,
data R,/Rr, compatible porosity scales or
cross plot porosities.
Wellsite Uses all logs to provide a first order
evaluation log computer analysis.
Formation dip Computes formatron dtp from 4-arm
computations dipmeter
True vertical Computes lVD of any point from dipmeter
depth log orientation data
Log Input Requrred Presentation Schlumberger
Any logs run on Usually 3 to 5 Cyberlook
tape. tracks. Varies Pass 1
by service
company,
diplays only
log data.
Resistivity and Usually 3 or 4 Cyberlook
porosity tracks. Has
reservoir data
derived from
log data.
4-arm dipmeter Formation dip, Cyberdip
hole deviation,
calipers.
Contmuous Replay of any TVD
dipmeter plus log on TVD
any log to be scale
Gearhart Dresser Welex
cross-plot Prolog Computer
(x-plot) Van
Well Prolog CAL
evaluation
log
FED DDL Pro-Dip
TVD TVD
converted lo
TVD
All logs available in real time are also avarIable in replay time If recorded on magnetic tape
Without any doubt, the digital age is responsible for
the creation of new equipment deemed impossible
before. Many interpretation techniques and studies today
could not be made without the use of computers. Finally,
electronic transmission of log data is a present reality,
facilitating exchange between wells and offices, towns
and continents. An overview of this vast field is
necessary.
Magnetic Tapes
API-recommended standard format permits logging ser-
vice company tapes to be read by most computers. More
exhaustive treatment of the subject is available directly
from the service companies. Quality control of the
magnetic tape is ensured in real time in integrated log-
ging systems having on-board computers.
Computed Log Products
Log analysis performed by a computer is available to the
log user at three different levels.
1. Real-time quick-look products, summarized in
Table 49.4, run at the same time the log is being run.
Many of these curves, such as R, and F curves, are
recorded on the standard logs and are often placed in the
SP or resistivity tracks.
2. Wellsite log analysis products, summarized in
Table 49.5, are generally available at the wellsite in
replay time. Wellsite analysis is made after the logging is
completed. The process involves playing back taped logs
and using an appropriate log analysis program, such as a
shaly-sand analysis or a dipmeter computation.
3. Computing center products am provided well after
the logging is finished (days or weeks later) and are
generally more comprehensive than either of the wellsite
products. In general, these computations fall into three
categories: shaly-sand analysis, complex lithology
study, and dipmeter processing. The most-used products
are summarized in Table 49.6. Other, less frequently
used products such as tar sand analysis or mechanical
properties are not included; details on these may be ob-
tained directly from the service company.
TABLE 49.6-LOG ANALYSIS AVAILABLE FROM COMPANY COMPUTING CENTERS
Generic Name Derivation Log Input Required Presentation Schlumberger Gearhart
Advanced Uses most sophisticated analytical and Rssistivhy, density, Usually 4 tracks SARABAND Comsand
sandstone statistical methods to correct and compute neutron, gamma presentation
analysis logs in sandstones and shaly sandstones. ray with sonic of lithology, YOUN F Pairs
desirable saturation,
porosity and
bulk volume.
Advanced Uses most sophisticated analytical and Resistivity, density, Usually 4 tracks COAIBAND Comlith
carbonate statistical methods to correct and compute neut r on, gamma presentation
analysis logs in carbonate and lithologically complex ray with sonic of lithology, GLOBAl . Frax
reservoirs and saturation,
microresistivity porosity, and
desirable bulk volume.
Advance Uses most advanced correlation logic to *-arm dipmeter Arrow plot with CLUSTER NEXUS
dipmeter compute dips followed by a statistical caliper, (structural) and
computa- sorting to retain the most reliable data. correlation GEODl P
tions curve and (stratigraphic)
hole deviation.
Also available:
azimuth
frequency,
modified
Schmidt plots,
histograms,
and listings.
Dresser Welex
EPI LOG CAL
Sandstone
Analysis
EPI LOG CA,
Complex
Reservoir
Analysis
Dresser Diplog
computed analysis
dipmeter
49-38
PASS ONE
PETROLEUM ENGINEERING HANDBOOK
CO#fNSAlED fUHATlCW4
DENTaT mrom
COM?ENSATED
NElJmoN roIosm
Fig. 49.46-CYBERLOOK Pass One log.
An example of wellsite log analysis is the
CvBERLOOK"pmgram, 36 which requires as a minimum
suite of logs a deep investigation resistivity,
CNL-FDC (compensated neutron/density logs), a
gamma ray, or SP curve. The CYBERLOOK computation
is based on the dual-water model and is normally made
in two passes.
On the Pass One log (Fig. 49.46), the SP curve is on
Track 1 with the gamma ray. On Track 2, in four cycles,
are found the R, curve, the R, (computed fmm R,),
and the porosity given by the CNL. Track 3 shows the
porosity given by the density, 40, the porosity given by
the neutron, fpN, and a cmssplot porosity computed from
#D ami #N.
On Pass Two log (Fig. 49.47), the Track 1 gives the
shale index, which is the minimum shale index of several
shale indicators obtained from the SP curve, the gamma
ray, and the maximum and minimum neutron readings.
Track 2 shows R, as a dashed curve and Ro as a solid
curve. The left half of Track 3 has the water saturation
and the right half has the porosity and bulk volume free
water. A differential caliper is presented as a dotted
curve with bit size in the middle of Track 3. A gas flag
appears in the depth track when a large hydrocarbon cor-
rection was necessary to obtain the porosity from
neutron/density logs.
VOLAP is an example of a complex analysis program
(Fig. 49.48). It is based on the dual-water model, as is
the CYBERLOOK program mentioned previously, but the
computations are far more refined and the results more
accurate. For a detailed study of the dual-water model,
see Refs. 37 and 38. The dual water model simply says
that in a shaly sand, its equivalent formation water con-
ductivity is dependent on the relative amount of
bound water and free water.
The conductivity of the bound water is found by the
use of the nearby shale resistivity and the total porosity
given by the average of CNL. In a like manner, the free
ELECTRICAL LOGGING 49-39
CYBERLOOK
GRAIN DtWTY
v (*
-------- ----
640
WIT RESISTWIlY WATER POROWY
owIuY* Y
,oQ) ,JANRAllON ANALYSJS
DEEP RENTIVITY 1 (AUPoI (-) M SIZE
Fig. 4%47-CYBERLOOK Pass Two log.
water conductivity is found by use of the resistivity of
the clean water sand and its total porosity. In a shaly
water sand, the equivalent water conductivity is found in
the same way by using the resistivity of the shaly water
sand and its total porosity. Knowing the bound and free
water conductivities, it is easy to compute their fractions
of the total porosity that are necessary to obtain the same
equivalent water conductivity of the shaly water sand.
The fractions of bound and free water can be related to
the relative deflections of the gamma ray or SP curve,
etc., thus permitting the use of such calibrations when
analyzing hydrocarbon saturated zones. The analysis is
done by using a dispersed-clay-type equation.
Nomenclature
a,,f = chemical activity of mud filtrate
a,. = chemical activity of formation water
A,. = corrected attenuation of a formation
A log
= recorded attenuation of a formation
C = equivalent conductivity of losses in the
formation
C,t = conductivity as given by induction log
CT = total conductivity signal
Ci = conductivity of invaded zone
C, = conductivity of mud
C, = true conductivity of formation
c
x0
= conductivity of flushed zone
E = electric field
E,. = total electrochemical EMF
EJ = liquid-junction EMF
EM = shale-membrane EMF
Epsp = pseudostatic SP
Esp = static SP
49-40
tllOli POROSITY PRESENTATION
1
-
+
~
i l
+++
Fig. 49.48-High-porosity presentation.
En = electric field at the first receiver
FR = formation resistivity factor
FR,\
= resistivity factor of formation water
FR,,,
= resistivity factor of water in invaded zone
f,,. = fraction of interstitial (connate) water in the
total mixture
Gi = geometrical factor of invaded zone
G,, = geometrical factor of mud
G,j = pseudogeometrical factor of the invaded
zone
G,! = geometrical spreading loss
G, = geometrical factor, true formation
G,,, = geometrical factor of flushed zone
iR = resistivity index
j = vectorial operator J-l
PETROLEUM ENGINEERING HANDBOOK
K,. = electrochemical coefficient
m= cementation exponent or factor
n = saturation exponent
R, = apparent resistivity
R = annulus resistivity
i: = corrected resistivity
RIL = induction-log resistivity
RpL = proximity-log resistivity
R, = resistivity of invaded zone
R,,. = resistivity of mudcake
R
4
= resistivity of mud filtrate
R, = true formation resistivity
R, = formation-water resistivity
R = equivalent formation-water resistivity
RI = resistivity of the water found in the
invaded zone
R = resistivity of flushed zone
i: = resistivity of a clean (nonshaly) formation
saturated with 100% water
RI,1
= resistivity of 1- X 1 -in. microinverse
R2 = resistivity of 2-in. micronormal
R
16 =
short-normal resistivity
Si = water saturation in the invaded zone
S,, = residual oil saturation
S, = formation water saturation
S
x0
= water saturation in the flushed zone
ph
= propagation time for hydrocarbon
tP/
= travel time in the lossy medium
tPm
= loss-free propagation time of matrix
tPo
= loss-free propagation time
tpwo
= loss-free propagation time of water
Y = maximum producible oil index
SP
= SP reduction factor
y = complex propagation factor
t = relative dielectric permittivity
p = magnetic permeability
4~ = density porosity
WEPT = electromagnetic propagation tool porosity
$HC = hydrocarbon porosity
4~ = neutron porosity
w = angular frequency
Abbreviations
CNLTM = compensated neutron log
DIL = dual induction-laterolog 8
EPT = electromagnetic propagation tool
ES = electrical survey
FDC rM = compensated density log
ID = deep-reading induction device
IEL = induction-electrical log
IES = induction-electrical survey
IL = induction log
ILd = deep induction log
IM = medium-reading induction device
ISF = induction spherically-focused log
LL = laterolog
LLD = deep laterolog
LLS = shallow laterolog
ML = microlog
ELECTRICAL LOGGING
MLL = microlaterolog
MSFL = shallow MICROSFL
PL = proximity log
SDL = simultaneous dual laterolog
SFL = spherically focused log
SSP = static SP
References
I.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
II.
12.
13
14.
15.
16.
17.
18.
19.
20.
21.
Dunlap, H.F. and Hawthorne. H.R.: Calculation of Water
Resistivities from Chemical Analysis, J. Per. Tech. (July 1957)
202-17; Trans., AIME, 192.
a. Log Interpretation Charts, Schlumberger Well Services
(1979).
b. Log Interpretation Charts, Dresser-Atlas (1981).
c. Charts for the Interpretation of Well Logs, Welex (1979)
EL-1002.
d. Chart Book. Gearhart (1982).
Lamont. N.: Relationships Between the Mud Resistivity, Mud
Filtrate Resistivity, and the Mud Cake Resistivity of Oil Emulsion
Mud Systems, J. Pet. Tech. (Aug. 1957) 51-52; Trans., AIME.
210.
Mounce, W.D. and Rust, W.M. Jr.: Natural Potentials in Well
Logging, Per. Tech. (Sept. 1943); Trans., AIME. 6.
Winsauer, W.O., er al.: Resistivity of Brine-satured Sands in
Relation to Pore Geometry, Bull., AAPG (Feb. 1952) 253-77.
patnode, H.W. and Wyllie, M.R.J.: Presence of Conductive
Solids in Reservoir Rocks as a Factor in Electric Log Interpreta-
tion, J. Pet. Tech. (Feb. 1950) 47-52; Trans., AIME, 189.
Archie. G.E.: Classification of Carbonate Resetvotr Rocks and
Petrophysical Considerations, Bull., AAPG (Feb. 1952) 36,
218-98.
Waxman, M.H. and Thomas, E.C.: Electrical Conductivittes m
Shaly Sands-I. The Relation Between Hydrocarbon Saturation
and Resistivity Index; II. The Temperature Coefficient of Elec-
trical Conductivity, J. Pet. Tech. (Feb. 1974) 213-23; Trans.,
AIME, 257.
Waxman, M.H. and Smits, L.J.M.: Electrical Conductivities in
Otl-Bearing Shaly Sands, Sue. Pet. Eng. J. (June 1968) 107-22;
Trans., AIME, 243,
Kunz, K. and Moran, J.: Some Effects of Anisotropy on
Resistivity Measurements in Boreholes, Geophpics (Oct. 1958)
23, 770-94.
Doll, H.G.: Filtrate Invasion in Highly Permeable Sands, Pet.
Engr. (Jan. 1955) 27, BJ3-66.
Gondouin, M. and Scala, C.: Streaming Potential and the SP
Log. J. Pet. Tech. (Aug. 1958) 170-79; Trans., AIME, 213.
Hill, H.J. and Anderson, A.E.: Streaming Potential Phenomena
in SP Log Interpretation, J. Pet. Tech. (Aug. 1959) 203-08;
Truns., AIME, 216.
Wyllie, M.R.J.: Investigatron of Electrokmetic Component of
the Self-Potential Curve,J. Pet. Tech. (Jan. 1951) l-18; Truns.,
AIME, 192.
Wyllie, M.R.J., de Witte, A.J.. and Warren. J.E.: On the
Streaming Potential Problem in Well Logging, Trans., AIME
(1958) 213, 409-17.
Wyllie, M.R.J.: Quantitative Analysis of the Electrochemical
Component of the SP Curve. J. Per. Tech. (Jan. 1949) 17-26:
Trans., AIME, 186.
Segesman, F. and Tixier, M.P.: Some Effects of Invasion on the
SP Curve, /. Pet. Tech. (June 1959) 138-46; Trans., AIME.
216.
Doll, H.G.: SP Log: Theoretical Analysis and Principles of ln-
tetpretation, J. Pet. Tech. (Sept. 1948) 146-85; Truns., AIME,
179.
Goudouin, M., Tixier. M.P., and Simard. G.L.: Experimental
Study on Influence of Chemical Composition of Electrolytes on
SP Curve, J. Pet. Tech. (Feb. 1957) 58-72: Trans., AIME. 210.
Doll, H.G.: Introduction to Induction Logging and Application
to Logging of Wells Drilled with Oil-base Mud. J. Pet. Te&.
(June 1949) 148-62; Truns.. AIME, 186.
Dumanoir, J.L., Tixier. M.P.. and Martin, M.: Interpretation of
the Inductton-Electrical Log in Fresh Mud, J. Pet. Tech. (July
1957) 202-17: Trans., AIME. 210.
22.
23.
24.
25.
26.
27.
28.
29.
30.
31.
32.
33.
34.
35.
36.
37.
3x.
49-41
Doll, H.G.: Laterolog-A New Resistivity Loggmg Method
with Electrodes Using an Automatic Focusing System, J. Pet.
Tech. (Nov. 1951) 305-16; Trans., AIME, 192.
Doll, H.G.: Micro Log-A New Electrical Logging Method for
Detailed Determinations of Permeable Beds, J. Pet. Tech. (June
1950) 155-64; Trans., AIME, 189.
Doll, H.G.: The MicroLaterolog, J. Per. Tech. (Jan. 1953)
17-32; Trans., AIME, 198.
Tixier, M.P.: Electrical Log Analysis in the Rocky Mountains.
Oil and Gas J. (June 1949) 48, 143-48.
Tixier, M.P.: Porosity Index in Ltmestone from Electrical
Logs,, Oil and Gas J. (Nov. 1951) 140-42, 169-73.
Wyllie, M.R.J.: Procedures for the Direct Employment of
Neutron Log Data in Electnc Log Interpretation, Geophysics
(Oct. 1952) 17, 790-805.
Tixier, M.P., Alger, R.P., and Tanguy, D.R.: New Develop-
ment in Induction and Sonic Logging, J. Per. Tech. (May 1960)
79; Trans., AIME, 219.
Doll, H.G. and Martin, M.: How to Use Electric Log Data to
Determine Maximum Producible 011 Index in a Formatton. Oil
ad Gas J. (July 1954) 53, 120-26.
Tixier, M.P.: Evaluation of Permeability from Electric Log
Resistivity Gradient, Oil and Gas J. (June 1949) 48, 11323.
a. Resistivity Depanure Curves, Bull., Schlumberger Well
Surveying Corp. (1949).
b. Interpretation Charts for Electric Logs and Contact Logs,
Bull, Welex Inc., A-101.
a. Resistivity Depanure Curves (Beds of infinite Thickness).
Bull., Schlumberger Well Surveying Corp. (1955).
b. Fundamentals of Quantitative Analysis of Electric Logs.
Ed., Welex Inc., A-132.
Poupon, A., Loy, M.E., and Tixier, M.P.: A Contribution to
Electrical Log Interpretation in Shaly Sands, J. Per. Tech. (June
1954) 138-45; Trans., AIME, 201.
Tixier, M.P.: Porosity Balance Verifies Water Saturation Deter-
mined From Logs, .I. Pet. Tech. (July 1958) 161-69; Truns.,
AIME, 213.
Wharton, R.P., er al.: Electromagnetic Propagation Logging:
Advances in Technique and Interpretation, paper SPE 9267
presented at the 1980 SPE Annual Technical Conference and Ex-
hibition, Dallas, Sept. 21-24.
Best, D.L., Gardner, J.S., and Dumanoir, J.L.: A Computer-
Processed Wellsite Log Computation, paper presented at the
1978 SPWLA Annual Logging Symposium, June 13-16.
Coates, G.R., Schulze, R.P., and Throop. W.H.: Volan*-An
Advanced Computational Log Analysis. paper presented at the
1982 SPWLA Annual Logging Symposium, July 669.
Clavier. C.. Coates. G.R., dnd Dumannir. J Thcorcticai and
Expertmental Bases tar the Dual-W&r Model for lntcrpretation 01
Shaly Sands, Sw. Prr. E,tg. J. (April 1984) I S3-6X.
General References
Alger, R.P.: Interpretation of Electrical Logs in Fresh Water Wells in
Unconsolidated Formations, paper presented at the 1966 SPWLA
Annual Logging Symposium, Tulsa, OK, May 8-l I.
Departure Curves for Laterolog, Bull., Schlumberger Well Suney-
mg Corp. (Aug. 1952).
DeWttte. L.: A Study of Electric Log Interpretation Methods in Sha-
ly Formations, J. Per. Tech. (July 1955) 103-10; Trans., AIME,
204.
Doll. H.G.: SP Log in Shaly Sands. J. Per. Tech. (July 1950)
205514; Trun.~. I AIME, 189.
Guyed, H.: Electric Analog of Resistivity Logging, Grophwics
(1955) 615-29.
Guyed. H.: Electric Log Interpretation, Oil Week/~ (Dec. 1955).
Guyeds Electrical Well Logging, Bull., Wellex Inc.. A-132.
Interpretation Handbook for Resistivity Logs, Bull., Schlumberger
Well Surveying Corp. (1949).
49-42 PETROLEUM ENGINEERING HANDBOOK
Johnson, H.M.: A History of Well Logging, Geophysics (1962)
507-27.
Jorden, J.R. and Campbell, F.L.: Well Logging I-Rock Properties,
Borehole Environmenr, Mud and Temperature Logging, Monograph
Series, SPE, Dallas (1984).
Keller, G.V.: Modified Mono-Electrodes for Improved Resistivity
Logging, Prod. Monthly (July 1950) 14, 13-16.
Kewer, J.K. and Pmkop, C.L.: Effect of the Presence of Hydmcar-
bons on Well Logging Potential, Oil and Gas J. (Dec. 1955)
102-06.
Lipson, L.B. and Overton, H.L.: The Effect of Treating Agents on
the Electrochemical Activities of Drilling Mud Filtrates, paper
SPE 867G presented at the 1957 SPE Annual Meeting, Dallas, Oct.
7-10.
Mayer, C. and Sibbit, A.: Global, A New Approach to Computer
Processed Log Interpretation, paper SPE 9341 presented at the
1980 SPE Annual Technical Conference and Exhibition, Dallas,
Sept. 21-24.
Millican, M.L., Raymer, L.L., and Alger, R.P.: Wellsite Record-
ings of the Movable Oil Plot, paper presented at the 1964 SPWLA
Annual Logging Symposium, Midland, TX, May 13-15.
Morris, R.L. and Biggs, W.P.: Using Log-Derived Values of Water
Saturation and Permeability, paper presented at the 1967 SPWLA
Annual Logging Symposium.
Pitson, S.J.: Formation Evaluation by Log Interpretation, World
Oil (May 1957) 170-83.
Tixier, M.P., Morris, R.L., and Connell, J.G.: Log Evaluation of
Low Resistivity Pay Sands in the Gulf Coast, Log Analyst
(Nov./Dee. 1968).
Log Interpretation, Vol. I-Principles, Vol. II-Applications, Wyllie, M.R.J.: The Fundamentals of Electric Log Interpretation. sec-
Bull., Schlumberger Well Services (1974). ond edition, Academic Press Inc., New York City (1957).
Chapter 50
Nuclear Logging Techniques
Darwin V. Ellis, Schlumberger-Doll Research *
Introduction
In this chapter, the use of nuclear radiation in wireline
logging will be presented. To avoid repetition, the reader
is referred to Chap. 49 for a basic introduction to the
principles of wireline logging in terms of the operation
and genera1 types of devices used in the area of electrical
logging; Chap. 51 discusses the third major area-
acoustic well logging.
To introduce the general subject of nuclear logging, it
is appropriate to provide a motivation for the use of
nuclear measurement techniques in well logging. This
can be done best by constructing a list of petrophysical
parameters of interest in the evaluation of hydrocarbon-
bearing formations. In the most straightforward applica-
tion, the purpose of well logging is to provide
measurements that can be related to the volume fraction
and type of hydrocarbon present in porous formations. In
the case of openhole logging (as distinguished from
measurements made in a production well with steel cas-
ing), there are four principal parameters of interest: (I)
presence of hydrocarbons, (2) porosity, 4, (3) water
saturation, S,, and (4) permeability, k. To this list, ad-
ditional parameters or descriptors can be added: (5)
lithology, (6) clay identification, and (7) pore fluid iden-
tification. For cased-hole logging the same list of
petrophysical parameters of interest may hold, but with
perhaps more emphasis on fluid identification.
Relationship of Petrophysical Parameters and
Physical Parameters
These petrophysical parameters of interest are derived
normally from a number of measurements provided by
logging services. For the moment, we will concentrate
on some bulk physical parameters associated with them
that may be amenable to measurement through the use of
nuclear techniques.
Aulhcf of the original chapter on this toptc in the 1962 edition was John L.P.
Campbell.
Presence of Hydrocarbons. An obvious method for the
detection of hydrocarbons is based on their chemical
compositions. Since there is no oxygen in most
hydrocarbons, the ratio of the atomic concentration of
carbon to oxygen for a hydrocarbon is significantly dif-
ferent from the ratio for most sedimentary rocks and for-
mation fluids. Thus, a measurement of the ratio of the
number of carbon atoms to oxygen atoms (C/O) con-
tained in a formation would indicate directly the
presence of hydrocarbons when no carbon is present in
the matrix. This is to be contrasted with the method of
electrical measurements, where detection of hydrocar-
bons is based on the contrast of conductivities between
saline water and hydrocarbon in a porous medium.
Porosity. The porosity or nonmatrix portion of a rock
sample can be determined from a measurement of its
bulk density. The fundamental equation that relates the
bulk density, Pb, to the solid matrix, which has a density
pmrr, and the porosity or volume fraction, $, which con-
tains a fluid of density pf, is
Pb=&f+(l-~)Pma. ___. . ...(l)
From this relationship, the porosity, 4, can be deter-
mined from a measurement of bulk density, assuming
that the matrix density and fluid density are known.
These will be known with any precision only if the fluid
type and properties and the lithology are known. In prac-
tical terms, the density range of fluids is between 0.8 and
1.2 g/cm3 (although calcium chloride solutions may
reach 1.4 g/cm3), and most matrix densities are between
2.60 and 2.96 g/cm3.
Another means of detection and quantification of
porosity is based on the fact that the formation porosity is
filled with liquid or gas, all of which contain dispropor-
tionate amounts of hydrogen. This hydrogen may be
50-2 PETROLEUM ENGINEERING HANDBOOK
associated with the brackish formation water or with the
hydrocarbons. Thus, detection of hydrogen is a means of
inferring porosity in an otherwise solid rock matrix.
Hydrocarbon Saturation. The determination of
hydrocarbon saturation can proceed once the porosity of
a formation has been determined. It can be done (1) by
the direct measurement of C/O and comparison to the
value expected for fully oil- and water-saturated cases,
or (2) by a more indirect measurement of the effective
salinity of the formation in question.
Permeability. There is no clear-cut physical parameter
amenable to nuclear measurements that will predict for-
mation permeability accurately. However, there is one
measurement technique-nuclear magnetic resonance-
that can be related to permeability; it is discussed in
Chap. 53.
Lithology, Clay Types, and Fluid Identification.
These parameters have been grouped together because of
a common approach for their determination, which is
basically some aspect of their chemical composition.
There are two principal interests in identifying the
lithology. One is for a reasonable matrix density to be
assigned to a formation so that porosity can be extracted
from the density measurement. The other is to provide
identification of formations for use in well-to-well cor-
relation. Since the neutron properties of rocks are
somewhat dependent on the type of lithology, it is possi-
ble to determine the three principal lithological matrices
by comparison of the gamma ray attenuation and
neutron-slowing-down properties of the medium. Well-
to-well correlation often is done most simply by com-
parison of the natural radioactivity of the formations.
However, a more direct approach for the identification
of the lithology (i.e., sandstone, limestone, or dolomite)
is not based on the density but rather on the unique
chemical composition of each of these matrices. One
method of identifying the lithology would be to make a
chemical identification of the various elements
associated with the matrix. Another slightly more refined
approach to the determination of the lithology depends
on another bulk property of the material: its average
atomic number. The average atomic number of the for-
mation, which reflects to some extent the lithological
composition, can be obtained by measuring the low-
energy gamma ray absorption properties of the material.
Identification and quantification of clays are much
more difficult, since the chemical compositions of clays
are so varied. Hence, the chemical composition of clays
is a key to their detection. A measurement of the
presence of elements such as Al, Si, Fe, and K must be
counted as a means to their identification. An earlier
technique, which measured the total natural gamma ray
activity of earth formations, was based on the fact that
the naturally occurring radioactive daughter products
(subsequent products of radioactive decay of an element)
of uranium, thorium, and potassium were associated
with clay minerals. Sometimes, however, one or more of
these elements (U, Th, K) is present in a formation con-
taining no clay. Examples of this include the case of
potassium feldspar in the rock matrix or uranium dis-
solved in the formation water.
A third property of clays is the great abundance of
hydrogen associated with the clay mineral structure.
Thus, detection of the presence of hydrogen is another
means of clay identification.
Pore fluid identification is based on indirect
measurements and inferences. The presence of gas in the
formation pores will have a significant impact on the
bulk density for reasonable porosities as well as on the
neutron-slowing-down properties. The distinction be-
tween oil and water again is measured most directly by
the atomic C/O density ratio or based on the thermal
neutron absorption properties of the water phase, which
generally contains chlorides
Fig. 50.1 summarizes the relationships between
petrophysical descriptors and physical parameters,
which can be determined quantitatively through the use
of nuclear radiation and measurement techniques. A
third column has been added to indicate the additional in-
formation necessary to interpret the suggested bulk prop-
erty measured to obtain the desired petrophysical
descriptor.
Physical Parameters and Nuclear Radiation
Before presenting the basic nuclear phenomena
necessary to describe the operation of most of the com-
mon nuclear logging devices, we need to link, in general
terms, the physical parameters discussed previously to
the types of general nuclear techniques that will be
described later in mote detail. To be specific, it should
be pointed out that the types of nuclear radiation used in
well logging are gamma radiation and neutrons. These
two types of penetrating radiation are the only ones that
are able to traverse the pressure housings of the logging
tools and the formation of interest and still return a
measurable signal. It is for this reason that (Y and fi radia-
tion are of no particular interest for exploring formation
characteristics; their penetration ranges are much too
small to be of any practical use.
In the preceding section, it is clear that many of the
proposed parameters to be measured are. in fact, no
mom than the chemical composition of the earth forma-
tion. Instead of the obvious but time-consuming and ex-
pensive chemical analysis of formation samples, a
technique of gamma ray spectroscopy can be used. This
is based on the fact that the nucleus of any atom, after
having been put into an excited state by a previous
nuclear reaction, can emit gamma rays of characteristic
energies, which uniquely identify the atom in question.
Gamma ray spectroscopy refers to the detection and
identification of these characteristic gamma rays.
Another use of gamma rays is in conjunction with the
measurement of bulk density. The bulk density of a
material has a significant influence on the scattering and
transmission of gamma rays through it. At very low
energies, the transmission of gamma rays is influenced
additionally by the chemical composition. This addi-
tional absorption is related to the atomic number, Z, of
the absorber.
The interest in using neutrons in well logging tech-
niques comes from several properties of their interaction
with matter. First, the transmission and moderation of
neutrons are influenced by the bulk properties of the
medium and, in particular, by the amount of hydrogen
present. The scattering of neutrons by hydrogen is very
NUCLEAR LOGGING TECHNIQUES
50-3
Petroph ysical Physical
Descriptors Parameter
I
Lithology
Clay Identification
Necessary
Additional
Information
I
Cl0 Ratio
Lithology
w Lithology
I
Bulk Densitv
Hydrogen Content
Apparent Salinity
Bulk Density
/
Hydrogen Content
Average Atomic
Number,
t Porosity
Th, U, K
Ca, Si, S, Fe
Al, .
Fig. 5&l--Relationship between petrophysical descriptors and measurable physical parameters
efficient in reducing the neutron energy. Second, in-
teraction of high-energy neutrons with certain nuclei can
excite characteristic gamma rays for subsequent elemen-
tal identification by gamma ray spectroscopy. At very
low energies, neutrons can be absorbed, thereby reduc-
ing the flux, and as a byproduct, another set of
characteristic gamma rays may be emitted. Some of
these capture gamma rays are emitted after some delay
and are referred to as activation gamma rays. So there
are two types of measurements that can be based on the
use of neutrons: the scattering or slowing-down proper-
ties of formations and neutron production of gamma rays
(either by absorption or inelastic high-energy reactions
with elements) of characteristic energies for use in spec-
troscopic identification. Fig. 50.2 illustrates the types of
nuclear measurement techniques that can be used to
measure physical parameters related to the relevant
petrophysical descriptors sought.
Nuclear Physics for Logging Applications
Nuclear Radiation
Nuclear radiation refers to the transport of energy by a
nuclear particle. In the earliest investigation of radioac-
tive materials, three types of radiation were identified
and named, quite unimaginatively, CY, /3, and y radiation.
It subsequently was discovered that (Y radiation consisted
of fast-moving He particles stripped of their electrons
and that /3 radiation consisted of energetic electrons. The
gamma rays were found to be packets of electromagnetic
radiation, also referred to as photons.
The discovery of this radiation then provoked its quan-
tification, namely the measurement of the amount of
energy transported. The unit chosen is known as the
electron-volt (eV), which is equal to the kinetic energy
acquired by an electron accelerated through an electric
potential of 1 V. For the types of radiation discussed in
the following sections, the range of energies is between
fractions of an eV and millions of electrons volts (MeV).
Another convenient multiple for discussing gamma ray
energies is the kiloelectron volt (keV).
Since a! and /3 radiation consist of energetic charged
particles, their interaction with matter is primarily
ionization. That is, they interact with the electrons of
material by losing energy rapidly during their passage
and transferring it to electrons. In most materials their
range is rather limited and is a function of the material
properties (2, the atomic charge or number of electrons
per atom, and its density) and the energy of the particle.
They consequently have not been of any practical impor-
50-4
PETROLEUM ENGINEERING HANDBOOK
Physical Parameter
Nuclear Measurement
Technique or Parameter
: ,C/O Rati?:-
I
l Induced Inelastic Gamma Ray Spect.
@Gamma Ray Attenuation
Neutron Slowing-Down Length
Hydrogen Capture Gamma Ray Spect.
*Induced Inelastic Gamma Ray Spect.
Apparent Salinity*
b Thermal Neutron Absorption X-Section
Bulk Density ;~;i. .. 6
Average Atomic Number b
Th. U, KF .. -.
Gamma Ray Attenuation
Gamma Ray Photoelectric Absorption
Natural Gamma Ray Spectroscopy
)lnduced Capture Gamma Ray Spect.
Activiation & High Resolution Spect.
w Gamma Ray Attenuation
b Neutron Diffusion Length
*Thermal Neutron Absorption X-Section
---+ Chlorine Capture Gamma Ray Spect.
Fig. 50.2-Nuclear measurement techniques linked to measurable physical parameters of petro-
physical interest.
tance for well logging applications. Gamma rays, on the
other hand, are extremely penetrating radiation, which
makes them of great importance for well logging
applications.
Radioactive decay of certain naturally occurring
substances such as radium was responsible for the
developments mentioned and needs further discussion.
Radioactive decay is a time-varying pmperty of nuclei
whereby a transition from one nuclear energy state to
another lower one is made spontaneously. The result is
that the excess energy is shed by the nucleus by one or
more of the types of radiation previously mentioned. The
basic experimental fact of radioactivity is that the proba-
bility of any one nucleus decaying, within an interval of
time dt, is proportional to dt-i.e., it is independent of
external influences, including the decay of another
nucleus. This probability is proportional only to the time
interval of observation. So for a single radioactive atom
the probability P(dt) of decaying in the interval of time dr
is expressed as
P(dr)=Xdr, . . . . . . .(2)
where X is the decay constant. For a collection of Np
particles, the number decaying, dN, is just
dN= - AdrN,, , . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . (3)
resulting in the expression for radioactive decay, namely
where N,, now is the number of particles remaining at
time r, of the initial number of particles Ni . The constant
of proportionality, X, is related to the better-known
parameter, the half-life, t ,,z ,
by
0.693
tlh =-. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
h
(3
NUCLEAR LOGGING TECHNIQUES
No physical quantity can ever be measured exactly,
but in the case of nuclear processes where the number of
events observed is small, randomness is important. The
practical complication of this statistical process of
nuclear decay is that only the bulk or average properties
can be predicted with any certainty. We can talk only
about the measurement of a group of particles together
and the distribution of the measured value about some
mean.
TO understand one important property of nuclear radia-
tion, it is necessary to digress a moment for a quick
review of the binomial distribution,
which was
discovered in the 18th century by Bernoulli. It describes
the probability, P, , that an event that has a probability P
of occurring will occur x times when the observation is
repeated z times. The probability thus specified was
identified with the binomial expansion of (P+q)i, where
q=l-P, . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ...(6)
so that the general term of the expansion is
p,= z!
-P( 1 -,)ZPX,
x!(z-n)!
. . , . . . . . . . . . (7)
which gives the probability of x occurrences in z trials.
This expression can be applied to radioactive decay, in
which P, represents the probability of having x nuclei
decay in time dt when there are z atoms present. For this
case, generally the probability P is very small but the
number of particles observed (z) is very large so that Eq.
7 simplifies to
e-P
P,=/L~--, . . . . . . .(8)
x.
I
which is known as the Poisson distribution. It gives the
probability of observing x decays in a given time where
an average of ji decays is to be expected. Fig. 50.3
shows the general form of the Poisson distribution with
the maximum probability at the mean value, which was
taken as 100 for this example. The curve resembles the
usual bell-shaped distribution curve with a width
specified by a parameter u, the standard deviation.
The practical importance of this discussion is that the
appropriate u for the Poisson distribution that
characterizes the statistics of counting random nuclear
events is not an independent parameter (as is the case for
most measurements) but is related to the mean value ,%
by
0=x$ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ...(9)
This means that if N,. counts from a radiation detector
are expected per time interval, then, in repeated observa-
tions, about 32% of the measurements will deviate
beyond the value of N, + 6. This is a quantitative
description of the statistics associated with all nuclear
logging techniques.
x
a
Number of Occurrences, x
Fig. 50.3-The Poisson distribution for the case of mean value
(CL) of 100. The probability, P,, is shown for values
of x around the expected mean value.
There have been a number of clever techniques for
dealing with the statistical fluctuations inherent in
nuclear counting rates. Probably best known is the R-C
circuit, which has a time constant associated with it and
permits the recording of a continuous moving average.
There are now more modem digital signal processing
techniques (such as Kalman filtering) to provide more
refined filtered counting rates or outputs derived from
statistically varying counting rates. However, the only
sure approach to reduce the fluctuations is to increase the
average number measured, either by using higher-output
sources, more efficient counters, or longer counting
times per sample.
Particle Reactions. There are certain nuclear particle in-
teractions of interest to well logging. To discuss these as
necessary in the following sections, a few mathematical
definitions are presented here to help the mechanisms of
the reactions.
As in radioactive decay, the process of nuclear reac-
tions is also statistical in nature. The question of interest
is how readily these reactions will take place. Fig. 50.4
shows the idealization of the nuclear reaction process. A
beam of radiation (it may be gamma rays or neutrons) of
an intensity pi is seen to enter the slab of material. The
intensity of the radiation, 9 i , is called the flux and has
units of numbers of particles per unit surface area per
unit time.
The slab of material is characterized by N,, the
number of particles per unit volume with which the flux
of radiation may interact. The experimental fact ob-
served is that after passing through a slab of material of
thickness 6/z, a certain fraction of the incident particles
have undergone interactions, and that number is propor-
tional to the thickness and the number of target nuclei
and the incident flux. This is expressed mathematically
as
6\k=a~Np6h, . . . . . . . (10)
50-6
PETROLEUM ENGINEERING HANDBOOK
N, nuclei cm3
This forms the basis for the cheapest, easiest, and most
reliable method for neutron production. The physical ex-
planations of this reaction are beyond the scope of in-
terest of the present work and may be found in Refs. 1
and 2. The practical construction of a neutron source
consists of finding a naturally occurring cr emitter and
mixing it with an appropriate light element having a
large (cy,n)* cross section. Some possibilities for (Y emit-
ters are Pu, Ra, Am, and PO. Three target elements are
Be, B, and Li. The actual spectrum (energy distribution)
of emitted neutrons is quite complicated and depends
somewhat on the geometric details of the cy emitter and
target; but generally speaking, the peak of the neutron
distribution is around 4 MeV.
Another method of exploiting particle-induced reac-
tions is by use of charged particle accelerators. In one
realization currently used in well logging, deuterium and
tritium ions are accelerated toward a target impregnated
Fig. 50.4-Idealized view of nuclear radlation interactlng with
with the hydrogen isotopes deuterium (D) and tritium
matter showing the reduction in flux traversing a thick-
(T). The reaction is written as
ness of material characterized by the number of in-
teracting particles per cubic centimeter.
D+T-+4He+n+ 17.6MeV. . . .(l3)
where the constant of proportionality, (T, is called the
cross section of the interaction. The units of this
microscopic cross section u are area/interacting target
nucleus. Cross section is used because in a classical
sense it is the apparent area each target nucleus presents
to the incoming beam. In effect, it collects all the nuclear
interaction details into one useful number. The practical
unit is called the barn and is equal to lO-24 cm. The
macroscopic cross section, C, is the product of (T and N,
and has the dimension of area/particle times par-
ticles/volume or inverse length. In practical terms, C can
be calculated easily because Ni, is related to Avogadros
number, NA , and the material density, ph. by
N*=%P,,
M
. . ..___...____.__. (11)
where M is the molecular weight of the target for a single
particle per molecule.
In general, the cross sections for most reactions must
be determined experimentally and are often available in
graphical or tabular form. The quantity &N,, in Eq. IO
has dimensions of (cm . set) - and has the interpreta-
tion of the reaction rate per unit volume resulting from
the incident flux.
Nuclear Reactions. To discuss the second type of radia-
tion of great importance to well logging applica-
tions-neutrons. which are not the result of naturally oc-
curring radioactive decay schemes-a brief discussion of
artificial or induced radioactivity is given here.
The classic reaction that inspired the discovery of the
neutron was the bombardment of beryllium by alpha par-
ticles and can be written as
The cross section for this reaction has a maximum at
about 100 keV of D projectile energy, which dictates the
accelerating voltages in such a device.
Despite the engineering difficulties of constructing
such a device, the advantages for logging are many. One
is the relative high energy of the produced neutrons.
They are emitted at 14.1 MeV (nor 17.6 MeV, because
some of the energy of this reaction is given up to the
alpha particle). These high-energy neutrons are useful
for producing other interesting nuclear reactions in the
formation, as discussed later. The other advantage is that
a source of this type can be controlled-i.e., switched off
and on at will. This provides a degree of safety un-
paralleled for radioactive sources as well as opening the
door to measurements involving timing as a means of
determining some interesting nuclear properties of the
formation.
Now that we have covered the two types of nuclear
radiations currently used in logging devices, let us ex-
amine how gamma rays and neutrons interact with matter
and define some macroscopic properties of matter that
can be used to characterize this behavior.
Fundamentals of Gamma Ray Interactions
For the purposes of our discussion there are three types
of gamma ray interactions that are of interest: the
photoelectric effect, Compton scattering, and pair pro-
duction. The type of interaction a gamma ray will
undergo depends on the properties of the material and the
energy of the gamma ray. The ordering of these three in-
teractions reflects the transition of the dominant process
as the gamma ray energy increases.
The photoelectric effect concerns the interaction of a
gamma ray with an atomic electron in the material. In
this process the incident gamma ray disappears and
transfers its energy to the bound electron. Depending on
This shorthand (a, n) tndlcates a reamon of an /a parWe wth an unspec,f,ed
9Be+4He+ C+n+5.76 MeV. .(12)
nucleus, n. resulttng I the produclm of a neulron and anolher uns,,ec,f,ed
nucleus.
NUCLEAR LOGGING TECHNIQUES
50-7
the energy of the incident gamma ray, generally the elec-
tron is freed from its nucleus and begins collisions with
the adjacent material. Normally the ejected electron is
replaced by another electron with the accompanying
emission of a characteristic fluorescence X-ray with an
energy dependent on the atomic number of the material
and generally below 100 keV.
The cross section for the photoelectric effect, P,,~~,
varies strongly with energy. falling off as nearly the cube
of the gamma ray energy (EGO). It is also highly depen-
dent on the atomic number (Z) of the absorbing medium.
In the energy range of 40 to 80 keV, the cross section per
atom of atomic number Z is given by
(14)
For most earth formations the photoelectric effect
becomes the dominant process for gamma ray energies
below about 100 keV.
The photoelectric effect is an important process in
understanding one of the conventional gamma ray detec-
tion devices and a well logging tool that is sensitive to
the lithology of the scattering formation. The tool in
question makes a measurement of the photoelectric ab-
sorption factor, F,, , which is proportional to the
photoelectric cross section per electron.
Since this quantity is very sensitive to the average
atomic number of the medium, Z, it can be used to obtain
a direct measurement of the lithology of the scattering
medium. This is because the principal rock matrices
(sandstone, limestone, and dolomite) have considerably
different photoelectric absorption characteristics and the
pore fluids play only a minor role because of their
low Zs,
The Compton scattering process involves the interac-
tion of a gamma ray and an electron. It is a process in
which only part of the gamma ray energy is imparted to
the electron and the energy of the gamma ray, conse-
quently, is reduced. Unlike the photoelectric effect, the
probability for Compton scattering changes relatively
slowly with energy.
To see the bulk effect of Compton scattering in a
material consisting of nuclei of atomic mass A and
atomic number Z, one can use the linear absorption coef-
ficient, which is just the Compton cross section, gc(,,
multiplied by the number of electrons per cubic
centimeter:
N A
cc0 =u& Ap~Z, . . (15)
The final Z factor in this equation takes into account that
there are Z electrons per atom. Consequently, the at-
tenuation of gamma rays resulting from Compton scat-
tering will be some function of the bulk density (ph) and
the ratio of Z/A. The fact that Z/A = % for most elements
of interest is the basis for the determination of bulk den-
sity from gamma ray scattering devices.
q~=q,~-~&fW,~h
. . . . .
(17)
where h, in this case, is very nearly the source-to-
detector spacing.
It is convenient to define the electron density index as
The third and final gamma ray interaction is that of
pair production. It, like the photoelectric process, is one
of absorotion rather than scattering. In this case the eam-
Z
pp=2--ph,
*
. . . . (18)
1 c n
.Ol 0.1 1.0 10
Gamma Ray Energy (MeV)
100
Fig. 50.5~Regions of dominance of the three major gamma ray
interactions in terms of the gamma ray energy, E,,.
and the atomic number, 2, of the target material. The
two lines separating the three regions indicate where
the two adjacent interactlons occur with equal prob-
ability.
ma ray interacts with the electric field of the nucleus. and
if the gamma ray energy is above the threshold energy of
1.022 MeV, it disappears and an electron/positron pair is
formed. The subsequent annihilation of the positron
(positively charged electron) results in the emission of
two gamma rays of 5 1 I keV each. The cross section of
this process is somewhat energy-dependent and is zero
below the required threshold energy of 1.022 MeV. In
addition, it also depends on the charge of the nucleus.
To establish the regions of dominance of the three
types of interactions, refer to Fig. 50.5. It shows, as a
function of gamma ray energy and atomic number of the
absorber, the regions in which the probabilities of the
various processes are equal. The regions of dominance
are quite clear.
From the earlier definition of cross section, the fun-
damental law of gamma ray attenuation can be stated as
l=P,e-h, _. _. _. . _. .(l6)
where *; is the flux incident on a scatterer of thickness
h, n is the number of scatterers per unit volume, and u is
the cross section for scattering per scatterer.
In the case of gamma-gamma density devices, the
source of gamma rays is chosen to have an energy for
which the primary interaction is Compton scattering. In
this case the scatterers are electrons and u refers to the
Compton cross section per electron. This results in the
following expression for the attenuation of the source
energy gamma rays:
50-8 PETROLEUM ENGINEERING HANDBOOK
Photoelectric
Compton
0.1 1 10
Gamma Ray Energy, MeV
Fig. 50.6-The mass absorption coefficient for gamma ray
Fig. 60.7-The relationship between neutron energy and speed
interactions in aluminum. for the three broad classifications of neutron energies.
so that the attenuation of the gamma rays is seen to be
proportional to the spacing, h, between source and detec-
tor and the electron density index, which in turn can be
related to the bulk density if the properties (specifically
Z/A) of the scattering material are known. For most
sedimentary rocks the ratio of Z/A is nearly r/z so that p r
is very nearly equal to ph.
Another unit for measuring the gamma ray attenuation
properties of a material is the mass absorption coeffi-
cient, K, ,* which regroups the constants in Eq.
17-i.e.,
K,=ZNAo, . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ..I.. . . (19)
A
so that the gamma ray attenuation equation can be writ-
ten as
*=9$-K-. . . . . . . . . . . . .(20)
The convenience of the mass absorption coefficient for
Compton scattering is that it is remarkably similar for all
materials since Z/A = % and the density dependence has
been eliminated. Fig. 50.6 shows the mass attenuation
coefficients (in cm*/& for aluminum. This element,
with a density of 2.7 g/cm3 and atomic number of 13, is
quite typical of earth formations. The average atomic
number ranges from 11 to 16 between quartz and
limestone, while the grain densities are between 2.65
and 2.71 g/cm3.
Fundamentals of Neutron Interactions
As in the case of gamma rays, the interaction of neutrons
with materials can be categorized by the types of interac-
tions with the appropriate cross sections that describe
' The symbol used i n physi cs tormass absorpti on cOef f l Ci enl I s P
Neutron Speed
km/psec)
Source :. ::
2. 2 -
0. 22 -
O. i l 0. 1 t 10 102 103 104 105 106 10' Energy (eV)
1 keV 1MeV
each one. The reactions of neutrons with matter are
much more varied and complex than those of the gamma
rays. For simplification we will confine ourselves to four
principal types of interactions of neutrons with matter.
Fig. 50.7 defines in broad terms the energy range of
interest for neutrons. For logging applications it can be
seen that the energy range of interest is over about 9
decades: from source neutrons of 5 to 15 MeV in the
broad fast neutron range above 10 eV, to epithermal
neutrons in the range of 0.2 to 10 eV and thermal
neutrons, which are distributed around 0.025 eV at room
temperature.
To have an idea of the time scale for later discussions
of the themralization process, it is useful to note the rela-
tionship between neutron energy and its associated
velocity. To evaluate the velocity of a neutron, we can
use (at low energies) the classical relationship between
kinetic energy, Ek, velocity, v, and mass, m,
Ek=%mv2, . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ..(21)
so that the velocity, v, is given by
J
2Ek
v= -. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ..(22)
m
If this expression for velocity is evaluated for thermal
energies (0.025 eV), the result is 2200 m/s or 0.22
cm/ps. Thus, the velocity at any energy E (in eV) is
given by
J
E
v=o.22 ~ o,025 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
NUCLEAR LOGGING TECHNIQUES
where v is the velocity, cm/pLs. Therefore, the speed of
an epithermal neutron of 2.5 eV is 2.2 cmips, and for a
near-source energy neutron of 2.5 MeV the velocity is
2200 cmips. These velocities are also noted on Fig.
50.7.
Of the four principal types of interactions, the first two
generally are referred to as moderating interactions, or
interactions in which the energy (or speed) of the neutron
is reduced. One of these is known as elastic scattering
and the other, inelastic scattering. Classical mechanics
(elastic billiard ball analysis) can describe the
moderating power of the struck nucleus. The energy of
the neutron is reduced more efficiently as the mass of the
struck nucleus approaches the mass of the neutron. Thus,
hydrogen and other low-atomic-mass elements are quite
efficient in reducing fast-neutron energy. Fig. 50.8 il-
lustrates, for elastic neutron scattering with several
elements, the range of reduction in neutron energy
available for a single collision. It is seen that for the most
common earth formation elements the maximum energy
reduction per collision for the heavy elements is about 10
to 25 %, However, for the case of hydrogen it is seen that
the entire neutronenergy can be lost in a single collision.
In the case of inelastic scattering, a portion of the
energy of the incident neutron goes into exciting the
target nucleus. This reduces the energy of the incident
neutron and, in addition, the target nucleus usually will
produce a characteristic gamma ray upon de-excitation.
This type of reaction always has a threshold energy
(below which it will not happen) associated with it and is
exploited in the measurement of the C/O ratio in earth
formations.
The second general category of neutron interactions is
known as absorptive interactions. The two general types
are radiative capture and reactions in general. In
radiative capture, unlike the moderating interactions
considered above, the neutron (usually near thermal
energies) is absorbed by the target nucleus and then
disappears, and subsequent characteristic gamma rays
are produced. .The general category of neutron reactions
is quite broad; it will be sufficient to say that the interac-
tion of neutrons with other nuclei can provoke the emis-
sion of other particles such as alphas, protons, /3s, or
even several subsequent neutrons. All these reactions,
although common, have a very small probability for hap-
pening relative to the other interactions of interest to us
and usually occur over a restricted and high-energy
range.
To show the complexity of the cross sections for
neutron interactions see Fig. 50.9, which schematically
indicates the variations with energy. The top figure
refers to the total cross section as a function of neutron
energy, EN, and the four following figures indicate how
this can be decomposed. The first line (n,n) refers to
elastic scattering, which is shown to be rather constant
with energy except for some resonances at low energies.
The next line shows inelastic interactions (n,n) showing
some characteristic threshold below which this reaction
is not possible; the fourth line is one of the many particle
reactions possible (n,(y); and the final line (although
there could be others) is the radiative capture (n,?),
which is seen to increase in probability at low energies.
Despite these complexities, there are some gross prop-
erties that can be assigned to materials on the basis of
50-9
0.8
0.6
E/E0
0.4
I 1 I I
0 H 10 20 30 40
A, Atomic Mass
Fig. 50.8-The range of energy reduction possible for neutron
elastic scattering with several important elements for
formation evaluation. E, is the energy before scat-
tering, and E is the energy after scattering. Hydro-
gen is seen to provide the greatest possible energy
reduction for a single collision.
Total 11
Cross-Section
Elastic
Scattering
tn. n)
Inelastic
Scattering
(n, n)
Reaction
,::, ( 1
Neutron Energy, EN
Fig. 50.9-A schematic illustration of the components involved
for the total neutron cross sectlon as a function of
energy. The characteristics of four specific cross sec-
tions are shown.
50-10
PETROLEUM ENGINEERING HANDBOOK
/
H2O
/-,40 p*u.
,:::i:::-20 p,u,
\
0 p.u.
0.1 ~
0.1 1.0
Neutron Energy, MeV
10
Fig. 50.10-The mean free path of fast neulrons in water and water-filled limestone at several porosities as a function of energy.
their neutron cross sections. The first is the macroscopic
cross section, which is defined as the product of the cross
section in question times the number of atoms per cubic
centimeter, N,-i.e.,
NAPb
Ei =NpUi =- CTi . . . . . . . .
A
The dimensions of the macroscopic cross section C; are
inverse centimeters and the interpretation is that its
reciprocal is the mean-free-path length in centimeters be-
tween interactions of Type i. Frequently in logging, use
is made of the macroscopic absorption cross section at
thermal energies. The units of this (so-called capture units,
c.u.) are just 1,000 times the Cj defined previously,
where Ui refers to the thermal absorption cross section,
which is dominant at thermal energies for most elements.
Fig. 50.10 shows the total mean free path in limestone
of 0, 20, 40, and 100 porosity units (PU) as a function
of energy for fast neutrons. At the energy of chemical
source emission (2 to 4 MeV), it is seen that there is very
little porosity dependence. It is only as the neutrons are
slowed down that the mean free path becomes strongly
porosity-dependent.
As mentioned earlier, in the case of elastic scattering.
low-mass nuclei are more efficient in reducing the ener-
gy of the ccattered neutron. As can be inferred from Fig.
50.8, the result of a collision can be considered. on aver-
age, as a percentage decrease of the neutron energy. This
usually is expressed as the average logarithmic energy
decrement, [ :
=I@;)--in(E)= -ln(EIE;). . . (25)
It can be shown from classic mechanics that the average
log energy decrement is simply related to the atomic mass,
A, of the struck nucleus by
2
Fz-.-.-
A+2/3 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
(26)
for large values of atomic mass A. The average log ener-
gy decrement allows an estimation of the average num-
ber of collisions, n, to reduce the neutron from an initial
energy Ei to some lower energy E from the following
reasoning. If the sequence E 1, E2 . . E, represents the
average energy after each collision, then we can write
ln(%) =ln($$. .F) . . .
=ln($) =n In($) _.,
(27)
(28)
=nf. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ..(29)
NUCLEAR LOGGING TECHNIQUES
TABLE CO.l-NEUTRON SLOWING-
DOWN PARAMETERS
Moderator
H
:
Ca
Hz0
20-PU limestone
0-PU limestone
t
1.0
0.158
0. 12
0. 05
0. 92
0. 514
0.115
14. 5
91.3
121
305
15. 8
29. 7
132
Average number of col l wons f rom4. 2 MeV to 1 eV
Thus, the average number of collisions is given by
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
The constant .$ can be computed for a mixture of elements
by weighting the value of each 2: i for element i with the
appropriate total scattering cross section u;. Table 50.1
shows some typical values for the average logarithmic
energy decrement and the number of collisions necessary
to reduce source energy neutrons (4.2 MeV) to 1 eV.
There are two more parameters that help to character-
ize neutron interactions with bulk material. One parame-
ter is known as the slowing-down length, L,Y, and the
other as the diffusion length, Ld. L,s can be described as
roughly proportional to the average distance a neutron (in
an infinite homogeneous medium) travels from its emis-
sion at high energy until it arrives at the lower edge of
the epithermal energy region. This distance can be
calculated4 with a detailed knowledge of the cross sec-
tions of the constituent elements. Fig. 50.11 shows the
variation of L, as a function of water-filled porosity for
limestone, sandstone, and dolomite.
Ld can be thought of as the distance a thermal energy
neutron travels between the point at which it became ther-
mal until its final capture. This distance is given by
Ld=v@E), . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ..(31)
. Sandstone
30 40 50 60 I D 80 90
Water- Fi l l ed Porosi ty. p. u.
Fig. 50.11-The calculated slowing-down length, L,. as a func-
tion of water-filled porosity for three rock matrices:
sandstone, limestone and dolomite.
where D is the thermal diffusion coefficient and c is the
macroscopic thermal absorption cross section of the ma-
terial. The diffusion coefficient, D, also can be calculated
from the knowledge of the cross sections of the material
and is shown in Fig. 50.12 as a function of porosity for
the three principle matrices.
Since thermal neutrons will be affected strongly by the
presence of thermal absorbers, it is interesting to look at
an abbreviated list of elements that frequently are found
in formations that have large macroscopic thermal absorp-
tion cross sections, This is found in Table 50.2, where
the units are capture cross section (c.u.) per gram of ma-
terial. Of particular interest is chlorine, the implication
being that salt water will have some measurable effect on
the thermal neutron population as well as iron and bo-
ron, which frequently are associated with clays.
Fig. 50.12-The calculated thermal diffusion coefficient, D, as
a function of water-filled porosity for three rock ma-
trices: sandstone, limestone, and dolomite.
50-12 PETROLEUM ENGINEERING HANDBOOK
Gamma Ray
Trajectory
lnsulat& End Plate
I
Avalanche
Discharge
Fig. 50.13-Components of a gas-discharge radiation detector.
Photo-Cathode
/
Nal(TI)
Crystal
Photo-
Multiplier Tube
Fig. 50.14-Schematic of the steps involved in gamma ray de-
tection by the production of a measurable electri-
cal signal in a photomultiplier coupled to an Nal
crystal.
Another auxiliary parameter, the migration length
(L,), has been defined as
L; =L;+L~. . . . . . . . (32)
It can be viewed as a distance that represents the combi-
nation of the path traveled during the slowing-down phase
(L,) and the distance traveled in the thermal phase be-
fore being captured (Ld). The use of this parameter pro-
vides a convenient way of predicting the response of a
thermal neutron porosity device, which is discussed in
more detail in a later section.
Nuclear Radiation Detectors
Gamma Ray Detectors. The devices for the detection
of gamma rays involve the exploitation of one or more
of the three processes of gamma ray interactions with mat-
ter described earlier. Three general types of gamma ray
detectors in current use will be described next. The first
variety, the ionized-gas counter, is a direct descendant
of the earliest efforts in nuclear radiation detection. The
second and most common present-day gamma ray detec-
tor used in well logging applications is the scintillation
detector. The third type of device, the solid-state detec-
tor, is just beginning to be used in logging applications.
The common form of the ionized-gas or gas-discharge
counter consists of a metal cylinder with an axial wire
passing through it (Fig. 50.13) and insulated from it. The
cylinder is filled with a gas that is normally nonconduc-
tive, and some moderate (several hundreds of volts) elec-
trical potential is maintained between the central wire and
the cylinder. The detection process is initiated by the for-
mation of some ionized gas molecules. These freed elec-
trons are accelerated by the radial electric field and in
successive collisions produce additional free electrons,
which finally results in a measurable charge collection on
the central wire.
For gamma rays to be detected with such a device, the
gas somehow must be ionized initially. Since the gas den-
sity is moderate, even at rather high pressure available
in commercial tubes, and the atomic number of useful
gases is relatively low, there is little possibility of the gam-
ma rays interacting directly with the gas. The main de-
tection mechanism is photoelectric absorption or recoil
electron ejection from Compton scattering in the metal
shield. For the gamma rays absorbed near the inner radius
of the cylinder, there is some probability of the ejected
electron escaping into the gas and providing the initial
ionization. This also is illustrated in Fig. 50.13.
It should be evident from the foregoing discussion that
the detection efficiency of such detectors is not high. It
can be improved somewhat by the incorporation of con-
ductive high-atomic-number gamma absorbers, such as
silver, as an inner lining of the cylinder. Although they
can be operated in a proportional mode, the energy reso-
lution of these detectors is not of great practical use. The
most positive aspects of gas-discharge counters are their
simplicity, ruggedness, and reliability for functioning in
the hostile environment of well logging. Because of their
poor efficiency and inapplicability to spectroscopic gam-
ma ray detection, they are being replaced rapidly by a
newer generation of scintillation detectors.
A more common type of gamma ray detector uses a
scintillation crystal. Once again, the active detector ele-
ment is sensitive to ionizing radiation, such as energetic
electrons. When these particles travel within the crystal
lattice, they impart their energy to a cascade of secon-
dary electrons, which finally are trapped by impurity
atoms. As the electrons are trapped, visible or near-visible
light is emitted. The light flashes are then detected by a
photomultiplier tube optically coupled to the crystal and
transformed into an electrical pulse. This is indicated sche-
matically in Fig. 50.14. The output pulse height can be
related to the total energy deposited in the crystal by the
initial high-energy electron. The great advantage of such
a detection scheme is the possibility of performing gam-
ma ray spectroscopy--that is, to detect the actual energy
of the incident gamma ray, which, in some cases, will
identify uniquely the source of the emitted gamma ray,
as in the case of induced gamma ray logging.
However, a scintillation detector is a detector of gam-
ma rays only to the extent that an electron is produced
in the crystal through one or more of the three basic gam-
TABLE 50.2~-MACROSCOPIC THERMAL
ABSORPTION CROSS SECTIONS
{X[c.u./(g/cm3)])
Boron 42 300
Chlorine 564
Hydrogen 198
Manganese 146
Iron 27.5
NUCLEAR LOGGING TECHNIQUES 50-13
ma ray interaction mechanisms: photoelectric absorption,
Compton scattering, and pair production. Thus, the gam-
ma ray detection efficiency of a scintillator will depend
on its size, density, and average atomic number (for photo-
electric absorption). A scintillator in common use is a
crystal of sodium iodide doped with a thallium impurity,
NaI (Tl), which has good gamma ray absorption proper-
ties and a fairly rapid scintillation decay time (- 0.23
psec) to allow for high-counting-rate spectroscopy.
Photo-Multiplier
The use of such a device for gamma ray spectroscopy
implies that the output light pulse is proportional to the
incident gamma ray energy; however, this is possible only
for the case of total absorption of the gamma ray. Some
of the difficulties that can complicate the detected spec-
trum are shown in Fig. 50.15, for the case of a tool de-
signed to look for the unique gamma rays emitted by
inelastic neutron reactions with carbon and oxygen. The
figure illustrates what might happen to an inelastic car-
bon gamma ray that is produced at the site marked (IS)
with an initial energy of 4.44 MeV. It first makes a Comp-
ton scattering in the borehole fluid (CS) and loses 90 keV
of energy before traversing the tool housing and entering
the NaI detector with an energy of 4.05 MeV. At the point
marked (PP) it suffers a pair-production interaction,
producing one electron and one positron with energies of
2.00 and 1.03 MeV, respectively, the missing 1.02 MeV
having gone into the creation of the electron/positron pair.
Both particles impart their energy to the scintillation proc-
ess indicated by the dashed lines. When the positron has
given up all its kinetic energy, it annihilates with an elec-
tron to produce two gamma rays, each of 0.51 MeV ener-
gy. One of the gamma rays undergoes Compton scattering
at (CS), and the reduced-energy gamma ray (0.41 MeV)
is finally absorbed photoelectrically within the crystal at
point (Ph.A). The other 0.51-MeV gamma ray is shown
escaping the crystal, to the right, and being absorbed in
the tool housing without contributing to the total energy
transferred to the crystal. The energy recorded by the
crystal for the event depicted is 3.54 MeV (4.05
MeV - 1.02 MeV pair-production $0.511 MeV annihi-
lation) instead of the 4.44 MeV that we would like to be
measurin
Optical Coupling
(0.41)
Na(TI) Crystal
M
(4.
Reflective Coating
Fig. 50.15~Illustration of the possible sources of gamma ray
energy degradation in an Nal detector system.
Thus, %. t e degradation of the structure of the incident
gamma ray spectrum is seen to be inherent in the physics
of the many processes involved in the detection. Only if
the gamma ray is absorbed totally by the detector is the
light output of the scintillator proportional to the incident
gamma ray energy. This would be the case for the photo-
electric absorption, for example. Fig. 50.16 shows the
energy deposited in this case as the single line to the right
marked E,.
Full Energy
lPhoto-Electricll
Light Flashes
Produced by
Compton Recoil
Electrons /
Peak
If only a Compton interaction occurs, then a fraction
of the energy will be registered. The possible range of
energy deposition in this case follows the distribution
shown in Fig. 50.16 from zero to the Compton edge,
which corresponds to the maximum energy being trans-
ferred from the gamma ray to the electron. Additionally,
if the gamma ray is of sufficiently high energy there may
be a pair-production reaction, and if one or more of the
5 1 1-keV photons escapes the detector without interaction,
the so-called first and second escape peaks will be pro-
duced in the detected spectrum. Fig. 50.17 indicates the
additional distortion introduced by this process.
-
Energy Transferred Compton Ey
to Crystal Edge
In addition to the distortions in the measured spectrum
produced by the possible interactions within the detector,
Fig. 50.16~Idealized response from a scintillation detector to
mono-energetic gamma rays of energy E, showing
the photo-peak and the Compton tail.
50-14 PETROLEUM ENGINEERING HANDBOOK
Energy Transferred to Crystal
Fig. X1.17-Idealized spectrum distortion in a scintillator caused
by pair-production. The highest energy peak corre-
sponds to photoelectric absorption or the full ener-
gy of the incident monoenergetic gamma ray, and
the two lower energy escape peaks correspond to
escape from the crystal of one or two of the annihi-
lation gamma rays of 511 keV.
a dominant perturbation to the measurement is the detec-
tor resolution. This refers to the broadening of the line
spectra, as can be observed clearly in Fig. 50.17. The
width of the observed gamma ray lines is, in the case of
an NaI detector, primarily a function of the gamma ray
energy, the size of the crystal, and the optical coupling
between the crystal and photomultiplier, as well as the
characteristics of the photomultiplier. One of the major
drawbacks of the scintillation detectors is their poor ener-
gy resolution. The reason is that detection in this type of
device requires a number of inefficient steps, the result
being that the energy required to produce one informa-
tion carrier (a photo-electron in the photo-multiplier) is
about 1,000 eV. Thus, the number of carriers for a typi-
cal radiation detection is rather small; the statistical fluc-
tuations on such a small number place an inherent
limitation on the energy resolution.
The use of semiconductor materials as radiation detec-
tors can produce many more information carriers per de-
tected event and, thus, can achieve a very-high-energy
resolution. In a solid-state device such as the germanium
detector, the semiconductor properties are used to trans-
fer the charged-particle energy into a usable electrical
pulse in a much more direct manner. When a gamma ray
interacts with the detector, charged particles are produced.
These, in turn, transfer energy to electrons bound (by only
0.7 eV for Ge) in the crystal lattice, enabling many of
them to become free. Each free electron leaves a positive
hole in the electron structure of the crystal. Under a strong
electrical field applied to the detector crystal, the free elec-
trons and holes migrate quickly to the electrodes and cre-
ate an electrical impulse.
The excellent resolution arises because the band gap
is so small. About 3.5 x lo5 electrons are freed by the
detection of a l-MeV gamma ray to contribute to the re-
sulting pulse with no intervening inefficient steps. The
result is sharp energy resolution. Another result is that
the detector must be operated at extremely low tempera-
tures. This is because at room temperatures the electrons
have sufficient energy to cross the 0.7.eV band gap and
camouflage those freed by gamma ray interactions.
Although the gamma ray spectra obtained with Gc detec-
tors are superb, their overall counting rates are less than
those obtained by NaI detectors. Application of solid-state
detectors is limited to devices concerned with precise spec-
troscopic elemental definition or in-situ chemical analysis.
Neutron Detectors. Neutrons are detected through
nuclear reactions in which energetic charged particles are
produced. Thus, most neutron detectors consist of a tar-
get material for this conversion coupled with a conven-
tional detector, such as a proportional counter or
scintillator, to achieve the measurement. Since the cross
section for neutron interactions in most materials is a
strong function of neutron energy, different techniques
have been developed for different energy regions. For well
logging applications, at present, it is the detection of ther-
mal and epithermal neutrons that is of interest. The de
tection schemes considered in this section are appropriate
for these low-energy neutrons.
The determination of useful nuclear reactions for neu-
tron detectors involves satisfying several criteria: the cross
section for reaction must be very large, the target nuclide
should be of high isotopic abundance. and the energy
liberated in the reaction following the neutron capture
should be high for subsequent ease of detection by con-
ventional means. Three target nuclei have been found
generally to satisfy these conditions: B, Li, and He.
In the case of the first two targets, the (n,ol) reaction is
used, and for 3He it is the (n,p) reaction.
The boron reaction is exploited widely in the form of
BF3 in a proportional tube. In this case the boron trifluo-
ride serves as the target and as the proportional tube gas.
For this application the gas is enriched in B, to attain
a high detection efficiency. Another approach is to use
boron as the inner coating of a proportional counter, which
may use some other proportional gas more suitable than
BFJ for applications involving fast timing, for example.
Since a suitable lithium compound gas does not exist,
the lithium reaction is not exploited in a proportional coun-
ter. However, lithium scintillators, similar to those of so-
dium iodide for gamma ray detection, are available.
Because of the large amount of energy released by the
(n,cr) reaction, neutrons are registered at an energy of
about 4. I MeV, which provides a means of discriminat-
ing against the gamma rays, which also will be detected
readily by the LiI crystal.
The most common neutron detector in well logging,
however, is based on the He (n,p) reaction. In this case
He is used as the target and proportional gas in a coun-
ter. It is preferred to BF3 because it has a higher cross
section than the boron reaction and the gas pressure can
be made much higher without degradation of its propor-
tional operation. The overall simplicity of a proportional
tube is preferred to the additional complications associated
with a scintillator.
For the three reactions discussed, the cross sections vary
inversely with the square root of the neutron energy 50
that the detection efficiency for neutrons will vary in the
same manner. The detectors using these reactions, then,
NUCLEAR LOGGING TECHNIQUES
50-15
are basically thermal neutron detectors. For some logging
applications, it is desirable to measure the cpithcrmal neu-
tron flux while being insensitive to thermal neutrons. This
can be achieved by making a minor modification to any
of the three types of detectors previously mentioned. It
consists of using an exterior thermal-neutron-absorbing
material with a large cross section, such as cadmium. to
shield the detector. Thermal neutrons will be absorbed
in the shield, but the reaction particles. whose range is
small (on the order of tenths of millimeters). will not reach
the counter. The higher-energy neutrons that manage to
penetrate the shield will be detected by the thermal neu-
tron detector with somewhat reduced efficiency.
Nuclear Radiation Logging Devices
The logging devices discussed in the following section fall
under two general categories: those that measure natural
radiation fields and those that produce radiation fields and
measure some aspect of their interaction with the forma-
tion. The first group contains tools that measure the natur-
al gamma ray activity of earth formations resulting from
the spontaneous decay of radioactive materials. The sec-
ond category can be broken down into the type of radia-
tion used-gamma rays or neutrons. The latter may be
subdivided further into the use of chemical or steady-state
neutron sources or pulsed particle accelerator-based
sources described earlier.
Rather than trace the historical development, which has
been well documented by Segesman, only the most re-
cent logging devices will be discussed. Both neutron
porosity and gamma-gamma density devices have under-
gone substantial evolution since their respective introduc-
tions as commercial services. The earliest devices
invariably used a single detector. As the use of these types
of measurements grew, more emphasis was put on im-
proving the quantitative nature of the measurements and
a better appreciation of environmental effects was gained.
This led to the development of borehole-compensated
devices generally using a second detector at a lesser spat-
ing from the source that, because of its larger sensitivity
to environmental effects, provides a correction to be ap-
plied to the principal detector.
Gamma Ray Devices
There are two series of naturally occurring radioactive
isotopes that occur in significant quantities in sedimen-
tary rocks: the uranium and thorium series. The only other
significant naturally occurring radioisotope is that of
potassium (40K). Clay minerals that are formed during
the decomposition of igneous rocks in general have a very
high cation exchange capacity. Because of this property
they are able to retain trace amounts of radioactive min-
erals that originally may have been components of the
feldspars and micas that go into the production of clay
minerals. This process generally results in a higher con-
centration of radioactive elements in shales than in sand-
stones or carbonate rocks not produced by weathering.
However, some radioactivity can be associated with car-
bonate rock and sandstones because of transport of radi-
oactive minerals in solution in the formation waters.
The principal use of the gamma ray log is to distinguish
between the shales and the nonshales. Historically, the
first gamma ray devices measured only the total gamma
1.46
0 0.5 1.5 2 2.5 3
Gamma Ray Energy, MeV
Fig. 50.18-Theoretical gamma ray emission spectra from the
three naturally occurring radioactive products.
ray flux emanating from the formation. However, it is
now known that different types of shale have different total
gamma ray activity because of the Th, U, and K concen-
trations. Fig. 50.18 shows the various gamma ray line
emissions associated with each. This indicates that by de-
termining the intensity of the particular gamma ray ener-
gies it is possible to identify the quantity of each
radioactive emitter in the formation. With the develop-
ment of improved spectroscopic-quality gamma ray de-
tectors, it became natural to refine the gamma ray
measurement into a measurement of the actual concen-
trations of the three components.
The measurement element for recent gamma ray or
spectral gamma ray logging devices is the NaI detector.
The gamma ray devices measure the total number of gam-
ma rays above some practical lower limit (on the order
of 100 keV). This total counting rate will be (I) a func-
tion of the distribution and quantity of radioactive mate-
rial in the formation and (2) influenced by the size and
efficiency of the detector used. For this reason some
calibration standards have been established by the API,
and all total-intensity gamma ray logs are recorded in API
units.
The definition of the API unit of radioactivity comes
from the artificially radioactive formation constructed at
the U. of Houston facility. A formation containing ap-
proximately 4% K, 24 ppm Th, and 12 ppm U was con-
structed and defined to be 200 API units. The details of
this calibration facility can be found in Ref. 6.
Spectral gamma ray devices basically use the same type
of detection system as the total gamma ray devices, but
instead of one broad energy region for detection. the gam-
ma rays are analyzed into several different energy bins.
50-16 PETROLEUM ENGINEERING HANDBOOK
n emitters/cm3 This simply says that the total counting rate is propor-
tional to nlpb, which can be expressed as the weight per-
cent of the material that is radioactive. Consequently, the
utility of expressing the radioactive contents as weight
fractions is seen.
One of the fundamental difficulties in the interpretation
of the gamma ray device measurements is inherent in its
very concept. There are nonradioactive clays and there
are hot dolomites. The use of spectral gamma ray
devices can often point out an anomaly such as a hot
dolomite or other formation with some unusual excess of
U, or in other cases K or Th.
To Emitters in Shell
Both types of devices suffer to some small degree from
the borehole environment. Because of mud in the bore-
hole and varying hole diameters, the gamma rays emit-
ted from the formation must pass through different
amounts of gamma ray absorbers to reach the detector.
Additional complications can arise because of mud addi-
tives such as barite or KCl. In the first case, the barium
Emitters in Shell
content of the mud becomes a very efficient absorber of
4nnr*dr
low-energy gamma rays emanating from the formation.
In the second case, the borehole fluid is also a source of
Fig. 50.19-Geometry for the gamma ray flux al a point from uni-
radioactive potassium, which is contained in the KC1 ad-
formly distributed sources in an infinite medium. ditive. Ref. 7 discusses a method for correcting for these
effects.
This allows for the determination (after comparing to nor-
malized standard formations where the concentrations of
K, U, and Th are known) of the concentrations of these
elements present in the measured formation. These log
output quantities usually are expressed as a percent by
weight of the total material.
It is of interest to note that the gamma ray intensity from
a uniformly distributed source (whose concentration is
maintained at a constant value when expressed in weight
percent of the medium in which it is embedded) is in-
dependent of the formation density, even though the at-
tenuation is a direct function of the formation density. This
can be seen from the following argument.
Consider an infinite homogeneous medium containing
n gamma ray emitters per cubic centimeter, each with a
source strength of emission of one gamma ray per sec-
ond. To calculate the total gamma ray flux that would be
seen by a detector at a given point in this medium, refer
to Fig. 50.19. The contribution to the total counting rate
from a spherical shell of thickness dr at a distance r from
the detector would be the number of emitters contained
in this shell multiplied by the attenuation over the path
length r to the detector,
dP=4*r2.dre
-K,Pb
-,
4ar2
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
(33)
Gamma-Gamma Density Devices
As noted in an earlier section, the transmission of gam-
ma rays through matter can be related to the electron den-
sity if the predominant interaction is Compton scattering.
Thus, a gamma ray transmission-type measurement
through a formation can be used to determine its density
and with some information on the material composition
(lithology and pore fluids) the porosity can be determined.
The gamma ray source usually used in density devices
is 37Cs, which emits gamma rays at 662 keV, well be-
low the limit for pair production. This isotope has a half
life of about 30 years, which provides a usable, stable
intensity during a reasonable period. Some devices use
6oCo, which emits two gamma rays at 1332 and 1173
keV.
The earliest devices consisted of the gamma ray source
and a single detector, which initially was called a Geiger-
Miiller tube. However, to compensate for the frequent oc-
currence of intervening mudcake, modern devices incor-
porate two detectors (generally both NaI) in a housing that
shields them from direct radiation from the source and
is forced up against the formation with a hydraulically
operated arm. This arm provides a force of application
as well as a measurement of the diameter (along one axis)
of the borehole.
The measurement principle derives from the fact that
the counting rate of a detector will vary exponentially with
the density of the formation. Consequently, the forma-
and the total counting rate is just the integral
tion density can be determined simply from an observed
counting rate. However, in the case of intervening mud-
cake of unknown density and thickness, there will be a
*=n
s
-eeKaPbrdr, . . . . . . . . . (34)
disturbance of the counting rate. Fig. 50.20 shows the
usual logging situation. To correct for this intervening
0
mudcake, the apparent density of the long- and short-
spacing devices can be derived. Laboratory measurements
1
then are used to define the correction, Ap, that must be
*=n- KoPb. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . (35) applied to the apparent density from the long-spacing de-
tector to read the value of the formation density behind it.
NUCLEAR LOGGING TECHNIQUES
50-17
In at least one device the shape of the gamma ray spec-
trum is measured and correlated with the photoelectric
absorption parameters of the formation, which, in turn,
can be linked with the lithology of the formation. The
photoelectric factor, Fpe, is proportional to the photo-
electric cross section per electron. Fig. 50.21 shows the
utility of such a measured parameter for distinguishing
between the three principal matrices.
Since the Fpe of mixtures does not combine volumetri-
cally, a new parameter, U, which has the property of com-
bining linearly, has been developed for interpretation
purposes. The definition of U is the product of Fpp and
electron density,
Long Spacing
Detector
U=Fpepe, . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ..(36)
and corresponds to the macroscopic photoelectric cross
section. This follows from the definition of Fpe, which
is the photoelectric cross section per electron, and pp,
which is proportional to the number of electrons per cu-
bic centimeter. Thus, the value of U for any mixture can
be computed by making a simple volumetric addition of
the Uassociated with each of the pure components of the
mixture. Table 50.3 lists some useful lithology parame-
ters for a number of commonly encountered minerals. Fig.
50.22 shows the use of U and density in the determina-
tion of lithology once the effect of porosity has been elim-
inated.
Short Spacing
Detector
Source
Examination of Table 50.3 shows the enormous sensi-
tivity of the parameter U or Fpe to elements with a large
atomic number. In particular, note the values of Fpe for
the several iron compounds and for barium. In the case
of iron, this sensitivity can be exploited to make a deter-
mination of shale content of the formation if there is iron
associated with the clay mineral. This is discussed in the
section on interpretation. However, the sensitivity to barite
makes the Fpe measurement difficult in heavily weight-
ed barite muds. If there is a substantial thickness of barite
mudcake between the tool skid and the formation or if
there is invasion of BaS04 particles into the formation,
the resultant photoelectric absorption can seriously dis-
turb the measurement.
Fig. 50.20--Schematic of a compensated density device in a
borehole with mudcake.
Porosity
*
Neutron Porosity Devices
Historically, the neutron device was the first nuclear
device to be used to obtain an estimate of formation
porosity. The principle of operation is based on the fact
that hydrogen, with its relatively large scattering cross
section and small mass, is very efficient in the slowing
of fast neutrons. Thus, a measurement of the flux of
epithermal neutrons resulting from the interaction of high-
energy source neutrons with a formation will be related
to its hydrogen content. If the hydrogen (in the form of
water or hydrocarbons) is contained within the pore space,
then the measurement will yield porosity. The simplest
version of the device consists of a source of fast neutrons
such as Pu-Be or Am-Be with average source energies
of several MeV and a detector of much lower-energy neu-
trons at some distance from the source. Two general
categories will be considered on the basis of the types of
neutrons detected-epithermal or thermal.
Dolomite
4
i
Fig. 50.21-Values of the photoelectric factor, Fpe, [or the three
principal matrices showing the relative Insensitivity
to porosity.
To be a little more quantitative about the response of
neutron porosity devices, we can use the results of two-
group diffusion theory, * which show that the flux of
50-l a
Elements
Hydrogen
Carbon
Oxygen
Sodium
Magnesium
Aluminum
Silicon
Sulfur
Chlorine
Potassium
Calcium
Titanium
Iron
Strontium
Zirconium
Barium
Minerals
Anhydrite
Barite
Calcite
Carnallite
Celestite
Corundum
Dolomite
Gypsum
Halite
Hematite
llmenite
Magnetite
Pyrite
Quartz
Rutile
Sylvite
Zircon
Liauids
Water
Salt water
Oil
PETROLEUM ENGINEERING HANDBOOK
TABLE 50.3-LITHOLOGY PARAMETERS FOR VARIOUS MATERIALS
Formula
H
C
0
Na
WI
Al
Si
S
Cl
K
Ca
Ti
Fe
Sr
Zr
Ba
CaSO s
BaSO,
CaCO 3
KCI.MgCI,,GH,O
SrSO,
AI,O,
CaCO, .MgCO,
CaSO,.ZH,O
NaCl
Fed&
FeO.TiO,
M&O,
Fe304
FeS 2
FeS 2
Si02
TiO
KC;
ZrSiO,
Clean sandstone
Dirty sandstone
Average shale
Anthracite
coal
Bituminous
coal
C:H:O-
93:3:4
C:H:O-
a2:5:13
Molecular
Weight
1.008
12.011
16.000
22.991
24.32
26.98
28.09
32.066
35.457
39.100
40.08
47.90
55.65
87.63
91.22
137.36
z
Fpe
1 0.00025
6 0.15898
8 0.44784
11 1.4093
12 1.9277
13 2.5715
14 3.3579
16 5.4304
17 6.7549
19 10.081
20 12.126
22 17.089
26 31.181
38 122.24
40 147.03
56 493.72
It
pb
L
u
2.700 2.602
2.070 2.066
136.146 5.055 2.960 2.957 14.95
233.366 266.8 4.500 4.011 1070.0
100.09 5.084 2.710 2.708 13.77
277.88 4.089 1.61 1.645 6.73
183.696 55.13 3.960 3.708 204.0
101.90 1.552 3.970 3.894 6.04
I 84.42 3.142 2.870 2.864 9.00
172.18 3.420 2.320 2.372 8.11
58.45 4.65 2.165 2.074 8.65
159.70 21.48 5.210 4.987 107.0
151.75 16.63 4.70 4.46 74.2
84.33 0.829 3.037 3.025 2.51
231.55 22.08 5.180 4.922 109.0
i 19.98 16.97 4.870 4.708 79.9
I 19.98 16.97 5.000 4.834 82.0
60.09 1.806 2.654 2.650 4.79
79.90 10.08 4.260 4.052 40.8
74.557 8.510 1.984 1.916 16.3
183.31 69.10 4.560 4.279 296.0
18.016 0 358 1.000 1.110 0.40
0.807 1.086 I.185 0.96
0.119 0.850' 0.948 0.11
0.125 0.850" 0.970 0.12
1.745
2.70
3.42
0.161
0.180
2.308 2.330
2.394 2.414
2.650' 2.645'
1.700' 1.749
1.400 1.468
4.07
6.52
9.05
0.28
0.26
NUCLEAR LOGGING TECHNIQUES 50-19
2.65
2.70
5 6 7
I I i
8 9 10
U
maa
Fig. 50.22-Matrix identification chart from U and density once the effect of porosity has been eliminated
epithermal neutrons, in an infinite medium containing a
point source of fast neutrons, falls off exponentially with
the distance from the source, L, with a characteristic
length, L,s, which is determined by the constituents of the
medium:
where D is the epithermal diffusion coefficient, which is
related to the transport mean free path of neutrons. At
a fixed spacing, counting rates should vary nearly ex-
ponentially with the slowing-down length of the forma-
tion. An indication of this type of behavior can be seen
in Fig. 50.23, which shows, on the left, the counting rate
~ ,=L eeLILs
of one of the early epithermal neutron devices as a func-
cp, D , . .
(37)
L tion of porosity, and on the right as a function of slowing-
down length. The matrix effect is much reduced in the
Sl owmg- Down Length. Ls. cm
Fig. 50.23-Counting rates for a long-spacing epiihermal detector in test formations of varrous porositres.
On the left, the data are plotted as a function of the formation porosity with th:ee data trends
resulting that car respond to the three matrices of the test formattons. On the right, the same
data have been replotted as a function of the corresponding slowing-down length
for each of
the test formattons.
50- 20
' 6
s
az
m5
. E
z
a 4
u
23
6
7
k 2
z"
6 '
. o
z 0
LT 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 90 100
Porosity, %
Fig. 50.24-The ratio of near to far detector counting rates as
a function of porosity for a thermal neutron
porosi-
ty device.
-Sandstone
c
+
- A-
YY
90 l oo
Porosity, p.u,
Fig. 50.25-The calculated migration length, L, , as a function
of porosity for the three principal matrices: sand-
stone, limestone, and dolomite.
PETROLEUM ENGINEERING HANDBOOK
second presentation. It also shows how the counting rate
in any other material, once its slowing-down length has
been calculated, then can be estimated or, conversely, how
the slowing-down length of the formation can be deter-
mined from a measurement of the epithermal flux. It was
seen in Fig. 50.11 that the slowing-down length is strongly
dependent on the amount of hydrogen present in the mix-
ture for which it is calculated.
Fig. 50.11 also shows the slowing-down length as a
function of porosity for three common matrix materials:
limestone, dolomite, and sandstone. From this presenta-
tion, it can be seen that if the matrix is known, the appro-
priate true porosity can be determined. As an operational
expedient it has been convenient to convert the epither-
mal counting rate into porosity directly, assuming a lime-
stone matrix with a slight correction to be made for the
other two matrices. The separation of the three curves
in the previous figure suggests how such a correction is
made.
One of the first really quantitative devices of this type
used a single epithermal detector in a skid applied mechan-
ically against the borehole wall. This sidewall epithermal
neutron device had the advantage of minimizing borehole
effects, although it is sensitive to the actual size of the
borehole and can be disturbed by the presence of mud-
cake between the pad surface and the borehole wall.
A more recent development is the dual-detector com-
pensated neutron device. This type of device uses a pair
of thermal detectors for increased counting rate to improve
the statistical uncertainty of the derived porosity values
at high porosity. The second detector, the nearer to the
source, is used to provide compensation for borehole ef-
fects. Although thermal neutron detection is used, it can
be shown8 that if the source-to-detector spacings are ap-
propriately chosen, the ratio of the two counting rates
should vary exponentially as the inverse of the slowing-
down length just as in the case of the single epithermal
detector. In practice, however, it is found that some ad-
ditional corrections must be made to the measurements,
which can deviate from expected values if the thermal cap-
ture properties of the borehole and formation are signifi-
cantly different. These generally are provided by the
service companies in the forms of charts or nomographs.
More recently they have been provided as a part of com-
puterized interpretation.
The migration length, discussed in an earlier section,
provides a convenient way to characterize the response
of the thermal neutron device. Fig. 50.24, taken from Ed-
mundson, shows the ratio of the near to the far count-
ing rate of such a device for three types of lithologies as
a function of porosity. If the porosity values on the points
of this plot are converted through the use of Fig. 50.25,
which shows the migration length, L, , as a function of
porosity, then the counting rates for the three lithologies
lie on a single ljne, as seen in Fig. 50.26. This demon-
strates that the response characteristics of the neutron
porosity tools are given by some function of the slowing-
down length and diffusion length rather than porosity.
Although the API committee6 that set up the gamma
ray calibration standards also took some steps to stan-
dardize neutron log responses, their recommendations for
API units have not been implemented. The conventional
approach to neutron log output is to calibrate the tool in
limestone primary formations and to report all readings
NUCLEAR LOGGING TECHNIQUES 50.21
in apparent limestone porosity. Conversion charts are then
necessary to correct the apparent limestone porosity for
the matrix in which the measurement actually was made.
(As noted previously, some consideration should be given
to using the slowing-down length and diffusion length as
the units for reporting the log measurements.) These meas-
urements would be converted to porosity by use of charts
similar to Figs. 50.11 and 50.25, lying entirely in the
realm of interpretation.
q Sandslone (Quartz)
0 Limestone
4 Dolomite
@ Water (100%)
One of the biggest limitations of the thermal porosity
device is the disturbance on the measurement that can be
caused by shale, either from its iron or potassium con-
tent or associated trace elements with high thermal cap-
ture cross section. However, even without the additional
disturbance of thermal absorbers, clays and shales pre-
sent a problem for all neutron porosity interpretation be-
cause of the hydroxyls associated with the clay mineral
structure. Fig. 50.27 illustrates this point by showing the
variation of slowing-down length of a sand/illite and
sand/kaolinite mixture as a function of porosity. In both
cases the sand and shale volumes are in equal proportions.
It is clear that if the presence of clay in addition to the
sand is not taken into account, large errors in porosity
can result. Also note that the apparent porosity of kaolinite
is much larger than that of illite. The examples shown
in the figures indicate that a 20-PU sand/illite mixture will
appear to be about 2.5 PU, whereas the 20-PU
sandjkaolinite mixture will have an apparent porosity of
about 36 PU. This will be seen in a later section to be
caused by the differing hydroxyl content of these two clay
minerals.
2-
l -
01 I
7. 5 10 15 23 25 30 35
Migration Length, Lm, cm
Fig. 50.26-The ratio data of Fig. 50.24 plotted as a function of
the migration length, L, , corresponding to the
matrix and porosity of the test formation meas-
urements.
32. 1
27. 5
It is also of note that the most recent neutron porosity
device consists of a pair of thermal and a pair of epither-
mal detectors. This enables measuring an apparent porosi-
ty unaffected by thermal absorbers and simultaneously
obtaining a measurement of the macroscopic thermal ab-
sorption coefficient, C, which additionally describes the
formation.
Pulsed Neutron Logging Devices
Pulsed neutron logging devices respond to the macroscop-
ic thermal absorption capture cross section. The macro-
scopic thermal absorption cross section depends on the
chemical constituents of the matrix and pore fluids. Chlo-
rine, which is nearly always a constituent of formation
waters, has a large absorption cross section. Thus, a meas-
urement of the absorption cross section can provide the
means of identifying salt water and measuring formation
fluid saturation.
12. 5
10. 0
7. 5
5. 0
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40
Porosity, p.u.
To determine the macroscopic thermal cross section,
the actual phenomenon being measured is the lifetime of
thermal neutrons in an absorptive medium. In a manner
analogous to radioactive decay, we can predict the time-
dependent behavior of thermal neutrons. The reaction rate
for thermal neutron absorption is given by the product
of the macroscopic cross section C and the velocity of the
neutron, v. So for a system of NN neutrons the rate of
thermal absorption is given by
Fig. 50.27-The calculated slowing-down length as a function
of porosity for sand and sand/clay mixtures. For the
two lower lines the matrix is composed of equal mix-
tures, by volume, of sand and kaolinite or illite.
dNN= -Cvdt, . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . (38)
which when integrated yields
NN=NiC, . . . . . . . . . . . . , . . . . . . . . . (39)
50-22
PETROLEUM ENGINEERING HANDBOOK
t n
Fast Neutron
Burst from
z
Pulsed Source
2
>
c
:
7
z
Build-up & Decay
of Thermal Neutrons
1
0 100 200 300
Time, ks
Fig. 50.28--Schematic timing diagram of a pulsed neutron cap-
ture/gamma ray device.
which relates the number present at time t to an initial
number Ni at time zero. The exponential decay constant
is seen to depend inversely on the desired quantity C.
The practical realization of such a pulsed neutron log-
ging device depends on a pulsed source of high-energy
neutrons. Such a device was discussed previously. The
basic mode of operation consists of pulsing the source of
14-MeV neutrons for a brief period. This forms a cloud
of high-energy neutrons in the borehole and formation,
which then becomes thermalized through multiple colli-
sions. This process is illustrated in Fig. 50.28. Only at
thermal energies does the absorption become important
and the neutrons begin to disappear in accordance with
Eq. 39. As each neutron is captured, whether it be by
hydrogen or chlorine, gamma rays are emitted, and the
decay of the gamma ray counting rate is the actual meas-
urement that reflects the decay of the neutron population.
As seen from Eq. 39, the decay constant for a particu-
lar formation is given by 1lv.L The value of the capture
cross section C is listed in Table 50.4 for a number of
pertinent cases. Included in the table is the decay time
associated with the particular matrix, which was computed
from the relationship
K
?d=- c , . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
abs
where K is 4550 psec, because v for thermal neutrons is
0.22 cmlpsec and Cabs, the thermal absorption cross sec-
tion, is in capture units.
TABLE 50.4-CAPTURE CROSS SECTIONS
AND DECAY TIMES
c
it/
(C.U.)
(w=c)
- -
Quartz 4.26 1066
Dolomite 4.7 966
Lime 7.07 643
20-PU lime 10.06 452
Waler 22 206
Salt water (26% NaCI) 125 36
Since the derivation of the decay-time measurement is
based on the simple model of a cloud of thermal neutrons
being present and then decaying, it is of some interest to
see just how long it is after the burst of 14-MeV neutrons
that they become thermalized. To estimate this time we
need only to refer to the section on neutron physics, where
the average number of collisions for thermalization and
the mean free path were discussed. The simplest estimate
of the time required is to suppose that between each col-
lision the average distance traveled is the mean free path
(l/C,). The time between one collision and the next, At,
is then given approximately by
At,i
c, v, . . . . . . . . . . . . ..I............ ..(41)
where C, is the total cross section and v is given in terms
of the energy E by Eq. 23. The 1 Iv factor can be replaced
by using Eq. 23 in conjunction with the expression (Eq.
30) for the average number of collisions, a, yielding
1
-oQ~'*, . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ..(42)
V
where E is the average logarithmic energy decrement de-
fined in Eq. 25.
The value of an average mean free path for formations
of interest can be estimated from Fig. 50.10. From the
above information, the total time, t, (psec), from emis-
sion to thermal energies is given by
Evaluation of this expression for 20%-porosity limestone
gives an estimate of about 2.8 psec and in water it is only
0.5 psec, both of which are much smaller than the decay
times shown in Table 50.4.
Numerous measurement schemes are used for control-
ling the period during which the 14-MeV neutrons are
produced and the period during which the gamma rays
are measured. Some devices use dual-detector systems in
an attempt to correct for the small disturbance that can
be introduced by the borehole size and salinity as well
as to provide some measure of the porosity.
Inelastic and Capture Gamma Ray Spectrometry
The primary motivation for the development of induced
gamma ray spectroscopy devices was the possibility of
performing in-situ chemical analysis of the formation con-
stituents. The tantalizing possibility of directly measuring
the ratio of the number of carbon atoms to oxygen atoms
and thus providing the first direct downhole measurement
of the presence of hydrocarbons spurred the development
of a number of technologically sophisticated devices. This
is to be contrasted with a traditional approach that depends
on the analysis of a core or side-wall sample.
Tools of this type are based on a type of chemical anal-
ysis that can be performed through the use of neutrons
and gamma ray spectroscopy. Neutrons are used to ex-
cite the nuclei, which then emit gamma rays of precise
NUCLEAR LOGGING TECHNIQUES
I I I
J
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14
Neutron Energy, E,, MeV
Fig. 50.29-Cross sections for the production of inelastic gam-
ma rays by carbon and oxygen as a function of the
incident neutron energy.
Ge Detector
Gamma Ray Energy. MeV
Fig. 50.30-Comparison spectra from a high-resoluhon solid-
state detector (Ge) compared to the gamma ray
spectrum detected with a more conventional Nal de-
tector.
50-23
energies uniquely identifying the isotope in question.
There are two neutron reactions that can produce such
gamma ray emissions: inelastic scattering, which can
occur with very-high-energy neutrons, and capture reac-
tions with thermalized neutrons as exploited in pulsed neu-
tron logging.
Few elements for well-logging applications have large
inelastic cross sections, but fortunately carbon and oxy-
gen do. Fig. 50.29 shows the cross sections for the pro-
duction of gamma rays from inelastic scattering from
carbon and oxygen. These inelastic induced gamma rays
are observed not only by spectroscopic gamma ray de-
tection but also in conjunction with timing. To avoid con-
fusion with gamma rays produced from thermal capture,
the inelastic gamma rays are detected during the burst of
14-MeV neutrons. At some later time, gamma rays aris-
ing from thermal absorption are detected, providing sen-
sitivity to a large number of elements such as H, Fe, Cl,
Si, Ca, S, etc. At least two different neutron pulsing and
gamma ray detection sequences are currently in use. One
method lo uses a fixed time of about 50 to 100 psec be-
tween neutron bursts, and another method, which col-
lects information on the capture gamma rays, uses a
variable neutron-pulse interval that is controlled by the
characteristic decay time of the thermalized neutrons.
Tool design differences can optimize the detection of
the inelastic or capture gamma rays. Some designs incor-
porate the measurement of both through appropriate tim-
ing cycles. In addition to the measurement of the gamma
ray yields of the various elements, the macroscopic cross
section C can be determined from an analysis of the de-
cay of the total gamma ray signal, which is also meas-
ured. The only practical limitation on the number of
elements is determined by counting statistics and the in-
herent detector resolution.
An experimental tool that uses a high-resolution Ge de-
tector has measured more than two dozen different ele-
ments in borehole logging. This type of detector must be
operated at very low temperatures (- I96C), which in-
troduces a number of technological problems for bore-
hole measurements. However. the advantage that it brings
is in the much improved resolution, which increases the
number of distinct gamma rays that can be distinguished
in the spectrum. Fig. 50.30 shows the dramatic improve-
ment compared to a conventional NaI detector for the ex-
amination of a natural uranium sample. Two elements that
are readily detectable with such a device are aluminum,
which is very useful in the classification and quantifica-
tion of in-situ clays, and vanadium, which can be
correlated I2 with the API gravity of the associated oil.
Interpretation of Nuclear Logs
The following section discusses how the previously men-
tioned nuclear logging tools are used in interpretation.
However, it should be stated at the outset that this is not
intended to be a self-contained log interpretation course.
A number of references- of such works should be
consulted for further information.
The approach taken here is more or less a stand-alone
interpretation of each tool. An examination of all the com-
bination measurements and the interpretation techniques
used with each tool is beyond the scope of this chapter.
Nonetheless, several of the more standard tool combina-
tion interpretation approaches are discussed. Fig. 50.31
50- 24
PETROLEUM ENGINEERING HANDBOOK
Interpretation Steps Nuclear Measurements Used
: I Cor;el~iions of : jj . I : ~:.: i : : : : jGamma Ray j j I
. ,.
; : : :
/ Clean Zones :: . 1 j
,. : .:
: i Natural Th, U.K. Spectrosc&
Porosity
. .
. G&n&Density : :
Neutron Pordsity : : :
//
,,
Lithology &
-Photoelectric F&&r ip,betisity/Neutron
Clay Typing
Induced Gamma Spectroscopy:
High ResolutionGamma Ray Spectroscopy
I
/
Saturation
Pulsed Neutron
C/O~(Gamma Spectroscopy)
Fig. 50.31-four interpretation tasks and the nuclear measurements associated with them.
indicates four of the steps in the interpretation process
and the nuclear measurements used to obtain the desired
results. The indicated list of measurement devices or tech-
niques is in the order of the discussion that follows.
Interpretation of Gamma Ray Measurements
The gamma ray log traditionally has been used for cor-
relating zones from well to well, crude lithology identifi-
cation, and rough volume of shale estimation. With the
current state of knowledge of clay composition and other
more refined lithology determinations, it is clear that the
surest use of the gamma ray is, indeed, for correlation.
For estimating the volume of shale, the approach is to
scan the log for minimum and maximum gamma ray read-
ings, Ymin and ymax.
The minimum reading then is
assumed to be the clean point and the maximum reading
is taken as the shale point. Then the gamma ray reading
in API units at any other point in the well, ylog , is scaled
accordingly:
V
sh a
Ylog -Ymin
. . . . _. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Ymax -Ymin
This ratio usually is referred to as the gamma ray index
and can be scaled into percent shaliness according to
charts I3 depending o n rock type. This method is some-
times appropriate, if in fact the maximum gamma ray
reading corresponds to the same type of shale as the values
that are being interpreted.
Numerous examples show the deficiencies of this
method, and for this reason the spectral gamma ray tool
was developed. Tools of this type measure, in fact, the
relative concentration of three radioactive components of
the total gamma ray signal. It is interesting to point out
the relationship between the concentration of the three
radioactive components and the total gamma ray signal
in API units. It is given by
YAPt=AxTh+BxU+CxK. . . (45)
When thorium and uranium are measured in ppm and
potassium in weight percent, it is found that ratios of the
coefficients (A:B:C) are 1:2:4; i.e., 1 wt % K contributes
four times more to YAPI than 1 ppm of thorium. It is ob-
vious from this that in a shaly sand, if a mineral rich in
potassium (such as mica) is present, the total gamma ray
signal will increase and give a false indication of pcrcen-
tage shale when, in fact, this additional radioactivity is
caused by the mica.
There are two solid reasons for using a spectral gam-
ma ray measurement over the standard gamma ray, which
is really reliable only for correlation. The first is for the
detection of radioactive anomalies, such as referred to
previously, and the second is to make some estimation
of the clay types by classifying them in terms of the rela-
tive contributions of the three radioactive components. For
this second point the reader is referred to publications on
spectral gamma ray interpretation. I*-*
Fig. 50.32 shows a log example from the North Sea
in a micaceous sand. At 10,612 to 10,620 ft, a shale is
indicated that has a total gamma ray signal of about 90
API units. With just the total gamma ray as an indicator
it appears that the zone 10,568 to 10,522 ft contains about
half the amount of shale estimated for the lower zone.
However, the decomposition of the gamma ray signal
shows quite clearly that the amounts of U, Th, and K in
these two zones are quite different. In fact, the upper zone
is a mixture of sand and mica, whereas the lower zone
is, indeed, shale.
In the next example, Fig. 50.33, the gamma ray alone
would indicate that below the lower boundary of the shale
bed at 12,836 ft, there is a relatively clean sand. It can
be seen, however, from the K trace that the high level
of potassium in the shale zone persists several feet below
12,836. This excess potassium was found to be caused
by feldspar, which has considerable impact on the grain
density to be used in the interpretation of density logs.
The third example, Fig. 50.34, shows how a uranium-
rich formation would be misinterpreted (in simple gam-
ma ray interpretation) as being shale. The sudden increase
NUCLEAR LOGGING TECHNIQUES
50-25
-#
,
Gamma Ray
Depths Thorium Uranium Potassium
50 4J 0
0 API 200 0 ppm200 wmloo % 5 50 %o 0
Fig. 50.32-A spectral gamma ray log from the North Sea in a micaceous sand.
50-26 PETROLEUM ENGINEERING HANDBOOK
Gamma Ray Depths Thorium Uranium Potassium
Porosity and
Fluids Analysis
bv Volume
Hydrocarbon
I
water
Fig. 50.33-A spectral gamma ray log from Nigeria where a continuing trace of K is attributed to the presence of feldspar.
in uranium content alone signals that this is not a simple
shale of the variety in the adjacent levels. Core analysis
showed this zone, however, to be rich in organic materi-
al and U is often trapped in organic complexes.
Porosity Determination
Gamma-Gamma Density Devices. The basic output of
the gamma-gamma density device, bulk density, is con-
ceptually the simplest measured parameter to interpret in
terms of porosity. The basic relation (Eq. 1) is
Pb =d&f+(l -dhma,
which volumetrically links the density of the pore fluid,
pf, and the rock matrix density, pmo, to the bulk densi-
ty, Pb.
However, there are a few difficulties to overcome to
interpret the output of such a density device, especially
the matter of electron density index, oe. It was shown
in an earlier discussion that the gamma-gamma density
device is measuring the electron density index. Table 50.3
shows a comparison between bulk density and electron
density index. It is in close correspondence for nearly all
the compounds listed except for water and hydrocarbons.
This is because the average value of Z/A is about % for
all elements except hydrogen. It is seen that because of
NUCLEAR LOGGING TECHNIQUES 50-27
Tppm Uwm
K%
0 GRAPl 150 0 20, 0 10,o 5 0 100 %
B i i i i i i / i 4
Fig. 50.34-A spectral gamma ray log showing a zone of anomalous U concentration
this discrepancy for hydrogen, the bulk density and elec-
tron density index of water differ by about 11%
To compensate for this fact, a simple transform of the
electron density index is made so that in water-filled lime-
stone the transformed or log density, p log. agrees with
the bulk density. Fig. 50.35 shows this simple transform
where the bulk density for 0-PU limestone and water are
plotted against the electron density values. The equation
of the straight line connecting these two points,
pb=1.07~p,-o.188, . . . . . . . . . (46)
corresponds to the published transform I4 used by the log-
ging companies. It is worthwhile to point out that this
transformed density, p l0g, will also agree to within 0.004
g/cm3 for the other principal matrix materials listed in
the table.
Returning to the interpretation problem, the solution of
Eq. 1 for porosity yields
Pm -Pb
$=-
p*-Pf .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
(47)
so the problem rests on knowing the values to insert for
fluid and matrix density. Before examining the means for
determining these values, it is perhaps of some interest
to know to what precision these two parameters must be
known.
It is interesting to look at the uncertainty that can be
tolerated on the value used for the matrix density, pm0 .
From the previous equation we can write
Pb -Pmo
1
dC$= -~
(Pf-PmlJ2
ap,.
Pf -Pm2
1
(48)
50-28
2.5
1 .o 1.5 2.0 2.5 3
Electron Density, per g/cc
Fig. 50.35-The transform between the measured electron den-
sity index, pe, and bulk density, pb.
If this is evaluated for the case of a sand of about 30%
porosity we can use the values pb =2.16, pf= 1 .OO, and
pmn =2.65 and obtain
d$=0.43dp,. . . . . . . . . . . . . (49)
Thus, for the uncertainty in 4 to be less than 0.02, the
uncertainty in p ma must be less than 0.05 g/cm3. A more
detailed analysis of the uncertainty in grain density that
can be tolerated can be found in Ref. 2 1.
For values of fluid density it is necessary to know the
type of fluid in the pores. The fluid density for hydrocar-
bon may range from 0.2 to 0.8. Salt-saturated water
(NaCI) may be as high as 1.2 g/cm 3, and with the pres-
ence of CaCl2, values even as great as 1.4 g/cm 3 may
occur. However, the uncertainty that can be tolerated in
pf is much greater than that for p ma. An error analysis
of Eq. 41 for the values chosen above shows that
&#J =O. 188pf, which allows about double the margin of
error.
The value for matrix density in simple cases can be
taken from Table 50.3, which shows a rather narrow var-
iation between 2.65 g/cm3 for quartz and 2.96 g/cm3 for
anhydrite. Grain densities for shales are an entirely
separate matter and will not be covered here. The obvi-
ous problem left is assigning a matrix density, which can
only be done with a knowledge of the lithology. In es-
sence, all density interpretation aimed at porosity deter-
mination revolves on this.
Before going on to the determination of lithology and
thus an estimate of grain density, quality control of the
density measurement should be discussed.
PETROLEUM ENGINEERING HANDBOOK
As mentioned earlier, the modern gamma-gamma den-
sity devices are compensated measuring devices. They use
two detectors at different spacings from the gamma ray
source to compensate for the possible intervening pres-
ence of mudcake or drilling fluid. Normally. in addition
to the density curve the log will also show a trace of the
compensation, generally referred to as the Ap curve. This
curve represents the correction made to the apparent den-
sity seen by the long-spacing detector (P,,~) based on the
discrepancy between the long- and short-spacing meas-
urements.
The counting rate from either detector can be convert-
ed to an ap arent density after a series of laboratory
calibrations.
Y
* If there is not any intervening material be-
tween the tool surface and the formation being measured,
then the two values will be equal. As the mudcake thick-
ness increases, the two density values will diverge for
some reasonable value of thickness (generally less than
1 in.). The quantity Ap is determined by experimentation,
as a function of the density differences, to be the amount
to be added to the apparent long-spacing density, pls, to
match the bulk density of the formation-i.e.,
p,,=pls +Ap. . . . , . . . . . . . . (50)
Although it commonly is thought that Ap is a measure
of the mudcake thickness, h,,, it is, in fact, proportion-
al to the product of mudcake thickness and the density
contrast between the mudcake, pmc, and the formation
density-i.e.,
Apcxh,,(pb -pmc). . . . . . . . . (51)
Beyond some thickness (- 1 in.), the compensation
scheme will break down and the ph value will be in
doubt. However, this point cannot be identified simply
by use of a cutoff value of Ap. A very small gap of water
(p,, = 1) in front of a low-porosity formation would yield
a large value of Ap and yet be perfectly compensated for,
whereas a 1-in.-thick mudcake of medium density in front
of a high-porosity zone may yield a small Ap with some
residual error in the compensation. Nonetheless, it is cer-
tain that the Ap curve will be used as quality control on
the bulk density with some fixed cutoff value despite this
caution.
Neutron Porosity Devices. Modem neutron porosity
devices are of two types, depending on the energy range
of detection: thermal or epithermal. By convention. the
log output usually is scaled in equivalent limestone porosi-
ty units. Under appropriate circumstances, this would cor-
respond to the true porosity of a clean, water-filled
limestone formation. In the following discussion it is
assumed that the log reading already has been corrected
for the various environmental effects. In addition to the
environmental corrections that must be made before the
porosity values are interpreted, there are three effects that
must be considered in more detail.
Matrix Efsect. As in density logging, it is necessary
to know the rock matrix to make any practical use of the
app:lent limestone porosity value measured. Fig. 50.36
shows, for a thermal and an epithermal device, the matrix
correction necessary to transform the measured units into
the appropriate porosity units. It should be noted that these
NUCLEAR LOGGING TECHNIQUES 50-29
- SNP
- - CNL.
30
-%NPmr
Neutron Porosi ty I ndex I Li mestone~. p. u
- - r&l CNLl cor Neutron Porosi ty I ndex ( Li mestonel . p. u
Fig. 50.36-Matrix correction chart for two specific neutron
porosity tools.
two charts are for two very specific tools (CNL* and
SNP*). When such tools are involved, the appropriate
chart for the corresponding tool should be used, since
some of the so-called matrix effect is tool-design depend-
ent. However, a large part of the matrix effect can be un-
derstood in terms of the two basic parameters used to
describe the bulk parameters of the formation (i.e., the
slowing-down length and the migration length).
First consider the case of epithermal detection. To dem-
onstrate the construction of the matrix-effect correction
curves, there are four steps to consider.
1. The first step is the link between the measurement
(for this case we take the simple case of using the ratio
of near- to far-detector counting rate) and porosity in the
primary laboratory calibration standards. This is a
freshwater-filled limestone with g-in. borehole. Fig. 50.37
shows the behavior of the ratio, F=NN,, lNNe as a func-
tion of limestone porosity, +rS. From this plot a fit can
be established to ascribe a functiqnal relationship between
the measured parameter F and the limestone porosity @jS,
F=J@,,). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . (52)
2. In the second step, the relationship between the meas-
ured parameter F and the slowing-down length, L, , must
be established for measurement in all three of the prin-
cipal matrices. That this can be done easily is shown in
Fig. 50.38, where measurements in quartz, dolomite, and
limestone are shown for a range of porosities. From this
plot a new fit can be found,
F=f(L,), . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . (53)
Mark of Schl umberger
0
0 10 20 30 40
Porosity, p.u.
Fig. 50.37-Experimental values for the ratio of epithermal
counting rates as a function of porosity in limestone
calibration formations.
that allows the prediction of the measured ratio from the
known slowing-down length of the formation.
3. The next step is to establish the connection between
the slowing-down length, L, , and porosity for limestone
as shown in Fig. SO.39 and seen earlier in Fig. 50.11.
This curve now represents the limestone transform of
Eq. 52 and the porosity axis represents true porosity.
4. The slowing-down lengths of sandstone and dolo-
mite now are calculated as a function of porosity and are
shown also in Fig. 50.39. They fall on either side of the
limestone response because of their different chemical
compositions, which influence their slowing-down
lengths.
Fig. 50.38-Data of Fig. 50.37 plotted as a function of the equiva-
lent slowing-down length, L, , of the corresponding
formations.
50-30 PETROLEUM ENGINEERING HANDBOOK
25. 0
The apparent limestone porosity for either formation
can be found by selecting a porosity, lo-PU sandstone
for example, and finding the corresponding slowing-down
length (approximately 15.5 cm). The apparent limestone
porosity then is obtained by finding the porosity associated
with the limestone formation of the same 15, value. In this
case it is 8.5 PU. The same case for dolomite indicates
14 PU instead of 10 PU.
A similar procedure can be used for a thermal neutron
porosity device. As shown earlier, it has been found use-
ful to cast the results in terms of the migration length
L m. 9 Because the L, contains some information con-
cerning the macroscopic thermal absorption cross section,
the results are qualitatively similar to the preceding but
differ slightly in magnitude. This can be seen by perform-
ing the preceding exercise on the plots of L, vs. porosity
of Fig. 50.25.
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40
Fig. 50.40 shows the neutron/density crossplot for a
dual-detector thermal device. The matrix effect can be ob-
served by comparing the equiporosity points on the in-
dividual lithology lines with the apparent limestone
porosity scale on the abscissa. These discrepancies are
the same as indicated in the portion of Fig. 50.36 indi-
cated as thermal. Ref. 23 discusses the effect of ab-
sorbers on the thermal tool response.
Gas Effect. Neutron porosity devices have been
calibrated for liquid-filled porosity. However, the replace-
ment of the liquid in the pores by gas will have a con-
siderable impact on the slowing-down length of the
formation and thus on the apparent porosity. In general
terms, partial replacement of the water component of the
mixture by a much lighter gas will increase the neutron
slowing-down length and thus the apparent porosity will
decrease. The actual apparent porosity decrease will be
a function primarily of the true porosity, the water satu-
ration, the gas density, and, to some extent, the litholo-
gy. In a situation such as this, replacement of fluid in the
pores by a less-dense gas will decrease the bulk density
of the formation. These two effects have been exploited
in well logging by making the density and neutron porosity
measurements in a single measurement pass. On the log
presentation these two effects cause the density and neu-
tron traces to separate, which can be recognized easily
as being caused by the presence of gas, if the invasion
is less than 6 in.
To quantify the traditional neutron-density pas separa-
tion indication and to illustrate the possibility ofcstimat-
ing gas saturation from an epithermal neutron
mcasuremcnt and a density mcasurcmcnt. conxidcr Figs.
SO.41 and 50.42. In both these figures the slowing-down
length of a sand formation has been computed between
Lcro and 40 PU at 2-PU increments. These values of
slowing-down length have been plotted as a function ol
the corresponding bulk density of the formation for the
five gas saturations indicated on the figures. In the caxc
of Fig. 50.41. the gas density, P,~% has been taken to bc
O.OOI g/cm. and in Fig. S0.47. the gas dcnslty has been
taken to be about 0.25 g/cm3. which covers the cntirc
range possible under normal rcscrvoir conditions. In cithcr
cam it is clear that. for the presence 01 gas at a fixed
poroGty. the slowing-down length is lqcr than th;lt ah-
sociated with the water-tilled porosity. The mterpretation
of this larger value of L, ih an apparent decrease in
porosity. In the caxc of the total ,:a\ saturation curve of
Porosity, p.u
Fig. 50.39-Estimation of the epithermal matrix effect from
slowing-down length, L,. as a function of porosity
for sandstone and dolomite
Equtvalent Limestone Porosity, %
Fig. 50.40-A neutron/density cross plot for a thermal neutron
porosity device. The lithology of a formatlon can be
identified by plotting points representlng o, (In
limestone porosity units) and pb. Point A may rep-
resent a 22.p.u. limestone or. less likely, a mixture
of sandstone and dolomite.
NUCLEAR LOGGING TECHNIQUES
Fig. 50.41-A plot of slowing-down length, L,, vs. bulk densi-
ty, pb, for sandstone formations with varying gas
saturation. Invasion of borehole fluid is assumed to
be negligible and the gas density is taken to be 0.001
glcm3.
Fig. 50.41, L, values greater than - 28 cm would cor-
respond to zero or negative apparent porosities on the log
readings.
On the plots of L, vs. ph. a pair of points (L,, , p,,) will
yield the saturation and porosity corresponding to the con-
ditions of gas density specified. For both figures the as-
sumption for the calculation is that the matrix is sandstone
with no shale. The gas density difference for the two plots
spans the range of expected gas densities. The saturation
referred to on the figures is with reference to a gas/water
mixture. For the lowest curve on both figures, the porosity
is entirely filled with water.
Since the slowing-down length normally is not presented
on a neutron porosity log, an example taken from the log
of Fig. 50.43 can serve as a guide. From the gas zone
clearly indicated on this figure we can use the following
values for the illustration: @N, neutron porosity (sand)=
27 PU and $0, density porosity (sand)=35 PU.
The lowermost curves on Figs. 50.41 and SO.42 serve
to determine the correspondence between +N and the
slowing-down length. L, It is indicated by the horizon-
tal line to be about I I cm for this example. The density
porosity of 35 PU can be seen to correspond to a density
of about 2.07 g/cm. as indicated by the vertical lint.
The intersection of these two points at the coordinate
(2.07. I I), shown in the figure, indicates about 25% gas
saturation in the case of a gas density of 0.25 g/cm (Fig.
50.42), and a saturation of about 12.5% if the gas dcnsi-
ty ix taken to be nearly zero. The porosity of the forma-
tion can be found by following the slope of the
equiporosity lines from the example coordinate to the low-
er liquid-saturated line and is seen to indicate a value of
about 33 PU for both casts.
With more information concerning the gas properties
of a reservoir, this interpretation can be used instead to
yield an indication of the invasion of the drilling fluid into
the zone of investigation of the neutron and density
devices.
Shale Effect. Generally. the presence of shale tends to
increase the neutron porosity values. The reason for this
lies in two effects: additional hydrogen resulting from the
Fig. 50.42-Effect of gas saturation in sandstone for a gas den-
sity of 0.25 g/cm 3.
+D
0.65
@N
0.05
600
670
700
Fig. 50.43-Log example of the neutron/density combination ex-
hibiting the characteristic crossover behavior In a
gas zone.
50-32
PETROLEUM ENGINEERING HANDBOOK
Fig. 50.44-Comparison of (1/L,)3 for sandstone, kaolinite, and
illite as a function of porosity. The apparent porosi-
ty of pure illite is seen to be about 53 p.u. and for
illite, 12 p.u.
Flg. 50.45-Variation of (l/L,)3 vs. porosity for sand and
sandlkaolinite mixtures. A line at 30 p.u. indicates
the effect of changing the matrix from sand to
kaolinite, and another indicates the change in
(l/L,)3 expected when the 30 p.u. is filled progres-
sively with kaolinite.
I 1
0 LM+6w
q so+sw
A WL+sW
l LM+Fw+B
I 6 I
0 10 20 30
Ax, cu
hydroxyls in the clay minerals, and in the case of ther-
mal porosity devices, the possibility of additional ther-
mal neutron absorbers such as boron associated with the
clay minerals.
Initially, consider the case of thermal absorbers and con-
sider just two types of clay minerals, kaolinite and illite.
For these two clays (and many others) we refer to the data
compiled by Edmundson et al. 9 The chemical formula
for kaolinite is A14Si40 tc(OH)s and the formula for il-
lite is K2Si6A1sFe302e(OH)4.
The important point to note about these formulations
is the differing amount of (OH). A rough calculation in-
dicates that kaolinite has about one-third the hydrogen den-
sity of water and that illite, with a lesser amount of
hydroxyls, has about one-tenth the hydrogen density of
water. In the case of either of these pure clay miner-
als, a neutron porosity device will detect some large value
of porosity, since the slowing-down length will be influ-
enced greatly by the presence of the (OH) components.
That the slowing-down length is considerably affected
can be seen in Fig. 50.44, which shows the value of L,
of sand, illite, and kaolinite from 0 to 100 PU. The or-
dinate in this figure is (1/L,)3, which has been chosen
because it tends to vary linearly with the combination of
two materials of differing values of L c. Values for the
two pure clay minerals are indicated at 0 PU. From the
figure, the apparent porosity would be about 53 PU for
pure kaolinite and about 12 PU for illite. This is consis-
tent with the trend expected from the hydrogen density.
For the slowing-down length, the choice of the replace-
ment of three Fe atoms for three Al atoms is immaterial,
but it will have an impact on the thermal neutron absorp-
tion because of capture by the iron.
By using a plot similar to Fig. 50.44, the expected
response of an epithermal neutron porosity device to a
mixture of kaolinite and sand can be predicted. Fig. 50.45
shows an example of this. In the case of a true 30 PU
(that is, 30% of the volume is water-filled), the mixed-
matrix line indicates the change of L, with a change in
the sand/kaolinite matrix. Following the indicated line,
a matrix of 70% sand and 30% kaolinite would have an
apparent porosity of about 41% compared to the actual
value of 30 % .
On the other hand, we can take the case of 30 PU, or
more precisely the case of 70 ~01% being sand, and ask
what happens to the value of L, as the porosity is filled
with kaolinite. This process also is indicated by the
porosity-infilling line in Fig. 50.45. It is clear that the
endpoint of this line must lie on the line of the 30/70
kaolinite mixture. As indicated in this case, the minimum
apparent porosity as deduced from the slowing-down
length will be about 12 PU where, in fact, there will be
no porosity available for fluids.
The impact on thermal neutron porosity devices is
somewhat more difficult to predict and will depend in de-
tail on the tool design and consequent response. A simi-
lar type of graphical construction using the migration
length instead of the slowing-down length can be used to
see that for the normal neutron absorbers, such as iron,
in the clay minerals there is not a large effect. However,
if boron is present in any substantial quantity, this will
not be the case. To deal with this problem Arnold et al. 24
have determined experimentally a correction for the ap-
parent porosity of a dual-detector thermal neutron porosity
Fig. 50.46-Correction for a thermal neutron porosity tool as a
function of the formation, C.4
NUCLEAR LOGGING TECHNIQUES
device as a function of the macroscopic absorption cross
section KL of the formation. It is shown in Fig. 50.46.
Despite the foregoing discussion. it must be recognized
that neutron porosity devices do. in fact, respond to
porosity. among other things. The dynamic range of the
measurement at low porosity is excellent because of the
sensitivity of the slowing-down length in this range. The
problems of interpretation caused by the influence of shale
are tractable when the neutron measurements arc com-
bined with other tools.
Lithology Determination
Neutron/Density Combination. One of the traditional
methods of lithology interpretation is the neutron/densi-
ty combination. The useful property of combining these
two measurements can be seen in Fig. 50.40: the three
principal lithologies form three different response lines.
The grain density. P,,~~,. increases in an almost linear
fashion from sand to dolomite. so that it is tempting to
draw lines of equal grain density for intermediate points
that do not lie on any of the three lines. This type of
presentation is shown in Fig. 50.47. With this approach,
the particular lithology mixture is not of great importance
but a fair estimation of the appropriate grain density is
obtained despite the fact that p,,],, is not a characterizing
parameter for neutron logs.
The combination of the neutron and density measure-
ments in this fashion can solve only simple binary miner-
al combinations. To interpret the results unambiguously,
the two minerals must be known. For example, one can
imagine a result. marked as Point A on Fig. 50.40, aris-
ing from a formation consisting of a sand and dolomite
mixture. In this case, with no additional knowledge. the
interpretation of the indicated point, intermediate between
dolomite and sandstone. would be limestone.
Photoelectric Factor. Discrepancies such as these can be
resolved by the use of additional information. In particu-
lar. one such nuclear measurement is the photoelectric
factor. F,,, It is convenient for purposes of interpreta-
tion to use the quantity U (Eq. 36). It has the property
of combining volumetrically for the case of several sub-
stances being present in the scattering region whose in-
dividual absorption characteristics can be computed. For
a two-component system (fluid and matrix) of porosity
C#J this can be written as
u=ufc#l+u,,,,,(1 -f$). (54)
F,,,. for this mixture then can be determined from Eq. 36,
where
P~=(Pc)l.~+(Pr),,,n(l -4). .(55)
The results of this type of computation are shown in the
crossplot of Fig. 50.48, which shows how F,,,. varies as
a function of density for the three principal matrices: lime-
stone. dolomite, and sandstone. The interesting thing
about this presentation is the order in which the three lines
fall; dolomite now is bracketed by limestone and sand-
stone. It is obvious that in the hypothetical case of the
sandy dolomite. given previously. the ambiguity about the
presence of limestone would be removed when inspect-
ing the corresponding value of F,,,, In this case it would
clearly indicate a sand/dolomite mixture.
Neutron Porosi ty I ndex. 4, . , , . P. U.
Fig. 50.47-Extracting apparent grain density, prna, from the
neutron/density cross plot.
One elementary use of the Fpr curve in conjunction
with density is to make a simple two-mineral model. This
is no more than formalization of the relationships seen
in the preceding figure. This is done by solving the fol-
lowing set of equations for U and p, and using the fact
that the volumes sum to unity:
u,,,,=iJ,v, +U2V2+iJf$,
plog=p,V, +prV2+pf.$. (56)
and
I=V, + v2 ++.
Bul k Omsi ty, pb, g/ cc
Fig. 50.46-A cross plot of the photoelectric factor vs. density.
Lines for the three principa! matrices are indicated.
The points represent the sampled log data.
50-34
PETROLEUM ENGINEERING HANDBOOK
Iron Content
D-l% by Weight) -10% 1 F
pe-3
1600
XMeasuredl
Fig. 50.49-A log example showing the conversion of the excess
F,, in a shaly sand to the weight fraction of iron.
In Track 1, the estimate from Fpe (Eq. 61) is com-
pared to values obtained by core analysis.
The indicated parameters for the two suspected minerals
can be inserted in this equation to solve for the appropri-
ate porosity and lithology mix.
However, there is no reason to limit this type ofanaly-
sis to two minerals. It can be expanded to many more with
the addition of supplementary measurements such as Th,
U. K. Al. Fe, and Si. The natural combination with the
gamma ray spectral information has been shown useful
for complex mineralogy in which two different three-
mineral combinations can be treated. 2s
Another interesting use of F,, can be to get an esti-
mation of shale in sand. The F,,(> values measured in
shales are related primarily to their iron content. For an
example of this application, refer to Fig. 50.48. The data
points shown on the crossplot are from some sand and
shale sequences. The clean-sand points are evident by their
placement with respect to the indicated sand line. The
shale points are those scattered to higher values of F,, .
In this case the lithology measurement is responding to
the photoelectric absorption resulting from the iron as-
sociated with the shale. In this particular case the shale
is known to be a mixture of kaolinite and illite and the
iron is associated with the illite.
To demonstrate the quantitative nature of the F,,,, mcas-
urement, consider the following argument for the deter-
mination of the weight percent of a trace photoelectric
absorber in an otherwise two-component system. If F,,,,.,
represents the photoelectric factor of the trace absorber
and the associated volume fraction is V, (which is con-
sidered to be much smaller than unity), the following ap-
proximate equation applies:
(1~~,~+CI,,,(,(l~~)+II,V,, . . . . . . . . (57)
where V., < < 1 and
U,=p,,F,,<~,. _. _. .(58)
Note that the third term in this equation represents the
product of the trace element absorption factor and its as-
sociated mass contained in I cm3:
U,V., =F,,<.\.p.,V\. _. _. _. .(59)
Thus. the weight per cubic centimeter of the absorber can
be determined from the measured parameter (i.e.. from
the product of the measured p and F,,,,) Cl from the fol-
lowing:
p, v\ =
~-~,~-~,,,,A~-~)
F
,w,
(63)
The fraction by weight of the solid fraction. f\, , is then
given by
An interesting application of this idea is shown for the
log data of Fig. 50.48. The measured F,,,, curve is shown
in Track 2 of Fig. 50.49 along with the curve of the an-
ticipated F,, based on pure sandstone. The shading rep-
resents the excess photoelectric factor, which can be
converted to percent weight of iron by use of the above
argument. The resulting curve of the iron concentration
is found in Track 1 of Fig. 50.49, along with a series of
discrete measurements of the iron concentration made on
the core samples. The good argument demonstrates the
validity of the supposition that, in this case, the F,,(, meas-
urement is responding primarily to the iron concentration
in the shale and the volume of shale present. A similar
procedure could be followed for any other suspected trace
element of sufficient concentration and photoelectric ab-
sorption factor.
Induced-Gamma-Ray Spectroscopy. The induced gam-
ma spectroscopy tools are very important for lithology
determination in complex situations. In the case of induced
capture gamma rays a large number of elements can be
identified: hydrogen, silicon. calcium. iron, sulfur, and
chlorine. Lithology identification can be made by com-
paring the yields of particular elements. For example, an-
hydrite is identified easily by the strong gamma ray yield
from sulfur and calcium associated with this mineral.
NUCLEAR LOGGING TECHNIQUES
TABLE 50.5-ATOMIC DENSITIES IN UNITS OF
AVOGADROS NUMBER (6.023 x 10z3)
Limestone
Dolomite
Quartz
Anhydrite
Oil
Water
Density Oxygen Carbon
(g/cm 7
(atoms/cm3) (atoms/cm 3,
2.71 0.081 0.027
2.87 0.094 0.031
2.65 0.088
-
2 96 0.087
-
0.85
-
0.061
1.0 0.056
-
Limestone can be distinguished from sandstone by com-
paring the silicon and calcium yields. Numerous
references. show examples of these types of proce-
dures as well as interpretation schemes proposed by some
service companies.
High-resolution spectroscopic devices will provide
enormous advances in mineralogical identification. Such
devices use solid-state gamma ray detectors instead of the
conventional Nat detectors, which suffer from poor reso-
lution. One of the most promising applications of such
devices is the possibility of making aluminum activation
measurements. Because aluminum is a common consti-
tuent of clay minerals. it is well adapted to quantitative
clay content determination. As an example of the type of
information that is obtainable from a high-resolution gam-
ma ray spectroscopy device. refer to Fig. 50.50. which
shows the gamma ray spectrum obtained after irradiation
of the formation with a zsCf source. Along with the
gamma rays from the naturally occurring thorium, ura-
nium. and potassium, the artificially produced radiation
from manganese, sodium, aluminum, and vanadium is
seen.
The gamma ray intensities from the aluminum and
vanadium isotopes can be used to produce a log calibrat-
ed in weight percent of the two elements. In the case of
the aluminum, the measurement is a continuous one made
at about 400 ftihr and is shown in Fig. 50.5 I along with
core measurements from the same well. To detect the
vanadium, since it is present in rather small amounts, sta-
tionary readings were taken. These values are indicated
along with error bars representing the uncertainty of the
measurement caused by counting statistics. These two
traces illustrate the type of detailed evaluations that can
be made by logging devices, which previously could be
made only with extensive core analysis.
Saturation Determination
Inelastic Gamma Ray Spectroscopy. Two nuclear tools
are well adapted for the determination of saturation. The
first is based on the determination of the ratio of carbon
to oxygen atoms in the formation. The use of such a ratio
is shown clearly in Table 50.5. where it is seen that thcrc
is a significant difference between the atomic C/O ratios
of oil, water, and the common matrix minerals.
Fig. 50.52 shows how the atomic C/O ratio changes
as a function of porosity and water saturation for the three
principal matrices. From this figure it is clear that for
clean formations of a given lithology the interpretation
is relatively straightforward. An inherent difficulty in the
measurement is immediately obvious. At low porosities
the dynamic range of the C/O ratio as a function of water
Fig. 50.50-Gamma ray spectrum obtained with a high resolu-
tion Ge gamma ray spectrometer and Cf neutron
source.
Vanadium Aluminium
0
(w-d
200 0
(W
.
FEzik--
Fig. 50.51 -Aluminum and vanadium logs of an oil-bearing shaly
sand derived from a high-resolution gamma ray
spectrometer. The solid bars represent the results
of core analysis. The dashed bars indicate the log
value of vanadium and its statistical uncertainty.
S-36
0.7
0.6
0 0.5
Z
2
g 0.4
z
G
0.3
0.2
0.1
0
/* ,./-
,.aO/*
*-I .
cc
I 1 I 1
10 20 30 40
Porosity, 4, %
Fig. 50.52-Variation of C/O as a function of porosity and water
saturation.
saturation shrinks to zero. Examples of interpretation of
this ratio in more complex situations can be found in the
references. 28Zu
Pulsed Neutron Logging. The second type of nuclear
device used for the determination of water saturation. par-
ticularly in cased wells, is the pulsed neutron device. This
log responds primarily to the time taken for the thermal
neutrons to be absorbed by the formation. The most com-
mon important thermal neutron absorber is chlorine.
which is present in most formation waters. Hence, the
response of the pulsed neutron tool resembles the usual
opcnhole resistivity measurements.
The advantage. however, of the pulsed neutron tech-
nique is the ability to log in cased hole. It can distinguish
between oil and salt water contained in the pores. If the
porosity is known, gas/oil interfaces can be distinguished.
Under ideal conditions of salinity. porosity, and litholo-
gy. the water saturation, S,,.. can be computed.
In the simplest case of a single mineral, the measured
value of C 1,j(, can be thought of as consisting of two com-
ponents. on; from the matrix and the other from the for-
mation fluid:
&,jg =(I -r$)z:,,,,, +4C,. (62)
PETROLEUM ENGINEERING HANDBOOK
Porosity, +
Fig. 50.53--Solution of S, with Z.
In terms of water saturation, the fluid component is broken
into water and hydrocarbon components:
c
I<,~ =(I -$P,,,,, +G,,.C,,. +$(I -S,,.)C,,. (63)
The graphical solution of this equation for S,, is shown
in Fig. 50.53. To use this approach the I alues of C,, and
El, must be known.
The presence of shale, which may contain thermal ab-
sorbers such as boron, will seriously disturb this simple
interpretation scheme. but a number of references in-
dicate methods for dealing with the problem. For satura-
tion determination, the results of a single measurement
run are questionable if the water sahnlty is less than
50,000 ppm and if the porosity is below 15 o/c. particular-
ly in shaly zones.
Perhaps the greatest successful application of this type
of device is in the time-lapse technique. In this procedure
the change in saturation between two runs in a producing
reservoir can be determined simply from the diffcrcnce
ofthe two measured C values, the porosity. and the differ-
ence in C,, and C,,--i.e.,
s,,., -S,,.z =
c, -cz
. ..,,..............
(64)
4G I, -c/E)
Uncertainties in the quantity (such as C,,,,, . 2:,,, and clay
volume) disappear in this differential measurement
technique.
Future Interpretation Models
New interpretation models will evolve from a more fun-
damental approach to the interpretation of complex lithol-
ogies in which relationships are formed between the
geochemistry of the formation, as determined from core
analysis, and log measurements.
NUCLEAR LOGGING TECHNIQUES 50-37
The premise of this approach is that the total geo-
chemical signature of a formation may yield valuable in-
formation on the minerals present, including clays, the
grain size, and other indications of the environment of
deposition and diagenetic alteration. This information may
be related to the types and abundances of clay minerals
present, to the electrical properties of the clays and,
perhaps, even to the location of the clays. It seems
reasonable, for example, that chemical data can not only
distinguish kaolinite from illite, but also that the chemi-
cal properties of a detrital kaolinite will differ from those
of a kaolinite grown slowly in pore spaces.
One of the primary tools for the penetration into this
area of interpretation is the high-resolution spectroscop-
ic tool, which was described previously. It will enable
us to obtain a precise mineral identification at each loca-
tion of interest. However, other devices, such as the in-
duced gamma ray spectroscopy tool. the gamma-gamma
density device with a direct measurement of lithology , and
the combination thermal and epithermal neutron device,
are being examined for their responses to particular min-
erals of interest, for incorporation into this interpretation
scheme.
F,, =
F
prx =
h=
h,,. =
K=
K, =
L=
Ld =
L, =
L.7 =
m=
M=
In addition to the possibility of obtaining grain-size es-
timates from this approach and thus an additional input
to permeability transforms, one result will be the real pos-
sibility of the detection, quantification, and classification
of the clay minerals from log measurements. One of
the primary benefits of such an interpretation output will
be a reservoir damage risk assessment. This will be based
on the knowledge that has been acquired through unfor-
tunate experience concerning potential damage to a reser-
voir that can occur when the clay mineral content is not
considered in production planning. For example, acidi-
zation of a formation containing chlorite, an iron-rich clay
mineral, can produce an iron oxide gel that fills pores,
ruining a potentially valuable formation. Another exam-
ple is that diagenetic pore-lining kaolinite particles will
remain in place at low production rates. At higher rates,
however. the particles may break loose, lodge in pore
throats, and damage production.
Although geochemical interpretation is in its infancy,
initial experience with clay type and grain-size prediction
from core analysis data and log data has been very en-
couraging. Refinement of this type of interpretation mode1
may lead to a new cycle of future tool development. One
can imagine measuring specific geochemical parameters
with an entire range of new tools rather than inferring
them from perturbations on measurements designed for
other purposes.
n=
n=
NA =
Ni =
NN =
Nrvf =
NN~ =
Np =
N, =
P=
pi =
4=
r=
s, =
t=
t
% =
U=
Uf =
u =
cl; =
v=
V.rh =
v.x =
x=
I=
z=
Cd=
Ylog =
Nomenclature
A = atomic mass
D = thermal diffusion coefficient
E = energy
EGR = gamma ray energy
E; = initial energy
Ek = kinetic energy
EN = neutron energy
E, = energy before scattering
E, = energy of mono-energetic gamma rays
Jr = fraction by weight of solid fraction
Ymax -
Ymin =
6h =
h=
Y=
t=
Ph =
PP =
Pf =
P# =
Plog =
P/F =
Pmcr =
Pm =
lJ=
F = measured parameter
photoelectric absorption factor
photoelectric factor of trace absorber
thickness
mudcake thickness
conversion constant between 7d and Cabs
mass absorption coefficient
distance from the source
diffusion length
migration length
slowing-down length
mass
molecular weight
number of scatterers per unit volume
average number of collisions
Avogadros number
initial number of particles
number of neutrons
neutron counting rate at far detector
neutron counting rate at near detector
number of particles
counts from a radiation detector
probability
probability of having x nuclei decay in
time dr
probability of nonoccurrence
path length (radius) to the detector
water saturation
time
half-life
product of Fpe and electron density
fluid parameter
matrix parameter
trace element parameter
velocity
volume of shale
associated volume fraction
number of decays
particles observed
atomic number
emitter
gamma ray reading in API units at any
point in the well
maximum gamma ray reading
minimum gamma ray reading
thickness of slab material
decay constant
average value of Poisson distribution
average logarithmic energy decrement
bulk density
electron density index
fluid density
gas density
log density
apparent long-spacing denGty
solid matrix density
mudcake density
microscopic cross section or standard
deviation
UC0
= Compton cross section
50-38
PETROLEUM ENGINEERING HANDBOOK
OP =
C=
12.
cross section for the photoelectric effect
macroscopic thermal absorption cross
section
thermal absorption cross section
macroscopic Compton cross section
formation fluid cross section
hydrocarbon cross section
macroscopic cross section
observed formation cross section
matrix cross section
total cross section
water cross section
decay time
porosity
density porosity
limestone porosity
neutron porosity
radiation flux
intensity of radiation
flux of epithermal neutrons
I3
I4
15.
16
I7
18
7he Roir of Trace Metals in Petroleum. T.F. Yen (ed.). Ann Ar-
bor Science Publishers Inc.. Ann Arbor (1975).
Well Logging and Interprefatiorr Techniques. Dresser Atlas, Houston
(1982).
Log Interpretation-Vol. 1, Principles, Schlumberger, Ridgefield.
CN (1974).
Desbrandes, R.: Theorie et Inrerpretarion des Diqraphies, Edi-
tlons Technip, Paris (1968).
Serra, 0.: Diagraphies Differ&-Bases de Ilnterpretation,
Bull., Cent. Rech. Explor:Prod Elf-Aquitainc. Editions Technip.
Paris (1979).
Hilchie, D.W.: Applied Openhole rLq Interpret&on, Douglas W.
Hilchie Inc., Golden, CO (1978).
Hassan, M.. Hossin. A., and Combaz. A.: Fundamentals of the
Differential Gamma Ray Log-Interpretation Technique. Trans..
SPWLA (1976) paper H. -
I9
20
21
22
23
F&l, W.H.: Gamma Ray Spectral Data Assists in Complex For-
mation Evaluation, The Log Amdyst (Sept.-Oct. 1979) 20. No.
5. 3-38.
Serra, 0.. Baldwin, J.. and Qutrem. J.A., Theory. Jnterpretatton
and Practical Applications of Natural Gamma Ray Spectroscopy.
Truns.. SPWLA (July 1980) paper Q.
Granberry, R.J., Jenkins, R.E., and Bush, D.C.: Gram Density
Values of Cores from some Gulf Coast Formattons and their Im-
portance in Formation Evaluation, paper presented at the 1968
SPWLA Annual Logging Symposium, New Orleans. June 23-26.
Ellis. D.V. rt t/l.: Litho-Density Tool Calibration, Bx P<,(. 01,~.
J. (Aug. 19X5) 515-23.
Ellis, D.V. and Case, C.R.: CNT-A Dolomite Response. paper
S presented at the 1983 SPWLA Annual Logging Sympostum, Cal-
gary, June 27-30.
Arnold, D.M. and Smith, H.D. Jr.: Experimental Determination
of Envmxrmental Corrections for a Dual-Spaced Neutron Porost-
ty Log, paper W presented at the 1981 SPWLA Annual Logging
Symposium. Mexico City, June 23-26.
Quirein, J.A.. Gardner, J.S., and Watson. J.T.: Combined Natural
Gamma Ray SpectraliLitho-Density Measurements Applied to Com-
plex Lnhologies, paper SPE 1 I143 presented at the 1982 SPE
Annual Technical Conference and Exhibition, New Orleans, Sept.
26-29.
References
4
5
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
II
Evans, R.D.: 771~ Aiomic Nuclrus. McGraw-Hill Book Co., New
York City (1967) 426-38.
Weidner. R.T. and Sells, R.L.: Hmwntar~ Modern Phwics, Allyn
and Bacon, Boston (1960) 372-78.
Bertozzi, W., Elbs, D.V., and Wahl, J.S.: The Physrcal Foun
dation of Formation Lithology Loggmg with Gamma Rays. Geo-
phwics (Oct. 1981) 46, No. 10.
Kreft, A.: Calculation of the Neutron Slowmg Down Length in
Rocks and Soils, Nukleonrka (1974) XIX.
Segesman, F.F.: Well-loggmg Method, Geophwjc~ (Nov. 1980)
45, No. 11.
Belknap, W.B. era/.: API Cahbration Factlity for Nuclear Logs.
Drill. and Prod. Prac.. API. Dallas (1959).
Ellis. D.V.: Correctton of NGT Logs for the Presence ot KCI
and Barite Muds, paper presented at the 1982 SPWLA Annual
Logging Symposium, Corpus Chrtsti, July 6-8.
Allen, L.S. et&.: Dual-Spaced Neutron Logging for Porosity.
Geop,phwics (Feb. 1967) 32, No. 1.
Edmundson, H. and Raymer. L.L.: Radioactive Loggmg
Parameters for Common Minerals, paper presented at the 1979
SPWLA Annual Logging Sympostum, Tulsa, June 3-6.
Culver, R.B.. Hopkinson. E.C.. and Youmans. A.H.: Car-
bon/Oxygen (C/O) Logging Instrumentation. Sot. I?(. ,!?a~. J
(Oct. 1974) 463-70
Hertrog. R.C. and Plaseh. R E.: Neutron-Excited Gamma-Ray
Spcctrometry for Well Logging. IEEE Tmm. NW. S-u (Feb.
lY79) NS-26. No. I.
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
Flaum, C. and Pirie, G.: Determination of Lithology from In-
duced Gamma Ray Spectroscopy, paper H presented at the 1981
SPWLA Annual Loggmg Symposntm, Mexico City, June 23-26.
Gilchrist, W.A. Jr. et rrl., Applicatton of Gamma Ray Spectroscopy
to Formation Evaluation. paper presented at the 19X2 SPWLA
Annual Loggin: Symposium, Corpus Chrtsti, July 5-9.
Westaway. P.. Hertzog, R.C., and Plasek, R.E.: The Gamma
Spectrometer Tool Inelastic and Capture GaInma-Ray Spectroscopy
for Rescrvo~r Analysis, Sot Per. .h,g. J. (June 1983) 553-64.
Oliver, D.W., Frost, E., and Fettl, W.H.: Contmuous Car-
bon/Oxygen Logging-Instrumentation. Interpretive Concept\ and
Field Applications, paper TT presented at the I981 SPWLA An-
nual Logging Symposium, Mexico Cny. June 23-26.
Pulsed Neutron Lqging. W.A. Hoyer (ed.), SPWLA Reprint
Volume (1979).
Herron, M.M.: Mineralogy from Geochemical Well Logging.
paper presented at the 1984 Annual Meeting of the Clay Mmerals
Society, Baton Rouge. Oct. l-4.
Chapter 51
Acoustic Logging
A. (Turk) Timur. chc\,roa COT.
Introduction
Acoustic wave propagation methods have become an in-
tegral part of formation evaluation since the first
downhole measurement of velocities was conducted in
1927. These early measurements were conducted to ob-
tain time/depth curves to use in interpreting seismic
data. In the 1930s, proposals were made to conduct
velocity measurements in a fashion similar to electric
logging, by using an acoustic transmitter and one or
more receivers. First successful implementation of this
technology was in the late 1940s and early 1950~.~-
Commercial acoustic velocity logs were first introduced
in 1954 by Seismograph Service Corp. in the U.S. and
by United Geophysical in Canada.
Since then, technology involving borehole measure-
ments of acoustic wave propagation properties has
developed significantly and has become established as a
major formation evaluation method. These acoustic
wave propagation methods used in well logging can be
broadly classified into two groups: transmission and
reflection. Properties measured in each method and their
applications in formation evaluation are listed in Table
51.1
Compressional wave velocities measured by acoustic
logging were found to be related to porosity so closely
that the acoustic log became a standard porosity tool.
which it still is in many areas. The second most common
use of borehole acoustic measurements is in evaluating
cement jobs by measurements inside casing.
This chapter describes the use of acoustic wave propa-
gation properties in formation evaluation after a brief
description of elasticity. acoustic wave propagation
properties in rocks, and methods of recording these in
the borehole.
Elasticity
Introduction
The theory of elasticity investigates relationships be-
tween external forces applied to a body and resulting
changes in its size and shape. In this theory, it is as-
sumed that displacements are small and the body returns
to its original condition after the forces are removed. Ap-
plied forces and the resulting deformations are described
by stresses and strains.
Stress is the force, F, per unit area. A, applied; strain,
t, is deformation per unit length, t. or volume, V, as il-
lustrated in Fig. 5 1.1.
Within the elastic limit, as shown in Fig. 51.2.
stresses are found to be proportional to strains (Hookes
law). The ratio of stress to strain is a different constant
for different loading conditions. These proportionality
constants are defined as elastic moduli. which are fun
damental properties of a material.
Youngs Modulus, E. This is the ratio of tensile or com-
pressive stress (FL/A) to the resultant strain (tL, =ALlL):
FLiA
E=-
ALIL
Shear (or Torsion) Modulus, G. The ratio of shearing
stress (F,IA) to the shearing strain E,, =(AL/L) is
F,7 IA
G=-.
6 s
Bulk Modulus, K. Bulk modulus describes the change
of V under hydrostatic pressure, p:
K=P
AVIV
where K is also the reciprocal of compressibility, c.
51-2 PETROLEUM ENGINEERING HANDBOOK
TABLE 51.1-ACOUSTIC WAVE PROPAGATION METHODS
Property Applicatton
Transmission
seismic and geological
interpretation
porosity
Compressional- and shear- lithology
wave velocttles hydrocarbon content
geopressure detection
mechanical properties of
rocks
Compressional- and shear- cement bond quality
wave attenuations location of fractures
rock consolidation
permeability indication
Reflection
location of vugs and
fractures
Transit time and amplitude orientation of fractures and
of reflected waves bed boundaries
channeling and microannulus
casing quality
Poissons Ratio, p, This is a measure of the geometric
change of shape under uniaxial stress. It is expressed as
the ratio of the fractional change in diameter, d,
(transverse strain, eT) to the fractional change in length
(longitudinal strain, EL):
Adld
p=aL,L..
Relationships Among Elastic Parameters. These four
elastic parameters are not independent; any one
parameter can be expressed in terms of two others:
E=2(1 +p)G
Acoustic Waves
Acoustic waves propagate mechanical energy. For in-
stance, if an elastic material is subjected to an instan-
taneous force at one end. it is compressed (Fig. 51.3).
Fig. 51.1-Longitudinal, transverse, and shear deformations.
This disturbance is then transmitted along the material by
a series of compressions and rarefactions. The distur-
bance travels at a constant velocity that is a fundamental
property of the material. The elastic moduli and the den-
sity determine the velocity of propagation for each
material.
Two types of mechanical wave propagation will be
described qualitatively. Detailed discussions of acoustic
wave propagation are given in Refs. 7 through 11.
Compressional Waves. Compressional waves are those
in which the mechanical disturbance is transmitted by a
particle motion parallel to the direction of wave propaga-
tion (Fig. 51.3). They are also called longitudinal,
pressure, primary, or P-waves. Particles of the material
oscillate around this rest position in simple harmonic
motion. As they move from equilibrium, they push or
pull their neighbors, thereby transmitting the disturbance
through the material. The velocity of this compressional
wave motion, lip, is a constant for a given material:
v,=+(K+4/,G), . . . . . .
.(I)
P
where p is the density.
Shear Waves. Shear waves, also called transverse, tor-
sional, or S-waves, are those where particle motion is
perpendicular to the direction of wave propagation (Fig.
51.4).
Particles in the material again move about their rest
position with simple harmonic motion. For this motion
to be transmitted, however, each particle must have a
force of attraction to its neighbor. Whereas compres-
sional waves can be propagated simply by elastic colli-
sion of one molecule with the next, attractive forces must
exist between adjacent molecules to transmit shear
waves. Since these forces are very small in gases and liq-
uids, fluids do not transmit shear waves.
The velocity of shear waves, v,, , is also a constant for
a given material:
G %
v,,=
0
- . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
P
(2)
Yield StrengIh
Breaking Point
Elastic Limit
STRESS
t
Hookes Law Region
STRAIN -
Fig. 51 .P-Stress/strain diagram for an elastic material
ACOUSTIC LOGGING 51-3
a A B A B A
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . ..I.. . . .-. . * . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ..a... . . me.* . . . . . . .
:*....
*::::
:*
r-- . . . . .
*.
. ..I....... . . ..-.. . . ..m. * * . . . . . . . . . . a.
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . s.... . . . ..-. . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . :.::*..*
...:.
..*** .*...*. :..*..::::
.*:::a .*...*.*:::. .,..
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . w...... . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Dlrecllon
. . . . . . . . . . . . _ ..-.. . ..-.. . . . . . . . . . . . . .
01Parllcle
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
lbM,lO
I
. . ..*......:::::f:.............*.......
: :. . . - . . . . .
.*...*a-...-,-
*. . . .
-.*: . . . . . :.:::...:..,.,....:.::::. . . . .
.*a.. .*... . .,.*
,..... *.-- . . . . . . . . * . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
*... Z... .*... * . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .-. . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
.**... .*... :.: :::..
:::::::.....: .*,,.. ..: . . . .
. . . ..I.. *... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . * . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . .... . . ..m.* . . . . . . . . . . . . .
.:...:.a
***...
.:.*,
.,.*.
. . . . ::::::.
*.a *...-
*.-...a..
a.. .-
.-.-.::e:
- *
Dlrecllon cd
L-A-
rJileCtion
-a
PartIck W.Wdegth 0 wave Dlrecllon Of
MOllO Propagalion Ware PmpagafK.n
Fig. 51.3-Compressional wave. Fig. 51.4-Shear wave.
Characteristics of Acoustic Waves
Acoustic waves have many characteristics similar to
light waves. They undergo interference, diffraction,
reflection, and refraction. At a boundary separating
materials of two different velocities, they are mode con-
verted, reflected, and refracted according to Snells law.
For either compressional or shear waves, velocities are
related to frequency, f, by
L= hf,
where X is the wave length.
Motion of either compressional or shear waves in an
extended medium is characterized by an infinite number
of particles, each vibrating in simple harmonic motion.
A simple description of this wave propagation is given
by a plane wave solution of the wave equation:
u=A cos(2+2n~).
distance, s, from the source is
A=A e-ffs
0 1
where A,, is the amplitude at the source.
A schematic diagram of an experimental apparatus is
given in Fig. 51.5 to illustrate the measurement of
acoustic properties. Two piezoelectric elements are at-
tached to the specimen as shown. A pulser provides the
electric pulse to the transmitting piezoelectric element
and also triggers the oscilloscope trace. The transmitter
vibrates according to the change of voltage with time,
generating a mechanical pulse in the specimen. As it
travels through the specimen, the mechanical pulse is at-
tenuated. The receiving piezoelectric element converts
this attenuated pulse into an electric pulse that is
displayed on the oscilloscope screen.
The travel time of the mechanical pulse through the
specimen is read on the horizontal scale of the
oscilloscope, and the velocity is calculated from
where u is the particle motion at a given point, s, away
L
v=-.
from the source and at any given time, t. At any given t
time, t=O, the displacement along the wave varies as
cos(2as/X); hence, the u is equal to signal amplitude A,
By using a set of either P-wave or S-wave transducers,
where s is equal to even multiples of wavelength-i.e.,
both velocities, vp and v,?, can be measured as de-
s=O, X, 2X. Motion of each particle, on the other hand,
scribed. These velocities, assuming an infinite,
is described by a simple harmonic motion given by
isotropic, homogeneous, and elastic medium, are related
to elastic moduli by
u=A cos(27rjl).
4
v,~~=P=K+~G, . . . . . . _. (3)
An additional feature of acoustic waves to be con-
sidered is attenuation. As one moves away from the v,p=G, . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ...(4)
source, the intensity of sound decreases. This decrease
of acoustic waves results from (1) geometric spread of
energy, reflection, refraction. and scattering, and (2) ab-
sorption, whereby mechanical energy is converted into
heat.
The decrease in intensity because of absorption is
given by
,=I e-2cu.\
0
where I,, is the acoustic intensity at the source, I is inten-
sity at a distance, s, from the source, and 01 is the coeffi-
cient of absorption.
The acoustic intensity is proportional to the square of
the amplitude; therefore, the amplitude, A. of a wave at a
Fig. 51.5-Experimental apparatus for measurement of veloci-
ty and attenuation.
51-4
PETROLEUM ENGINEERING HANDBOOK
Acoustic Properties
I Or, in more common units, attenuation is given in
decibels per unit length, defined as
\
Models
/
Fig. 51 .&Factors affecting acoustic properties of rocks.
and
o.s(v,/v,)* - 1
/A= (v,,v,)2 -1
, . . . . . (5)
where P, K, and G are P-wave, bulk, and shear moduli,
respectively, p is Poissons ratio, and p is density.
As mentioned earlier, these same elastic constants can
be obtained directly by measuring lateral and
longitudinal strains as functions of stress. Elastic con-
stants measured in this manner are referred to as static
elastic constants in contrast to dynamic elastic constants
measured through the use of acoustic wave propagation
techniques.
One method for measurement of attenuation requires
specimens of two different lengths from the same
material. Assuming that the voltage amplitude of the
received signal from the specimen of length L t is A I and
from the specimen of length L2 is AZ, and that voltage
amplitudes are proportional to the amplitudes of
mechanical pulses, the two amplitudes can be expressed
as
A, =A,CaLI
and
A
2
=A e-uL2
0
Hence, the coefficient of absorption, nepers/cm, is ob-
tained from
1
cy=-
InA.
L2-L, A2
20
a=-
log A.
L2-L1 A2
Other parameters defining attenuation are the quality
factor, F,, and the logarithmic decrement, 6. Coeffi-
cients of compressional and shear wave attenuation (op,
as) are related to the respective quality factors (Fqp,
F,,y) and the logarithmic decrements (6,,, 8,) by
1 ffv 6
-=-=- . . . . .
F, of a, . . . . . . . . .
. (6)
where v is velocity and f is frequency.
Acoustic Wave Propagation in Rocks
Introduction
Acoustic wave propagation properties of rocks are
known to depend on porosity, rock matrix composition,
stress (overburden and pore fluid pressures), tempera-
ture, fluid composition, and texture (structural
framework of grains and pore spaces), as illustrated in
Fig. 51.6. I2 A unified approach involving measure-
ments of compressional and shear-wave velocities,
analyses of rock composition, and use of theoretical
models to interpret these data was described in Refs. 13
through 16.
Acoustic Properties
Acoustic wave propagation properties were described in
the preceding section for homogeneous, elastic media.
Applications of these relationships to rocks, however,
are complicated by the presence of pores and cracks, and
fluids contained in them. A simplified, theoretical
development is described in the Appendix to illustrate
some of these complications by incorporating rock-
frame, pore-fluid, and rock-grain compressibilities into
the velocity equations.
As indicated earlier, acoustic wave properties in rocks
are functions of numerous independent variables.
Therefore, evaluation of various theories of acoustic
wave propagation requires laboratory experiments con-
ducted on rock samples under controlled pressure,
temperature, and saturation conditions.
Various experimental methods have been developed
for measuring acoustic wave propagation properties of
rock samples. Detailed description of one of the
laboratory systems is given by Timur. It is designed to
conduct sequential measurements of properties of both
the compressional and the shear waves on rock samples
subjected to simulated subsurface conditions. A typical
experimental setup is shown in Fig. 51.7, where a rock
sample is assembled between two transducers in a sam-
ple holder. This assembly is placed in a pressure vessel
and subjected to varying overburden and pore fluid
pressures and temperatures. A minicomputer digitally
records the compressional and shear-wave pulses
transmitted through the rock samples, as well as sample
temperature, overburden and pore fluid pressures, and
sample length changes.
ACOUSTIC LOGGING
Insulated
Thermocouple
Linear Variable
Differential Transformer
2iirifT@
Pore Fluid
P and S Wave
Transmitter
_ Sample
(Jacketed)
_ P and S Wave
Fig. 51.7-A typical sample ( d=8.9 cm, L = 5.1 cm) assembled
for acoustic measurements.
A typical set of compressional and shear-wave veloci-
ty data obtained with this apparatus is shown in Fig.
5 1.8. The rate of change of porosity in this sample with
varying overburden and pore fluid pressures is shown in
Fig. 5 1.9. These data were obtained from concurrcnt
measurements of changes in the sample pore and bulk
volumes during acoustic measurements.
Fig, 5 1.10 illustrates typical compressional and shear
wave attenuation data. obtained from the amplitude
spectra of transmitted pulses.
Porosity
Porosity dependence of v,, in rocks has been intensively
investigated. W This forms the basis for estimating
porosities from in-situ measurements with an acoustic
velocity log.
Results of early laboratory measurement of
compressional-wave velocities determined on water-
saturated sandstones are plotted vs. porosities in Fig.
5 1.1 I. The porosity/velocity relationship is within the
indicated statistics as long as the lithology remains
relatively constant.
Es
v,
Navalo Sandstone

I
Porosity 11.5. Density 2.46
vi
PO/P1 2.30
I
OVERBURDEN PRESSURE, PSI x 101
00.00 4.00 8.00 12.00 16.00 20.00 24.00 26.00 r
1 7
- 0.00 0.16 0.31 0.47 0.62 0.78 0.94 109 z
Fig. 51.8-Pressure dependence of compressional- and shear-
wave velocities in a Navajo sandstone.
Porosity dependence of v,, has also been investigated
to some extent.25m28 A change in shear-wave travel
times (lit),$) per unit change in porosity ($J) is found to be
almost twice the corresponding change in I /II,,
Rock Composition
Rock composition affects the velocities in significant
ways, as illustrated in Fig. 51.12. Laboratory data
plotted in this figure are for cores saturated with brine
and subjected to an overburden pressure of 3,000 psi.
The two principal minerals in the rock were quartz. in
the form of tripolite, and calcite. They were mixed in
relative proportions ranging from approximately 50%
calcite/50% quartz to 80% calcite/20% quartz. The
samples with lower porosity had a continuous calcite
matrix, whereas the samples with a higher porosity had a
continuous quartz matrix.
Effects of rock composition usually are taken into ac-
count by establishing velocity/porosity relationships for
each group of rocks of similar composition through cor-
relations of both the laboratory and the field data. This is
illustrated in Fig. 51.12 by two separate groupings, one
for calcite matrix and the other for quartz.
Rock composition plays a significant role in acoustic
wave propagation properties. A procedure for com-
prehensive analyses needed for this purpose was de-
scribed by Jones et al. I3 First, they conducted a com-
bination of measurements of X-ray diffraction, elemental
analysis, clay analysis, and grain density measurements.
Each of these then was assigned an experimental error,
and linear programming was used to establish the rock
mineral composition, as shown in Table 51.2.
PETROLEUM ENGINEERING HANDBOOK
100
60
Fq
40
20
4
1
0
Berea Sandstone
h r 16
I , I I
2000 4000 6000 8000
DIFFERENTIAL PRESSURE, psi
,L
0 4 8 12 16 20 24 28
OVERBURDEN PRESSURE. PSI x 101
Fig. 51.9-Pressure dependence of porosily of Navajo sand-
stone.
Fig. 51 .I+Pressure dependence of compresslonal and shear
attenuation in a Berea sandstone saturated with
brine.
Stress
Pressure dependence of velocities of compressional and
shear waves also has been the subject of numerous
studies. Velocities of elastic waves traveling in a porous
medium are known to be functions of both the external
(overburden) pressure, pO, and the internal (pore fluid)
pressure, pf. Some of the experimental results indicating
dependence of compressional-wave velocity on confin-
ing pressure are given in Fig. 5 1.13 for various rock
samples including dolomite, limestone, and sandstone
and for a sandpack. 29 In general, velocities increase
with increasing p0 and decrease with increasing pt.
From a theoretical analysis of elastic wave propaga-
tion in sphere packs, Brandt3 predicted velocities to be
functions of (p, -npf), where n is a number between 0
and 1. Experimental data of Hicks and Berry and
Wyliie et al. I9 indicated n to be close to unity, whereas
data obtained by Banthia et al. 32 indicated values of n to
2.5
1
VELOCITY, km/s
3 3.5 4 4.5 5 6
I I T r --- -1
VELOCITY, km/s
3 3.5 4 5 6 7
I I I I--II
ft/sec x lo3
ft/sec x 103
B ;ci II!-- _12 13 15 17 1
10 12 15 20
I 1 I r-1 7
35
30
5
\
Time Average ft/sec (m/s)
Malrix 19500 (5944)
,I Fluid 5000 (1524)
0
0
\p Calcite ft/sec (m/s)
Matrix 22500 (6858)
Brine 5235 (1596)
10
5
0
9
4
Quartz
(Tripolite)
Matrix 19200 (5852)
Brine 5235 (1596)
I
I , I I I \I \
100 90 80 70 60 50 40
P-WAVE TRAVEL TIME, sec/ft x 10m6
, 1 I /
120 110 100 90 80 70 60
RECIPROCAL VELOCITY. sec/ft x 10m6
50
Fig. 51 .l I-Velocttylporosity data determined in laboratory for Fig. 51.12-Comparison of compressional-wave velocities as
water-saturated sandstones compared with time- function of porosity for brine-saturated tripolite
average relation for quartz/water system. samples under confining pressure of 3,000 psi.
ACOUSTIC LOGGING
TABLE 51.2-ROCK COMPOSITION
Sample Navajo sandstone
Petrography medium-porosity, well-sorted quartzite
Grain density 2.60
Grain porosity 19.4
X-ray, wt%
Quartz 93.0
Calcite 1
Dolomite
-
Clay 1.7
Feldspar 0.7
Pyrite
Anhydrite 0.4
NAA and AAS, wt%
Si 42.60
Al 1.20
Ti 0.79
Fe 0.20
MQ
0.02
Ca 0.20
Na 0.00
::
0.16
54.00
Phyllo-silicate 6.00
Computed volume, %
Quartz 68.37
Calcite
-
Dolomite
-
Clay 4.73
Feldspar 0.57
Pyrite
Anhydrite
-
Silica 6.93
Siderite
-
be significantly less than 1. To investigate this
discrepancy, Gardner et al. 33 conducted experiments
taking into account the past pressure history of samples.
They found that p n and pi are equally effective in chang-
ing velocities-i.e., n = 1, provided that the differential
pressure (pd =po -pf) follows a pressure cycle
previously imposed on the sample (Fig. 51.14).
Temperature
The effect of temperature on elastic wave velocities is
considered to be of second order and usually is neglected
in seismic exploration and acoustic log interpretations.
To study this effect, early laboratory experiments4-38
were conducted by measuring velocity as a function of
overburden pressure at constant values of temperature in-
stead of as a function of temperature at constant
pressure. Also, the effects of pore fluid pressure were
not considered. Later, the effects of temperature on the
velocities were investigated through laboratory measure-
ments on rock samples subjected to simulated subsurface
pressure conditions (Fig. 51.15). On the average, the
compressional wave velocities were found to decrease by
1.7% and the shear-wave velocities by 0.9% for 100C
increase in temperature.
Below freezing temperatures, however, the effect of
temperature on elastic wave velocities become much
more significant. An increase of 50% or more in com-
pressional wave velocities is observed upon freezing the
pore fluid in some rock samples.39 Below freezing,
compressional wave velocity in water-saturated rocks
was found to increase with decreasing temperature,
whereas it was nearly independent of temperature in dry
z
G 13
0
i
-Y
Sandstone
11
d = 18
0 2000 4000 6000 8000 10.000
PRESSURE, psi
Fig. 51.13-Compressional-wave velocity vs. confining pres-
sure for brine-saturated carbonates, sandstone
and sand pack.
rocks. The shapes of the velocity vs. temperature curves
were functions of rock composition, pore structure, and
the pore fluids. Some of the velocity vs. porosity data at
subfreezing temperature is illustrated in Fig. 5 1.16. 39-43
Fluid Composition
An understanding of the effects of fluid composition on
elastic wave properties has become much more signifi-
cant with the increasing interest in detection of hydrocar-
bons with seismic measurements. As a result, these ef-
fects have been the subject of many studies, both
theoretical and experimental, in the recent literature. The
Fig. 51.14-Compressional-wave velocity as a function of dif-
ferential pressure.
51-8 PETROLEUM ENGINEERING HANDBOOK
Berea Sandstone
0 0 ,A
h (,po = 1360, pf = 600 bars)
a
Do v
o (PO = 345, pf = 150 bars)
0 a
0 7 = = , 138, 60 tars) 9 c Lp? pf
0 Compressional Wave Velocity
A Shear Wave Velocity
(p. = 1380, pf = 600 bars
c
,i ? fi-~ x -A%
I
3.05
2.30
L--~ .~ I
0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 lE0 200
TEMPERATURE. C
Fig. 51.15-Temperature dependence of compressional- and
shear-wave velocities in brine-saturated Berea
sandstone.
0.40
0.35
E
%
p- 0.30
k
::
ii
0.25
i
8
E
5 0.20
ii
0.15
0.10
Simpson
(Ref. 41)
Umiat
6
7
l Laboratory Measuremenls
/
0
AField Measurements from Alaska g
10 20 30 40 50 60
-10
70 60 90 100
9
10
14 c
G
0
d
'6 >
16
20
22
is:
SE!
32
POROSITY, PERCENT
Fig. 51.16-Compressional-wave velocity of frozen rocks as a
function of porosity.
first important theoretical contribution was made by
Gassmann,44 who described the relationships between
pore fluid, rock skeleton (or frame), and the rock grains
by starting with first principles of the theory of elasticity.
Later, Biot45,46 developed a more comprehensive theory
of elastic wave propagation in a fluid-saturated, isotropic
and microhomogeneous porous solid over a wide fre-
quency range. Biots theory, which reduces to that of
Gassmann at low frequencies, incorporates the effects of
fluid composition through the density and compressibili-
ty of the saturant fluid (see Appendix).
Geertsma4 investigated the applications of Biots
theory to the interpretation of acoustic logs and estimated
expected range of velocity dispersion by comparing
velocities at zero and infinitely high frequencies. Since
the estimated velocity dispersion was found to be
generally less than 3%, the low frequency approximation
of Biots theory and, hence, Gassmanns theory is useful
for most applications. Brown and Korringa further
generalized Gassmanns theory and succeeded in remov-
ing the requirement of macrohomogeneity.
The experimental data of King, 4 shown in Fig. 5 1.17
for brine-, kerosene-, and air-saturated (dry) Boise sand-
stone ($=25 %), illustrated the predicted behavior;
compressional-wave velocity is greater in brine-saturated
rocks than in comparable gas-saturated rocks, with the
reverse true for shear-wave velocity.
On the other hand, experimental data of Gregory 5o in
Fig. 51.18 indicate that for some rocks, shear-wave
velocity behavior upon the change of saturation from gas
to brine is opposite to the predictions of the Biot theory.
This may be due to the presence of isolated microcracks
in these rocks, whereas the BiotiGassmann theories
assume the pore structure to be open and interconnected.
Texture
Texture in this context is the structural framework of the
rock consisting of solid matrix and pore structure. Its im-
portance in elastic wave propagation has been
dramatically illustrated in Fig. 51.19. The data in this
figure are the compressional and shear-wave velocities in
dry and water-saturated Troy granite with a porosity of
0.3 %. 5 Velocities were measured as functions of con-
fining pressure by maintaining pore fluid pressure (pf) at
1 bar. Compressional-wave velocities are higher when
the rock is water-saturated, whereas the shear-wave
velocities are unchanged between the two states. What is
most interesting, however, is that a porosity of only
0.3% is affecting the velocities b 20% or more.
Classical bounding theories5z-5r obviously cannot ac-
count for these large changes in the respective moduli
because of large differences between the properties of
rock matrix and fluid in the pores. This is because they
used the total porosity without considering how it is
distributed.
Scanning electron micrographs (SEMs) shown in Fig.
5 1.20 show pore space in Troy granite to consist mainly
of thin cracks, typical of most granites. 56
The effects of these cracks on elastic wave propagation
properties have been investigated extensively, and many
theoretical models have been developed. 14q5 The
theoretical curves shown in Fig. 51.19 were obtained by
fitting the velocity data with the noninteractive scattering
theory. I4 For these theoretical formulations, the rock is
ACOUSTIC LOGGING
2.9
-r?
E
x
5 2.7
ti
d 2.1
>
1.9
1.7
1.5
1.3
---O Brine
- -A Kerosene
-0 Dry
Boise Sandstone
6 = 25%
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5
DIFFERENTIAL PRESSURE, k bar
Fig. 51.17-Observed and theoretical compressional- and
shear-wave velocities in Boise sandstone as a
function of pressure for three saturation flulds. The
circles, triangles, and squares are laboratory data
from King for brine-, kerosene- and air-saturated
(dry) samples.
assumed to consist of a solid matrix and pores of
spherical and oblate spheroidal shapes. Using the SEMs
as a guide and the porosity as a constraint, the pore space
was modeled by a spectrum of pore shapes ranging from
spheres to very fine cracks. Theoretical velocities were
calculated as a function of pressure by first determining
the ranges in pore shapes at each pressure condition.
Depending on the fit, the pore aspect ratio (ratio of minor
to major axis of an ellipsoid) spectra were adjusted and
calculations were repeated until good fits were obtained
to all velocities. Theoretical curves plotted on Fig. 5 1.19
are based on the final model.
Effects of various pore shapes on acoustic velocities as
predicted by the noninteractive scattering theory are il-
lustrated in Fig. 51.21. The effects shown in this figure
are for a rock with matrix properties of K,,, =0.44
megabar, G=0.37 megabar, and pm=2.7 g/cm; for
water with K,,, =23.2 kilobar and pw, = 1 g/cm; and for
gaswithK,=1,5XlO-kilobarandp,=lO-g/cm.
As indicated, for a given porosity, the thinner (smaller
aspect ratio) pores affect the velocities much more than
the spherical pores.
0.90
0.85
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40
POROSITY, O/o
Fig. 51.18~S-wave velocity ratio vs. porosity for dry, (v,),, and
fully water-saturated, (v,),. rocks.
DEPTH, km
---
0 Satd
- 0 Dry
1:: 1~ , , Troyyranite
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8
DIFFERENTIAL PRESSURE, k bar
Fig. 51.19-Observed and theoretical compresslonal (v,) and
shear (w,) velocities in dry and water-saturated
Troy granite as a function of differential pressure.
The data (points) are from Ref. 51.
51-10 PETROLEUM ENGINEERING HANDBOOK
Fig. 51.20~-Scanning electron micrographs of pore system cn Troy granite
ACOUSTIC LOGGING 51-11
This theory also was used to analyze the well-
behaved (according to Biot/Gassmann) experimental
data of Fig. 51.17, where the results are plotted as solid
and long- and short-dashed curves. Additionally,
however, it also can explain the unexpected behavior
of the experimental data of Fig. 5 I. 18, as illustrated in
Fig. 5 1.2 1 by its predictions for the S-wave velocities in
rocks with pores of various shapes.
Modeling of the real rock can be achieved by approx-
imating the regular pores by spheres and rounded
spheroids and by approximating the grain boundary
spaces and flat pores by low-aspect-ratio cracks.
However, there is no practical way to measure a pore
aspect-ratio spectrum independently. An extensive study
by Hadley 58 involved counting hundreds of cracks on
three SEMs, each covering about 1 mm2 of rock sur-
face. These results are being used for testing crack
theories. So far, these theories have added much to our
understanding of acoustic wave propagation; their prac-
tical applications, however, have not yet materialized.
Summary
Factors affecting acoustic wave propagation properties
of rocks were illustrated in a qualitative fashion with em-
phasis on compressional and shear-wave velocities,
mostly because attenuation properties are much less
understood. Among the factors influencing velocities,
porosity, lithology (mineral composition and structural
framework), saturation and differential pressure are con-
sidered primary, and the others, with certain qualifica-
tions, secondary. As the previous discussion indicates,
significant advances have been made in understanding
the properties of acoustic wave propagation in rocks.
Further advances will be made because of the
significance of this work, not only in formation evalua-
tion, but also in seismic exploration.
(A) Wavefronts
1
12345012345
--
1 y --Az,.oi \
-\
-.
I\ \
il-:-
1.c
I\
I \ ',
1, \
I \ '1
I \\ ',o,, . \
1 \
'\ 'h
I \
I '1
I
\
. '
\
I
\
I
\ O.O!
\ 0.01
\o.os
1
\,,,,r ::,:r;a:r
P-Wave S-Wave
I I I I I I / 1 I 1 1
POROSITY, % POROSITY, %
Fig. 51.21-Normalized P- and S-wave velocities vs. columr 1
concentration of inclusions (porosity) of different
aspect ratios for water- and -gas-saiurated pores,
respectively.
Acoustic Wave Propagation Methods
Introduction
Acoustic wave propagation methods used in well logging
can be classified into two groups: transmission and
reflection (Table 51.1). In the transmission method, one
or more transmitters emit acoustic energy, which is
transmitted by formation and/or casing and is detected
by one or more receivers. In the reflection method, one
or more transducers emit acoustic energy, part of which
is reflected by the borehole wall and/or casing and is
detected by the same transducer.
In this section, both the transmission and reflection
methods will be described, starting with a description of
acoustic wave propagation in a borehole and followed by
various methods of recording acoustic data.
Fig. 51.22-Compressional, P, and shear, S, wave propagation
in or around a fluid-filled borehole.
PETROLEUM ENGINEERING HANDBOOK
Pseudo-Rayleigh
Compressional
i I
Airy Phase
IIMt+
Fig. 51.23-Acoustic waveform.
Acoustic Wave Propagation in a
Fluid-Filled Borehole
The propagation of elastic waves in a borehole filled
with liquid has been studied extensively.60-70 Only a
qualitative description of the phenomenon will be given
here for identifying the components of an acoustic pulse
reoorded in a borehole.
The general geometry for the transmission method is
illustrated in Fig. 51.22, which shows a single receiver
logging sonde. Two pressure transducers are spaced on
an acoustically insulated body, the upper one to generate
compressional waves in the borehole fluid and the lower
one to detect compressional waves reaching it. The
receiver converts these waves to electrical signals. These
are transmitted to the surface and displayed on an
oscilloscope as a record of received-signal amplitude vs.
time and recorded either in analog form on film or
digitally on magnetic tape.
This received signal, which is referred to as the
acoustic waveform, represents several acoustic waves
and is illustrated by the synthetic waveform trace shown
in Fig. 51.23. For the usual case of a liquid-filled
borehole in a formation with both the compressional- and
shear-wave velocities higher than borehole fluid veloci-
ty, two body (or head) waves and two guided waves are
propagated. These waves are shown in Fig. 5 1.23 in the
order of their arrival time at the receiver: (I) compres-
sional wave, (2) shear wave. (3) pseudo-Rayleigh
waves, and (4) Stoneley waves.
Compressional and shear waves, which are also called
P. primary, and S, secondary waves, respectively, are
head or body waves because they travel in the body of
the formation. Pseudo-Raylcigh and Stoneley waves,
which also are called reflected conical (or normal mode)
and tube wave (or water arrival). respectively, arc guid-
ed waves because they require the presence of the
borehole for their existence.
A description of the various ray paths of these waves
may help further in understanding elastic wave propaga-
tion in and around the borehole. The acoustic transmitter
shown in Fig. 51.22 generates compressional waves
traveling with a velocity, vf. in the mud. When these
waves reach the borehole face, they are both reflected
and refracted. For angles of incidence less than the Pm
wave critical angle tI1,,
part of the energy is transmitted into the formation in the
form of compressional wave and another part as a shear
wave, and the remainder is reflected back into the mud
as a compressional wave, all according to Snells law.
At or near the P-wave critical angle, a shear wave is
still transmitted into the formation and P-wave reflected
back into the mud, but a P-wave is critically refracted
and travels with the v, in the formation, close and
parallel to the borehole wall, while continuously
radiating P-wave energy back into the mud at the same
P-wave critical angle (Fig. 5 I .22).
At the S-wave critical angle (o,,).
O,y=sin- f ,
( > v
5
the S-wave is critically refracted and travels with the \J,,
in the formation along a path similar to that of the
refracted P-wave. It also continuously radiates P-wave
energy back into the mud at the S-wave critical angle
(Fig. 51.22). Beyond the S-wave critical angle, all the
incident energy is reflected back into the mud to form the
guided pseudo-Rayleigh waves (Fig. 5 1.24).
To summarize, the compressional wave travels as a P-
wave between the transmitter and the formation, in the
formation, and also between the formation and the
receiver (PPP); the shear wave travels as a P-wave be-
tween the transmitter and the formation, an S-wave in
the formation, and again as a P-wave between the forma-
tion and the receiver (PSP). If the formation shear-wave
velocity is slower than borehole fluid velocity, shear
waves cannot be refracted along the borehole wall;
therefore, no shear head wave is generated.
As described earlier, compressional and shear waves
travel at velocities determined by the elastic moduli and
the density of the formation:
.(7)
and
( . . . .
p,, is the bulk density of formation, and I,, and I, are
compressional- and shear-wave transit times.
The body waves travel at all frequencies at speeds
given by Eqs. 8 and 9. They are nondispersive (variation
of velocity with frequency is negligible), and undergo at-
tenuation and geometric spreading. Attenuation, 01, of
the body waves is proportional to the logarithmic ratio of
the amplitudes, A 1 and A?, at distances s t and s? from
the source 15,t6:
51-13
ACOUSTIC LOGGING
where (Y is in decibelift and F,, is a geometrical
spreading factor.
The tingy packet shown between the compressional
and shear waves is called the leaky or PL mode. 66 It is a
guided wave generated by the interaction of the forma-
tion with totally reflected compressional waves between
the compressional and shear critical angles. Paillet and
White@ have shown that the leaky mode propagates at a
velocity close to that of compressional waves in the for-
mation and its phase velocity decreases with increasing
frequency. They also have shown that the leaky mode
amplitude, and hence the shape of the compressional
wave train, varies with a change of Poissons ratio.
Pseudo-Rayleigh and Stoneley waves are the two main
guided waves. They both arrive after the shear wave,
have larger amplitudes and longer durations than cithcr
the compressional or the shear wave, and are disper-
aivc.67 The pseudo-Rayleigh wave is gcneratcd by the
total internal reflection of the acoustic energy at the
borehole face beyond the shear critical angle. It travels
within the borehole by multiple internal reflections
without loss of energy into the formation; therefore, it is
a guided wave. Its amplitude decays exponentially in the
formation away from the borehole face, but is oscillatory
in the fluid. A pseudo-Rayleigh wave is not generated
unless I., > lf and it travels with a velocity 11,. such that
vf< I,. s v,> with an Airy phase traveling slower than f.
Fig. 5 I .25 shows the dispersion characteristics for the
phase and group velocities of the guided waves in a
fluid-filled borehole. The parameters used are (1) for
the formation, P-wave velocity= I5 x IO3 ftisec, S-wave
velocity=9~ 10 ftisec, density=2.3 g/cm, and (2)
for the borehole fluid, P-wave velocity=6x 10 ftisec,
density = 1.2 g/cm3 : the borehole diameter is 8 in. The
phase and group velocities plotted are normalized to the
P-wave velocity of the borehole fluid.
As shown in this figure, the pseudo-Rayleigh waves
are very dispersive. At the low-frequency end. there is a
cutoff frequency below which these waves are not
generated. At this frequency, the pseudo-Rayleigh wave
phase velocity is equal to the shear-wave velocity of the
formation and it steeply decreases with increasing fre-
quency and asymptotically approaches at high frequen-
cies the velocity of the fluid in the mud. Group velocity
of pseudo-Rayleigh wave has an Airy phase that travels
more slowly than the borehole fluid velocity (Fig.
5 1.25). Pseudo-Rayleigh waves have large amplitudes
and arrive after the refracted shear wave, often making
identification of the smaller-amplitude S-wave arrival
difficult. However, only a small error is made if the
velocity estimates are made by using the pscudo-
Rayleigh arrivals.
The second type of guided waves is the Stoneley
wave. which is the true surface wave coupled between
the borehole fluid and the formation. The particular mo-
tion of these waves is shown in Fig. 5 1.26. 7 where Y is
the borehole radius. Their amplitudes decay exponential-
ly both in the fluid and in the formation away from the
borehole face. As shown in Fig. 51.24, they are slightly
dispersive. have no geometric spreading, and travel at
<
----- p
- s
-. -. Guided Waves
Fig. 51.24-Two-receiver sonde and the ray paths of body and
guided waves.
CUtOIl
Frequency
- - Group
I I I
0 10 20 30
FREQUENCY. ktiz
Fig. .51.25-Dispersion characteristics of the pseudo-Rayleigh
and Stoneley waves.
51-14 PETROLEUM ENGINEERING HANDBOOK
i
Rock
I
r 0 r=R
Elorehole
F.X.?
Fig. 51.26-Stoneley (or tube) wave particle motions
Formrtlo
Fig. 51.27-Transit time measurement by a single-receiver
tool.
ou1put
From
Receiver 1
OlAput
From
Receiver 2
Fig. 51.28-Transit time measurement by a two-receiver tool.
velocities slightly slower than that of the borehole fluid
or formation shear wave velocity, whichever is less.
Unlike the formation shear wave or pseudo-Rayleigh
waves, Stoneley waves always are present, whether or
not v,~ is greater than vf. They arrive as a compact pulse
slightly later than that for a direct fluid arrival or shear
arrival if v,~ < vf. Stoneley wave amplitudes are high at
low fre
9
uencies and decay rapidly with increasing fre-
quency. In the low-frequency end, the Stoneley waves
are called tube waves and travel with a velocity, v,,
given by
v, =
f
( >
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Kf ,~,
57
where Kf is the bulk modulus of the fluid, given by
Q=P~; >
and
(9)
Therefore, in formations with v, < vf, so that neither
shear nor pseudo-Rayleigh waves are present, the
Stoneley wave can be used to estimate formation shear-
wave velocity if formation bulk density is available from
a density log.
The dispersion characteristics described so far (of the
pseudo-Rayleigh and the Stoneley waves) are for a
borehole containing a point source. The effects of the
logging sonde on dispersion behavior also have been in-
vestigated by Cheng and Toks6z.67 Their study in-
dicated, first, that the dispersion curves for the pseudo-
Rayleigh wave are shifted to lower frequencies as the
borehole radius increases. They further found that for a
relatively rigid tool, presence of a logging sonde simply
makes the borehole diameter appear smaller, thus shift-
ing the dispersion curves to higher frequencies.
As stated at the beginning of this section. only a
qualitative description was given of the elastic wave
propagation in a fluid-filled borehole. Ray theory is only
an approximation when describing elastic wave proper-
ties in a cylindrical geometry. Accurate description of
this phenomenon requires solution of the wave equation
for cylindrical boundary conditions. The reader is re-
ferred to the references given at the beginning of this sec-
tion for a more quantitative treatment.
Methods of Recording Acoustic Data
As described in the previous section, an acoustic
waveform is rich in information. It may have four com-
ponent waves: compressional, shear, pseudo-Rayleigh,
and Stoneley. Each of these, in turn, has four measurable
properties: velocity, amplitude, amplitude attenuation,
and frequency. 27
Various methods of logging were developed to record
one or more of these properties. A brief description of
some of these logging techniques, with emphasis on
those in more common use. follows.
ACOUSTIC LOGGING
51-15
-------- MeasuredTnnsltTlmr
Fig. 51.29-The effect of hole enlargement on the response of
acoustic velocity logging tools: (a) one-receiver
type and (b) two-receiver type.
Conventional Acoustic Logging
The most commonly used property of acoustic waves in
a borehole is the velocity of compressional waves. In
conventional acoustic logging, the time, t, required for a
compressional wave to travel through 1 ft of formation is
recorded as a function of depth. This parameter, 1, re-
ferred to as the interval transit time, transit time, or
travel time, is the reciprocal of the velocity of the com-
pressional waves:
,=,,J-
P
Transit time also is referred to as compressional-wave
slowness and is identified as fP to differentiate it from
shear wave transit time:
Velocities observed in acoustic logging vary from
4,000 to 25,000 ft/sec; hence, the travel times range
from 40 to 250 ~s/ft.
Tool Characteristics. The original acoustic logging
tool, as mentioned earlier, used one transmitter and one
receiver (Fig. 51.27). Values of L recorded in this ar-
rangement, however, also include travel time of sound in
mud in the borehole. To remove this component, a
dual-receiver commercial tool was introduced74 to
measure the time difference between the arrival of the
signal at the first receiver and at the second receiver
(Fig. 51.28).
Two-receiver systems, however, also were found to be
unsatisfactory, especially at boundaries of hole ir-
regularity, 75 as illustrated in Fig. 5 1.29.
To improve accuracy of 1 measurement further, a
borehole-compensated sonde (Fig. 51.30) with two
Transmitter
lr Transmitter
Fig. 51.30-Borehole-compensated acoustic log
51-16
PETROLEUM ENGINEERING HANDBOOK
Measurements from Lower Transmftler LT
+I
Fig. 51.31-Travel time measurement with the borehole-com-
pensated acoustic log.
transmitters and four receivers was developed.76 This
borehole-compensated tool may be considered to be
composed of two separate two-receiver systems. As il-
lustrated by the measurement scheme in Fig, 5 1.3 1, per-
turbations caused by hole irregularities are oppositely
directed; therefore, they cancel. These sondes usually
have a 2-ft span between the receivers with a 3-ft spacing
between each transmitter and its near receiver.
h
ib,
Fig. 51.33-The effect of bed thickness on the response of an
acoustic velocity logging device: (a) bed thinner
than the span and (b) bed thicker than the span.
Caliper
Hole Diam.
Inches
i 16
BHC Sonic Log
2 Span
t p see/it
100 70 40
Fig. 51.32-Presentation of acoustic log
Log Presentation. Transit time 1 measured by acoustic
velocity logs is recorded as a function of depth across
Tracks 2 and 3 in units of microseconds per foot
(psecift). The typical example shown in Fig. 51.32 also
has the integrated travel time recorded at the left edge of
Track 2 as a series of pips, placed at l-millisecond
intervals.
Additional Curves Recorded. A three-arm caliper and
a gamma ray curve can be recorded simultaneously in
Track I of the conventional acoustic logs (Fig. 51.32).
The gamma ray curve can be replaced or supplemented
by a spontaneous-potential (SP) curve; however, this SP
should be used only for qualitative interpretation because
of proximity of the electrode to the metal in the sonde.
Tool Span. The usual span for the acoustic log receivers
is 2 ft; however, tools with receiver spacings of 3 in.77
to 1 rn or longer also have been developed for special
applications.
The shorter the span, of course, the more detail given
by the tool. The relative effects of bed thickness. h, and
tool span on measured transit times are illustrated in Fig.
5 1.33. The log measures only the formation between the
receivers. The measured transit time is the weighted
average of transit times in formations between the
receivers.
Cycle Skipping and Triggering on the Noise. In transit
time logging, the first arrival of the acoustic pulse must
trigger both receivers of the sonde to yield correct values
ACOUSTIC LOGGING 51-17
Detection
Levels
Near
Receiver -
Far
Receiver
I
I + 1 Cycle
14
Fig. 51.34-Cycle skip and triggering on the noise
of t. Under certain conditions, even though the first ar-
rival is strong enough to trigger the first receiver, it may
be attenuated to such an extent that by the time it reaches
the far receiver it may be too weak to trigger it (Fig.
5 I .34). Instead, the far receiver may be triggered by a
later arrival in the same acoustic pulse. This causes large
and abrupt increases in the recorded transit time values.
This phenomenon, known as cycle skipping, may oc-
cur when the signal is strongly attenuated by (1) gas
sands, especially if they cause gas in the mud; (2) poorly
consolidated formations: (3) recently drillstem-tested in-
tervals, because of the release of gas; (4) fractured for-
mations: and (5) aerated mud.
If the detection levels are set too low, however, either
one or both receivers may be triggered by noise, which is
always present as the tool is being dragged up the hole.
Depending on the receivers involved, triggering may
cause 1 spikes either too short or too long. Examples of
cycle skipping and trig ering by noise are illustrated in
Figs. 51.35 and 51.36.
$9
Calibration. The precision of measurement of acoustic
transit time with the acoustic log is determined by the
precision of the timing circuitry, which, in turn. is con-
trolled by the frequency of the quartz crystal used. For
the usual crystals of 2.5 MHz, the potential resolution of
the transit time measurement is f0.4 psecift.
The accuracy of the transit time measurement,
however, depends on many other factors in addition to
the precision of the timing circuitry. A discussion of
some of the factors affecting the measurement of transit
time is given by Thomas.j
SP 1 / 1Span
5
L-
- I
3Span
7; P 4
3Span
Cycle Sklpptng
.Accentuated
Fig. 51.35-Sonic log run in Edwards limestone: (a) 1-ft span,
(b) 34 span, and (c) 34 span with intentionally ac-
centuated cycle-skipping.
An essential factor is to ensure the proper calibration
of the logging system. Calibration procedures of each
commercially available acoustic velocity system are
described in respective service company manuals. These
should be required before and after logging to ensure the
accuracy of the surface equipment. It is important to em-
phasize, however, that most calibration procedures do
Induction
Resistivity
(API Units)
(f]M)
50 100 0.2 2.0
Interval
Travel Time
(psecht)
200 150 100
-7- x
Fig. 51.36-Cycle skip and noise on acoustic log
TIME, @SEC
2000 3000
Fig. 51.37-Acoustic waveform recording
L
Sonde
Fig. 51.38-Approximate volume of investigation of conven-
tional acoustic logs.
PETROLEUM ENGINEERING HANDBOOK
just that. They merely check linearity of some of the cir-
cuitry in the surface instrumentation without any input
from the downhole sonde.
A true calibration requires measuring the response of
the complete system, surface instrumentation, and sonde
in a standard environment. For this purpose, the tool is
placed in a fluid-filled steel sleeve and transit time is
checked against the known value of 57 psec/ft. In addi-
tion, some free pipe in the surface casing should be
logged while going in and coming out of the hole, and
checked against the value for steel of 57 psec/ft.
Anhydrite beds, with a transit time of 50 pseclft, and
other formations with known transit times sometimes can
be used to check the accuracy of the log; however, these
methods are useful only if the downhole velocities in
naturally occurring rocks are known not to vary from
location to location or with depth of burial.
Amplitude/Time Recording
As described earlier, the acoustic wave (Fig. 51.37a)
contains information other than compressional wave
velocity. One of the methods developed to record some
of this formation is the amplitude/time recording. In this
method, which is also called the X-Y mode, the
amplitude of acoustic energy is recorded as a function of
time at preassigned depths along the wellbore (Fig.
5 1.37~). Usually, this is achieved by analog recording of
the output of one of the receivers on film.
Within the last few years, however, the introduction of
wellsite and downhole computers has made possible the
digital recording of waveforms from an array of acoustic
receivers. For example, with one of these tools, a
waveform is digitized at every %-in. depth interval of
the borehole to obtain more than 500 data points. Pro-
cessing of this wealth of new information is a current
area of research that is expected to increase significantly
the usefulness of borehole acoustic measurements.
Intensity/Time Recording
For most applications, analog recordings of waveforms
at %-in. depth intervals are rather cumbersome to use.
Hence, for routine use, to obtain a continuous recording
or a log, waveforms are recorded in the intensity/time
mode. In this presentation, each waveform is reduced to
a series of dashes of varying width and intensity, de-
pending on its frequency and amplitude (Fig. 51.37b).
The process can be visualized by rotating the acoustic
waveform of Fig. 51.37b by 90 on its horizontal axis
and then recording the positive-going portions of the
wave train as series of dashes and leaving the negative-
going portions as blank spaces, as shown in Fig. 51.37
c. The intensity/time log (Fig. 51.37d) is obtained by
stacking these dashed lines from each depth interval.
Unfortunately, this process has not been standardized.
Some service companies have the negative part of the
waveform as the dark dashes and the positive part as the
light blanks; other companies, vice versa. Also, some
service companies have the time increasing from left to
right, while other companies increase in the opposite
direction. The various trade names for this presentation
are Variable Density Log (VDL) by Schlumberger and
Dresser, 3-D Log by Birdwell, and Micro-Seismogram
Log by Welex.
ACOUSTIC LOGGING
Long-Spaced Acoustic Logging
Introduction. Conventional acoustic logs have a
relatively shallow depth of investigation, Di. The ap-
proximate bulk volume of the rock investigated by con-
ventional acoustic logs is illustrated in Fig. 51.38. so
This region is most subject to alterations because of
stress relief, mechanical damage caused by drilling, and
chemical alteration (clay hydration) caused by drilling
fluid. An important early study by Hicks clearly
demonstrated that acoustic velocities in certain forma-
tions sensitive to damage were significantly lower when
measured near the borehole face than when measured
deeper in the formation. Hicks clearly demonstrated
that these borehole effects on acoustic velocities
diminish with increased transmitter-to-receiver spacing.
Since then, many investigators have observed drastically
poor logging data caused by borehole enlargement and
formation alteration around the borehole.
Borehole Size, Effects of borehole geometry on log
measurements can be considered in terms of hole rugosi-
ty and hole enlargement. Borehole rugosity, which can
cause significant errors in pad-type tools (such as densi-
ty. sidewall neutron porosity, microrcsistivity, and high-
frequency dielectric measurements) can produce diffrac-
tions in acoustic waves propagating along the borehole.
In general, these should not affect the first-arrival com-
pressional transit time measurements but can affect the
190
160
170
160
- 150
7
i 140
2 130
120
110
100
90
51-19
Long Spacing
8-10 ft Sonde
Conventional
3-5 ft Sonde
Transmitter-Near
Receiver Spacing
6 8 10 12 14 16
HOLE DIAMETER. IN.
16 20
Fig. 51.39-Maximum detectable formation transit time,
various transmitter-to-near-receiver spacing.
Fig. 51.40-Effects of cavity on density, sldewell neutron, and acoustic logs.
51-20 PETROLEUM ENGINEERING HANDBOOK
Long Spacing
Acoustic Log
Conventional
Acoustic Log
R
R
-
R
R
T
r\;; i
e :::I
d :_p
:.
:. 1 g
z:i; i
o::: n
.
n I;
e::jI ;
:. ::.
:::
. :. .
:::
r
., :.:.:.
:. m
. :.
:.
a
t
&
. :, .
... ..
. .,.I. i
..
. .
.
0
. ..
n
Fig. 51.41-Comparison of depth of investigations of conven-
tional and long-spacing acoustic logs.
amplitudes. The hole size, however, can have a signifi-
cant effect on the transit time measurements if the hole is
large enough and the tool is centralized because the
acoustic energy traveling directly down the hole in the
mud might arrive at the receiver before the formation
compressional wave.
Hole size effects on acoustic measurements have been
investigated extensively. %** For a centralized tool,
Goetz et al. 8L computed the travel times along the direct
mud path and the refracted path in the formation, for
various hole sizes. Some of their results are illustrated in
Fig. 5 I .39 in terms of I vs. borehole diameter. Below the
line labeled conventional 3- to 5-ft sonde, a centered tool
will read the formation transit time. Between this line
and the dashed line (computed for a receiver with a 5ft
spacing from the transmitter), a centered tool will record
a value intermediate between formation and mud transit
times. Above the dashed line, a conventional acoustic
log measures the velocity of compressional waves in the
mud. The upper solid line is for a longer-spacing
acoustic log with 8- to lo-ft receiver spacing. Below this
Conventional
(3-5 11)
Long Spacing
(E-10 11)
40 120 100 150
5
I
a 150
< 30
120

9 100
f
E 20
2
p a 10
A
I
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 IO 11 12 13 14 1s
ALTERATION DEPTH
(Inches from Borehole Wall)
Fig. 51.42-Effects of formation alteration on measurements
with convemional (3 lo 5 ft) and long-spacing (8 to
10 ft) acoustic sondes.
line, the long-spaced tool measures high formation tran-
sit times in larger-diameter holes in the range where con-
ventional tools would record incorrectly low formation
travel times.
Even though these borehole size effects are important.
conventional borehole-compensated acoustic logs can
record reliable measurements under much more adverse
borehole conditions than other porosity tools, such as
density and neutron tools. The influence of a cavity on
the density, sidewall neutron, and conventional acoustic
tools is compared in Fig. 5 1.40. s3 In this figure, over
the elliptical cavity indicated by the calipers on the den-
sity and acoustic logs, both the density and sidewall
neutron curves are useless, whereas the acoustic log pro-
vides reliable data. This feature of the acoustic log is
used to complement density and neutron porosity that are
not reliable because of poor hole conditions.
Formation Alteration. A more important factor affect-
ing the borehole acoustic measurements is formation
alteration or damage around the borehole (Fig. 51.41).
This can occur because of stress relaxation near the
borehole wall, mechanical damage caused by prolonged
exposure to drilling, or chemical alteration of the foma-
tion by interaction of drilling fluid with sensitive clays in
the formation. Under these conditions, accurate
measurements of acoustic velocities depend on hole size
and transmitter receiver spacing, as well as velocities of
both altered and unaltered zones around the borehole.
Formation alteration was investigated by Goetz et
ul. ** by assumi g n a step profile transit time around the
borehole, with the altered or damaged zone having a
transit time kd that is greater than the undisturbed forma-
tion 1 and a mud transit time of 200 psec/ft. They com-
puted the depths of investigation of conventional
acoustic (3- to 5-ft) and long-spacing (8- to lo-ft)
acoustic logs in a 10.in.-diameter borehole. They also
ACOUSTIC LOGGING 51-21
12'
10'
10'
LTl
Fig. 51.43-Schlumberger long-spacing sonic log.
calculated formation alteration (td-t) as a function of
alteration depth for unaltered formation transit times of
100, 120, and 150 psec/ft. Their results, plotted in Fig.
5 I .42, illustrate the ability of the longer-spacing tool to
overcome the effects of formation damage. In this
figure, the area to the left of each curve represents the
conditions for reliable measurements. For example, at an
alteration of 20 psecift, a conventional tool can handle
an alteration of 5 in. if the formation transit time, I, is
100 psec/ft, but only 3 in. if t= 150 psec/ft.
Long-Spacing Acoustic Logging Tool. Both the
borehole enlargement and the formation alteration ef-
fects can be accommodated by acoustic tools with longer
transmitter-to-receiver spacings. A schematic diagram of
one such tool, the Long Spacing Sonic by
Schlumberger, s4 is shown in Fig. 5 1.43. Two transmit-
ters, 2 ft apart, are at the bottom, and two receivers, 2 ft
apart, are at the top, with 8ft spacing between the two
sections. Two long-spacing logs are recorded concur-
rently, one with 8- to IO-ft spacing and the other with lo-
,
LTd
Fig. 51.44-Borehole-compensated transit time measure-
ments: (a) conventional and (b) depth derived.
to 12-ft spacing. Borehole compensation is accomplished
by a depth-derived measurement scheme illustrated in
Fig. 51.44b, rather than the inverted array technique
shown in Fig. 5 1.44a, which was described earlier (Fig.
5 1.3 1). To obtain the transit time at depth level, first the
transmitter Tr is pulsed twice and the respective times
fI =Tr -RI, t? =Tr --RI are recorded. The transit
time for this case is given by
II -tz
tI =- psecift,
2
which is subject to errors discussed earlier if the hole size
is different at the two receiver positions.
After the tool has moved 9 ft 8 in. up hole, the
transmitters will be spanning the same depth interval be-
tween the points of refraction. This time they are each
pulsed, and the travel times, t3 =Tt -+R? and
f4 =Tz +Rz are recorded by the second receiver (Rz).
For this second case, the transit time is given by
f4 -13
11 = - psecift,
2
which is subject to the same errors as t, but in an op-
posite direction. The depth-derived transit time for the 8
to IO-ft spacing is obtained by averaging these two
measurements:
II +t2
t-
2
A similar borehole compensation is obtained for the
lo- to 12-ft spacing by using the second transmitter T2
in the first position, instead of T , , and the first receiver
R r in the second position, instead of RZ
51-22 PETROLEUM ENGINEERING HANDBOOK
BHC Sonic
Travel Time
(psedft)
140
Hole O::n 4 Days
40
--------_---_
--Hole Open 79 Days
- r- r- ~I r- l r- ~- r1- l r y- r 7 T r
.
r- - ;
<T- . , - '
i . . -
- I
C' >
CT , ,
_ '
r
. j
Fig. 51.45-Formation alteration caused by exposure to mud;
bit size 12% in.
Effects of prolonged exposure to drilling and drilling
mud on acoustic velocities measured with a conventional
borehole-compensated acoustic log are illustrated in ex-
ample logs in Fig. 5 1.45 taken from the reference by
Misk et al . * The dashed curve is obtained after the hole
has been exposed to drilling for 4 days with the borehole
relatively undamaged; the solid curve is after 79 days of
exposure. During this period, the formation over much
of the interval has been damaged enough to increase the 1
by 30 psecift or more.
As described previously, long-spacing acoustic logs
are less affected by altered zones A comparison of con-
ventional and long-spaced acoustic logs is shown in Fig.
51.46 for a sand/shale section.73 In the upper section,
the conventional log is reading higher values of I than
those by the long-spacing tool, probably because of shale
alteration. In Sand Z, both logs are in agreement.
whereas in sections directly above and below Sand Z. the
conventional log is reading significantly higher values of
t. probably because of hole washouts.
250
pseclft
LJJ
( :. Spacing
Fig. 51.46-Conventional and long-spacing acoustic logs tn a
sand/shale section.
The example in Fig. 5 1.47 is a comparison of the two
acoustic tools in shallow and deeper Louisiana gulf coast
sand/shale sequences. s6 Physical characteristics of both
the shale at 3,470 ft and the sand at 3.500 ft have been
altered by drilling and interaction with mud filtmte. The
conventional spaced tool is reading 15 psecift higher
because of this alteration. This is also reflected by a
lo-millisecond difference between the respective transit
time integration curves shown in the depth tract. In the
deeper section, as the formations become more com-
pacted, the formation alteration is reduced; hence, the
conventional and long-spacing measurements are in
agreement within the interval 8,500 to 8,600 ft.
Even though, in most instances. the t values from 8- to
IO-ft and lo- to 12-ft spaced receivers are in agreement,
very deep formation alteration can sometimes affect the I
values recorded by the S- to IO-ft receivers. The example
in Fig. 51.48 is from a shallow well with modified
depths. In the upper zone, the 8- to IO-h spacing is
reading values higher by IO psecift than those given by
ACOUSTIC LOGGING 51-23
il
b
:
I
i
i
-
-
Fig. 51.47-Conventional (BHC) and long-spacing (LSS)
acoustic logs in a Louisiana gulf coast sand/shale
sequence.
GR
- psedft
160 60
Fig. 51.48-Very deep formation alteration.
the lo- to 12-ft spacing, because of very deep formation to 20 in. In the lower section, the borehole is not washed
alteration. In the lower section, the 8 to IO-ft spacing out but the conventional tool is reading up to 60 ,usec/ft
still reads a few microseconds higher down to the com- too high because of formation alteration. Below 8,700 ft,
pacted formations below depth 227 ft. all three curves (i.e., the 3- to 5-ft, 8 to lo-ft, and IO- to
In the final example shown in Fig. 51.49, the better 12-ft curves), are in agreement.
response of the long-spaced logs in enlarged boneholes is
illustrated. In the upper section, the conventional spaced Summary. Borehole size and formation alteration can
tool is reading the mud transit time in a hole washed out significantly affect the properties of acoustic waves
51-24
PETROLEUM ENGINEERING HANDBOOK
\
1
I-
I -
\
I
/
c
I
1
I-
I
I -
I
I_
I
/
I-
, L
I
3-5+\
BHC :
-I
i
Fig. 51.49~-Response of conventional and long-spacing
acoustic logs In an enlarged borehole.
Fig. 51.50-Identification of shear arrivals on analog recording
of (a) acoustic waveforms and (b) variable-density
(3D) presentations.
traveling in a borehole. The long-spaced acoustic tools
are much less affected by borehole conditions and yield
more reliable values of compressional-wave transit times
under borehole conditions in which conventional tools
would be grossly in error. The vertical bed boundary
resolution of the long-spaced tool is the same as that of
the conventional tool since the receiver spacing is 2 ft for
both. Because of the longer transmitter-to-receiver spac-
ing, the acoustic energy has to travel farther; therefore, it
is attenuated more. This has caused more frequent spik-
ing and cycle skipping on the long-spaced acoustic logs;
however, this technology is improving through the in-
troduction of more powerful transmitters, more sensitive
receivers, downhole digitizing, and surface processing
of waveforms.
Shear-Wave Logging
The borehole acoustic measurement methods described
so far have been for obtaining compressional wave
velocities. The desirability of obtaining other informa-
tion contained in the acoustic waveform has long been
recognized. I7 Most of the effort has been directed
toward obtaining the velocity of shear waves.
Early attempts involved hand-picking the shear-wave
arrivals on the analog recording of either waveforms or
variable-density-microseismogram or three-dimension-
al (3.D)-presentations as illustrated in Fig. 5 1 .50e3
Another method involves automatic recording of
shear-wave travel times by a bias technique. v) In this
method, a high-amplitude event following the
compressional-wave arrivals is assumed to be the shear
wave arrival. The transit time of these waves is measured
by setting the voltage bias level higher than the compres-
sional-wave amplitudes.
A thorough investigation of conventional methods for
determining shear-wave velocities from long- and short-
spaced acoustic logs was conducated by Koerperich.
In this study. borehole experiments were conducted by
using a conventional Schlumberger Borehole Compen-
sated Sonic Log@ (BHC) with two transmitters and four
receivers at 3- and 5-ft spacing and a Schlumberger ex-
perimental long-spaced tool with a single transmitter and
four receivers located at 10, 12. 14. and 16 ft from the
ACOUSTIC LOGGING 51-25
transmitter. Waveforms recorded with these tools in a
carbonate section are shown in Fig. 51.51 for several
transmitter-to-receiver spacings. As indicated in this
figure, it is easier to identify the later arrivals on the
longer-spacing waveforms because of the greater separa-
tion in arrival times.
Some measurement results from this study are shown
in Figs. 51.52 and 51.53 for a carbonate and a
sand/shale section, respectively. For both compressional
and shear waves, long spacings generally yield slightly
lower travel times (higher velocities) than short spac-
ings. Another important aspect of this study involved
laboratory measurements of acoustic velocities on core
samples. Compressional and shear-wave velocities were
measured on core plugs subjected to simulated subsur-
face overburden and pore pressure conditions. These
results are lotted as circles in Figs. 51.52 and 51.53.
Koerperich
r,
states that average agreement between the
laboratory and log shear velocities (for both the long-
and short-spaced tools) is within 2% for carbonates and
8% in sandstones, and that it is slightly better for the
compressional waves. He states further that these dif-
ferences between the laboratory and the log values are
nonsystematic.
The foregoing discussion demonstrates that determina-
tion of shear transit times in a borehole by hand-picking
the arrival times from waveforms or from variable-
density presentations is at best a tedious and not very ac-
curate process. Further, attempts to automate this pro-
cess by threshold detection have been subject to errors
when using an axial transmitter/receiver logging
technology designed primarily for measurement of
compressional-wave travel times. The reasons for these
errors are explained by some of the recent modeling
studies of acoustic wave propagation in a fluid-filled
borehole. 6sm67 These studies demonstrate that the shear-
wave arrival is indistinguishable from the onset of the
reflected conical waves on the synthetic acoustic
waveforms. However, the phase and group velocities of
the reflected conical wave at its low-frequency cutoff are
equal to the formation shear-wave velocity (see Fig.
5 1.25). Hence. if the onset of the reflected conical wave
is measured in error, the transit time will be close to that
of the shear wave. This might be the case in some of the
previously discussed studies.
Acoustic Array Logging
Borehole modeling of acoustic wave propagation has
demonstrated the need for a new generation of acoustic
logging technology to extract more information from
acoustic waveforms. Acoustic logging tools having ar-
rays of transmitters and receivers, and complex digital
signal processing capabilities have been developed to
analyze the data obtained.
One such tool is shown in Fig. 51.54. It has a Iower-
frequency transmitter (1 1 kHz vs. the conventional 20
kHz), an array of four receivers placed at a longer spac-
ing from the transmitter, and a downhole digitizer to
record waveforms without cable distortions. Surface in-
strumentation records the signals digitally. The process-
ing method, using a four-fold correlation algorithm.
analyzes waveforms from the four receivers simulta-
neously to obtain compressional and shear-wave transit
times (Fig. 51.55).
Depth.
II
591.6
591.6
r S Wave Time Pick T-R
Spacing
3
5
5946-v
- 10
594 7 12
0 1000 2000
Time.qec
Fig. 51.51-Acoustic waveforms recorded at various trans-
mitter-to-receiver spacings in a carbonate section.
Another acoustic array log is a 12-receiver experimen-
tal sonde developed by Schlumberger. It has a single
IO-kHz transmitter and an array of 12 receivers. The
receivers have been arranged both in a nonuniform array
spanning 4 ft with spacings of 0, 6, 9, 12, 1.5, 18, 21,
24, 27, 30, 36, 42, and 48 in. and in a uniform array
spanning 5.5 ft with 6 in. between the receivers. The
spacing between the transmitter and a receiver array is
adjustable between 5 and 25 ft.
An experimental tool developed by Elf Aquitaine uses
an array of transmitters and an array of receivers. The
transmitting array has five transmitters uniformly spaced
at 0.25 m apart; hence, it has a span of 1 m. The receiv-
ing array has 12 receivers uniformly spaced at I-m inter-
vals. The distance between the receiving and the
transmitting arrays is set at 1 m.
Finally, the prototype sonde by Schlumberger (shown
in Fig. 51.56) has an eight-receiver array and two
transmitters.j In addition, it has two additional
receivers spaced at 3 and 5 ft from the transmitter to
simulate conventional tools. It also has the capability to
measure the compressional-wave velocity of the
borehole fluid. Again, waveforms are digitized
downhole and transmitted to the surface for recording
and analysis.
As apparent from the previous discussion, this is a
very active area of development. Tools are constantly
being developed to explore the extraction of additional
information, such as pseudo-Rayleigh and Stoneley
wave velocities, from acoustic waveforms. Capabilities
are being developed to record large amounts of data. For
example, more data are obtained with one of these array
tools in a l-mile-deep well than are recovered in a l-mile
seismic section.
A parallel and complementary area of development is
signal processing methods for analyzing these data.
Processing methods such as direct phase determina-
tion, y4 slowness time coherence, 93 and semblance 77,95
have been developed to permit automated analysis of
shear-wave transit times. Array processors are being ad-
ded to wellsite data acquisition systems to permit real-
time signal processing.
51-26 PETROLEUM ENGINEERING HANDBOOK
Fig. 51.52-Borehole and laboratory measurements of compressional- and shear-wave transit times
in a carbonate section.
Fig. 51.53-Borehole and laboratory measurements of compressional- and shear-wave transit times
in a sand/shale section.
ACOUSTIC LOGGING 51-27
r- - - -
- - - - - - - - - - - - -
- ; rx; ]
,
L------------------l
Van
Cartridge
1 (Telemetry. Analog-to-
0.3 Ill
0.3 Ill
0.3 In
Digital bonvertk)
spacers
Fig. 51.54-A four-receiver acoustic array log with a downhole
digitizer.
So far, emphasis has been on extraction of shear-wave
velocity from acoustic waveforms. With continued im-
provement in tool design and signal processing, it is ex-
pected that in the not too distant future, acoustic logs will
record not only the velocities of compressional, shear,
pseudo-Rayleigh and Stoneley waves, but their attenua-
tions as well.
Reflection Method
The reflection method of acoustic wave propagation log-
ging is basically similar to sonar. A single transducer
rotates at constant speed, emitting acoustic pulses in the
megahertz range and recording their echoes from the
borehole face (Fig. 51.57). As in the transmission
method, both travel times and amplitudes are used. The
azimuth of the beam also is recorded.
The first such logging tool, the borehole televiewer, Vh
used only the amplitude of the reflected signals to
I
Gamma
Ray
0
APIU ,
Compr.
T&&
tP
-
C
iii
Fig. 51.55-Compressional- and shear-wave transit time log ob-
tained by analysis of the waveforms recorded with
the sonde in Fig. 51.54.
generate a picture of the borehole wall. When the
borehole wall is smooth, the amplitude of the reflected
signal is high; it is recorded as a light spot. Low-
amplitude reflections from fractured or vuggy walls are
recorded as dark spots. The resulting log is essentially a
black and white picture of the borehole wall, split ver-
tically along magnetic north and flattened (Figs. 51.58
through 5 1.60).
For the borehole televiewer (BHTV) log, the vertical
scale is depth and the horizontal scale corresponds to
azimuth of the borehole wall. An isometric view of a
vertical fracture intersecting the wellbore in an east-west
direction is shown on the left in Fig. .51.58.97 The cor-
responding BHTV log on the right shows the fracture as
two vertical dark lines 180 apart. Similarly, an
isometric of a south-dipping fracture or bedding plane is
shown with the corresponding BHTV log in Fig. 5 1.59.
An example of a BHTV log (SeisvieweP by Bird-
we1198) based on amplitude imaging is shown in Fig.
51-28
PETROLEUM ENGINEERING HANDBOOK
R
Receiver Electronics
~ Fluid-Delta T Measurement
Wideband Receivers
Spaced 6 Apart
Rg \
Two Standard Ceramic Receivers
UT\
LT/
Two Low-Frequency Transmitters
Transmitter Electronics
l-l
Fig. 51.56-An eight-recerver acoustic array sonde.
Fig. 51.5743lock diagram of BHTV logging system.
E
S
N
il
*o- --_
--.
W
1 III.
.
N E S W N
Vertical Fracture
Intersecting Well Bore
BHTV Log
Fig. 51.58-Isometric of a vertical fracture intersecting a bore-
hole and corresponding BHTV log.
51.60 for a borehole intersected by two fractures. The
corresponding isometric on the right describes the two
different dips and strikes.
Significant hardware and signal processing im-
provements have been made to early BHTV
technology. 97,99-101 Current technology uses transit
time information to obtain an image, in addition to the
image obtained from the amplitudes of the reflected
signals. Transit time images complement amplitude im-
ages in many ways. Transit time measurement is essen-
tially a near-perfect borehole geometry tool with a
resolution of 0.05 in. BHTV images developed from the
transit time measurements can be considered as two-
dimensional (2D) relief maps of the borehole.
Further use of transit time measurements is made in
generating tilted polar scan displays. 99 These are essen-
tially 3D casts of the borehole, which can be viewed
from all directions. The tilted polar scan of Fig. 51.61
shows a damaged section of a casing viewed from two
angles, which also can be viewed from any desired
angle.
Applications
Introduction
Some present and possible future applications of acoustic
logging will be presented to illustrate the use of borehole
acoustic measurements described earlier and listed in
Table 51.1. Discussion here will emphasize the more
important uses, and only references will be given to
more routine and less significant ones.
Seismic and Geological Interpretation
Borehole measurements of acoustic properties were
developed originally to obtain time/depth curves to use
in seismic interpretation. lo2 In addition to recording
transit times of the compressional waves as functions of
depth, acoustic logs also integrate these data and record a
tick mark on the log for each millisecond of elapsed
time. These marks are then used in conjunction with
check-shot surveys for seismic interpretation. 79,03
Recent advances in borehole shear-wave velocity
recording also have allowed this technology to be used
with surface seismic shear surveys in a way similar to the
compressional-wave velocity log use with the seismic
compressional surveys. 04
ACOUSTIC LOGGING
An important geological application of acoustic logs
has been for correlating geologic sections. As described
earlier (see Fig. 51.39), acoustic log response is much
less affected by borehole irregularities than are some of
the other porosity logs. As a result, acoustic logs provide
valid data over a large proportion of the borehole.
Further, acoustic logs usually show much character
and detail. Therefore, they have been useful for locating
bed boundaries, identifying gas/oil interfaces, and deter-
mining subsurface geology. An example of geological
correlation is shown in Fig. 5 1.62; even though the two
wells in this figure are 10 miles apart, the character of
the compressional transit time curves is quite similar.
Porosity
Borehole measurements of acoustic velocities were in-
strumental in the development of quantitative formation
evaluation in the 1950s, although they were developed
initially to aid seismic interpretation. Over the years, the
primary use of acoustic logs in formation evaluation has
been the determination of porosity from measurements
of compressional-wave transit time (t= l/v,). Earlier in
this chapter, factors affecting acoustic properties were
described through both theoretical and experimental
studies of elastic wave propagation in porous media. On
the basis of these discussions, it would be at best naive to
expect a simple linear relationship between porosity and
compressional-wave transit time. However, empirical
observations have indeed demonstrated the validity of
such a relationship under certain special conditions.
Consolidated Rocks. A commonly used linear relation-
ship for estimating porosity from acoustic measurements
(based on laboratory measurements of acoustic velocity
and porosity in porous rocks and other materials) was
proposed by Wyllie et al . 18,t9 Commonly referred to as
the Wyllie time-average equation, it is expressed as
1
G , (l-4)
. . . . . .
(10)
VP L V,
or in terms of transit times, as
t=&+(l-4)1,, . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . (11)
where
( (= 1 lvP) = transit time of the compressional
waves for the liquid-saturated
porous medium,
I~(= l/vL) = transit time for saturant liquid that
forms the solid frame of the porous
medium,
t, (= l/v,) = transit time for rock matrix that forms
the solid frame of the porous
medium, and
$I = porosity.
This relationship can be rearranged as
1(hL -tm)++t, . . . . . . . . . . . . . . (12)
51- 29
BHTV Log
Dip: Orientation of Minimum
Angle: tan- h/d
Fig. 51.59~isometric of fracture or bedding plane intersecting
borehole at moderate dip angle, and corresponding
BHTV log.
N E S W N
5560
5561
5562
5563
5564
5565
Dip
Angle q ireclian
58 N 70 E
Angle Direction
740 N 46 w
Fig. 51.60-BHTV indicating two fractures of different dips and
strikes.
Fig. 51.61-BHTV tilted polar image of a section of a damaged
casing.
51-30 PETROLEUM ENGINEERING HANDBOOK
where the slope is m=tL-t,,, and the intercept is b=t,.
The most attractive feature of Eq. 12 is its simplicity.
It states that the transit time of an acoustic wave in a
porous rock is the porosity-weighted average of its tran-
sit times in the matrix and the liquid in its pores. Also, it
extrapolates to correct values for 0 and 100% poros-
ities-i.e., I, and tL, respectively.
This simplicity coupled with pedagogically pleasing
qualities made Eq. 12 popular and, more importantly,
established acoustic logging as an important tool in for-
mation evaluation. As stated, however, there is no
theoretical justification for such a simple relationship. In
Fig. 51.62-Acoustic log correlation between two wells
Porosity Evaluation from I
t -t, I
d=-X-
Ipwtm
FCP
,I/(//.//..
30 40 50 60 70 60 90 100 110 120 130
I,, /Jsec/ll
v, ftlsec
i,. @?c/ft
Sandsloner 16,000 - 19,500 55.5 - 51.3
Limestones 21,000 - 23,000 47.6 - 43.5
Dolomites 23,000 - 26,000 43.5 - 38.5
Fig. 51.63-Porosity evaluation from acoustic log
the Appendix, the linear relationship, Eq. 13, is shown
to be a second-order approximation of a comprehensive
relationship, Eq. A-9, with the intercept h approximately
equal to the matrix transit time and the slope m strongly
dependent on elastic properties of the porous rock frame
and the compressibility of pore fluid. Nevertheless,
under the right conditions, a linear dependence of transit
time on porosity has been established through literally
hundreds of empirical observations.
A graphical representation of the time-average equa-
tion, Eq. 11, is given in Fig. 51.63. lo5 This is a good
beginning for determining porosity from acoustic log
measurements when no other information is available. It
provides acceptable values of porosity for well-
compacted rocks with uniform pore size distribution and
under effective stress (difference between the over-
burden stress and pore fluid pressure) of at least 4,000
psi.
In most applications, the linear relationship of Eq. 13
has been found to be more useful than the time-average
equation, Eq. 11, provided that the values of b and m can
be determined. As indicated in the Appendix, the
parameter b is approximately equal to (l/v,,,); therefore,
it depends on rock matrix properties. Published values
for b range from 50 to 60 yseclft for sandstones, from 45
to 50 for limestones, and from 40 to 48 for dolomites.
Velocities of compressional and shear waves for a
large number of materials are given in handbooks by
Clark lo6 and by Simmons and Wang. lo7 An extensive
list of compressional and shear transit times have been
compiled by Wells et al. lo8 for minerals and rocks en-
countered in oil and mineral exploration. Probably the
most comprehensive compilation of compressional and
shear-wave velocities for marine sediments, rock-
forming minerals, and rocks is given, for various
pressures and temperatures, in a recent handbook by
Carmichael. 09 A set of compressional and shear-wave
velocity data from the literature is listed in Table 5 1.3
for selected materials, to illustrate the range of velocities
encountered in and around the borehole.
The values of m depend on the elastic moduli of the
rock frame, which in turn are controlled by the effective
stress and pore structure and by the compressibility of
the pore fluid. Changes in velocities have been observed
to become smaller with increasing effective stress.
Therefore, pressure dependence of m may be small
enough to be neglected in normally pressured sections
below 7,000 ft. Effects of pore structure might be
ACOUSTIC LOGGING
51-31
TABLE 51.3-ACOUSTIC VELOCITIES
Material v,(fllsec) v,(ftlsec)
Nonporous solrds
anhydrite
calcite
cement (cured)
dolomite
granite
gypsum
limestone
quartz
salt
steel
20,000
20,100*
12,000
23,000
19,700
19,000
21,000
16,900 *
15,000*
20,000
Water-saturated porous rocks in situ Porosity (o/o)
dolomites 5 to 20 20,000 to 15,000
limestones 5 to 20 18.500 to 13.000
sandstones 5 to 20 16,000 to 11,500
sands (unconsolidated) 20 to 35 11,500 to 9,000
shales 7,000 to 17,000
-
Liquids *
water (pure)
water (100,000 mg NaCIIL)
water (200,000 mg NaCIIL)
drilling mud
petroleum
4,800
5,200
5.500
61000
4,200
Gases
air (dry or motst) 1,100
hydrogen 4,250
methane 1,500
described qualitatively by stating that the magnitude of m
increases with decreasing grain contact areas. Thus, m is
small for crystalline rocks and larger for granular and
shalier rocks, ranging from 0.5 to 1.5 psec/ft for car-
bonates and from I to 3 psec/ft for sandstones.
Compressibility of the pore fluid depends on whether
it is gas, oil, or water and becomes significant in poorly
consolidated rocks (see Eq. A-7). In well-consolidated
rocks under high effective stress, the relative contribu-
tion of pore fluid compressibility to the overall rock
elastic moduli is small; therefore, variations of m
because of pore fluid content may be neglected.
The large range in values of b and m necessitates the
use of core analysis data to calibrate the acoustic log for
estimating porosity. For this purpose, porosities and
travel times are measured on core samples under the
equivalent subsurface pressure conditions, and the linear
relationship between the two is established by statistical
analysis. If laboratory measurements of I are not
available, restored pressure measurements of porosity,
or porosity corrected for equivalent subsurface condi-
tions can be correlated to I from the acoustic log to
establish the linear relationship. provided that adequate
depth correspondence between core and log data can be
established.
There are numerous field examples of acoustic log
measurements yielding reliable estimates of porosity in
well-compacted, clean sandstones and carbonates, pro-
vided that the lithology is known. Fig. 51.64 illustrates
11,400
-
12,700
11,200
-
11,100
12,000
8,000
9,500
11,000 to 7,500
9,500 to 7,000
9,500 to 6,000
-
the close agreement between acoustic-log-measured
transit times and core-measured porosities for carbonate
sections in two wells.
In fact, the acoustic log in certain areas is the most
consistently reliable porosity device. To reiterate, the
conditions required are (1) lithology is accurately
known, (2) porosity is largely intergranular, and (3)
rocks are well compacted and subjected to a differential
stress of at least 4,000 psi.
As with other conventional porosity logs, variations in
lithology make porosity estimates from compressional-
wave transit times unreliable. To overcome this. acoustic
logs are used with density and/or neutron logs, or with
measurements of shear-wave transit times described in
the next section.
Secondary Porosity. Another application of the acoustic
log is for estimation of secondary porosity in vugular
and/or fractured rocks. For this, it is assumed that com-
pressional wave velocity is affected only by the primary
or intergranular porosity. The density and neutron logs
are assumed to respond to total porosity. Hence, any dif-
ference between these is assumed to be secondary
porosity consisting of vugs and/or fractures. An example
of this is shown in Fig. 5 1.65, where the section contains
anhydrite with fracture porosity. u Notice that while the
transit time I remains approximately constant over the
entire section, density oh decreases from 2.97 to 2.83
51-32
PETROLEUM ENGINEERING HANDBOOK
South Ralph
Wevburn Saskatchewan
Mlsswpplan LImestone
Tranr,, Tlrn.3 /Jsec/tt
100 85 70 55 40
Salt Potential Spacing - 1 ft, 2 Receivws
millivolts Poro.lfy - (%)
Steelman (Kvqsford) Field
M~ss~rs~pp~en Limestone
Saskatchewan
Tranl,, Tlrnl? /.lsecm
100 85 70 55 40
Specsng - 1 ft. 2 Receivers
Porolltv - (%)
Self Potential
mdlivolts
35 30 25 21 15 10 5 0
~--
3
/
>
L-
Sonic Log
/----
ore Analysis
Zore I
4naIySiS-j-
t
/
/
I
I
--_--
t ?.
+-I
----i--1
I r
;
-
I~<-,
i
+
-1
L
L-
Note: Porosity Scale Based on Matrix Velocity , Vm
q 23,000 ft/sec q 23,000 ft/sec
Fig. 51.64-Acoustic log vs. core analysis porosity
ACOUSTIC LOGGING
g/cm 3 . and the neutron porosity 4 W increases from 0 IO
4%. thereby indicating a secondary porosity of 4%.
Poorly Consolidated Rocks. In poorly consolidated
sandstones, reliability of porosity estimates from
acoustic logs is rather poor. In these cases, usually a
combination of density and neutron logs is preferred.
One significant advantage of the acoustic log is that it is
much less affected by the hole conditions, such as
washouts and rugosity. This was illustrated in Fig. 5 I .39
where the density and sidewall neutron logs were re-
sponding to hole conditions whereas the acoustic log was
found to yield reliable estimates of porosity.
Several methods have been developed to obtain
porosity information from acoustic logs in poorly com-
pacted sands. 21.11 One approach 2 involves adjustment
of porosity calculated from the time-average equation us-
ing a compaction correction factor Fc,,. First. the ap-
parent porosity $,, is computed from
-,,I
I$,=-. . . . . . .(14)
~1 - 01
Then this value is corrected by F,, to obtain the cor-
rected porosity, 4,.. from
&=$. . . .(15)
P
The values of Fc7, (Fig. 5 1.63) range from 1 to 1.6 or
higher. One method used to estimate F,, is based on
estimating the compaction of sands from the compaction
of adjacent shales. If the transit time of adjacent shales is
100 psecift or less, they are assumed to be compacted.
Hence. to obtain the correction factor, the transit time L,,,~
observed in the nearby shales is divided by 100.
FcP=*. . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
100
.(16)
Other methods for determining F,, include determina-
tion of porosity either from a resistivity log in a water-
bearing sand or from other porosity logs such as density
and/or neutron, and then comparing the value with 4,,
obtained from the acoustic log.
More recently another empirical relationship for
estimating porosity from compressional-wave velocity
was developed by Raymer et al. on the basis of exten-
sive field observations of transit time vs. porosity. The
relationship reported is for the full porosity range from 0
to 100%; however, for the porosity range of interest, 0 to
37%, it is expressed as
where v, is 17,850 filsec for sandstone, 20,500 ftisec
for limestone, and 22,750 ftisec for dolomite, respec-
tively; and of is velocity of sound in the pore fluid.
-
t
Fig. 51.65~Secondary porosity in the Auquilco formation. Neu-
quen basin, Argentina.
TRANSIT TIME, psedlt
Fig. 51.66-An empirical relationship for estimating porosity in
sandstone, limestone, and dolomite.
51-34
PETROLEUM ENGINEERING HANDBOOK
Time Average Eq.
1, 56 psec/li.
l Clean Sands
A Shaly Sands
Velocity, ft/sec
80 90 100 110 120 130 140 150 7J60
50
I, INTERVAL TRANSIT TIME, vsec/ft
Fig. 51.67-Velocity/porosity correlations for moderately con- Fig. 51.68-Shaly sand models for acoustic wave propagation
a) Laminated
c) Grain Boundary Structural
b) Framework Structural
solidated to unconsolidated sands. studies.
fif
9
-
5 0 - Laminated
1
-- Structural
-.- Dispersed
Compressional
10 20 30 40 50 60
CLAY/SHALE FRACTION OF FORMATION, %
Fig. 51.69-Estimated shale effects on compressional and
shear velocities.
d) Dispersed
0 Sandstone
CD Clay
A graphical representation of this empirical relation-
ship is given in Fig. 51.66. Raymer et al. t It found this
relationship to be a better estimator of porosity than the
time-average equation. They also reported that it is ap-
plicable to both consolidated and unconsolidated rocks.
Predictions from this relationship and from the time-
average equations were investigated by Hartley It* for
the moderately consolidated to unconsolidated sands of
the Gulf of Mexico. The lack of agreement indicated in
Fig. 5 1.67 led Hartley to the universally applicable con-
clusion that empirical relationships may provide er-
roneous porosities if they are applied outside of the data
set from which they were developed.
Shaly Sands. Another aspect of Hartleys study t con-
siders the effects of shaliness in porosity interpretation.
In Fig. 5 1.67, porosity predictions from the empirical
relations are worse for the shaly sands. Effects of shales
on acoustic velocities are not very well understood; as a
result, they are difficult to account for. A recent
theoretical study by Mineart shed much light on this
problem by relating clay effects to their distribution
within the rock framework. Minear used the Kuster-
Toksoz I4 model of porous media and divided clay
distributions into four groups. As illustrated in Fig.
51.68, these four groups are (1) the laminated model
(Fig. 51.68a), in which clay-mineral-rich and shaly
layers alternate with clean sandstone layers. (2) the
framework structural model (Fig. 51.68b), in which
shale grains substitute for quartz grains randomly, (3) the
grain boundary structural model (Fig. 5 1.68c), in which
shale grains occur at some, but not all. boundaries be-
tween the quartz grains, and (4) the dispersed clay model
(Fig. 51.68d), in which clays occur dispersed in the pore
fluid or lining the pores but not between the grain
contacts.
ACOUSTIC LOGGING 51-35
90 100 110 120 130 140 150
I,, dn
Laboralory Data (Ref. 27) Field Data (hiked Lithologlar Excluded)
C Limestone OLtmertone
ADolomite QDolomltc
1 Sandstones 0 Sandntone
Fig. 51.70-Compressional-wave transit time vs. shear-wave Fig. 51.71-Compressional- to shear-wave velocity ratio vs.
transit time. compressional-wave velocity. Data from Fig. 51.70.
One of the obvious conclusions in this study is that the
time-average equation is applicable to the laminated
model. A more interesting conclusion, however, states
that the framework (Fig. 51.68b) and grain-boundary
(Fig. 5 1.68~) shales seem to have the same effect on
acoustic velocities. Further results of this study are sum-
marized in Fig. 51.69. The differences, t&ly -tclean,
between the transit times of the shaly and clean forma-
tion for both the compressional and shear waves are plot-
ted vs. the clay or shale fraction for a sandstone with a
porosity of 30%. Structural and laminated shales have
approximately the same effect on I,, and l-5 but increase
t,, more than I,, Dispersed clay, if it has a density close
to that for sandstone, has about the same effect on L,, as
the structural and the laminated clays: however, its effect
on I,, is only about one-third of that by the other two.
Lithology
Estimation of lithology from conventional acoustic log
measurements may be made by solving for the matrix
travel time from the time-average equation if the porosity
is known from another source. Even though this tech-
nique has been used under certain conditions, matrix
transit times of the most common rock types determined
in this fashion are not distinct enough to make this a very
useful method.
A more deterministic method for establishing lithology
from acoustic log measurements is based on the relation-
ships shown in Fig. 5 1.70. In this figure, laboratory- and
borehole-measured values of compressional-wave transit
times are plotted against shear-wave transit times.
Laboratory data cover a porosity range of 5 to 30% for
sandstones and 5 to 2.5 % for carbonates. and an effective
stress range of 0 to 6.000 psi. As indicated, each
lithology has a well-defined trend, regardless of porosity
or effective stress (depth). Lines of equal velocity ratio
(v,Iv,) are closely spaced for dolomites and
limestones- 1.8 and I .9, respectively. The sandstones
range from 1.6 for low-porosity sands to 1.75 for high-
porosity sands under low effective stress.
Lithology identification is also illustrated in Fig.
51.71 by replotting the velocity ratio data of Fig. 5 1.70
vs. compressional wave velocities.
Use of borehole measurements of compressional and
shear transit times is described by NationsEX for deter-
mining porosity and lithology in mixed-lithology rocks.
He assumes that velocity ratio is a constant for a pure
rock type: 1.6 for sandstones, 1.8 for dolomites, and 1.9
for limestones. He further assumes that mixed-lithology
rocks will exhibit a ratio that is directly proportional to
the content of the two minemls and that porosity is
distributed equally between the two. From the velocity
ratio, he first determines the mineralogical composition;
then, on the basis of this information, assigns the ap-
propriate matrix transit time for calculating porosity. An
example of the results of this technique is illustrated in
Fig. 5 1.72 for dolomite/sandstone and dolomite/
limestone mixtures.
Hydrocarbon Content
Acoustic signals on microseismogram or variable-
density logs are known to disappear sometimes in oil and
gas zones in unconsolidated formations. This property is
used to locate oil/water contacts. as well as gas caps, but
is not completely reliable. Sometimes, even within the
bame zone, signal disappearance may or may not be in-
dicative of presence of hydrocarbons.
Laboratory studies conducted by Gardner and Har-
ris on sandpacks indicate that shear-wave velocities
decrease when liquid is added to sandpacks, whereas the
compressional-wave velocity increases (Fig. 51.73).
51-36 PETROLEUM ENGINEERING HANDBOOK
Lithology Set
0 Dolomite-Sandstone
*Dolomite-Limestone
Dolomitlc Sandstone
With Part of Pore
Space Not Connecte
FDC-CNL POROSITY,
Fig. 51.72-Porosity from compressional-wave transit time cor-
rected for lithology by the velocity ratio vs. porosity
from density/neutron crossplot for complex
lithologies.
\
\
\
-we_
,y
5000 psig
\
\
I I
20 40
POROSITY, 40
Fig. 51.73-Variation of compressional-wave and shear-wave
velocilles of wet and dry sands with porosity at
5,000 psig differential pressure.
Water Saturated
4 \ 200 PSI
3
c
- 1000 ps,
0
I I I I I I
0 10 20 30 40 50 60
POROSITY. .
3
0.
0.
0
Fig. 51.74-Ratio of compressional-wave to shear-wave veloci-
ty for sands and consolidated rock.
These observed differences between compressional
and shear-wave velocities are illustrated by plotting
velocity ratio as a function of porosity and pressure (Fig.
5 1.74). Also shown in this figure is the velocity ratio
range of 1.75 & 0.20 for the consolidated sedimentary
rocks. A velocity ratio greater than two indicates an un-
consolidated sand saturated with liquid. Below this value
it may be either an unconsolidated sand containing gas or
a consolidated rock.
For the consolidated rocks, the ranges of velocity
ratios for liquid and gas saturation were obtained by
Gregory50 through laboratory measurements. The
results of his study are summarized in Fig. 51.75.
Additional experimental data obtained on a sandpack
are shown in Fig. 51.76. I6 Laboratory measurements
of compressional- and shear-wave velocities are
measured as a function of water saturation and plotted on
this figure together with measured values of density.
These data and the previous observations may be inter-
preted in general terms through use of the Gassmann-
Biot theory described in the Appendix. Taking the
square roots of Eqs. A-l and A-2 gives, respectively,
I
L,, = -
Ph %
[
PC/ +f(Kf)
and
G %
v,,= - .
( >
Ph
Predictions of these equations also are plotted on Fig.
5 1.76 as dashed lines. One of the predictions of Eq. A-l
is that for 100% gas saturation, incompressibility of pore
ACOUSTIC LOGGING
1 .QO
,.20 _ Consolidated Sedimentary Rocks
Pressure Range - O-10,000 psi
1.10 I I I I I 1 1 1
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40
POROSITY, %
Fig. 51.75-Variations of velocity ratio with porosity for water-
saturated and gas-saturated rocks.
fluid (K$ is much smaller than that of the rock matrix
(K,,,); hence, f(Kf) becomes negligibly small (see Eq.
A-4). Therefore, P-wave velocities calculated from this
equation for the gas-saturated rocks are smaller than
those for the liquid-saturated rocks.
The S-wave velocity, however, becomes the function
of gas saturation through dependence on the bulk density
because the shear modulus G is the same for the rock
whether it contains gas or liquid. Hence, as indicated in
Eq. A-2, shear-wave velocity increases upon introduc-
tion of gas to the extent that the bulk density decreases.
Returning to the P-wave velocities, since the com-
pressibility of gas is much larger than that of water, a
small amount of gas reduces pore fluid compressibility
essentially to that of gas as predicted by Eq. A-7 (see
Appendix).
Cf=S,,.c,,. i-(1 -S,,.)c,,
where cX is gas compressibility. Hence, a small amount
of gas reduces compressional-wave velocities signifi-
cantly, but additional gas saturation has little further ef-
fect. This was illustrated by the laboratory data and
theoretical prediction plotted in Fig. 5 I .76. A field ex-
ample shown in Fig. 51.77 confirms this by
demonstrating that compressional-wave transit time does
not differentiate the upper zone at 90% gas saturation
from the lower one containing 20% gas, because the I
curve essentially is responding to the velocity of the mud
in both intervals.
Effects of gas saturation on the compressional to
shear-wave velocity ratio is illustrated in Fig. 5 1.78 for a
deep dolomite reservoir. I7 Over the 18,500 to
18,520-ft interval the v,,Iv, ratio is 1.8; this is as ex-
pected for a dolomite lithology. Over the gas zone below
18,520 ft, however, this ratio is reduced to 1.6, and
clearly differentiates the gas zone. A similar gas effect is
shown in Fig. 5 I .79 for a sandstone reservoir. In this
case, the vp/v, ratio is reduced from 1.67 to 1.5 1, again
clearly dehneating the gas zone.
fii
$J 5.0
I I
=
I
i
Measured (VP) ,
Ii 1
e 4.07 -- I ---L-__-!-- i
1.
i
Computed rvp) /
-----/
I
I
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0
WATER SATURATION, S,
Fig. 51.76-Compressional- and shear-wave velocity and bulk
density vs. saturation for a sand pack.
Sonic, ii secift -200 180 130
Induction Log
Resistivily f!M 1
I I I
1 .o 10.0 100.0
I I I
Fig. 51.77-Gas effect on acoustic log
51-38 PETROLEUM ENGINEERING HANDBOOK
Fig. 51.78-Gas effect on compressional- to shear-wave veloci-
ty ratio in a dolomite reservoir.
1.6 1.7
t Velocity
Ralio
rllTl
Fig. 51.79-Gas effect on compressional- to shear-wave veloci-
ty ratio in sandstone reservoir.
t
Fig. 51.80-Typical gulf coast induction log indicating Iwo gas
sands.
Fig. 51.81-Scope pictures from selected levels in the log on
Fig. 51.80.
In general, the effects of gas saturation on acoustic
velocities in rock may be summarized as follows.
1. Compressional-wave velocity is greater in liquid-
saturated rocks than in comparable gas-saturated rocks,
whereas the reverse is true for shear-wave velocities.
2. The difference in compressional-wave velocity for
the liquid- and gas-saturated states becomes negligibly
small with increasing depth, whereas the equivalent dif-
ference for the shear-wave velocities remains constant.
3. Under equivalent pressure conditions, compres-
sional-wave velocity decrease upon gas saturation (in
poorly consolidated rocks) is much greater than that in
well-consolidated rocks.
Attenuations of elastic waves are also used to identify
gas zones. I8 This is illustrated in the typical Gulf Coast
sandsshowninFigs.51.80and51.81.InFig.51.80,the
induction log indicates two gas zones: one in a thin
stringer at 5,476 ft and the other in a massive sand at
5,520 ft underlain by water. Scope pictures in Fig. 5 1.8 1
were recorded with a single-transmitter, dual-receiver
acoustic log while going into the hole described in the
previous figure. In Fig. 51.81a, the lower-receiver
signal is just becoming affected as it moves very close to
the gas stringer. One foot lower, at 5,477 ft, the lower
receiver is in the top of the gas zone. In Fig. 5 1.8 lc, the
lower receiver is in the gas sand and the upper receiver is
being affected. In the massive gas sand at 5,540 ft, both
receivers are showing almost total compressional wave
loss, whereas in the water sand at 5,580 ft, a strong
signal is apparent at both receivers. For comparison, a
typical shale response at 5,462 ft is given in Fig. 5 1.8lf.
ACOUSTIC LOGGING 51-39
Geopressure Detection
Geopressure refers to a buried rock/fluid system in
which the fluid pressure is greater than the hydrostatic
pressure of a full column of formation water.
Geopressure also is called abnormal pressure or over-
pressure. Abnormally high fluid pressures are found
worldwide. Such pressures occur when fluid in the pore
space begins to support more overburden than just
fluids-i.e., not all the compressional forces are
transmitted by the rock matrix only.
The ability to predict the occurrence and magnitude of
abnormal pressures is a requirement in planning efficient
drilling and, ultimately, completion procedures. Hott-
man and Johnson established a procedure for deter-
mining the first occurrence of geopressure and the
precise depth vs. pressure relationship. They observed
that for hydrostatic-pressure formations in a given
geological province, a plot of the logarithm of
compressional-wave travel time in shales, i,,h, vs. depth
is generally a straight line. The divergence of the observ-
ed travel time kc,,, from that obtained with the established
normal trend kli is a measure of the pore-fluid pressure in
the shale and, hence, in the adjacent permeable forma-
tion (Fig. 51.82). They also established a trend of
resistivity vs. depth for shales and used it similarly in
conjunction with acoustic log data.
A field example showing acoustic log response in an
abnormal pressure section in the North Sea is given on
the right track of Fig. 5 1.83. * A remarkably accurate
prediction of abnormal pressure by surface seismic
measurements is shown for comparison in the left track.
A procedure for evaluation of formation pressure is
summarized as follows.
1. Plot shale velocity or transit time and establish a
normal compaction trend line.
2. Locate the anomalous pressure top at the depth at
which plotted data points diverge from the normal trend.
3. Take the difference between observed shale transit
time and normal shale transit time.
4. Convert the difference to formation pressure gra-
dient by means of an empirically derived curve for a
given age and for a given area (Fig. 5 1.84 was used for
the example shown in Fig. 51.83).
5. Multiply the pressure gradient obtained by depth to
compute the formation fluid pressure at that depth.
Another approach for evaluating abnormal pressures is
suggested by Eaton. * He proposes the following em-
pirical relationship for predicting pore fluid pressure
(Pf):
where
D = depth, ft
p/D = pore fluid pressure gradient, psi/ft,
p,/D = overburden stress gradient, psi/ft,
(P/D) ,r
= normal hydrostatic pressure gradient
(0.456 psiift for Gulf Coast, 0.434 for
fresh waters),
1,
= transit time on the extrapolated normal
curve at depth,
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
-
-
-
'ob
/
I
Fig. 51.82-Prediction of Qeopressure from shale transit time.
Predicted
Abnormal
Pressure TopL
Normal
Pressure or
Lithology Change
Abnormal-
Pressure
i
I,,,-n = 38
Mud Wt. = 13.3
1(
1
Top Chalk
Actual
Abnormal
Pressure Top
t&-f, = 36
Mud Wt. = 14.0
____.~.~
Top Chalk
Fig. 51.83-Comparison of seismic prediction and actual down-
hole pressure environment.
17
MEASURED, I&, - NORMAL fs,,
Fig. 51.84-Transit-time/pressure correlation, North Sea.
0 200 I400 600 600 1000
..,
.#,,I ,I..
I
I ;
,I
I- Caring Travel
Fig. 51.8%Free pipe
Time
-. \
Fig. 51.86-Good bond to casing and formation
PETROLEUM ENGINEERING HANDBOOK
oh
= observed transit time at depth, and
m = empirical exponent varying regionally
around a value of three.
Cement Bond Quality
The primary purposes of oilwell cementing are to secure
casing to prevent leakage to the surface and to isolate
producing zones from water zones. With the increasing
cost of completing wells, accurate determination of the
quality of the casing cementation has become necessary
to avoid costly recompletion and squeeze cementing
jobs.
The successful cementing of a well is affected by
many factors: cement setting time, pressure, tempera-
ture, hole size and deviation, formation and cement
characteristics, casing surface, and damage to the ce-
ment bond by perforating or squeezing operations. These
and many other factors must be considered when
evaluating the effectiveness of a cement job.
Early in acoustic logging, it was observed that the
amplitude of an acoustic signal in a firmly cemented pipe
is only a fraction of that of a free pipe. tZ3 Since then,
downhole acoustic measurements have been firmly
established as the primary technology for determining
cement bondin not only to the casing but to the forma-
tion as well .25 Under favorable conditions even the . %
compressive strength of cement can be determined. I6
Free Pipe. A schematic axial transmitter and receiver
configuration is shown in Fig. 5 1.85 for cement bond
logging. * In a free pipe, most of the energy is confined
to the casing and the borehole fluid, as indicated in Fig.
5 I .85. The resulting acoustic waveform as recorded by
the receiver is also shown in this figure. The following
observations characterize waveforms observed in free,
unbonded casing.
1. The first arrival of the waveform is equal to the total
travel time in casing between transmitter and receiver,
plus the travel time in fluid between the tool and the
pipe.
2. The amplitude of the entire waveform is high.
3. The waveform exhibits a highly uniform frequency.
4. The waveform is persistent and lasts a relatively
long time.
Good Bond to Casing and Formation. When the ce-
ment is perfectly bonded to both the casing and the for-
mation, a very favorable acoustic coupling is developed.
As a result, maximum energy is transferred to the forma-
tion, and very little energy is transmitted through the cas-
ing and cement sheath. As shown in Fig. 51.86, the
waveform shows practically no signal at the casing ar-
rival time and very little amplitude until the formation ar-
rival time.
Bond to Casing and to a High-Velocity Formation. In
areas of high-velocity formations, signals from the for-
mation arrive at the same time as or earlier than the cas-
ing signal, thereby complicating the interpretation
significantly (Fig. 51.87).
Cement Bond to Casing Only. A commonly occurring
condition is that the periphery of the casing is totally sur-
rounded and bonded by a hardened sheath of cement that
ACOUSTIC LOGGING
51-41
1
,-Casing Travel Time
I
Fig. 51.87-Bond to casing and to a high-velocity formation.
is not bonded to the formation (Fig. 5 1.88). This might
happen because the cement does not bond with mudcake
of poorly consolidated formations, or the mudcake dries
and shrinks away from cement.
Under this condition, energy traveling through the cas-
ing is attenuated drastically because of the highly at-
tenuating cement sheath. The annulus outside the cement
sheath offers very unfavorable acoustic coupling; hence.
very littlc energy is transferred to the annular fluid and
virtually none into the formation. This is indicated by the
lack of later-arriving formation energy in the waveform
of Fig. 51.88. The energy observed at Y!O psec is the
beginning of the fluid wave for the transmitter-to-
receiver spacing of 5 ft.
Partial Bonding. A most difficult situation in evaluating
cement bond quality is the condition of partial bond (Fig.
5 I .89). A small gap may be formed between the casing
and cement in an otherwise well-bonded casing. In this
situation the waveform typically contains two distinct
wave energies. The first wave energy arrives at casing
time, since part of the casing is free to vibrate. The sec-
ond wave energy arrives at a time indicated by the
velocity of the formation. Hence, both a moderately
strong casing arrival and a moderate-to-strong formation
arrival exists.
The typical partial-bonding waveform is characteristic
of either a microannulus or a channel in the cement. A
microannulus is a very small separation between casing
and cement. Normally, a hydraulic seal exists with a
microannulus. but not with a channel in the cement.
Thus. it is important to differentiate between the two.
The best way is to rerun the bond log with pressure on
the casing. If a microannulus exists, the casing will ex-
pand, decreasing the separation and transferring acoustic
energy to and from the formation. The casing signal will
decrease and formation signals will then become more
evident. However, if only channeling exists, pressuring
the casing will not greatly alter the log.
Another way to differentiate between microannulus
and channeling is by noting the length of section over
which the condition exists. I5 Since microannulus is
thought to be caused by the condition of the exterior sur-
face of the casing, such as the presence of grease or mill
0 200 ,; 400 600 800 1000
1
.I : 1
.*:
1
t.-. I,
i
I- Casing ikeI Time
Fig. 51.88-Cement bond to casing only.
varnish, the effect tends to appear over a long section of
log. Channeling ordinarily occurs over shorter sections.
Examples of various bonding conditions are illustrated
by the variable-density (3D) log shown in Fig. 5 I .90.
The interval from X552 to X614 ft shows a good pipe
bond but no formation bond. Only a few formation ar-
rivals can be seen, indicating a lack of acoustical cou-
pling between the cement sheath and the formation itself.
Above and below this interval are sections of poorly
bonded pipe. This probably is due to channeling. This is
suggested by the strong pipe signal overriding a weak
formation signal. The interval from X468 to X518 ft i$
well bonded, as evidenced by the strong formation
signal. However, there is evidence of a microannulus
between X506 and X518 ft. Here the fonnation signal is
distorted somewhat by a casing signal.
A recently introduced technology, the Cement Evalua-
tion Tool by Schlumberger. shows great promise in dif-
ferentiating between microannulus and channeling. I
This tool is based on the acoustic reflection method;
however, unlike the boreholc telcviewcr with one
rotating transducer, it has eight transducers placed on a
centralized sonde at 45 from each other in a helical
path. These transducers, emitter and receiver. are about
0 200 ,400 600 800 1000
I
I
-f~ ,I,.
-~ ., 4 ,
_I
/
- C&g Tk~el Time
Fig. 51.89-Partial bonding
51-42
I- usec lncreasina
PETROLEUM ENGINEERING HANDBOOK
Good Bond
Probable
Micro-Annulus
Channel-Poor Bond
Good Bond to Casing
No Bond to Formation
Channel-Poor Bond
Fig. 51.90-Good bond to casing-no bond to formation
Maxlmwn
Fig. 51.91-Ultrasonic cement evaluation log
Fig. 51.92-Full waveforms and variable-density log for dif-
ferent bonding conditions.
1 in. in diameter and operate at 500 kHz. They repeated-
ly send a short ultrasonic pulse toward the casing to
make it resonate in its thickness mode. Cement behind
the casing is detected as a rapid damping of this
resonance, whereas a lack of cement gives a longer
resonance decay.
An example of a cement evaluation log is shown in
Fig. 5 1.91. I30 The right track can be viewed as a map of
cement behind the casing. It is divided into eight chan-
nels, each one representing one transducer with a
shading from white (free pipe) to black (good cement).
In this example, a channel is clearly visible as a white
streak.
Summary of Bonding Conditions. Typical full
waveforms for various bonding conditions are sum-
marized in Fig. 51.92. 128
When there is no cement bonded to the casing, a free
casing signal is indicated on the variable-density log as
straight dark lines with distortion at the collars. This
distortion occurs for a vertical distance equal to the spac-
ing between the transmitter and receiver of the logging
instrument (6 ft on the example shown in Fig. 51.92).
When there is good cement bonding both to the casing
and to the formation, there is no casing signal. but there
is a strong formation signal. The difference in response
for the low- and high-velocity arrivals for a well-bonded
section is clearly illustrated in the lower section of the
variable-density log of Fig. 51.92.
Cased-Hole Evaluation
Most existing wells were completed before the advent of
reliable porosity logging devices; therefore, accurate
porosity data for planning of enhanced recovery opera-
tions must be obtained through existing casing. Radioac-
tivity logging measurements commonly are used for this
purpose; this information, however, can be sup-
plemented by the acoustic log measurements in wells
ACOUSTIC LOGGING
where a good cement bond exists between casing and the
formation. 13 A recent study X2 involving laboratory
modeling and computer simulations has indicated that
acoustic logging can be successful in both bonded and
unbonded casing.
Through-casing acoustic logs have provided reliable
measurements of compressional and shear-wave velocity
data for evaluating porosity and lithology. An openhole
and cased-hole comparison is shown in Fig. 5 1.93 for
the compressional and shear-wave transit times t,, and I,,
The logs were obtained by analysis of the waveforms
digitally recorded with the acoustic logging system
shown in Fig. 51.54. The agreement between compres-
sional and shear transit time logs run in open and cased
holes is excellent. This further enhances the role of
acoustic measurements in cased-hole evaluation.
Mechanical Properties
A knowledge of the mechanical properties of rocks is im-
portant in drilling, production, and formation evaluation.
Mechanical properties include the elastic properties such
as Youngs modulus, shear modulus, Poissons ratio,
and bulk pore compressibilities, as well as the inelastic
properties such as fracture pressure gradient and forma-
tion strength. Borehole measurements of acoustic prop-
erties in combination with density log measurements are
being used more and more for in-situ determination of
mechanical properties of rocks.
Elastic Moduli. Elastic constants describe the
mechanical properties of matter: Youngs modulus,
shear modulus, bulk modulus, and Poissons ratio.
Knowledge of these moduli for rocks is needed in study-
ing the propagation of acoustic waves, as well as in prac-
tical engineering problems connected with drilling, for-
mation fracturing. and predicting reservoir performance.
A commonly used approach to gather this information
is to obtain core samples and to conduct laboratory ex-
periments. For meaningful results. these measurements
must be made at equivalent subsurface conditions.
Needless to say, these are time-consuming and costly.
Even then the results are suspect because the process of
coring removes the overburden stress from the sample
and causes other disturbances that may not be reversible.
Numerous studies have been conducted that compared
elastic moduli obtained by the static (from measurements
of stress and strain) and the dynamic (from acoustic
velocities and density) methods. In rocks subjected to
lower effective stresses, the dynamic elastic moduli are
higher than the static values; as the stress increases,
however, these differences decrease. 33.31 Theoretical
studies by Walsh X predicted that this could be caused
by the resence of cracks in rocks. In fact, Simmons and
Brace
P
found the static and dynamic moduli to be in
close agreement when rocks are subjected to higher
stresses (30,000 psi) so that the cracks are closed.
The relationship of the in-situ-measured elastic moduli
to those determined in the laboratory was investigated by
Myung and Helander. They made laboratory
measurements of compressional- and shear-wave velociL
ties on core samples under simulated subsurface pressure
conditions and reported a close agreement between in-
situ and laboratory-determined values of dynamic elastic
moduli.
51-43
Interval Transit Time 1
500
pslm
A0
I I
,
I
2 Cased Hole
Fig. 51.93-Comparison of digital-sonic logs in a well before
and after casing.
Since then, many other investigators have used
borehole acoustic measurements to determine elastic
moduli. 89,37,38 Compressional- and shear-wave veloc-
ities obtained from the acoustic log measurements are
used with values of density from a density log to calcu-
late Youngs modulus, shear modulus, bulk modulus,
and Poissons ratio by assuming an infinite, iso-
tropic, homogeneous, and elastic medium (see Eqs. 3
through 6).
Applications of these in-situ-determined values of
moduli include predicting sand production and sub-
sidence, and determining fracturing characteristics of
formations. An application involving fracture
characteristics is shown in Fig. 51.94.h The core and
log data are from a section of igneous and metamorphic
rocks. The fracture characteristics of the core are shown
graphically as well as plotted quantitatively as rock
quality designation (RQD), which is the ratio of the
cumulative length of unfractured core to the unit length
of core. Elastic moduli curves are quite similar to the
RQD curve.
PETROLEUM ENGINEERING HANDBOOK
R.Q.D.
mo4oobooaoomoonoouoo 91aJ w
Elastic Properties 3-D Velocity
,&EC INCREASING
I
Fig. 51.94-Comparison of rock quality designatton (R.Q.D.), elastic properties, and 3D velocity log
Fracturing. Fracturing of formations is a commonly
used well stimulation technique. To detennine the best
zoncb for fracturing. laboratory compressibility tests can
be run on rock samples from the zones of interest. Frac-
ture design requires a knowledge of elastic moduli.
which can be obtained from borehole measurements.
An earlier use of boreholc acoustic measurements was
for the identification of zones favorable for fracturing.
Hi@amplitude and high-velocity Lhear w;1vc\ have
been associated with zonch that can be fractured sue-
w\fully. whereas Tones with low-velocity and low-
amplitudc S-waves wcrc found to be quite plastic. In the
example shown in Fig. 51 .c)S. Anderson and Walker
inclicatc 3 wcil-defined shear wave in the /lone from
4.600 to 4.54.5 ft and none ahovc this LOW.
During drilling. control of hydrostatic prcssurc in the
horeholc is nccc.shaQ to not cscccd fracturing prczsuro ot
the formations. thcrcby causing circulation 10~.
However, a knowledge of fracture pressure is needed for
proper design of fracturing operation to stimulate
hydrocarbon production from tight formations. An
estimate of fracture pressure (p/,.) is given by Hubbert
and Willis:
where
1~0
= overburden pressure.
11, = pore-fluid pressure.
p = Poisson> ratio. and
D = depth.
Recent applications of this relationship are discusxcd hy
Atkinson. I41
ACOUSTIC LOGGING
51-45
Am&ude
an +
4500
4600
Comp. 1 Shear
Fig. 51.95-Evaluation of fracturing prospects.
Sand Control. Sand-production control has been a cost-
ly problem affecting the economics of oil and gas pro-
duction in many areas. To avoid unnecessary sand-
control measures, various techniques have been
developed that use borehole measurements of acoustic
propertics, 13X.IJ?~l4~
In the example shown in Fig. 5 I .96. the need for sand
control is predicted by assuming that hydrocarbon effects
on acoustic properties are predominant in poorly con-
solidated formations. In the oil zones shown, transit
times are significantly higher than the value in the water
zone, and the amplitudes are reduced, thereby indicating
poorly consolidated rocks.
Fracture Evaluation
Many of the important reservoirs in the world produce
from naturally occurring fractures, yet evaluating the
performance of these reservoirs is much less understood.
Techniques for evaluating naturally fractured reservoirs
are reviewed in the literature by Aguilera and van
Poollen, IJ5 Suau and Gartner, A6 and Aguilera.
Among these, techniques based on measurements of
acoustic properties are prominent. Cycle skipping
observed on the transit time curve has been associated
with fracturing in certain formations. Also. reduction of
signal amplitude has been correlated with fractures.
More successful applications, however. involve the use
of variable-density or waveform logs. 4x.4y For these
logs, when fractures occur, anomalies also occur in the
acoustic wave banding pattern. Sometimes these are
diagonal patterns. but more often they occur as sudden
breaks in the banding.
Fig. 51.97 shows a variable-density log (3-D log)
from a granite section in New Hampshire. In Zone C.
51-46 PETROLEUM ENGINEERING HANDBOOK
RESISTIWTY ohm mVm
0 18 Normal
5650..
t
Fig. 51.96-Hydrocarbon effects indicate the need for sand control.
Fig. 51.97-Variable density (3D) log in fractured granite.
125-130
the compressional wave is not attenuated, whereas the
shear-wave amplitude is reduced significantly. A
theoretical study by Knopoff and McDonald would
predict this to be due to a low-angle (or horizontal) frac-
ture. High-amplitude compressional and shear energies
indicate that Zone B has no fractures. High attenuation
of the compressional and shear waves in Zone A is inter-
preted to be caused by an oblique fracture. The diagonal
energy pattern below Zone C is caused by the presence
of a reflector (fracture) near the borehole.
In the foregoing analysis, fractures are considered to
be thin reflectors causing distortion in wave propagation
because of acoustic impedance mismatch with the sur-
rounding rock. Since abrupt changes in lithology and
porosity also can cause similar acoustic impedance
mismatches, this simplified interpretation becomes much
more complex.
When the hole conditions are favorable and there is no
mudcake or heavy muds in the hole, the borehole reflec-
tion method provides a more straightforward technique
for the evaluation of fractures. A borehole televiewer
sonde operating in a circular borehole intersectin
a ver-
tical fracture is shown on the left in Fig. 51.98.
8
( The
borehole televiewer log obtained in this configuration.
shown on the right. clearly depicts the vertical fracture as
two dark lines.
ACOUSTIC LOGGING 51-47
Fig. 51.98-Vertical fracture intersecting a circular borehole and its representation on BHTV
amplitude log
The amplitude image from the BHTV, however, can-
not distinguish whether the fracture is open or filled. An
open fracture produces an image on the amplitude log
because little or no signal returns to the sonde. A filled
fracture also can produce an image if there is sufficient
acoustic impedance contrast between the filling material
and the host rock to produce a weaker signal. Therefore,
both open and filled fractures may produce similar dark
images on the amplitude log.
Transit time imaging, however, responds not to varia-
tions of signal amplitude but rather to the travel time
(and, hence, the distance) from the borehole wall. On the
transit time log, the distance to the borehole face is
represented by a gray scale designating white for far,
dark for near, and black for no signal. Therefore, an
open fracture produces a black image on the transit time
image, whereas a filled fracture does not. Fig. 51.99
shows a vertical fracture on the amplitude log on the left.
The similar black outline on the transit time log on the
right confirms that this is an open fracture.
Permeability
Theoretical studies by Biot45.46 have indicated that
changes in acoustic attenuation may reflect the fluid
mobility (the ratio of permeability to viscosity). Later
studies by Wyllie et al. 24 and Gardner and Harris
considered the logarithmic decrement (Eq. 6) of acoustic
energy to be a result of solid friction (jostling decre-
ment) in the rock matrix and viscous drag (sloshing
decrement) within the saturant fluid.
The solid matrix losses (jostling losses) were studied
experimentally by Gardner and Harris, I5 with respect
to the effects of overburden pressure and fluid saturation.
The results of their investigation indicate the jostling
decrement of a sandstone under overburden pressures to
be almost independent of fluid saturation and signal fre-
quency. Hence, changes in the logarithmic decrement
can be attributed to sloshing loss, which, according to
Biot,45.46 reflects changes in fluid mobility.
Later, iv a theoretical study, RosenbaumM applied
Biots theory to the investigation of propagation of
acoustic pulses in a fluid-filled borehole surrounded by a
porous medium. He predicted that permeability could be
estimated from an analysis of tube wave data contained
in the acoustic waveform recorded in a borehole. He sug-
gested that, for a sealed interface between the borehole
and formation, maximum sensitivity to permeability was
obtained in the interval between S-wave arrival and the
fluid wave. For the open interface (no mudcake), the en-
tire signal following the S-wave arrival could be used.
The P-wave arrival was least sensitive to permeability
and could be used for normalization.
Results of this study were first tested by Staai and
Robinson 15 in the Groningen gas field, The
Netherlands. They recorded acoustic waveforms and
analyzed them to obtain a permeability profile, which
compared favorably with the core analysis data.
More recently, Rosenbaums prediction@ of the rela-
tionship between the energy loss of the tube (Stoneley)
wave and permeability was investigated more extensive-
ly by Williams et al. 52 Using a special long-spacing
acoustic logging tool, they measured the tube wave tran-
sit time and energy ratio in wells located in different
geographic locations with formations of varying
lithology, permeability, saturating fluid, depth, and
geological age. From these wells, they also obtained
whole core samples for measurements of permeability.
For these widely varying conditions, they report
qualitative correlations between core-measured permea-
bilities and the tube wave data.
An example shown in Fig. 5 1.100 for a Cretaceous
carbonate section is highly promising as it indicates that
both tube amplitude ratio, Am /AR , and transit time cor-
relate well with a permeability increase of three orders of
magnitude in the center zone.
Conclusions
Borehole measurements of acoustic properties have a
wide range of applications in exploration, production,
51-46
5210
5220
5230
AMPLITUDE
Dark-Weak Slgnal
While-Strong SIgnal
I E S W N
TRANSIT TIME
Black-No Slgnal
Dark-Near
White-Far
N E S W N
Fig. 51.99-Vertical fracture of the BHTV amplitude log on the
left, confirmed to be open by the BHTV transit time
log on the right..
and formation evaluation. Theoretical and experimental
studies have significantly improved our understanding of
the relationships between acoustic wave propagation and
formation evaluation parameters, such as porosity, fluid
saturation, and lithology. This, in turn, has prompted the
development of new and improved borehole acoustic
measurement technology and sophisticated digital signal
processing technology to analyze the large amount of
data. Even then. current applications often use only a
small fraction of the information available in acoustic
waveforms.
Advances in the understanding of acoustic wave prop-
agation are interactively complementing improvements
in downhole recording and transmission technology. and
developments in signal processing. This should result
not only in a broader and more quantitative use of the
present applications, but also in the development of
many new applications.
Fig. 51.100-Permeability correlation with tube wave data
Nomenclature
A = area; or signal amplitude
A,, = signal amplitude at the source
h = intercept defined by Eq. 13
c = compressibility
d = diameter
Di = depth of investigation
E = Youngs modulus
f = frequency
f(Kf) = function of incompressibility of a fluid
in pore spaces
F = force
F,, = compaction correction factor
F, = quality factor
G = shear modulus
I = intensity
I,, = acoustic intensity at the source
K = bulk modulus
L = length
m = slope
n = number
p = pressure
pCi = differential pressure
pf = internal (pore fluid) pressure
pf/D = pore fluid pressure gradient. psiift
(pf./D) ,I
= normal hydrostatic pressure gradient
(0.456 psiift for U.S. gulf coast)
P.fr
= fracture pressure
PO
= external (overburden) pressure
p,,lD = overburden stress gradient. psiift
P,l = P-wave modulus for the rock frame (or
the dry rock)
ACOUSTIC LOGGING
51-49
r = borehole radius
s = arbitrary point
S = saturation
f = travel time
t = transit time
I( = I/Y,,) = transit time for the compressional
waves for a liquid-saturated porous
medium
I~~( = I/Y~,) = transit time for saturant liquid
,I
= damaged zone transit time
I,,,( =1/t,,,,) = transit time for rock matrix that forms
the solid frame of a porous medium
1,, =
transit time on the extrapolated normal
curve at depth
1 oh
= observed transit time at depth
N = particle motion at s
1 = velocity
f
= compressional-wave velocity of drilling
I,, =
\r =
\,, =
\, =
O!=
6=
E=
CL =
t, =
CT =
0, =
X=
P=
P=
4=
Subscripts
a=
C=
(1 =
f=
,? =
hc =
L=
/n =
N=
0 =
P=
.s =
S/l =
1\ =
mud
compressional-wave velocity
pseudo-Rayleigh-wave velocity
shear-wave velocity
tube- or Stoneley-wave velocity
coefficient of absorption; or attenuation
coefficient
logarithmic decrement
strain
longitudinal strain
shearing strain
transverse strain
S-wave critical angle
wave length
Poissons ratio
density
porosity
apparent
corrected
dry rock
pore fluid
gas
hydrocarbon
liquid
matrix
neutron
overburden or oil
pore volume; or P-wave modulus
S-wave modulus
shale
water
Acknowledgments
I wish to thank A.A. Brown, G.S. De, and K.J. Dunn of
Chevron Oil Field Research Co. and M.N. Toksoz of the
Massachusetts Inst. of Technology for reviewing the
manuscript. Debbie Ivey for typing. and. more impor-
tantly. the participants of the Chevron Formation
Evaluation seminar durmg the past 20 years for many
helpful suggestions toward the evolution of this chapter.
APPENDIX
Theory of Elastic Wave Propagation
in Rocks
The first theoretical expression of elastic behavior of a
saturated porous medium was given by Gassmann.U
Later, Biot45,46 developed a more comprehensive theory
of elastic wave propagation in a fluid-saturated,
isotropic, porous solid over a wide frequency range. The
predicted velocity dispersion by this theory is. in
general, less than 3% ; therefore, the low-frequency
approximation should be useful for most applications.
Velocities predicted by this theory at the lower fre-
quencies can be expressed simply by
7
\; =
Pl +mf)
.
(A-1)
Ph
and
G
Lj,,Z = -
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
(A-2)
Pb
where Pd is the P-wave modulus for the rock frame (or
the dry rock), and f(Kf) is the function of the incom-
pressibility of the fluid in the pore spaces. The P-wave
modulus for the dry rock can be expressed, in turn, by
Pd=Kd+;Gd: .t.. (A-3)
and the functionf(Kf), by
flKf.1 =Kj
(1 -K,,/K,,,)
(I-K$K,,,M+(K,,, -K,,)K+K,,,
(A-4)
in which K is incompressibility (or bulk modulus), G is
shear modulus, and the subscripts d, f, and m refer to the
rock frame (or the dry rock), fluid, and rock matrix.
For rocks containing both water and hydrocarbons, the
bulk density is expressed as
p/,=$p,.+(l -d)p,,,, . .(A-5)
where
Pf=S,,P,,.+(l -S,,.)p,,(,, .(A-6)
and the fluid incompressibility. K,, which is the inverse
of compressibility, cf, is given by
c, =S,,.c,,.+(l -S,,,)C,,< , (A-7)
where S denotes saturation, and the subscript hc refers to
hydrocarbon.
Rock frame incompressibility, K,,. in Eq. A-3. which
is the inverse of compressibility of dry rock, (,I, is
related to PV compressibility, c,, . by
c,,=&.,~ +c,,$. (A-X)
51-50 PETROLEUM ENGINEERING HANDBOOK
on the basis of Van der Knaaps definitions. Substitu-
tion of this equation into Eq. A-l, after some manipula-
tion, results in
3
1-p CL
-=
Ph,i 2 1 +!J
(cf-CJ SC, -
fc ,,,. (A-9)
Further substitutions into this equation for density from
Eq. A\5 and rearranging yields a quadratic equation in p.
Negleciing terms involving I 2 (since p is a fraction) and
assuming p to be independent of porosity yields an equa-
tion expressing l/v,,2 as a linear function of porosity. For
lower porosities.
i=mt$+b. . . . (A-10)
v
P
If the Poisson ratios for the saturated rock and the rock
matrix are assumed to be close in value, then b becomes
approximately equal to l/v,,,. The parameter m in Eq.
A- IO, however, is a strong function of c,, .
As the foregoing discussion indicates, Eq. A-10 is an
approximation of Eq. A-9. Therefore, the commonly
used time-average equation, 8.9 which is of the same
form as Eq. A-10,
(A-11)
(where vf is the velocity of saturant liquid) also may be
considered to be an approximation of the more general
theory.
References
I. Leonardon. E.G.: Logging, Sampling, and Testing, Hi~toc
offetro/eur~r Eqvneeru~~. API, New York City (1961) 493-578.
2. GPq?h!SiC\ (Oct. 1944) 540.
3. Mounce. W.D. rr ul. : Seismic Velocity Logging. Pmc,. , Fifth
Annual Midwestern Geophysical Meeting, Dallas (Nov. 19-20.
1951).
4. Summers. G.C. and Broding. R.A.: Continuous Velocity Log-
ging. Groplwsic~s (19.52) 27. 595.
5. Vogel. C.B.: A Selsnuc Velocity Logging Method,
Gcoph~.\ic~~ (1952) 27. 586.
6. Sean. F.W. and %eman\ky. M.W.: Uffilx,rri/!, P/zv.vic:\. Addiwn-
Wc+y Pubhhhlng Co. Inc.. Reading. MA I 1955) 1031.
7. Ewing. W.M., Jardetzhy , W.S.. and Press. F.: E/mric I+uLY.~ ifi
Lrrwrrd Mdiu. McGraw-Hill Book Co. Inc., New York City
(1957) 380.
8. White. J.E.: %suk Wuuv: Radiutiof~, Trcrn.\t,~i.\sio,l. mrl A/-
muuriou. McGraw-Hill Book Co. Inc., Nek York Ciry (1965)
302.
9. Goldman. R.. Ulrru.wiic~ 7i,<~krro/o~~~, Reinhold Puhliahmg
Corp.. New York City (1962) 304
IO. Krautkrtimer. I. and Krautkrjmcr. H.. Ulrrcrsouic Te,riq o>/
Mrurriols. Springer-Verlag. New York City (1969) 52 I.
I I. Guyed. H. and Shdnc. L.E.: Geo/~/~w~~u/ We// Logqirrg. Hubert
Guyed. Houston (1969) 1. 256.
12. Tlmur, A.: Rock Physics. 77~ Arcrhim J. ,jw .Sumrx~ rurrl
ht~~irlrenrl~ sprc~itri /.wrr ( 1978) s-30.
13. Jones. S.B.. Thompson. D.D.. and Timur, A.: A Unified In-
ve~tigation of Elastic Wave Propagatmn in Cm\tal Rocks.
paper presxwd at the Rock Mechamc\ Contercncc. Va11. CO
(1976).
14. ToksBz. M.N., Cheng. C.H.. and Timur, A.: Velocities ot
Seismic Waves in Porous Rocks, Grophwics (1976) 41.
621-45.
15. Toksiiz, M.N., Johnston, D.H., and Timur. A: Attenuation of
Seismic Waves in Dry and Saturated Rocks. Paa I: Laboratory
Measurements. Geophysics (1979) 44, 68 I-90.
16. Johnston, D.H., Toksb;z, M.N., and Timur. A. Attenuationof
Seismic Waves m Dry and Saturated Rocks: Part 11: Theoretical
Models and Mechanisms, Gmphgsics (1979) 44. 691-71 I.
17. Timur, A.: Temperature Dependence of Compressional and
Shear Wave Velocities in Rocks. Grr,p/zwic.r (1977) 42,
950-56.
18. Wyllie, M.R.J., Gregory, A.R., and Gardner, G.H.F.: Elastic
Wave Velocities m Heterogeneous and Porous Media,
Ceophy.~ics (1956) 21, 4 I-70.
19. Wyllie. M.R.J., Gregory, A.R.. and Gardner. G.H.F.: An Ex-
perimental Investigation of Factors Affecting Elastic Wave
Velocities m Porous Media, Geophysiclc (1958) 23, 459-93.
20. Berry, J.E.: *Acoustic Velocity in Porous Media, J. Pet. Twh.
(Oct. 1959) 262-70: Trans.. AIME. 216.
2 I. Tixier. M.P.. Alger, R.P., and Doh. C.A. Sonic Loggmg. J.
Pet. Tech. (May 1959) 106-14: Trms., AIME (1959) 216.
22. Sarmiento, R.: Geological Factors Influencing Porosity
Estimate from Velocity Logs. Bull.. AAPG (1961) 633-44.
23. Wyllie. M.R.J.: i% Fundammtc~ls of We// Log Imerpretation,
Academic Press, New York City (1963).
24. Wyllie, M.R.J., Gardner, G.H.F.. and Greeorv. A.R. : Studies
of Elastic Wave Attenuation in Porous Media, Geophysics
(1962) 27, 269.
75. Wyllie, M.R.J., Gardner. G.H.F.. and Gregory. A.R.: Some
Phenomena Pertinent to Velocity Logging, J. Pet. Tech. (July
1961) 629-36.
26. Gregory, A.R.: Shear Wave Velocity Measurements of
Sedimentary Rock Samples Under Compression, Proc., Fifth
Symposium on Rock Mechanics (1963) 439.
27. Pickett. G.R. : Acoustic Chamcter Logs and Their Applications
in Formation Evaluation. J. Pet. Tech. (June 1963) 659-67:
Truns., AIME, 228.
28. Christensen, D.M.: A Theoretical Analysis of Wave Propaga-
tmn in Fluid Filled Drillholes for the Interpretation of the Three-
Dimensional Velocity Log, Trms. SPWLA (1964) 5
29. Gardner, G.H.F., Gardner, L.W.R., and Gregory. A.R.: For-
mation Velocity and Density-The Diagnostic Basics for
Stratigraphic Traps, Geophy.rics (1974) 39, 770-80.
30. Brandt, H.: A Study of the Speed of Sound in Porous Granular
Media, J. Appl. Mech. (1955) 22, 479
31. Hicks, W.G. and Berry, J.t.: Application of Continuous
Velocity Logs to Determining of Fluid Saturation of Reservoir
Rocks, Geophysics (1956) 21, 739-54.
32. Banthia, B.S., King, M.S., and Fatt, I.: Ultrasonic ShearWave
Velocities in Rocks Subjected to Simulated Overburden Pressure
and Internal Pore Pressure, Geoph~.k\ (1964) 30, I 17-2 I
33. Gardner, G.H.F., Wyllie, M.R.J.. and Droschak. D.M.:
Hysteresis in the Velocity-Pressure Characteristic\ of Rocks.
Gtwphysits (1965) 30. 1 I I-16.
34. Hughes, D.S. and Cross. J.H.: Elastic Wave Velocities in
Rocks at High Pressures and Temperatures. Gro~kwics (Oct.
1951) 26, 557-93.
35. Hughes. D.S. and Kelly, J.L.: Variation of Elastic Wave
Velocity with Saturation m Sandstone, Gropl+i~~s (1952) 17,
739-52.
36. Hughes, D.S. and Maurette. C.: Variation of Elastic Wave
Velocities in Granites wth Pressure and Temperature.
Cwp/zwic:v (1956) 21, No. 2. 277-84.
37. Hughes. D.S. and Maurette, C.: Variation of Elastic Wave
Velocities in Basic Igneous Rock? with Pressure and
Temperature. Geophysics 11957) 22. 23-31
38. Birch, F.: Interpretation of Seismic Structure of the Crust in
Light of Experimental Studies of Wave Velocities in Rock\.
Gcophwic.5 (contribution in honor of Beno Butenherg).
Pergamon Press. Oxford (1958).
39. Timur, A.: Velocities of Compressional Waves in Porous
Media at Permafrost Temperatures. Gcwph~sia ( 1968) 33.
584-96.
40. CoIlin\. F.R.: Test Wells, Umiat Area. Alaska, with
MIcropaleontologic Study of the Umlat Field. Northcm Alaska,
by H R. Berquist. U.S. G&. Sunjc,y Pro/: (1958) 71. No. 206.
paper 305-B.
ACOUSTIC LOGGING 51-51
41.
42.
43.
44.
45.
46
47.
48.
49.
50.
51.
52.
53
54
55
55
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
Robinson. F.M.: Test Wells. Simpson Arca. AIdsha. alth a
Section on Core Analysis. by S.T. Yuster. U.S. Ger~i. .%II.).P!,
Pro/Y (1959) S23-68. paper 30.5-J.
Bar&. D.F.: Setsmic Velocity Measurements. al the Ogotoruk
Creek Chariot Site, Northwestern Alaska in Geological In-
vestigations m Support of Project Chariot in the Vicinity of Cape
Thompson. Northwest Alaska-Preliminary Report. U.S.
Gcol. Survey. TEI-735. issued by U.S. Atomic Energy Comm.
Tech. Inf. Scrvicc. Oak Ridge, TN (1960) 62-78.
Mtiller. G.: Geschwindtgkeitsbestimmungen elastischer
Wellen in gefrorenen Gesteinen und die Anwendung akustischer
Messungen auf Untersuchungen dcs Frostmantels an
Gefrierach%zhten, Grophwicu/ Prmpecting (1961) 9. No. 2.
276-95.
Gassmann, F.: Ueber die Elastizitlt ptrr(iser Medien. Virrrrl-
/uhr.\.\rhriji c/w Nururfmchenden Grs.. Zhrich (195 I) 96, l-23.
Biot, M.A.: Theory of Propagation of Elastic Waves in Fluid-
Saturated Porous Solid: 1. Low Frequency Range, J. Acousrid
SW. of Anwico (1956) 28, 168-78.
Biot. M.A.: Theory ofpropagation of Elastic Waves ma Fluid-
Saturated Porous Solid: II. Hiyh Frequency Range. J.
Acoushd SW. of Amerira ( 1956)28. 179-9 I -
Geertsma. J.: Velocity-Log Interpretation: The Effect of Rock
Bulk Compressibility. Sock Per. &. J. (Dec. 1961) 235-48:
Truns.. AIME. 222.
Brown, R.J.S. and Korringa. J.: On the Dependence of the
Elastic Properties of a Porous Rock on the Compressibility ofthe
Pore Fluid, Geophyics (1975) 40. 60% 16.
King. M.S.: Wave Velocities in Rocks as a Function of
Changes m Overburden Pressure and Pore Fluid Saturants.
Gfw~h,wic.\ (1966) 31, 50-73.
Gregory. A.R.: Fluid Saturation Effects on Dynamic Elastic
Pmperties of Sedimentary Rocks. G~&x~ic:r (1976) 41.
895-92 I.
Nur. A.M. and Simmons, G.: The Effect of Saturation on
Velocity in Low Porosity Rocks. Earth Plan. Sci. Lrtrws
(1969) 7. 183-93.
Voigt. W.: Lehrtxuh &r Krista//~hwik. B.G. Teubner. Leipzig
(1928).
Reuss. A.: Berechnung der Fliessgrenze van Mischkristallen
auf Grund der Plastizitltsbedingung fiir Emknstalle. Z. Aww.
Muth. Mrrh. (1929) 9. 49-58.
Hill, R.: The Elastic Behavtor of a Ctystallmc Aggregate.
Proc. Phu SW. London (1952) 65. 349-54.
Hill, R.: Elastic Properties of Reinforced Solids: Some
Theoretical Principles, J. Meclz. PIzn. So/d.s ( 1963) 11.
357-72.
Timur. A., Hempkins, W.B., and Weinbrandt, R.M.: Scant
ning Electron Microscope Study of Pore Systems in Rocks. J.
Geophys. Res. (1971) 76, No. 20. 4932-48.
Korringa. J. ef ui.: Self-Consistent Imbedding and the Ellip-
soidal Model for Porous Rocks. J. Geophys. Res. (1979) 84,
5591-98.
HadIe?. K.: Comparison of Calculated and Observed Crack
Denstttes and Seismic Velocities in Westerly Granite, J.
Geophw. Rex. (1976) 81, 3484-94.
Van der Knaap. W.: Nonlinear Behavior of Elastic Porous
Media. Trans., AlME (1959) 216, 179-87.
Biot. M.A.: Pmpagation of Elastic Waves in a Cylindrical Bore
Contaminn a Fluid, J. Appl. Phys. (Sept. 1952) 23, No Y.
997- 1005l
White, J.E.: Elastic Waves Along a Cylindrical Bore,
Geophyics (1962) 27. 327-33.
Christensen, D.M.: A Theoretical Analysis of Wave Propaga-
tion m Fluid-Filled Drill Holes for the Interpretation of Three-
Dimensional Velocity Log, Trun.s , SPWLA (1964).
Geyer, R.L. and Myung. J.I.: The 3-D Velocity Log. a Tool
for In-Situ Determination of the Elastic Moduli of Rocks.
Dynamic Rock Mechanics, Pmt.. Twelfth Symposium on Rock
Mechanics (1971) 71-107.
Rosenbaum, J.H.: Synthetic Microaeismogram Logging in
POROUS Formations, C&hv.sir.~ (1974) 39, i4-32. -- -
Tsang. L. and Rader, D.: Numerical Evaluation of the Tran-
sient>coustic Waveform Due to a Point Source in a Fluid-Filled
Borehole. Geophysics (1979) 44. 1706-20.
Cheng. C.H. and Toksoz. M.N.: Modeling of Full Wave
Acoustx Logs. Trans., SPWLA (1980) 21. paper J.
Cheng. C.H. and Toksiiz, M.N.: Elastic Wave Propagation in
a Fluid-Filled Borehole and Synthetic Acoustic Logs.
Gcwphwics (1981) 46. 1042-53.
6X
69
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
80
Xl
82
83
84
85
86.
87
88.
89
90.
91.
92.
93.
94.
Y5.
Radcr. D.: Ac(,u\tic Logging: The C[,mplcte W,~veform and It\
Interpretation. Dr~~~iop~wt~tt i/r Gwphy Cctrl Eylorcrriorr
Method-3. A.A. Fitch (ed.). Applied Science Publisher\
(1982) 151-93.
Palllet. F. and White. J.E.: Acoustic Models of Propagation in
the Borehole and Their RelatIonship to Rock Propcrtie\,
Geop,physic~ (1982) 47, 1215-28.
Minear, J.W. and Fletcher. C.R.: Full-Wave Acoustic Log-
gng. Truns.. SPWLA (1983) paper EE.
Cheng, C.H. and Toksiiz. M.N.: Generation. Propagatmn and
Analysis ofTube Waves in a Borehole. Trw,s., SPWLA (1982)
paper P.
Ingram, J.D.: Method and Apparatus for Acoustic Logging of a
Borehole, U.S. Patent No. 4,131.875 (IY78).
Thomas, D.H.: Seismic Applications of Sonic Logs. 7%w Lo,?
A?t@sr (Jan.-Feb. 1977) 23-32
Tixier. M.P.. Alger, R.P.. and Doh. C.A.: Sonic Logging, .I.
Per. Tech. (May 1959) 106-14: Truns.. AIME. 216.
Lynch, E.J.: Formation Evulrrcrtron. Harper and Row. New York
City (1962) 422.
Kokesh, F.P. rr u/ : A New Approach to Sonic Loggmg and
Other Acoustic Measurements, J. Per. Tech. (March 1965)
282-86.
Kimball, C.V. and Matzetta, T.L.: Semblance Processing of
Borehole Acoustic Array Data, Gwphyrics ( 1984) 49, 274-81.
Arditty, P.C., Ahrens, G., and Staron, Ph.: EVA: A Long
Spacing Sonic Tool for Evaluation of Velocities and Attenua-
tion. paper presented at the 1981 SEG Annual Meeting. Los
Angeles.
Ausbum. J.R.: Well Log Editmg in Suppwi of Detailed
Seismic Studies, Truns., SPWLA (1977) paper F.
Jageler, A.H.: Improved Hydrocarbon Reservoir Evaluation
Through Use of Borehole-Gravimeter Data. J Pet. Ted. (June
1976) 709-18.
Hicks. W.G.: Lateral Velocity Variations Near Boreholes,
Ceophyic~s (1959) 24, 45 l-64
Goetz, J.F.. Dupal. L.. and Bowler. J.: An Investigation into
Discrepancies Between Sonic Log and Seismic Check Shot
Velocities, Part I , AIEA J. (1979) 19. 131-41.
Ransom, R.C.: Methods Based on Density and Neutron Well-
Loggmg Responses to Distinguish Characteristics of Shaly Sand-
Stone Reservoir Rock, The Log Analw, (May-June. 1977) 18.
47-62.
The Long Spacing Sonic, Schlumberger technical pamphlet
(1980).
Misk, A. ef 01.: Effects of Hole Condition\ on Log
Measurements and Formation Evaluation, SAID. Third Annual
Logging Symposium (June 1976).
The Long Spacing Sonic, Schlumberger techmcal pamphlet
(1982).
Spalding, J.S.: Lithology Determination from the Micro-
Seismogram, 77w Lr,g Ann/w/ (July-Aug. 1968).
Nations. J.F.: Lithology and Porosity from Acoustic Shear and
Compressional Wave Transit Time Relationships, Truns.,
SPWLA 18th Annual Logging Symposium (June 1974).
Kowalbki, J.: Formation Strength Parameters from Well
Logs. Pmt., Fifth Formation Evaluation Symposium. Cana-
dian Well Logging Society. Calpaw. Canada (1975).
Myung. John-<: Fracture Inve&pation of the Devonian Shale
Using Geophysical Well Logging Techniques. Proc., Ap-
palachian Petroleum Geology -$yn&sium oh Devonian Shalei.
West Virginia Geological and Economic Survey. Morgantown,
WV (1976).
Koerperich, E-A.: Shear Wave Velncitier Determined From
Long- and Short-Spaced Boreholc Acouwc Devices. Sw. Pet.
Eng. J. (Oct. 1980) 317-26.
Aron. J.. Murray. J., and Sceman. B.: Formation Comprcs-
sional and Shear Interval-Transit-Time Logging by Means of
Long Spacings and DigItal Techniques. paper SPE 7446
presented at the 1978 Annual Technical Conference and Exhihi-
tion. Houston, Oct. l-4.
Parks. T.W., McClellan. J.H.. and Morris. C.F.: Algorithms
for Full-Waveform Sonic LoppinE. paper presented at the 1983
IEEE-ASSP Workshop on Sp&t~al E%mation. Nov.
Ingram, J.D. e, (II.: Direct Phase Determinatmn of Shear
Velocities from Acoustic Waveform Logs. paper prcwnted at
the 1981 SEG Meeting. Los Angeles. Oct.
Willis. M.E. and Toksiiz, M.N. Automatic P and S Velocity
Determination from Full Waveform Digital Acoustic Logs,
Gcophv\icr (1983) 48, 1631-44.
51- 52
PETROLEUM ENGINEERING HANDBOOK
96.
91.
98.
99.
l oo.
101.
102.
103.
104.
105.
106.
107.
108.
109.
110.
111.
112.
113.
114.
Zemanek, J. ei a/. : The Borehole T&viewer-A New Loggmg
Concept for Fracture Location and Other Types of Borehole In-
spection, J. Pet. Tech. (June 1969) 762-74: Trans., AIME.
246.
Wiley, R.: Borehole T&viewer-Revisited. Trans., SPWLA
( 1980) 21, paper HH.
Seisviewer Logging, Birdwell, Div. of Seismograph Service
Corp., technical pamphlet (198 I).
Broding, R.A.: Volumetric Scanning Well Logging, Trans.,
SPWLA (1981) 22, paper B.
Taylor, T.J.: Interpretation and Application of Borehole
Televiewer Surveys, Trans., SPWLA (1983) 24, paper QQ.
Pastemack, ES. and Goodwill. W.P.: Applications of Digltal
Borehole Televiewer Logging, Trans. 1 SPWLA (1983) 24,
paper X.
Peterson. R.A., Fillipone, W.R., and Coker. F.B.: The Syn-
thesis of Seismograms from Well Log Data, Geophy.~ic.~ (July
1955) 20, No. 3, 516-38.
Ausbum, B.E., Nath, A.K., and Wittick. T.R.: Modem
Seismic Methods-An Aid for the Petroleum Engineer. J. Pet.
Tech. (Nov. 1978) 1519-30.
Omnes, G.: Exploring with SH-Waves. paper presented at the
1978 CSEG Natl. Convention, Calgary. Canada, May.
Log Interpretation Charts, Schlumberger (1979).
Clark, S.P.: Handbook of Physical Constants, Geological
Sot. of America, memoir 97 (1966) 587.
Simmons, G. and Wang, H.: Single Crystal Elastic Constants
and Calculated Aggregute Properties: A Handbook, MIT Press,
Cambridge. MA (1971) 370.
Wells, L-E., Sanyal, SK., and Mathews, M.A.: Matrix and
Response Characteristics for Sonic. Density and Neutron,
Tmns., SPWLA (1979) 20, paper Z.
Carmichael, R.S.: Handbook of Physical Properties of Rocks,
CRC Press (1982) 2, 345.
Evaluaci6n de Formaclones en la Argentina, Schlumberger
(1973) 94-95.
Raymer, L.L., Hunt, E.R., and Gardner, J.S.: An lmpmved
Sonic Transit Time-To-Porosity Transform, Trans., SPWLA
(1980) paper P.
Hartley, K.B.: Factors Affecting Sandstone Acoustic Compres-
sional Velocities and An Examination of Empirical Correlations
Between Velocities and Porosities. Tram:, SPWLA (1981)
paper PP.
Minear, J.W.: Clay Models and Acoustic Velocities, paper
SPE I I031 presented at the 1982 SPE Annual Technical Con-
ference and Exhibition, New Orleans, Sept. 26-29.
Kuster, G.T. and Toksiiz, M.N.: Velocity and Attenuation of
Seismic Waves in Two-Phase Media: Part 1: Theoretical For-
mulations. Geophysics (1974) 39, 587-606.
115. Gardner, G.H.F. and Harris, M.H.: Velocity and Attenuation
of Elastic Waves in Sands, Trans., SPWLA (1968) 9, paper M.
116. Domenico, S.N.: Effect of Brine-Gas Mixture on Velocity in
an Unconsolidated Sand Reservoir, 77~ Log Anulyst (1977) 18,
38-46.
117. Kithas, B.A.: Lithology, Gas Detection, and Rock Properties
from Acoustic Logging Systems, Trans., SPWLA (1976) 17,
paper R.
118. Laws, W.R., Edwards, C.A.M., and Wichmann, P.A.: A
Study of the Acoustic and Density Changes Associated with
High-Amplitude Events on Seismic Data, Trans., SPWLA
(1974) IS, paper D.
119. Hottman, d.& and Johnson, R.K.: Estimation of Formation
Pressures from Log-Derived Shale Properties, J. Pvt. Tech.
(June 1965) 717-22: Trans.. AIME, 23b.
120. Herring, E-A.: North Sea Abnormal Pressures Determined
from Logs, Pet. Erg. (1973) 45. 72-84.
121. Fertl, W.H.: Abnormal F&motion Pressure, Elsevier Scientific
Publishing Co., New York City (1976) 382.
122. Eaton, B.A.: The Equation for Geopressure Prediction from Well
Logs, paper SPE 5544 presented at the 1975 SPE Annual Tech-
nical Conference and Exhibition, Dallas, Sept. 2X-Oct. 1.
123. Grosmangin, M., Kokesh, F.P., and Majani, P.: A Sonic
Method for Analyzing the Quality of Cementation of Borehole
Casings, J. Pet. Tech. (Feb. 1961) 165-71; Trms.. AIME.
222.
124. Walker, T.: A Full-Wave Display of Acoustic Signal in Cased
Holes, J. Pet. Tech. (Aug. 1968) 81 l-24.
125.
126.
127.
128.
129.
130.
131.
132.
133.
134.
13s.
136.
137.
138.
139.
140.
141.
142.
143.
144.
145.
146.
147.
148.
149.
150.
151.
152.
Brown, H.D., Grijalva, V.E., and Raymer, L.L.: New
Developments in Sonic Wave Train Display and Analysis in
Cased Holes, Trans., SPWLA (1970) 11, paper F.
Pardue, G.H. et al.: Cement Bond Log--k Study of Cement
and Casing Variables, J. Pet. Tech. (May 1963) 545-55;
Trans.. AIME, 228.
Acoustic Cement Bond Log, Technical Pamphlet, Dresser
Atlas (1979) 20.
Cement Bond Evaluation in Cased Holes Through 3-D Velocity
Logging, Technical Pamphlet, Birdwell (1978) 12.
Fr&lich, B., Pittman, D., gnd Seeman. B.: Cement Evaluation
Tool-A New Approach to Cement Evaluation, paper SPE
10207 presented at the 1981 SPE Annual Technical Conference
and Exhibition, San Antonio, Oct. 4-7.
Cement Evaluation Tool, Technical Pamphlet. Schlumberger
(1983).
Fans, L.: Acoustic Logging Through Casmg, Trans., CWLS
Formation Evaluation Symposium (1968) 2, paper J.
Chang, S.K. and Everhart, A.H.: A Study of Some Loggmg in
a Cased Borehole, J. Pet. Tech. (Sept. 1983) 1745-50.
Simmons, G. and Brace, W.F.: Comparison of Static and
Dynamic Measurements of Compressibility of Rocks, J.
Geophys. Res. (1965) 70, 5649-56.
King, M.S.: Static and Dynamic Elastic Moduli of Rocks
Under Pressure, Rock Mechanics-Theory and Practice, Proc.,
Eleventh Symposium on Rock Mechanics (1970) 329-5 1.
Walsh, J.B.: The Effect of Cracks on the Uniaxial Elastic Com-
pression of Rocks, J. Geophw. Res. (1965) 70, 399-41 I,
Myung, J.1. and Helander, D.P.: Correlation of Elastic Moduli
Dynamically Measured by In Situ and Laboratory Techniques,
The Log Analyst (1972) 13. 22-33.
McCann, D.M. and McCann, C.: The Application of Borehole
Acoustic Logging Techniques in Engineering Geology. The
Lag Analyst (1977) 18, No. 3. 30-37.
Coates, G.R. and Denoo, S.A.: Mechanical Properties Pro-
gram Using Borehole Analysis and Mohrs Circle, Trans.,
SPWLA (1981) 22. paDer DD.
Anderson. T. and Walier, T.: Log Derived Rock Properties for
use in Well Stimulation, paper SPE 4095 presented at the 1972
SPE Annual Meeting, San Antonio, Oct. 8-11.
Hubbert, M.K. and Willis. D.G.: Mechanics of Hydraulic
Fracturing, J. Pet. Tech. (June 1957) 153-66; Tuans...AIME,
210.
Atkinson, A.: Fracture Pressure Gradients from Acoustic and
Density Log Data: An Updated Approach, Trans.. SPWLA
(1977) 18. paper AA.
Walker, T.: Acoustic Character of Unconsolidated Sands,
Welex paper (197 1).
Stein, N. and Hilchie, D.W.: Estimating the Maximum Pro-
ductlon Rate Possible from Friable Sandstones without Using
Sand Control, .I. Pet. Tech. (Sept. 1972) 1157-60; Trans.,
AIME, 253.
Tixier, M.P., Loveless, G.W,, and Anderson, R.A.: Estima-
tion of Formation Strength From the Mechanical Properties
Log, J. Pet. Tech. (March 1975) 283-93.
Aguilera, A. and van Poollen, H.K.: Current Status on the
Study of Naturally Fractured Reservoirs, The Log Analyst
(1977) 18, 3-23.
Suau, I. and Gartner, J.: Fracture Detection from the Logs,
Trans., Sixth European Formation Evaluation Symposium of the
SPWLA London Chapter (1979) paper L.
Aguilera, A. : Naturally Fractured Reservoirs, PennWell
Publishing Co., Tulsa (1980) 703.
Walker, T.: Progress Repon on Acoustic Amplitude Logging
for Formation Evaluation, paper SPE 45 I presented at the 1962
SPE Annual Meeting, Los Angeles, Oct. 7-10.
Myung, J.I. and Baltosser, R W.: Fracture Evaluation by the
Borehole Logging Method, Stabilirq Rock Slopes, Thirteenth
Symposium on Rock Mechanics (1972) 31-56.
Knopoff, L. and McDonald, G.H.F.: Attenuation of Small
Amplitude Stress Waves in Solids. Gct>ph,wic.c (1958) 34.
Staal. J.J. and Robinson, J.D.: Permeability Profiles from
Acoustic Logging, paper SPE 6821 presented it the 1977 SPE
Annual Technical Conference and Exhibition, Denver, Oct.
9-12.
Williams, D.M. et al.: The Long Spacing Acoustic Logging
Tool, Trans., SPWLA (1984) 25, paper T.
Chapter 52
Mud Logging
Alun H. Whittaker, Exploration Logging IX.*
Introduction
Conventional mud logging has been commercially
available since 1939. The service involves extraction of
gases from the returning mud stream and analysis of the
gas for combustible hydrocarbons. Commonly, the
resulting analyses are logged at drilled depth and plotted
alongside a drill-time or rate of penetration log and a cut-
tings sample geological log. Although the mud log data
cannot be related directly to undisturbed reservoir prop-
erties, they are important indicators of potentially pro-
ductive horizons in the well. The conventional mud log
continues to be the most important geological data
source available before wireline logs are run.
The mud logging unit offers a useful location for the
operation of other wellsite analyses and services. It pro-
vides a clean, well-lighted laboratory area with a stable
electrical supply and is continuously operated by
geologists or geologically trained technicians. Many
mud logging contractors have made use of these assets to
augment conventional mud logging with an extensive
range of geological and engineering services. Often
unrelated to the traditional gas analysis function of the
unit, these services nevertheless generally are considered
aspects of mud logging now in the same manner as
sonic, density, and neutron logs often are grouped with
electric logs.
The earliest expansion of mud logging services began
in the 1960s with the introduction of improved methods
of geopressure detection. New techniques were added to
the logging unit and it became common for a separate
pressure log to be prepared alongside the mud log.
The 24-hour activity of the mud logging unit allowed
continuous operation of this service in which early detec-
tion was essential.
In the 1970s, the advent of rugged microelectronics
allowed the introduction of more sophisticated and
automated equipment into the logging unit. Most
notably, the use of drilling rig data-acquisition systems
The chapter on this topic In the 1962 edibon was written by A.J. Pearson.
linked to minicomputers introduced a range of drilling
optimization and control services. Unlike conventional
mud logging and geopressure detection, these services
are essentially nongeological. Generally, engineering
personnel are added to the logging crew for these
services.
In the 1980s three new aspects to mud logging ser-
vices have been introduced. First, direct links between a
wellsite minicomputer and an office data center allow
centralized surveillance and control of several wells. The
logging unit provides a wellsite access point to the cen-
tral computer data base and analytical software.
Second, there is the increasing use of the mud logging
unit as the surface receiving and control center for
downhole measurement-while-drilling (MWD) services.
The mud logging unit provides both a convenient work-
ing environment and support data (e.g., total depth
measurement) for this service. Additionally, the ability
to integrate mud logging and MWD data in a single com-
puter adds economy and speed to the well evaluation
process.
Third, the 1980s have brought the first fundamental
changes in the methods of hydrocation and geological
analysis, which continue to be the common denominator
of all mud logging services. Improved sampling techni-
ques, pyrolysis, chromatography, and other geochemical
techniques have enhanced the diagnostic and quantitative
value of mud logging. Wellsire geochemical screening
for reservoir and source-bed type may now be performed
in the mud logging unit.
Service Types
The number and range of mud logging contractors is
possibly greater than that of any other oilfield service.
The logging services offered by any single contractor
may range from basic hydrocarbon logging, using equip-
ment barely more sophisticated than that introduced 40
years ago, to complex chemical and physical analyses
and a complete engineering surveillance and control
center.
52-2
Similarly, logging personnel may be graduate
geologists or engineers, or technicians of various levels
of expertise. In specifying the mud log service for a well,
the operators engineer, geologist, and the logging con-
tractor should define the objectives and problems an-
ticipated and select those aspects of the service required.
Since extra service usually implies extra cost,
economics must play a part in the decision. In engineer-
ing monitoring, it is relatively easy to compute the sav-
ing in drilling time or cost required to justify some addi-
tion to logging service day rate. This is discussed in
detail at the end of this chapter.
Although overlaps occur, the services provided in mud
logging may be grouped in line with the traditional
oilfield disciplines: (1) formation evaluation ser-
vices -hydrocarbon analysis, geological analysis, and
geochemical analysis; (2) petroleum engineering ser-
vices-geopressure evaluation and petrophysical
measurements; (3) drilling en@neering services-data
acquisition and data analysis. This order is convenient
for the following discussion of logging services since it
closely parallels the historical development of mud log-
ging and the level of sophistication of logging units used
today.
Formation Evaluation Services
Gas Extraction Methods
Although the modem mud logging unit may perform
many different services, probably its most critical one is
the analysis of hydrocarbon gases. 2 Before this analysis
can be performed, a sample of gas must be extracted
from the drilling mud. This is performed by the gas trap
(Fig. 52.1).
The gas trap is a square or cylindrical metal box im-
mersed in the shale shaker ditch, preferably in a location
PETROLEUM ENGINEERING HANDBOOK
of maximum mud flow rate. Ports in the lower part of the
trap allow mud to enter and leave the trap. An electric or
pneumatic agitator motor provides both pumping and
degassing of mud passing through the trap.
Gas evolved from the mud is mixed with ambient air in
the upper part of the trap and drawn through a vacuum
line to the logging unit for analysis. This device provides
a relatively cheap and reliable method of obtaining a
continuous gas sample. However, the efficiency of the
device is somewhat affected by drilling practice. Pump
rate and ditch mud level will influence mud flow rate
through the trap; mud rheology will be a factor in the
degassing efficiency of the trap; and mud and ambient
air temperature around the trap and vacuum line will af-
fect the relative efficiency with which light and heavy
hydrocarbons are extracted and retained in the gas phase.
This latter effect is most noticeable in areas of high diur-
nal temperature variation, where heavier alkane gases
seen in daylight may condense and be lost in the cold of
night.
An alternative to the conventional gas trap is the
steam, or vacuum, mud still. In this device, a small sam-
ple of drilling mud is collected at the ditch, returned to
the logging unit, and distilled under vacuum. The
method provides a relatively high and uniform extraction
efficiency for all hydrocarbons. It is, however, a time-
consuming manual process. Analyses are noncontinuous
and subject to human error; for example, light hydrocar-
bons can evaporate while the sample stands prior to
analysis.
While a useful addition to the conventional gas trap at
times, the mud still does not provide a real alternative.
The development of a continuous gas trap with good and
consistent efficiency of extraction is a high priority in the
improvement of mud logging technology.
Fig. Cl-Gas extraction at the ditch
MUD LOGGING
Hydrocarbon Analysis
The basic form of gas analysis involves the analysis by
combustion of the bulk sample. Although commonly
called total gas analysis, it is, in reality, analysis for
total combustible gases and primarily detects the low-
molecular-weight alkanes (paraffins) such as methane,
ethane, propane, butane, and pentane (with partial con-
centrations of hexane and heptane at higher ambient
temperatures).
Catalytic Combustion Detector (CCD). After filtration
and drying, the gas stream is injected at constant
pressure and flowrate into a detector chamber (Fig.
52.2). The original type of mud logging gas detector,
and probably still the most widely used, is the catalytic
combustion, or hot wire detector (Fig. 52.3).
The hot wire detector is a Wheatstone bridge circuit
consisting of four resistances: a fixed resistor, Rf; a
rheostat, R,, used to trim or balance the bridge; and a
matched pair of coiled platinum wire filaments, Rd and
R,. The two filaments are enclosed in an analysis cell
with the detector filament, Rd, exposed to the flow of
gas sample and the reference filament, R,, isolated in
pure air.
When a bridge voltage, V, is applied, the filaments
become heated. A voltage between two and three volts is
commonly selected to give a high enough filament
temperature for hydrocarbon combustion at the filament
surface (actual voltage used depends on the particular
detector design). Combustion heat causes the
temperature and hence resistance of the detector filament
to rise relative to the reference filament. The bridge is
unbalanced and current flows between the two sides of
the bridge. Using a galvanometer of resistance R, , this
current, I,, can be measured. Since combustion occurs
at the filament surface only, the galvanometer current is
quite sensitive and linear with changing gas
concentration.
Obviously, detector response will depend on both the
concentration and composition of the sample gas phase,
since each hydrocarbon species will have its own par-
ticular heat of combustion. Table 52.1 shows these for
the low-molecular-weight alkanes.
Since gas composition is unknown, the total gas detec-
tor cannot be calibrated for tme compositional response.
The detector is calibrated with a mixture of a single
alkane, usually methane, in air. Detector response is
then reported in percentage equivalent methane in air
or EMA. Using a variable resistance, R,, in the bridge
it is possible to adjust the bridge current, I,, and
graduate the galvanometer directly in percentage EMA.
An older practice, which is now becoming obsolete, was
to take the galvanometer reading in milliamps and
relabel it as gas units. Such units are obviously equip-
ment specific although some company or regional stan-
dards have been enforced. Where this practice continues,
confusion can be avoided by requiring the logging con-
tractor to report calibration data on the mud log heading.
For example, the contractor would report 100 total gas
units=2% EMA.
Fig. 52.4 shows the response of a typical CCD to com-
monly occurring combustible gases. Notice that a
response of 1% EMA, or 50 total gas units, may indicate
a concentration of 1% methane or a somewhat lower
52-3
:VACuUM PUMP
r PRESSURE
1 REGULATOR
Fig. 52.2-Gas analysis system.
ZERO ADJUST
POTENTIOMETER
L SPAN ADJUST
POTENTIOMETER
Fig. 52.3-Catalytic combustion detector.
TABLE 52.1-HEATS OF COMBUSTION OF THE SIMPLE
ALKANES
Cn +2n+2)
(3n + 1)
+-O,-nCO,+(n+l) H,O+E
2
Molecular E
n=1 Weight (kcallmol) kcallgm Structure
Methane 1 16 191 11.9 i
Ethane 2 30 342 11.4 u
Propane 3 44 493 11.2 tit
Iso-butane 4 56 648 11.2 A
Butane 4 58 650 11.2 j-c+4
52-4 PETROLEUM ENGINEERING HANDBOOK
ZERO 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 x2 I.4 16 , 8 20
AO.JvsT
PERCENT DROt.aRBON IN AIR
Fig. 52.4-Catalytic combustion detector response.
concentration of a mixture of methane and heavier
alkanes. Total gas response may be thought of as a gas
richness indicator, increasing both with gas concentra-
tion and with addition of heavier fractions.
To assist in discriminating light alkanes from heavy
ones, a second identical detector may be used. By setting
a lower bridge voltage (1 to 1.4 V) and filament
temperature, the detector is no longer capable of induc-
ing combustion of methane. The resulting detector out-
put, still reported in percentage EMA, is commonly
labeled petroleum vapors, wet gas, or heavies, although
only qualitative comparison of the two detector
responses allows recognition of dry and oil-associated
gas shows.
Response of the CCD can be maintained linearly up to
the stoichiometric, or ideal, combustion composition of
hydrocarbon in air. Above this composition, approx-
imately 9.5% EMA, the detector saturates, in-
complete combustion occurs, and response becomes
nonlinear. At higher concentrations, the sample must be
diluted with air before it is introduced into the sample
chamber to maintain a combustible gas mixture.
Theoretically, by using progressive sample dilution, a
CCD can be maintained linearly up to concentrations of
100% EMA. In reality, each dilution stage requires a
reduction in gas sample volume and an increasing mix-
ing error. It is generally accepted that 40% EMA is the
maximum limit of reliability of a CCD.
As an alternative to progressive dilution, where high
gas concentrations are regularly expected, the detector
can be reconfigured to operate as a thermal conductivity
detector (TCD). Though the detector circuit remains
essentially unchanged, it is operated at a lower voltage
such that no gas combustion occurs. Bridge current now
is reversed, responding to the cooling effect of the gas
stream passing over the detector filament. Methane,
which has a substantially greater thermal conductivity
than air, will produce a large cooling effect, which may
be linearly calibrated up to very high concentrations. The
device is, however, poorly responsive to the heavier
alkanes, CO2 and hydrogen sulfide (HzS), which have
thermal conductivities close to that of air. The high con-
ductivity gases, hydrogen and helium, will give
responses even greater than that of methane.
The CCD is quite selective for hydrocarbons. Carbon
dioxide (COZ) and hydrogen sulfide (HzS) will not bum
at the detector filament. They will marginally reduce the
HYDROGEN
+1 7+ *I n
SAMPLE +-J
Fig. 52.5-Flame ionization detector.
+ Ii20
thermal conductivity of the gas mixture and induce a
small heating effect at the detector filament. This
positive response is commonly so small as to be in-
significant when compared with the greater hydrocarbon
response. However, if the concentration of noncombusti-
ble gases becomes so high as to prevent complete com-
bustion of hydrocarbon with air, a much larger negative
response will occur.
Hydrogen will bum in the detector, even at low
voltage, giving a concentration response similar to
methane. Although free hydrogen does occur as an in-
termediate product of petroleum maturation, it is ex-
tremely reactive and diffusive. Occurrence of hydrogen
in a petroleum gas show is therefore most uncommon.
Significant concentrations of hydrogen have been shown
to result from deep-seated structural movement, but the
most common origin is from the corrosion of aluminum
drillpipe or of steel drillpipe in extremely low pH drilling
fluids.
A serious disadvantage of the CCD is the tendency of
the catalyst surface to become poisoned by the ac-
cumulation of impurities and partial combustion prod-
ucts. This may result in a slow, progressive degradation
of performance or a sudden, catastrophic loss, when, for
example, silicon compounds are present in the mud.
Regular detector calibration is essential to maintain
reliable operation.
Flame Ionization Detector. The inherent limitations of
the CCD resulted in a search for a more reliable detector
technology. The most accepted and increasingly used is
the flame ionization, or hydrogen flame, detector
(FID) (Fig. 52.5).
One important difference between the flame ionization
and the catalytic combustion principles is that the flame
ionization method involves complete combustion of the
sample. A small quantity of sample is introduced into a
hydrogen/oxygen mixture that is continuously burning in
a combustion chamber. The heat generated by the
hydrogen flame is sufficient to initiate complete combus-
tion of all hydrocarbons in the sample. A large oxygen
excess is maintained relative to the small sample volume
and saturation never occurs. The heat output of the
hydrogen flame is the sum of the heats of combustion of
hydrogen and the sample hydrocarbons.
Unfortunately, most of the heat produced is from the
large volume flow of pure hydrogen. The small, dilute
flow of hydrocarbons produces such a small proportion
of the total heat of combustion that it cannot be measured
accurately. Combustion heat then cannot be used as a
measure of hydrocarbon concentration. Detection of the
hydrocarbons instead relies upon an unusual in-
MUD LOGGING
52-5
termediate stage in combustion that only occurs in
hydrocarbons burning at high temperatures. This in-
volves the creation of unstable electrically charged
anions and cations. By placing a positive electrode, or
anode, in the form of a cylindrical chimney above the
hydrogen flame, the negative anions may be collected
and the resultant electric current used to determine
hydrocarbon concentration.
The ionization/combustion sequence is a complex one
that involves many intermediate and alternate reaction
steps. The number of ions created, and therefore the cur-
rent flowing, is in direct proportion to the concentration
of the alkanes and to the number of carbon atoms in the
alkanes (Fig. 52.6). The FID response in percentage
EMA is, therefore, like the CCD, a richness indicator
showing increases with increasing concentration and in-
creasing alkane molecular weight.
The FID is totally selective for compounds containing
carbon-to-hydrogen (C-H) bonds. Other gases and im-
purities in the sample stream produce zero or negligible
response and do not degrade detector performance.
Although the detector response is effectively linear
throughout all concentrations, the electrometer used to
monitor and amplify the detector current has perfor-
mance limits of linearity. Since mud log gas shows may
vary from tens of parts per million (ppm) to tens of per-
cent, both electrical signal attenuation and sample split-
ting are required to ensure low-range sensitivity and
high-range linearity of FID response. In most modem in-
struments this is handled automatically, ensuring a
higher degree of accuracy than manual sample dilution.
Gas Chromatography. In addition to a total gas detec-
tor, most modem logging units will also contain a gas
chromatograph. This device allows the separation of the
individual alkanes and their separated detection, giving a
gas analysis of composition and concentration. While
this analysis is of greater value than the total gas
response in EMA, the chromatograph does not provide a
continuous analysis but processes batch samples
separated by a number of minutes. In drilling terms, this
translates into separate analyses several feet apart. The
chromatograph does not replace the total gas recorder in
showing the fine detail and progressive changes in a gas
show.
In gas chromatography, a fixed volume gas sample is
carried through a separating column by a carrier gas,
usually air. The column contains liquid solvent surface
or a fine molecular sieve solid. By difference in gas
solubility or by differential diffusion, the gas mixture
becomes separated into its components, the lightest
traveling most quickly through the column and the
heaviest most slowly.
Depending on the nature of the column, each compo-
nent will pass through and exit the column in a
characteristic time. From the column, the components
pass in turn to a detector, which may be a CCD, TCD, or
FID. The detector is calibrated with a gas mixture of
known composition and concentrations. A separate
calibration factor for each component can be used for
detector response as the components occur in turn.
Since heavier components take longer to traverse the
column, the time and depth interval between samples is
governed by the number of components to be analyzed.
0 0.2 0:4 0.6 0.8 1 :o
HYDROCARBON CONCENTRATION % IN AIR
Fig. 52.6-Flame ionization detector response.
In routine logging, a chromatograph usually will be set
to cycle through continuous automatic analyses for
methane, ethane, propane, isobutane and n-butane. This
requires approximately 3 to 5 minutes. If heavier alkanes
(e.g., pentanes) need to be detected, the automatic con-
trol is disengaged and the analysis allowed to continue
for a longer period of time.
Infrared Absorption Detector. The third, and least
used, form of detector is the infrared absorption detector.
This instrument uses the principle that any chemical
bond will absorb infrared energy of a specific frequency
governed by the chemical nature and geometry of that
bond. For example, methane contains four identical
carbon-to-hydrogen (C-H) bonds. If a gas sample is ir-
radiated with infrared energy at a frequency
characteristic of this bond, the energy absorbed by the
sample will be in proportion to the number of C-H bonds
and hence to the concentration of methane in the sample.
All other alkanes contain C-H and carbon-to-carbon
(C-C) bonds. Although these bonds are chemically iden-
tical, they vary in geometry and hence characteristic in-
frared frequency, depending on their position within the
alkane molecule. Theoretically it should be possible to
pass the gas sample through a series of test cells, testing
for infrared absorption at a series of characteristic in-
frared frequencies. Combination of the results would
provide a continuous analysis of both alkane type and
concentration-i.e., the equivalent of a continuous
chromatogmph.
Unfortunately, the C-H and C-C bonds show such a
large number of minutely varying geometries that, in-
stead of a series of discrete characteristic frequencies, a
continuous band of overlapping absorptions occurs. At
best, using a two-absorption cell system, it is possible to
provide an estimate of methane concentration and total
hydrocarbon concentration, in EMA. This result is com-
parable to the result obtainable from a dual CCD system
and inferior to the results from an FID-equipped gas
chromatograph.
Detection of Nonhydrocarbon Gases. The most
commonly occurring nonhydrocarbon gases in petroleum
exploration are CO*, HzS, helium, nitrogen, and
hydrogen. As discussed previously, the occurrence of
naturally produced hydrogen is rare. Helium and
nitrogen also tend to have regionally or geologically
52-6
PETROLEUM ENGINEERING HANDBOOK
specific occurrences. CO2 and H2 S arc common trace or
significant components of natural gases and equipment
for their detection should be used on any exploration
well.
Chromatograph-Thermal Conductivity Detector.
The most versatile device for detection of nonhydrocar-
bons is a chromatograph equipped with a TCD. By se-
lecting an appropriate column material and length, any
single component or combination may be separated. The
TCD will provide a response to any gas that has a ther-
mal conductivity different from that of the carrier gas.
This response will differ for each sample gas/carrier gas
combination but, by using gas mixtures of known com-
position, calibration curves for each component can be
developed.
Best response and sensitivity is achieved when the
maximum difference exists between the thermal conduc-
tivities of the sample gas and the carrier gas. Thermal
conductivity generally declines exponentially with in-
creasing molecular weight. Thus the light gases
(hydrogen and helium) may be readily detected by use of
air as the carrier gas. For the heavier gases (nitrogen,
CO;, , and HzS) that have thermal conductivities closer
to that of air, a lighter and higher thermal conductivity
carrier gas must be used. Helium is a common choice but
hydrogen also may be used if available.
An important consideration when assessing the
reliability of analyses for nitrogen and CO2 is their
presence in the sample caused by the introduction of air
into the gas trap and the aeration of drilling fluid.
Air of normal atmospheric composition, dissolved and
entrained in drilling fluid, will be introduced continuous-
ly into the borehole. In the hot downhole environment,
corrosion and other oxidation reactions will deplete oxy-
gen from this air resulting in a relative increase in
nitrogen and CO* concentration. Oxidation of car-
bonaceous material will further add to CO2 enrichment.
Alternatively, the presence of corrosion inhibitors in the
mud may deplete both oxygen and CO*. Regardless of
the mechanism involved, oxygen depletion will increase
with temperature and length of circulation time through
the downhole system.
At the surface, this oxygen-depleted air and any gas
recovered from the formation is mixed with ambient air
at the gas trap. This air will vary in composition with the
surrounding atmosphere-e.g., emissions from rig
motors, vehicles, and others.
Any show of nitrogen or CO2 from the formation must
be recognized above background concentrations, which
will show some random variation and a progressive in-
crease as the hole is deepened and mud circulation
becomes hotter and of longer duration. Regardless of the
analytical method used, precision of the ppm level can-
not be provided by the analysis. When only trace quan-
tities of gas are expected or when a precise composi-
tional analysis is required, mud logging analysis of CO2
or nitrogen cannot be relied upon.
Of the nonhydrocarbon petroleum gases, HIS and
CO? are the most significant. They are the most com-
monly occurring gases in high concentrations and
because of their polar nature pose serious problems of
corrosion of drilling and production equipment. H2S is
also toxic in relatively low concentrations. In many
areas, detectors specific to these gases are considered
standard mud logging equipment.
Infrared Absorption Detector. Continuous CO2 detec-
tion is best handled with infrared absorption. An infrared
analyzer is used that is responsive to the characteristic
frequency of the carbon-to-oxygen (C-O) bond unique to
COz. Correction of atmospheric CO2 concentration is
performed by alternately scanning two sample cells. One
contains a sample from the gas trap and the other con-
tains ambient air. Differential output provides a measure
of CO2 concentration above atmospheric.
Tube-Type Detector. Several types of H2S detectors
are used, all of which monitor a change resulting from
the chemical oxidation of the gas. The simplest detector
is the tube-type device in which the sample gas mixture
is drawn at a controlled flow rate through a glass tube
containing reactive lead acetate. The lead acetate, which
is deposited on a substrate of high-surface-area silica gel
granules, reacts with HzS to produce lead sulfide and
changes from white to dark brown or black in the
process:
Pb(CH3C00)2 +H2S-2CH3COOH+PbS.
Since the amount of lead acetate in any unit length of
tube is constant, the tube may be graduated in terms of
concentration of H2S in a fixed volume of sample.
The panel-mounted instrument has two tubes installed.
Flow of sample from the ditch is constant through one of
the tubes, and, if H2 S is present in the gas being evolved
at the ditch, the lead acetate begins to discolor pro-
gressively from bottom to top (the direction of sample
flow). Since the sample, and hence the discoloration, is
continuous, this response is qualitative only. The
discoloration indicates that H2S is present in only trace
or in enriched quantities, but no estimate of actual con-
centration can be made.
As soon as this discoloration is seen, a warning must
be given since even trace quantities of gas can be
dangerous. A quantitative analysis can be made by
switching flow to the second tube and introducing a
timed sample. In this case, a fixed amount of discolora-
tion occurs and the scale allows reading of the H2S
concentration.
An alternative configuration for the tube indicator is in
a small handbellows, often called a puffer or snif-
fer, which can be used to sample the atmosphere in
various locations around the rig.
Since the lead acetate reaction is not reversible, once
the tube is used it must be replaced. The instrument can-
not keep a continuous record of HzS concentration but
only a series of individual measurements. This is a
drawback, but not a serious one since any quantity of
H 2 S in the atmosphere is both a health hazard and an in-
dication that the mud system is totally saturated. Once
HzS is detected, mud treatment to remove it must begin.
Gas measurement is required to ensure that it is removed
and does not reappear.
The tube indicator may be used to detect CO2 or any
other gas for which a discoloring reactant is available.
For CO*, hydrazine is used in place of lead acetate.
MUD LOGGING 52-7
Presence of CO2 is indicated by a purple coloration of
the chemical in the tube:
CO2 +N2H4 -NH2NHCOOH.
The tube method, however, is poorly suited to con-
tinuous monitoring since there will be a uniform rate of
discoloration by atmospheric CO2
Paper-Tape-Type Detector. A more sophisticated ver-
sion of this detection principle uses continuous paper
tape, impregnated with lead acetate, to allow continuous
analysis and a quantitative electrical output for chart
recording and activation of alarms.
The detector mechanism is similar in appearance to an
open-reel tape recorder. Its operation and operating com-
ponents are analogous to that of tape recording. Paper
tape, a porous filter paper coated with an even concentra-
tion of lead acetate, is wound from reel to reel at a con-
stant speed. The tape passes through a sample chamber
through which gas from the ditch passes continuously.
The tape will be discolored by an amount proportional to
the concentration of lead acetate on the tape, the speed at
which the tape is moving (both of which are constant),
and the concentration of H2S in the sample. From the
sample cell the tape passes to a detector where light from
a collimated source is reflected from the tape to a
photoelectric cell. The output of the photoelectric cell is
readily calibrated in terms of H2S concentrations by
passing through the system test paper strips with zones of
different color that correspond to a range of known
concentrations.
The paper-tape-type detector may be used for the
detection of COz or other gases if a suitably impregnated
paper tape is available. Unlike the tube indicator, it is
possible to discriminate between a baseline of at-
mospheric discoloration and a true show above
baseline.
Although the paper-tape-type is superior to the tube in-
dicator, both suffer the disadvantage of requiring
periodic replacement of the reactive material, lead
acetate, and the possible degradation of the product in
storage. Indicator tubes and rolls of paper tape are sup-
plied in sealed, dated packages and should never be used
if the seal is broken or the package is beyond its expira-
tion date.
Solid-State Electrical Detector. The most modem Hz S
analyzers involve use of a solid-state electrical detector.
This device depends on the reversible reduction of
metallic oxides by HzS as its means of detection. A
semiconductor sensor element is exposed to a flow of gas
drawn from the ditch. The surface of this element con-
sists of a proprietary metallic oxide layer. In the presence
of HzS, this layer will be partly reduced to metallic
sulfides, and its electrical resistance will change:
(metal) O+HzS-+(metal) S+HzO.
This is an equilibrium reaction. If Hz S ceases to be pres-
ent, the reaction reverses with the reoxidation of sulfides
to oxides. At all times, the sulfide-to-oxide ratio (and
hence the electrical resistance) of the layer is a direct
function of the concentration of H2S in the sample pres-
ent in the vicinity of the sensor.
Alternative configurations of this device involve
multiple installations with either samples being drawn
from, or sensor elements located in, various locations
around the rig with centralized monitoring and alarm
functions. Locating the sensor in a remote location may
cause problems if the sensor is exposed to potential
damage or mistreatment. It does, however, remove the
risk of loss of response resulting from gas dissolving in
condensation in long vacuum lines.
The device has high reliability and accuracy and is
widely used in the industry. There are, however, two
deficiencies that should always be considered. The first
and most important is that if the sensor is operated for a
period of time without any H2S present, it tends to lose
reaction speed. (It is important to note here that the sen-
sor does not lose sensitivity! It will respond, within
calibration, to the presence of H2S, but will respond
somewhat sluggishly to the first appearance.)
For safety reasons, the sensor must be reactivated
regularly by using a sample of H2S to maintain its reac-
tion speed.
Second, the sensor will respond to certain organic
sulfides that may be present in oil or result from mud ad-
ditive decomposition. The response to these compounds
is low but may result in a false H2 S show.
Soluble Sulfide Analyzer. One disadvantage common
to all Hz S gas analyzers results from the high solubility
of the gas in water. H2.S will not be liberated from the
drilling fluid and will not be seen by a gas analyzer until
a saturated solution of the gas exists. Since serious corro-
sion problems may be caused by low concentrations of
the gas in mud and even a few ppm of the gas in air is a
health hazard, it can be seen that by the time that HzS
gas is detected at the surface, a major problem already
has developed.
Early detection of H2 S requites analysis of the drilling
mud. This can be accomplished by regular sampling and
wet chemical analysis, but the mud logging service can
provide continuous soluble sulfide analysis by using a
selective ion electrode measurement system.
With this device, a sensor probe, which is immersed in
the drilling fluid, contains pH (hydrogen ion) and pS
(sulfide ion) specific electrodes and a temperature sen-
sor. When HzS dissolves in water it will in part
dissociate into bisulfide (HS -) ions and sulfide (S ~ -)
ions. The solubility of H2S and the degree of dissocia-
tion are controlled by the pH and temperature of the solu-
tion If these two parameters and the concentration of a
single dissolved sulfide species are measured it is possi-
ble to deduce the concentration of all other species. In
the soluble sulfide analyzer this is done automatically by
a microprocessor. By using this device it is possible to
detect H2 S and begin treatment to remove it from the
mud without concentrations ever becoming high enough
for gas detectors to be effective or for personnel to be
placed at risk.
Geological Analysis
After gas analysis, the most important function of mud
logging is the sampling and evaluation of drill cuttings.
52-a PETROLEUM ENGINEERING HANDBOOK
Even when the mud logging unit operator is not a profes-
sional geologist, the minimum requirement is for iden-
tification and brief description of sample lithology,
estimation of reservoir properties (amount and type of
porosity and permeability), and description of oil
staining.
Sample Lag Time. Hydrocarbon and geological
analysis depend on the representative sampling of drill
cuttings and gases liberated by the cutting action of the
drillbit. In interpreting the analytical results, it is
necessary to account for the lag time and physical effects
of the gas and cuttings travel from the bottom of the hole
to the surface.
Lagging of samples is essential so that results may be
reported or logged at the depth from which the sample
originated (at the time the sample arrives at surface, the
depth, of course, will be somewhat greater). Lag time
may be obtained simply by calculating the time
necessary to displace the total annular volume of drilling
fluid as given by
van=v, -VP, ,..,.....,.....,...........(l)
qP
van=- . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . v )
(2)
an
and
D
I/=-, . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .(3)
VCWI
where
V = annular volume, m3/m,
VT = hole capacity, m3/m,
VP = pipe capacity and displacement, m3/m,
V,
= annular velocity, m/s,
qP
= pump output, m3/s,
tl = lag time, s, and
D = depth, m.
Separate calculations must be performed for each an-
nular section (drillpipe in casing, drillpipe in open hole,
drill collars in open hole, etc.).
Calculated lag times ate used when first drilling out of
casing or in hard rock areas where an in-gauge hole is ex-
pected. However, a calculated lag time cannot take into
account capacity variation in out-of-gauge holes or varia-
tion in pump rate or efficiency (for example, when the
pump is stopped to make a connection).
Determining and using lag in terms of pump strokes
has distinct advantages over lag determined on a time
basis. The counters tracking the cuttings up the hole stop
automatically when the pump is stopped. Clocks would
continue to run, and some subtractive factor would have
to be introduced. The most important advantage,
however, lies in accuracy. A lag determined in terms of
an interval of time is correct for only one speed of the
circulating pump (that speed at which the lag determina-
tion was run), whereas the lag in pump cycles is accurate
for any pump rate.
The lag can be determined by placing a tracer in the
drillpipe at the surface when the kelly bushing is
broken off, allowing the tracer to be pumped through
the hole and back to the surface, and counting the
number of strokes requited of the circulating pump to
make this circulation. From this total pump stroke count,
the number of strokes required to pump the tracer down
through the pipe to the bottom of the hole is subtracted.
This figure is calculated on the basis of the capacity of
the drillpipe and the displacement of the circulating
pump. The result is the lag stroke.
Various materials (such as whole oats, barley, or strips
of colored cellophane) may be used as tracers and picked
up on the shaker screen for approximating the lag. Under
ordinary circumstances, however, calcium carbide
placed in the drillpipe will react with the mud to form
acetylene. This gas will be picked up by the mud gas
detector and is the most convenient and reliable method
for determining the lag. Acetylene gas appears as wet
gas on the gas detector and is easily distinguished from
methane produced from the formation.
Representative Cuttings Samples. There is no
substitute for representative cuttings samples accurately
correlated to the depth from which they came. They are
the required supportive data for the evaluation of any
mud logging, geological, geophysical, or engineering
data. Every rig has a shaker screen for separating the cut-
tings from the mud as they reach the surface. The shaker
screen may or may not be a good place from which to
take cuttings samples. 3-5 If the shaker screen is used, a
board or catching box should be placed at the foot of the
screen for collecting composite samples. This becomes
especially important where drill rate is low, to ensure
that the sample collected is representative of the whole
interval drilled and not just the final few inches.
Where a traditional rhumba shaker is used, dif-
ferences in flow through the possum belly (ditch at the
rear of the shale shaker) will result in density and size
sortings of cuttings across the various screens. This sort-
ing can be of assistance to the logging geologist in par-
tially separating large cavings from the smaller bot-
tomhole cuttings. However, great care must be taken to
ensure that a representative sample is caught. Where a
modem doubledeck shaker is used, cuttings on both
the upper and lower screens should be sampled.
A sampling depth interval should be set that thz mud
logger can be expected to maintain while keeping up
with other responsibilities. Sample intervals can be
shortened as the hole is deepened and drill rate falls. The
mud logger should never allow more than 15 minutes to
pass between catching samples. For example, if the sam-
ple interval is 10 ff and the drill rate is 10 ft/hr, the mud
logger should take four scoops of samples over the hour
to fill the sample bag for the interval. Special samples
should always be taken whenever background gas
changes are seen or the lag time after drilling breaks oc-
cur. If a board or catcher box is used, it must be cleaned
off after each sample is taken.
Samples should be taken from the desilter or desander
outlets whenever these are running. In this way, the log-
ging geologist can establish the quantity and appearance
of sand and line solids commonly contaminating the mud
system. If an unconsolidated formation is penetrated,
MUD LOGGING 52-9
sample from the desander will contain both formation
sand and mud solids. The logging geologist must be able
to discriminate between these.
Washing the cuttings in many areas, however, par-
titularly areas and zones of tertiary sands and shales, is
Washing and preparing the cuttings to be examined are
probably as important as the examination itself. In hard
rock areas, the cuttings are usually quite easily cleaned,
in which case washing is a matter of merely hosing the
sample in a container of water to remove the mud film.
rate of reaction, which is rapid for calcite and slow for
dolomite, provides a guide to relative composition.
sample.
This test can be made more quantitative by use of a
calcimeter. In this device a weighed sample is treated
In more complex mixed carbonates and sulfates (e.g.,
with acid in a sealed reaction chamber. Reaction is
monitored by measuring either the volume or pressure of
evolved CO;! over time until reaction is complete. Out-
put is percentage of calcite and dolomite in the rock
more difficult and requires several precautions. The
clays and shales present are often soft and of a consjsten-
cy which goes into solution and makes mud. Care must
be taken to wash away as little of the shale as possible,
and, in determining the sample composition, to take into
account that which is washed away.
After washing the cuttings to remove the mud, they are
washed through a 5-mm sieve unless doing so will fur-
ther cause excessive loss of shale or clay. It is generally
considered that the cuttings will pass through the S-mm
sieve, and that the material that does not is cavings and
may be discarded. However, the material that does not
pass through should be examined for sand cuttings. If
they should be present, these afford an excellent oppor-
tunity for study of larger-than-normal cuttings chips.
Cuttings from wells drilled with oil-based or oil-
emulsion muds are usually more representative of the
drilled formation than cuttings drilled with water-based
mud because the oil emulsion prevents sloughing and
dispersion of clays and shales into the mud. At the same
time, washing and handling cuttings drilled with this
type mud poses somewhat of a problem; they cannot be
cleaned by washing in water alone. It is usually
necessary to wash the cuttings first in a detergent solu-
tion to remove the mud. Some of the liquid commercial
detergents available may be used. In extreme cases, it
may be necessary to wash the cuttings first with a
nonfluorescent solvent such as naptha, and then wash
them in a detergent solution to remove the solvent. Use
of a solvent is not advisable unless absolutely necessary
because of the risk of removing any oil staining present.
An oven mounted on the wall of the logging unit can
be used to dry a portion of the cuttings sample after it has
been washed, but some of the washed cuttings are ex-
amined wet under the microscope. A sample of un-
washed cuttings also is required for cuttings analysis in
the blender. Although these cuttings should not be
rigorously washed, a light rinsing to remove surface
drilling mud film is advisable.
The logging geologist should extract a small amount of
sample from each stage of the sample preparation proc-
ess. From examination of all samples, an accurate
estimate of sample composition can be produced. 3 Once
the percentages of the various constituents have been
estimated, the sample description in logical order should
contain (1) rock type, (2) color, (3) hardness (indura-
tion), (4) grain size, (5) grain shape, (6) sorting, (7)
luster, (8) cementation or matrix, (9) structure, (10)
porosity, (11) accessories, and (12) inclusions.
Only a visual sample examination usually is required
at the wellsite in elastic (sand/shale) formations. In car-
bonates, other tests may be required to determine the
chemical and physical nature of the rock. The simplest of
these is to test cuttings with dilute hydrochloric acid; the
anhydrite and gypsum), a chemical stain kit may be
used. Small samples of washed drill cuttings are spot-
tested with a series of chemical test solutions.
Characteristic coloration of a test solution is indicative of
the presence of a particular mineral in the sample.
Many excellent texts are available that discuss the
geological aspects of mud logging. These include Low, 6
Maher, 7 and McNeal. * Since this chapter deals primari-
ly with the technology of mud logging, they are not
discussed further here.
Hydrocarbon Content of Samples
In addition to a geological evaluation, cuttings samples
must be tested for hydrocarbon content. A blender or
cuttings gas analysis must be performed on every sample
caught. This involves disintegration of a sample of cut-
tings in a blender, extraction of a sample of liberated
gas, and injection into a total gas analyzer. This can be
performed by manual extraction with syringe and injec-
tion into the units online gas analyzer. However, for
speed and continuity of operation, modem logging units
use automatic extraction and injection into an indepen-
dent catalytic combustion cuttings gas analyzer.
As soon as a representative cuttings sample has been
taken, a measured amount (100 cm3 in a measuring cup)
of unwashed sample is placed in the blender jar and
covered by 600 cm3 of water, then blended for 30
seconds and left to stand for another 30 seconds before
taking a gas sample. If the hole is caving badly, the
amount of cuttings may be increased but should be con-
sistent-especially before and through a show. With hard
carbonates, low-porosity sandstones, or similar reservoir
rocks that cannot be efficiently pulverized by the cutter
blades (40 to 60 seconds blending is recommended), the
blender jar should be allowed to stand for 2 or 3 minutes
before taking any gas readings. After the gas analysis is
performed, the water should be inspected for oil signs or
petroleum odor. Any droplets can be skimmed off for ex-
amination. The crushed rock material also may be of
value in clarifying lithological evaluation.
The blender is a good evaluation tool because it gives
some indication of the quality of the reservoir with
respect to the porosity and the GOR. A good porosity
sandstone generally will be well-flushed by the time it
reaches the surface, so the amount of cuttings gas ob-
tained will increase proportionately to the decreasing
porosity. This is also true with a sucrosic dolomite or
high-porosity limestone such as chalk. However, if the
reservoir is a fractured carbonate, etc., with all the oil
and/or gas in the fractures, little or no cuttings gas will
be recorded and the use of the blender as a porosity in-
dicator is of limited value, because future production is
52-10
going to be more dependent on the complexity of the
reservoir fracturing than the inherent porosity and
permeability of the rock itself.
In oil reservoirs, gas is normally in solution with the
oil, and the agitation of a covered sample provides an ex-
cellent index of the amount of gas with the oil, which is
significant in view of the gas already recorded from the
ditch. A high cuttings gas with an oil show should be
treated as a very significant show and should be one of
the more important factors to consider in the overall
evaluation.
When large intervals of reservoir rock are cored, the
blender readings obtained are not likely to be as infor-
mative as those obtained if the section had been drilled
normally. Generally, the amount of sample is reduced
because the center is still in the core barrel. With the
often slower drill rate, the percentage of cavings may be
increased. Also, if a diamond head is being used, the
rock will be coming back in a very ground-up and often
badly altered state. Thus, if the geologist is agreeable,
representative loo-cm3 samples from the more broken-
up parts of the recovered cores may be blended with
water, and any readings can be used to supplement the
readings obtained during the actual coring.
Inspection for liquid hydrocarbons should be made at
the microscope (oil-stained cuttings), the blender jar
(petroleum sheen and odor after blending), and in an
ultraviolet light inspection box (fluorescent oil droplets
on cuttings and diluted mud samples).
Visible oil stain and color is an important indication of
oil presence and type as are ultraviolet fluorescence in-
tensity and color, grading from dull brown for the
heaviest (residual or wet) oil to bright blue-white for
light oils and condensate. However, crosschecking of
observations is essential to confirm the presence of oil.
Many mud additives, contaminants, minerals, or rig
floor debris will have an oily appearance or odor and
may fluoresce under ultraviolet light. Only if visible
stain and ultraviolet fluorescence yield the same conclu-
sion is oil confirmed. For example, samples con-
taminated with pipe-dope will have a dark oily ap-
Fig. 52.7-Comparative results of REII, OSA, and THA
PETROLEUM ENGINEERING HANDBOOK
pearance suggesting heavy oil. However, the same cut-
tings examined under ultraviolet light will show a bright
blue-white fluorescence characteristic of the highest
gravity. This incompatability allows the identification of
a contaminant and avoids the logging of a false show. A
good mud logger should examine all mud additives
stocked at the wellsite and determine, before their use,
their characteristic properties and appearance when
mixed with drilling mud or cuttings.
If a true oil stain is identified, a single, representative
cutting should be tested with an organic solvent. This is
the cut test. Solvent cut is valuable in assessing
fluorescence and allows deductions to be made of oil
mobility and permeability of the reservoir. By removing
the oil from the colored background of the cutting, the
solvent allows a better estimate of fluorescence. The way
in which the solvent cut occurs (e.g., instantly for high-
gravity oils, more slowly for more viscous lower-gravity
oils, or irregularly streaming from limited permeability)
also yields useful information. If no cut can be obtained
from a washed cutting, the test should be repeated on a
dried cutting, a crushed cutting, or after application of
dilute hydrochloric acid. This will produce the required
cut and yield further evidence on permeability or effec-
tive porosity. After the cut solvent has evaporated, a
residue of oil remains in the cut dish, displaying the oils
natural color.
Finally, if sufficient oil is present, it may be possible
to determine its refractive index. Just as oil stain color
and fluorescence progressively change with oil type,
refractive index correlates well with oil gravity. Portable
refractometers that require only a small droplet of sample
are available for use in the mud logging unit. By using a
small quantity of oil (skimmed from the surface of the
blender jar or a diluted mud sample), a very reliable
estimate of oil gravity can be obtained.
Geochemical Analysis
More sophisticated analyses of hydrocarbon and
hydrocarbon source material involve the principle of
pyrolysis-thermal decomposition of a sample in an inert
atmosphere. Three such devices are presently available:
the Rock-Eva1 II* (RE), the Oil Show Analyzer
(OSA), and the Therrnalytic Hydrocarbon Analyzer
(THA). All these devices use variations of the lnstitut
FranGais du Pitrole-Centre de Recherches du Groupe
Petrofina (IFP-FINA) temperature-programmed
pyroanalysis method developed by Espitalie. 3,9 The
process involves the heating of a weighed rock sample
through an increasing temperature program in an inert
helium stream. Since combustion cannot occur, the
helium carries away from the sample hydrocarbons and
CO2 resulting from the thermal volatilization of
petroleum and organic source material in the rock. These
evolved gases may be analyzed by flame ionization and
thermal conductivity detectors. The amount of gas ex-
pressed as milligrams per gram of rock, the evolved gas,
and the time and temperature of evolution may be used to
characterize the richness and type of a reservoir or source
rock.
The differences between the three devices are shown
in Fig. 52.7. The RE 11 uses a uniform temperature ramp
of 25Umin up to 550C. The helium stream carrying
evolved gases passes to a CO2 trap and then to an FID.
MUD LOGGING 52-11
On completion of the pyrolysis the trapped CO2 is
passed to a TCD. The output showing temperature, FID
and TCD response is called a pyrogram.
The RE II pyrogram characteristically shows two
distinct peaks in FID response. The first, SI , represents
true hydrocarbons, oil and gas, volatilized from the sam-
ple. The second, 52, represents hydrocarbons generated
by the thermal cracking of hydrogen-rich organic source
material, kerogen, in the sample. The temperature,
T
maxi
at which the peak of S2 occurs is indicative of the
maturity of the kerogen. Mature kerogen, capable of
generating oil or gas, will have a T,,, in the range of
435 to 470C. A lower T,,, indicates immature kerogen
and a T,,, above 470C indicates postmature material
that has already yielded the majority of its hydrocarbon
product.
The TCD response, S3, represents the yield of CO2
from the thermal cracking of oxygen-rich kerogen in the
sample. A comparison of S2 and S3 provides the relative
hydrogen/oxygen richness of the kerogen. This is useful
in estimating source type. Hydrogen-rich kerogen is
prone to rich oil yields, whereas oxygen richness gives
more gas-prone and lower-yield kerogen.
Following completion of pyrolysis the sample is further
heated in an oxygen atmosphere causing the complete
The oil show analyzer (OSA) differs from the RE II in
that it uses a nonuniform temperature consisting of two
temperature steps followed by a temperature ramp.
isolating and detecting methane, ethane, propane,
butane, and isobutane or a second, low-voltage catalytic
combustion detector, allowing discrimination of total
gas from petroleum vapors.
4. A separate cuttings gas analyzer, allowing gas
analysis from blended cuttings samples.
5. A microscope and ultraviolet light inspection
chamber for the identification and description of
lithology and liquid hydrocarbons.
6. A pumpstroke counter, which, in conjunction with
calcium carbide lag tests, allows gas readings and cut-
tings samples to be lagged back to correct drilled depth.
In addition, the unit requires a drilling depth and time
recorder for the determination of sample depth and the
calculation of rate of penetration, an important rock
strength/porosity indicator. Ideally, this should be in-
dependent of the drillers depth recorder.
Although pressure control is not a standard function of
mud logging (see Petroleum Engineering Services), the
Since mud logging samples (gas, oil, and cuttings) are
extracted from the mudstream, changes in mud
chemistry and rheology must be considered when
evaluating mud log results. The logging unit should be
equipped to perform basic mud tests-e.g., mud
balance, Marsh funnel, sand test kit, and filter press.
Laboratory glassware and chemicals are required to per-
form chemical tests and titrations on cuttings and mud
filtrate samples.
combustion of all remaining organic carbon in the
sample.
The OSA pyrogram generally shows three
characteristic peaks in FID response with SO and Sl cor-
responding to the two temperature steps and representing
the splitting of the RE II Sl peak into a lower-
temperature (gas-indicating) peak and a higher-
temperature (oil-indicating) peak. The S2 peak and T,,,
are the same as those seen in RE II. S4 represents CO2
produced by pyrolysis (S3 equivalent) and by combus-
tion. Combination of the pyrolysis and combustion gas
products provides a measure of the total organic carbon
content or the gross organic richness of the rock.
RE II has become widely used as a laboratory instru
ment and both it and the OSA have seen use in the mud
logging unit in frontier exploration. The restriction on
their wider implementation in mud logging has been the
high complexity (and price) of these instruments, which
has limited their use to the most advanced logging units
and demanding exploration environments.
The THA, a much simpler device, is better suited to
routine mud logging services. It uses only an FID and a
temperature program similar to the OSA pyrolysis phase
(without the final combustion phase). The THA
pyrogram provides SO, Sl, S2 and T,,, . Neither CO;!
analysis, S3, nor S4 is available from the THA.
The Modern Mud Logging Unit
There are six basic requirements for a modem mud log-
ging unit* based on the previous discussions.
1. A total combustible gas analyzer using catalytic
combustion or flame ionization detector.
2. A gas sample dilution system, allowing
maintenance of linear detector response at high gas con-
centrations or a backup thermal conductivity detector.
3. An automatic cycling chromatograph capable of
mud logger, by continuously monitoring mud gas con-
tent, should be aware of situations of potential drilling
hazard. It is therefore usual for the mud logging unit to
be equipped with a level monitor for the active mud pit.
This allows the mud logger to be a second line of
defense, after the driller, in detecting a well kick or loss
of circulation.
The Mud Log
Format
Fig. 52.8 shows a typical modem mud log. There are
currently no industry standards for mud logs, and presen-
tation varies among operators. However, the track order
commonly follows that shown in the example.
Truck I is used for rate of penetration (ROP). Also in-
cluded in this column are items of drilling data that may
affect interpretation of the log (bit types, changes in
drilling parameters, circulation breaks, etc.).
Track 2 is for depth notation and for symbolic
representation of special evaluations (for example, cored
or tested intervals).
Truck 3 is a graphical representation of formations
penetrated. Usually the column is subdivided into 10
equal columns and graphic symbols are used to represent
10% increments of lithology types seen in cuttings.
Unlike other tracks on the log, the lithology track is not a
calibrated physical measurement but a subjective assess-
ment. Care should be taken to establish rules of drafting
- acceptable to the preparer and user of the log.
Even after removal of cavings and contaminants, a
cuttings sample is not truly representative of a single
depth interval. Variation in particle size and density
cause differences in annular recovery rate and mixing of
cuttings in the annulus. A true cuttings percentage will
never show sharp formation boundaries as a result of this
mixing. For example, a thin sandstone within a massive
52-12 PETROLEUM ENGINEERING HANDBOOK
XL MUD LOGGING
COMPANY
COMPANY ABC OIL COMPANY OF THE
NETHERLANDS
WELL DESMOND Xl
F,ELD ANDORRA
REG,ON DUTCH NORTH SEA
COORDINATES 5 0 50 N
02 1530E
API WELL INDEX NO
SPUD DATE 514!78
ELEVATION AKBlo MSL 84 5
RKB lo SF 174 2
TOTAL DEPTH 5345
CONTRACTOR DEEPER DRILLING CO
,q,G , TYPE CHARLIE JONESJACKUP
LOG INTERVAL
DEPTH FROM 400 TO 5345
DATE FROM5478 TO 20 5 78
SCALE -UNIT 1 500 69, STANDARD
LOG PREPARED BY
A EVANS,G JONES
f3 EDWARDS
IOLE SIZE
:ASING RECORD
30 AT 400 9aAT 4185
20AT 735 7 A, 5340
x *T 2995
AT
IUD TYPES
SEAWATER GEL
KCL POLYMER
TV 2300
TO
5345
TO ~
.ITHOLOGY SYMBOLS
\EBREVIATIONS
FORMATION EVALUATION LOG
Fig. 52.8-Mud log formal
MUD LOGGING
52-13
shale with sharp boundaries shown clearly by ROP and
total gas analysis may appear from cuttings to be a sandy
shale horizon of much greater vertical extent.
thin horizons may be submerged in a high background
and not identified from total gas alone (Fig. 52.9).
A geologist may use all available data to prepare an in-
terpretive lithological log. That is, in the previous exam-
ple, to sharply show the sandstone boundaries as in-
dicated by ROP. Sometimes a mud logger will attempt to
add some degree of interpretation to a cuttings log.
Again, in the example the mud logger would show the
presence of sand in all the cuttings samples but exag-
gerate the percent sand in the sample coinciding with the
higher ROP.
Even gas reliably identified as resulting from a drilled
interval may be misleading as a show-quality indicator.
Factors that affect the magnitude of a gas show include
the volume of the rock cylinder crushed in the drilling
process, controlled by bit diameter and ROP and dilution
of liberated gas in mud (i.e., the flow rate of drilling
mud passing bottom as the hole is cut). Thus, gas show
magnitude will be expected to increase in larger diameter
holes, at higher ROPs, or at reduced mud flow rate
(Fig. 52.10).
This semi-interpretation may result in confusion
when later sample examinations are compared with the
mud log and, in my opinion, mud loggers should be in-
structed to prepare a true cuttings log representing the
percentages of lithologies actually seen in the sample. If
the mud logger is geologically qualified and the
operators geologist requires geological interpretation,
then an interpretive lithological log should be prepared
as an additional track on the mud log.
A simple technique is available to remove these factors
from evaluation by normalizing gas show magnitude to a
standard or normal set of drilling conditions:
Track 4 presents the results of hydrocarbon analyses.
It may consist of one single width track but most often is
subdivided into two or more separate tracks, as in the ex-
ample. Track 4 will include the results of total gas, cut-
tings gas, and chromatographic analyses and when oil
shows occur, an estimate of oil show quality and oil cut
will be added. Supplementary gas analyses (helium,
hydrogen, CO 2, or H 1 S) also may be added to this track
or plotted on a supplementary log.
R,
l-
R
(4)
OB
Track 5 primarily is used for brief sample descriptions.
Also included in this track are mud test results, casing
and cementation records, hole deviations, carbide test
results, and many other operating data used in interpreta-
tion of the mud log. On wider format logs, Track 5 also
may be subdivided to add an interpretive lithology and
an extra data track to be used for the results of special
analyses or calculations.
where
G pOs = observed total gas, %,
G,, = normalized total gas, %,
4oB = observed mud flow rate, m/s,
9n =
normal mud flow rate, m/s,
d
OB
= observed bit diameter, m,
d, = normal bit diameter, m,
R
it
= observed ROP, m/s, and
= normal ROP, m/s.
Once a normal set of conditions are selected, the
equation can be readily simplified giving
0.010
G,, = Gpo~
Interpretation
R
OB
The object of logging drilling-mud gas shows is to iden-
tify potentially productive oil and gas horizons. While
such zones often may be indicated by major
events-e.g., large gas and fluorescence shows-more
critical interpretation is required to avoid false alarms or
missed opportunities.
and
-
G,, =
0.0126 Gpos90B
(d,B)2 RoB ) . . . . . . . .
. (5)
Total Gas shows
The magnitude of a total gas show is not in itself a con-
clusive indication of show quality. Gas detected at the
surface originates in three ways: (1) from the disintegra-
tion of a cylinder of rock by the drill bit as the hole is
deepened, (2) from the influx of gas from previously
drilled formations exposed in the borehole wall, and (3)
from the drilling mud itself in the form of recycled oil
and gas and decomposition of mud additives.
where
9n
= 0.050 m3/s (793 galimin),
d, = 0.251 m (9.875 in.), and
R, = 0.010 m/s (118 ft/hr).
In extreme cases (for example, in long, geopressured
shale sections or when using oil-based drilling fluids) in-
flux or contamination may constitute the majority of gas
seen at the surface. In such circumstances the magnitude
of a gas show from a potential reservoir must be
evaluated against the established background gas level
from overlying sediments. Gas shows from relatively
Normalization can be very useful in correlation of gas
shows between wells drilled with very different pro-
grams. However, it should be remembered that nor-
malization cannot remove the effect of influx and con-
tamination; nor does it account for varying gas trap effi-
ciency with ambient conditions.
Finally, remember that the gas produced by drilling is
liberated by the crushing of material at the bottom of the
hole and is representative of the fluid composition within
the rock pore space at the time of impact. Remember that
oil and gas flow from a producing well; they are not
mined. The presence of a fluid within a rock is not
52-14 PETROLEUM ENGINEERING HANDBOOK
Fig. 52.9-Mud log total gas shows.
Fig. 52.10-Variation of total gas with drilling parameters.
necessarily indicative of productivity of that fluid ,fram
that rock. Comparison of total gas analyses from mud
and cuttings and chromatography can yield useful clues
as to the productivity of a hydrocarbon-containing
formation.
Total gas from the cuttings blender test is a good in-
dicator of fluid mobility. As the crushed rock cuttings
are carried to surface and relieved of formation
hydrostatic pressure, exsolution and expansion of gas
should effectively flush the cuttings, leaving only a small
volume of residual fluid at the surface. When higher cut-
tings total gas, relative to ditch total gas, is observed,
this is an indication that this flushing has been impeded.
An obvious explanation is that the rock lacks sufficient
permeability to allow gas expansion and flushing.
However, residual low-gravity oil or tar will have a
similar effect in impeding gas exsolution and escape. In-
spection of cuttings lithology, fluorescence, and the cut
test should provide confirming evidence (Fig. 52.1 I).
For example, strong cementation or shaliness in the cut-
tings would be indicative of low permeability, whereas
dark or dull oil stain and fluorescence with a slow cut or
absence of cut is more indicative of heavy oil.
At the opposite extreme of mobility, a formation may
be so permeable that it is flushed effectively with mud
filtrate even before being drilled. On recovery to surface
neither mud nor cuttings will contain hydrocarbons. In-
deed, no cuttings may be seen since such formations are
commonly unconsolidated and disintegrate on recovery.
In this circumstance the first observations will be a
sharp increase in rate of penetration followed, after the
lag time, by a negative gas show; total gas declines
below the original background. Testing the desander ef-
fluent or a mud sampling probably will show an increase
in loose sand grains. The negative gas shows confirms
only the excellent permeability, and for this reason alone
the zone deserves closer inspection when a resistivity log
is available. No evidence is available of the formations
fluid content from the mud log.
Most potential reservoirs fall between these two ex-
tremes: producing (1) a positive gas show and (2) cut-
tings blender gas, depending on permeability and oil
MUD LOGGING
52-l 5
ss. LT GRI-BFF. FY,
sue *NG. GO POR. N IS
S-iAlN. GO PL IEL FLOR
~LT,~L~u~H CUT FLOR,
PLAS:OCC SD
ss. Y. F-NED GR. PR
SRT. FRI. W/lNT0W
SLTST. ABUW BR IEL
OIL FLOR, STRMG YEL-
GOLD CUT FLOR
--I
SS. BRN, NEO-CRS,
W/RN0 OTL. W SRT. OL
BRN OIL STN. EVEN
.
,....
0LL *EL-BRN FLOR,
. YE0 STRAW CUT. BRT
EL CUT FLOR
r
!:-I. ;:!:{..:
..I.. ,/
. . /
, .:,. :.
. . . :... .
:: I :::
p-
I:..:: I
--f-e++
;:: : :
, *. ,. ,:I; 1;: i : : i i
.::.
::._..
:, :.,:
I
:;I,:; j .:
r:;.:l: : ;
:
..& ,./.
5% LT GRY-ERW. YE0
GR. SUB RNO. W SRT.
FRI. WI S1L CUT. DULL
ORNG BRN FLOR. SLO
BRT LT YEL CUT FLOR
52-16 PETROLEUM ENGINEERING HANDBOOK
gravity. Color and fluorescence of the oil stain and
results of the cut test are indicative of oil type. However,
note again that presence of hydrocarbons in the rock and
even presence of porosity and permeability are not con-
clusive evidence of hydrocarbon productivity.
Chromatogram Interpretation
The hydrocarbon chromatogram is often a useful guide
to reservoir productivity. It is not the actual amount of
any one alkane that is significant but the relative amounts
of light and heavy components characteristic of the
overall reservoir fluid. Such characteristics normally can
be recognized on the mud log itself. An aid to this can be
the calculation and plotting of the numerical ratios of the
values of the various hydrocarbons (e.g., C2/C I)
C3/C1, etc.). Such gas-ratio plots will often yield
distinctive character or events not always im-
mediately evident from the chromatogram itself.
However, interpretation of the plots depends on the same
logical procedures.
Most petroleum hydrocarbons originate from a similar
organic source and proceed in their maturation by a
similar temperature- and pressure-controlled physico-
chemical process. For this reason, petroleum accumula-
tions, although markedly different in composition, tend
to show a spectral relationship to each other in terms of
the type and amount of hydrocarbon species present.
Therefore, although two crude oils of 30API gravity
may be extremely different in total composition, they
will contain some similar components in similar com-
positional relationships to each other. Since petroleum
maturation continues by the continuous cracking of
complex branch molecules into simpler straight chain
molecules, these significant relationships are readily
seen in the petroleum gases methane through butane.
Thus, study of chromatographic analysis of these gases
often may lead to a gross estimate of the type and quality
of the reservoir.
At low temperatures and shallow burial, biological and
catalytic decomposition of organic debris results in a
low-yield production of methane and CO2 Though the
CO2 will dissolve in and migrate with pore waters, the
methane will accumulate in porous zones either as free
gas or in solution in water. Such zones will yield im-
pressive gas shows when drilled, but with few excep-
tions will produce only gas-cut water.
It is a reasonable general rule that a gas show contain-
ing methane as the only significant component is not
commercially productive and is unworthy of further
evaluation. However, it also should be remembered that
exceptional cases do occur, including the southern North
Sea nonassociated gas reservoirs that produce +94%
methane.
At higher temperatures, organic material first
polymerizes to form kerogen, which is then
hydrogenated and cracked with increasing temperature to
form bitumens, tars, and progressively higher-gravity oil
and gas. Associated petroleum gases are fragments of
this cracking process and as cracking continues, the pro-
portion of light to heavy gases increases in a manner
similar to the lightening of the liquid hydrocarbon. This
fractionation of gases and liquids continues during the
migration of the hydrocarbons from source to reservoir.
The end result of this process is reflected in a gas show
chromatogram. A gas-productive interval will show
predominantly methane and ethane with only traces of
the heavier alkanes. Oil productivity is signaled by the
enrichment of the heavier alkanes, especially propane.
Decreasing oil gravity is reflected by progressively
greater proportions of propane and the butanes. In lower-
gravity oils, the concentration of these gases may exceed
that of ethane. But all productive horizons will contain
methane as the dominant alkane. Zones in which
methane represents at least half of the total gas usually
contain heavy residual oil from which the lighter gas and
liquid fractions have migrated, leaving an immovable,
nonproductive fluid.
These general rules of chromatograph evaluation can
prove useful in reservoir evaluation but of course should
not be used in isolation. Conclusions regarding oil gravi-
ty and mobility should be compared with the results of
blender tests, cuttings examination, fluorescence, and
cut tests. Furthermore, evaluation should proceed from
the prior-show baseline values and throughout the show
interval. Considering the variables inherent in the drill-
ing, transportation, and extractions of samples, no con-
clusion may be drawn from a single sample or analysis.
Conventional Mud Log
The conventional mud log offers more drilling and for-
mation evaluation data in a single form than any other
data source. Many of these data are subject to uncon-
trolled variables in the measurement technology and by
the very nature of borehole environment. As a result, no
simple conclusive rules of quantitative log evaluation are
available. However, integration of all the data on the log
with geological and regional experience can make the
conventional mud log a most powerful exploration tool.
Petroleum Engineering Services
Geopressure Evaluation
The petroleum engineering functions of mud logging
developed from the introduction of a number of pressure
evaluation techniques during the 1960s. These tech-
niques are practiced conveniently in the logging unit and
in some cases use data or equipment already available in
the unit. Also, interpretation of the resultant data rc-
quires the same integrative approach, using drilling data
and geological evaluation, as required in mud log inter-
pretation. Unlike mud log evaluation, however, pressure
evaluation techniques are able to provide reliable quan-
titative estimates of formation parameters, such as
pressures and porosity. lo
Drilling into a geopressured zone causes a change in a
number of basic formation/drilling relationships. This
change is usually a reversal of a gradual de th-related
trend in a lithologically uniform formation.
IP
Compac-
tion increases uniformly with depth in a normal
pressured clay rock. A geopressured zone may be poorly
compacted relative to those zones overlying it. Porosity
and water content decrease uniformly with depth in a
normal pressured clay rock. A geopressured zone in
which dewatering has been slowed will show a reversal
in the trend, with increased water content and increased
porosity. Other factors relating to fluid movement, such
as ionic concentrations, hydrocarbon saturations, etc.,
MUD LOGGING 52-17
may be different in geopressured zones. Differential
pressure across bottom is the difference between the
drilling mud hydrostatic pressure and the fluid pressure
in pores of the undrilled formation at the bottom of the
hole. Since drilling mud usually is denser than formation
fluids, this difference will be positive and will increase
with depth. In a geopressured zone, the formation pore
pressure is abnormally high and the differential pressure
across bottom will decline or even become negative.
Thus, any measureable parameter that reflects any or
all of these factors may be used as a means of inter-
preting changes in formation pressure and eventually as a
means of evaluating and obtaining quantitative estimates
of formation pore pressures.
Gas Analysis. The incursion of formation fluids into the
borehole may result from a number of causes, some but
not all of which result from an underbalanced condi-
tion-either temporary or permanent. * If an under-
balanced condition exists, there will be a natural tenden-
cy for fluid to flow from the formation into the borehole.
With a formation having good porosity and permeability,
this flow will be massive and a kick will occur. Such a
kick will be indicated by the incursion of formation fluid
downhole, causing the expulsion of mud from the
borehole at surface. Were this to continue, a blowout
would result. It is the logging geologists responsibility
(other duties permitting) to monitor the mud pit level and
to report any unpredicted or unexplained level changes.
A massive incursion of fluid resulting in a well kick is
unlikely to be misinterpreted as a gas show. In fact, if the
hole is full, the kick should be recognized by a rise in pit
level long before the fluid causing it has time to appear at
surface.
However, minor incursions caused by slight or tem-
porary underbalance, or where insufficient permeability
to provide a sustained kick exists, do occur and must be
interpreted correctly.
When an underbalance sufficient to cause a kick exists
but there is insufficient permeability to sustain a massive
fluid influx, a steady fluid feed-in may result. If this
minor flow is from a discrete formation already cut, it
will be noticeable - producing a sustained minimum gas
background even when circulating but not drilling. If this
is the case, the logging geologist should make a note of
this sustained circulating gas on the mud log.
If the feed-in is from the formation currently being
drilled, then as a greater and greater area of formation in
the borehole wall is exposed by drilling, increasing flow
will take place. If this is the case, the mud gas will ex-
hibit a sustained minimum when circulating but will con-
sistently rise as drilling proceeds. Cuttings gas will in-
evitably be high relative to mud gas since it is only the
lack of permeability that is preventing the feed-in from
becoming a kick. Where permeability is effectively ab-
sent (e.g., in clays or shales) even a minor feed-in cannot
take place. Fluid pressure in the rock will gain access to
the borehole by the opening of pre-existent microfrac-
tures and partings in the rock. The result will be the cav-
ing or sloughing of rock fragments into the borehole, ac-
companied by a small amount of gas. A minimum gas
background and, in this case, cavings recovery exist
when circulating without drilling.
Fig. 52.12-Connection gas indicating underbalance.
Circulating bottomhole pressure is higher than when
the mud is static. This is caused by annular pressure
losses when circulating. It is therefore possible for a
feed-in, caving, or even a kick to result because of a
resultant underbalance when circulation is stopped. Fur-
thermore, pressure is further reduced because of the
swabbing effect when pipe is moved upward-e.g.,
when making a connection. The literal meaning of
swabbing is the pulling of a full-gauge tool from the
hole, acting like the plunger in a syringe and initiating
fluid flow into the borehole. Swabbing by moving the
drillstring does not work in this way. When pipe is
pulled upward, the high-viscosity gelled mud will at-
tempt to move with the pipe, thus reducing the effective
hydrostatic pressure acting on the borehole wall.
Pressure reduction is a function of pulling speed, mud
rheology, and annular diameter. The important con-
sideration is that pressure reduction takes place not just
below the bit but at all points in the open hole.
Downtime gas or connection gas is a gas show
resulting from the momentary underbalance caused by
pump shutdown and/or pipe movement. It can be
recognized by the occurrence of discrete gas show ap-
pearance at, or slightly less than, the lag time after cir-
culation recommences. This is gas actually being pro-
duced by the formation and, while not being plotted on
the mud log, the value should be reported on the log
because it is indicative of formation permeability and
fluid content. When a connection gas occurs, the logging
geologist also should check a flowline mud sample for
evidence of produced oil or salt water with the gas. The
incidence of connection gas should be reported to the
52-18 PETROLEUM ENGINEERING HANDBOOK
:ONNE
GA:
iC
SE
TOTAL GAS I
NORMALIZED
I
Fig. 52.13-Normalized total gas.
drilling supervisor, who may choose to increase mud
density in response to the indicated underbalance.
It is important to remember that the entire openhole
section will be underbalanced by swabbing. The connec-
tion gas may not come from the bottom of the hole but
from some horizon above. In fact, two or even more con-
nection gases may result from a connection. For this
reason it is important that lag time and annular velocities
should be identified accurately by the logging geologist
so that connection gases can be identified with the pro-
ducing formation and the mud log annotated
accordingly.
Drilling into a permeable reservoir with an under-
balance is potentially dangerous because a kick may
result. Even if a kick does not occur immediately, the
hazardous situation will be marked by an increasing
feed-in as more formation is drilled, accompanied by
progressively larger connection gases (Fig. 52.12). The
condition should be reported by the logging geologist
and noted on the mud log. If increases in mud density
alleviate or remove the effect, this should also be noted
on the mud log in explanation of the consequent reduc-
tion in gas.
Fig. 52.13 demonstrates the effect of varying differen-
tial pressure on gas show magnitude. The total gas
curves for two wells drilled through a similar section are
shown. The data for both wells have been normalized to
reduce the effects of hole diameter, ROP, mud pump
output, and surface extraction efficiency. Well A was
drilled with a constant mud density, whereas in Well B
mud density was controlled to maintain a constant
positive differential pressure (overbalance).
In the upper portion of the section, the two gas curves
are similar and the normalized gas curves coincide
almost exactly. In the lower portion a progressive devia-
tion between the two wells is seen that is somewhat
reduced but remains evident even in the normalized
curves. We can interpret this as being caused by the
penetration of a transition zone into a geopressured zone.
In Well A, maintaining a constant mud density results
in a decreasing overbalance and eventually an under-
balance or increasing negative differential pressure.
Connection gases occur and become larger with deeper
penetration. Additionally, feed-in of gas from the under-
balanced borehole wall causes an increase in background
gas that, since it is not a product of freshly cut formation,
cannot be accounted for in the normalization calculation.
Well B, on which a constant overbalance was main-
tained by increases in mud density, did not show in-
creases in gas background or connection gases. Indeed,
if any zone showed good permeability, the overbalance
may have resulted in flushing gas away from the
borehole and a reduction in observed total gas.
By careful observation of these phenomena, a fairly
accurate log of differential pressure (and hence pore
pressure) may be obtained. This information should be
used in conjunction with the other techniques described
in the following paragraphs.
MUD LOGGING
52-19
Cuttings Evaluation. During the normal mud-logging
process, cuttings are sieved and graded to a size assumed
to be representative of drilled cuttings. The larger
fragments are cavings from the walls of the borehole and
play no part in the compilation of a lithological log.
In geopressure evaluation, these cavings play a major
role. The presence of cavings in the sample indicates that
the borehole wall is unstable. The most noticeable and
usually most predominant cavings are those of clay,
shale, or calcareous lithologies. Coal, however, will
cave as a matter of course, hence interpretations should
not include coal cavings. The amount of cavings in the
bulk sample is an indication of the degree of instability
of the borehole walls. Simply watching the cuttings
traverse the shaker screens will give a reasonable indica-
tion of the amount and size of the cavings in relation to
the bulk sample.
Cavings are produced by underbalanced drilling and
stress relief. Abrasion of the walls by the drillpipe will
also cause cavings, but generally these will not be discer-
nible from cuttings because of their small size.
If the pore pressure is higher than the hydrostatic
pressure in the borehole, the hydrostatic pressure dif-
ferential will cause the pore fluids to move toward the
borehole. In an impermeable formation, the resultant
pressure gradient adjacent to the borehole wall may
become great enough to overcome the tensile strength of
the rock. When this occurs, the rock fails in tension and
cavings are formed.
All parts of the earths crust contain stresses that
change with depth, area, lithology, history, etc. Drilling
a hole in the ground relieves some stresses other than
those in the vertical plane, and the hole geometry in rela-
tion to some stresses acts to concentrate them. If the
borehole wall is not supported sufficiently by the mud
column, it may fail either (1) in compression from the
vertical stress or (2) in tension from the horizontal stress,
or both.
The drilling process causes the formation of
microcracks and fractures, and these act as areas of stress
concentration and potential initial failure points. Thus it
is sometimes noticed that part of a borehole may cave
copiously for a short time and then become stable. This
is because of the removal of the damaged zone (i.e., cav-
ings) adjacent to the bore/formation interface. Formation
is exposed that is more coherent and lacks concentrations
of stress, thus it absorbs the extra energy without failing.
Cavings produced by underbalanced drilling are
typically long, splintery, concave, and delicate (Fig.
52.14a). Cavings produced by stress relief tend to be
more blocky and can vary in size tremendously, depend-
ing on the formation characteristics. Examples are
shown in Fig. 52.14b.
Remember that if the cavings are clays, they may react
with the mud and lose their distinctive morphology. In-
terpretations based on reactive clays should be pursued
with caution. The quantity and nature of cavings should
be regularly reported on the mud log or on a supplemen-
tary data log if pressure evaluation services are being
performed.
Shale Bulk Density. Shale density determination can be
of great value since it provides information on the com-
paction of the shale. Under normal conditions, shale
ACE
FRONT
Q
h
.
L11
PLAN
Fig. 52.14-Cavings resulting from underbalance and stress
relief.
density should increase with depth. Any deviation from
this consistent trend may indicate that geopressures ex-
ist. The magnitude of the bulk density change will vary
with the type and magnitude of the geopressure. Often,
the bulk density will decrease, but in other cases it may
remain constant or continue to increase but at a lower
rate than the previously established trend. Several
methods are used for measurement of shale bulk density.
Pycnometer Method. By using a container with
repeatable volume, this method involves measuring
change of weight resulting from displacement of fluid by
the sample. The most practical application of this
method at the wellsite is to use a mud balance.
Place enough cuttings in the cup so that the balance in-
dicates 8.34 lbm/gal (i.e., density of fresh water) with
the cap on. Fill the cup with water and weigh again. The
new reading is W2 in the following equation.
8.34
-Ys=
16.68-w2 , . . . . .
where ys is the specific gravity of sample and Wz is the
mud weight of sample and water, lbmigal.
Mercury Pump Method. The bulk volume of a known
weight of sample is measured. The bulk weight of a
prepared sample is first established using an accurate
chemical balance. The bulk volume of selected cuttings
is then determined using a high-pressure mercury pump
by the Kobe system (Boyles law principle) at a pressure
of about 24 psi, which is recorded on the attached
pressure gauge. Mercury is used to compress the air
around the cuttings but does not contact the sample
material.
The high accuracy of the instrument and large amount
of sample used (approximately 25 g = 2,000 individual
shale cuttings) give good consistency of results. Because
of the accuracy and convenience in operation, this
method should be used whenever possible; however,
very careful and consistent sample handling is necessary
for best results.
Buoyancy Method. The sample is weighed in air and in
a liquid of known density. This is an alternative version
of the pycnometer method. Theoretically, it should be a
more accurate method if an accurate laboratory balance
52-20 PETROLEUM ENGINEERING HANDBOOK
is used. In practice, it is most inaccurate since the densi-
ty of the liquid will vary with ambient temperature.
Density Comparison Methods. The simplest of these is
the float-and-sink method. Shale cuttings are im-
mersed in fluid mixtures of different densities in which
they will either float or sink, depending on relative den-
sities. This method is inexpensive and quick but is
limited in sensitivity because of large difference in the
densities of available fluids (approximately 0.1 to 0.05
g/cm3 and easy contamination of calibrated fluids.
Density Gradient Method. This consists of a fluid col-
umn in which density varies uniformly with depth. This
is prepared by the partial mixing of a light fluid
(neothene) and a heavy fluid (tetrabromoethane) in
which beads of known density are suspended. A calibra-
tion curve of density vs. depth is prepared. Shale cut-
tings immersed in the column will sink to the level at
which their density is the same as the fluid. Depth is
recorded and density read off from the calibration curve.
Both of the heavy liquid methods (density comparison
and density gradients), while being quick and simple,
have the disadvantage of determining the density of in-
dividual cuttings. Special care must be taken to ensure
that cuttings are true bottomhole cuttings, and several
determinations should be made for each interval to avoid
anomalous results. Six or eight cuttings should be chosen
that are representative and free of dust or cracks that may
trap air and water and result in low apparent densities. In
addition, the fluids used have unpleasant odors and some
of them may be hazardous to health. Toxicity labels
should be checked for specific mixtures but it is a good
general rule to use these fluids in a fume hood or with a
vapor extraction system.
It is commonly observed that shale density may
decrease as much as 0.5 g/cm3 or more. If this reduction
occurs over a significant depth interval, the calculated
overburden gradient may reverse. The low-density zone
also may change in lithologic character. Fissility,
plasticity, carbonate content, color change, and other
differences may not be apparent. Measurements from
cuttings from water-based muds usually are too low,
simply because of the adsorption characteristics of clays.
Likewise, measurements taken from wireline logs can
also give false indications. Specifically, the formation
density log can be affected by a rugose hole and the
shallow depth of investigation may not read beyond the
hydrated zone. The result is erroneously low readings,
causing excessive calculated porosities. The sonic log
will be affected greatly by hydrated clays, resulting in
very high transit times, high porosities, and too low
densities.
Values may be successfully obtained from these logs
when water-based muds are used, but caution should be
exercised as errors may exist, as explained earlier.
SHALE DATA PRESSURE LOG
I
Fig. 52.15-Shale data log.
MUD LOGGING 52-21
The best densities are those obtained from wells drilled
with less reactive muds, such as oil- or potash-based
fluids. Both actual cutting densities and log densities
should be accurate because the clay remains in its virgin
state.
Increases in density beyond the normal trend because
of decreased porosity or calcification should be noted
carefully since these may constitute caprocks above
geopressures. Precipitation of pyrite or high iron concen-
tration results in abnormally high bulk densities in clays
and shales. It has been proposed that in some wells the
occurrence of pyrite in shales masked the density reduc-
tion caused by porosity increase. Careful microscopic
examination of clays may indicate the occurrence of very
fine pyrite, and high iron concentration is indicated by a
red/brown color cast. Pore pressure interpretations can-
not be accomplished by using shale density if heavy
minerals are present; however, since shale density is
mainly used for qualitative purposes in geopressure
evaluation, the role of the other geopressure indicators
remains unchanged.
Any decrease in density (without change in clay
character) may be recognized as a pressure transition
zone.
Recognition of a normal bulk density trend line may be
difficult because of degree of scatter in the rectangular
coordinate plot. A semilog plot considerably reduces this
scatter, but the normal bulk density range (approximate-
ly 1.6 to 2.7 g/cm3) results in a more distorted trend line
and difficulty in recognizing deviations (Fig. 52.15).
Shale Factor. Ion-exchange reactions take place be-
tween an adsorbent solid and a solution. Ions bound to
the solid surface are released into the solution and other
ions from the solution become fixed at the surface. Ion
exchange can proceed by the exchange of positive ions
(cations) or negative ions (anions) but not both. The
reactivity of a solid compound in ion exchange reactions
is governed by its specific surface (surface area per unit
volume) and by the surface density of ion exchange sites
(points on the surface where ions may be bound). Reac-
tivity is expressed as cation or anion exchange capacity
(CEC or AEC) using units of milliequivalents (of a
suitable ion) per hundred grams (of the compound).
Various clay types have different CECs and conse-
quently different adsorption capacities. A smectite-rich
clay will undergo diagenesis to illite with increasing
temperature and ionic exchange. For diagenesis to pro-
ceed, water must be flushed from the clays. If potassium
exchange cations are not available, a montmorillonite
clay will lose its water but will not convert to illite.
Thus, if this type of clay is drilled with a water-based
mud, the clay will immediately rehydrate and cause
severe drilling problems.
Shale factor is a measure of clay CEC. CEC will
decrease as clays convert from montmorillonite-rich to
illite-rich with temperature (and thus with depth). Pure
montmorillonite clays have a CEC of approximately 100
meq/lOO g. Pure illites show no swelling characteristics,
but their CEC is generally between 10 and 40 meqilO0
g. Kaolinites have a CEC of approximately 10 meq/lOO
g. Of the most common clay types, it is only the smectite
group (including montmorillonite) that has an affinity for
water. Thus, any clay zone that contains montmorillonite
Fig. 52.16-Shale factor response.
will have an affinity for water in an amount proportional
to the montmorillonite content, and this will be shown by
a proportional value of shale factor. Note that the shale
factor as measured at the wellsite will not give values
corresponding to actual chemical CEC. This is because
of impurities in the sample, methodology, experimental
error, and the fact that the methylene blue dye (used in
the titration) is a very large molecule and thus cannot be
adsorbed in interlayer sites.
If the clay is calcareous, and calcimetty is also being
performed, then the shale factor may be corrected for
carbonate content as given by
100
Fstu =
100 - Cca*
xFsha, . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
where
F $ht = true shale factor, meq/lOO g,
F sha = apparent shale factor, meq/lOO g, and
c
cart,
= carbonate content, %.
For example, a calcareous clay has a carbonate content
of 37 % , and an apparent shale factor of 16:
100
Fsht = -
1oo-37(16)=25 meq/lOO g.
Theoretically, shale factor should indicate whether
montmorillonite dehydration or compaction disequilibri-
um was the major mechanism in generating an apparent
geopressure. Geopressures caused by compaction dis-
equilibrium indicate that the pressured zone is immature
with respect to shallower, normally pressured sediments.
This implies that diagenesis has been restricted by the in-
efficiency of the dewarering mechanism, resulting in
clays containing a larger proportion of montmorillonite
within the geopressured zone. Shale factor would thus
decrease to the top of the geopressured zone, increase
within the zone, and then decrease as the pore pressure
gradients decline (Fig. 52.16). Any overall increase in
shale factor within a geopressured zone indicates that
compaction disequilibrium has played a part in its
formation.
52-22
PETROLEUM ENGINEERING HANDBOOK
EARTHS SURFACE
- HEATFLOW LINES --- EQUITEMPERATURE LlNES
Fig. 52.17-Distortion of heat flow around an insulating
geopressured zone.
If, however, a geopressured zone was caused by mont-
morillonite dehydration, then upon entering the interval
a sharp decrease in montmorillonite content will be
observed. Hence the geopressured zone will contain less
montmorillonite, because it has been converted to illite,
which releases to the pore spaces water that has been
unable to escape fast enough and results in a pore
pressure increase. Shale factor thus will decrease in the
pressured zone (Fig. 52.16).
Shale factor cannot be a geopressure indicator. The
differing responses described are not definitive, and
geopressure has to be indicated from other sources
before an interpretation by use of shale factor can be
achieved. Geoprcssures caused by montmorillonite
dehydration and compaction disequilibrium may cause
no change in shale factor; also, if geopressures were
caused by another process (e.g., aquathermal pressuring
that results when trapped pore fluids are heated but are
unable to expand and is therefore independent of matrix
composition), a change may not be reflected in shale fac-
tor with depth.
In the past, the consensus was that shale factor should
increase in geopressured zones and could thus act as an
indicator. Re-evaluation of the various geopressure
mechanisms show that this is not necessarily the case.
However, shale factor should be capable of delineating
between compaction disequilibrium and montmorillonite
dehydration as the major geopressure mechanism.
Flowline Temperature. The geothermal gradient, the
rate at which subsurface temperature increases with
depth, can be calculated from
2-11
gG=
D -D (loo), . . . . . . . . . . .
2 I
where
gG = geothermal gradient, C/100 m,
T, = temperature, C (at depth D, , m), and
T2 = temperature, C (at depth D2, m).
For any given area, the geothermal gradient is usually
assumed constant. While the average gradient across
normally pressured formations may be constant, geo-
pressured formations exhibit abnormally high geo-
thermal gradients. l3
Since a constant flow of heat occurs radially from the
earths core to the surface, the total flow of heat across
any depth increment will be constant. However, the
temperature differential across an increment depends on
the thermal conductivity of the material. Since overall
heat flow from the earths surface is generally constant
within any particular area, the heat flux through the
various formations with depth is in equilibrium. The rate
of change of temperature across a formation with a low
thermal conductivity (caused mainly by high porosity)
will be high; conversely, a low geothermal gradient is in-
dicative of high thermal conductivity formations-i.e.,
lower porosity. Water and hydrocarbon migration to
shallower depths may also affect the geothermal gra-
dient. Pore fluids, as insulators, retain heat so that on
migration these hot fluids modify the temperatures of the
formations that they pass through and ultimately become
trapped. Fowler14 cited examples from the Middle East,
Canada, and U.S. oil fields of geothermal gradient
bulges that indicated possible entrapment of hot fluids
from greater depths. The mechanism also may be related
to montmorillonite dehydration, because the huge
volume of water squeezed from the clay provides the im-
petus for migration. Dead basins (i.e., no source
rocks) have been shown to exhibit normal geothermal
gradients, hence on initial exploration wells the geother-
mal gradient may indicate the potential of the whole
area.
An insulating zone produces a distortion in the isother-
mal lines that normally run perpendicular to the lines of
heat flow (Fig. 52.17; Ref. 15).
Because of the high geothermal gradient, these are
more closely spaced in the insulating zone. In the zones
above and below, the isothermal lines are more widely
spaced in compensation and the zones exhibit a reduced
geothermal gradient. The converse occurs in beds of
high thermal conductivity (i.e., sands and some
limestones)
Since water has a thermal conductivity of about one-
third to one-sixth that of most rock matrix materials, it
can be seen that thermal conductivity is directly related
to the degree of compaction of a formation. The higher-
than-normal water content of geopressured shales
reduces the thermal conductivity. Therefore, the top of a
geopressured zone is marked by a sharp increase in
geothermal gradient. The temperature of the mud at the
flowline may reflect the geotemperature, and recording
of flowline temperature is a practical method to deter-
mine temperature gradient, provided variable factors
such as pump rate, lag time, ambient temperature,
lithology, and temperature changes at the surface that are
caused by mud mixing and chemical treatments can be
accounted for. In areas where large annual temperature
variations occur, considerable differences may be noted
in flowline temperatures; even diurnal temperature fluc-
tuations may cause a 10C variation in flowline
temperature while drilling.
Prior to reaching a geopressured zone, a temperature
transition zone will be encountered in which, because of
distortion of the isothermal lines, there will be a reduc-
tion in geothermal gradient. In practice, this effect is
52-23
MUD LOGGING
TEMPERATURE DATA LOG
I
Fig. 52.18-Flowline temperature log.
reflected in the flowline temperature gradient, even to
the extent of a fall in flowline temperature (i.e., a
negative gradient), followed by an extremely large in-
crease in flowline temperature as the geopressured zone
is penetrated (Fig. 52.18).
A dual temperature probe system with sensors at the
flowline and suction pit is effective in removing surface
effect, if lagged differential temperature is plotted. It is
normally sufficient for the points to be plotted at 30-e in-
tervals unless more frequent temperature variation is
noticed, but points plotted at 104 intervals allow more
accurate data and better resolution for improved inter-
pretation. Circulations, mud additions, water additions,
and other significant events should be noted.
It is found that the resultant temperature curve is
broken when the bit is changed, or during short trips or
other downtime, and a certain time is necessary for the
mud system to re-establish a temperature equilibrium
upon circulation. The rate at which this thermal
equilibrium is re-established may be significant. as a
more rapid re-establishment may indicate an increased
geothermal gradient. Drilling variables that affect the
rate of re-establishment of equilibrium include total mud
volume. The practice of reducing active pit volume to a
minimum, dictated by hole size, aids in reducing the
time required to attain equilibrium after tripping and
reduces the circulation time needed to stabilize flowline
temperature. A discontinuity in the plot also occurs at
each casing depth and corresponds to a change in hole
size. A higher annular velocity in open hole reduces the
amount of heat gained from exposed formations, and a
lower annular velocity in the marine riser increases the
amount of heat lost to the sea. However, these factors
only lead to a change in measured temperature; the rate
of change of temperature should remain unchanged.
Since pressure predictions can be based on temperature
gradient rather than on temperature magnitude, each
depth segment between discontinuities can be analyzed
separately for gradient trends. It is also helpful to replot a
smoothed curve of segments end to end without regard
for absolute temperature values. In certain cases it has
been found that, instead of plotting the individual
segments as an end-to-end smoothed curve, end-to-end
plotting of the individual segment trend lines may be of
52-24 PETROLEUM ENGINEERING HANDBOOK
IIFFERENTIAL PRESSURE RATE OF PENETR*T,ON
,CROSS BOTTOM (PSI) (CONSTANT N.W.0.EC0)
0C
Fig. 52.19~-Response of drilling rate to geopressure.
value. This trend-to-trend smoothed curve is merely a
graphical method of removing irrelevant scatter from the
plot.
The reduction in temperature gradient caused by
distortion of isothermal lines may be noticed before the
geopressured zone is encountered; that is, an advance
warning of geopressure may be given. Thus a fall in
flowline temperature gradient followed by a sharp rise
when the geopressure transition zone is drilled provides a
warning that even closer attention must be paid to other
drilling parameters to achieve confirmation of possible
geopressures. However, like other methods of pressure
evaluation, flowline temperature reflects a varying
physical parameter in an assumed constant rock type;
therefore, changes in lithology must be closely
monitored to avoid false indications.
Drilling Models. Bingham I6 proposed that the relation-
ship between ROP, weight on bit (WOB), rotary speed,
and bit diameter may be expressed in the general form
R
-=
,.......................
N
(9)
where
R = ROP, ft/min,
N = rotary speed, rev/min,
db = bit diameter, ft,
W = WOB, lbm,
Kn = matrix strength constant (dimensionless),
and
d = formation drillability exponent
(dimensionless).
Jorden and Shirley solved Eq. 9 ford, inserted con-
stants to allow common oilfield units to be used and to
produce values of d-exponent in a convenient workable
range. Most important, however, they let KD be unity,
removing the need to derive empirical matrix strength
constants, but making d-exponent lithology-specific as
in
d=
where
d = drilling exponent (dimensionless),
R = ROP, ft/hr,
N = rotary speed, rev/min,
W = WOB, lbm, and
db = bit diameter, in.
In a constant lithology, d-exponent will increase as the
depth, compaction, and differential pressure across bot-
tom increase. Upon penetration of a geopressured zone,
compaction and differential pressure will decrease and
be reflected by a decrease in d-exponent (Fig. 52.19).
Differential pressure is dependent on mud density as
well as formation pore pressure. Therefore, any change
in the mud density used promotes an unwanted change in
d-exponent.
Rehm and McClendon proposed a mud weight
corrected drilling exponent of the form
dxc =
where
d,, = corrected d-exponent (dimensionless),
R = ROP, ftlhr,
N = rotary speed, revimin,
dh = bit diameter, in.,
g+, = normal formation balance gradient, lbm/gal,
Pet
= effective circulating density, lbm/gal, and
W = WOB, 1,000 lbm,
or in the metric form
. .
(12)
with R in m/hr, N in rpm, Win tonnes (1,000 kg), db in
cm, and g,p and ,oec in gicm3.
This correction was empirically derived but has been
applied worldwide with much success. The use of actual
mud density in place of effective circulating density
(ECD) has been found to be acceptable within normal
limits of accuracy. ECD should, however, be used when
available.
Factors not considered by d-exponent in its basic form
are drilling hydraulics, tooth efficiency, and matrix
strength.
MUD LOGGING 52-25
I
,
J
0C
SEMlLOG SCALE
Fig. 52.20-Example of formation pore pressure gradients for
d, plot.
Drilling hydraulics become important in large holes
where efficient hole cleaning is impossible and in soft
formation where jetting will make a large contribution to
drilling.
Matrix strength controls both magnitude and rate of
change of d-exponent with depth.
Tooth efficiency can affect d-exponent in two ways:
(1) tooth wear will cause a gradual increase in d-
exponent (i.e., decrease in ROP), and (2) a change of bit
type may produce a change in d-exponent, especially if
the change is a radical one (e.g., from milled-tooth bit to
an insert or diamond bit).
If differential pressure becomes large, the simple ratio
correction to the d-exponent will not eradicate the effect
on ROP.
Furthermore, the relationships among force applied,
Wl db, rotary speed, N, differential pressure, g,,~,/p~(.,
and ROP, R, are more complex than the d-exponent for-
mulation would imply. While working well within cer-
tain normal working ranges, radical changes in any of
these parameters (for example, change in hole size after
setting casing) may result in a shift in d-exponent trend.
When plotted on a logarithmic scale against depth, the
d-exponent will exhibit an approximately linear increas-
ing trend through normal, hydrostatically pressured
formations. Where geopressure, abnormally high forma-
tion fluid pressure is encountered, d-exponent values
will fall consistently below the extrapolation of this nor-
mal trend. It has been shown empirically that d-exponent
deviation may be related to formation pore pressure
anomaly by the simple ratio
Ppa - dxcn ) . . . . . . . . .(13)
---
Ppn . xco
d
Fig. 52.21-Logging unit systems.
where
PPa
= actual pore pressure at depth of interest,
psi, or formation balance gradient,
lbmlgal equivalent mud density (EMD),
PPn
= normal pore pressure, psi, or formation
balance gradient, lbmlgal (EMD),
d
xc- 0
= observed corrected d-exponent at depth of
interest, and
d
x- n
= expected corrected d-exponent on normal
trend line at depth of interest.
Using this relationship, it is possible to calculate pore
pressure or formation balance gradient (equivalent mud
density to balance pore pressure) from d-exponent.
Alternatively, the relationship may be used to prepare an
overlay allowing direct reading of formation balance gra-
dient from the d-exponent plot (Fig. 52.20).
Drilling exponents may be calculated from drillers
data using a simple calculator and manual plotting and
trend recognition. However, quality of the data is greatly
improved when a data-acquisition system provides
WOB, rotary speed, and mud density directly to the log-
ging unit and a minicomputer is used to read these sen-
sors automatically, to perform the calculations, and to
print or plot the results. Computer-equipped mud log-
52-26 PETROLEUM ENGINEERING HANDBOOK
I
it :, :::::t::::i::::l::1:i:Xt
Fig. 52.22-Formation pressure log.
ging units were introduced to provide pressure evalua-
tion services in areas of known geopressured problems
(e.g., offshore U.S. gulf coast) and high-risk, hazardous
exploration areas (e.g., the North Sea). Fig. 52.21
shows the available equipment configurations of a
computerized logging unit. In addition to pore pressure,
this type of unit commonly provides a pressure log in-
cluding supplementary calculations of fracture pressure,
overburden pressure, and kick tolerance (Fig. 52.22).
Petrophysical Measurements
Mud Log Data. As discussed previously, mud log data
are qualitative in nature. It is not possible with conven-
tional mud log measurements to obtain quantitative
values of such parameters as porosity, permeability,
hydrocarbon saturations, etc. However, the mud logging
unit may provide special equipment or services, allowing
more quantitative evaluations.
For example, while a mud log gas analysis cannot be
truly representative of gas production composition, gas
analysis of recovered fluids from a well test can be. Us-
ing conventional gas analyzers and chromatograph, a
quantitative analysis of recovered natural gas may be ob-
tained. For more complex fluids, special chromato-
graphs, pyrolyzers, or analyzers can give complete
analysis of oils or sour gas. The logging unit also may
provide ionic analysis of recovered waters and, by use of
tritium ( 3H) or nitrate (NO3) tracers, provide
discrimination between recovery of mud filtrate and true
formation water. These types of service can be of special
value in remote locations where logistics or distance pre-
vent rapid transport of samples to an analytical
laboratory.
Core Analysis. In addition to gas and fluid analysis,
conventional core analyses I9 (porosity, bulk density,
permeability, and saturations) also may be performed in
the logging unit when the drilling operation is remote
from the laboratory. Wellsite core analysis offers the ad-
vantages of rapid evaluation and high-quality samples
from fresh core but is rarely of the high quality to be ex-
pected from the specialized equipment and personnel in a
core laboratory. A new technique, which is suitable to
the logging unit, uses a pulsed nuclear magnetic
resonance analyzer to determine fluid content, total and
free-fluid porosity, and permeability. This device, work-
ing on a principle analogous to the nuclear magnetic log-
ging tool (NML), provides accurate, repeatable data
from minimal quantities of sample and without complex
sample preparation. Samples may be obtained without
causing core or sidewall core destruction and the test
may be performed on cuttings.
Drilling Porosity
The d-exponent (Fig. 52.20) develops a consistent trend
with depth controlled by increasing overburden loading
and compaction. Changes in formation pore pressure
gradient will result in major, consistent deviations from
this trend. The d-exponent data also will exhibit minor,
MUD LOGGING 52-27
POROSITY PERMEABILITY
I
ROCK PROPERTIE
[MILLIDARCIES]
FORMATION
DENSITY
PSEUD(
1~ ~~
)-SON1
Fig. 52.23-Drilling porosity log.
inconsistent scatter about the prevailing trend, reflecting
continuous variation in rock mineralogy, cohesion, and
porosity.
More sophisticated, second-generation drilling ex-
ponents are able to isolate the major pore pressure and
minor rock character variations. With this type of
analysis it is possible to provide a continuous log of pore
pressure and drilling porosity. It is important to
remember that drilling porosity, although scaled in
percentage units, is not a true porosity measurement. It is
primarily a rock strength indicator, reflecting both
porosity and intergrain cohesion. As such, its response is
very similar to that of the sonic log, and the two logs cor-
relate extremely well (Fig. 52.23).
Unlike the d-exponent, the second generation drilling
exponents require complex manipulations and iterations,
limiting their use to logging units equipped with a com-
puter. Also, unlike the d-exponent, they do not involve a
widely published and used single method. Although
based on similar drilling response models, all mud log-
ging contractors offer drilling porosity logs involving
their own unique mathematical methods that are com-
monly held as proprietary secrets. While understandable
from a commercial view, this policy places the user in
the position of being able to judge the value and reliabili-
ty of a particular log only on the bases of his or her own
experience and limited published results. It is hoped that,
with the maturation of this type of service, wider
publication and discussion of methods will begin.
Drilling Engineering Services
The mud logging unit can provide two levels of service
of value to the drilling engineer-data acquisition and
data analysis.
Data Acquisition
An automatic data acquisition system located in the log-
ging unit will monitor sensors installed on equipment,
flowline, mud pits, pumps, etc. Simple calculations are
performed on the data (e.g., calculation of total depth
and ROP, summation of pit volumes, comparison of cur-
rent values with high- and low-alarm setpoints). Results
then are displayed on TV monitors at various locations
around the rig and may be recorded on a printer or
magnetic tape. By use of a dedicated land line or satellite
link, data can be transmitted to a remote location, allow-
ing several rigs to be monitored from a single central
control room.
This type of equipment was introduced by mud log-
ging service companies as a means of obtaining drilling
and mud data more reliably and rapidly than could be ex-
pected from standard rig instrumentation. While these
data were required initially for pressure evaluation
analyses, the data acquisition system provided an impor-
tant secondary function as a rig monitoring service by
supplying the drilling engineer accurate, up-to-date drill-
ing information while away from the rig floor and a com-
plete foot-by-foot record of drilling progress and perfor-
mance on paper or magnetic tape.
52-28 PETROLEUM ENGINEERING HANDBOOK
Since that time. several conventional rig instrumenta-
tion manufacturers have upgraded their product lines to
include similar data acquisition systems that operate in
an unmanned, or stand-alone, mode. While this of-
fers the operator the advantage of flexibility in selecting
services (i.e., the mud logging service best suited to the
geologist and the data acquisition service best suited to
the engineer), it does have drawbacks.
Reliability of a data acquisition system is primarily
controlled by the operation of its sensors. In the rigorous
environment of the rig this requires regular attention.
The success of a stand-alone data acquisition system is
related entirely to the training and motivation of the rig
crew or the availability of manufacturers service
personnel.
The mud logging unit is manned at all times. Trained
personnel are available at all times to calibrate, maintain,
and service the data acquisition system and its sensors.
Since these personnel are already at the wellsite as part
of the mud logging service, this extra margin of reliabili-
ty is achieved without extra cost beyond the similar cost
of the data acquisition hardware.
Data Analysis
Beyond simple data acquisition, the mud logging service
also may supply computers, software, and specialized
wellsite personnel for drilling data analysis. The
desirability of such services depends on the difficulty
and cost of the drilling operation, availability of oil com-
pany expertise at the wellsite, and quality of communica-
tion with the exploration headquarters.
For example, infill drilling in an established domestic
field using a well-developed drilling program, ex-
perienced wellsite supervisors, and close communication
with home office requires data acquisition only as a
means of monitoring optimal and safe adherence to the
drilling program. On the other hand, on an offshore
wildcat, the availability of data analysis and expertise at
the wellsite can be very cost effective. *O An increase in
drilling efficiency or a decrease in downtime sufficient to
save a single day of rig time can, in these circumstances,
produce sufficient savings to pay for data analysis ser-
vices for the whole well.
Data analysis services offered include: (1) bit op-
timization-selection of bit type and operating
parameters to optimize bit ROP and bit life; (2) bit
economics-cost per unit depth and breakeven calcula-
tion between bit types; (3) drilling hydraulics2 -op-
timization of drillstring, nozzle, and annulus hydraulics;
(4) directional analysis-determination of well path, bot-
tomhole position, and intersection points for deviated
wells; (5) trip monitoring-calculation of string weights,
swab pressures and fillup requirements for tripping,
monitoring of pit level deviations, and overpull (fric-
tional drag in the borehole); (6) casing calcula-
tions-assembly of casing tally, calculation of cement
volumes and mixing requirements, and monitoring of
displacement; (7) pressure control-calculation of mud
weight, volume and pressure requirements for safe well
control lo; and (8) logistics-usage and inventory control
of well expandables, equipment maintenance schedul-
ing, well progress data base, and report generation.
Selecting a Mud Logging Service
Mud logging contractors commonly offer three levels of
standard service: (1) standard mud logging; (2) mud log-
ging and data acquisition, and (3) mud logging and data
analysis (including pressure evaluation). For the most
basic level of mud logging, a single operator may tje
responsible for 24-hour operation. More sophisticated
services and data acquisition usually require two
geologists working 12-hour tours. Data analysis services
require two people, a geologist and an engineer. on each
tour.
Each of these services may be augmented with extra
equipment such as sensors, special gas detectors,
pyroanalyzers, more powerful computers or peripherals
and specialist personnel at extra day rate as the drilling
program demands. 2,10
At least two mud logging contractors now offer an ad-
ditional, fourth level of service in which mud logging
and data analysis are combined with an MWD service.
Very little of the information gathered by a mud log-
ging unit is not obtainable from some other source. For
example, stand-alone instrumentation can monitor gas,
mud, and drilling parameters; rig crews can catch
samples; porosity is available from wireline logs; and oil
company geologists and engineers may perform
geological evaluation and drilling data analysis. Why
then is mud logging such a widely used service?
The advantage of mud logging service is that all these
data may be derived from a single source, the mud log-
ging unit, located at the wellsite and continuously
manned with dedicated, specially trained personnel.
Therefore the data are obtained more reliably, more
quickly, and usually more economically than from any
other combination of sources.
Reliability and speed therefore are the tests required in
selecting a mud logging contractor. The equipment must
be designed and maintained adequately to provide
reliable and safe operation in the rigorous wellsite en-
vironment. The wellsite crew must be trained to operate,
maintain, and troubleshoot the equipment and to under-
stand its output. The contractor must maintain adequate
service personnel and inventory to allow rapid repair or
changeout in the event of major malfunctions. The log-
ging crew must be trained in geological and engineering
theory, be experienced in practical drilling operations,
and have a thorough knowledge of the geological sec-
tion, drilling program, and operational procedures of the
particular well and operator.
Once a contractor is selected, economy becomes the
prime consideration in choosing a level of service. In
day-rate drilling, time and money may be directly
equated. Any service that speeds well progress, reduces
downtime, or promotes decision-making is potentially a
cost saver. Even on footage drilling, personnel, com-
munications, etc., are cost-generating factors which may
be reduced by improved drilling efficiency. On rank
wildcat exploration wells, the bird in the hand
philosophy may be desirable to obtain data at the earliest
possible time as a hedge against the risk of it being
unavailable later. For example, to obtain porosity
measurements from the mud logging unit while drilling
is an investment against later borehole loss or damage
that may prevent later wireline logging.
MUD LOGGING
52-29
Quantification of cost saving is possible by using the For cost effectiveness (i.e., for the additional service
same methods used to calculate drilling cost per foot. In to save its own cost or more), overall well cost must be
its simplest form this is unchanged or reduced. Thus,
Cd=
Cbe + Crr/
) . . . . . . D,
(14)
where
Cd = drilling cost, $/m,
C, = rig cost, $/D,
Cbp = cost of bits and expendables, $,
11 = time on location, days,
D, = total well depth, m.
For optimization of services and products this can be ex-
panded to the form
Cd=[(CFI +CF2 +. ~CFn)+(Cdrl +CdR.. .cdrn)
X(t,+tt+t,+t,+td)];D, . . . . . . . . .(15)
and
CdxD, =C( CF) , , +C( C, , ) , xc( t ) , ,
. . I . . . . . (16)
where
CF = individual fixed cost items or footage
charges services, $,
Cdr = individual day rate services, rentals,
salaries, etc., $,
t, = rotating time, days,
t, = tripping time, days,
to
= off-bottom time (reaming, conditioning,
well control, etc.), days,
t,
= evaluation time (logging, testing, coring,
etc.), days, and
td = downtime (breakdowns, weather, decision
making, etc.), days.
A( cd XD,)=(cd XD,)-(cd XD,)Io, . (18)
A(CdXD,)= -Acml -[E(c,,), xAt,,l
+AC,, x[C(t,), -At,,], . . . . (19)
AC,, I
AC,, + [~(c,,>, +Af,, 1
. [E(t,), -At,,]
(20)
If this is evaluated as true, that the day rate for the ex-
tra equipment is in fact less than the evaluated expres-
sion, then the service is cost effective on the particular
well. In this case, substituting some reasonable figures
such as:
Onshore Offshore
ACFbl = $l,ooo ACF~I = $1,000
z(cdr) n = $6,000/D E(c&)n = $19,OlWD
Ar,l = 12 hours=0.5 day Atrj = 12 houn=O.S day
C(AZ[)~ = 30 days E(Afl), = 35 days
we obtain for onshore:
AC,, I
1,000+(6,000)(0.5)
(30 -0.5)
=$135.59/D.
The extra equipment will result in an overall cost sav-
ing on the well so long as it does not increase the mud
logging daily rate by more than $135/D.
We obtain for offshore:
Using this formulation, it is possible to calculate the
decrease in one cost category required to offset an in-
crease in any other.
For example, consider the use of drilling optimization.
Let us assume, conservatively, that regional statistics in-
dicate that by upgrading a mud logging unit to include
data acquisition equipment no overall ROP improvement
is obtained but that a well can be completed using one
less bit. Well cost as a result of this is given by
1,000+(19,000)(0.5)
AC,, 5
(35 -0.5)
=$304.35/D.
Using these same figures, let us now assume that, in
addition to saving one bit, an overall decrease of 5% in
drilling time is also achieved. If I, =21 days, saving in
rotating time=21 ~5% = 1.05 days, then for onshore:
(cd xD,)=[C(c~)n -AcFbll
Ac
XT
I 1,000+[6,000 (0.5+1.05)]
(30-0.5-1.05)
+WC,,), +Ac,,l[W,), --Art, I, . (17)
=$362.04/D.
where
ACFbl = cost of one bit saved, dollars,
AC,, = extra cost of mud logging, dollars/D,
(f,),? = total time on location, days
At,,
= time for one trip saved, day, and
(Cd xD,) = well cost. dollars,
For offshore:
AC,, =
1,000+[19,000 (0.5+1.05)]
(35-0.5-1.05)
=$910.31/D.
52-30
These cost justifications, or cost savings, refer only to
the extra cost of data acquisition above that of standard
mud logging and include only those benefits resulting
from drilling optimization. Other cost savings resulting
from better rig and mud monitoring and well control may
also be quantifiable from a study of regional drilling
statistics.
A cost benefit analysis of this type is a worthwhile ap-
proach to all aspects of drilling cost reduction. Cost sav-
ing resulting from advanced evaluation and monitoring
commonly is appreciated in expensive offshore explora-
tion. As the above examples show, such techniques may
be equally successful in comparatively cheaper onshore
development drilling, especially where problems such as
geopressure or crooked holes occur.
Standards For and Status of Services
The terms mud logging covers a diverse range of ser-
vices and qualities of service. It is regrettable that, in the
U.S. especially, the whole industry is accorded a status
reflecting its lowest level. Field employees of the higher
quality and more reputable contractors commonly
eschew the term mud logger, preferring the title
logging geologist or logging engineer, depending
on their educational background. The wide range of
equipment and techniques used by such companies com-
monly results in their personnel being the best educated
and trained service personnel present on any wellsite.
In 1980, the Sot. of Professional Well Log Analysts
(SPWLA) established a Hydrocarbon Well Log Stan-
dards Committee comprising members of both the ser-
vice company and exploration company sides of the
field. The efforts of the committee have done much
toward establishing standards and status representative
of the best of the industy. 22,23 I express my gratitude to
this committee and its members for these efforts and for
assistance in the development of this chapter.
Nomenclature
Cbr
= cost of bits and expendables, dollars
C
carh
= carbonate content, %
Cd = drilling cost, dollars/m
C
dr =
individual day rate services, rentals,
salaries, etc., dollars
Cf = individual fixed cost items or footage
charges services, dollars
C, = rig cost, dollars/D
d = formation drillability exponent
(dimensionless)
db = bit diameter, ft or in.
d, = normal bit diameter (m)
d 0~ = observed bit diameter (m)
d, , . = corrected d-exponent (dimensionless)
d, , . , , = expected corrected d-exponent on nor-
mal trend line at depth of interest
d, , , = observed corrected d-exponent at depth
of interest
Fh
= apparent shale factor, meq/lOO g
F
h
= true shale factor, meq/lOO g
G
P
= normalized total gas (%)
G
poB
= observed total gas (R)
gc =
geothermal gradient, C/100 m
gq% =
normal formation balance gradient,
lbm/gal
KD =matrix strength constant (dimensionless)
N= rotary-speed, rev/min
Ppu =
actual pore pressure at depth of interest,
psi, or formation balance gradient,
lbm/gal equivalent mud density
@MD)
P/ m=
normal pore pressure, psi, or formation
4n =
qoB =
q/ J =
R=
R, =
R
OS =
td =
balance gradient, lbm/gal (EMD)
normal mud flow rate (m3/s)
observed mud flow rate (m3/s)
pump output, m3/s)
ROP, ft/min
normal ROP (m/s)
observed ROP (m/s)
downtime (breakdowns, weather, deci-
t, =
sion making, etc.), days
evaluation time (logging, testing, corm
fl =
Ol), =
I, =
ing, etc.), days
lag time, seconds
total time on location, days
off-bottom time (reaming, conditioning,
t, =
t, =
v =
;; =
VP =
varl =
w=
(CdXD,) =
AC
Fbl =
AC,, =
At,, =
Per =
well control, etc.), days
rotating time, days
tripping time, days
annular volume, m 3 /m
hole capacity, m3/m
pipe capacity and displacement, m3/m
annular velocity, m/s
WOB, Ibm
well cost, dollars
cost of one bit saved, dollars
extra cost of mud logging, dollars/D
time for one trip saved, day
effective circulating density, Ibm/gal
PETROLEUM ENGINEERING HANDBOOK
References
1. Field Geologists Training Guide. Exploration Logging Inc.,
Sacramento, CA (Jan. 1979).
2. Mud Logging: Principles and Interpretation, Exploration Log-
ging Inc., Sacramento, CA (Aug. 1979).
3. Formation Evaluation-Part I: Geological Procedures. Ex-
ploration Logging Inc., Sacramento, CA (Feb. 1981).
4. Hopkins, EA.: - Factors Affecting Cuttings Removal During
Rotary Drilling, .I. Pet. Tech. (June 1967) 807-14; Trans..
AIME, 240.
5. Sifferman, T.R. et al.: Drill Cuttmg Transport m Full Scale Ver-
tical Annuli, J. Pet. Tech. (Nov. 1974) 1295-1302.
6. Low, J.W.: Examination of Well Cuttings, Quarterly cjj r/w
Colorado School ofMines (1951) 46, No. 4. l-48.
7. Maher, J.C.: Guide book V/I/: Lqging Drill Curtings, Oklahoma
Geological Survey, Norman (1959).
8. McNeil, R.P.: Lithologic Analysis of Sedimentary Rocks.
Eu[(., AAPG (April 1959) 43, No. 4, 854-79.
9. Clementr, D.M., Demaison, G.J., and Daly, A.R.: Wellsite
Geochemistry by Programmed Pyrolysis. paper OTC 3410
presented at the 1979 Offshore Technology &if&-ence. Houston,
April 30-May 3.
10. Theory and Evaluation of Formation Pressures: The Pressure
Log Reference Manual. Exploration Logging Inc., Sacramento,
CA (Sept. 1981).
I I. Hottman, C.E. and Johnson, R.K.: Estimation of Formation
Pressures from Log-Derived Shale Properties, .I. Per. Tech.
(June 1965) 717-22: Trans.. AIME. 234.
MUD LOGGING 52-31
12. Goldsmith. R.G.: Why Gas-Cut Mud is Not Always a Serums 19. Anderson, G.: Corin,q und Core AnaI~~sis Hundbook. Petroleum
Problem, Work! Oil (Oct. 1972) 175, No. 5, 51-54, 101. Publishing Co., Tulsa (1975).
13. Dawdle, W.L. and Cobb, W.M.: Statrc Formation Temperature 20. Bellottt, P. and Giacca, D.: Pressure Evaluation Improves Drill-
From Well Logs, J. Per. Tech. (Nov. 1975) 1326-30. ing Programs, Oil and Gus J. (Sept. 11, 1978) 76-85.
14. Fowler. P.T.: Telling Live Basms from Dead Ones by 21. Drilling Hydraulics Manual, Exploration Loggmg Inc.,
Temperature, World Oil (May 1980) 190, No. 6, 107-22. Sacramento, CA (July 1983) 8. l-8; 9, l-10; 10, 1-7: D, l-4.
15. Lewis, C.R. and Rose, S.C.: A Theory Relating High 22. SPWLA Standard No. 1: Standard Hydrocarbon Well Log
Temnerature and Ovemressures. J. Pet. Tech. (Jan. 1970) Form. SPWLA. Houston (June 1981).
ll-lb. 23. SPWLA Standard No. 2: Hydrocarbon Well Log Calibration
16. Bineham. M.G.: A New Amroach to lnfemretinn Rock Dnllabiii- Standards, SPWLA, Houston (June 1981).
ry, Fetroieum Publishing i3b., Tulsa (1965).
17. J&en, J.R. and Shirley, O.J.: Applicatmn of Drillmg Perfor-
mance Data to Overpressure Detection, J. Per. Tech. (Nov.
General Reference
1966) 1387-94.
18. Rehm. B. and McClendon, R.: Measurement of Formation Jorden, J.R. and Campbell, F.L.: Well Log,& I-Rock Prupenies,
Pressure From Drilling Data, Dnllin~, Reprint Series, SPE.
Borehole Environmenf, Mud and Temperarure Logging. Monograph
Dallas (1973) 6a, 49-60. Series, SPE, Dallas (1984) 9.
Chapter 53
Other Well Logs
Richard M. Bateman, vizibg IK. *
Introduction
Many well logs generally are not classified as electrical,
nuclear, or acoustic logs. The most important of these
are discussed in this chapter. Included as miscellaneous
well logs are: (1) measurements taken while drilling
(MWD), (2) directional surveys, (3) dipmeter logs, (4)
caliper logs, and (5) casing inspection logs. All of these
are used by the petroleum engineer on occasions. The
logs are discussed in the order listed, which was selected
for convenience only and is unrelated to the importance
of the logs.
MWD plays an increasingly important role in modem
drilling practices. It allows an operator almost immediate
feedback on both the geometry of the hole being drilled
and the characteristics of the formations penetrated.
Without MWD this kind of information is available only
from conventional sources such as deviation surveys and
logs that, a priori, must be run after the drilling has taken
place. Of particular benefit, MWD can be applied when
drilling directional wells and/or when overpressured for-
mations are of concern.
By having the kind of information MWD can supply
more or less in real time, the driller may take appropriate
action, such as changing the weight on bit (WOB), in-
creasing the mud weight, or pulling out of the hole for a
conventional logging run once the desired formation has
been reached.
Many different MWD measuring systems are in com-
mercial use today. However, they all have common
characteristics: (1) a downhole sensor sub, (2) a power
source, (3) a telemetry system, and (4) surface equip-
ment. The downhole sensor subs may contain instrumen-
tation capable of measuring parameters such as torque,
*Aulhor of the OrIginal chap!er on this topic. enblled Miscellaneous Well Logs. I
the 1962 edilion was A.J. Pearson
WOB, borehole pressure, borehole temperature, tool
face angle, natural formation gamma ray activity, forma-
tion acoustic travel time, formation resistivity, hole
deviation from vertical, and hole azimuth with respect to
geographic coordinates. The sensors and the telemetry
system can be activated by a surf ace power source, a
downhole turbine, or downhole batteries. In the case of a
surface power source it is necessary to make electrical
connections between the surf ace and the downhole sen-
sors, which, in turn, requires either special drillpipe or
an electric cable. With a downhole turbine the cir-
culating mud itself drives an electric generator located in
the MWD drill collar. This, in turn, leads to an increase
in the hydraulic horsepower required of the mud pumps
to maintain circulation. In the case of batteries no special
cabling or additional mud pumping is required, but the
MWD system is limited by the life of the batteries used.
Once they are discharged no fmther measurements can
be made and the MWD sub must be retrieved and re-
dressed with fresh batteri es.
The telemetry system most commonly used is that of
coded mud pressure pulses. The output from a specific
sensor is converted from analog to a digital form and en-
coded as a series of pressure pulses, which are detected
and decoded at the surface. The pressure pulses may be
in the form of overpressure or underpressure anomalies
introduced, respectively, by either a relief valve short-
ing the mud circulation or a check valve choking it.
However, coded mud pressure pulses are not the only
means available for telemetry. Other methods, either in
use or under experimentation, include: (1) elec-
tromagnetic e-mode (electric current) or h-mode
(magnetic field); (2) acoustic telemetry through drillpipe
and/or tubing in straight hole, or through the earth by
seismic waves; (3) hardwire systems; (4) systems with
self-energizing repeaters; and (5) hybrid systems that
combine vari ous transmission methods.
53- 2 PETROLEUM ENGI NEERI NG HANDBOOK
The surf ace equipment consists of a decoder of the
mud pulses (or other parameter, depending on the
telemetry system in use) together with signal processing
hardware and software that together produce the data that
the drilling engineer needs. Output may be in the form of
a visual display, either on the rig floor or at a remote site,
or as a hard copy listing, or log, of the parameters
recorded. Data also may be recorded on magnetic tape
for future use.
In most systems, the transmission of data to the sur-
face is selective. For example, a measurement of hole
deviation and azimuth may require that the drilling proc-
ess be suspended temporarily and the drillstring held mo-
tionless for a short period. Readings then are ac-
cumulated in a buffer and only transmitted to the sur-
face when mud circulation recommences.
Fig. 53.1 illustrates an MWD downhole assembly
with its mud pulse transmitter, turbine generator, and
sensor sub.
Fig. 53.2 shows a data transmission schematic for
MWD. Typically, each measurement or word is
transmitted as part of a data frame, which in turn consists
of a synchronization word and 15 measurement words.
Some measurements are transmitted more than once in
each frame. Current telemetry systems are capable of
transmitting a complete frame in a matter of 1 or 2
minutes. The actual sampling rate in terms of
- Mud Flow
- Transmitter
._ Generator
- Turbine
.- Electrical Cable
.- Sensor Package
- Drill Collar
measurements per unit of depth is inversely proportional
to the rate of penetration (unit of depth/ unit of time). *
Fig. 53.3 shows a complete MWD logging system
schematic and integrates surface and downhole sensors,
the telemetry system, the surface hardware and software
(for computer processing of the data) , and the final prod-
uct in the form of a log. 3
Fig. 53.4 shows an MWD log on which is displayed
gamma-ray, short normal resistivity, annular tempera-
ture, downhole WOB, surf ace WOB, and computed
directional data (drift and azimuth).
Fi g. 53. 1- Typi cal MWD downhol e assembl y.
-
M

L
r
,
P
L
E
x
E
R
-
Fi g. 53. 2- MWD data transmi ssi on schemati c.
OTHER WELL LOGS 53- 3
Fi g. 53. 3- MWD l oggi ng systemschemati c
Fig. 53.5 shows a comparison between an MWD-
generated computed directional survey and a multishot
run in the same well. Table 53.1 illustrates a directional
survey listing corresponding to the plan view shown in
Fig. 53.5.
Directional Surveys
Directional surveys4T5 are used to determine the location
of the hole path with respect to the surface location. This
information is used (1) to prove legally that the bot-
tomhole location is under the correct surf ace property,
(2) to ascertain the bottomhole location in purposely
deviated wells, (3) to determine the radius of curvature
of the hole as it affects the ability to run casing or tools,
and (4) to differentiate between measured depth and true
vertical depth (TVD) when using formation elevations
for structural mapping.
Available Tools
The two basic types of directional surveys are continuous
surveys and station surveys. The station surveys can be
either single shot or multishot. Single or multi refers to
the number of stations recorded. Single shot surveys nor-
mally are recorded during the drilling operation and are
recorded at given depth or time intervals. These single-
shot records are accumulated and used to plot the hole
path. Multishot surveys are the result of several shots run
at given depth intervals after the hole has been drilled.
Continuous surveys are run after a portion of the hole has
been drilled. These are recorded continuously over the
selected interval. Although continuous, multishot, and
single-shot instruments are all different, there is another
classification of instruments that must be considered
when choosing a survey.
Surveys run inside metal casing cannot use the
magnetic compass for hole direction. Gyroscopes nor-
mally are used whenever a survey is needed inside cas-
ing. These gyroscopes must be aligned on the surface
before proceeding with the survey. They also should
have their alignment verified as part of the after-survey
checks.
The openhole directional surveys normally use
magnetic compass orientation to fix the hole direction.
This requires the input of the deviation between
magnetic and true north. All devices use a pendulum
system for determining the angle of hole deviation.
All continuous dipmeter surveys measure data that can
yield a directional survey. This directional survey is
available either as part of the dipmeter or as a separate
PETROLEUM ENGI NEERI NG HANDBOOK
Fig. 53.4-An MWD rotary drilling log.
survey over portions of the hole where formation dips are
not desired. At present, this instrument does not work in
a cased hole, so the survey must be tied in to known
coordinates at the bottom of the casing.
Any device that uses a magnetic compass to fix direc-
tion will be affected by metal in or near the borehole.
This effect must be considered when a survey is run in an
open hole that has been whipstocked past abandoned
drillpipe or may be near a cased wellbore.
Fig. 53.6 illustrates a gyroscopic survey tool incor-
porating an accelerometer.
Legal Requirements
Each state has a separate definition of what constitutes a
legal directional survey. These definitions may in-
clude specifications such as (I) length of downhole sen-
sor, (2) whether or not such assembly is centered, (3)
method of calculating station-type surveys, (4) profes-
sional qualifications of person supervising or certifying
the results, and (5) documentation, presentation, and
distribution of results. These criteria must be considered
when choosing a service company and a type of survey.
Computation of Results
Directional surveys are available in any area where
directional drilling is done or where dtpmeters are
available. The field log may be a series of station
readings or a continuous curve showing hole direction
and deviation. The computed results will include a well
plat that shows the vertical projection of the wellbore.
Additional plots may show wellbore projections on a
vertical plane passing through the surface location. A
tabulated listing will show the wellbore coordinates and
deviation angle,
OTHER WELL LOGS 53- 5
NORT
-100 100 300 500 700 900 I100 1300 IS00 1700
1500
1900
1100
900
e
:3
6
100
ij
5
8
j
so0
300
100
-100
-300
T
I I
j
I
I
,
SOjIO LINE
I /
1 opo ORTR rFpO?l YSl? FTI
bR$HEO LXNE I
1
Fig. 53. 5- Compari son of MWD di recti onal wi th mul ti shot di recti onal
Methods of Calculation. There are many methods of
calculating directional surveys. 6 Most companies use
one of the following five basic methods.
1. Tangential Method. This method uses the inclina-
tion and azimuth angles at the bottom of each course
length (distance between readings or stations). This is
usually the most common and least accurate method.
The error introduced increases with the inclination angle
and the course length. This method is not recommended.
2. Balanced Tangential Method. This method uses
the inclination and azimuth angles at both the top and
bottom of each course length to tangentially balance the
two sets of measurements over the course length. This
method is more accurate than the tangential method but
is still sensitive to the course length.
3. Angle Averaging Method. This method uses a sim-
ple mathematical average of the inclination and azimuth
angles at the top and bottom of the course length to com-
pute the survey using the tangential method. This is more
accurate than the tangential method but still simple
enough for hand calculations in the field. Course length
should be kept as short as feasible.
4. Radius of Curvature Method. This method uses the
inclination and azimuth angles at the top and bottom of
the course length to generate a space curve representing
the curve path. This space curve passes through the
measured angles at the top and the bottom of the course
length. This method usually is considered the most ac-
curate but is still sensitive to course length.
53- 6 PETROLEUM ENGI NEERI NG HANDBOOK
TABLE 53. 1~MWD DATA LI STI NG FOR DI RECTI ONAL SURVEY
Readi ngs Anal ysi s ( conf i dence l evel =99. 0%)
Survey
Number Deoth
90
91
92
93
94
95
96
97
98
99
100
101
102
103
104
105
106
107
108
109
110
111
112
113
114
115
116
117
118
119
120
121
122
123
124
125
126
127
128
129
130
131
132
133
134
5425. 0
5457. 5
5, 478. 0
5. 509. 0
5. 540. 0
5571. 0
5. 589. 0
5, 605. O
5, 631. 0
5. 695. 0
5, 735. 0
5, 756. 0
5, 821. 0
5, 852. 0
5, 949. 0
6932. 7
6, 090. O
6, 117. 0
6, 150. 2
6, 216. 2
6, 241. 8
6, 272. 0
6, 302. O
6, 337. 0
6, 402. O
6, 455. 8
6, 553. 3
6, 600. 3
6, 678. 3
6, 708. 3
6. 740. 3
8, 771. 3
6838. 3
6, 893. g
6, 926. 7
6, 989. 4
7, 020. O
7, 054. o
73084. 4
7, 114. 2
7, 153. g
7, 184. 8
7, 240. l
73272. 7
79285. 8
7, 316. g
7, 346. 0
Course
Length
m
30. 0
32. 5
20. 5
31. 0
31. 0
31. 0
18. 0
16. 0
26. 0
64. 0
40. 0
21. 0
65. 0
31. 0
97. 0
83. 7
57. 3
27. 0
33. 2
66. 0
25. 6
30. 2
30. 0
35. 0
65. 0
53. 8
97. 5
47. 0
78. 0
30. 0
32. 0
31. 0
67. 0
55. 6
32. 8
62. 7
30. 6
34. 0
30. 4
29. 8
39. 7
30. 9
55. 3
32. 6
13. 1
31. 1
29. 1
Angl e
( degrees)
37. 80
37. 67
36. 53
35. 73
35. 72
35. 08
35. 08
34. 35
33. 90
32. 17
31. 28
30. 97
28. 87
27. 88
26. 52
24. 65
23. 63
22. 80
22. 45
21. 27
20. 93
19. 68
19. 78
19. 30
18. 28
17. 17
15. 87
14. 92
14. 62
14. 78
14. 32
13. 85
1318
12. 63
12. 87
12. 55
12. 58
12. 60
12. 40
11. 50
10. 90
10. 00
7. 90
7. 40
7. 00
7. 40
5. 90
Azi muth Verti cal
Angl e Dogl eg Depth
( degrees) 1100 f t
( f i )
~-
41. 80
43. 50
43. 50
44. 00
41. 80
42. 40
42. 40
42. 80
43. 30
46. 30
47. 40
46. 60
45. 10
47. 20
45. 40
46. 10
48. 90
47. 00
46. 10
46. 80
46. 00
48. 20
44. 80
46. 10
41. 80
49. 50
50. 10
59. 50
47. 20
53. 50
5590
59. 50
57. 90
57. 60
63. 30
67. 80
66. 30
65. 70
67. 10
66. 90
66. 90
68. 60
68. 90
63. 00
66. 90
58. 70
58. 40
2. 34 5, 180. 4 696 559
3. 22 5. 206. 1 710 573
5. 52 5, 222. 5 719 581
2. 75 5, 247. 5 732 594
4. 14 5, 272. 7 746 606
2. 33 5. 298. 0 759 618
0. 00 5, 312. 7 767 625
4. 79 5, 325. a 773 631
2. 03 5, 347. 4 784 641
3. 72 5, 401. o 809 666
2. 64 5, 435. 0 823 681
2. 47 5, 453. 0 831 689
3. 43 5, 509. 3 853 712
4. 52 5, 536. 6 863 723
1. 64 5, 622. g 894 755
2. 26 5, 698. 4 919 781
2. 67 5, 750. 7 935 798
4. 15 5, 775. 5 942 806
1. 48 5, 806. i 951 815
1. 83 5, 867. 4 968 833
1. 71 5, 891. 2 974 840
4. 85 5, 919. 6 981 840
3. 84 5, 947. 8 988 855
1. 85 5, 980. a 997 863
2. 64 6, 042. 3 1, 012 878
4. 82 6, 093. 6 1, 023 889
1. 34 6, 187. 0 1, 041 911
5. 67 6, 232. 3 1, 048 921
4. 03 6, 307. 8 1, 060 937
5. 35 6, 336. 8 1, 065 942
2. 38 6, 367. 8 1, 069 949
3. 20 6, 397. 8 1, 073 955
1. 14 6, 463. 0 1. 082 969
0. 99 6, 517. 2 1, 088 979
3. 90 6, 549. 2 1, 092 986
1. 66 6, 610. 3 1, 097 998
1. 06 6, 640. 2 1, 100 1, 004
0. 35 6, 673. 4 1, 103 1, 011
1. 18 6, 703. l 1, 106 1, 017
3. 02 6, 732. 2 1, 108 1, 023
1. 51 69771. 1 1, 111 1, 030
3. 08 6, 801. 5 1, 113 1, 035
3. 80 6, 856. 2 1, 116 1, 043
2. 85 6, 888. 5 1, 118 1, 047
4. 81 6, 901. 5 1, 119 1, 048
3. 54 6, 932. 3 1, 121 1, 052
5. 15 6, 961. Z 1, 122 1, 055
North East Verti cal Mai or
5. Mercury Methods. This method is used by the U.S.
Government at the Mercury Test Site in Nevada. This is
a combination of the tangential and balanced tangential
methods. The portion of the course length defined by the
length of the surveying instrument is treated by the
tangential method. The remainder of the course length is
treated by the balanced tangential method.
All these methods are critical to the course length or
separation between stations. As the course length in-
creases, their inaccuracies and deviations from each
other increase. As the course length decreases, they all
become more accurate. On very short course lengths (10
ft or less) there is very little to choose between the
methods. For this reason, directionals computed from
Uncertai nty Range
Axi s
1. 3 10. 0 9. 5 343
1. 3 10. 0 9. 5 344
1. 3 10. 0 9. 6 344
1. 3 10. 0 9. 6 345
1. 3 10. 0 9. 6 346
1. 3 10. 1 9. 6 347
1. 3 10. 1 9. 6 347
1. 3 10. 1 9. 6 347
1. 3 10. 1 9. 6 348
1. 4 10. 1 9. 6 351
1. 4 10. 1 9. 7 352
1. 4 10. 1 9. 7 353
1. 4 10. 1 9. 7 356
1. 4 10. 1 9. 7 357
1. 4 10. 2 9. 8 3
1. 5 10. 2 9. 8 6
1. 5 10. 2 9. 8 8
1. 5 10. 2 9. 8 8
1. 5 10. 2 9. 8 9
1. 5 10. 2 9. 8 10
1. 5 10. 2 9. 8 10
1. 5 10. 3 9. 8 11
1. 5 10. 3 9. 8 11
1. 5 10. 3 9. 8 11
1. 5 10. 3 9. 8 12
1. 5 10. 3 9. 8 13
1. 5 10. 3 9. 8 14
1. 5 10. 3 9. 8 14
1. 5 10. 3 9. 8 15
1. 5 10. 3 9. 8 15
1. 5 10. 3 9. 9 15
1. 5 10. 3 9. 9 15
1. 5 10. 4 9. 9 16
1. 5 10. 4 9. 9 16
1. 5 10. 4 9. 9 16
1. 6 10. 4 9. 9 16
1. 6 10. 4 9. 9 16
1. 6 10. 4 9. 9 16
1. 6 10. 4 9. 9 16
1. 6 10. 4 9. 9 16
1. 6 10. 4 9. 9 16
1. 6 10. 4 9. 9 16
1. 6 10. 4 9. 9 16
1. 6 10. 4 9. 9 16
1. 6 10. 4 9. 9 16
1. 6 10. 4 9. 9 16
1. 6 10. 4 9. 9 16
continuously measuring devices, such as dipmeter tools,
may be more accurate than station reading devices.
Dipmeter devices normally compute every 1 or 2 ft
although data listings may be accumulated and listed on-
ly every 50 ft.
Presentations. Directional data are normally presented
both in well sketches and tabulated data. Well sketches
include two elements.
1. Plunar View. This is a vertical projection of the
wellbore path on a horizontal plane. Such a projection
shows the separation between the wellbore and the sur-
face location. The wellbore path is marked with
measured depths.
OTHER WELL LOGS
2. Vertical Sections. These are of two types. The first
is a projection of the wellbore on a vertical plane through
the surface location and aligned at various azimuths. The
second i s plot of depth against closure where closure is
the horizontal distance of the wellbore from the surf ace
location. The tabulated data listing will show the
measured depth, vertical depth, hole azimuth, deviation
angle, x and y distances, and closure distance.
Field Examples. Fig. 53.7 shows a number of presenta-
ti ons of devi ati on survey computati ons i ncl udi ng: ( . A)
plan view,(R) vertical section, and (C)depth vs. closure.
The deviation survey listing is also shown in Table 53.2.
Dipmeter Logging
Introduction
The dipmeter tools arc run to determine the direction and
angle of formation dip from the survey of one borehole.
This information is of obvious importance in the study of
structural and stratigraphic problems. 7
As illustrated in Fig. 53.8, the angle of formation dip
is the angle between a horizontal plane and the bedding
plane of the formation. The strike of a formation is the
direction of the horizontal line formed by the intersection
of these two planes. Although strike is a common
geologic term (particularly in surf ace geol ogy) , i t i s
more convenient to use dip azimuth in discussing the
dipmeter. The direction of dip is perpendicular to the
strike. In the remainder of this section dip azimuth will
be used instead of strike.
Dipmeter tools are in a class by themselves. The
technique, the purpose, and the intemretation of
dipmeter logs arc entirely different from those of other
logging tools. The dipmeters purpose is to measure the
dips of formations. To do this, the tool must
simultaneously and continuously do two separate jobs:
first, it must orient itself in space, normally with respect
to magnetic north and vertical, and second, it must react
to formation bedding planes.
All present dipmeter tools go about this job in the same
way. An inclinometer section supplies continuous
measurements of deviation, both the amount and the
direction, and of the orientations of the tools electrode
array, either with respect to the borehole direction or
magnetic north (a few specialized tools for far north
operations use gyroscopic orientation, nominally with
true north). At the same time, an electrode array is main-
tained in contact with the borehole wall by pressured
linkages. The electrodes respond to resistivity variations,
while the expanding linkages activate a caliper
recording.
These pads, normally numbering four, are identical,
and so mounted as to remain in a plane normal to the tool
axis. When an anomaly is detected by at least three pads,
these deflections plus the caliper reading identify three
points in what is assumed to be a plane, the plane of
deposition of the formation. This identification is then
referred to vertical and true north, giving the true dip of
the formation.
Recording correct data with a dipmeter tool is a
straightforward, more or less mechanical process,
though the tools used to do it are some of the most
sophisticated in the industry. Interpreting the data draws
heavily on computer technology.
53-7
TO
ELECTRONIC5
SECTION
TOP 4
SLIP RINGS
KATE tiYH0
SPIN AXIS-
rVRCjIJl. MOTVK.
c
ACCELEROMETER
INPUT AXIS
\ INPUT AXIS
WY~IMBAL
-RESOLVER
Fi g. . 53. 6- Eastman Whi pstock Seeker- l .
PETROLEUM ENGI NEERI NG HANDBOOK
Fi g. 53. 7C- Devi ati on survey depth vs. closure.
Fi g. 53. 7A- Devi ati on survey pl an vi ew
Tools Available. All major service companies use four-
arm dipmeter tools. Fig. 53.9 shows a typical dipmeter
tools mechanical section with the four pads, the elec-
trodes, and the caliper assembly visible. Most of these
tools will operate to 20,000 psi and 350F in holes be-
tween 6 and 16 in. in diameter. Different varieties of
tools handle low- and high-deviation holes by using dif-
ferent methods of measuring hole deviation and hole
azimuth angles. Fig. 53.10 illustrates a monitor log and
a computer-answer log.
Calibration. The dipmeter is essentially a physical tool,
and its calibration is physical. The inclinometer section
is adjusted to read correctly in a special test jig. Special
care is given to ensure that the deviation sensor registers
zero with the tool held vertical. The operation of the in-
clinometer is checked before and after each log run, first
by allowing the tool to hang vertical in the derrick, then
by rotating the tool manually through at least one full
revolution.
The calipers are checked as usual, by calibration jigs
of known diameter. Four-arm dipmeters record a
separate caliper with each opposing pair of pads, which
can thus flex independently of each other while remain-
ing in the same plane. Finally, the sensitivity of the elec-
trodes is checked by shorting them out in sequence; this
also verities the correct wiring of the electrode array.
Oil-Base Muds. Dipmeters run in oil-base muds present
a special problem. Because the oil-base mud will not
connect the resistivity electrodes to the formation elec-
trically it is necessary to use special knife-edge blade
T
c
I
L
Fi g. 53. 78- Devi ati on survey verti cal secti on.
OTHER WELL LOGS
53- 9
Fi g. 53. 8~I l l ustrati on of di p, stri ke, and di p azi muth
electrodes. These blades mechanically cut into the for-
mation and make contact with the water in the formation.
This method does not give the quality of data that is ob-
tained with the conventional system in water-base mud.
The reason for this is the considerable amount of noise
introduced into the resistivity recording caused by the
knife blade sliding along the borehole wall. The better
the contact made between the knife edge and the forma-
tion, the better the quality of the resistivity
measurements. Two important things can be done to im-
prove this contact.
1. Make sure that the knife-edge blade is sharp
Demanding new blades is the best way to ensure sharp
edges. New blades are also less likely to have electrical
insulation problems.
2. Have the logging company dress and adjust their
dipmeter tool to apply the maximum arm pressure. This
will force the knife edge electrodes into the formation
mechanically. This adjustment may be made with dif-
ferent spring mechanisms or by applying greater pad
pressure through a hydraulic linkage. Either way this is
very important to obtain good resistivity data.
Because the oil-base mud dipmeter is a low-usage tool,
the service company should be given maximum notice so
they can prepare for the job. All special instructions and
stipulations should be given at the same time.
When recording the log, it should be remembered that
the final data can be expected to be only 10 to 20% as
good as an ordinary dipmeter. Therefore, it is advisable
to consider multiple repeats over critical zones. The data
usually will be valid only for general structural use so
particular attention should be paid to shale zones. All
resistivity curves should have good character, although
their similarity will not extend down to small details. A
slow or dead curve usually indicates a faulty knife-edge
electrode. The orientation curves are unchanged from an
ordinary dipmeter so the same comments apply to both.
The Computed Dipmeter Log
The computation of dipmeter surveys8 requires
sophisticated software and a substantial computer. The
task requires that the anomalies recorded on the resistivi-
ty traces at bed boundaries be correlated and the
displacement of each with respect to the others along the
borehole be determined. Once this step has been taken
then any two pairs of displacements are sufficient to
define a plane. Where more than three resistivity curves
are recorded, as with most modem dipmeter tools (4-,
6-, and 8-pad tools are in use), then multiple pairs of
TABLE 53. 2- DEVI ATI ON SURVEY LI STI NG
Measured Vertical
Depth Depth
( W ( W
5000 5000
10000 10000
15000 15000
200 00 20000
25000 25000
300 00 30000
35000 350. 00
40000 40000
45000 450. 00
500 00 500. 00
550 00 550. 00
600 00 599 99
65000 649 99
70000 699 99
75000 749 99
800 00 799 99
85000 a49 98
900. 00 899 98
950 00 949 98
1, 000 00 993 97
1. 050 00 1. 049 37
1. 10000 1, 099 96
1. 15000 1. 14996
1. 200 00 I . 19995
1, 250 00 1, 249 94
1. 300 00 1, 299 94
1. 35000 1. 349 93
1. 40000 1. 399 92
1. 45000 1. 449 91
1. 50000 1. 499 90
1. 550 00 1. 549 a9
1. 600 00 1. 599 aa
1. 650. 00 1. 649 87
1, 700. 00 1. 699 86
1. 75000 1, 749 a4
1, 800 00 1. 799 83
1. 850 00 1. 849 82
1, 900 00 1, 899 a0
1. 950 00 1, 949 79
2. 000 00 1. 999 77
2. 050 00 2, 049 75
2. 100 00 2. 099 73
2. 150 00 2, 149 71
2. 200 00 2. 199 69
2, 250 00 2. 249 67
2, 300 00 2, 299 65
2. 350 00 2, 349 62
2, 400 00 2, 399 60
2. 450 00 2, 449 57
2. 500 00 2. 499 55
2. 550 00 2. 549 52
2, 600 00 2. 599 49
2. 650 00 2. 649 46
2. 700 00 2. 699 43
2. 750 00 2. 749 40
2. 800 00 2. 793 37
2. 850 00 2. 849 33
2. 900 00 2. 899 29
2. 950 00 2, 949 26
3. 000. 00 2. 999 22
3 050 00 3. 049 18
HOk
Dl rectl on
95
95
95
95
95
95
95
95
95
95
95
95
95
95
95
95
95
95
95
95
95
95
95
35
95
95
95
95
95
95
95
95
95
95
95
95
95
95
55
95
95
95
95
95
95
95
95
95
95
95
95
95
95
95
95
95
95
95
95
95
95
Deuatl on
Angl e
( degrees)
004
0 08
011
015
0 19
023
026
0 30
034
038
041
045
0 49
053
057
0 60
0 64
068
0 72
0 75
0 79
083
087
0 90
0 94
0 98
102
106
109
1 13
1 17
121
124
128
132
136
140
143
147
1 51
155
I 58
162
166
170
1 73
1 77
181
185
i a9
192
1 96
2 00
2 04
207
2 11
215
2 19
2 22
2 26
2 30
' Ref erenced f romRKB=l 5 f t. MSL=Otl
Magneti c decl ! nati on 0. 00 degrees went of north
North East
DUf i Dl l f l
- 0 00 0 02
- 001 0 07
- 001 0 15
- 002 0 26
- 004 041
- 005 0 59
- 007 081
- 0 09 105
- 012 1 33
- 014 1 64
- 017 199
- 021 2 36
- 024 2 77
- 0 28 322
- 0 32 365
- 037 420
- 041 4 74
- 0 47 5 32
- 052 5 92
- 057 6 56
- 063 7 23
- 0 69 7 94
- 076 868
- 083 345
- 090 1025
- 097 1109
- 105 11 96
- 1 12 12 86
- 1 21 13 79
- 1 29 14 76
i 38 15 76
- 147 16 79
- 156 1786
- 166 1896
- 1 76 2009
- 1 86 2125
- 196 2245
- 207 2368
- 218 2494
- 230 2623
- 241 2756
- 2 53 28 92
- 265 3032
- 2 78 31 74
- 290 3320
- 304 3463
- 317 3622
- 330 3777
- 344 3936
- 359 4099
- 373 4264
- 388 4433
- 403 4605
- 418 4780
- 434 4959
- 450 5141
- 466 5326
- 482 5514
- 499 5706
- 5 16 5901
- 534 6099
Cl OSUF2
002
007
0 15
0 26
041
0 59
081
1 06
134
165
199
2 37
2 78
323
371
422
4 76
5 34
595
659
726
797
8 71
948
1029
11 13
1200
1291
1384
1482
1582
1686
1793
1903
20 16
21 33
2253
2377
2503
2633
2767
2903
3043
31 86
3333
34. 32
3635
3792
39 51
41 14
4280
4450
4623
4799
4978
51 60
5346
5536
5728
5924
61 23
53-10
Low Angle
RELATI VE
AZIMUTH *xxx
BEAAINGx*X~
OF REFERENCE
y-
DHD
4+--L-
HIGH SIDE
OF TOOL
fN
- NO 1 PAD
REFERENCE
ELECTRODE
High Angle
RELATIVE xxx
HIGH SIDE.
NO 1 PAD
\
NO 1 PAD
xx Az, mth of hol e dev, al , on- Cl ockwi se angl e f ro. ms3gnetl C
North to DHD
XLX Rmti ve bearmg- Cl ockwse angl e f romDHO to Ref erence
El ectrode
xxxx Arl muth 01 Ref erence El ectrode- Cl ockwse angl e f rommag-
net~c North to Ref erence El ectrode
Fi g. 53. 9- Four- arm di pmeter tool .
PETROLEUM ENGINEERING HANDBOOK
displacements may be chosen and multiple apparent bed-
ding planes defined. The correct choice of the most prob-
able bedding plane is determined by the interpretation
logic in the dipmeter program. The correlation of one
resistivity curve to another is a more mechanical task and
is controlled by the interpreters choice of three
parameters-the correlation length, the search angle, and
the step length-as illustrated in Fig. 53.11. A short in-
terval of one curve is correlated to a second curve at
discrete steps throughout a depth range defined by the
search angle. At each step a correlation function is
evaluated.
When the value of the correlation function is deter-
mined at each step, then a correlogram can be built and a
search made for a maximum value. This maximum in-
dicates the displacement of the curve sector defined on
the first curve by the correlation interval from a similar
section on the second curve. Successive correlations are
continued in the same correlation interval with other
curves and then in the next correlation interval and so
forth.
Once a plane at any point in the well has been defined
its orientation relative to vertical and geographic north
also must be computed. This requires that the position of
the tool in the hole and the deviation and azimuth of the
hole itself be known. These data are supplied from the
orientation section of the tool.
The dipmeter log, as recorded, is not evaluated easily
for quality, so an appraisal of the computed log should
be included in dipmeter quality control. A computed
dipmeter log may be available on location, if a computer
logging unit is available, but it is normal to wait for days
or even weeks for the results if processing is done at a
central computer office.
Working with the computed log, look for two distinct
defects: undetected problems with the recorded data and
problems with the computation. A computed dipmeter
should model real-life geology; if it seems not to do that,
an investigation is in order. If the problem is in the com-
putation, it normally can be solved by repeating the com-
putation job. Even if the problem is with log
measurements, the logging companys computer experts
often can solve it by special handling.
Application of Dipmeter and Directional Data
Dipmeter Patterns. Once a dipmeter log has been nm
and computed then the results have to be interpreted in
the light of known geological and geophysical facts. In
general dipmeter results are used to find gross structural
features, fine stratigraphic features, and true vertical and
true stratigraphic thicknesses.
The most common method of representing computed
dipmeter results is by an arrow or tadpole plot. A
series of special characters is plotted as a function of
depth with their origin indicating the dip magnitude and
a short line indicating the dip azimuth, as illustrated in
Fig. 53.12A. For the purpose of reference the uphole
direction on the plot is considered north and the
clockwise direction the short line points from its base is
the dip azimuth angle. When viewed together as pat-
terns, these dip vectors or L tadpoles can be interpreted
in terms of gross geological structure or sedimentary
detail as illustrated in Fig. 53.12B.
OTHER WELL LOGS 53- l 1
L
RESISTIVITY ARROW
INCREASES - ,P PLOT iu
Fi g. 53. 10- Di pmeter moni tor l og and computed di pmeter l og
I
1
I
I
I SEARCH ANGLE
I
CORRELATION
NEXT CORRELATION
INTERVAL
INTERVAL
Fi g. 53. 1 l - Di pmeter computati on terms correl ati on i nterval , step, and search,
53- 12
YETHOD OF PLOTTfNG
a
0 10
20 + DIP MAGNlTUDE
IDIP
S
I
L
I
J
EXAMPLE 10 N45E
DIRECTION
b
/4 I
ie i
BLUE PAT,ERN
Fig. 53.12-Dipmeter i nterpretati on rul es showi ng ( a) method
of pl otti ng di ps and ( b) patterns of di ps.
Fig. 53.13 shows three common structures: a folded
structure (anticline), an unconformity, and a normal
fault. Fig. 53.14 shows three common sedimentary
features: a channel cut and fill, a buried bar with shale
drape, and current bedding.
Other complex patterns may develop, such as those
related to: (1) missing and repeat sections (Fig. 53.15A),
(2) stratigraphy of continental deposits (Fig. 53. lSB),
(3) stratigraphy of continental shelf deltas (Fig. 53. IX),
(4) stratigraphy of continental shelf tide/wave-dominated
deposits (Figs. 53.15D and E), and (5) continental slope
and abyssal environments (Fig. 53.1 SF). Other forms of
representing dip data are also used to good effect, such
as polar and stereographic plots and azimuth frequency
diagrams.
One of the main uses for dip data as far as the reservoir
engineer is concerned is in computation of reservoir
volumes, which require true vertical thickness
measurements (TVT). For the geologist a related
measure. the true stratigraphic thickness (TST) is of im-
mediate concern. 9-3
In the simple case where the wells are vertical and the
bedding is horizontal, correlations can be made directly
between logs of neighboring wells. Reservoir volume is
calculated by multiplying reservoir thickness (directly
derived from the logs) by reservoir area (delimited by
other means).
However, this simple case is exceptional because (1)
most reservoirs exist as the result of some structural
event or accident, implying some formation dip at least
at the reservoir periphery, and (2) most wells deviate to
some extent from vertical, intentionally or not. As long
PETROLEUM ENGI NEERI NG HANDBOOK
Folded Structure
SP fCross Section N . S /Dip Pan*m
Unconformity
SP 1 Cross SIctlcn SE NW
Fig. 53.13-Common geologic structures and corresponding
di pmeter patterns.
OTHER WELL LOGS
Buried Bar with Shale Drape
u c.ma.sadm uw-SE
1040 ?ml?mm
4
4
4
4
.
.
---------
,
,
\
.-L---d
4
4
Fi g. 53. 15A- Mi ssi ng and repeat secti ons.
Current Bedding
Y
@#-msrQn NE-SW
I- I
Fi g. 53. 158- Strati graphi c i nterpretati on, conti nental envi ron-
ment.
Fi g. 5X14- Di pmeter patterns i n sedi mentary f eatures
53- 14
PETROLEUM ENGI NEERI NG HANDBOOK
Fi g. 53. 15( 3- Strati graphi c i nterpretati on, conti nental shel f ,
del ta domi nated.
r-
z I I
,= D,,l EFLEC, s,cr D,,
Fi g. 53.15E- Strati graphi c i nterpretati on, conti nental shel f ,
ti dal wave domi nated.
Fi g. 53.15D- Strati graphi c i nterpretati on, conti nental shel f ,
ti dal wave domi nated.
Fi g. 53,15F- Conti nental sl ope and abyssal envi ronments.
OTHER WELL LOGS
53- 15
as dips and deviations do not exceed a few degrees, the
simple vertical-horizontal case is approximated closely
enough not to need corrections. But when deviations and
dips exceed about 10 degrees, corrections are needed
because apparent formation thicknesses measured on
logs are greater than true stratigraphic thicknesses by dif-
ferent amounts in different wells. This adds to the dif-
ficulty of well-to-well log correlation. Also, if wells are
deviated from vertical, and if formations have substantial
dip, apparent thicknesses differ from the vertical
thicknesses needed for reservoir volume calculation, and
must be corrected.
To achieve these corrections in a convenient manner,
modem data processing affords three different computed
log products: the true vertical depth (TVD), TST, and
TVT plots. Proper interpretation of these plots requires
considerable caution and may be quite difficult.
Frue Vertical Depths
Fi g. 53. 16- Pri nci pl e of true verti cal depth ( TVD) .
Common Principles of TVD, TST, and TVT Plots.
Figs. 53.16 through 53.18 illustrate the principles of
thickness transformations. Formation parameters record-
ed by logging tools are reproduced without alteration,
but their depths are altered to suit respective purposes.
Depths should be thought of as summations of overlying
formation thicknesses.
Two methods exist for computation of altered depths:
(1) common surj&e point, which assumes a hole drilled
from the same surf ace point or formation top with a dif-
ferent course, and (2) common subsur&ace point, which
assumes a hole drilled either vertically, or normal to the
bed dip, from some point in the actual well course, such
as a formation top, or a point of formation dip change.
Depths may be reset arbitrarily at the common point. In
this approach it is set to zero, thus representing only
thickness as counted down from the common point.
ZVD Plot. This plot ignores formation dip and corrects
for well deviation only. Thus, it represents formations as
they would look in a vertically drilled well, provided the
formations had zero dip. It is usef ul in areas of direc-
tional drilling where dip is low, for well-to-well correla-
tions, and for reservoir volume calculations. It usual l y i s
run only in the common surface point mode.
Fi g. 53. 17- Pri nci pl e of true strati graphi c thi ckness ( TST) .
TST Plot. This plot accounts for formation dip, and re-
qui res knowledge of true well course, whether vertical or
not. It displays formations as though the well had been
drilled perpendicular to them. If a change of dip occurs,
an equal and opposite change of deviation is assumed.
If only one dip is present, the plot represents the logs
that would have been obtained if the well had been
drilled at the same location perpendicular to that dip. If
more than one dip is present, the interpretation becomes
more complicated. At each dip change, some
stratigraphic column must either disappear, or thin, or
thicken, or even repeat itself.
17/T Plot. This plot is closely related to the TST, and
as such accounts for both well deviation and formation
dip. It shows formation thickness as though the well had
been drilled vertically through the dipping beds.
Evidently, a TVT in a vertical hole would be identical to
the original log. The TVT is meant to be used for reser-
voir volume calculations from deviated hole logs.
Reductions in Special Cases. If the well is vertical and
the formations are horizontal, all three transformed logs
would be identical to the original log, and the processing
Fi g. 53. 16- Pri nci pl e of true verti cal thi ckness ( TVT) .
53- 16 PETROLEUM ENGI NEERI NG HANDBOOK
would be a waste of computer time. If the well is
deviated and the formations arc horizontal, the TST and
the TVT are identical to the TVD, and running the latter
is sufficient. If the well is vertical and the formations
dip, the TVD and TVT plots would be wasted computer
time, but the TST may be useful in well-to-well correla-
tions. If the well is drilled perpendicular to the formation
dip (as it often tends to be in hard rocks in particular) the
TST would be a waste of computer time, but the TVT is
needed for reservoir calculations, and the TVD may be
of use if deviation is pronounced.
Algorithms. The algorithms used for computing the
TVD, TST, and TVT have been covered well in the
literature. I4 Any implementation of these algorithms for
computer applications should be approached with cau-
tion. Many programming languages differ in their treat-
ment of trigonometric functions for angles exceeding
90. Another area requiring care is in the matter of preci-
sion. When depth data are processed, a repetitive ac-
cumulation of depth increments is made. As many as
IO4 or more additions must be made in a normal well.
Thus the precision of each increment must be at least one
part in IO6 or better. Depending on the computer used
(16 bit, 32 bit, etc.) the programming of these algorithms
should demand appropriate precision.
By way of summary, all three plots perform valuable
functions, but all three may be misleading if not used
with the proper caution, in particular with respect to ab-
solute depths.
1, The TVD is incorrect in both formation thicknesses
and in absolute depths if formations have appreciable
dip.
2. The TST is always correct in formation thicknesses.
It should be run in the common subsurface point mode.
If changes of dips are present, it should reset the subsur-
face point at each change of dip and make independent
plots through each dip zone. This resetting may be made
automatically if the program allows it, and manually
otherwise.
3, The TVT may produce apparent thicknesses greater
than measured thicknesses. Such thicknesses may be fit-
titious when beds are truncated in their vertical extension
by unconformities or faults. It should be run in indepen-
dent sections for each change of dip, in the common sub-
surface point mode, as for the TST.
Fig. 53.19-A typical borehol e.
Caliper Logs
Introduction
The caliper log measures the diameter of the borehole.
The first caliper logs were developed to determine
borehole size in holes shot with nitroglycerin. These ear-
ly logs showed large variations in hole size even in the
portions of the hole that had not been shot. This il-
lustrated the need for the caliper log over the entire hole.
Methods of Recording
Several types of caliper are currently in use. One type
consists of three or four spring-driven arms, which con-
tact the wall of the borehole. The instrument is lowered
to the total depth (TD), and the arms are released either
mechanically or electrically. The spring tension against
the arms centers the tool in the well. The arms move in
and out with the change in wellbore diameter. The arm
motion is transmitted to a rheostat so that change in the
resistance of an electric circuit is proportional to the hole
diameter. The borehole diameter is recorded at the sur-
face by measuring the potential across this resistance.
Another instrument uses three flexible springs, which
contact the wall of the borehole. These springs are con-
nected to a plunger that moves up or down as the springs
expand or contract with changes in borehole diameter.
The plunger passes through two coils. When an alter-
nating current is passed through one coil. an elec-
tromotive force (EMF) is induced in the other coil. The
amount of this induced EMF is a function of the plunger
position and is proportional to borehole diameter. Either
of the preceding instruments may be adjusted so that they
will record borehole area rather than hole diameter. If the
caliper log is used to determine hole volume, area should
be recorded on a linear scale. If the caliper log is used to
determine hole configuration, the hole diameter is
recorded on a linear scale.
A third type of caliper log is the microcaliper, which is
discussed in connection with the electrical-log
microdevices. This instrument uses two pads rather than
arms or flexible springs. Hole diameter is determined by
the movement of these pads, which are held against the
borehole wall by springs.
Typical Borehole Configuration
A schematic of a typical borehole is shown in Fig.
53.19. As illustrated in this figure, some formations cave
considerably, causing enlarged holes. Other formations
do not cave, and because of the presence of mudcake,
the hole size actually may be reduced to less than bit
size. Although not illustrated in Fig. 53.19. some fotma-
tions may swell, causing reduction in hole size.
The primary cause of formation caving is the action of
the drilling fluid. Action of the bit and the drillpipe also
have an effect. Most drilling muds are composed
primarily of water. The chemical action of this water on
shales (hydration of the shales) causes many shales to
disintegrate and slough into the hole. The amount and
rate of this sloughing depend on the nature of the mud
and shale. Other shales (heaving shales) swell rather than
disintegrate.
If a freshwater mud is used to drill a salt section, it will
dissolve salt until the mud becomes salt-saturated. The
drilling fluid does not react with formations such as
OTHER WELL LOGS
limestone, dolomite, and sandstone. However, if those
formations are permeable, a mudcake will be formed, as
illustrated in Fig. 53.19. This mudcake forms rapidly.
The character (density and thickness) of the mudcake
varies with the mud used to drill the well. Of course,
thickness of the mudcake is limited by erosion of the
drilling fluid while circulating.
In some areas the shallow portion of the hole is drilled
with water. If loosely cemented sands are encountered,
they may cave under this condition.
The action of the bit is probably not too important. But
if a thin sand is surrounded by shales that have caved, the
bit probably knocks off part of the sand ledge with each
round trip.
Action of the-drillpipe against the side of the hole
causes some enlargement even in sandstones and
limestone. Usually this enlargement is not great enough
to affect hole volume appreciably, but it may cause the
drillpipe to become differentially pressure stuck,
necessitating a fishing job. Formation wear by the
drillpipe will cause the hole to be noncylindrical, in
which case a four-arm caliper will display the long and
short axes of the hole.
Interpretation and Application of Caliper Logs
Caliper logs usually are recorded on vertical scales from
1 in.= 100 ft to 5 in.= 100 ft. The horizontal scale is
selected to show a detail picture of hole diameter and is
usually on the order of 1 in. =4 in. Because of the dif-
ference in scales, it is easy to get the impression from
caliper logs that tremendous cavities are created. When
plotted on the same horizontal and vertical scales, it is
evident that the normal borehole is quite regular. This
should be remembered when using the caliper log.
The primary uses of the caliper log are: (1) to compute
hole volume to determine the amount of cement needed
to fill up to a certain depth, (2) to determine hole
diameter accurately for use in interpreting other logs,
and (3) to locate permeable zones as evidenced by the
presence of a filter cake. Other applications of the caliper
log include proper location of casing centralizers, and
packer seats for openhole drillstem tests.
Caliper logs are also available in conjunction with hole
deviation and hole azimuth measurements, in which case
the log is referred to as a borehole geometry log.
Fig. 53.20 is an example of a borehole geometry log
using a standard three-track presentation. The borehole
orientation is displayed in Track 1, while the two in-
dependent orthogonal caliper readings are recorded in
Track 2 with a standard scaling. The caliper data are also
available in Track 3 but with a reduced sensitivity.
Together with the bit size and future casing size, this
visual display, enhanced by the shading between the
calipers and the bit size, quickly gives a clear impression
of the borehole shape. Within the depth track the total
hole volume integration is recorded along the edge of
Track 1, and the cement volume (the difference between
the total hole volume and the future casing volume) is
presented along the edge of Track 2.
53- 17
i
Fig. 53.20- Borehole geometry log.
Casing Inspection Logs
Introduction
Inspection of the mechanical state of the completion
string is an important aspect of production logging.
Many production (or injection) problems can be traced
back to mechanical damage to, or corrosion of, the com-
pletion string. A number of casing inspection methods
are available including: (1) multifingered caliper logs,
(2) electrical potential logs, (3) electromagnetic inspec-
tion devices, and (4) borehole televiewers or borehole
TV. Of these the majority measure the extent to which
corrosion has taken place. Only the electrical potential
log may indicate where corrosion is currently occurring.
With the exception of the caliper logs, all the devices re-
quire that the tubing be pulled before running the survey,
since most are designed to inspect casing rather than tub-
ing, and all are large-diameter tools.
Caliper Logs for Tubing and Casing Inspection
Various arrangements of caliper mechanisms ate
available to gauge the internal shape of a casing or tubing
string. Fig. 53.21 illustrates three such tools. Table 53.3
lists the various sizes available, their respective number
of feelers, and the appropriate casing size.
Tubing Profile Calipers. Tubing profile calipers will
determine the extent of wear and corrosion, and will
detect holes in the tubing string-all in a single run into
the well. The large number of feelers on each size of
caliper ensures detection of even very small irregularities
in the tubing wall.
In pumping wells, the tubing caliper log may be run by
one person and there is no need for a pulling unit crew to
be present. A pull sheet showing the maximum
percentage of wall loss of every joint of tubing in the
well may be prepared. Before the well is pulled, a pro-
gram of rearranging the tubing string can be provided.
Moving partially worn joints nearer the surface and
discarding thin-wall joints substantially prolongs the ef-
fective life of tubing strings and reduces pulling costs in
pumping wells. In flowing or gas lift wells, the tubing
profile caliper provides an economical method to check
53- I 8
Tubing Profile
Cal i per
Casing Pmfrle
Caliper
Fi g. 53. 21- Casi ng and tubi ng prof i l e cal i per tool s
PETROLEUM ENGI NEERI NG HANDBOOK
TABLE 53. 3- TUBI NG AND CASI NG
PROFI LE CALI PERS
Si zes of Tubi ng Prof i l e Cal i pers
Tool
Di ameter Number of OD
( i n. ) Feel ers ( i n. )
1% 20 2
1 / 2 20 wl6
1% 26 2%
2%6 32 27/ s
2%6 44 3%
3 h 44 4
Si zes of Casi ng Prof i l e Cal i pers
3% 40 4% t0 6
5% 64 6% to 7510
7v? 64 8% l o 9
7% 64 9%
8 / 4 64 10%
9% 64 11%
1 I S/ l 6 64 133/ e
13% 64 16
17% 64 20
periodically for corrosion damage, to monitor the effec-
tiveness of a corrosion inhibitor program, or to detect
and remove damaged tubing joints when working over a
well.
Split Detector. This is an accessory tool that may be run
in combination with the tubing profile caliper. This tool,
functioning much like a magnetic collar locator, is
designed to detect and log vertical splits or hairline
cracks in the tubing that might be difficult to locate with
the profile caliper. In practice, the split detector is used
to log down the tubing, and the profile caliper to log up
the tubing. This gives a complete inspection for wall
thickness and splits in one run of the cable in the well.
Casing Profile Calipers. Casing profile calipers are
available to log 4%in.- through 20-in.-OD casing. The
tool is especially valuable where drilling operations have
been carried on for an extended period of time through a
string of casing. The determination of casing wear is of
great importance when deciding if a liner can be hung
safely, or if a full production string is required. In pro-
ducing wells, the casing profile caliper will locate holes
or areas of corrosion that may require remedial work.
The tool is also valuable when abandoning wells because
it permits grading of casing to be salvaged before it is
pulled.
Casing Minimum-ID Calipers. The minimum-ID
caliper can pass through and accurately measure restric-
tions as small as 3% in. in casing with a nomi nal ID up to
13% in. This log is of particular val ue in determi ni ng
areas of collapsed or deformed casing, identifying
casing-weight change intervals, or detecti ng parted
casing.
Examples of these logs are given in Fig. 53.22.
53-19 OTHER WELL LOGS
TUBING PROFILE CALIPER
r
CASING PROFILE CALIPER CASING MINIMUM I.D. CALIPER
Fi g. 53. 22- Tubi ng and casi ng prof i l e l ogs.
Electrical Potential Logs
An electrical potential log determines the galvanic cur-
rent flow entering or leaving the casing. This will in-
dicate not only where corrosion is taking place and the
amount of iron being lost, but also where cathodic pro-
tection will be effective. The magnitude and direction of
the current within and external to the casing is derived
mathematically from electrical potential measurements
made at fixed intervals throughout the casing string. To
achieve reliable results from this kind of survey, the
borehole fluid must be an electrical insulator (i.e., the
hole must be either empty or filled with oil or gas). Mud
or other aqueous solutions will provide a short that in-
validates the measurements. The log itself is a recording
vs. depth of the small galvanic voltages detected. Fig.
53.23 illustrates such a log with three different runs
recorded, each with a differing level of cathodic protec-
tion applied to the casing.
Figs. 53.24 and 53.25 show an interpretation of casing
potential profile logs nm both with and without cathodic
protection. Note that in Fig. 53.25 the metal loss has
been reduced to practically zero by the application of an
appropriate cathodic protection.
Electromagnetic Devices
The most commonly used casing corrosion inspection
tools are of the electromagnetic type. They come in two
versions, those that attempt to measure the remaining
metal thickness in a casing string I5 and those that try to
detect defects in the inner or outer wall of the casing. I6
Although frequently run together, these tools will be
discussed separately.
Electromagnetic Thickness Tools. The electromagnetic
thickness tools are available under a variety of trade
names such as ETT (Schlumberger), Magnelog
(Dresser), and Electronic Casing Caliper Log (Mc-
Cullough). They operate in a manner similar to openhole
induction tools. Each consists of a transmitter coil and a
receiver coil. An AC is sent through the transmitter coil.
53- 20 PETROLEUM ENGI NEERI NG HANDBOOK
This sets up an alternating magneti c f i el d, whi ch i n-
teracts both wi th the casi ng and the recei ver coi l ( see
Fig. 53.26). The coils are spaced about three casing
diameters apart to ensure that the flux lines sensed by the
receiver coil are those that have passed through the
casing.
The signal induced in the receiver coil will be out of
phase with the transmitted signal. In general the phase
difference is controlled by the thickness of the casing
wall. Thus the raw log measurement is one of phase lag
in degrees and the log is scaled in degrees. Fig. 53.27 il-
lustrates an ETT log in severely corroded casing. Note
that an increasing thickness corresponds to an increase in
the phase shift angle and vice-versa. Some presentations
of this log show a resealing in terms of actual pipe
thickness. This requires that the operator make some
calibration readings in the type of casing present in the
well. It is quite common to see quite large differences in
thickness between adjacent stands resulting from a
number of variables, such as the drift diameter of the
pipe, the weight per foot, the magnetic relative
permeability of the steel used, etc.
The ETT-type tool is good at finding vertical splits in
pipe, since the magnetic flux lines pass perpendicular to
the casing wall. A horizontal circumferential anomaly is
less well defined.
Fi g. 53. 23- Casi ng potenti al prof i l e.
Eddy Current and Flux leakage Tools (Pipe Analysis
Log). Another closely related measurement uses a slight-
ly different technique and forms the basis of the Pipe
Analysis Log (PAL). I6 Two electromagnetic measure-
ments are of interest in the context of the pipe analysis
tool-magnetic flux leakage and eddy current
distortion.
Fi g. 53. 24- Casi ng potenti al prof i l e anal ysi s- wi thout cathodi c
protecti on.
Fi g. 53. 25- Casi ng potenti al prof l l e- wi th cathodi c protecti on.
OTHER WELL LOGS
53-21
I;2ux leakage. If the poles of a magnet are positioned
near a sheet of steel, magnetic flux will flow through the
sheet (Fig. 53.28). So long as the metal has no flaws the
flux lines will be parallel to the surface. However, at the
location of a cavity either on the surface of the sheet or
inside it, the uniform f l ux pattern wi l l be di storted. The
flux lines will move away from the surface of the steel at
the location of the anomaly, an effect known as flux
leakage. The amount of flux distortion will depend on
the size of the defect. If a coil is moved at a constant
speed along the direction of magnetic flux parallel to the
metal sheet, a voltage will be induced in the coil as it
passes through the area of flux leakage. The larger the
anomaly, the greater the flux leakage and, therefore, the
greater the voltage. The magnetic flux is distorted on
both faces of the sheet, regardless of the location of the
PHASE SHIFT
3M
Fi g. 53. 26- El ectromagneti c thi ckness tool
Fi g. 53. 27- El ectromagneti c thi ckness l og.
53- 22
Magnetic flux
1
Sensor
coil
J
FL
Flux
f
leakage
1
I
/iagnet
/
lole piece
Casing H
.l
Fi g. 53. 28- Magneti c f l ux l eakage pri nci pl e.
PETROLEUM ENGI NEERI NG HANDBOOK
defect, and therefore the coil needs to be moved along
only one surface to survey the sheet completely. Since
the coil must be moved through a changing magnetic
flux to produce a voltage, no signal is generated when it
is moved parallel to the surface of an undamaged sheet of
steel _
Eddy Currents. When relatively high frequency AC is
applied to a coil close to a sheet of steel, the resulting
magnetic field induces eddy currents in the steel (Fig.
53.29). These eddy currents, in turn, produce a magnetic
field that tends to cancel the original field, and the total
magnetic field is the vector sum of the two fields. A
measure voltage would be induced in a sensor (receiver)
coil situated in the magnetic field. The generation of ed-
dy currents is, at relatively high frequencies, a near-
surface effect. Therefore, if the surface of the steel adja-
cent to the coil is damaged then the magnitude of the ed-
dy currents will be reduced, and, consequently, the total
magnetic field will be increased. This will result in a
variation in the sensor coil voltage. A flaw in the sheet of
metal on the surface away from the coils will not be
detected and, depending on its distance from the surface,
a cavity within the sheet will not influence the eddy cur-
rents either.
Tool Principle. The measuring sonde consists of an iron
core with the pole pieces of an electromagnet at each
end, and 12 sensor pads in two arrays between the pole
pieces (Fig. 53.30). The two arrays are offset radially to
ensure complete coverage of the inner surface of the cas-
ing. Each of the pads contains a transmitting coil (for the
eddy current measurement) and two sensor coils wound
in opposite directions (for both the flux leakage and eddy
current measurements). The two sensor coils are wound
in opposite directions so that for both measurements
Transmlttcr
coil
Fi g. 53. 29- Eddy current pri nci pl e
OTHER WELL LOGS
53-23
there is zero voltage as long as no anomaly exists, but a
signal will be produced when the quality of the casing is
different below the two coils. The same sensor coils can
be used for both measurements since two distinct fre-
quencies are involved. A frequency of 2 kHz is used for
the eddy current measurement, giving a depth of in-
vestigation of about 1 mm. The sensor pads are mounted
on springs so that they are held in contact with the cas-
ing, facilitated through centralization of the sonde.
Various sizes of magnet pole pieces are available and are
selected according to the casing ID to optimize the signal
strength for the flux leakage measurement.
Six measurements of flux leakage and eddy current
distortion are made on each array, and the maximum
signal from each array is sent uphole to the surface in-
strumentation. Four signals, the eddy current and flux
leakage data from the two arrays, are recorded.
The flux leakage data correspond to anomalies located
anywhere in the casing, while eddy current distortion oc-
curs only at the inside wall of the casing. The standard
presentation of the measurements is as shown in Fig.
53.31, with the data from the two arrays displayed in
Tracks 2 and 3. Enhanced data arc displayed in Track 1,
making any anomalies more obvious.
Interpretation. The measurements are generally
suitable only for qualitative interpretation. This is
because any voltages induced in the sensor coils depend
not only on the size of any flaws in the casing, but also
on the magnetic permeability of the casing, the logging
speed, and the abruptness of a defect. The measurement,
therefore, is used primarily to locate the presence of
small defects in the casing, such as pits and holes.
Defects such as gradual decreasing of the wall thickness
cannot be detected. To get a complete picture of the state
of the casing the electromagnetic thickness tool also
should be used to measure the casing wall thickness,
since the PAT device will give zero signal in the two ex-
tremes of no casing and perfect casing (except at the
collars).
Two sets of data are recorded, one set influenced by
defects occurring anywhere in the casing, and the other
by faults on the inner surface. By examining the log,
therefore, it can be inferred whether the casing is dam-
aged on the inner or outer wall, assuming that there is no
defect within the casing. Although the magnetic flux
bulges away from both sides of the casing at the location
of a defect, the effect is greater on the side of the flaw,
hence for the flux leakage measurement, smaller defects
can be detected on the inner surface than on the outer
surface. Because of the overlapping configuration of the
two-pad arrays all of the inner surface of the casing is
surveyed, but there is a casing-diameter-dependent
defect size below which the flaw will be seen by only
one array, and above which it will be seen by both
arrays.
The eddy current measurements are not able to detect
flaws smaller than about 0.39-in. diameter, while the
flux leakage limit is somewhat lower (0.25 in.). This
means that if an anomaly of less than %-in. diameter is
present it cannot be determined whether it is on the inner
or outer surface. If a deflection is noted on the eddy cur-
rent measurement but not on the flux measurement it is
6 ARM
CENTRALIZER
MAGNET
UPPER
PAD ARRAY
6
C
LOWER
PAD ARRAY
MAGNET
ARM
ENTRALIZER
Fig. 53.30-The pipe analysis tool
53-24 PETROLEUM ENGI NEERI NG HANDBOOK
T
ENHANCED CURVES LOWER ARRAY UPPER ARRAY
r
Total wall Total wal l Inner wal l lnner wall
/
1 I I
rrl j i
I;IFI I I I
I I i
/ /
/
i
I4
z
Z-=-
.-
_ .--
_- -
--
.
-
I !
---
-=
----
COI
Se\
Sur
erc
face
Fi g. 53. 31- The pipe analysis log In severely corroded casing.
OTHER WELL LOGS
LOWER ARRAY
I
UPPER ARRAY
Total wall inner wall Inner wall Total wall
\-.
,i
lz-. I
., -
_- -
Fig. 53.32-Pipe analysis log over a perforated section of casing.
53-26
assumed that the defect on the inner wall is less than 1
mm deep, and also usually can be ignored. In addition,
events can be seen on the flux leakage readings that are
not caused by casing damage but are a result of the
presence of localized magnetization in the casing. This is
one reason why a reference PAT survey should be run in
new casing, so that a time-lapse technique can be applied
to determine the casing damage.
The example of Fig. 53.32 includes sections of per-
forated casing (798 to 805 m, 807 to 819 m and 821 to
830 m), and there is a clear indication of damaged and
undamaged casing. The flux leakage measurement (total
wall) is responding strongly through the perforated inter-
vals, the eddy current curve less so. This is probably a
result of the diameter of the perforations being fairly
close to the detection limit of the eddy current measure-
ment. In the upper section the tool response is much
lower, indicating a certain amount of corrosion on both
surfaces of the casing, but probably nothing major. The
large deflections occurring on all the curves are caused
by the casing collars.
Casing Collar-Locator Log
The collar locator is used to locate casing collars, usually
in conjunction with another cased-hole service such as a
nuclear log or a perforating gun. Perhaps its most com-
mon use is in precisely locating perforating points. To do
this the collar locator is run with a nuclear log (either the
gamma-ray or neutron log) after the casing is set. This
survey accurately positions casing collar in reference to
the nuclear log. By correlating the nuclear log with logs
run in an open hole, casing collars can be positioned ac-
curately with reference to the openhole logs. The collar
locator is then run with the perforating gun. The collars
adjacent to the desired perforating interval are located
and the desired interval perforated using the casing col-
lars as reference points. Use of the collar locator makes it
possible to locate perforations within a few inches of the
desired interval.
Various types of collar locators are now in use. Some
of the collar locators are sensitive enough to locate old
perforations in casing. The collar locator also can be
used to locate the casing shoe in openhole completions.
I.
2.
3.
4
5
6
7.
8.
9.
IO.
II.
12.
13.
14.
15.
16.
17.
PETROLEUM ENGINEERING HANDBOOK
References
Kamp, A.W.: Downhole Telemetry From the Users Point of
View, J. Pet. Tech. (Oct. 1983) 1792-96.
Grosso, D.S., Raynal, J.C., and Radar. D.: Report on MWD
Experimental Downhole Sensors, J. Per. Tech. (May 1983)
899-904,
Measurements While Drilling (M.W.D.) Technical Specifica-
tions, Schlumberger Well Services. Houston.
Hodgson, H. and Gemado, S.G.: Computerized Well Planning
for Directional Wells, paper SPE 12071 presented at the 1983
SPE Annual Technical Conference and Exhibition, San Francisco,
Oct. 3-6.
Scott, A.C. and Wright, J.W.: A New Generation Directional
Survey System Using Continuous Fyrocompassmg Techmques,
paper SPE 11169 presented at the 1982 SPE Annual Technical
Conference and Exhibition, New Orleans, Sept. 29-Oct. 2.
Walstrom, J.E., Harvey, R.P.. and Eddy, H.D.: A Comparison
of Various Directional Survey Methods and an Approach to Model
Error Analysis. J. Per. Tech. (Aug. 1972) 935-43.
Dipmeter- Interpretation-Volume-l-Fundamentals, Schlum-
I berger Ltd., New York City (1981) 8. 10. 53.
Bateman, R.M. and Konen, C.E.: The Log Analyst and the Pro-
grammable Pocket Calculator-Part Ill-Dipmeter Computa-
I
I
lion. The Log Anal~w (Jan.-Feb. 1978) 19. No. I, 3-l 1.
Bateman, R.M. and Hepp, V R.: Application of True Vertical
Depth, True Stratigraphic Thickness and True Vertical Thickness
Log Displays, paper presented at the 1981 SPWLA Annual Log-
ging Symposium.
Pennbaker. P.E.: Vertical Net Sandstone Determination for
lsopach Mapping of Hydrocarbon Re.servoin. Bull., AAPG
(Aug. 1972) 53, No. 8, 1520-29.
Hepp, V.R.: Vertical Net Sandstone Determination for lsopach
Mapping of Hydrocatin Reservoirs-Dixussmn. Bull., AAPG
(1973) 57, 1784-87.
Holt. O.R., Schoonovers, L.G., and Wlchmann. P.A.: True
Vertical Depth, True Vertical Thickness, and True Stratigraphic
Thickness Logs, Truns., SPWLA Logging Symposium (1977)
paper Y.
Peveraro, R.: Vertical Depth CorrectIon Methods for Deviation
Survey and Well Log Interpretation, Truns., SPWLA European
Symposium, London (1979) paper P.
Bateman. R.M. and Konen, C.E.: The Log Analyst and the Pro-
grammable Pocket Calculator-Part VI-Finding True Straw
graphic Thickness and True Vertical Thickness of Dipping Beds
Cut by DirectIonal Wells. 771~ Log Aria/w (March-April 1979).
Cuthbert, J.F. and Johnson, W.M. Jr., New Casing lnspectmn
Log, paper SPE 5090 presented at the 1974 SPE Annual
Meeting, Houston, Oct. 6-9.
Illiyan.-I.S., Cotton, W.J. Jr.. and Brown, G.A.: Test Resultsof
a Corrosion Logging Technique Using Electromagnetic Thickness
and Pipe Analysis Logging -Tools,-J. Per. Tkh. (April 1983)
801-08.
Well Evaluation Development-Continental Europe. Schlum-
berger Ltd., New York City (1982).
Chapter 54
Acidizing
A.W. Coulter Jr., Dwell-Schlumberger
A.R. Hendrickson, Dowell-Schlumberger
S.J. Martine2.u. of Tulsa *
Introduction
The use of acids to stimulate or to improve oil produc-
tion from carbonate reservoirs was first attempted in 1895.
Patents covering the use of both hydrochloric and sulfur-
ic acids for this purpose were issued at that time. Although
several well treatments were conducted, the process
failed to arouse general interest because of severe corro-
sion of well casing and other metal equipment, The next
attempts to use acid occurred between 1925 and 1930.
These consisted of using hydrochloric acid (HCl) to dis-
solve scale in wells in the Glenpool field of Oklahoma
and to increase production from the Jefferson Limestone
(Devonian) in Kentucky. None of these efforts were suc-
cessful and acidizing once again was abandoned.
The discovery of arsenic inhibitors, which allowed HCl
to react with the formation rock without seriously damag-
ing the metal well equipment, revived interest in oilwell
acidizing in 1932. At that time, Pure Oil Co. and Dow
Chemical Co. used these inhibitors with HCl to treat a
well producing from a limestone formation in Isabella
County, MI. Results of this treatment were outstanding.
When similar treatments in neighboring wells produced
even more spectacular results, the acidizing industry was
born.
Throughout the years following those early treatments,
the acidizing industry has grown to one using hundreds
of millions of gallons of acid applied in tens of thousands
of wells each year. Technology has developed with in-
creasing rapidity, and many changes and innovations have
been made to improve the effectiveness of acidizing treat-
ments. Because of new techniques of application and de-
velopment of additives to alter the characteristics of the
acid itself, acidizing has become a highly skilled science.
A knowledge of available materials, chemical reactions
Authors of the OrigInal chapter on this topic I the 1962 editlon Included th!s aulhor
(deceased). P E. Rlzgerald. and Harold E Staadt
at treating and well conditions, reservoir properties, and
rock characteristics are required to design an effective and
efficient acidizing treatment. Since it is beyond the scope
of this text to cover all aspects of acidizing in detail, this
discussion will be limited to a general description of ma-
terials, techniques, and design considerations. A bibli-
ography is provided for those requiring a more detailed
discussion of a particular subject. Also, the major well
stimulation companies providing acidizing services offer
literature and technical assistance for problem analysis and
treatment design.
General Principles
The primary purpose of any acidizing treatment is to dis-
solve either the formation rock or materials, natural or
induced, within the pore spaces of the rock. Originally,
acidizing was applied to carbonate formations to dissolve
the rock itself. Over a period of time, special acid for-
mulations were developed for use in sandstone formations
to remove damaging materials induced by drilling or com-
pletion fluids or by production practices.
There are two primary requirements that an acid must
meet to be acceptable as a treating fluid: (1) it must react
with carbonates or other minerals to form soluble prod-
ucts, and (2) it must be capable of being inhibited to pre-
vent excessive reaction with metal goods in the well. Other
important considerations are availability, cost, and safe-
ty in handling. While there are many formulations avail-
able, only four major types of acid have found extensive
application in well treatments: hydrochloric, hydrofluoric,
acetic, and formic acids.
Hydrochloric Acid (HCI)
An aqeuous solution of HCl is most commonly used for
acidizing treatments, for reasons of economy and because
it leaves no insoluble reaction product. When HCl is
54- 2
I
T
3500
In
I
/ 3000
16
I 4
12
I O
n
b
4
2
0
0 4 n I 2 16 20 24
STRENGTH OF ACID, PERCENT BY WEIGHT
Fi g. 54. 1- Sol uti on of l i mestone i n aci d.
TABLE 54. 1~- HYDROCHLORI C ACI D DENSI TY AT 6OF
% HCI Speci f i c Gravi ty' "Baume** l bml gal psi l f t depth
1. 00 1. 0048 0. 7 8. 377 0. 4351
2. 00 1. 0097 1. 4 8. 418 0. 4372
3. 00 1. 0147 2. 1 8. 460 0. 4392
4. 00 1. 0197 2. 8 8. 501 0. 4415
5. 00 1. 0248 3. 5 8. 544 0. 4437
6. 00 1. 0299 4. 2 8. 586 0. 4459
7. 00 1. 0350 4. 9 8. 629 0. 4482
8. 00 1. 0402 5. 6 8. 672 0. 4504
9. 00 1. 0447 8. 2 8. 710 0. 4524
10. 00 1. 0500 6. 9 8. 754 0. 4547
11. 00 1. 0550 7. 6 8 796 0. 4568
12. 00 1. 0600 8. 2 8. 837 0. 4590
13. 00 1. 0646 8. 8 8. 876 0. 4610
14. 00 1. 0702 9. 5 8. 922 0. 4634
15. 00 1. 0749 10. 1 8. 962 0. 4654
16. 00 1. 0801 10. 8 9. 006 0. 4677
17. 00 1. 0849 11. 4 9. 045 0. 4698
18. 00 1. 0902 12. 0 9. 089 0. 4721
19. 00 1. 0952 12. 6 9. 132 0. 4743
20. 00 1. 1002 13. 2 9. 171 0. 4764
21. 00 1. 1057 13. 9 9. 218 0. 4788
22. 00 1. 1108 14. 5 9. 261 0. 4810
23. 00 1. 1159 15. 1 9. 303 0. 4832
24. 00 1. 1214 15. 7 9. 349 0. 4855
25. 00 1. 1261 16. 3 9. 385 0. 4876
26. 00 1. 1310 16. 9 9. 433 0. 4899
27. 00 1. 1368 17. 5 9. 478 0. 4922
28. 00 1. 1422 18. 0 9. 523 0. 4946
29. 00 1. 1471 18. 6 9. 563 0. 4967
30. 00 1. 1526 19. 2 9. 609 0. 4991
31. 00 1. 1577 19. 8 9. 663 0. 5012
32. 00 1. 1628 20. 3 9. 694 0. 5035
33. 00 1. 1680 20. 9 9. 738 0. 5057
34. 00 1. 1727 21. 4 9. 777 0. 5078
35. 00 1. 1779 21. 9 9. 820 0. 5100
36. 00 1. 1827 22. 4 9. 860 0. 5121
37. 00 1. 1880 22. 9 9. 924 0. 5144
38. 00 1. 1924 23. 4 9. 941 0. 5163
39. 00 1. 1963 23. 8 9. 974 0. 5180
40. 00 1. 2008 24. 3 10. 011 0. 5199
41. 00 1. 2053 24. 7 10. 049 0. 5219
145
PETROLEUM ENGI NEERI NG HANDBOOK
pumped into a limestone formation, a chemical reaction
takes place, producing calcium chloride, CO*, and water.
This reaction is represented by the following equation:
One thousand gallons of 15% HCI will dissolve approxi-
mately 10.8 cu ft (1,840 lbm) of limestone. It will liber-
ate approximately 7,000 cu ft of CO1 , measured at
atmospheric conditions, and produce 2,042.4 lbm of cal-
cium chloride. This salt is dissolved in the original water
of the acid solution, plus 39.75 gal of water formed dur-
ing the reaction. The specific gravity of this solution will
be 1.181 (20.4% calcium chloride). While 15 wt% HCI
has been the most commonly used, concentrations of 20
and 28% have become extremely popular over the past
2 decades. Regardless of the acid strength used, the reac-
tion is the same and equivalent amounts of carbonate rock
are dissolved. For example, 10,000 gal of 3% HCl solu-
tion will dissolve the same amount of rock as 1,000 gal
of 28% HCl. Fig. 54.1 shows the effect of acid concen-
tration on the amount of limestone dissolved. The main
differences between the two solutions are their reaction
rates (or spending times) and their physical volumes.
Although lower concentrations of acid have greater
equivalent volumes, their reaction times and depth of
penetration into the reservoir, from the wellbore, are con-
siderably less than those of the higher-strength solutions.
Reaction rates and penetration will be discussed later.
Similar reactions occur when dolomite or impure lime-
stone is treated with HCI. Dolomitic lime contains a large
percentage of magnesium combined as calcium magnesi-
um carbonate. Although it reacts more slowly, this min-
eral also dissolves in HCl, and the resulting magnesium
chloride is soluble in the spent acid. Other impurities oc-
curring in limestone and dolomite are often insoluble in
acid, and if appreciable percentages of such components
are present, special additives must be included in the acid
solution to ensure their removal.
HCl ordinarily is manufactured in concentrations of 32
to 36 wt% HCl and is diluted at service company stations
to 15, 20, or 28% for field use. The concentrated acid,
the various chemical additives, and water are mixed in
the tank truck used to haul the acid to the wellsite. Table
54.1 lists the weights of various concentrations of HCI.
These data are useful in calculating mixing proportions
for acid dilution, using the following equation:
vl-0 =
vda cda 7 da
Cca(HCI)Yca '
where
V/da
= final volume of dilute acid,
cdd
= desired concentration of dilute acid,
?' du
= specific gravity of dilute acid,
V,, = volume of concentrated acid required,
Cccr(HCI)
= percent of HCI in concentrated acid, and
ycO = specific gravity of concentrated acid.
Approximate proportions of concentrated acid and water
requi red for dilution are shown in Fig. 54.2.
ACI DI ZI NG
54- 3
Determination of acid strength can be estimated in the
field using either a hydrometer or a field titration kit. The
accuracy of hydrometer readings depends on the care and
technique used by the field engineer. Both the hydrome-
ter and the glass cylinder in which the test is made should
be free from oil or dirt. The spindle should float freely
in the acid, and all readings should be made at the lowest
level of the acid meniscus. The temperature of the acid
sample should be taken and the hydrometer reading cor-
rected to 60F.
FORMULA FOR MIXING ACID IN ANY DESIRED
CONCENTRATION:
VOLUME OF STRONG =
(VOL OF WEAK) (%WEAK) (SF? GR.OF WEAK)
(=&OF STRONG) (SF. GR.OF STRONG)
GALLONS OFCONCENTRATED
t
7 HYDROCHLORIC ACID TO MAKE
1,000 GALLONS OF DILUTE ACID
-8
Determination of acid strength by titration is simplified
by the use of 0.59 N standard sodium hydroxide solution.
If a 2-mL sample of the acid is titrated with this standard
solution to a methyl orange end point, the burette read-
ing (milliliters of sodium hydroxide used) will be equal
to the acid strength (percent HCI).
- 9
&
Acetic and Formic Acids
Acetic acid (CH3COOH) and formic acid (HCOOH) are
weakly ionized, slowly reacting, organic acids. They are
used much less frequently than HCI and are suitable
primarily for wells with high bottomhole temperatures
(BHTs above 250F) or where prolonged reaction times
are desired. The reaction of these acids with limestone
is described by the following equation:
- 32
- 30
- 28
3
s- 23
2:
Q- 20
2- I ;
- 17
k- 16
Z- 15
=- I 4
- 13
k- 12
2HOrg+CaCOj +CaOrgz +HzO+CO,.
HAc is available in concentrations up to 100% as glacial
HAc. while HCOOH is available in 70 to 90% concen-
trations. For field use, HAc solutions normally are dilut-
ed to I5 % or less.
- I O
- I I $?
- 12 1
- 13 0
- 14 2
I 5 a
-16 z
- 17 0
- 189 E
- 2om
- 2&
2,
EKBG
- 282
: 3oE
: 32 z
- 34w
: 36g
1380
- 400
Above this concentration, one of the reaction products,
calcium acetate, can precipitate from its spent acid so-
lution because of its limited solubility. Similarly, the con-
centration of HCOOH normally is limited to 9 to 10%
because of the limited solubility of calcium formate. At
a 10% concentration, 1,000 gal HAc will dissolve 740
Ibm of limestone, whereas 1,000 gal HCOOH dissolves
970 lbm. Where more dissolving power per gallon of acid
is desired, HCI is sometimes mixed with HCOOH or
HAc. Such blends still provide extended reaction times.
when compared with HCl. HCOOH and HAc also may
be blended together. Table 54.2 illustrates some of the
more common acid strengths and blends.
Fi g. 54. 2- Di l uti on of concentrated HCI
TABLE 54. 2- DI FFERENT ACI DI ZI NG SOLUTI ONS
Aci d
Concentrati on
Type
Rel atwe
CaCO, Eoui val ent Reacti on
( I bm/ l , i ) OObal aci d) ti me
Hydrofluoric Acid (HF)
HF is used in combination with HCI and has been referred
to as intensified acid or mud removal acid. depend-
ing on the formulation and use. HF is used primarily to
remove clay-particle damage in sandstone formations, to
improve permeability of clay-containing formations, and
to increase solubility of dolomitic formations. Its utility
is based on the fact that some clays. silica, and other ma-
terials normally insoluble in HCI have some degree of
solubility in HF. For example, I .OOO gal of an acid solu-
tion containing 3% HF and 12% HCI will dissolve 500
lbm of clay and up to I .450 lbm of CaC03,
7. 5 HCI 890 0. 7
15 HCI 1, 840 1. 0
28 HCI 3, 670 6. 0
36 HCI 4, 860 12. 0
10 Formi c 910 5. 0
10 Acetl c 710 12. 0
15 Aceti c 1, 065 18. 0
7. 5 Formi c/
14 HCI mi xture 2, 420 6. 0
I O
14
Aceti c/
HCI mi xture 2, 380 12. 0
8 Formi c/
14 Aceti c mi xture 1, 700 18. 0
4HF+SiO? -tSiFJ +2H10
and
ZHF+SiF,+HzSiF,.
Approwlmale time for acid react!on 10 be COmpleled ( %qx?nl ) to an equ~vaienf
strength of 2 5% HCI solution Values are compared by using spending lime 01
15% HCI as 1
54- 4
PETROLEUM ENGI NEERI NG HANDBOOK
0.4
I
I
I
\-MUD ACID
0.3 7
0.2
I
0. I
0
/-REGULAR ACID
I
I I I
I
0 6 12 18 24
TIME OF CONTACT IN HOURS
Fi a. 54. 3- Sol ubi l i tv of bentoni te i n mud removal aci d
; 0.41
I I I
z 0.3u
2 TIME OF CONTACT IN HOURS
1
Fi a. 54. 4- Sol ubi l i tv of si l i ca sand i n mud removal aci d
Figs. 54.3 and 54.4 compare solubilities of bentonite and
silica in HCl and HF acids.
In carbonates, application of HF/HCl mixtures must be
controlled carefully because of cost and possible precipi-
tation of reaction products such as calcium f l uori des or
complex fluosilicates, which have a very limited solubil-
ity. For reaction with silicates, such as natural clays or
clays in drilling fluids, the blends usually contain 2 to 10%
HF and 5 to 26% HCI. The concentration of HCl used
in the blend shoul d be equal to or greater than that of the
HF.
The so-called intensified acids used in dolomitic for-
mations are mainly HCl containing small concentrations
of HF, usually about 0.25 % Intercrystalline films of sil-
ica, insoluble in HCl, often occur in the crystal structure
of dolomite. When such are present, they prevent the aci d
from contacting the soluble portions of the rock. The pres-
ence of fluoride intensifier in the acid will destroy such
films, allowing the acid to react more completely with
the soluble portions of the rock. Fig. 54.5 illustrates the
comparative reaction rates of HCI and intensified acid on
dolomite formations.
More recent developments of HF involve the use of
delayed-action agents in sandstone acidizing. The first of
these was a self-generating mud acid system, reported by
Templeton er al. The system provides slow generation
of acid from the hydrolysis of methyl formate. yielding
methyl alcohol and HCOOH acid. The acid then reacts
with ammonium fluoride to yield HF in situ. They attrib-
ute the success of the system to getting the HF reaction
away from the wellbore into areas that conventional HF
solutions normally do not reach before spending. Equal-
ly important factors are the techniques of application and
of returning the well to production following treatment.
The treatment technique mvolves use of an aromatic sol-
vent and mud acid preflush, along with the self-generating
mud acid (SGMA). The wells are returned to production
by opening the choke gradually over a 90-day period and
never allowing an excessive drawdown. The process is
available from most service companies as SGMA.
A significant development in this area of slow-reacting,
HF-supplying, clay-dissolving acid has been the f l uobori c
acid system reported by Thomas and Crowe. This acid
hydrolyzes to form hydroxyfluoboric acid and HF, which
will dissolve clays.
HBF4 +HZO-HBF30H+HF.
This reaction provides a slow-release source of HF, which
can penetrate deeply before spending. Perhaps more im-
portant, the slowly generated hydroxyfluoboric acid reacts
with clays to form a nonswelling, nondispersing product
that stabilizes fine clays and holds fine particles of silica
in place.
Acid Reaction Rates
A knowledge of the factors affecting the reaction rate of
acids is important for several reasons. First, these fac-
tors, correlated with reservoir and formation character-
istics, form a guide for the selection of acid type and
volume for a given treatment. Next, a study of these fac-
tors can furnish an understanding of what parameters
govern spending time, which will determine how far a
given formulation can penetrate into the formation before
spending. Many factors govern the reaction rate of an
acid, such as pressure, temperature, flow velocity, acid
concentration, reaction products, viscosity, acid type,
area/volume ratio, and formation composition (physical
and chemical). These factors have been the subject of ex-
tensively reported research for many years. Details of such
studies are available in published literature. Only a brief
general discussion will be presented here.
Pressure
Fig. 54.6 shows the effect of pressure on the reaction rate
of 15% HCl with limestone and dolomite at 80F. Above
500 psi, pressure has little effect on reaction rate. At bot-
tomhole treating pressures, there is only a small differ-
ence (a factor of 1.5 to 2) in the comparative reaction of
acid with limestone and dolomite compared to the rather
large difference (a factor of about 10) at atmospheric
pressure.
Temperature
Acid reaction rate increases directly with temperature. At
140 to 150F, the reaction rate of HCI and limestone is
ACI DI ZI NG
54- 5
.INTENSIFIED
5 IO 15 20 25
TIME IN MINUTES PRESSURE (PSI)
Fi g. 54. 5- Comparati ve reacti on rates of conventi onal and
i ntensi f i ed acids.
approximately twice that at 80F. It must be recognized
that the temperature controlling the reaction is affected
by the injection temperature of the acid (a major factor),
and by the heat liberated by the reaction itself (a minor
factor). Computerized programs are used to estimate the
bottomhole fluid temperature at various stages, allowing
more effective acid treatment design.
Flow Velocity
Fig. 54.7 shows that increased flow velocity increases the
reaction rate of 15 % HCl with CaCO 3. This velocity ef-
fect is more pronounced in narrower fractures. Reaction
rate is a function of shear rate, 6 v/b, set - as illustrat-
ed by the following equation:
R=[(28.5 v/b)0.8+184]x10-6, . . . . . . . . . . . ...(l)
where R is the reaction rate in lbmisq ft-set, v is the flow
velocity in fracture, ft/sec, and b is the fracture width,
ft. (The reaction rate is for 15% HCl with marble at 80F
under 1,100 psi pressure.)
The flow velocity in fractures and channels depends on
injection rate and actual geometry of the flow path.
vd=O. 18i,,l(rfb) (radial fracture), . . .(2a)
vlf= 1,15i,,l(hb) (linear fracture), . . . (2b)
v,, = 17.2i,,/d2 (cylindrical channel). . . . .(2c)
where
v = flow velocity in fractures and channels,
ftlsec,
1ac
= acid injection rate, bbl/min,
rf = fracture radius, ft,
h = fracture height, ft,
d = channel diameter, in., and
b = fracture width, in.
Acid Concentration
Reaction rate increases with acid concentration up to 24
to 25% HCl, but not proportionally, as shown in Fig.
- MARBLE
400 800 1200 1400 2000 2400
Fi g. 54. 6- Ef f ect of pressure on reaction rate ( 15%HCI ti t 80F) .
I
10 I O0 1, 000 10, 000
40,000
, ACID FLOW VELOCITY ,s,ce,
FI ACl Ul E WI DTI I
Fi g. 54. 7- Ef f ect of f l owon reacti on rate ( 15% HCI wi th
CaCO,).
54.8. Above 25% HCl, the reaction rate actually decreases
because of reduced acid activity. As acid spends, the reac-
tion rate decreases as a result of reduced acid concentra-
tion and the retarding effect of dissolved reaction products,
such as calcium or magnesium chloride.
Area/Volume Ratio
Area/volume (A/V) ratio is one of the major factors affect-
ing reaction rate spending time, and may vary over a wide
range. This ratio, the area in contact with a given volume
of acid, is inversely proportional to pore radius or frac-
ture width. Fig. 54.9 shows the time required for 15%
HCl to spend on marble, at 80F and 1,100 psi, for three
different A/V ratios.
The term spending time has very little meaning or
value by itself. It must be related to flow geometry and,
thus, to the distance the acid penetrates before it is spent.
In matrix acidizing, extremely high A/V ratios may be
encountered. For example, a IO-md, 20%-porosity lime-
stone may have an A/V ratio of 28,000 to 1. In such a
formation, it would be very difficult to obtain significant
penetration before spending. A natural fracture, 0.00 1 in.
wide, has an A/V ratio of 3,200: 1. A 0. l-in. fracture has
an A/V ratio of 32: 1. The smaller ratios in wider frac-
PETROLEUM ENGI NEERI NG HANDBOOK
I
0 5 IO I5 20 25 30 35
PERCENT HCI
Fi g. 54. 8- Ef f ect of concentrati on on reacti on rate and spend-
i ng rate.
TABLE 54. 3- EFFECT OF TEMPERATURE
ON ORGANI C I NHI BI TOR PROTECTI ON
TI ME
Protecti on
Concentrati on Temperature Ti me
WI C F)
( hours)
0. 6 175 24
1. 0 250 6
2. 0 300 6
2. 0 350 4
With mhtbltor aId
tures allow greater penetration of the acid into the reser-
voir before spending is complete.
Formation Composition
Probably the most important factor that governs effective-
ness of an acidizing treatment is the rock composition.
Its chemical and physical characteristics determine how
and where the acid will react with and dissolve the rock.
From the standpoint of chemical composition, there is
little difference in the reaction rate of HCI on most lime-
stones, all other factors remaining constant. The physi-
cal rock texture. however, can control pore size
distribution. A/V ratio, pore geometry, and other prop-
erties. This, in turn, influences the type of flow channels
created by acid reaction and is the key to acid response.
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 0
Th4E (min)
Fi g. 54. 9- Ef f ect of A/ V rati o on spendi ng ti me ( 15% HCI , 80F
and 1, 100 psi ) .
Two formations having the same acid solubility and per-
meability may respond differently to acid treatment be-
cause of variances in physical structure.
Acid Additives
The use of a corrosion inhibitor as an additive made pos-
sible the f i rst commercially feasible acidizing treatments.
Since that time, many auxiliary chemicals have been de-
veloped to modify acid solutions, influencing their appli-
cation and recovery.
Corrosion Inhibitors
Inhibitors are chemical materials that, when dissolved in
acid solutions, greatly retard the reaction rate of the acid
with metals. They are used in acidizing to avoid damage
to casing, tubing, pumps, valves. and other well equip-
ment. Inhibitors cannot completely stop all reaction be-
tween the acid and metal; however, they do slow the
reaction, eliminating 95 to 98% of the metal loss that
would otherwise occur. Most inhibitors have practically
no effect on the reaction rate of acid with limestone, dolo-
mite, or acid-soluble scale deposits.
The length of time that an inhibitor is effective depends
on the acid temperature, type of acid, acid concentration,
type of steel, and the inhibitor concentration.
Organic inhibitors in HCI are effective up to 400F,
but above 200F relatively large concentrations are re-
quired. The effect of temperature on corrosion inhibition
is illustrated in Table 54.3.
Equations have been developed for estimating BHTs
during acid treatments. By knowing these temperatures,
adequate corrosion protection can be provided, even in
wells with static BHTs up to 400F.
Surfactants
Surfactants are chemicals used to lower the surface terl-
sion or interfacial tension of fresh acid or spent acid so-
lutions. The use of a surfactant improves the treating
efficiency in a number of ways.
The presence of a surfactant improves the penetrating
ability of the acid solution entering a formation. This is
extremely desirable in matrix acidizing treatments. be-
ACIDIZING
54-7
z
-
ST
3;
2 lpoo
I
0 a 800yORDlNARY A C I D ,
0
g 6 0 0
i;i
/
Egjpek&
k!
0 5 IO 15 20
3
z
PENETRATION IN FORMATION- FEET
E
PHI t-942 PH3 PHI PH5
Fi g. 54.10Effect of surface-tension-reducing agent in facili-
tating return of spent acid.
Fi g. 54.11Photograph showing effect of pH on the volume of
silicate particles.
cause it provides deeper penetration of acid into the for-
mation. In addition, surfactants permit the acid to
penetrate oily films clinging to the surface of the rock and
lining the pores, so that the acid can come in contact with
the rock and dissolve it.
The use of surfactants also facilitates the return of spent
acid following the treatment (Fig. 54.10). Wetting of the
formation is more nearly complete and there is less
resistance to flow of the acid, so that the spent acid is
readily returned through the treated section. This is es-
pecially important in low-pressure wells.
Another advantage in the use of surfactants in acid is
the demulsifying action obtained. Many surfactants are
capable of inhibiting the occurrence of emulsions or de-
stroying those already formed.
Surfactants also promote dispersion and suspension of
fine solids to provide better cleanup following treatment.
These solids may be either mud solids or natural fines
released from the formation. They are suspended and
physically removed from the formation.
Special surfactants are used as antisludge agents. Some
crudes form an insoluble sludge when in contact with acid.
The sludge consists of asphaltenes, resin, paraffin, and
other complex hydrocarbons. The acid reacts with the
crude at the interface, forming an insoluble film. The
coalescence of this film, which results on the sludge par-
ticles, can be avoided by use of proper additives. Ethyl-
ene glycol monobutyl ether is a mutual solvent surfactant
used in matrix sandstone acidizing to water-wet the for-
mation. This agent prevents particle migration and sub-
sequent particle plugging. It improves cleanup by
preventing the stabilization of emulsions by fine particles.
Many different surfactants are used in acidizing. Type and
concentration for a particular application should be select-
ed on the basis of laboratory testing.
Silicate-Control Agents
Various silicate compounds, commonly known as clays
and silts, usually are present in most limestones and dolo-
mites. One of the characteristics of these silicates is that
they will swell in spent acid. Naturally, this is undesirble
because swollen silicate particles may block formation
flow channels, reducing well production.
Silicate-control additives are chemicals that prevent
released silicate particles from adsorbing water. Some
buffer the pH of the solution near the isoelectric point
(where the volume of the swelled clays is at a minimum).
Others cause shrinkage of the silicate particles by replac-
ing the adsorbed water molecules with a water-repellent
organic film. Thus, possible formation plugging is
prevented, treating pressures are lowered, faster cleanup
is provided, and the occurrence of particle-stabilized emul-
sions is minimized. This is illustrated in Fig. 54.11.
Iron-Control Agents
Iron control is approached two ways. The oldest and most
common approach is to use sequestering agents, which
act by complexing iron ions, thereby preventing precipi-
tation when the acid spends. A second method is use of
reducing agents that reduce any ferric ions (Fe
3+
) to fer-
rous ions (Fe
2+
), which do not precipitate as the hydrox-
ide or hydrous oxide until the pH of the system is above
7. Since acids in contact with the formation rock will not
spend to a pH that high, the hydroxide will not damage
the well. Spent acid usually has a pH between 4.5 and
6.5, no higher.
Erythorbic acid is one of the most effective reducing
agents that can be used for this purpose. The reduction
of all the ferric iron to ferrous iron, however, does not
prevent the precipitation of ferrous sulfide (FeS), which
precipitates when the acid spends to a pH of 2, as it will
readily in almost any formation. To protect fully against
iron precipitation in a sour well, a complexing agent is
needed. Citric, lactic, and acetic acids as well as EDTA
or NTA are popular sequestrants. In some wells where
H
2
S can become mixed with the acid it also may be ad-
visable to use both the reducing agent and the sequester-
ing agents, since ferric iron can react with H
2
S to
54-8 PETROLEUM ENGINEERING HANDBOOK
precipitate free sulfur, which itself can damage permea-
bility The loss of effectiveness of acetic acid at tempera-
tures above 125F and the possibility of precipitating
calcium citrate also are factors that should be considered
in guarding against iron precipitates.
Alcohols
Methyl and isopropyl alcohols sometimes are used at con-
centrations of 5 to 20 ~01% of acid to reduce surface ten-
sion. Methyl alcohol is sometimes used at concentrations,
up to 66 % to increase vapor pressure of the acid and spent
acid solution. Use of alcohols thus improves both rate and
degree of cleanup, which can be particularly helpful in
dry gas wells.
Gelling and Fluid Loss Agents
Natural gums and synthetic polymers are added to acid
to increase the viscosity of the acid solution. 3 This
reduces leakoff into large pore spaces and, to some ex-
tent, into natural hairline fractures. It also provides some
degree of reaction rate retardation.
Other materials used to control leakoff are fine (IOO-
mesh) sand4 and fine salt.5 These materials bridge in
hairline fractures to reduce fluid flow out of the main frac-
ture during fracture acidizing treatments.
Another successful fluid-loss control agent is a mixture
of finely ground, oil-soluble resins. 6 Originally designed
as a diverting agent for use through gravel packs during
sandstone matrix acidizing treatments, this agent was later
shown to be effective as a fluid-loss agent in fracture
acidizing, when used at higher concentrations.
Liquefied Gases
Liquid nitrogen and liquid CO2 sometimes are used in
acid solutions to provide added energy for better well
cleanup. Nitrogen also is used to make foamed acid, which
provides excellent leakoff control in low permeability
rock. 8.9
Retarded Acids
It is often desirable in acid fracturing treatments to retard
the reaction rate of the acid to provide deeper penetra-
tion of active acid into the formation. Retardation may
be accomplished by use of slower-reacting acids (HAc
and HCOOH), by adding chemicals to reduce reaction
rate, or by increasing concentration to extend spending
time.
HAc and HCOOH are weakly ionized and sometimes
are used to obtain longer reaction time. The additional
cost of these acids may prohibit extensive use in certain
formations. Deeper matrix penetration than would be ob-
tained by HAc or HCOOH is obtained by the faster-
reacting HCl because the channeling or wormhole effect
produced by the HCl reduces the A/V ratio, thus prolong-
ing reaction time. In fractures, the HAc and HCOOH
would obtain deeper penetration than HCl; however, larg-
er volumes would be required to dissolve an equivalent
amount of rock.
Some chemicals, added to HCl, form a barrier on the
rock surface, which interferes with its normal contact and
retards the reaction rate of the acid. Acid-in-oil emul-
sions generally exhibit retarded reaction rates. The acid
in the emulsion does not completely contact the rock sur-
face because of the presence of an interfering oil film.
This is particularly true for emulsions with at least 20%
oil as the outer phase. Certain surfactants recently have
been found to be beneficial in reducing reaction rate and,
thus, extending spending time and penetration distance.
These surfactants, in the presence of oil, provide a
hydrophobic or water-repellent, oil-like film on the rock
surface that restricts acid/rock contact. Fluid-loss mate-
rials and gelling agents (acid-thickening additives) also
tend to reduce the reaction of HCl by film development
on rocks.
High concentrations of an acid provide longer reaction
times than lower concentrations because (1) there is more
acid to react, (2) the additional reaction products further
retard reaction rates, and (3) the enlarged flow path, with
reduced A/V ratio, extends the spending time and penetra-
tion of a high-concentration acid. For example, 28% HCl
may take four to six times longer to react completely than
does 15% HCl. In this case, the reaction time is extend-
ed in spite of the initially faster reaction rate of the
28% HCl.
Acidizing Techniques
There are three fundamental techniques used in acidizing
treatments.
1. We&ore Cleunup. This entails fill-up and soak of
acid in the wellbore. Fluid movement is at a minimum,
unless some mechanical means of agitation is used.
2. Matrix Acidiz,ing. This is done by injecting acid into
the matrix pore structure of the formation, below the
hydraulic fracturing pressure. Flow pattern is essentially
through the natural permeability structure.
3. Acid Fmcturing. This is injection into the forma-
tion above hydraulic fracturing pressure. Flow pattern is
essentially through hydraulic fractures: however, much
of the fluid does leak off into the matrix along the frac-
ture faces.
The technique selected will depend on what the opera-
tor wishes to accomplish with the treatment.
Matrix acidizing may be selected as a proper technique
for one or more of the following reasons: (1) to remove
either natural or induced formation damage, (2) to achieve
low-pressure breakdown of the formation before fractur-
ing, (3) to achieve uniform breakdown of all perforations,
(4) to leave zone barriers intact, or (5) to achieve reduced
treating costs.
The principal types of formation damage are mud in-
vasion, cement, precipitates, saturation changes, and
migration of fines. The effect of damage on injectivity
or productivity is shown in Figs. 54.12 and 54.13. It can
be seen that the greatest flow increase results from restor-
ing the natural rock permeability. The magnitude of this
primary flow increase depends on the extent (radius) of
the damage. Further increase in pore size by matrix acidiz-
ing results in only a limited increase in flow (stimulation).
If the producing formation does not have enough natural
permeability, then a hydraulic fracturing treatment should
be considered. The primary purpose of fracturing is to
achieve injectivity or productivity beyond the natural
reservoir capability. An effective fracture may create a
new permeability path, interconnect existing permeabil-
ity streaks, or break into an untapped portion of the
reservoir.
ACIDIZING 54-9
5
00
m
25
0
I 2 3 4 6 7 0 9 lo
RADIAL EXTENTd c4ALGul ZorE. FEET I
IO 100
1000
PERCENT OF NATURAL PERMEAEl l l TY
Fig. 54.12-Effect of damaged zone on flow.
Fig. 54.13-Effect of permeabi l i ty changes on radi al f l ow.
The success of any fracturing treatment depends on two
factors: fracture conductivity and effective penetration,
as illustrated in Fig. 54.14. If enough etched fracture con-
ductivity can be achieved, then increased penetration be-
comes important. For any given formation, there will be
an optimum conductivity and penetration, which will be
controlled by cost. In other words, there will be some
point where production increase per dollar spent will be
a maximum. This must be determined by pretreatment
design.
Laboratory Testing
The physical and chemical characteristics of the forma-
tion rock often affect the results of an acidizing treatment.
In some cases, the use of special additive chemicals will
improve the action of the acid or avoid cleanup difficul-
ties in returning the spent acid following the job. It is im-
portant, therefore, that samples of the formation rock
(either cores or cuttings) and, if possible, samples of the
crude oil and formation brine be subjected to laboratory
testing before acidizing to design the most effective
treatment.
McGUlRE AND SIKORA
IO' IO' IO' ID' IO'
RELATIVE CONDUCTIVITY, bk#,,-In
Customarily, permeability. porosity, and oil- and water-
saturation tests are run on formation core samples, using
standardized core-analysis procedures. In addition, acid-
solubility tests are run to determine to what extent the for-
mation will respond to an acidizing treatment.
Fi g. 54. 14- Rel ati onshi p of conducti vi ty and penetration to
producti vi ty i ncrease. J = producti vi ty i ndex of wel l
af ter sti mul ati on, J , =producti vi ty i ndex bef ore
sti mul ati on, ri =radi us of f racture ( f t) , re =drai nage
radi us ( f t) . k, =permeabi l i ty of f racture ( md) ,
k, =permeabi l i ty of f ormati on ( md) , and b = f rac-
ture wi dth ( i n. ) .
Formation solubility may be determined two different
ways. In the first method, a weighed chunk of the rock
is immersed in an excess of acid and maintained at for-
mation temperature. After an hour, any insoluble residue
is washed. dried, and weighed. With samples known to
contain silicates, additional tests may be run in which the
rock is exposed to the dissolving action of combined HCl
and HF.
with the acid to be used in the acidizing treatment and
then are shaken. The mixture is allowed to stand, and the
time required for the oil and acid to separate is observed.
Additional tests are run on mixtures of the crude oil with
acid that has been spent completely on pulverized forma-
tion rock. If the formation crude shows a tendency to
emulsify with either the fresh acid or the spent acid, the
use of an appropriate surfactant is indicated.
A more rapid test, suitable for samples known to con-
sist largely of limestone or dolomite, entails dissolving
a weighed sample of the rock in an excess of HCl and
measuring the volume of CO* gas evolved during the
reaction. A simple apparatus for conducting this test is
shown in Fig. 54.15.
Similar tests using a mixture of crude and acid are made
to determine aci d sludging tendencies. Sludge is identi-
fied by filtering the mixture through a small mesh screen.
Appropriate surfactants that are added to the acid to pre-
vent sludge formation are evaluated.
In addition to these tests of the formation rock, the emul -
sifying tendencies of the formation crude should be deter-
mined whenever possible. Samples of the crude are mixed
Other determinations of rock characteristics include
tests for clay swelling tendencies and tests to determine
rock composition (such as X-ray diffraction analysis) to
i ndi cate need for stabilizers, sequestering agents, or other
acid additives.
54-10 PETROLEUM ENGI NEERI NG HANDBOOK
Fi g. 54. 15- Laboratory sol ubi l l ty tester ( carbon di oxi de evol u-
ti on method) .
Acid Treatment Design
Three techniques of acidizing have been described previ-
ously. Wellbore cleanup treatments normally do not re-
quire complicated design procedures. Matrix and fracture
acldlzmg treatments. on the other hand, can involve ex-
tensive predesign laboratory testing and complicated de-
sign procedures and calculations.
Matrix Acidizing-Carbonate Formations
Matrix acidizing in carbonates normally is used to break
down all perforations and to remove damage. Plugging
materials can be removed and permeability restored in
two ways: (1) by dissolving the damaging material itself
or (2) by dissolving part of the rock in which the damage
exists. In carbonate rocks with acid solubilities greater
than 50%) the latter method is often most effective. The
dislodged solid particles or liquids then can bc removed
physically by the return of the spent acids to the well.
HCI normally is used in matrix treatments of car-
bonates, but HAc and/or HCOOH should be considered
TABLE 54. 4- FLOW THROUGH PORES OF VARI OUS
SI ZES
Diameter of Pore Pore Vol ume Fl owThrough Pores
( A w
(% of Total Flow)
i l 60 10
1 to 2 25 15
2 to 5 12 30
5 and above 3 45
for wells with temperatures in excess of 250 to 300F.
Any acid solution should be modified by use of proper
additives to meet special situations.
Acid inhibitor selection must be based primarily on
treating temperature and, to some extent, on the type of
acid formulation.
Surfactant type and concentration should be selected to
minimize emulsion tendencies and, perhaps, to aid in dis-
persing fine undissolved solids. These may be drilling
mud, cement solids, or natural clay particles released from
the formation. Suspension and removal of these materi-
als can play an important part in the overall treatment
results.
Diverting agents may be used to promote uniform
penetration in long sections. Acid-swellable synthetic
polymers, controlled-solubility particulate solids, perfo-
ration ball sealers, gel slugs, etc., have been used suc-
cessfully to provide more uniform injectivity. Assuring
the distribution of acid into the entire interval is a critical
part of carrying out a matrix treatment. Otherwise, large
portions of the interval may get very little, if any, acid.
In matrix acidizing, injection rates should be controlled
so that the formation is not fractured. The use of as high
a rate as possible without exceeding the fracturing pres-
sure is recommended. In certain cases, it may be neces-
sary to create a fracture to open perforations, after which
pressure can be reduced below fracturing pressure, thus
providing a matrix flow pattern.
Controlling the injection pressure is the primary con-
cern. Maintaining bottomhole pressures below hydraulic
fracturing pressures may restrict injection rates to only
fractional barrels per minute. An increasing rate may then
be possible as the treatment progresses.
Because of differences in the size and shape of the pores,
penetration of acid in a carbonate rock is far from uni-
form. Porosity anomalies may result from vugs, hairline
fissures, or tortuous capillary-like pores. Because of these
heterogeneities, a channeling or wormholing occurs
with most acid formulations. The resultant effect is the
attainment of much greater acid penetration of matrix than
expected.
The wide distribution of flow in a rock of varying pore
diameters (Table 54.4) is further accentuated by acidiz-
ing. As discussed in a preceding section, the fast-reacting
HCl may provide greater penetration of the limestone
matrix than the slow-reacting acetic acid, but not as great
as with the emulsified or gelled acids. Evidently, the slow
reaction of acetic acid does not change the flow distribu-
tion rapidly enough to channel, but rather results in
several small pore enlargements for short distances as op-
posed to a few large, long channels.
Since the formation damage normally does not exist for
a great distance from the wellbore, the volume of acid
needed is small. With a formation porosity of IO%, 60
ACIDIZING 54-11
gal of acid per foot of section will fill the porosity to a
radius of 5 ft. Usually, matrix treatment volumes range
from 50 to 250 gal per foot of section. If damage is deep-
er than 5 to 10 ft, then larger volumes of acid, a means
of retarding the reaction rate, or, perhaps, fracturing tech-
niques, may be required. Very little rock must be dis-
solved to result in a significant amount of damage repair
or permeability increase. Removal of only 1% of lime-
stone or dolomite rock for a distance of about 5 ft from
the wellbore requires only 70 gal of 15 % HClift of verti-
cal interval.
An overflush in the matrix acidizing treatment is rec-
ommended. This will ensure efficient displacement of the
acid into the matrix. A minimum shut-in time is recom-
mended before returning the spent acid to the well. Since
the spending time of acid is short, a long shut-in time of
several hours is not necessary, even for the so-called
retarded acid. The overflush fluid may be brine, water,
oil, or a weak acid. Enough volume should be used to
ensure maximum penetration of the last portion of the
acid, before it is spent.
Matrix Acidizing--Sandstone Formations
The purpose of sandstone acidizing is to restore permea-
bility by dissolving away formation-damaging clay-like
minerals or other acid-soluble materials. The clay may
be inherent in the formation or may be the result of drill-
ing mud or workover fluid invasion.
The type of acid used most often in sandstones is a mix-
ture of HF and HCl. These mixtures commonly are rem
ferred to as mud acids or mud removal acids. As
previously discussed, fluoboric acid also has become
popular in sandstone formations. Concentrations of 2 to
6 % HF and 8 to 12 % HCl normally are used. If a signifi-
cant amount of calcium carbonate is present in the for-
mation (5 to lo%), a spearhead of HCl should be used
to react with it before the HF/HCl is injected. With car-
bonate content above 20%, HF acid probably is not need-
ed, except to give entry through clay damage.
As in any matrix-type treatment, injection of the
HF/HCl should he below fracturing pressure. The volume
of acid required depends on the depth and severity of the
damage. A total of 50 to 250 gal of acid per foot of inter-
val is the normal treatment volume, if damage is not ex-
tensive. An acid solubility test may not be a realistic
evaluation of acid requirements.
Results of a field study by Gidley et al. lo confirmed
some earlier recommendations based on laboratory core
flow studies. These results showed much greater success
when more than 125 gal/t? acid was used.
The reported core flow test showed what response the
formation will have to acid. This is illustrated in Fig.
54.16. Although some of these formations have approxi-
mately the same acid (HF/HCI) solubility, permeability,
and porosity, the response to acid is quite different.
Initial reduction in permeability is a common occurrence
observed with many formation core flow tests. It is at-
tributed to sloughing particles (clays, silica, fines, etc.)
that apparently bridge in the flow channels and restrict
flow, before their further reaction with the acid. An in-
adequate acid volume treatment could lead to a restricted
permeability in a formation, if the bridging is severe.
Since secondary reactions may occur, resulting in pos-
sible precipitation of damaging reaction products, mud
"0 5 IO 15 20
MUD ACID VOLUMf RfPUIRfMENT5 (p.l/f12)
Fig. 54.16--Response of cores from producing formations to
mud acid.
acid should be returned to the wellbore as soon as the in-
itial spending time has elapsed. The spent HF/HCl acids
should not be allowed to mix with formation brine, if at
all possible because of the danger of precipitates.
Inhibitors, surfactants, and diverting methods should
be selected just as in an HCl acid treatment. As in the
case of matrix acid treatment in carbonates, an overflush
is recommended. Suitable fluids include weak acid, oil,
or water. Formation brine should not be used to over-
flush HF/HCl. Short shut-in times should be used-a few
hours at the most.
Fracture Acidizing-Carbonate Formations
The primary purpose of an acid fracturing treatment of
a carbonate formation is to achieve productivity or injec-
tivity beyond the natural capabilities of the reservoir. It
is most applicable in formations with a low and/or ineffec-
tive permeability structure. The effectiveness of an in-
duced hydraulic fracture is a function of both its
conductivity and the extent of penetration of the drainage
radius of the well.
These factors will depend on well and reservoir prop-
erties, formation characteristics, injection rate, type and
volume of acid used, and shape and orientation of the frac-
ture. All these factors have been correlated by several
companies into guides to acid fracture treatment de-
sign. Such guides provide mathematical relationships for
determining the fracture area and conductivity achieved
by different volumes of specific acid formulations at var-
ious injection formulations. These guides are programmed
for computer calculation, so that rapid comparison of var-
ious treatment designs can be made for selection of best
results per dollar of treatment cost. These guides are not
sufficiently similar to get clear comparison between differ-
ent companies but should be compared only with other
calculations from the same system.
Critical Wells
In ultradeep, high-temperature wells, many factors must
be considered in the stimulation treatment design. First,
the high BHT can drastically affect reaction rate of acid,
inhibition, and other properties of the acid formulation.
54-12 PETROLEUM ENGINEERING HANDBOOK
These effects can be partially offset by formation cool-
down techniques. Basically, this consists of pumping a
pad volume of fluid (generally gelled water) into the for-
mation to cool the rock to a more normal treating tem-
perature. Most companies have computer programs
available to calculate pad volumes required for a given
temperature reduction.
Another problem is created when fluids with tempera-
tures lower than BHTs are used. This problem is me-
chanical and involves tubing movement. In ultradeep
wells, such contraction can create stress in the tubing
greater than tubing strength, resulting in a parted string.
The solution to this problem is to slack off or to release
tension at the top of the tubing string as the job progress-
es. Again, computer programs are available from most
service companies to predict tubing movement under given
conditions.
Summary
In summary, acidizing is a process that uses reactive ma-
terials to increase well production by dissolving either the
reservoir rock or damaging materials blocking the pore
spaces of the rock. Different kinds of acids and additives
are available, so that treating fluids can be tailored to meet
individual well needs. Acid formulations may be applied
in either matrix- or fracture-type treatment, depending on
the degree of stimulation or production increase desired.
While acidizing, and acidizing treatment design, in de-
tail are beyond the scope of this text, published literature
offers answers and assistance in solving many of the prob-
lems encountered. The General References cover many
of the recent technical developments in this field. In ad-
dition, most service companies providing acidizing serv-
ice offer laboratory facilities, technical assistance, and
computer programs for problem analyses and treatment
design.
References
I .
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
Templeton, C.C. er al.: Self-Generating Mud Acid, J. Per. Tech. Coulter, G.R. and Purvis, S.B.: Successful Stimulation Practices-
(Oct. 1975) 1199-1203. Offshore Holland, J. Per. Tech. (June 1982) 121 l-18.
Thomas, R.L. and Crow, C.W.: Matrix Treatment Employs New
Acid System for Stimulation and Control of Fines Migration in Sand-
stone Formations, paper SPE 7566 presented at the 1978 SPE
Annual Technical Conference and Exhibition, Houston, Oct. l-3.
Crowe, C.W., Martin, R.C., and Michaelis, A M.: Evaluation
of Acid Gelling Agents for Use m Well Stimulation, paper SPE
9384 presented at the 1980 SPE Annual Technical Conference and
Exhibition, Dallas, Sept. 21-24.
Miller, B.D. and Warembourg. P.A.: Prepack Technique Using
Fine Sand Improves Results of Fracturing and Fracture Acidizing
Treatments.. paper SPE 5643 presented-at the 1975 SPE Annul?
Technical Conference and Exhibition, Dallas, Sept. 2%Oct. I.
Schrieter, F.E. and Shaw, M.S.: Use of Fine Salt as a Fluid Loss
Material in Acid Fracturmg Stimulation Treatments, paper SPE
7570 presented at the 1978 SPE Annual Technical Conference and
Exhibition, Houston, Oct. l-3.
Crowe, C.W.: Evaluation of Oil-Soluble Resm Mixtures as Di-
venmg Agents for Matrix Acidizing, paper SPE 3505 presented
at the 1971 SPE Annual Meeting, New Orleans, Oct. 3-6.
N&ode. D.E. and Kmk. K.F.: An Evaluation of Acid Fluid Loss
Additives. Retarded Acids, and Acidized Fracture Conductivity,
paper SPE 4549 presented at the 1973 SPE Annual Fall Meecmg,
La5 Vegas. Sept. 30-Oct. 3.
King, G.E. and Hollingsworth, F.H.: Evaluation of Dwertmg
Agent Effectiveness and Clean-up Characteristics Using a Dynamic
Laboratory Model-High Permeability Case. paper SPE 8400
presented at the 1979 SPE Annual Technical Conference and
ExhIbition, Las Vegas, Sept. 23-26.
Coulter, A.W. Jr., Copeland, C.T., and Harrisberger, W.H.: A Lab-
oratory Study of Clay Stabilizers, Sot. Pet. Eng J . (Oct. 1979)
267-69.
Coulter, A.W. Jr. er al.: Alternate Stages of Pad Fluid and Acid Provide
Improved Leakoff Control for Fracture Acldizing, paper SPE 6124
presented at the 1976 SPE Annual Technical Conference and
Exhibition, New Orleans, Oct. 3-6.
Coulter, A.W. Jr et al. : Mathematical Model Simulates Actual Well
Conditions In Fracture Acidizing Treatment Design. paper SPE 5004
presented at the 1974 SPE Annual Meeting, Houston, Oct. 6-9
Crawford, D.L., Coulter, A.W. Jr.. and Osborn, F.E. III: Removal
of Wellbore Damage From Highly Permeable Formations and Naturally
Fractured Reservoirs, paper SPE 8796 presented at the 1980 SPE
Formation Damage Control Symposann, Bakersfield, CA, Jan. 28-29.
Crenshaw, P.L., Flippen, F.F., and Pauley. P.O.: Stimulation
Treatment Design for the Delaware Basin Ellenburger. paper SPE
2375 presented at the 1968 SPE Annual Meeting. Houston. Sept.
29-Oct. 2.
Crowe, C.W. and Minor, S.S.: Effect of Acid Corrosion Inhibitors
Upon Matrix Stimulation Results, paper SPE I I1 I9 presented at the
1982 SPE Annual Technical Conference and Exhibmon. New Orleans.
Sept. 26-29
9. Scherubel, GA. and Crowe, C.W.: Foamed Acid: A New
Concept in Fracture Acidiaing, paper SPE 7568 presented at&he
1978 SPE Annual Technical Conference and Exhibition. Houston,
Oct. 1-3.
10. Gidley, J.L., Ryan, J.C., and Mayhill, T.D. : Study of Field
Applications of Sandstone Acidizing, /. Per. Tech. (Nov. 1976)
1289-94.
General References
Abram, A. ef al: The Development and Application of a High pH Acid
Stimulation System for a Deep Mississippi Gas Well, paper SPE 7565
presented at the 1978 SPE Annual Technical Conference and
Exhibition, Houston, Oct. 1-3.
Barron, A.N., Hendrickson, A.R., and Wieland, D.R.: The Effect
of Flow on Acid Reactivity in a Carbonate Fracture, J . Per. Tech.
(April 1962) 409-15; Trans., AIME, 225
Black, H.N. and Stubbs, B.A.: A Case History Study-Evaluation
of San Andres Stimulation Results, paper SPE 5649 presented at the
1975 SPE Annual Technical Conference and Exhibition, Dallas, Sept.
29-Oct. 1.
Broddus, E.C. and Knox, J.A.: Influence of Acid Type and Quantity
in Limestone Etching, paper API No. 851-39-I presented at API
Production Dev. Mid-Continent Dist., Wichita, March 31-April 2,
1965.
Burkill, G.C.C. and Pierre, M.L.: Successful Matrix Acidizing of
Sandstones Requires a Reliable Estimate of Wellbore Damage, paper
SPE 5590 presented at the 1975 SPE Annual Technical Conference
and Exhibition, Dallas, Sept. 29-Oct. I,
Chat&in, J-C., Silberberg, I.H., and Schechter, R.S.: Thermodynamic
Limitations in Organic Acid-Carbonate Systems, Sot. Per. Eng. J .
(Aug. 1976) 189-95.
Church, D.C., Quisenberry, J.L., and Fox, K.B.: Field Evaluation
of Gelled Acid for Carbonate Formations, J . Pet. Tech. (Dec. 1981)
241 l-74
Clark. G.J., Wong, T.C.T., and Mungan, N.: New Acid Systems for
Sandstone Stimulation, Proc., SPE Formation Damage Control
Symposium, Lafayette, LA (March 24-25, 1982) 187-97.
Coppel, C.P.: Factors Causing Emulsion Upsets in Surface Facilities
Following Acid Stimulation, J. Per. Tech. (Sept. 1975) 1060-66.
ACIDIZING
54-13
Davis. J.J., Mantillas, G., and Melnyk. J.D.: Improved Actd Hendrickson. A.R.. Rosme, R.B., and Wieland. D.R.: The Role of
Treatments by Use of the Spearhead Film Technique. paper SPE Acid Reaction Rates in Planning Acidizing Treatments. Truns.,
1164 presented at the 1965 SPE Rocky Mountain Regional Meeting, AIME, 222 (1961).
Billings. MT, June 3-4.
Deysarkar, A.K. cf al. : Crosslinked Fracture Acidizing Acid Gel.
paper 82-33-16 presented at the 1982 CIM Annual Meeting, Calgary.
June 6-9.
Hendrickson, A.R., Hurst. R.E., and Wieland. D.R.: Engmeered
Guide for Planning Acidizing Treatments Based on Specific Reservoir
Characteristics. J . Per Twh. (Feb. 19M)) 16-23: Trans.. AIME. 219.
Hill, D.G. and DeMort, D.N.: Effect of Hydrogen Sulfide on Inhibition
Dill, W.R.: Retarded Acidizing Fluids. U.S. Patent No. 4.322.306
of Oil Field Tubing in Hydrochloric Acid, paper SPE 6660 presented
(1982).
at the 1977 SPE East Texas Section, Sour Gas Symposium, Tyler.
Nov. 14-15.
Dill. W.R. and Keeney, B.R.: Optimtzing HCI-Formic Acid Mixtures
for High Temperature Stimulation, paper SPE 7567 presented at the
1978 SPE Annual Technical Conference and Exhibition, Houston,
Holman, G-B.: State-of-the-Art Well Stimulation,J. Per. Tech. (Feb.
1982) 239-41.
Oct. l-3.
Horton, H.L., Hendrickson, A.R.. and Crowe. C.W.: Matrix
Dunlap, P.M. and Hegner, IS.: An Improved Acid for Calcium Sulfate
Acidizing of Limestone Reservoirs, paper API-No. 906-10-F
Bearing Formations, J. Pet. Tech. (Jan. 1960) 67-70: Trans..
presented at the 1965 API Prod. Div. Southwest District Meeting,
AIME. 219.
Dallas, March 10-12.
Eiy, .I., McDow. G., and Turner, I.: Stimulation Techniques Used
Hudock. K. and Skelton, N.: Fracture Acids Undergo Comparative
in the Austin Chalk, Proc., 29th Annual Southwestern Pet. Assn.
Tests, Northeast Oil Reporter (Feb. 1982) 74-76. 78.
Short Course, Lubbock (1982) 110-2 1.
Jennings, A.R.: The Effect of Surfactant-Bearing Fluids on Permea-
Fogler, H.S., Lund, K., and McCune, C.C.: Predictmg the Flow and
bility Behavior in Oil-Producing Formations, paper SPE 5635
Reaction of HCliHF Acid Mixtures in Porous Sandstone Cores, Sue.
presented at the 1975 SPE Annual Technical Conference and
Per. Eng. J. (Oct. 1976) 248860; Trans., AIME, 261.
Exhibition, Dallas, Sept. 29-Oct. 1.
Ford, W.G.F. and Roberts, L.D.: The Effect of Foam on Surface
Keeney, B.R. and Frost, J.G.: Guidelines Regarding the Use of
Kinetics m Fracture Acidizing. J . Pet. Tech. (Jan. 1985) 89-97.
Alcohols in Acidic Stimulation Fluids, paper SPE 5158 presented
at the 1974 SPE Annual Meeting, Houston, Oct. 6-9.
Ford, W.G.F.: Foamed Acid, An Effective Stimulation Fluid, paper
SPE 9385 presented at the 1980 SPE Annual Technical Conference
and Exhibition, Dallas, Sept. 21-24.
Ford, W.G.F.. Burkleca. L.F., and Squire, K.A.: Foamed Acid
Stimulation Success in the Illmois and Michigan Basins, paper SPE
9386 presented at the 1980 SPE Annual Technical Conference and
Exhibition, Dallas, Sept. 21-24.
Graham. 1.W.: Well Stimulation by Two-Phase Flow, U.S. Patent
No. 4,174,753 (1979).
Green, E.B., Lybarger. J.H., and Richardson, E.A.: In-Situ
Neutralization System Solves Facility Upset Problems, Paper SPE
4796 presented at the 1974 SPE Annual Meetmg, Houston, Oct. 6-9.
Haafkens, R., Luque, R.F., and DeVries, W.: Method for Formmg
Channels of High Fluid Conductivity in Formation Parts Around a
Borehole, U.S. Patent No. 4,249,609 (1981).
Kincheloe, R.L.: Matrix Acidizing Reduces Formation Damage. Pet.
Eng. (Jan. 1967) 74-75, 78, 83.
King., G.E.: Foam Stimulation Fluids: What They Are. Where They
Work, Pet. Eng. Inrl. (July 1982) 52. 56. 58, 60.
Knox, J.A., Lasater, R.M.. and Dill, W.R.: A New Concept in
Acidizing Utilizing Chemical Retardation, paper SPE 975 presented
at the 1964 SPE Annual Meeting, Houston, Oct. 11-14.
Kunze, K.R. and Shaughnessy, C.M.: Acidizing Sandstone Forma-
tions with Fluoboric Acid, paper SPE 9387 presented at the 1980
SPE Annual Technical Conference and Exhibition, Dallas, Sept. 21-24.
Labrid, J.: Acid Stimulation in Argillaceous Sandstone-Interpreting
Acid Response Curves-Measuring Kinetic and Petrophysical Param-
eters, paper SPE 5156 presented at the 1974 SPE Annual Meeting,
Houston, Oct. 6-9.
Lee, M.H. and Roberts, L.D.: The Effect of Heat of Reaction on Tem-
perature Distribution and Acid Penetration in a Fracture, Sot. Per.
Eng. J . (Dec. 1980) 501-07.
Hall, B.E.: Methods and Compositions for Dissolving Silicates, U.S.
Patent No. 4,304,676 (1981).
Hall, B.E., Underwood, P.J.. and Tinnemeyer, A.C.:Stimulation of
Leggett, B. el al. : Use of a Novel Liquid Gelling Agent for Acidtzing
the North Coles Levee Field with a Retarded-HF-Acid. paper SPE
in the Levelland Field, paper SPE 11121 presented at the 1982 SPE
9934, presented at the 1981 SPE California Regional Meeting.
Annual Technical Conference and Exhibition, New Orleans, Sept.
Bakersfield. March 25-27.
26-29.
Hall, B.E. and Anderson, B-W.: Field Results for a New Retarded
McBride, J.R., Rathbone. M.J., and Thomas, R.L.: Evaluation of
Sandstone Acidizing System, paper SPE 6871 presented at the 1977
Fluoboric Acid Treatment in the Grand Isle Offshore Area Using
SPE Annual Technical Conference and Exhibition, Denver, Oct. 9- 12.
Multiple-Rate Flow Test, paper SPE 8339 presented at the 1979 SPE
Annual Technical Conference and Exhibition, Las Vegas, Sept. 23-26.
Harris, F.N.: Application of Acetic Acid in Well Completion,
Stimulation, and Reconditioning, J . Pet. Tech. (July 1961) 637-39.
McCune, C.C. er al. : Acidization VI-A New Model of the Physical
and Chemical Changes in Sandstone During Acidizing, paper SPE
Harris, L.E.: High Viscosity Acidic Treating Fluids and Methods of
Foaming and Using the Same, U.S. Patent No. 4,324,668 (1982).
5157 presented at the 1975 SPE Annual Technical Conference and
Exhibition, Dallas, Sept. 29-Oct. 1.
McLaughlin, W.A. and Berkshire, D-C.: Adicizing Reservoirs While
Harris, O.E., Hendrickson, A.R.. and Coulter, A.W. Jr.: HighCon- Chelating Iron with Sulfosalicvlic Acid, Canada Patent No. 1.086.485
centration Hydrochlortc Acid Aids Stimulation Results in Carbonate
Reservoirs. J . Pet. Tech. (Oct. 1966) 1291-96.
(1980). -
Hendrickson, A.R. and Cameron, R.C.: New Fracture Acid Tech-
nique Provides Efficient Stimulation of Massive Carbonate Sections,
J . Cdn. Pet. Tech. (Jan.-March 1969) 1-5.
McLeod, H.O., Ledlow, L.B., and Till, M.V.: The Planrung,
Execution and Evaluation of Acid Treatments in Sandstone Forma-
tions. paper SPE 11931 presented at the 1983 SPE Annual Technical
Conference and Exhibition, San Francisco, Oct. 5-8.
54-14
PETROLEUM ENGINEERING HANDBOOK
McLeod. H.O. and Coulter. A.W. Jr.: The Use of Alcohol in Gas
Well Stimulation. paper SPE 1663 presented at the 1966 SPE Eastern
Regional Meeting. Columbus, OH. Nov. IO- I I.
McLeod. H.O.. McGinty. J.E.. and Smith. C.F.: Deep Well
Stimulation with Alcoholic Acid, paper SPE 1558 presented at the
1966 SPE Annual Meeting, Dallas. Oct. 2-5.
Miller, B.D. and Bergstrom, J.M.: Results of Acid-in-Oil Emulsion
Stimulations of Carbonate Formations. paper SPE 5648 presented
at the 1975 SPE Annual Technical Conference and Exhibition. Dallas,
Sept. 28Oct. I.
Moore. E.W., Crowe. C.W., and Hendrickson. A.R.: Formation,
Effect and Prevention of Asphaltene Sludges During Stimulation
Treatment, 3. Pet. Tech (Sept 1965) 1023-28.
Muecke, T.W.: Principles of Actd Stimulation. Proc.. SPE Intl. Pe-
troleum Conference and Exhibition, Beijing, China (1982) 2. 291-303.
Norman, L.R., Conway, M.W., and Wilson. J.M.: Temperature Stable
Acid Gelling Polymers. Laboratory Evaluation and Field Results,
paper SPE 10260 presented at the 1981 SPE Annual Technical
Conference and Exhibition, San Antonto. Oct. 5-7.
Norman. L.R.: Aqueous Acid Solution Gelling Agents. Canada Patent
No. 1.106.724 (1981).
Novotny. E.J.: Prediction of Stimulation from Acid Fracturing
Treatments Using Fintte Fracture Conductivtty. /. Pet. Tech. (Sept.
1977) 1186-94; Tmns.. AIME. 263.
Pablev,, A.S., Ewing. B.C.. and Callawav. R.E.: Performance of
Crosslinked Hydrihlortc Actd in the Rocky Mountain Region,
Paper
SPE 10877 presented at the I982 SPE Rocky Mountain Regtonal
Meeting. Billings, MT, May 19-21.
Pollard, P.: Evaluation of Acid Treatments From Pressure Buildup
Analysts, 1. Pet Tech. (March 1959) 38-43: Trans.. AIME. 216.
Roberts. L.D. and Guin, J.A.: A New Method for Predicting Acid
Penetration Distances, Sot. Pet. Eng. J . (Aug. 1975) 277-85.
Ross, W.M.. Pierson, N.O., and Coulter, A.W.: Matrix Acidizing
Corrects Formation Damage in Sandstones, Per. Eng. (Nov. 1968)
64-69.
Rowan, G.: Theory of Acid Treatments of Limestone Formations,
J . Inst. Pet. (Nov. 1959) 321-32.
Royle, R.A.: Demulsifyer for Inclusion in Injected Acidization Systems
for Petroleum Formation Sttmulation, U.S. Patent No. 4.290.901
(1981).
Salathrel, W.M. and Shaughnessy, C.M.: Method for Generating
Hydrofluoric Acid in a Subterranean Formation, U.S. Patent No.
4,136,739 (1979).
Scherubel, G.A.: Method of Controlling Fluid Loss in Acidizing
Treatment of a Subterranean Formation. US. Patent No. 4.237,974
(1980).
Scherubel, G.A.: Self-Breaking Retarded Acid Emulsion. Canada
Patent No. 1,086,934 (1980).
Shaughneasy, C.M. and Kunze. K.R.: Understandmg Sandstone
Acidizing Leads to Improved Field Practices. paper SPE 9388
presented at the 1980 SPE Annual Technical Conterence and
Exhibttion, Dallas. Sept. 2 l-24.
Smith, C.F., Dollarhide. F.E.. and Byth, N.J.: Acid Corrosion
Inhibitors-Are We Getting What We Need? J. Pet. Tech. (May
1978) 737-46.
Smith, C.F., Crowe. C.W.. and Wieland. D.R.: Fracture Acidizing
in High Temperature Limestone. paper SPE 3008 presented at the
1970 SPE Annual Meeting, Houston. Oct. 4-7.
Smith, C.F., Crowe, C.W., and Nolan, T.J. III: Secondary Deposition
of Iron Compounds Following Acid Treatments, J . Pet. Tech. (Sept.
1969) 1121-29.
Smith. C.F., Nolan, T.J. III, and Crenshaw, P-L.: Removal and
Inhibition of Calcium Sulfate Scale In Waterflood Projects. J. Per.
Tech. (Nov. 1968) 1249-57.
Smith, C.F., Ross, W.M., and Hendrickson, A.R.: Hydrofluoric Acid
Sttmulation-Developments for Field Application, paper SPE 1284
presented at the 1965 SPE Annual Meeting. Denver. Oct. 3-6.
Smith, C.F. and Hendrickson. A.R.: Hydrofluoric Acid Stimulation
of Sandstone Reservoirs. J . Per. Tech. (Feb. 1965)215-22; Trum..
AIME, 234.
Swanson, B.L.: Well Acidizing Composntons, U.S. Patent No.
4,240,505 (1980).
Vivian. T.A.: Acidification of Subterranean Formations Employing
Halogenated Hydrocarbons, U.S. Patent No. 4,320.014 (1982).
Wade, R.P. and Aziz, K.: Stimulating the Triassic Carbonates in the
Foothills Gas Trend of Northeast Brittsh Columbia, paper 81-32-35
presented at the 1981 CIM Annual Meeting, Calgary.May 5-6
Walsh. M.P., Lake. L.W., and Schechter. R.S.: A Deacriptton of
Chemical Precipitation Mechanisms and Their Role in Formation
Damage During Stimulation by Hydrofluoric Acid. fro<. SPE For-
mation Damage Control Sympostum, Lafayette. LA (1982) 7-27.
Watkins, D.R. and Roberts, G.I.: On-Site Acidizing Fluid Analysis
Shows HCI and HF Contents Often Varied Substantiallv From Speci-
fied Amounts, paper SPE 10770 presented at the 1982 SPE California
Regional Meeting, San Francisco, March 24-26.
Wiley, C.B.: Success of a High Friction Diverting Gel in Acid
Sttmulation of a Carbonate Reservoir, Cornell Unit, Wasson San
Andres Field, .I. Pet. Tech. (Nov. 1981) 2196-2200: Trans..
AIME, 271.
Woodroof, R.A. Jr., Baker, J.R., and Jenkins, R.A. Jr.: Corrosion
Inhibition of Hydrochloric-Hydrofluoric Acid/Mutual Solvent Mixtures
at Elevated Temperatures, paper SPE 5645 presented at the 1975
SPE Annual Technical Conference and Exhibition, Dallas. Sept.
29-Oct. 1.
Young, P.J. and Romocki, J.M.E.: Well Treating Compositions and
Method, Great Britain Patent No. 2.047,305 (1980).
Chapter 55
Formation Fracturing
S.J. Martinez, U. 01 TUIU *
R.E. Steanson. DOM~~II Schlumhergcr *:*:
A.W. Coulter. D oi~cil Schlumherrcr
* :i;
Introduction
Fracturing techniques were developed in 1948 and the first
commercial fracturing treatments were conducted in 1949.
The process rapidly gained popularity because of its high
success ratio, and within a very few years. thousands of
wells per year were being stimulated by hydraulic frac-
turing treatments.
Early treatments consisted of pumping 1,000 to 3.000
gal of fracturing fluid, containing about I Ibm of
20/40-mesh sand/gal. at rates of I to 2 bbbmin. Today.
a single treatment can require several hundred thousand
gallons of fluid and more than a million pounds of prop-
ping agent. Although irtjection rates have exceeded 300
bblimin in some instances, rates of 20 to 60 bblimin are
about average. Materials, equipment, and techniques have
become highly sophisticated. A bibliography is present-
ed at the end of this chapter for those interested in a de-
tailed discussion of particular technologies. This
discussion is limited to a generalized description of frac-
turing theory, materials, techniques, equipment, and treat-
ment planning and design.
Hydraulic Fracturing Theory
Oil and gas accumulations occur in the pore spaces or
natural fractures of a subsurface rock where structural
and/or stratigraphic features form a trap. When a well
is drilled into an oil-bearing rock. the fluids must flow
through the surrounding rock into the wellbore before they
can be brought to the surface. If the pore spaces of the
rock are interconnected so that channels exist through
which the oil can flow. the rock is permeable. The ease
wzith which tlutd can how through a rock determines its
degree of permeability. It has high permeability ifoil. gas,
or water can flow easily through existing channels and
low permeability if the connecting channels are very small
and fluid flow is restricted.
In the case of high permeability. drilling fluids may
enter the flow channels and later impair flow into the well-
bore. In the cast of low permeability, the flow channels
may not permit enough flow into the wcllbore. In either
case. the well may not be commercial because fluid can-
not flow into the wellborc fast enough. It then becomes
necessary to create an artificial channel that w*ill increase
the ability of the reservoir rock to conduct tluid into the
wellbore. Such channels often can be crcatcd by hydraulic
fracturing.
During hydraulic fracturing treatments. what actually
happens when a rock ruptures. or fractures. can be ex
plained by basic rock mechanics. All subsurface rocks are
stressed in three directions because of the weight of over-
lying formations and their horizontal reactions. Whether
one of the horizontal stresses or the vertical stress ia the
greatest will depend on the additional stresses imposed
on the rock by prior folding. faulting. or other peologi-
cal movement in the area. These tectonic stresses will con-
trol the direction of the fracture and determine wghethcr
the fracture plane will be horizontal. vertical, or inclined.
Every formation rock has some measure of strength de-
pending on its structure. compaction, and cementation.
It has tensile strength in both vertical and horizontal direc-
tions. The forces tending to hold the rock together are
the stresses on the rock and the strength of the rock it-
self. When a wellbore is filled with fluid and pressure
is applied at the surface, the pressure ofthe fluid in a per-
foration or even in the port spaces of the rock will in-
crease. This hydraulic pressure is applied equally in all
directions. If the pressure is increased, the forces applied
by the fluid pressure in the rock will become equal to the
forces tending to hold the rock together. Any additional
pressure applied will cause the rock to split or fracture.
The fracture will extend as long as sufficient pressure is
applied by injection of additional fluids.
55-2
When the treatment is complete and flow is reversed
to produce the well. pressure will gradually return
(decline) to reservoir pressure. As this occurs, the force5
tending to hold the rock together come into play again
and the fracture will close or heal. To prevent closure,
some solid material must be placed in the fracture to hold
it open. Such materials are called propping agents.
Since the permeability of these propping agents is much
higher than that of the surrounding formation. the ability
of the propped fracture to conduct fluids to the wellbore
can result in good production increases. In fact, fractur-
ing has made profitable production possible from many
wells and fields that otherwise would not have been prof-
itable.
Formations Fractured
Fracturing has been used successfully in all formations
except those that are very soft. Fracturing has proved suc-
cessful in sand, limestone, dolomitic limestone, dolomite.
conglomerates, granite washes, hard or brittle shale, an-
hydrite, chert, and various silicates. The plastic nature
of soft shales and clays makes them difficult to fracture,
Fracturing has helped wells producing from formations
that have such a wide range of permeabifities that it is
impossible to set upper and lower permeability limits of
formations that might be helped by fracturing. Produc-
tion increases have been obtained from zones having per-
meabilities ranging from less than 0.1 to as high as
900 md.
Fracture Planes
Analysis of pressures encountered on many thousands of
fracturing treatments has shown that the bottomhole pres-
sures (BHP) recorded during the injection of fracturing
materials range from 0.40 to I .80 psi/ft depth. Only in
a few treatments have fracturing pressure gradients been
outside of this range. Those were almost all in shallow
experimental treatments. The fracture gradient of is cal-
culated from treatment data by Eq. I:
Rf=
PI! fP> -Pj
) D
(1)
where
gt = unit fracture gradient, psiift,
p/r = total hydrostatic pressure, psi,
p,, = total surface treating pressure, psi,
pf = total friction loss, psi, and
b = depth of producing interval, ft.
Analysis of thousands of treatments plus experimental
work in reservoirs with known fracture gradients indi-
cate that horizontal fractures are produced in reservoirs
having fracture gradients of 1 .O or higher. This is gener-
ally in shallow wells less than 2,000 ft deep. Vertical frac-
tures are produced in reservoirs having fracture gradrents
of 0.7 or lower. Such gradients are normally encountered
in wells deeper than 4,000 ft. Very few cases have been
found where formations have gradients in the intermedi-
ate range between 0.7 and 1 .O. Consequently. the use of
fracture gradients to predict the general inclination of frac-
tures should be useful in almost every case.
PETROLEUM ENGINEERING HANDBOOK
With few exceptions. wells in the same reservoir will
have nearly identical fracture gradients. Thus. the gra-
dient from one well generally will serve as a guide for
the entire pool.
Fracture Area
In 1957, Howard and Fast presented a mathematical
equation to determine the surface area of a newly opened
fracture. The equation, based on the quantity of fractur-
ing materials used and the rate at which they are injected
into the formation, takes into account the physical charac-
terisitics of the fracturing fluids and the specific reser-
voir conditions. This equation is:
ib
A,=---
47rK
e- .erfc(x) + __ - 1
I
.
(2)
where
x =
and
A, =
i=
t=
b=
K=
erfc(x) =
2K&t
b
total area of one face of the fracture at any
time during injection. sq ft,
constant injection rate during fracture
extension, cu ft/min,
total pumping time, minutes,
fracture width (breadth), ft,
fluid coefficient, a constant that is a meas-
ure of the flow resistance of the fluid
leaking off into the formation during
fracture operations, and
complementary error function of x.
Essentially, during a fracturing treatment, only the
volume of fracturing fluid that remains within the wall
of the fracture is effective. The fluid that leaks off into
the pores of the rock is lost insofar as added fracture ex-
tension is concerned.
When the width of a fracture is known or assumed (frac-
ture width is normally calculated using either Perkins and
Kern3 or Khristianovitch and Zheltov4 models), the
volume of the fracture can be calculated. With these data,
it is possible to plot the controllable variables of a fluid
volume and injection rate against the fracture area pro-
duced for any particular fluid coefficient. Examples of
such graphs, for various injection rates. are shown in Figs.
55.1 through 55.5.
The rate of fluid leakoff into the formation, as expressed
by the fluid coefficient, is controlled by three variables:
the viscosity and compressibility of the reservoir fluid,
the viscosity of the fracturing fluid, and the fluid-loss char-
acteristics of the fracturing fluid.
Reservoir-Controlled Fluids
This group includes those fracturing fluids having low vis-
cosity and high fluid-loss characteristics, in which the rate
of leakoff is controlled by the compressibility and viscosity
of the reservoir fluid.
FORMATION FRACTURING
55-3
(AVERAGE FRACTURE WIDTH =O.l INCH)
(AVERAGE FRACTURE WIDTH=O.I INCH)
FRACTURE SAND FILL, THOUSANDS OF LB
FRACTURE SAND FILL. THOUSANDS OF LB
60 05 I70 255 425 170 255 425
1, / I \ I I / E-100.000 GAL 1
D50.000 GAL
I I
In 70 40 f=cJ RO IO0 200 xl0 500
.
_- -_ ._-
FRACTURE AREA,bNE FACE, THOUSANDS OF SQ FT~
Fig. 55.1-Effect of fluid coeflicient and volumeon fracture area Fig. 55.2-Effect of fluid coefficient and volume on fracture area
at constant injection rate of 10 bbllmin. at constant inpction rate of 20 bbllmin
(AVERAGE FRACTURE WIDTH =O.l INCH)
FRACTURE SAND FILL, THOUSANDS OF LB
8.5 17 25 43 60 85 I70 255 425
IO
P
I
10 FRACT% 40 60 80 100 200 300 500
AREA, ONE FACE, THOUSANDS OF SO FT
f 8
4
F-250;000 GAL
26
I\ I \ \ I\ X
I, u .\I\1
ZO,BPM
E
05O;OOO GAL
I I I
10
FRACT::E AREA::NE:
_ A ,,
I I \
B-10,000 GAL
C-25.000 GAL1 I \I , I I
0 100 200 300
:ACE, THOUSANDS OF SO
FRACTURE AREA, ONE FACE, THOUSANDS OF SO FT
Fig. 55.3-Effect of fluid coefficient and volume on fracture area Fig. 55.4-Effect of fluid coefficient and volume on fracture area
at constant injection rate of 30 bbllmin.
at constant injection rate of 40 bbllmin.
(AVERAGE FRACTURE WIDTH : 0.1 INCH)
FRACTURE SAND FILL, THOUSANDS OF LB
.8.5 I7 25 43 60 85 170 255 425
50BPM I IhlllN
I I I \.
x S-IO;000 GAL
C-25,000 GAL
h
D-50,000 GAL
\
II I I I IIIIITV I ?.
IO FRACT%E 40 60 80 100 200 300 500
AREA, ONE FACE, THOUSANDS OF SQ FT
Fig. 55.5-Effect of fluld coefficient and volume on fracture area
at constant injection rate of 50 bbllmin.
55-4
PETROLEUM ENGINEERING HANDBOOK
The coefficient for this type of fracturing fluid may be
dctcrmined from Eq. 3.
K,. =0.0374~+ -. (3)
PR
where
K, = fluid coefficient (compressibility-viscosity
controlled), ftimin ,
Ap = differential pressure, across the face of the
fracture, psi,
k,, = effective formation permeability, darcies,
4,. = effective formation porosity. 7%.
(R = isothermal coefficient of compressibility of
the reservoir fluid, psi -I. and
PK = reservoir fluid viscosity. cp.
Compressibility considerations are generally found to be
most applicable in high-pressure, low-volume-factor wells
that have high saturations.
Viscosity-Controlled Fluids
This group includes those fracturing fluids in which the
rate of leakoff is controlled by the viscosity of the fluid
itself. The coefficient for this type of fracturing fluid is
cxpresscd by Eq. 4.
where
K, = fluid coefficient (viscosity controlled),
ftimin .
X,. = cffcctivc formation permeability. darcies,
111 = differential pressure across the face of the
fracture. psi-this ih the product of the
fracture gradient and depth. minus
normal reservoir pressure. (,q, XD)-~JR.
9,
= ctfcctivc formation porosity. %. and
p, = fracturing fluid viscosity. cp.
2r
I I I I I I I
I
0.5 5 50
CONDUCTIVITY RATIO
Fig. 55.6-Increased fracture penetration by containment of the
fracture in the productwe interval can provide much
greater production Increases.
The effective porosity represents the space in the matrix
into which fracturing fluid will leak off. In figuring ef-
fective porosity, the effects of residual oil and water satu-
ration should be considered. The permeability factor in
the equation almost always will be the permeability ofthe
water-wet formation. but it could be that of an oil-wet
formation. The average md-ft of exposed section also is
considered.
Fluid-Loss-Controlled Fluids
This group includes fracturing fluids containing special
fluid-loss additives designed to reduce the loss of fluid
taking place during a fracturing treatment.
The fluid coefficient for this type of fracturing fluid is
based on Eq. 5:
111
K,=0.0328z, .
(5)
where
K, = fluid coefficient, wall building (fluid-loss
additive), ftimin ,
17~ = the slope of the fluid-loss curve, plotting
cumulative filtrate volume vs. the square
root of flow time, mL/min. and
A = cross-sectional area of test media through
which flow takes place. cm2.
In this case, the coefficient is obtained from an ex-
perimental test to determine the fluid loss resulting from
the use of a particular fluid-loss additive in a particular
fracturing fluid. The test must be performed at. or cor-
rected to, bottomhole temperature (BHT) and pressure
conditions. Spurt loss is the leakoff occurring while the
tluid-retaining wall (filter cake) is being built up. It can
bc determined from this test by extrapolating the straight-
line portion ofthe curve back to zero time on the ordinate.
The value at this intercept is the spurt loss.
Stimulation Results
The increased production obtained following a fractur-
ing treatment is the result of increased fracture penctra-
tion and conductivity. The greater penetration produces
a larger drainage area from which reservoir fluids can be
produced. Increased fracture conductivity results from the
lowered resistance to flow through the fracture. permit-
ting greater production of fluid under reservoir energy
conditions.
Fig. 55.6> shows the relationship between fracture
penetration, fracture conductivity ratio, and production
increase. These curves represent fracture penetration as
a decimal fraction of the drainage radius. If a good con-
ductivity ratio can be achieved, then a fracture penetrat-
ing 100% of the drainage radius can provide as much as
a 1%fold increase in the production.
Fracture conductivity is controlled largely by propping
agent permeability, size. and placement. Strength of the
propping agent is also very important, The effect of thcsc
properties on fracture conducti\ ity will hc discussed later.
Fracture penetration is rclatcd directly to fracture-tluid
cll.iclency and containment ot.thc fracture withln the pro-
duction zone. A good fracturing tluicl should hc trclati\,c-
I\ IOM in cost and ha1.c low tluid 1~s. IOU friction lo\\.
FORMATION FRACTURING
55-5
good proppant transport characteristics. tcmpcraturc sta-
hility. ability to thin for good cleanup, and compatibility
with reservoir rock and tluids. Containment of the frac-
ture within the productive interval is a function not only
of tluid properties but also of technique.
Fracturing Materials
Fracturing Fluids
Fracturing fluids may be divided into three broad divi-
sions: oil based. water based. and mix based. Classitica-
tion depends primarily on the main constituent of the
fracturing fluid. The aqueous-based fluids are either water
or acid. and the mix-based fluids are emulsions.
Oil-Based Fluids. In the past. refined oils, crude oils and
soap-type gels of crude, kerosene. or diesel oil wcrc quite
common. Because of safety considerations, lack of tem-
perature stability, and cost of tailoring these materials to
be efficient fluids, they are seldom used today. A new
thickened and crosslinked hydrocarbon gel. made from
either light refined oils or crude oil. is used extensively
in hydraulic fracturing of oil- and gas-condensate wells
producing from reservoirs adversely affected by water or
brine. These gels exhibit all the characteristics of an cffi-
cicnt fracturing fluid.
Water-Based Fluids. Gels. Water-based tluids arc natural
or synthetic polymer gels of water or hydrochloric acid.
They may be either linear or crosslinked gels. The watcr-
based fluids are used almost exclusively except in those
extremely water-sensitive reservoirs previously men-
tioned. The popularity of aqueous fluids is based on many
factors. including these four: (1) they are safe to handle,
(2) their cost is low in comparison to oil-based tluids,
(3) they are. or can be formulated to be, compatible with
nearly all reservoir fluids and conditions, and (4) they can
be tailored to meet almost any treating requirements.
Rheological properties, friction pressure. fluid loss, and
break time can be closely controlled to provide an effi-
cient fracturing fluid over a wide range of well and rescr-
voir conditions. The primary disadvantage of aqueous
fluids is that they may not be applicable in formations that
are adversely affected by water.
Waterfrac services use linear (uncrosslinked) gels of
fresh water. salt water, or produced brine as efficient and
economical fracturing fluids. Guar and hydroxypropyl
guar thickening agents are available to satisfy the rcquire-
menta of a wide range of reservoir properties. They can
be used in either batch- or continuous-mix techniques. A
cellulose derivative thickener is available for applications
in which fluids with extremely low residue are required.
The viscosity of fluids used in waterfrac services is con-
trolled by thickening-agent concentration.
High-viscosity fracturing fluids have been developed
that contribute directly to wider. better-propped, and
more-conductive fractures. Fracture width is increased
by increasing the viscosity of the fracturing fluid. Wider
fractures permit use of larger proppant, which has grcat-
er permeability. These viscous fluids also have the
proppant-transport properties required to carry higher con-
centrations of proppant deeper into the fracture. They
achieve their high viscosity at gel concentrations in the
same range as the traditional waterfrac fluids by using
special crosslinking svstcms and stabtli/ers. The high-
viscosity gels arc particularly useful in deep well\ bccattsc
of their temperature stability. They are able to create wide.
deeply penetrating fractures at lower rates and can main-
tain their viscosity over the longer pumping times rcquircd
in deeper wells. Fig. 55.7 shows the viscosity profile ot
one such fluid.
Two other characteristics of fracturing Iluids normally
are reported and are used in computer job design. Thcsc
arc the consistency index, I,.. and the behavior index. l,,.
The power law model is used to calculate thcsc charac-
teristics. The consistency index is based on pipe tlow gc-
ometry. The power law parameters arc defined as follows:
I,, = behavior index; log slope of the shear
stress vs. shear rate curve.
dimensionless. and
I,. = consistency index; shear stress at I set t .
Ibf-see - ift
Apparent viscosity is related to the consistency index and
behavior index as follows:
47.880/,.
lJL,/= . ,-, 3
Y I
where
PO
= apparent viscosity, cp. and
y = shear rate. see t
Since shear history (shear rate and time at shear) ad-
versely affects the rheology of some crosslinked gels. test
methods have been developed that more accurately
describe the fluids at the time they enter the fracture. Ta-
ble 55. I compares data developed by the API test method
and shear history method.h The data provided by the
shear history method give more reliable prediction of fric-
tion losses while pumping. Such information is a requi-
site in job design to predict fracture geometry and reduce
6 1 a
TIME. HR
Fig. 55.7-Viscosity profile of high-viscosity, crosslinked, aque-
ous gel.
55-6
PETROLEUM ENGINEERING HANDBOOK
TABLE 55.1-COMPARISON OF RHEOLOGY DATA GENERATED BY API
RP39M AND SHEAR HISTORY METHOD FOR CROSSLINKED AQUEOUS FLUID
CONTAINING 30-lbm/l,OOO-gal THICKENER AND lo-lbm/lOO-gal STABILIZER
Temperature Time
PF)
(hours)
225 0
1
2
4
6
8
250 0
1
2
4
6
8
275 0
1
4
6
8
*Shear hIstory slmulatlon method
RP39M-XLA SHSM-XLA
I, I,
- -
0.570 0.065
0.588 0.045
0.630 0.021
0.672 0.011
0.710 0.0058
- -
0.656 0.127
0.674 0.019
0.712 0.0095
0.752 0.0046
0.792 0.0024
- -
0.718 0.014
0.740 0.010
0.805 0.0048
0.842 0.0037
the possibility of premature screenout. Figs. 55.8 through
55.13 are examples of friction-loss data for various fluids.
In many of the high-viscosity fluids, shear history ef-
fects are minimized by using additives to delay crosslink-
ing until the fluid reaches the bottom of the hole. This
technique also reduces friction losses since high viscosi-
ty does not develop until after the fluid has passed through
the tubulars.
Foams. During recent years, foams have become extreme-
ly popular as fracturing fluids. Normally classed as water-
FLOW RAlf , bbI/mi~
Fig. 55.8-Typical friction-loss curves for linear gel of fresh water Fig. 55.9-Typical friction-loss curve of linear aqueous gel using
or brine using guar or hydroxpropyl guar thickeners. cellulose thickener
cp at 170
set-
-
342
259
150
98
63
-
220
170
103
62
39
-
157
126
84
79
cp at 170
I, I set -
0.7512 o.0017 23
0.7709 0.0015 22
0.7912 0.0013 20
0.8309 0.0009 18
0.8713 0.0007 17
0.9115 0.0005 15
0.7306 0.0021 25
0.7743 0.0014 21
0.8179 0.0009 17
0.9044 0.0004 11
0.9918 0.0002 7
- - -
0.7156 0.0020 22
0.7371 0.0014 17
0.7688 0.0009 13
- -
- -
based fluid, foam is a dispersion of a gas, usually nitro-
gen, within a liquid. A surfactant is used as a foaming
agent to initiate the dispersion. Stabilizers are used where
high temperatures or long pumping time occur. The volu-
metric ratio of the gas to the total volume of the foam,
under downhole conditions, is called the quality of the
foam. Quality is expressed as a number equal to the per-
centage. A 75-quality foam is 75% gas by volume at
downhole temperature and pressure. In fracturing, foam
quality usually ranges from 65 to 85 (compositions con-
taining less than 52% gas are not normally stable foams).
FORMATION FRACTURING
flow RATE , bbl / mi n
Fig. 55.10-Typical friction-loss curve for crosslinked aqueous
gel using guar-based thickener.
Foam is designed primarily for low-permeability or
low-pressure gas wells. However, it may have equal ad-
vantages in low-pressure oil wells. In oil wells it may be
necessary to use a different foaming agent that is com-
patible with reservoir fluids and reduces the possibility
of emulsions.
Some advantages of foam are: (1) good proppant trans-
port, (2) solids-free fluid-loss control, (3) low fluid loss,
(4) minimum fluid retention owing to its low water con-
tent, (5) compatibility with reservoir fluids, and (6) low
hydrostatic pressure of returned fluids, which gives rapid
4-+++: x:0 ,b I 10 10 10 0I Pl O99
fLOW RATE , bbl lmim
Fig. 55.1 P-Typical friction-loss curve for oil-in-water dispersion-
type fracturing fluid.
FLOW RATE , bbI/mla
0
Fig. 55.1 l-Typical friction-loss curve for gelled oil fracturing
fluid.
cleanup and allows quicker well evaluation (gas in foam
helps return liquids to the wellbore).
Some disadvantages of foam are: (1) more surface pres-
sure is required because of low hydrostatic head; and
(2) there is the added expense of gas, especially under
high pressure where volume is reduced.
Mix-Based Fluids. Mix-based fluids are oil-in-water dis-
persions or emulsions that serve as highly efficient water-
based fracturing fluids.
I
01
I 1111111 I I l1llll
7 II I , 78910 20 30 40 IO 709090
fLOW RATE , bbl/m,n
0
Fig. 55.13-Typical friction-loss curve for heavy oil-in-water
emulsion-type fracturing fluid.
55- 8
PETROLEUM ENGINEERING HANDBOOK
1
- - - Fy- - - am. - ,
- - - - - _ __ 1, - - w
>. . . . . . . . , ,
7
.
- - - : - z- .
. .
. . . .
- q. y. 3
h. . 5
. .
%_
. _ 4
\ : : 1. 20- 40 m&al a% beads
Testsrun usi ng
al umi numpI ti es
. . 3. 20J Omeshexwi mental prop
: . 4. 28- 48 mesh sxpenmental prop
: &20- M meshsi nl ared bauxl l e
and linear ttow.
wi dth =0. 3i n:
\
. . . .
' Y.
. .
I . - . I
2. 5w 5. oM) 7, 5M) 10, 000 12. 5w 15, ow 17, 500 2f
Overburden presrure. pri
have been established so that the main considerations are
grain strength and grain size. If a proppant is not strong
enough to withstand closure stress of the fracture, it will
crush. and permeability will be reduced greatly. Also, as
reservoir pressure is reduced by fluid production, the
closure stress will increase. Therefore, it is important that
proppant strength be selected for the stress that will be
present during the later life of the well. Fig. 55. I4 shows
the effect of closure stress on permeability of various prop-
ping agents when the formation is a hard, competent rock.
Sand is an acceptable propping agent at closure stresses
up to 6,000 psi. At stresses greater than this, high-strength
proppants such as sintered bauxite particles or plastic-
coated sand grains should be used.
Fig. 55.14-Effect of closure stress on permeability of various
propping agents.
The viscous emulsions are water-outside-phase emul-
sions containing two parts oil (crude or refined) and one
part water or brine. These arc commonly called poly-
emulsions and are designed to provide high-viscosity
fracturing fluids at temperatures up to 350F. They are
seldom used because of fire hazard and cost.
A crosslinked gel provides high viscosity in the water
volume (95 %a). and a 5 % oil phase is dispersed through-
out the mixture to give excellent fluid-loss control prop-
erties without requiring the addition of solids. The leakoff
control is the result of two-phase fluid flow that reduces
the relative permeability of the formation more than con-
ventional fracturing fluids do over a wide permeability
range. The fluid is highly efficient even when compared
to viscous-emulsion fracturing fluids. Normally. the 5%
oil content is low enough to avoid significant effects on
either friction pressure or hydrostatic head. even when
used with the highly viscous water or brine gels.
Fracturing tluid composition is normally proprietary in-
formation of the service company supplying it. While
competitive iluids are available from most of the service
companies, rheological and friction-loss data will vary ac-
cording to the fluid. Therefore. handbooks provided by
the service companies should bc used to obtain data for
job design.
Propping Agents
Propping agents are used to maintain fracture-flow ca-
pacity after completion of a hydraulic fracturing treatment.
The amount of proppant used, the manner in which it is
placed in the fracture, and the properties of the material
itself all play a vital role in maintaining productivity
throughout the life of the well, The selection of the prop-
ping agent and scheduling of the proppant during the treat-
mcnt are important parts of the overall completion and
treatment design.
The ux physical properties of propping agents that af-
feet the resultant fracture conductivity are grain strength.
crrain size. grain size distribution, grain roundness tac-
2
tor. quality (amount of fines and impurities). and prop-
pant density
Grain Strength. While all thcsc physical properties have
;I decided cffcct on fracture conductivity. quality standards
In soft formations, the proppant will tend to embed into
the formation under closure stress and reduce fracture
width. This, in turn, reduces fracture flow capacity. In
the past, deformable proppants such as rounded walnut
shells and aluminum pellets have been used in an attempt
to overcome this problem. By deforming or spreading out,
these proppants presented a larger surface area to the fact
of the fracture and resisted embedment. The low density
and malleability of these proppants caused both pumping
and placement problems, and they were never widely ac-
ceptcd. There was also a corrosion or oxidation of the
aluminum that resulted in loss of pack permeability.
A better solution to embedment is a wide. packed frac-
ture. In such a fracture, width reduction resulting from
embedment is a small percentage of total fracture width,
and adequate flow capacity is maintained even after
embedment occurs.
Grain Size. A large proppant grain size provides a tnore
permeable pack under low closure stress conditions and
can be used in shallow wells. However. dirty formations
or those subject to significant fines migration are poor
candidates for large-size proppants. The fines tend to in-
vade the proppant pack. causing partial plugging and rapid
reduction in permeability. In these cases. smaller sizes
of proppant that resist invasion of fines are better.
Larger gram sizes are generally not considered for deep-
er wells because of greater susceptibility to crushing.
Proppant Placement. The manner in which a propping
agent is placed in a fracture is also important. As previ-
ously stated, soft or high-permeability formations need
a wide, fully packed fracture. In very-low-permeability
formations, only a thin fracture may be necessary. How-
ever. fracture length becomes important in such forma-
tions because the greater the surface arca of formation
exposed to the propped fracture, the greater the volume
of oil or gas that can drain into the fracture. Since fluid
enters the fracture along its entire length. long fractures
must be wider at the wellbore than at the tip to accom-
modate the increasing amount of fluid as the fracture nears
the wellbore. To accomplish this fracture geometry. the
proppant must be scheduled so that its concentration in
the fracture fluid increases steadily as the treatment
progresses.
Fracturing Techniques
Although fracturing treatments usually arc pctformcd by
pumping materials down the casing or tubing at rates as
high as well limitations and economics will permit. spc-
FORMATION FRACTURING
55-9
cial techniques sometimes are used to help control verti-
cal fracture growth. Such control is directly related to
fracturing efficiency. In the case of massive zones, ade-
quate fracture height to cover the entire zone is desirable.
With narrow zones, containment of the fracture within
the productive zone improves efficiency and penetration
and prevents fracture growth into undesirable zones.
While vertical growth can be controlled to some extent
by controlling injection rate. more sophisticated tech-
niques are required for optimum efficiency.
A Limited Entry@ technique involves designing the
number and size of perforations to match an economically
feasible pump rate so that all perforations are forced to
accept fluid during the treatment.
Another specialty technique to limit downward growth
of a vertical fracture involves building an artificial lower
barrier. This is done by using low injection rates and fluids
with poor proppant transport characteristics at the begin-
ning of the treatment. Propping agent can create a prop-
pant pack at the bottom of the fracture. A pressure drop
will exist across this pack and will divert the fluid that
follows outward and upward, thus slowing or even stop-
ping downward fracture growth.
Similarly, a buoyant propping agent can create an ar-
tificial upper barrier by floating to the top of the fracture
and bridging to form a proppant pack. In this case also,
the pressure drop across the pack will force subsequent
fluids outward to increase fracture length.
Multiple-Zone Fracturing
Whcrc multiple zones are open to the wellbore. mechan-
ical devices such as packers or bridge plugs can be used
to isolate zones so that each can be treated individually.
Where it is desirable to fracture more than one zone in
a single treatment, sized particulate materials or perfora-
tion ball sealers can be used. The particulate materials
usually are suspended in a viscous fluid and filter out at
the fracture entrance. After treatment, they generally flow
back with produced fluids. They also can break down
through chemical reaction. Ball sealers seat in perfora-
tions and divert fluid flow. They are unseated by reverse
flow and either fall to the bottom or are produced along
with the returning fluids. When ball sealers are used. a
mechanical device to catch the balls should be used at the
surface to prevent the balls from plugging valves or other
surface equipment.
Fracturing Equipment
Hydraulic fracturing equipment consists of pumps and
blenders. high-pressure manifolds and treating line, re-
motely controlled master valves, and tree savers.
Pumping equipment is the conventional triplex pump.
quintaplex pump. or a pressure-multiplier type of pump.
The latter employs an entirely different putnping concept
from the triplex pump. It operates by using a low-pressure
working fluid to push a large piston. This large piston
is directly connected to a smaller piston, or ram, which
handles the treating fluid. Because of a slow cycle speed.
the pressure multiplicrs are capable of long pumping times
at high pressures. Both the triplex and pressure multipli-
cr arc capable of high-pressure operation. Above
12.000-psi treating pressure, however. the multiplier is
prcfcrred. Thcsc units are capable of operating at prcs-
hutch slightly in cxccss of 70.000 psi.
Individual pumping units are powered by engines rang-
ing from less than 100 to more than 1,300 hp. For high
horsepower requirements, multiple units are used.
Fluids used in hydraulic fracturing are mixed in
blenders. They are either batch mixed before a job and
stored in tanks on location or continuously mixed during
the job. Blenders are capable of metering both dry and
liquid additives into a fluid, mixing the fluid and addi-
tives, and metering and mixing propping agent into the
fluids. After mixing and blending, the slurries are sup-
plied by the blender to the suction on the high-pressure
pumps under pressure. Blending units capable of handling
volumes in excess of 100 bblimin are available.
Liquid nitrogen is the gas normally used for foam or
energized tluid. Special transport and pumping equipment
is required to handle the nitrogen, which generally is me-
tered into the treating line on the downstream (high-
pressure) side of the triplex or multiplier pumps.
Another piece of equipment recently added to fractur-
ing fleets is the treatment monitoring vehicle. This vehi-
cle gathers data, uses a computer to analyze them. and
presents the results as they occur, or in real time. The
data are presented by a printer, plotter, and on a CRT
screen. Real-time analysis and presentation of data allow
positive control of a treatment. Ample warning of prob-
lems normally is available so that changes can be made
to permit successful completion of the job. Also. the
equipment can be used to monitor a tninifrac job before
the main treatment. Analysis of the minifrac can either
verify job design or indicate needed design changes be-
fore the main treatment.
Treatment Planning and Design
Success of a hydraulic fracturing treatment depends on
creating a deeply penetrating, highly conductive fracture
in the producing zone. Research, engineering studies, and
experience have provided reliable planning or treatment
design guides. Job calculations with these guides are based
on reservoir conditions, laboratory tests. theoretical data.
well information, and experience in a given area. Most
service companies and many oil-producing companies
have job-design calculations computerized to aid in rapid
and accurate design comparisons. Special computer pro-
grams are available also to calculate tubing expansion and
contraction, bottomhole cool-down (fluid temperature at
the wellbore and in the fracture), proppant scheduling to
provide best propped fracture geometry, and anticipated
productivity increase.
Evaluating and selecting optimal treating conditions for
any individual well includes several steps. First, accurate
reservoir and well-completion data must be accumulated
to provide a sound basis for engineered treatment preplan-
ning. Next, the fracture area and the extent of formation
penetration necessary to provide the desired productivity
increase are calculated. The fracture conductivity. as re-
lated to the permeability of the matrix, is detertnined also.
After this. the comparative efficiency of various frac-
turing fluids, based on specific well conditions. is dcter-
mined. as well as the volumes and injection rates necessary
to provide the desired fracture extension. Horsepower rc-
quirements for each type of treatment then can be calcu-
lated; and fracturing materials and tcchniqucs can be
sclccted that. theoretically. will most cfficicntlv and eco-
55-l 0
nomically produce the desired productivity increase. Only
when all these factors are considered collectively can a
well-integrated fracturing treatment be carried out.
Nomenclature
A=
A, =
b=
CR =
D=
erfc(x) =
gf =
i=
Ill =
I,. =
cross-sectional area of test media through
which flow takes place, cm*
total area of one face of the fracture at any
time during injection, sq ft
fracture width (breadth), ft
isothermal coefficient of compressibility of
the reservoir fluid, psi -
depth of producing interval, ft
complementary error function of x
unit fracture gradient, psi/ft
constant injection rate during fracture
extension, cu ftlmin
behavior index; log slope of the shear-
stress vs. shear-rate curve, dimensionless
consistency index: shear stress at 1 set-,
lbf-set - ift 2
k, =
K=
K,. =
K, =
K,. =
effective formation permeability, darcies
fluid coefficient, a constant that is a meas-
ure of the flow resistance of the fluid
leaking off into the formation during
fracture operations
fluid coefficient (compressibility-viscosity
controlled), ft/min X
fluid coefficient, wall building (fluid-loss
additive), ft/min X
fluid coefficient (viscosity controlled),
ft/min %
m= slope of fluid-loss curve, plotting
cumulative filtrate volume vs. square
root of flow time, mL/min
P.f =
P/r =
PR =
P., =
Ap =
total friction loss, psi
total hydrostatic pressure, psi
normal reservoir pressure, psi
total surface treating pressure, psi
differential pressure across face of fracture,
psi
total pumping time, minutes
shear rate, set -
apparent viscosity, cp
fracturing fluid viscosity, cp
reservoir fluid viscosity, cp
effective formation porosity, %
Key Equations in SI Metric Units
K,. =1.9203 x 10 -4 Ap
kc 6 6, C R
, . . .
LLR
K,.=2.41~10-~
k,ApO,
p, ..,..,,,
. .
(3)
. .
(4)
PETROLEUM ENGINEERING HANDBOOK
and
K, =0.001076;, . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .(5)
where
K,.,K,, and K, are in m/s I,
Ap is in kPa,
k, is in pm*,
4, is in percent,
CR is in kPa-,
pR is in Pas,
m is in mL/s, and
A is in m*.
References
1. Hurst, R.E.. Franks. J.E., and Rollins, J-T.: Horsepower Require-
ments for Well Stimulation. Drill Blr (Oct. 1958) 25.
2. Howard, G.C and Fast. C.R.: Hydmulic Frcrcturin~. Monograph
Series, SPE, Richardson, TX (1970) 2.
3. Perkins, T.K. Jr. and Kern, L.R.: Widths of Hydraulic Fractures.
J. Pet. Tech. (Sept. 1961) 937-49; firms.. AIME. 222.
4. Khristianovitch, S.A. and Zheltov, Y.P.: Formation of Vertical
Fracture by Means of Highly Viscous Fluids. Proc., Fourth World
Pet. Coni., Rome (1955) i. 579.
5. McGuire, W.J. and Sikora, V.J.: The Effect of Vertical Fractures
on Well Productivity, J. Pet. Terh. (Oct. 1960) 72-74: Truns.,
AIME. 219.
6. Cralgie, L.J.: A New Method for Determining the Rheology of
Crosslinked Fracturing Fluids Using Shear HIstory Simulation,
paper SPE 11635 presented at the 1983 SPElDOE Low-Permeability
Gas Reservoirs Symposium, Denver, March 14-16.
General References
Abou-Sayed, A.S.: Laboratory Eraluation of In-Situ Stress Contrast
in Deeply Buried Sediments, paper SPE I1069 presented at the 1982
SPE Annual Technical Conference and Exhibition. New Orleans, Sept.
26-29.
Abou-Sayed, AS.. Ahmed, U., and Jones. A.: Systematic Approach
to Massive Hydraulic Fracturing Treatment Design. paper SPE 9877
presented at the 1981 SPEiDOE Low-Permeability Gas Reservoirs
Symposium, Denver, May 27-29.
Agarwal. R.G.. Carter, R.D., and Pollock. C.B.: Evaluation and Per-
formance Prediction of Low-Permeability Gas Wells Stimulated by
Massive Hydraulic Fracturing, J. Pet. Tech. (March 1979) 362-72.
Ahmed, U., Strawn, J., and Schatz. J.: Effect of Stress Distribution
on Hydraulic Fracture Geometry: A Laboratory Simulation Study in
One-Meter Cubic Blocks, paper SPE II637 presented at the 1983
SPEiDOE Low-Permeability Gas Reservoirs Symposium. Denver.
March 14- 16.
Ahmed. U. et ul. : State-of-the-Art Hydraulic Fracture Stimulation
Treatment for a Western Tight Sand Reservoir, paper SPE I 1 I84
presented at the 1982 SPE Annual Technical Conference and Exhibi-
tion, New Orleans, Sept. 26-29.
Ainley, B.R. and Charles, G.J.: Fracturing Using a Stabilized Foam
Pad, paper SPE 10825 presented at the 1982 SPEIDOE Unconven-
tional Gas Recovery Symposium, Pittsburgh. May 16-18.
Almond. S.W.: Factors Affecting Gelling-Agent Residue Under Low
Temperature Conditions. paper SPE 10658 presented at the 1982
SPE Formation Damage Control Symposium, Lafayette. March 24-25.
Aron. J. and Murray, J.: Formation Compressional and Shear Inter-
val Transit-Time Logging by Means of Long Spacings and Digital
Techniques, paper SPE 7446 presented at the 1978 SPE Annual Tech-
nical Conference and Exhibition, Houston. Oct. l-4. ,
FORMATION FRACTURING 55-11
Baumgartner. S.A. 68, crl.: High-Efliciency Fracturing Fluids for High-
Temperature. Low-Permeability Reservoit?. paper SPE I IhlS
presented at the 1983 SPElDOE Low-Permeability Gas Reaervolrs
Symposium, Denver. March 14-16.
Cutler. R.A of rrl. : Comparison of the Fracture Conductivity of Com-
mcrcially Available and Experimental Proppants at Intermediate and
High Closure Stresses. Sot,. Pet. &g. J. (April 1985) 157-70.
Daneshy. A.A.: On the Design of Vertical Hydraulic Fractures. J.
Bennett, C.O.. Reynolds. A.C.. and Raghavan. R.: Analysisof Finite Per. Twh. (Jan. 1973) 83-97: Trcrns., AIME. 255.
Conductivity Fractures Intercepting Multilayer Re.servoirs. paper SPE
11030 presented at the I982 SPE Annual Technical Conference and Daneshy. A.A.: Numerical Solution of Sand Transport in Hydraulic
Exhibition. New Orleans, Sept. 26-29. Fracturing. J. Pet. Tech. (Jan. 1978) 132-40.
Bennett, C.O. et ul.: Performance of Finite Conductivity Vertically
Fractured Wells in Single-Layer Reservoirs, paper SPE IlO2$
presented at the 1982 SPE Annual Technical Conference and Exhibi-
iion. New Orleans. Sept. 26-29
Callahan, M.J.. McDaniel, R.R.. and Lewis. P.E.: Application of
a New Second-Generation High-Strength Proppant in Tight Gas Reser-
voirs. paper SPE II633 presented at the 1983 SPEiDOE Low-
Permeability Gas Reservoirs Symposium, Denver, March l4- 16.
Cinca-Ley. H.: Evaluation of Hydraulic Fracturing by Transient Pres-
sure Analysis Methods. paper SPE 10043 presented at the 1982 SPE
Intl. Petroleum Exhibition and Technical Symposium. Beijing. March
19-22.
Cinco-Ley, H. and Samaniego-V.. F.: Transient Pressure Analysis
for Fractured Wells. J. Per. Tech. (Sept. 1981) 1749-66.
Daneshy. A.A.: Hydraulic Fracture Propagation in Layered Forma-
tmns. Ser. Pet. Eq. J. (Feb. 1978) 33-41.
Daneshy, A.A. E( al.: Effect of Treatment Parameters on the Geome-
try of a Hydraulic Fracture, paper SPE 3507 presented at the I97 I
SPE Annual Meeting, New Orleans, Oct. 3-6.
Dobkins. T.A.: Improved Methods to Determine Hydraulic Fracture
Height, J. Pet. Tech. (April 1981) 719-26.
Elkins. L.E.: Western Tight Sands Major Research Requirements.
paper presented at the 1980 lntl. Gas Research Conference. Chicago,
June 9-12.
Fertl. W.H.: Evaluation of Fractured Reservoir Rocks Using Geo-
physical Well Logs, paper SPE 8938 presented at the 1980 SPEiDOE
Unconventional Gas Recovery Symposium. Pittsburgh. May 18-21.
Clark. J.A.: The Prediction of Hydraulic Fracture Azimuth Through
Geological. Core. and Analytical Studies. paper SPE I I61 I presented
at the 1983 SPEiDOE Low-Permeability Gas Reservoirs Symposl-
urn. Denver, March 14-16.
Gardner, D.C. and Eikerts, J.V.: The Effects of Shear and Proppant
on the Viscosity of Crosslmked Fracturing Fluids. paper SPE II066
presented at the 1982 SPE Annual Technical Conference and Exhibi-
tmn. New Orleans, Sept. 26-29.
Clark. P.E. and Quadir. J.A.: Proppant Transport in Hydraulic Frac-
Geertsma, J. and de Klerk. F.: A Rapid Method of Predicting Width
tures: A Critlcai Review of Particle Settling Velocity Equations, paper
and Extent of Hydraulically Induced Fractures. J. Pet. Tech. (Dec.
SPE 9866 presented at the 1981 SPEiDOE Low-Permeability Gas
1969) 1571-81; Trm~r.. AIME. 246.
Reservoirs Symposium, Denver, May 27-29.
Clark, P.E. and Guler. N.: Proppant Transport in Vertical Fractures:
Settling Velocity Correlations. paper SPE I1636 presented at the
1983 SPElDOE Low-Permeability Gas Reservoirs Symposium, Den-
ver, March 14-16.
Geertsma. J. and Haafkens, R.: A Comparison of Theories for Predict-
ing Width and Extent of Vertical Hydraulically Induced Fractures.
Trans.. ASME (1979) 101. 8-19.
Govier. G.W. and Aziz, K.: The F/or\, ofCo!np/er Mirrures in Pipes.
Van Nostrand Reinhold Co., New York City (1972).
Cleary. M.B.: Analysis of Mechanisms and Procedures for Produc-
ing Favorable Shapes of Hydraulic Fractures, paper SPE 9260
presented at the 1983 SPE Annual Technical Conference and Exhibi-
tion, Dallas. Sept. 21-24.
Guppy. K.H., Cinco-Ley, H.. and Ramey, H.J. Jr.: Pressure Build-
up Analysis of Fractured Wells Producing at High Flow Rates, J.
Pet. Tdz. (Nov. 1982) 2656-66.
Cleary. M.P., Kavvadas, M.. and Lam, K.Y.: A Fully Three-
Dimensional Hydraulic Fracture Simulator, paper SPE 1163 I present-
ed at the 1983 SPEiDOE Low-Permeability Gas Reservoirs Sympo-
sium. Denver. March 14-16.
Clifton, R.J. and Abou-Sayed. A.S.: A Variational Approach to the
Prediction of the Three-DimensIonal Geometry of Hydraulic Frac-
tures , paper SPE 9879 presented at the 1981 SPElDOE Low-
Permeability Gas Reservoirs Symposium, Denver, May 27-29.
Cloud. J.E. and Clark, P.E.: Stimulation Fluld Rheology 111. Alter-
natives to the Power Law Fluid Model for Crosslinked Gels, paper
SPE 9332 presented at the 1980 SPE Annual Technical Conference
and Exhibition, Dallas, Sept. 21-24.
Conway, M.W. and Harris, L.W.: A Laboratory and Field Evalua-
tion of a Technique for Hydraulic Fracturing Stimulation of Deep
Wells, paper SPE 10964 presented at the 1982 SPE Annual Techni-
cal Conference and Exhtbition, New Orleans, Sept. 26-29.
Cooke, C.E. Jr.: Effect of Fracturing Fluid on Fracture Conductlvi-
ty, J. Per. Tech. (Oct. 1975) 1273-82.
Crawley, A.B.. Northrup, D.A.. and Sattler, A.R.: The U.S. DOE
West&n Gas Sands Project Multiwell Experiment Updates. paper
SPE I I183 presented at the 1982 SPE Annual Technical Conference
and Exhibition. New Orleans, Sept. 26-29
Hall, C.D. Jr. and Dollarhide. F.E.: Performance of Fracturing Fluid
Loss Agent< Under Dynamic Conditions, J. fit. Tech. (July 1968)
763-68; Trans.. AIME, 243.
Hanson, J.M. and Owen, L.B.: Fracture Orientation Analysis by the
Solid Earth Tidal Strain Method, paper SPE II070 presented at the
1982 SPE Annual Technical Conference and Exhibition, New Orleans.
Sept. 26-29.
Hanson. M.E. ef al.: Some Effects of Stress, Friction. and Fluid Flow
on Hydraulic Fracturing, Sot. Pet. Eng J. (June 1982) 321-32.
Harrington, L.J., Hannah. R.R., and Beirute, R.: Post-Fracturing Tem-
perature Recovery and Its Implication for Stimulation Design. paper
SPE 7560 presented at the 1978 SPE Annual Technical Conference
and Exhibition, Houston, Oct. l-4.
Harrington, L.J., Hannah, R.R , and Williams. D.: Dynamic Expert-
ments and Proppant Settling in Crosslinked Fracturing Fluids. paper
SPE 8342 presented at the 1979 SPE Annual Technical Conference
and Exhibition, Las Vegas, Sept. 23-26.
Harris, P.C.: Dynamic Fluid-Loss Characteristics of Foam Fractur-
ing Fluids, paper SPE II065 presented at the 1982 SPE Annual Tech-
nical Conference and Exhibition. New Orleans. Sept. 26-29.
Hurst, R.E.: An Engineered Method for the Evaluation and Control
of Fracturing Treatments. &-i/i & Prod. Prcrc., API (1959) 168-76.
Cutler. R.A. er al. : New Proppants for Deep Gas Well Stimulation. King. G.E.: Factors Affecting Dynamic Fluid Leakoff with Foam Frac-
paper SPE 9869 presented at the 1981 SPEiDOE Low-Permeability turing Fluids. paper SPE 6817 presented at the 1977 SPE Annual
Gas Reservoirs Symposium. Denver. May 27-29. Technical Conference and Exhibition, Denver. Oct. 9-12.
55-l 2
PETROLEUM ENGINEERING HANDBOOK
Lcx~rboura. J.A.. Siflrman. T.R and Wahl. H.A : Evaluation ot
Smtth. M.B.: Stimulation Design lor Short. PI-cctw Hqdraullc
Frscturlng Fluid Stnbillty Usins 1 Heated Pres~ur~zccl Flow Loop.
Fractures-MHF. p;iper SPE LO>13 prewntcd jlt the the lY81 SPh
Srr. for. EQ. .I. (June 1984) 24Y-55.
Annual Techntcal Conlcrcncc and Exhibition. San Antonio. Oct. 1-7.
McDaniel. R.R.. Deywrher. A.K.. trnd Calluntn. M.J : An Improved
Smtth. M.B.. Logan. J.M.. ;tnd Wood. M.D.: Fracture Afttnulh--,A
Method lor Meawrtnf Flutd Los5 ut Stmulated Fracture Condtttonh.
Shallow Experiment. 71n/r.j., ASME (June IYXOI 102. YY- 105.
.Sm Per. hq. J. (Au:. 1985) 4X2-90.
Smith. M.B.. Rosenberg. R.J.. and Bowen. J.F.: Fracture Width: DC-
McLcwi. H.O. Jr.: A Simplified Apprcwh to Design of Fracturing
Trcntmcnt\ Li\ing High-Vihcwitg Crosslinked Fluids. paper SPE
II614 prewntcd at the 1983 SPEiDOE Lc w-Permeability Gab Rexr-
\mr\ Sympo\tum. Denver. March 14- 16.
Neal. E.A.. Parmley, J.L.. and Colpoy\, P.J.: Oxide Ceramic Prop-
pant\ liv Treatment of Deep Well Fractures. paper SPE 68 16 present-
cd at the 1977 SPE Annual Technical Conference and Exhthttion,
Denber. Y-12.
Noltc. K.G.: Dutcrmtnation of Fracturing Paramrter~ trom Fractur-
tng Prehwre Dechne. pqxr SPE 8341 presented at the I979 SPE
.Annual Tcchniwl Conference and Exhibition. Las Vegas. Sept. 23-26.
\ign \i\. Mcawremcn~. paper SPE 10965 prcwntcd at the IOX2 SPE
Annual Technical Conlerencc and Exhibition. New Orlcan~. Sept.
26-29.
Thomas. R.L. and Elhul. J.L. The Use 01 Vtw)$ Stuhlli/~r\ m
High Temperature Fracturing. paper SPE X344 presented at the lY7Y
SPE Annual Technical Contcrcnce and Exhlhition. Las Vegh. Sept
23-26.
Teufel. L. W.: Determination 01lwSitu Stressw trum Anelawc Stram
Recovery Measurements olorientcd Core: Appltcation\ to H!draul-
ic Fracturing Treatment Design. paper SPE I t h49 pre\entctl at the
19X3 SPElDOE Low-Pcrmcahilit) Ciao Re\ervwr\ Symportum. Dcn-
vu. March 14-16.
Noire. K.G.: Fracture Design Considerations Based on Preawre Anal-
>\is. paper SPE IO91 I presented at the 1982 SPE Cotton Valley Sym-
pwiurn. Tyler. TX. May 20.
Teutel. L.W. and Clark. J.A.: Hydrattllc Frxturc Propagatwn m
Layered Roth: Experimental Studie 01Fracturc Contammcnt. S,w.
PC/. OI,~. I. (Feb. 1984) 19-32.
Noltc. K.G. and Smith. M.B.: lntcrprctation trlFracturtng Prehsurc\.
J. PC/. Tdl. (Sept. 19X1) 1767-75.
Nord~rcn. R P : Propagation ol ;L Verttcal Hydraulic Fracture. Sex,
PC/. hy J. (Aug. 1972, 306-14.
Thiercelin. M. and Lemancryk. .R The Etiect of Stre\s Gradvmt on
the Height ot Vertical Hydraulic Fractures. pap! SPE I I626 prlxntv
ed at the IYX3 SPEIDOE Low-Pcrmcuhilil) Ga\ Rswt-I air\ Sympo-
\ium. Denver. March 14-16.
Tin\lev. J.M. (I rrl.: Vertical Fmcturc Hetcht-it> Etrcct I, Stcad\~
Palmer. I.D. and Carroll. H.B.: Three~Dimen~ionaI Hydraulic Frac-
tuw Propag;ltion m the Prcwwc of Strc\\ Variations. Sw. Prv tr~,~.
J. (Dec. iY83) 870-78.
Palmer. I.D. and C;~mmll. H.B.: Numerical Solution tar Height of Elon-
wted Hvdraultc Fracturch with LeakoH. paper SPE I1627 present-
e
cd itt the 1983 SPE!DOE Low-Permeability Gas Reservoirs
Sympostum. Denver. March 14-16.
Pcnq. G.S.: Nondama$~~ Fluid-Los\ Additive\ for Ux in Hydraulic
Fr;tcturing of Ga\ Wells. paper SPE 1065) presented at the 1982
SPE Formawn Damage Control Symposium. Lafayette. March 24-25.
Roprs. R.E.. Veatch. R.W.. and Noltc, K.G.: Pipe Viwmeter Study
01 Fracturing Fluid Rheolop) . Sw. Pcv. BI,~. J. (Oct. 1084, 575-81.
Roscnc. R.B. and Shumakcr. E.G.: Viscws Fluid\ Prwldc Improved
Rewlt\ from Hydraulic Fracturmg Treatmentr. paper SPE 3347
prewnttxl al rhc IY7 I SPE Rocky Mountw~ Regional Meeting. Blllmps,
MT. June 2-3.
Roxpilcr. M.H.: Determination of Princtple Strcsw and the Cm-
tmcmtnt 01Hydraulic Fracturea tn Cotton Valley. paper SPE 8405
presented at the 1979 SPE Annual Technical Conference and Exhibi-
t,on. La\ Vegas. Sept. 23-26.
Settari. A.: Simulation of Hydraulic Fracturing Proceases. Srw. Pcv.
15t.y. J. (Dec. 1980) 487-500.
Scttari. A.: Quantitative Analysis of Factors Controlling Verttcal Frac-
turc Growth (Containment). paper SPE I I629 presented ill the lYX3
SPEiDOE Low-Permc;thility Gas Reservoir\ Symposium. Denver,
March I-1- 16.
Settarr. A.: A New General Model of Fluid Losz, in Hydraultc Frac-
turing. Sot. Prr. +q. J. (Aug. 1985) 491-501.
Stnclatr. A.R.: Heat Trawtcr Eftects in Deep Well Fracturm:. .I.
P<,r. T<,<h. (Dec. 1971) 1484-92: Twri.\. AIME. 251.
State Productton Increase. J. PC,. 7iTh. (ii,) IYhY) 633-38: />tr,,;..
AIME. 246.
wn Poollcn. H.K.. TimIcy. J.M.. and Saundcrh. C.D. H>draultc
Frncturins-Fracture Flow Capacltg w. Well Prwlucttvtty. J. PC/.
7is<Ii. (May 1958) 91-95: Twrr.c., AIME. 213.
Veatch. R.W. Jr. and Crowell. R.F.: Joint Rc\e,rrch/Oper:ltic,nh Pro-
grams Accelerate Massive Hydraulic Fracturing Technology. .I. PH.
Twh. (Dec. 1982) 2763-75.
Verheek. C.M.J.: Analybi>of Production Tot> of Hydraulically Frac-
tured Well+ in a Tight Solutton Gas-Drive Rtwxwrlr. paper SPE
I1084 presented at the 1982 SPE Annual Technical Ccmlcrcncc and
Exhibition. New Orleans. Sept 26-29.
Warpmskt. N.R. (I (I/.: L;lhoratory Investigatwn on the Ellect of In+
Situ Strcahes on Hydraulic Fracture Containment. .+I. Prr. E/IX.
J. (June 1982) 333-40.
Waters. A.B.: Hydraulic Fracturing-What I\ It? J Pcv. li>~./~. (Aug.
lY81) 1416.
Wendorft. C.L.: Frac Sand Quality Control-A Muht tar Good Frac
Treatments. paper presented at the 1978 ASME Petroleum Div. An-
nual Meeting. Houston. Nov. 5-9.
Wheeler. J.A.: Analytical Calculations of Heat Tran\l& Iron1 Frac-
tureh, paper SPE 2494 presented at the lY6Y SPE Improved Oil
Recovery Symposium, Tulsa. April I.?- IS.
White. J.L. and Daniel. E.F.: Key Factors in MHF Dchisn. J. PCI.
7&/r. (Aug. 1981) 1501-12.
Whitsitt, N.F. and Dysart. G.R.: The Ellcct oITempcraturc on Sttmw
lation Design. J. &r. Twh. (April 1970) JY3%501: Inrrt$. AIMS.
249.
Wood. M.D. (21 trl.: Fracture Proppant Mapptng Usin: Surtace Stt-
perconducting Magnetometers, paper SPE II617 pre\ented at the
1983 SPElDOE Low-Pcrmcahility Gas Rcwwirh Symposium. Den-
ver, March 14-16.
Chapter 56
Remedial Cleanup, Sand Control,
and Other Stimulation Treatments
A.W. Coulter Jr., Dwell Schlumberger*
S.J. Martinez, Information Services Div., U. of Tulsa*
K.F. Fischer, Dwell Schlumberger*
Introduction
Although fracturing and acidizing are the most common
types of well stimulation used today, other types of stimu-
lation treatments also are used. Some of these treatments
use acid-type materials but are not generally classed as
acidizing jobs. These treatments are specifically designed
for the removal of a blocking agent such as gypsum
(gyp), drilling mud. paraffin, formation silicate, par-
ticles, or other materials on the wellbore face and in the
formation immediately adjacent.
The first stimulation treatments used in oil and gas wells
involved explosives such as dynamite or nitroglycerin.
This method was used for many decades before being dis-
continued for safety reasons. More recent attempts to
stimulate with explosives involved displacement of explo-
sive material into the producing formation in a fracture-
type treatment. The material was then detonated. Because
this method was hazardous, research involving explosives
has been discontinued.
Reperforation
In some cases it is useful to reperforate a well in the same
zone in which it was originally perforated. The detona-
tion of the gun loosens blocking materials in the forma-
tion adjacent to the well and in the previous perforations,
and simultaneously creates more drainage holes into the
wellbore. Also, over a period of time, some of the origi-
nal perforation tunnels might become totally blocked by
migratory fines, scale, gyp, or paraffin. Reperforation in
such cases could greatly increase drainage area into the
wellbore.
Abrasive Jet Cleaning
Another method used to clean up shot holes or to remove
gyp contaminating the formation near the wellbore makes
use of a jetting tool. One or more streams of sand-laden
fluid are forced through a hardened, specially designed
nozzle at pressures of 1,000 psi and up, to impinge against
the wall of the borehole.
These jets, striking against the face of the open hole,
loosen and break up gyp deposits, and may penetrate the
formation. If the tool is moved up and down while jet-
ting, the entire borehole can be cleaned. This same tool
may be used for perforating pipe; the high-pressure jets
of sand-laden fluid are able to cut through %-in-thick steel
pipe in 15 to 30 seconds. They can then penetrate the for-
mation to a depth of 12 or 15 in. in another 5 minutes
or so, forming large unobstructed channels for the pro-
duction of reservoir fluids.
Mud Removal
Several materials are used to remove drilling mud from
the borehole and the adjacent formation. The most com-
monly used material is a mud-dissolving acid consisting
of inhibited hydrochloric acid (HCI) with an added fluo-
ride. This material dissolves part of the mud and loosens
the remainder so that it may be flushed out. Mud-removal
agents are often used ahead of fracturing, acid jobs, or
cement, to clean the face of the pay, to allow a lower
breakdown pressure, and to minimize mud contamination.
Acid cleanup solutions, containing special surfactants
that increase penetration and provide special mud-
dispersing properties, are also used when an infiltration
of mud into the formation is suspected.
Other solutions, containing phosphates or other chem-
icals, may be used to loosen and disperse mud particles
so they can be more easily flushed from their position in
or adjacent to the wellbore.
Special blends of surfactants, iron chelating agents, and
mud-dispersing agents also have been effective in remov-
ing mud from the formation.
56-2 PETROLEUM ENGINEERING HANDBOOK
Water Blocks and Emulsions
Oil- and/or water-based solutions containing low-surface-
tension, emulsion-breaking agents have been used suc-
cessfully to remove water blocks or emulsions from a for-
mation. More recently, solutions of special surfactants and
alcohols have become popular. These materials are
pumped into the formation to contact the water or emul-
sion block. By changing the blocking materials physical
characteristics, the solution enables the blocking fluid to
be produced. Treatments of this type usually consist of
a specialized, commercially available product with an oil-
carrying agent. If a large zone is to be treated, diverting
agents, ball sealers, or packers should be used to ensure
that the solution contacts the blocking fluids. Otherwise,
the chemicals will probably enter the more permeable and
nonblocked portions of the formation and miss the block-
age completely.
Scale Deposits
When a well produces some water, gyp deposits may ac-
cumulate on the formation face and on downhole equip-
ment and thereby reduce production. These deposits may
have low solubility and be difficult to remove. Solutions
of HCI and ethylenediaminetetraacetic acid (EDTA) can
often be used to remove such scales. Soluble portions of
the scale are dissolved by the HCl while the chelating ac-
tion of EDTA breaks up and dissolves much of the re-
maining scale portions. When deposits contain
hydrocarbons mixed with acid-soluble scales, a solvent-
in-acid blend of aromatic solvents dispersed in HCl can
be used to clean the wellbore, downhole equipment, and
the first few inches of formation around the wellbore (crit-
ical area) through which all fluids must pass to enter the
wellbore. These blends are designed as a single stage that
provides the benefits of both an organic solvent and an
acid solvent that contact the deposits continuously.
Paraffin Removal
Several good commercial paraffin solvents are on the mar-
ket. These materials can be circulated past the affected
parts of the wellbore or simply dumped into the borehole
and allowed to soak opposite the trouble area for a peri-
od of time. Soaking, however, is much less effective be-
cause the solvent becomes saturated at the point of contact
and stagnates.
In the past, many paraffin solvents havt contained chlo-
rinated materials having an organic chloride ion. Presuma-
bly such materials have been taken off the market because
of problems encountered in refineries with poisoning of
certain catalysts by organic chlorides. The nonorganic
chloride ion from HCl is water soluble, and it can be read-
ily extracted from the oil during refining processes. There-
fore, the problem of catalyst poisoning does not arise when
HCl is used in paraffin-removal formulations such as acid
dispersions.
Hot-oil treatments also are commonly used to remove
paraffin. In such a treatment, heated oil is pumped down
the tubing and into the formation. The hot oil dissolves
the paraffin deposits and carries them out of the wellbore
when the well is produced. When this technique is used,
hot-oil treatments are usually performed on a regularly
scheduled basis.
Paraffin inhibitors are a recent development. These are
designed to create a hydrophilic surface on the metal well
equipment. This in turn minimizes the adherence of
paraffin accumulations to the treated surfaces.
Large-Volume Injection Treatments
A simple technique often used to free or to open block-
ages within the formation consists simply of pumping large
volumes of crude oil, kerosene, or distillate into the for-
mation. These treatments are especially effective when
the formation is blocked by fine silicates or other solids.
Pumping the oil into the formation may rearrange these
fine particles so that flow channels to the wellbore are
reopened. Sometimes it is helpful to add surface-active
agents or emulsion-breaking agents to the oil.
Steam Injection
In some areas where low-gravity crude is produced, steam
is used to heat and reduce the viscosity of the oil and there-
by allow the oil to move more easily to the wellbore. Two
types of steam injection are used. In some areas, steam
is injected into a central injection well and the oil pro-
duced from adjacent or surrounding wells.
The other type of injection is often referred to as huff
n puff. This consists of alternate steam-injection and
oil-production cycles from the same well.
General Comments
In any case of production decline, it is important to have
all available facts and to make the best possible analysis
from these facts as to the factors contributing to the
decline. If the problem is not analyzed as completely as
possible before treatment, a great deal of money may be
wasted in the use of an incorrect treatment. Also,
whenever a fluid is to be pumped into a specific part of
a zone, some chemical or mechanical method should be
used to ensure that the fluid enters the proper zone.
Sand Control
Sand Formation Properties and Geology
Most oil and gas wells produce through sandstone for-
mations that were deposited in a marine or detrital envi-
ronment. Marine-deposited sands, where most of the
hydrocarbons are found, are often cemented with calcare-
ous or siliceous minerals and may be strongly consoli-
dated. In contrast, Miocene and younger sands are often
unconsolidated or only partially consolidated with soft clay
or silt. These structurally weak formations may not re-
strain grain movement. When produced at high flow rates,
they may produce sand along with the fluids.
Why Sand is Produced
Fluid movement through sandstone reservoirs creates
stresses on the sand grains because of fluid pressure differ-
ences, fluid friction, and overburden pressures. If these
stresses exceed the formation-restraining forces, then sand
grains and fines can move and may be produced with the
fluid. Rapid changes in fluid production rates and fluid
phases cause unstable conditions that can result in in-
creased sand production. When a well starts to produce
water, it will often start to produce sand. Muecke dem-
onstrated that particle movement takes place in a mul-
tiphase system when the wetting phase starts to move.
Even consolidated sandstone can be mechanically and
chemically damaged with time as the reservoir is pro-
duced. Overburden stress on sand grains increases as the
REMEDIAL CLEANUP, SAND CONTROL, & OTHER STIMULATION TREATMENTS 56-3
reservoir pressure decreases. Water movement can dis-
solve minerals that cement sand grains as well as change
the carrying capacity of the formation fluids. Fines migra-
tion can reduce the permeability in the perforation tun-
nels. This can result in a higher pressure drop into the
wellbore and a change in formation stresses. A calcite-
cemented formation can be damaged by an improperly
designed acid treatment, and increased sand production
can result.
Consequences of Sand Production
Sand movement in unconsolidated formations and its ul-
timate production with oil and/or gas creates a number
of costly and potentially dangerous problems. Most com-
mon among these problems are the following.2,3
1, Production interruptions can be caused by sand plug-
ging the casing, tubing, flowlines, or separator.
2. Casing collapse can be caused by changes in over-
burden pressure and stresses within the formation.
3. Downhole and surface equipment can be destroyed,
resulting in downtime for equipment replacements, spills,
cleanup or even an uncontrolled blowout.
4. Disposal of produced sands is costly because regu-
lations require the disposed sands to be essentially oil-free.
Methods of Sand Control
Higher allowable production rates have increased the need
for more effective and durable sand-control systems,
which exhibit minimal permeability impairment. Experi-
ence indicates that sand control should be implemented
before the formation is seriously disturbed by sand
removal.4 Four general types of sand-control methods
have been developed to reduce or to prevent the move-
ment of formation sands with produced fluids.
1. In some cases, sand production can be prevented
merely by restricting the production rate and thus reduc-
ing the drag forces on the sand grains. 4 This simple ap-
proach is usually uneconomical. Increasing perforation
size and density along with the use of clean, nondamag-
ing completion fluids will help to decrease fluid velocity
and drawdown pressure at higher production rates.
2. Gravel packing is the oldest, simplest, and most con-
sistently reliable method of sand control. It has wide ap-
plication both on land and offshore. Advances in
gravel-pack technology, which use a viscous fluid to car-
ry high gravel concentrations around a screen, have re-
sulted in faster and more productive gravel packs.
Improved completion tools and through-tubing tools that
eliminate the need for costly workover rigs have expand-
ed the application of gravel packing.
3. Sand consolidation plastic treatments inject resins
into the producing interval, binding the formation sand
grains together while leaving the pore spaces open. With
use of special preflush systems and diverting agents, in-
tervals up to 30 ft thick have been successfully consoli-
dated and provided with the strength necessary to allow
high production rates.
4. Resin-coated gravel packing places gravel coated
with a resin both inside and outside the perforations and
in the casing. As the resin cures, the sand grains are bound
together. A strong, highly permeable, synthetic sandstone
filter results. After curing, the excess resin-coated grav-
el is drilled from the casing, resulting in a full-open well-
bore. This gravel pack can be used with or without a
screen, in primary or remedial work, and through coiled
or concentric tubing.
The type of sand-control method selected will depend
on the specific well conditions. Important variables such
as grain-size distribution, clay content, interval length,
bottomhole temperature, wellbore deviation, mechanical
configuration, bottomhole pressure, anticipated produc-
tion rates, and cost should be considered before deciding
on the method of sand control best suited to the well.
Formation Sampling
The most important design parameter in sand control is
the formation sand grain size. The success of gravel-pack
methods relies upon formation particles being restrained
by the larger pack gravel. Chances for a successful sand
control job are highest when representative samples of
the formation are available for sieve analysis. This ena-
bles selection of the proper size of gravel.
The most representative formation samples are obtained
from rubber-sleeve core barrels. Sidewall cores, although
they contain crushed grains and mud contamination, are
the second choice. Bailed or separator samples are not
representative since sand grains may have been
segregated-the larger grains remaining in the hole and
the smaller grains being produced with the well fluids.
Formation Analysis
Formation sand sieve analyses should be conducted to de-
termine formation properties under bottomhole conditions.
Treatment steps in acidizing, clay stabilization, and sand
control can be determined. Typical sandstone analyses in-
clude permeability, porosity, response to acid, mineral-
ogy, petrographic analysis, scanning electron microscope
analysis, X-ray diffraction analysis, and optical emission
spectrographic analysis.
Well Preparation
A successful sand-control installation is dependent on fol-
lowing the recommended procedures for all phases of the
drilling and completion operations. Selection of the proper
gravel size or resin, use of nondamaging drilling and com-
pletion fluids, perforation density and cleanliness, and
gravel placement are among the important factors affect-
ing well productivity. The following are some of the fac-
tors that should be considered before any sand control
procedures are initiated.
Cleanliness. Clean Tubing. Steps must be taken to en-
sure that new or used tubing is as free as possible of rust,
scale, mill varnish, and other contaminants or obstruc-
tions. Many of the contaminants can be removed chemi-
cally through the use of solvents or mechanically by
rabbiting the joints before running.
Acidizing the tubing string after it has been run will
remove rust and some of the pipe dope that accumulates
(see next section) inside the tubing. The string can be acid-
ized by pumping HCl down the string to within 100 to
200 ft of the bottom and then immediately reverse-
circulating the acid out. Complexing or reducing agents
should then be used. The acid should not be allowed to
exit the tubing string nor to reach the perforations. Any
iron present in the ferric state could precipitate as
gelatinous ferric hydroxide (FeOH), which can be ex-
tremely damaging to the formation.
56-4
PETROLEUM ENGINEERING HANDBOOK
TABLE 56.1-PRESSURE DROP ACROSS A SAND-FILLED PERFORATION
Gravel
U.S. 10120 mesh,
500 darcies
U.S. 20/40 mesh,
119 darcies
U.S. 40/60 mesh,
40 darcies
Formation sand,
1 darcy
Flow Rate, q
(BPDlperforaiion)
10
25
50
100
10
25
50
100
10
25
50
100
10
Pipe Dope. Pipe dope, when improperly applied, may
be squeezed inside the tubing at the joints and can be trans-
ported into the formation by treatment fluids or become
lodged in the screen or liner slots, resulting in decreased
production. It is virtually impossible to remove the solids
found in pipe dope from an oil or gas well chemically.
Pipe dope should therefore be applied sparingly to the pin
end of the tubing. It should not be used inside the collar
where it can be squeezed into the tubing strmg when the
joint is made up.
Filtering of Fluids. Significant reduction of oil and gas
production can be caused by formation damage caused
by solids in the fluids used in well completion or work-
over operations. Clays, silt, or organic solids injected into
a perforated interval can become trapped in the forma-
tion matrix or in the perforation tunnels where they can
act as a low-permeability choke, reducing the productivity
of the well.
Cement Bond. A good bond between the cement and the
formation and between the cement and the casing is es-
sential to isolate the producing zone. Primary cementing
is one of the most critical phases in a successful well com-
pletion. and good cementing practices should be followed.
Fig. 56.1-Hrgher perforatron density rncreases the success ra-
tro for sand consolrdatron treatments.
Ap (psi) With
Perforation Diameter of
3/8 in. 12 in. Vi in. 1 in.
0.6 0.2 0.1 0.05
24.0 8.0 2.3 1 .oo
132.0 44.0 10.0 4.00
495.0 175.0 37.0 13.00
2,079.o 666.0 137.0 48.00
2.0 1 .o 0.4 0.20
55.0 21.0 6.0 3.00
272.0 99.0 25.0 11 .oo
983.0 357.0 81 .O 31 .oo
4,037.o 1,298.O 282.0 104.00
6.0 3.0 1.3 0.70
177.0 67.0 20.0 9.00
893.0 324.0 80.0 33.00
3,250.O 1,178.O 260.0 98.00
13,400.o 4,360.O 927.0 323.00
450.0 190.0 64.0 32.00
27,760.O 9,280.O 2,091 .O 808.00
An in-gauge borehole is important, and the string should
be equipped with adequate centralizers, particularly in
deviated holes. Spacer fluids and cement slurry proper-
ties must be controlled. The string should be equipped
with scratchers through critical zones and either rotated
or reciprocated during placement of the slurry. Turbu-
lent flow is recommended.
If there is any indication of poor bonding, a squeeze
cement job should be performed. Intervals to be treated
separately should be effectively isolated by bonded ce-
ment to reduce the possibility of communication between
zones.
Perforations. The success of sand-control treatments in
cased holes, measured in terms of well productivity and
treatment life, is greatly affected by perforation size and
density and by perforating damage. Perforation tunnels
must be open so they can be filled with pack gravel to
prevent filling with formation sand. If perforations are
plugged, gravel cannot be deposited in the tunnels (as car-
rier fluids flow into the formation) and formation con-
solidation chemicals cannot be injected.
If formation sand is lodged in the perforation tunnels,
the pressure drop within the perforation can be excessive,
even though the permeability of the formation sand is rcla-
tively high. Experimental results indicate that fluid flow
can be turbulent in gravel-filled perforation tunnels with
pressure drops far greater than those predicted by Dar-
cys linear flow equations. As shown in Table 56.1, pres-
sure drop within a gravel-filled perforation tunnel can be
quite significant. 4m6
The greater the perforation density, the less the draw-
down through each perforation tunnel and the less the ve-
locity through each effective perforation. Intervals
perforated 4 shotsift show cumulative production before
sanding to be seven times greater than intervals perforat-
ed with only 1 shot/ft. Two perforations per foot show
two-thirds the capacity of 4 shots/ft.
In wells gravel-packed effectively. the lower fluid ve-
locity resulting from high perforation density and large-
diameter perforations reduces screen erosion and increases
the ltfc of the sand-control treatment. Pressure drop
REMEDIAL CLEANUP, SAND CONTROL, & OTHER STIMULATION TREATMENTS
56-5
through higher-density, large-diameter perforations also
is reduced, resulting in higher wellhead pressure and
greater oil or gas production.
For sand consolidation, closely spaced perforations (8
to I2 shots/ft) increase the likelihood of a uniform plas-
tic pattern around the wellbore, even if some of the per-
forations are plugged. Fig. 56.1 illustrates what can
happen when a perforation is plugged. Note that the sand
is not consolidated behind the plugged perforation on the
right side of Fig. 56.1(a), and that this is the spot where
a failure is most apt to occur.
Perforation Cleaning. The high-pressure jet from a per-
forating gun pierces the casing and forms a hole by pul-
verizing cement and formation into compacted particles.
Cement and material from the jet charge are mixed with
the formation material in the compacted zone while loose
debris fills the perforation tunnel. It is necessary to re-
move this debris from the perforation tunnel to increase
the probability of success in sand consolidation or gravel
packing. Fig. 56.2 shows the damage that can occur in
the perforation and on the face of the formation during
drilling and perforating. 8
Perforation-cleaning methods include backflow, under-
balanced perforating, backsurging, washing, and acid
stimulation, or combinations of these. These methods are
discussed next.
Backflow. Flowing the well may not clean up more than
a few perforations and, if enough differential is available
to purge debris from the perforations, the well may sand
up. Backflow must be done slowly and carefully.
Underbalance. Perforating with hydrostatic pressure
less than formation pressure allows tunnel debris to be
carried into the wellbore with the first surge of fluid from
the formation.
Backsurging. Backsurging techniques dislodge gun
debris and loose material from perforation tunnels by sud-
den exposure of a perforated zone to an open chamber
at atmospheric pressure. The differential pressure created
causes formation fluids to surge through the perforations
into the casing, flushing the perforation tunnels. Back-
surging has proved to be very successful in improving
productivity.
Perforation Washing. Washing IS achieved by strad-
dling a small increment of the perforated interval with
a special tool and injecting nondamaging fluids into the
perforations in the increment. The fluid circulates out-
side the casing and back through the perforations nearest
the tool seals, removing debris and formation sand from
the perforations and from behind the casing. The tool is
moved in increments equal to the seal spacing until the
entire perforated interval is washed.
After the perforations are washed or surged and debris
is circulated out, a positive-depth indicator is placed in
the well below the perforations to establish a reference
point from which the string is accurately spaced out. This
is especially important in multiple completions with close-
ly spaced producing intervals.
M&-LX Acid Stimulation. The purpose of matrix acidiz-
ing is to penetrate the formation at less than fracturing
pressure and to remove damage from perforation tunnels
and the critical area surrounding the wellbore. Mud filter
cake, silt, and clay are typical damaging materials that
may be removed by mud acid to restore a wells natural
productivity.
Fig. 56.2-Drawing of a perforation tunnel showing fluid inva-
sion from the wellbore into the formation, and debris
in the perforation and the compacted zone surround-
ing the perforation tunnel.
The formation solubility should be determined in both
mud acid and HCI. If mud acid is used, a formation solu-
bility at least 10% greater in mud acid than in HCl is pre-
ferred. Moreover, the formation solubility in HCl should
be less than 20% to avoid calcium fluoride precipitation.
A typical three-step acid stimulation consists of an HCI
preflush, matrix treatment with mud acid, and an HCI
overflush.
HCl Prejlush. A preflush of 50 to 100 gal/fi of perfo-
rations is advisable. The HCI is used to prevent contact
of mud acid with calcareous materials or formation brine.
This prevents or reduces the chances of precipitation of
calcium fluoride and various fluosilicates.
Matrix Treatment With Acid. The proper volume of
mud acid should be injected to remove damage near the
wellbore. Usually 50 to 200 gal/ft of perforations is re-
quired. Success in matrix acidizing depends on acid con-
tacting the entire production interval. This is achieved
through the use of diverting agents.
A mutual solvent comprised of ethylene glycol
monobutyl ether ).I0 is sometimes needed to achieve good
results. It is an effective water-wetting agent, demulsifi-
er. and interfacial-tension reducer.
Overflush. Completion or workover brine should not
be used as an overflush for mud acid because of the pos-
sible precipitation of sodium, potassium, or calcium
tluosilicates. The use of dilute HCI, ammonium-chloride
solution, light oil, or nitrogen as the overflush agent is
recommended.
Clay Control
In many cases, formation permeability may be damaged
by the various clay materials present. Many clays are
water sensitive, and contact with foreign fluids may cause
damage by two mechanisms. The first, and probably the
more critical, mechanism is dispersion and migration of
the clay particles. Dispersion may be caused by charge
differences or by fluid movement. The dispersed clays
are then free to move through the formation until they
enter an opening too small to pass, thus lodging and reduc-
ing permeability. The second mechanism is expansion or
swelling of the clay particles. Water absorbed between
56-6 PETROLEUM ENGINEERING HANDBOOK
DIAMETER RATIO PACK MEDIAN/ FORM MEDIAN
Fig. 56.3-Gravel-pack permeability impairment caused by for-
mation sand invasion is illustrated by curve of change
in ratio of increases. A ratio of 5 to 6 is the largest
gravel that will stop all sand entry. Theoretical curve
beyond 14 indicates sand flowing freely through grav-
el (after Ref. 12).
TABLE 56.2A-AVAILABLE GRAVEL SIZES
Gravel
Size I
(in.)
-
0.006 to 0.017 40/l 00 0.012
0.008 to 0.017 40/70 0.013
0.010 to 0.017 40160 0.014
0.012 lo 0.023 30150 0.017
0.017 lo 0.033 20/40 0.025
0.023 to 0.047 16130 0.035
0.033 to 0.066 12120 0.050
0.033 to 0.079 1 o/20 0.056
0.047 to 0.079 10116 0.063
0.066 to 0.094 8112 0.080
0.079 to 0.132 6/10 0.106
J.S. Sieve
Number
Approximate
Median
Diameter
[in.)
TABLE 5&2B-FORMATION SAND
SIEVE ANALYSIS
U.S. Sieve
Number
30
40
50
70
100
140
200
270
325
400
PAN
Cumulative Wt% Retained
Sample A Sample B
0.2 0.1
1.2 0.6
5.1 2.5
16.0 7.5
35.0 19.0
62.0 39.0
82.0 58.0
93.0 77.0
97.0 86.0
98.3 90.0
100.0 100.0
the clay particles causes the particles to expand, with a
corresponding decrease in pore volume and the plugging
of pore channels.
To avoid a production decrease, it is important to sta-
bilize clays before or along with a sand-control treatment.
Gravel Selection
Gravel should be sized to prevent invasion of the pack
by the finest formation sand. I-13 For example, if 20%
of a gravel pack is fine sands, the permeability will be
35% less than if no fines were present. 13,14
A gravel size should be selected that will restrict the
movement of fine formation sand but will not reduce the
flow of fluids to uneconomical rates. Saucier I2 suggests
that the gravel size for controlling uniform sands should
be five to six times the diameter of the mean (median)
formation sand grain size. Degree of pack impairment is
illustrated in Fig. 56.3, which shows the ratio of effec-
tive to initial pack permeability vs. the ratio of the pack
median diameter to the formation median diameter.
Proper gravel size is determined by the following steps.
1. Obtain a representative formation sample; closely
spaced samples from rubber-sleeve cores provide the best
design bases.
2. Perform a sieve analysis.
3. Plot the sieve analysis data on either a cumulative
logarithmic diagram (S-plot) or a logarithmic probability
diagram.
4. Calculate the gravel median grain diameter using a
five-to-six multiple of the 50-percentile formation grain
diameter. When multiple cores from a single zone are
provided, they should be analyzed and plotted separate-
ly. The samples should not be mixed. The sample with
the smallest 50-percentile grain diameter is used to select
the gravel. Tables 56.2A and 56.2B list some of the com-
mercial gravel sizes available. Gravel should be screened
and checked to verify size and distribution.
Sieve analysis data for two rubber-sleeve, core-barrel
samples, taken from the same zone, are tabulated and are
plotted in Figs. 56.4 and 56.5. Note that Sample A is from
a portion of the zone that contains coarser sand than the
portion from which Sample B was taken. If Sample A
alone had been taken, a coarser gravel would have been
selected, and a gravel-pack failure could have resulted.
In Fig. 56.6, produced, bailed, and core-barrel sam-
ples from the same well zone have been plotted. The core-
barrel sample plots as a straight line (minor variations are
typical, however). The dashed variation shown could in-
dicate a sieving or weight problem. A bailed sample would
typically rise on the left because finer formation grains
would have been produced, leaving the larger grains in
the wellbore. Conversely, a produced sample would rise
on the right, indicating an excess of fines.
The same data are shown in an S-plot (Fig. 56.7). Each
of the curves is typically S-shaped, and any curve plotted
by itself would not readily be interpreted as varying from
the norm. An error in gravel selection could result if the
sample type were not known.
Gravel Quality. Studies have indicated that gravels con-
taining fine particles outside the specified range will have
lower permeability. I4 Some supply sources furnish grav-
el with excessive amounts of particles smaller than spec-
ified. Angular gravels may bc broken during shipping and
REMEDIAL CLEANUP, SAND CONTROL, & OTHER STIMULATION TREATMENTS 56-7
CUMULATI VE LOG DIAGRAM (S.PLOT)
U. S. SI EVE NUMBER
GRAI N DIAMETER, in
Fi g. 56.4-Data from sieve analyses of Formation Sand Sam-
ples A and B, taken from the same zone, are plotted
here. Note that using Plot A would result in the selec-
tion of 20/40-mesh gravel rather than the better choice
of 40/60-mesh gravel for packing this zone, as indi-
cated by Plot B.
handling, thereby creating fine particles that reduce the
quality of the gravel. Rounded gravels provide tighter,
more uniform compaction and somewhat higher permea-
bility than angular gravels.
Screen Selection
Many types of wire-wrapped screens are available, in-
cluding ribbed, all-welded, grooved, and wrapped-on-
pipe. The all-welded screen has the wrapping wire
resistance-welded to wire ribs at each point of contact.
Spacer lugs, solder strips, and weld beads are not required
and, therefore, the all-welded screen is stronger and more
LOGARI THMI C PROBABI LI TYDI AGRAM
; Em. 8;
I
H g;:::-* - P s*llPeP torn1 D*rl;il i
CUMULATI VE PERCENTBY WEI GHT
Fi g. 56.5-Data for Samples A and B are again plotted here.
Sieve-analysis data for sands with a normal grain-size
distribution will plot as a straight line on a log proba-
bility grid. The logarithmic probability diagram has an
advantage over the S-plot in that sampling errors are
more readily detected. Variations from the straight-
line plot could be caused by sieving and weighing
errors, incorrect sample preparation, or by the sam-
pling method itself.
Fi g. 56.6-Logarithmic probability diagram of produced, bailed,
and core-barrel samples from the same well.
corrosion-resistant; it also has a lower pressure drop, and
it will not unravel if the wire is eroded or broken.
The wrapping wire on these screens is usually made
from 304 stainless steel while the pipe core is Pipe Grade
S or K. Other wire and pipe materials are available.
The configuration of the openings in all screens is very
important. If the sides of the slots are parallel, plugging
may occur as the small sand grains bridge the slot. To
reduce the chance of this occurring, the wire used to wrap
the screen is wedge-shaped.
Fig. 56.8 shows the construction features of an all-
welded screen.
For gravel packing, the gauge of the screen should be
small enough to prevent the passage of the gravel-pack
sand. Slot width is usually taken as one-half to two-thirds
of the diameter of the smallest gravel-pack grains.
CUYULATIYE LO6 OI~GRAM (I-PLO11
U 5. SIIYE UMGEI
Fig. 56.7-Cumulative log diagrams (S-plot) of produced, bailed,
and core-barrel samples from the same well. Note that
a bailed sample would result in the selection of a
coarser gravel.
56-8 PETROLEUM ENGINEERING HANDBC,Y
Fig. 56.B-All-welded screen
The screen diameter should be as large as possible and
yet leave adequate room for packing gravel. Table 56.3
shows the dimensions and inlet areas for several sizes of
wire-wrapped screens. Screens are available with slot
openings from 0.006 to 0.250 in. in 0.001 -in. increments.
The screen length should overlap the perforated inter-
val both above and below by 3 to 5 ft. Blank pipe should
be run above the screen to provide a reservoir for extra
gravel. Blank pipe length should be three to four times
the screen length with a minimum length of 60 ft.
Gravel Packing
Methods. The term gravel. as used here. refers to a
uniform, graded, commercial silica sand that is placed in
the wellbore and perforation tunnels for the purpose of
mechanically retaining formation sands. These are de-
scribed next.
Circulating gravel packs are done in two steps: an out-
side pack and an inside pack. The outside pack or pre-
pack places gravel outside the perforations, where voids
may exist in the formation surrounding the casing and in
the perforations. An outside pack is, of course, not used
in openhole completions. The outstde pack is usually at-
tained by pumping a gravel slurry through an open-ended
workstring with the application of fluid pressure. To
achieve good gravel placement, fluid must be lost to the
formation.
The inside pack is achieved by pumping a slurry con-
taining from 1/4 to 15 Ibm of gravel per gallon of fluid
down the workstring and through a crossover tool into
the annular space between the screen and the casing. The
gravel is held in place by the screen while the carrier fluid
(brine, diesel oil, etc.) flows through the screen and cross-
over tool into the tubing/casing annulus and back to the
surface.
A wash pipe extends from the crossover tool. inside
the blank pipe and screen, to the bottom of the screen.
Returns are taken through the wash pipe. It is recom-
mended that the wash pipe outside diameter be 0.6 times
the screen liner inside diameter and made up with flush
joints. This ratio of wash pipe outside diameter to liner
inside diameter optimizes gravel distribution along the
screen in deviated holes.
The screen and blank pipe should be centralized every
15 ft, and the length of the screen should be such that
it extends above and below the perforated interval by 3
to 5 ft. A calculated quantity of a high-density slurry at
15 Ibm of gravel per gallon of fluid (density of l3.8Y
Ibm/gal if fluid is water) is circulated into place. As the
grave1 settles out and packs in the hole outside the screen.
injection pressure will increase. When the injection pres-
sure has increased to between 750 and 1.500 psi above
the originally established injection pressure, pumping is
stopped. When the sandpack causes such a pressure in-
crease, the condition is called a screenout.
The slurry remaining in the reservoir above the screen
(established by the blank pipe) will settle out so that am-
ple gravel exists above the top of the screen. Since about
60% of the slurry volume consists of gravel. 100 ft of
slurry will result in 60 ft of settled gravel.
In grave1 packing intervals with the circulating method
and a high-density slurry, a lower tell-tale is recom-
mended. The lower tell-tale is a short section of screen,
not less than 5 ft long, located below the production
screen. A seal sub, installed between the lower tell-tale
and the production screen, seals the wash pipe. Returns
are thus taken only through the lower tell-tale. By this
method, gravel is placed at the bottom of the screen. and
a denser pack can be achieved. After screenout of the tell-
tale screen, the wash pipe is pulled up into the produc-
tion screen to complete the gravel pack.
Squeeze gravel packing uses a gravel slurry consisting
of 15 lbm of gravel added to a gallon of viscous carrier
fluid. This gives a high-density (13.89 lbmigal) slurry.
The carrier fluid transports the gravel into place and is
squeezed away into the formation. A viscosity breaker
in the carrier fluid reduces the viscosity according to a
preplanned schedule; this allows for fast well cleanup.
Reverse circulating gravel packing is a low-density
method using r/4 to 2 Ibm of gravel per gallon of carrier
fluid. The slurry is circulated down the tubing/casing an-
nulus. The gravel is retained on the outside of the screen
while the carrier fluid flows through the screen and to
the surface through the tubing. After the pack is completed
and all the gravel in the annulus has settled, the tubing
is pulled out of the hole, leaving the screen assembly with
a polished nipple on top in the hole. A productton packer
with an overshot seal assembly is then run over the
polished nipple. If the pack is done in perforated casing,
a prepack is usually done first.
Several disadvantages associated with a reverse circulat-
ing gravel pack include (1) long rig time, (2) pack voids.
(3) slurry pumped down the annulus scouring dirt and mill
scale from the inside of the casing and the outside of the
tubing, and (4) possible formation damage caused by large
amounts of dirty fluid circulated and lost to the formation.
REMEDIAL CLEANUP, SAND CONTROL, & OTHER STIMULATION TREATMENTS 56-Q
TABLE 56.3-COMMON SCREEN SPECIFICATIONS AND SIZES
OD Weight ID Holes
(in.) (Ibmlft) (in.) per ft
1.050 1.14 0.824 72
1.315 1.70 1.049 60
1.660 2.30 I ,380 72
1 .soo 2.75 1.610 a4
2.063 3.25 1.751 a4
2.375 4.60 1.995 96
2.875 6.40 2.441 108
3.500 9.20 2.992 108
4.000 9.50 3.548 120
4.500 9.50 4.090 144
5.000 13.00 4.494 156
5.500 14.00 5.012 168
6.625 24.00 5.921 180
7.000 23.00 6.366 192
7.625 26.40 6.969 204
9.625 36.00 a.921 264
Pipe Base Screen
Hole
Diam.
(in.)
/l
76
?A 6
%6
% 6
76
%
12
12
12
12
12
12
12
/2
/2
Total
Hole
Area
(sq in.lft)
3.53
4.60
5.52
6.44
6.44
10.60
11.93
21.21
23.56
28.27
30.63
32.99
35.34
37.70
40.06
51.84
1.55
1.82
2.16
2.40
2.56
2.88
3.38
4.00
4.50
5.00
5.51
6.01
7.14
7.52
a.15
10.17
Cased Hole Comoletion
Screen Surface Open Area in
sq in./ft for slot opening
(in.)
0.008
6.8
8.0
9.4
10.5
11.2
12.6
14.8
17.5
19.7
21.8
24.1
26.3
31.2
32.9
35.6
44.4
0.010 0.012 0.020
a.2 9.6 14.4
9.7 11.3 16.9
11.5 13.4 20.1
12.7 14.9 22.3
13.6 15.9 23.9
15.3 17.8 26.8
17.9 20.9 31.5
21.2 24.8 37.3
23.9 27.9 41.9
26.5 31 .o 46.5
29.2 34.1 51.3
31.9 37.2 55.9
37.9 44.2 66.5
39.9 46.6 70.0
43.3 50.5 75.9
54.0 63.0 94.7
Casing Screen Pipe Size
(in.) (in.)
4%
wl6
5 2%
5% 2%
6% 2%
7 27/8 to 3%
7%
27/8 to 3/2
8% 4
9%
4% t0 !ih
10% 5 to 5%
Openhole Completion
Openhole Screen
Casing Diameter Pipe Size
(in.)
(In.)
(in.)
2%
5% 12
65/s to 7% 14 to 16
75/s to as/e 14 lo 18
95/8 to 10% 16 to 20
4
5%
7
Wash-down gravel packs are done by dumping the grav-
el down the casing, allowing it to settle. and then run-
ning a screen-and-wash pipe assembly with a wash-down
set shoe into the hole. Circulation is established through
the shoe, and the screen assembly is lowered as the grav-
el is washed up the annulus. When the shoe tags bottom.
circulation is immediately stopped, and the gravel allowed
to settle around the screen. The screen is then released,
and a production packer with a seal sub is run into the
hole to seal the production string.
References
5
6.
7
8.
9.
IO.
I I.
12.
13.
I-1.
Brulst. E.H.: Better Perlormance nf Gulf Coast Well\. paper
SPE 4777 presented at the 1974 SPE Symposium on Formation
Damage Control, New Orleans, Jan. 3l-Feb. I.
Gurley, D.G., Copeland. C.T.. and Hendrick. J.O. Jr.: Debign.
Plan. and Execute Gravel Pack Operations for MaxImum Produc-
tion. J. Prr. Tech. (Oct. 1977) 1X9-66.
Stein. N., Odeh. A-S., and Jones, L.G.: Estimating Maximum
Sand-Free Production Rates from Friable Sands for Different Well
Completion Geometries. J. Pa. Tech. (Oct. 1974) 1156-58.
Klotz. J.A.. Krueger, R.F., and Pye. D.S.: Maximum Well
Producttvity in Damaged Formations Requires Deep. Clean Per-
forations, paper SPE 4792 presented at the 1974 SPE Symposi-
um on Formation Damage Control. New Orleans, Jan. 3l-Feb I.
Brooks, F.A.: Evaluation of Preflushes for Sand Consolidaiton
Plastcs, J. Par. TK~. (Oct. 1974) 1095-l 102.
Gidley. J.L.: Stnnulation of Sand\tonc Formations With the Acid-
Mutual Solvent Method.~ J PH. Tech. (May 19711 SSl-58.
Gulati. M.S. and Maly. G.P.: Thin-Sectjon and Permeability
Studtca Call for Smaller Gravels in Gravel Packtng, paper SPE
4773 presented at the 1974 SPE Symposium on Formation Damage
Control. New Orleans. Jan. 3l-Feb. I.
Saucier. R.J.: Gravel Pack Design Consideration\. J. Pet. Ted?
(Feb. 1974) 205-12.
Williams. B.B., Ellioct. L.S.. and Weaver. R.H.: Productwity
of Inside Casing Gra\,el Psck Completions. J. Pc,r. Twh. (April
1972) 419-25.
Sparlin. D.D.: Sand and Gravel-A Srudy of Their Permeabili-
tws, paper SPE 4772 presented at the 1974 SPE Sympwium on
Formation Damage Conrrol. New Orleans, Jan. 3 I-Feb. I.
Chapter 57
Oil and Gas Leases
Joe B. Clarke Jr., Vermilion Oil and Gas Corp.*
The Landowners Interest
Property
All property can be classified as either real or personal.
Real property is land and that which is affixed or ap-
purtenant to land. Personal property is every kind of
property that is not real property. Oil and gas in place are
considered to be a part of the land and are therefore a
form of real property. When oil and gas are reduced to
possession by being brought to the surface, they become
personal property.
Ownership of property is the right to possess and use
the property to the exclusion of others. Land cannot be
without ownership. The rightful owners may be hard to
determine, but ownership nevertheless exists. The extent
of an owners rights may vary. Absolute ownership is a
superior status excluding participation by anyone else.
The absolute owner is most frequently referred to as the
fee owner and absolute ownership as fee ownership.
There is a form of qualified ownership referring to a
status establishing an equal right of participation in
another person. For example, two parties are co-owners
of a tract of land. Each party has certain rights to use and
enjoy the land, but the rights of each party are qualified
by the rights of the other party. Another form of owner-
ship is limited ownership, which is a restricted right. The
absolute owner who grants a l-year grazing lease brings
a form of limited ownership into being.
The absolute or fee owner is entitled to possession,
which means the actual or physical occupancy of a thing.
The party in possession of a thing is occasionally not the
owner of that thing. Possession undoubtedly carries with
it the intention to hold, but possession does not mean
ownership.
The fee owner owns the surface of land and the
minerals thereunder. The surface owner has no right to
grant an oil and gas lease or mineral lease. However, the
rights of mineral owners are often subject to the rights of
This author also wrote the original chapter on thm topic rn the 1962 editlon.
surface owners. The mineral owner has the right to grant
mineral leases. A royalty owner has a right to receive
royalty or a share of production as obtained but has no
right to grant mineral leases or receive bonuses or
rentals.
Ownership of Hydrocarbons in Place. Various ideas
and theories have been suggested as to the nature of
ownership of oil and gas in the reservoir prior to extrac-
tion. Two principal ideas have evolved: the absolute-
ownership and the nonownership theories. In the
absolute-ownership theory, hydrocarbons are considered
a part of the land and absolute ownership of the land is
absolute ownership of the oil and gas in place. This
theory divests the absolute owner of the hydrocarbons in
place when there is drainage across property lines. The
nonownership theory requires the acceptance of oil and
gas as fugitive minerals. Absolute ownership of the land
will therefore carry with it only the exclusive right to
drill on the land in an attempt to reduce the oil and gas to
possession. Absolute ownership of the oil and gas is not
attained until the oil and gas are reduced to actual
possession.
Regardless of which theory of ownership each of the
various states adheres to in its statutes, the courts are in
agreement that oil and gas in place are minerals and a
part of the land; when they are reduced to possession,
they become personal property; a landowner has the
right to drill a well on the property in an attempt to
reduce the oil and gas to possession, and without liability
for drainage from adjacent lands; these privileges and
responsibilities can be transferred to others.
Rule of Capture
The theories of ownership provide for the migratory
nature of oil and gas under certain conditions. The im-
possibility of determining liability for drainage whem
57-2 PETROLEUM ENGINEERING HANDBOOK
landowners produce in a lawful manner from a well on
their land is recognized. This freedom from liability for
drainage is referred to as the rule of capture, Since
landowners cannot recover damages or enjoin the
operator when their property is being drained by a well
on adjacent lands, they must protect themselves as best
they can. In short, they must drill, or have the lessee
drill, a well on their own land as promptly as possible in
order to prevent further drainage. This offset drilling
rule is modified in these days of increased conservation
legislation. Many states have statutes relating to well
spacing, allocation of production, pooling, etc., which
provide equitable relief for the landowners who are being
drained by other means than the drilling of a well on their
land, and which tend to prevent the drilling of un-
necessary wells.
Mineral Severance
Severance of the minerals can occur in a number of
ways. One of the most common ways is the conveyance
of the land itself by a deed that provides for the reserva-
tion or exception of all or a part of the minerals to the
grantor. Mineral severance is often accomplished by a
deed conveying all or a part of the minerals themselves.
A severance of oil and gas from the surface is recognized
in all jurisdictions.
A lease or a conveyance using the term minerals
will include oil and gas without otherwise describing
them. A conveyance of a named mineral without the
phrase and other minerals will convey only the
mineral named. In some areas, oil and gas leases are
obtained; in other areas, oil, gas, and mineral leases
are obtained.
The owner of the mineral estate is entitled to the use of
the surface as it may be necessary, subject to certain
rights of the surface owner, for the exploration and
recovery of the minerals. The foreclosure of a mortgage
as to the surface estate is not effective as to the mineral
estate, provided the execution of the mortgage is subse-
quent to the date of the mineral severance.
Adverse Possession. Adverse possession refers to the
possession of real estate that is open, visible, con-
tinuous, and exclusive. The statutes of the various states
establish the manner in which titles can be acquired by
adverse possession. If such possession is continued for
the time and in the manner prescribed by the statutes, the
effect is to divest the owner of title and to vest in the
adverse possessor a new title. If the minerals have not
been severed, adverse possession of the surface is
adverse possession of the minerals. Minerals severed
from the surface prior to the commencement of adverse
possession cannot be acquired by adverse possession.
The years of occupancy, the construction and
maintenance of fences, the construction and use of
houses and outbuildings, the drilling of water wells, the
grazing of cattle, the cutting of timber, the growing of
crops, the payment of taxes, etc., are all important items
to be considered by the title examiner in determining
whether or not a basis exists for the establishment of an
adverse title under the statutes of the state involved.
Partition. Partition is a division of real estate among co-
owners whereby each acquires a separate tract The ef-
fect of partition is to terminate the ownership of the un-
divided interests of the joint owners and to establish
ownership in each co-owner as to the divided share. Par-
tition is effected either voluntarily or involuntarily. The
latter is called compulsory or judicial partition and con-
sists of partition in kind or partition by sale and division
of the proceeds. Partition in kind is, in general, the most
equitable form of partition. Where such partition is im-
practical or unfair, partition by sale and division of the
proceeds is resorted to.
A lessee who acquires an oil and gas lease from less
than the entire group of cotenants is faced with certain
problems, each of which has to be solved on its own
merits under the applicable statutes. Partition of a tract
subsequent to the granting of an oil and gas lease by the
co-owners does not enlarge the obligations of the lessee.
In such an instance, the lessee would not be required to
drill an offset to prevent drainage in the event that the
completed oil well is on one of the partitioned tracts.
Trespass. The landowner and his mineral lessee have
several remedies for unauthorized entry and use of the
surface and minerals. In determining the measure of
damages for unauthorized intrusion it must first be deter-
mined whether the trespass was made in good faith or in
bad faith. The measure of damages for unauthorized pro-
duction in the case of good-faith trespassers is the value
of the oil and gas at the surface less the reasonable costs
of production; the measure of damages in the case of
bad-faith trespassers is the value of the oil and gas at the
surface.
Unauthorized penetration of the subsurface is a form
of trespass. A lessee who commences a well on a tract of
land and allows or causes the borehole to deviate from
the vertical in such a manner so as to drill into the sub-
surface belonging to an owner who has not leased to the
lessee is liable for trespass. In questions involving this
type of trespass, a court order may be obtained for a well
survey to determine whether or not a trespass has oc-
curred. Should such a well produce, the measure of
damages would be the value of the hydrocarbons re-
moved. If the well results in a dry hole, the trespasser is
liable to the landowner for damages for the destruction of
the mineral value of the land.
Fee or absolute ownership carries with it the right of
absolute control, including the right to grant oil and gas
leases, to conduct exploratory operations on the land, to
authorize others to so use the premises, etc. It therefore
follows that a party who conducts exploratory operations
without permission violates the rights of the landowner
and is accordingly liable. In this type of trespass,
damages may be recovered from the standpoint that such
operation may have reduced or removed the marketabili-
ty of an oil and gas lease on the land or reduced the leas-
ing value of the land itself.
Correlative Rights. Despite the rule of capture, there
has been much said and written, and some legislation,
regarding correlative rights. Property owners overlying a
common source of supply are restricted in their right to
remove hydrocarbons by their duties to adjoining land-
owners. They are obligated not to injure the reservoir or
dissipate the reservoir energy, and they cannot remove a
disproportionate share of the hydrocarbons. In general,
OIL AND GAS LEASES 57-3
owners may not use their land in such a manner as to in-
jure the property of others. The principle of correlative
rights is enforced by law in those states that have enacted
comprehensive conservation legislation,
The Oil and Gas Lease
Background
A large number of printed lease forms are in use in the
oil industry. The evolution of the oil-and-gas-lease con-
tract has been a slow process. Present-day forms are
quite lengthy when compared with the contracts made in
the earlier years of the oil industry. The many
refinements made since then have been based on the hard
lessons learned through experience and on the many
court decisions rendered as a result of the inevitable con-
troversies which arose as the industry grew.
The courts have held, keeping in mind the fugitive
nature of oil and gas, that the primary purpose of the oil
and gas lease is development. Should the oil and gas
lease not contain an express provision in this regard, the
law will imply an obligation on the part of the lessee to
explore and develop the leased premises.
An oil and gas lease is a conveyance or an interest or
right. It is also a contract between the lessor and the
lessee. Since an oil and gas lease conveys an interest in
real estate, it must be in writing in accordance with the
statute of frauds. A lease is sufficient if the names of the
parties, the description of the property involved, and the
terms of the agreement are set forth. It is not necessary
that the lessee sign the lease to make it legally effective.
Witnesses are not required in order to make the instru-
ment effective between the parties. An acknowledgment
is required only in connection with the recording of the
instrument and does not affect the validity of the instru-
ment between parties. Recording the lease is not
necessary to the validity of the instrument between the
parties, but is required to afford protection against bona
fide purchasers.
The Lessor
A party owning a mineral interest and having the per-
sonal capacity to contract has the capacity to execute a
valid oil and gas lease. Oil and gas leases from minors
and insane persons are usually executed by guardians of
such persons under the direction and approval of the
court. The disabilities of minors may be removed in
some states by judicial proceedings and leases obtained
directly from such persons. Leases executed by minors
are voidable at their election upon reaching majority. A
lease executed by a person subsequently adjudged insane
is voidable.
Landowners often leave a will devising certain real
property to their children subject to a life estate or
usufruct in the surviving widow, who is called the life te-
nant or usufructuary. The children are called the re-
maindennen or naked owners. Neither the life tenant nor
the remaindetman has the right to lease without the con-
sent of the other. Both parties must join in the execution
of an oil and gas lease for it to be valid. It is important
that the rights of the lessors as to the bonus, delay ren-
tals, and royalty payments be clearly set forth in the
lease. Generally, the bonus and rental payments are
payable to the life tenant, and royalty is payable to the
remaindennan.
A landowner can execute an oil and gas lease on lands
that are subject to the qualified rights of others provided
the lease does not interfere with such prior rights. The
most common example is the landowner who grants a
surface lease for grazing purposes and then at a subse-
quent date executes an oil and gas lease. The lessee in
the oil and gas lease cannot be prevented from entering
on the surface to exercise the rights granted in the lease,
but at the same time the lessee is responsible to the tenant
for damages to the extent that the tenants rights are in-
terfered with. A tenants consent agreement is usually
obtained prior to operations of any kind.
An administrator is one who is vested with the right of
administration of an estate and is appointed by the court.
An executor is a person appointed by a testator, or the
party making a will, to execute his will. A trustee is a
person holding property in trust for another party. Ex-
ecutors, administrators, and trustees have authority to
execute oil and gas leases provided such specific authori-
ty is given by will, by the court, or by statutory pmvi-
sion. A power of attorney is an instrument authorizing
one to act as the attorney or agent of the person granting
it, and terminates upon the death of the grantor.
In the case of married persons, the husband may, in
general, execute a lease without the joinder of his wife.
Homestead statutes usually require that all instruments
creating encumbrances upon the homestead be signed by
both parties. The wife, in general, can execute a lease on
her separate property. In community-property states the
husband may or may not have the right to grant a lease
on the community estate without joinder by his wife;
however, most lessees will insist upon the joinder of the
wife.
The law differs among the states as to whether or not a
co-owner can execute a lease without the consent of the
other cotenant. In most of the states, such a lease would
be effective only as to the interest of the executing coten-
ant. Two or more lessees, each having leases on undivid-
ed interests in the same tract, are cotenants. Each is en-
titled to drill on any part of the leased premises but, if
successful, must account to the other cotenant for his
proportionate share of the production, less the cost of
production.
Consideration, Date, Description, and Delivery
A valid oil and gas lease requires a consideration, a
nominal cash payment or other consideration generally
being sufficient. An undated lease takes effect upon ex-
ecution and delivery. An exact description of the land to
be leased is not necessary, provided the land can be iden-
tified with reasonable certainty. Delivery and acceptance
of an oil and gas lease are required as with other con-
veyances: the intent of the lessor to make the instrument
legally effective must be apparent.
The Granting Clause. This clause in an oil and gas
lease is usually the first paragraph in the lease and is one
of the most important paragraphs in the entire contract.
The rights of the lessee are very broadly set forth. The
remaining provisions of the contract modify or enlarge
upon the provisions of this paragraph.
The granting of the lease is for the purpose of the
development of the mineral estate. Accordingly, the
lessee must have those exclusive rights that are necessary
57-4 PETROLEUM ENGINEERING HANDBOOK
to carry out the basic purpose of the lease. This includes
the right to build pits and erect tanks and other equip-
ment pertinent to the lessees operations. The lessee has
the right to construct, maintain, and use roads, pipelines,
and/or canals on the leased premises. The lessee is not
liable for operations on the leased premises unless the
surface is used excessively, the operations are negligent,
or any express provisions in the lease are violated. The
lessee is required to restore the premises to their original
condition, insofar as is practicable, when required by the
lease. The lessee has the right to conduct exploratory
operations on the leased premises and to conduct
secondary-recovery operations and to dispose of salt
water by reinjection into suitable formations.
The landowner is entitled to the use of the surface, less
that required by the lessee, who has the responsibility of
protecting this remaining surface for the benefit of the
lessor. The lessee must exercise complete control over
the surface storage of liquids and is responsible for
damages in the event of leakage and injury to the adjoin-
ing surface.
The Habendum Clause. A simple form of this clause
provides that this lease shall be for a term of blank
years from the date hereof, called primary term, and so
long thereafter as oil or gas is produced. This clause
fixes the ultimate duration of the lessees interest. The
lease may be terminated sooner, for example, by the
failure of the lessee to pay delay rentals. The primary
term will limit the life of the lease prior to the establish-
ment of production from the leased premises. The
primary term is one of the items that must be negotiated
at the time of the purchase. The term most commonly
used is either 3 or 5 years. It is usually difficult to ac-
quire leases with terms longer than 5 years. In very ac-
tive areas primary terms of 3 years and less are usual.
For the lease to be extended beyond its primary term,
production must occur, subject to certain exceptions to
be discussed subsequently. The fact that oil or gas may
have been discovered on the leased premises will not in
itself keep the lease in force unless specific provisions
are made to the contrary. This is especially applicable to
oil. In the case of gas, provision is frequently made in
the lease to extend the lease past its primary term in the
event the lessee is not able to market the gas for lack of
transmission lines, lack of a gas market, etc. When such
a provision appears in a lease, it is referred to as a shut-in
gas clause. It usually provides for the payment of a sum
of money on an annual basis in an amount that may be as
high as the lessor would ordinarily receive as delay
rentals.
The word produced in the habendum clause has
been held to mean produced in paying quantities.
What constitutes production in paying quantities has
been the subject of much dispute. In general, if a lease is
past its primary term, and enough production is being
obtained from the lease so that a profit is made, however
small, in excess of the cost of operation, disregarding the
drilling and completing costs, such lease is held by pro-
duction in paying quantities.
While a lease may generally be maintained in force
past its primary term only by production, there are other
ways provided for in the lease to maintain the lease past
the primary term. A lease can often be kept in force, in
the absence of production, through the date of expiration
and after the primary term by the lessees operations,
which are conducted in a diligent manner looking toward
the discovery and production of oil and gas. Most leases
provide that the lease may be kept in force for an in-
definite period of time in this manner provided that not
more than 60 or perhaps 90 days elapse between the
cessation of any such operations and the commencement
of additional operations. Such additional operations
might include reworking operations on any abandoned
producer or deepening operations on a dry hole or
possibly drilling operations for a new well at another
location on the leased premises.
Drilling and Delay Rental Clause. A simplified drilling
and delay rental clause might say that the lease shall
terminate on blank date unless on or before such date the
lessee either commences operations for the drilling of a
well on said land or pays to the lessor a rental of blank
dollars per acre for all or that part of the land which
lessee elects to continue to hold, which payment shall
maintain lessees rights in effect as to such land without
drilling operations for 1 year from the above date. The
lessee may continue to maintain such rights without drill-
ing operations for successive 1Zmonths periods by mak-
ing similar payments to the lessor.
Early oil and gas leases usually provided for the com-
mencement of a well. Changes were gradually made in
the lease to allow the lessee to defer drilling operations
by the payment of an annual sum called the delay rental.
This alternative obligation to drill or pay a delay rental,
when considered with the right of the lessee to surrender
the lease at any time, is called an or clause. Further
changes were made. Wording was added to the lease to
provide that, if no well was commenced before a certain
time, usually 1 year from the date of the lease, the lease
would terminate unless the lessee paid a delay rental.
This further revised wording is known as the unless
clause.
Regardless of which clause is used, the lessee has the
right either to commence a well within a specified time,
pay a delay rental in lieu of commencing operations, or
terminate the lease by the nonpayment of delay rentals.
Almost all leases in use today are of the unless type.
Since the lessee is under no obligation either to pay
delay rentals or commence operations for the drilling of a
well, the practice has been to pay a substantial considera-
tion, called the bonus, for the granting of the lease. The
bonus may be any agreed-upon sum but is usually large
when compared with the delay rental. The bonus is suffi-
cient to keep the lease in force and effect until such time,
usually 1 year, as a delay rental may be provided for.
The bonus is subject to negotiation at the time of the pur-
chase of the lease. The bonus may run from $1 to many
thousands of dollars per acre, depending on the size of
the tract, the royalty, anticipated oil and gas reserves, the
quality and quantity of geological and geophysical data
available, etc.
Most leases provide for the commencement of opera-
tions. The commencement of actual drilling is not
necessary unless specifically provided for. Operations
incident to the actual drilling are sufficient and include
building roads, digging pits, building the derrick, etc.
Such operations must be continuous, diligent, and in
good faith.
OIL AND GAS LEASES 57-5
The effect of the drilling of a dry hole during the
primary term by the lessee may vary from one lease form
to another. Most leases provide that, if a dry hole is com-
pleted on the leased premises within the primary term,
the lease may be kept in force by the commencement of
additional operations or by resuming the payment of
delay rentals as provided for in the lease.
In the unless type of lease, there is no obligation to
pay the delay rental and there is no liability for failure to
pay. Unless otherwise specifically provided for in the
lease, the entire amount of the delay rental must be paid.
Most leases permit the lessee to surrender a portion of
the leased premises and then pay delay rentals on the
balance. Delay rentals in most states are not a matter for
negotiation as is the bonus and are usually in the amount
of $l/acre/yr. Such is not the case in some areas, as in
southern Louisiana. Here the delay rental is just as im-
portant as is the bonus as an item to be negotiated upon;
it is the practice for rentals to be in an amount equal to at
least one-third to one-half of the bonus consideration on
a per-acre basis.
The lease provides that rentals may be made on or
before the specified date, payable to the lessor or to the
lessors credit in a bank designated by the lessor. Most
rentals are tendered by the lessee 3 to 6 weeks in advance
of the due date to provide time for the lessee to receive a
receipt from the lessors depository bank evidencing
deposit of the rentals to the lessors credit. The lease also
contains a proportionate-reduction clause or lesser-
interest clause, which allows the lessee to reduce the
amount of the delay rentals and royalty payments where
the lessor does not own a full interest.
Royalty Clause. A simple royalty clause might provide
that the royalties to be paid by the lessee are (1) on oil
and liquid hydrocarbons, one-eighth of that produced
and saved from the land; (2) on gas, one-eighth of the
market value at the well of the gas used by the lessee in
operations not connected with the land leased, the royal-
ty on gas sold by the lessee to be one-eighth of the
amount realized at the well from such sales; (3) one-
eighth of the market value at the mouth of the well of gas
used by the lessee in manufacturing gasoline.
The most common royalty is one-eighth, experience
having shown this to be the most equitable fraction to be
paid to the lessor in relatively unexplored areas.
However, in known trends it is often difficult to purchase
leases providing for a royalty of only one-eighth. Here
again, the royalty is an item that must be negotiated in
much the same manner as the bonus or delay rental.
Royalties of one-sixth and more are now quite common
in some areas.
The royalty interest created at the execution of the
lease is payable to the lessor in the event of production.
It does not refer to any additional royalties that may be
created by the lessee out of the working interest and that
are called overriding royalties. It does not refer to an ad-
vance royalty that can be deducted from any subsequent-
ly accruing royalties. It does not refer to a minimum
royalty, which is a sum the lessee agrees to pay in the
event of production regardless of whether or not it is
equivalent to the lessors share of gross production.
A failure to pay royalties does not in itself effect
automatic termination of the lease. Failure to pay
royalties within a reasonable time could result in a
forfeiture of the lease in a court action. Some delay,
perhaps several months, in disbursing royalty is to be ex-
pected; title must be approved by the oil or gas purchaser
and division orders circulated among those who will
share in the production.
Oil royalties are payable to the lessor either in oil or to
the lessors credit in the pipeline, which is called pay-
ment in kind, or by payment in money based on the value
of the royalty oil. Execution of a division order waives
the lessors right to receive royalty in kind. Royalty is
computed as a share of the gross and not as a share of the
net production, which means the royalty is not burdened
with any production costs. However, the lessor is re-
quired to pay his proportionate share of the cost of
transportation and gross production taxes.
Condensate or distillate is a liquid produced along with
gas, but which originally was in the vapor phase in the
reservoir. Casinghead gas is gas produced from an oil
well. A gas well produces gas as distinguished from cas-
inghead gas and may be defined in terms of gas/oil ratio
by various regulatory bodies. The royalty payable on oil
is also the royalty payable on condensate and other liquid
hydrocarbons when separated on the leased premises.
The royalties payable on gas are always payable in
money and never in kind, and are subject to transporta-
tion costs. Royalty on gas is payable only on that gas
which is sold or used off the leased premises. Royalty is
not payable to the lessor on gas used by the lessee as a
means of lifting the oil to the surface or that is injected
into the reservoir for pressure-maintenance purposes.
A gasoline plant may be justified in areas where there
are sufficient reserves of rich gas. A lessee will often
enter into a contract with a processing plant whereby his
gas wells are produced full-well stream to the plant for
extraction of liquid hydrocarbons. The independently
owned plant will retain a percentage of the value of the
liquid hydrocarbons removed as a processing charge and
credit the lessee with the value of the balance of the
separated liquids as well as with all the residue gas. The
lessee then disburses royalty to the lessor in accordance
with the terms of the lease. If the lessee owns an interest
in the plant, the lessee may be required to pay royalty on
extracted liquids and residue gas less only the actual
operating costs of the plant depending upon the terms of
the lease.
The Pooling Clause. The pooling clause provides that
the lessee, at its option, is given the right and power to
pool or combine the land or mineral interest covered by
the lease, or any portion thereof, with other land, lease
or leases, and mineral interests in the immediate vicinity
thereof, when in the lessees judgment it is necessary
or advisable to do so in order to develop or operate the
leased premises properly to promote the conservation of
oil and/or gas. The clause further states that any unit or
pool created for the production of oil shall not exceed 40
acres and that any unit for the production of gas shall not
exceed blank acres. The number of acres inserted in the
event of a gas well will vary from 160 to 640, depending
on local practice.
The term pooling refers to the combining of small
tracts for the purpose of forming a unit on which a well
may be drilled. A lease form should be used that contains
57-6 PETROLEUM ENGINEERING HANDBOOK
an appropriate pooling clause. It may not be quite so im-
portant to obtain this right in certain areas where only oil
is produced or in those states that provide for forced
pooling and integration. The pooling right is related to
development, and the owner of the working interest has
the responsibility for such development.
The lessee must act in good faith in exercising the
pooling privileges granted in the lease. When a lessee
declares a unit and places the unit declaration of record
in accordance with the lease, it is presumably done in the
interest of proper development and conservation. Cau-
tion should be exercised in planning a unit to be declared
so the unit will be in reasonable conformance to the sub-
surface and seismic data available. A lessee who
declares a unit of an unusual shape for the obvious pur-
pose of holding a lease past its expiration date, or that in-
cludes acreage most likely not productive, or that tends
to disregard available geological control is probably not
acting in good faith. Such a declared unit may be
vulnerable to attack by the lessors.
When a lease contains a pooling clause, appropriate
changes will appear elsewhere in the lease. The haben-
dum clause may read, this lease shall be for a term of
blank years from the date hereof, called primary term,
and so long thereafter as oil or gas is produced either on
this land or on acreage pooled therewith, or with any part
thereof. Operations for the drilling of a well or produc-
tion from a well on a unit constitute operations or pro-
duction from each of the tracts pooled.
Miscellaneous Clauses. Many miscellaneous clauses
are found in leases for the benefit of the lessor or the
lessee. The lessee is restricted in locating a well on the
leased premises to the extent that no well may be drilled
nearer than 200 ft to any house or barn. The lessee is re-
quired to lay pipelines at such a depth as not to interfere
with plowing and cultivating operations. The lessee may
be required to pay for all damages in connection with its
operations on the land, although the damages are often
restricted to timber and growing crops.
A paragraph is often found in leases that has as its pur-
pose the inclusion of small strips of adjacent land owned
by the lessor but not specifically described in the lease.
The lessor usually intends to include such small parcels
of land in the lease, but for various reasons a description
of the strip may have been omitted. This paragraph is
called the Mother Hubbard clause. It is not intended
that large tracts of land be subject to this clause but only
strips or parcels of perhaps several acres in size. The
lessee is given the right to use without cost gas, oil, and
water produced on the leased premises for lessees
operations thereon. The lessee is given the right to
remove machinery and fixtures from the leased
premises, including casing, within a reasonable period of
time after the lease has terminated.
The lease provides that the interests of the parties are
assignable in whole or in part. No change in ownership
of the land imposes any additional burden on the lessee
until the lessee has been furnished with a certified copy
of the recorded instrument evidencing the transfer. Since
portions of many leases are eventually assigned, a clause
is inserted to protect the lessee in the event of default in
rental payments by the lessees partial assignee. It pro-
vides that in the event of partial assignment a default in
the rental payment of the assignee shall not operate to
defeat or affect the lease insofar as it covers that portion
retained by the lessee.
The warranty clause provides that the lessor war-
rants and agrees to defend the title the land leased. If the
covenant of general warranty is breached, the lessee can
recover the consideration paid for the lease with interest
and the expenses incurred in defending possession. The
lessee is given the right to redeem for the lessor, by pay-
ment, any mortgages, taxes, or other liens on the leased
premises and to apply to the repayment of the lessee any
rentals and/or royalties accruing under the lease.
The Implied Covenant. It is important to keep in mind
that the underlying purpose of the lease is to secure pro-
duction. Most leases have very little to say about the
manner in which wells will be drilled, or even if a well
will be drilled at all. Little is ever said about the well
density or the intervals at which development wells will
be drilled. The lack of specific agreement between the
lessor and lessee in these regards is intentional. Too
much is unknown about the nature and characteristics of
any reservoir present. The obligations of the lessee are
the obligations of an ordinarily prudent operator under
the same or similar circumstances, considering the
lessors interest as well as his own. The obligation to
develop the leased premises as would a prudent operator
arises only after discovery of oil or gas and continues for
the life of the lease.
Assignments by the Landowner
Right to Transfer. Fee owners can dispose of their land
in any way they see fit, either in whole or in part. They
can convey the surface and reserve the minerals, or vice
versa. They can sell all or a divided part or an undivided
interest in the minerals. They can sell all or a part of their
interest in the proceeds from the minerals. They can
create a subordinate interest and transfer it to another
party, as is done when a lease is granted.
Mineral Deeds and Interests. A mineral deed transfers
the minerals or the right to obtain them as they exist in
place. The owner of minerals has the right to go on the
land, conduct exploratory operations, and produce oil
and gas. If the minerals are subject to a lease at the time
of the mineral conveyance, the mineral grantee may not
exercise these rights until the lease terminates. The
mineral owner has the right to execute a lease and to
receive the bonus money therefrom. The mineral owner
has the right to receive rentals and to share in the
royalties if and when payable under any lease. Mineral
interests are most often created by unqualified grants or
reservations. However, many mineral conveyances are
for a specified term of years, or for a specified term and
so long thereafter as oil or gas is produced.
Royalty Deeds and Interests. Royalty is a share in pro-
duction and, when applied to a lease, refers to the share
of the oil and gas that is received by the lessor from pro-
duction under the lease. This share is usually one-eighth
of the whole, although it may be any other fraction
agreed upon. Royalty also refers to an interest that is
created by grant or reservation either before or after the
OIL AND GAS LEASES
57-7
execution of a lease. The right to royalty is contingent on
production and carries with it no right or interest in the
minerals. The owner of a royalty interest receives no
bonus and no delay rental payments. A royalty interest is
an expense-free interest in the gross production and not
in the net production. Royalties as well as minerals may
be conveyed in fee or for a specified term of years, or for
a specified term and as long thereafter as oil or gas is
produced.
When referring to a conveyed royalty interest, it is
customary to refer to the number of royalty acres con-
veyed, as well as to the fractional interest. If a landowner
sold half of his one-eighth royalty in a tract of 80 acres,
the royalty grantee is said to have purchased 40 royalty
acres. If a royalty buyer purchased one-eighth of the
same landowners one-eighth royalty, the royalty pur-
chaser would be entitled to one-sixty-fourth of all pro-
duction and is said to own 10 royalty acres.
Assignments by the Lessee
Right to Transfer. The lessee is the owner of the lease,
and the interest is usually seven-eighths of the produc-
tion but may often be much less, depending on the
amount of royalty. This interest is referred to as the
working interest. A lessee may transfer his entire interest
either in whole or part, or an undivided portion in the
lease or a part thereof. The lessee has the right to convey
overriding royalties, production payments, undivided in-
terests, or an entire interest in a portion of the leased
premises.
Assignments and Subleases. An assignment is a
transfer of the assignors entire interest in a lease either
in its entirety or in a portion thereof. A sublease is a par-
tial transfer in that the sublessor retains an interest in the
lease in so far as it affects the property subleased. An in-
strument conveying the working interest but providing
for the reservation of an overriding royalty is a sublease
rather than an assignment.
Obligations undertaken by the lessee in the lease are
called covenants. A contractual relationship exists be-
tween the lessor and the lessee, and there is said to be a
privity of contract between the parties. The lessee has the
right to assign the leasehold estate to a third party. The
covenants contained in the lease are assumed by the third
party and are said to be covenants running with the land.
In the event of a true assignment, the lessee is usually
relieved of his obligations to the lessor. In the event of a
sublease, the lessee remains liable to the lessor because
of the privity of contract between them.
Overriding Royalty. An overriding royalty interest is an
interest carved out of the working interest and is not
burdened with the cost of development or production. It
is therefore a kind of royalty interest. An overriding
royalty is usually created in a sublease, but may be
created by grant. It in no way affects the royalty interest
that is payable to the lessor. The overriding royalty
owner generally cannot require the lessee to maintain the
lease in force, to drill a well, or to develop the property,
and shares in oil and gas only when, as, and if produced.
Production Payments. Oil payments, perhaps more
correctly referred to as production payments, are related
to overriding royalties in that they are usually carved out
of the working interest and bear no cost of production.
The overriding royalty differs from the production pay-
ment in that the former continues for the life of the lease
and the latter terminates upon the payment of a specified
sum of money from a stipulated percentage or fraction of
the working interest. Production payments can be of
practically any size and can be made payable out of any
fraction or percentage of the working interest.
The production payment is occasionally used in
negotiating a lease. A company may be willing to spend
not more than $lOO/acre as bonus for a lease but at the
same time be willing to provide for a production pay-
ment of perhaps $2OO/acre payable out of one-sixteenth
of seven-eighths. A landowner can occasionally be
shown the advantages of a production payment, with the
result that a deal is made instead of lost.
The use of the production payment in the large-scale
purchase of producing properties has become common.
The task of how to purchase a producing property for a
minimum cash outlay by the grantee with the grantor
receiving the entire purchase price in cash and with the
gain taxed at capital gains rates is often accomplished by
an ABC transaction. A is the seller and the owner of
the property. B is the purchaser of the property. C is the
purchaser of the production payment and either has or
can get the major part of the required cash. To illustrate,
A owns a producing property that will sell for
$l,OOO,OOO. B wants to buy the property but has only
$200,000 for the purchase. A will convey the property to
B for $200,000, retaining a production payment of
$800,000 plus interest payable out of 85 % of the produc-
tion. A will then sell the production payment to C for
$800,000 cash. All parties to the transaction receive the
maximum tax benefits allowed.
Unit Operations
Background
In recent years the objective has been to obtain the max-
imum ultimate recovery of oil and gas in place. In the
early days of the industry a great number of unnecessary
wells were drilled; only a fraction would have been re-
quired to obtain maximum efficient withdrawal. In time,
limits were placed on the amount of production; well-
spacing regulations came into existence; the establish-
ment of drilling units and the pooling of small tracts of
land followed. The advantages of cooperative develop-
ment on a small scale became even more apparent when
considered on the basis of the entire reservoir. Unit
operation of a reservoir, whether for cooperative
development, pressure maintenance, or secondary
recovery, requires a knowledge of the hydrocarbons in
place and an acceptance of the correlative rights of the
owners; a fair distribution of the proceeds is best ac-
complished by contractual agreements among the royalty
and working-interest owners.
The unit operation of an oil and gas reservoir is to be
distinguished from pooling, which is the combination of
small tracts to form a drilling unit or comply with spac-
ing regulations. The term unitization is usually used
interchangeably with unit operations. Unitization
57-8 PETROLEUM ENGINEERING HANDBOOK
therefore refers to the operation of all or a substantial
part of the reservoir by a unit operator in accordance with
the terms of a unitization contract. Unit operations may
include two categories, depending on the manner in
which they come into existence.
Voluntary Unit Operations. When the owners of the
interests in a reservoir agree that all or a major portion of
the reservoir is to be operated as a single unit regardless
of property or lease lines, a voluntary unit operation
comes into existence. The preparation of a unitization
agreement acceptable to all the parties is a major under-
taking. Two contracts are entered into, an operators
contract and a royalty owners contract, sometimes
called the unit contract. Many problems are involved re-
garding the operation of the reservoir and the drilling of
additional wells that are best handled in a separate con-
tract among the owners of the working interest. The
royalty-unitization agreement must expressly provide for
the consolidation of the interests of the lessors. Without
such authority, lessors could demand that their tract be
drilled to prevent drainage or be developed separately.
The working out of a voluntary-unitization agreement re-
quires a thorough knowledge of the conservation
statutes. The voluntary-unitization agreement may pro-
vide that the contract will not become effective until ap-
proved by the appropriate regulatory body.
Compulsory Unit Operations. Compulsory unit opera-
tions come into being by order of a regulatory body in
accordance with specific statutes. Early statutes provided
that, if a certain percentage of the lessees in an area to be
unitized petitioned the regulatory body to bestow
jurisdiction to issue appropriate orders, it would do so.
The laws of the states vary as to the percentage of owner-
ship required. There must first be agreement among a
majority of the lessees and royalty owners concerned
regarding a unit plan. Here again a great deal of work
and time are required. Numerous conferences are held
among the working-interest owners and studies are made
by various committees. Upon finalization of the plan,
signatures are obtained from the working-interest and
royalty-interest owners. A petition to the regulatory body
is made and a hearing is held after proper notice has been
given to all the interested parties. Upon issuance of the
appropriate orders, accounting adjustments are made
among the working-interest owners and the appointed
unit operator assumes operations of the area.
Getting the Well Drilled
Lease Purchases. Oil and gas leases are purchased for a
variety of reasons. Lease purchases are often of a trend
nature, with no drillable prospect having been shown to
exist. Such lease purchases could be in a sedimentary
basin considered likely to contain accumulation of
hydrocarbons, or as extensions to discovery wells. The
owners of the leases might then plan to conduct seismic
operations in an effort to isolate and define likely struc-
tures on large lease blocks or spreads of acreage.
However, the owner of a geological idea or unleased
data to justify the drilling of a well. In this instance,
leases are acquired for the very definite purpose of drill-
ing in the immediate future. Under such considerations,
the amount of the rentals or the extent of the primary
term becomes of secondary importance in negotiating the
leases. A landman or lease broker will then be employed
to review the records of the clerk of court to determine
surface and mineral ownerships of all the tracts of land in
the prospect including county roads, state and federal
highways, rivers, school lands, canals, etc. Mineral
leases will then be negotiated and acquired.
Capital to Drill the Well. Major oil companies have no
real problem in raising the necessary capital to drill
wells. Such funds are, to a large extent, available from
earnings, and to a lesser extent, from borrowings.
However, independents have been historically short of
cash to drill wells. An independent is a small corpora-
tion or a partnership or perhaps an individual engaged in
oil and gas exploration only. That is, an independent is
not engaged in the transportation and refining of
petroleum or in the marketing of petroleum products. In-
dependents drill approximately 85% of all wells drilled
in the U.S. and there are thousands of small companies
and individuals engaged flu11 time in oil and gas
exploration.
In recent years, the limited partnership has been the
primary source of venture capital for the independent.
Investors buy units of a drilling fund and become limited
partners. An experienced and successful independent
becomes the general partner. Another significant source
of venture capital for drilling wells has been the utility
companies and end-users, such as the chemical industry.
A typical independent may spend $5 to $15 million a
year in drilling money, almost none of which belongs to
the independent. The capital comes fmm investors and
from persons who buy into drilling deals. Regardless of
the source of the capital, the independent invariably pro-
motes or lays off a part of his deal, usually on a third for
a quarter basis. This means that the patty being promoted
or who buys into the deal will pay one-third of the cost of
drilling the well for a one-quarter interest in the well.
Variations of this type of promotion are endless; but by
and large this type of promotion is standard between in-
dependents and investors as well.
Sources of Prospects. Major oil companies maintain
large staffs of geologists, seismologists, paleontologists,
and other supporting personnel engaged in development
and exploration efforts. Major oil companies rarely par-
ticipate in drilling on prospects not generated by them.
On the other hand, most independents do not generate
their own prospects but must buy them from geologists
and others who generate geological prospects. The
geologists, landmen, and others who can generate pros-
pects and buy leases on them are then in a position, to a
limited extent, to promote their prospect in dealing with
an independent. Invariably, a nominal overriding royalty
can be retained on the leases and occasionally a carried
working interest to casing point. In this case it is difficult
to obtain a carried working interest of as much as one-
prospect may have sufficient subsurface and/or seismic quarter because the independent taking the deal must
OIL AND GAS LEASES
57-9
itself plan on laying off perhaps half of the deal and there
must be some room left in the structuring of the deal to
permit all concerned to realize some economic benefit.
Abstracts and Title Examination. Abstracts will be
ordered on at least the proposed drillsite and offsetting
tracts, and perhaps even on the entire prospect. The
abstract will usually contain exact copies of all in-
struments of public record pertinent to the land from pa-
tent to date. Qualified oil and gas attorneys will review
the abstracts and render a title opinion. There are usually
numerous title deficiencies, most of which can be met by
appropriate curative effort by the landman or title man.
Supplemental title opinions will be obtained after the
curative materials have been procured. Rarely can every
requirement be met and the lessee may have to elect to
waive such unmet remaining requirements and assume
the business risk of proceeding with the drilling of the
well.
Full-Interest Wells. When a lessee controls the entire
acreage on all of the prospects it is fortunate indeed. The
well can be drilled as the lessee pleases, being restricted
only by appropriate regulations. Should the well result in
being a producer the lessee will have control of the entire
reservoir, assuming the lessee has more or less correctly
anticipated the extent of the reservoir in the lease pur-
chases. However, this situation is rarely found. Con-
siderable work has yet to be done when a lessee is plan-
ning to drill a well and finds that all of the prospective
acreage is not controlled.
Joint-Operating Agreements. Generally a lessee think-
ing of drilling a well will have at least some leases on the
prospect. The remaining leases will be owned by one or
more competitors, presumably people who are also in-
terested in drilling wells and establishing production.
Since the owners of the leases covering the prospect will
all benefit in the event of production, it would seem
equitable that each pay a proportionate part of a well or
make a suitable contribution to the well.
However, it is not often that two or more lessees have
the same data, or interpret the data in the same way. A
lessee may elect to farm out its acreage, do nothing, or
join in the drilling of a well. The other lessees will be
contacted in an attempt to determine their interest in get-
ting a well drilled. The other lessees may not have sufti-
cient information to justify their joining in the drilling of
a well. The party desiring to drill the well may find it
desirable to make any information available to the adja-
cent lessees. This seismic or other control may represent
a sizable investment, and the other lessees may be will-
ing to pay for the data, exchange similar data of their
own in another area, or negotiate almost any kind of
agreement with the owner of the control. If all the lessees
are eventually agreed that a joint well should be drilled,
they will define a contract area that will be jointly
owned. A joint-operating agreement will be entered into
and the interests of the parties to the agreement deter-
mined on the basis of the surface acreage owned by each
as compared with the total acres in the contract area. The
joint-operating agreement will stipulate the interests of
the participating parties, specify the operator, limit cer-
tain expenditures, establish liabilities, provide for the
drilling of the first and subsequent wells, provide for
nonconsent operations, etc. Certain operating costs are
agreed on and an accounting procedure is attached to the
joint-operating agreement.
The joint-operating agreement is a very useful tool in
exploratory operations, particularly where the tracts of
land are small or where it may be desirable to share the
risk of an expensive exploratory well. Contract areas can
be of practically any size but for exploratory purposes
usually run from about 640 to several thousand acres in
size. The joint-operating agreement is also used occa-
sionally in development drilling. It finds frequent ap-
plication in a unit or pool ordered by a regulatory body
after a well has been completed as a producer.
Cash Contributions. A lessee may find it necessary to
drill a well on a reduced-acreage basis with cash support
from the adjacent lessees who might not be willing to
farm out or enter into a joint operation. The most com-
mon type of cash contribution is the dry-hole contribu-
tion. It is usually a sum of money per foot drilled, deter-
mined by reservoir participation, discounted for lack of
ownership in the well, etc. This type of contribution gets
its name from the fact that no money is payable in the
event the well is completed as a producer. The idea here
is that the offset lessee is willing to make a cash con-
tribution toward the drilling of a well that in all probabil-
ity will be dry but which will at least partially evaluate
the leases. In the unlikely event the well is completed as
a producer it is thought that the rewards are sufficiently
great for the owner of the well to make cash payment
from the offset lessee unnecessary. A variation of the
dry-hole contribution is the bottombole contribution,
which is payable upon reaching a specified depth
regardless of whether or not the well is completed as a
producer. Both types of cash contributions are used
infrequently.
Farmouts. A transfer of the working interest with the
obligation to drill a well is called a farmout. There are
any number of ways in which a farmout can be
negotiated. A farmout agreement provides for the drill-
ing of a well, or the option to drill a well, at a mutually
agreed location and to a mutually agreed depth on one of
the leases owned by the party making the farmout. Upon
completion of the well in accordance with the terms of
the farmout agreement, the lessee will assign or sublease
a portion of the leases and retain an interest, usually an
overriding royalty. The amount of the overriding royalty
will vary widely from area to area and will depend on a
number of factors including the available geological and
geophysical control, the amount of the working interest,
the proximity of production, producing history in the
area, lifting problems, suitable markets, size of the an-
ticipated reservoir, the number of acres being farmed
out, well costs, etc.
The operator that takes the farmout will be looking to
the net revenue interest to recover costs. Gross income
from the sale of production less royalty, overriding
royalty, and any other burdens on the leases determines
net revenue interest. Acceptable net revenue interests on
farmouts vary widely: a net revenue interest in
Oklahoma under a pooled section might be considered
57-10 PETROLEUM ENGINEERING HANDBOOK
unacceptable if less than 81.25%; in North Dakota in a tors share of such costs. A carried interest is a share in
wildcat well, 75%; in Louisiana in a low risk, close-in the net and not the gross production.
prospect, 68 %
A more complicated version of the farmout is found in
the better producing areas. Such farmouts are often made
on the basis of a portion of the working interest being re-
tained by the party making the farmout. A typical ar-
rangement might be the farmout of perhaps 2,000 acres
on a 60/40 basis for a free well into the tanks to 12,000
ft. The party taking the farmout would agree to drill and
complete a 12,000-ft test at the partys sole cost and risk
and thereby earn an assignment of an undivided 60 % in-
terest in the 2,000-acre block. If the well is productive
the party making the farmout owns 40% interest in the
well and in the production, usually after the operator has
recovered the costs to take full advantage of available tax
deductions. The party taking the farmout will obtain
payout from the proceeds of the sale of production from
the earning well less any royalties and overriding
royalties. Subsequent operations on the farmout block
would be under the terms of a joint-operating agreement.
Variations of this type of deal are countless. The well
could be a free well through the wellhead rather than into
the tanks. This means the operator would pay for all
completion costs through the well head but would share
on a 60140 basis in erecting tanks and treating equip-
ment. Another variation is the free well to the sand. This
means the operator would drill the well (at sole cost and
risk) to the objective horizon, run an electrical log, and
core and test as might be required to determine the
possibility of production. If a decision is made to attempt
a completion the operator will pay a negotiated fraction
of the cost of running a production string of casing and
setting subsurface production equipment, with the party
making the farmout paying the remainder of the cost.
Any interest may be negotiated; one-quarter and one-
third interest deals are commonly made. Other variations
might allow the operator to recover completion costs
before the party making the farmout would be entitled to
any share of the production. The party making the farm-
out might keep an overriding royalty during partial or
complete payout and at the time of the payout would
have the option to exchange the overriding royalty for a
working interest.
Carried Interest. A carried-interest contract is an ar-
rangement between co-owners of a working interest,
whereby one agrees to advance all or some part of the
development or operating costs on behalf of the others
and to recover such advances from future production, if
any, accruing to the other owners shares of the working
interest. The co-owner advancing such costs is referred
to as the carrying party and the co-owners for whom
costs are so advanced are referred to as the carried
parties.
A carried interest usually comes into being in connec-
tion with a farmout. The carried-interest contract may
apply not only to the first well but to subsequent wells.
The party making the farmout may assign a portion of
the working interest to an operator who will pay all the
costs of drilling and equipping the first well, and
possibly additional development wells. The grantee must
look to the production, if any, attributable to the gran-
tors share of the working interest to recovery the gran-
Net-profits Interest. A net-profits interest is an interest
in gross production measured by the net profits fmm the
operation of an oil and gas property. A net-profits in-
terest is similar to an overriding royalty in that it is
created out of the working interest. The proceeds accru-
ing to a net-profits interest are reducible by certain
development and operating costs, which are specified in
the net-profits contract. The net-profits interest is subject
to such expenses to the extent of its share of the income.
The owner of a net-profits interest is not required to pay
out or advance money for development or operating
costs, as in the case of the owner of a working interest,
and is not liable for such costs. If no net profit is realized
from the operation of the property the net-profits-interest
owner receives no income but neither is the owner liable
to the operator for a share of the loss. A net-profits in-
terest can be regarded as a non-operating interest similar
to an overriding royalty. The net-profits agreement finds
its principal application in farmouts. Equitable as it may
sound, this type of agreement is seldom used.
Lease Problems During Development
The lessor is often pleased and even overwhelmed by the
discovery of hydrocarbons on the land and the sudden
cash flow of royalty. Problems early in the development
phase, such as the use of the surface for tank batteries,
gathering lines, treating equipment, and roads are usual-
ly settled quickly. After a period of time, new problems
arise of a subtle and sophisticated nature. As some
lessors seek to maximize their royalty income, they turn
to petroleum consultants and oil and gas attorneys for ad-
vice. From this effort come legal demands for additional
development or release of undeveloped acreage. While
development can occur both horizontally and vertically,
lessor demands for development have generally been
sustained by the courts in a horizontal sense only,
A more recent and more complex problem relates to
the gas royalty clause and market value. The typical
lease refers to the lessors royalty as a fraction of market
value. When a lessee discovers gas and enters into a long
term contract for the sale of gas, the market value of gas
and the contract price for gas are almost identical.
However, the price of natural gas in recent years has
risen dramatically. The lessee is sometimes contractually
bound to a gas price with the purchaser and at the same
time faces a demand from the lessor for gas prices at
market value. The courts are not uniform from state to
state on this issue. The U.S. Natural Gas Policy Act of
1978, with its price ceilings on categories of natural gas,
may have been of some use in defending lessor suits for
market value on royalty gas. Lessees now appear to be
leaning to short-term gas contracts, provisions for fre-
quent renegotiation of price, rewriting the gas royalty
clause to provide for price received rather than
market value, providing for in-kind royalty on gas, etc.
Whether or not lessees will be successful in negotiating
such gas contracts in periods of falling demand remains
to be seen. Similarly, it can be expected that lessors and
their attorneys will resist any changes in the lease form
from the conventional wording on gas royalty. Resolu-
tion of this problem lies ahead.
OIL AND GAS LEASES
57-11
Taxation*
The taxation of income related to oil and gas is a highly
specialized field. The increasing complexity of tax laws
and the very real effect that taxes have on the successful
conduct of any business make it imperative that compe-
tent tax advice be sought out by any operator. however
small his organization may hc. The importance of tax
planning can hardly be overestimated. Improper ~tructur-
ing of a drilling deal or a sale of a property from a tax
standpoint can have the most serious of consequences.
The larger organizations and major oil companies have
tax departments comprised of specialists in the various
subdivisions of taxation. Independents and small
organizations must retain the services of tax consultants
on a continuing basis.
Very briefly, all income less certain exclusions exempt
from tax is gross income. Taxable income is gross in-
come less deductions. Tax rates vary for individuals and
corporations, as do long-term capital gains rates for in-
dividuals and corporations. Items of tax preference are
deductions such as the excluded portion of capital gains,
depletion, accelerated depreciation, and excess intangi-
ble drilling costs on productive property, all of which are
subject to a minimum tax. Capital expenditures are not
immediately deductible as are expenses, and must be
recovered through depreciation or depletion. Some ex-
penses. such as accelerated depreciation, are recaptured
at sale, that is, become taxable at ordinary rates. The
cost of tangible property used in business results in cer-
tain tax credits that are subtracted directly from the taxes
due and are not a deduction.
Capital expenditures include the bonus costs of pur-
chasing mineral leases. well and lease equipment, and
most geological and geophysical exploration costs.
Deductible expense items include overhead, lease ren-
tals. abandoned leases, most intangible drilling costs,
and geological and geophysical costs not resulting in
lease acquisitions.
The enormous sums of money put into oil and gas ex-
ploration by private investors through limited partner-
ships deserve further comment. The private investor has
taken advantage of the tax provisions in three principal
areas: depletion, intangible drilling and development
costs, and capital gains.
Depletion. A producing reservoir gradually suffers a
reduction in the quantity and value of hydrocarbons in
place. Depletion laws were enacted to provide for a
return of capital because of mineral extraction. The tax-
payer has a choice of two methods. Cost depletion pro-
vides for a reduction in basis as related to production and
sale of minerals. Percentage depletion provides for a
deduction of a percentage of the gross income from the
property, which is limited to 50% of the net income from
the property, and to 65 % of net income from all sources.
The U.S. Tax Reduction Act of 1975 effectively re-
pealed percentage depletion, with certain exceptions. An
exemption was allowed for independent producers and
royalty owners as a percentage of qualified production,
except as to transfers of producing property. For 1984
that percentage will be 15% of the first 1,000 BOPD pro-
duced, or 6 million cu ft/D gas.
Intangible Drilling and Development Costs. Tax-
payers owning operating rights and incurring intangible
costs may elect to expense or capitalize such costs. If the
taxpayer elects to capitalize, the intangible drilling costs
may be recovered through depreciation over 5 years, and
are subject to an investment tax credit. Such capitalized
costs do not represent a tax preference item. Since
capitalization of such costs offers no real tax benefits,
most taxpayers elect to expense such costs.
Intangible drilling costs may represent 80 to 90% of
the cost of an exploratory well; the remaining portion
representing tangible costs of equipment with salvage
value. It is no surprise to note the enormous success of
drilling funds through limited partnerships as such large
deductions are made available to investors.
Capital Gains. A sale of a capital asset after a holding
period set by law will subject the taxpayer to greatly
reduced tax rates of a maximum of 20% of the profits of
the sale. The sale of leases, either producing or non-
producing, is subject to these favorable capital gains tax
rates. The attraction of such favorable tax treatment in
the event of future sales of properties has been a further
inducement to investors in oil and gas exploration
Offshore Leasing
Jurisdiction. Fifteenth and sixteenth century explorers
claimed vast areas of waters, entire gulfs, seas, and
oceans. However, these early claims, as a practical mat-
ter, were unenforceable. The extent of national
sovereignty over the waters has not been resolved in in-
ternational law. By presidential proclamation in 1945,
the U.S. regards the natural resources of the Outer Con-
tinental Shelf (OCS) as a territory owned by the nation.
The Submerged Lands Act of 1953 confirmed the
jurisdiction and control of the U.S. over the natural
resources of the seabed of the continental shelf seaward
of the state boundaries.
Producing and Leasing History. The first commercial
oil production in the Gulf of Mexico was discovered in
1947 on a Louisiana state lease. Drilling on federal lands
under the OCS Lands Act began in 1954. Since 1956,
the OCS (Atlantic, Pacific, Gulf of Mexico, and Alaska,
comprising over more than 1 billion acres) has produced
about 6 billion bbl of oil and about 55 Tcf gas. Leasing
has proceeded at a snails pace. For years, into the early
1970s, the abundance of oil and gas onshore and in
world markets suppressed offshore leasing exploration
with its high costs. As the search intensified, efforts to
schedule lease sales met with great opposition from en-
vironmental groups. The time required for environmen-
tal assessment, state and local government comment,
and so on, sometimes exceeded 3 years. The U.S. Dept.
of Interior recently has moved to accelerate lease sales;
almost the entire continental shelf will have been offered
for lease at scheduled dates through 1987.
Written More Ihe Tax Reform Act of 1986. which lmplementschanges I alternal~ve
m,n,mum tax. depletion. depreclatlan. ~n~eslment tax cred# and deducton 01
losses
Leasing Procedure. The interior secretary prepares a
proposed 5-year leasing program. In the preparation
phase, the secretary invites and considers suggestions
57-12 PETROLEUM ENGINEERING HANDBOOK
from the governors of affected states, local government,
industry, federal agencies, and all interested parties, in-
cluding the general public. Time is provided for a
response from the governors and others after preparation
of a draft of a proposed program, and prior to publication
in the Federal Register. Time is again provided for a
response following publication and prior to submission
to the president and congress for approval. The director
of the Bureau of Land Management issues calls for
nominations pursuant to an approved program, confer-
ring with the governors where indicated. A list of tracts
tentatively selected for leasing is drawn up. The director
is free to make deletions or additions from the tentative
selection of tracts. A selected tract will, in general, not
exceed 5,760 acres. Upon approval by the secretary, the
proposed notice of sale will be published in the Federal
Register. The governors and local governments con-
cerned again have an opportunity to comment. The
secretary will make the final decision and will publish
the notice of sale in the Federal Register. The sale itself
will be held no sooner than 30 days after publication.
Tracts are offered for lease by competitive sealed bid-
ding. Leases are issued only to qualified bidders. Leases
are issued for an initial period of 5 years, although longer
times are provided for where unusually deep water or
adverse conditions would discourage exploration and
development. Annual rentals are due in advance to main-
tain the lease in the absence of production. Royalties bid
are variable with one-eighth royalty being a minimum.
Royalties on all leases in the Gulf of Mexico average
about one-sixth.
After being awarded a lease, a lessee seeks to obtain
the necessary permits. The lessee or operator will usually
drill one or more test wells to determine whether
hydrocarbons are present. If oil and/or gas is discovered,
the operator, as a matter of common practice, will aban-
don the exploratory holes without attempting to complete
or produce from them. Exploratory wells are usually
used to obtain information about potential oil and gas ac-
cumulation. Development or production wells are nor-
mally drilled from a production platform.
Economic Impact of Offshore Leasing. The interior
secretary has stated that 85% of Americas untapped oil
wealth is on publicly owned lands, of which two-thirds is
thought to be offshore. The economic implications for
the future in exploring and developing such reserves are
truly significant. The amount of capital required for such
exploration and development is staggering. But consider
the recent past: the OCS has produced about 6 billion bbl
oil and 55 Tcf gas. There would appear to be little ques-
tion about the ever-increasing significance of the leasing,
exploration, and development of lands comprising the
ocs.
General References
Hardy, George W. III: Louisiana Petroleum Land Operarims, Inst.
for Energy Development Inc., Oklahoma City (1980).
Kunrz, Eugene: Kuna Oil and Gas, W.H. Anderson Co., Cincinnati,
OH (1960).
Mosburg, Lewis G. Jr.: Perroleum Land Pracrices, IED Exploration
Inc., Tulsa (1978).
Mosburg, Lewis G. Jr.: Basics ofSwucturing fiplorabn Deals, IED
Exploration Inc., Tulsa (1979).
Outer Continental Shelf Mineral Leasmg and Rights-of-Way Grant-
ing Programs, Circular No. 2446, U.S. Dept. of the Interior,
Bureau of Land Management (1979).
Prentice-Hull Federul Tux Handbor~k, Prentice-Hall Inc., Enplewood
Cliffs. NJ (1986).
Woodard, Robert G.: Basic Land Management, Inst. for Energy
Development Inc., Oklahoma City (1982).
Chapter 58
The SI Metric System of Units and
SPE Metric Standard
Society of Petroleum Engineers
Adopted for use as a voluntary standard by the SPE Board of Directors, June 1982.
Contents
Preface...............
Part 1: S&The lnternahonal System of Units
Introduction
SI Units and Unit Symbols
Application of the Metric System
Rules for Conversion and Rounding
Special Terms and Quantities Involving
Mass and Amount of Substance.
Mental Guides for Using Metric Units
Appendix A (Terminology)
Appendix B (SI Units)
Appendrx C (Style Gurde for Metnc Usage)
Appendix D (General Conversion Factors)
Appendix E (Tables 1.8 and 1.9)
Part 2: Discussion of Metric Unit Standards
Introduction ...... ...............
Review of Selected Units .............
Umt Standards Under Discussion .......
Notes for Table 2.2 ... ...............
Notes for Table 2.3 .................
58-7
58-a
50-8
58-9
58-11
58-14
58-20
.58-21
58-21
.58-22
58-24
58-25
.58-25
58-2
Preface
PETROLEUM ENGINEERING HANDBOOK
The SPE Board in June 1982 endorsed revisions to SPE
Tentative Metric Standard (Dec. 1977 JPT. Pages
1575 161 1) and adopted it for implementation as this
SPE Metric Standard.
The following standard is the final product of 12 years
work by the Symbols and Metrication Committee.
Members of the Metrication Subcommittee included
John M. Campbell, chairman. John M. Campbell &
Co.: Robert A. Campbell. Magnum Engineenng Inc.;
Robert E. Carlile. Texas Tech U.; J. Donald Clark,
petroleum consultant; Hank Groeneveld, Mobil Oil
Canada: Terry Pollard. retired. et--c@io member: and
Howard B. Bradley. professional/technical training
consultant.
With very few exceptions. the units shown are those
proposed and/or adopted by other groups involved in the
metrication exercise, including those agencies charged
with the responsibility (nationally and internationally)
for establishing metric standards. These few exceptions,
still to be decided, are summarized in the introduction to
Part 2 of this report.
These standards include most of the units used com-
monly by SPE members. The subcommittee is aware that
some will find the list incomplete for their area of
specialty. Additions will continue lo be made but too
long a list can become cumbersome. The subcommittee
believes that these standards provide a basis for metric
practice beyond the units listed. So long as one maintains
these standards a new unit can be coined that should
prove acceptable.
Part 1: SI-The International System of Units*
Introduction
Worldwide scientific, engineering, industrial. and cotn-
mercial groups are converting to SI metric units. Many
in the U.S. arc now active in such conversion. based on
work accomplished by national and international
authorities. Various U.S. associations. professional
societies. and agencies are involved in this process. in-
cluding. but not limited to. the American Sot. for
Testing and Materials (ASTM)? American Petroleum
Inst. (API).. American Nat]. Standards Inst. (AN-
SI), . American Sot. of Mechanical Engineers
(ASME). and American Natl. Metric Council
(ANMC).X The Canadian Petroleutn Assn. (CPA) and
other Canadian groups have been especially active in
conversion work. SPE intends to hccp its worldwide
memberahlp informed on the conversion to and use of SI
metric unit,.
The term SI is an abbreviation for Le Systgme In-
ternational dUnit& or The International System of
Units.
SI is not identical with any of the former cgs, mks, or
mksA systems of metric units but is closely related to
them and is an extension of and improvement over them.
SI measurement symbols are identical in all languages.
As in any other language, rules of spelling, punctuation,
and pronunciation are essential to avoid errors in
numerical work and to make the system easier to use and
understand on a worldwide basis. These rules, together
with decimal usage, units coherence, and a series of
standard prefixes for multiples and submultiples of most
SI units, provide a rational system with minimum dif-
ficulty of transition from English units or older systems
of metric units. Refs. 1 through 4 of this paper are
recommended to the reader wishing official information,
development history, or more detail on SI: material from
these and other references cited has been used freely in
this report.
Appendix A provides definitions for some of the terms
used.
Prepared by T A Pollard for the subcommittee Based on paper SPE 6212
presented by T A Pollard at Ihe ,976 SPE Annual Techn~ca, Conference and
EXhlb, ho. New Orleans. act 3-6
SI Units and Unit Symbols3
The short-form designations of units (such as ti for feet.
kg for kilograms, m for meters, mol for moles, etc.)
have heretofore been called unit abbreviations in SPE
terminology to avoid confusion with the tetm sym
bols applied to letter symbols used in mathematical
equations. However, international and national standard
practice is to call these unit designations unit sym-
bols; the latter usage will be followed in this report.
SI Units
SI is based on seven well-defined base units that
quantify seven hn.sc~ ymntitic~ that hi c,orz~wztiorz are
regarded as dimensionally independent. It is a matter ot
choice how many and which quantities arc considered
base quantities. SI has chosen the seven babe quantities
and base units listed in Table I. I * as the basis of the ln-
tcrnational System. In addition, there arc two sup-
plcmentary quantities (Table I .2).
Tables 1. I and 1.2 show current practices for
designating the dimensions of base and supplementary
physical quantities, plus letter symbols for use in
mathematical equations.
SI &rived units arc a third claxs. formed by con-
boning. as needed, base units. supplementary units. and
other derived units according to fhe algebraic relations
linking the corresponding quantities. The symbols for
derived units that do not have their own individual sytn-
bols arc obtained by using the mathematical signs for
multiplication and division. together with appropriate
exponent> (e.g.. SI velocity. meter per second. m/s or
I11 s I SI anoular velocity. radian per second. radis or
rad.\-). e
Table I.3 contains a number of SI derived unit>. in-
cluding all the I9 approved units assigned special names
and individual unit hymbolh.
Appendix B provides a more dctallcd cxplanatmn oi
the S! system of unils. their dctinitions. Xld
ahhr-aviations.
Table and flgure numbers of Ihe or,glnal SPE publ,cat,on are used fhroughout ,h,s
chapter
THE SI METRIC SYSTEM OF UNITS & SPE METRIC STANDARD
58-3
SI Unit Prefixes*
The Sl unit prefixes. multiplication factors, and SI prefix
symbols are shown in Table 1.4. Some of the prefixes
may seem strange at first, but there are enough familiar
ones in the list to make it relatively easy for technical
personnel to adjust to their use; kilo, mega, deci, centi,
milli, and micro are known to most engineers and
scientists.
One particular warning is required about the prefixes:
in the SI system, k and M (kilo and mega) stand for 1000
and 1 000 000, respectively, whereas M and MM or m
and mm have been used previously in the oil industry for
designating thousands and millions of gas volumes. Note
carefully. however, that there is no parallelism because
SI prefixes are raised to the power of the unit employed,
while the customary M and MM prefixes were not. Ex-
amples: km means cubic kilometers, not thousands of
cubic meters; cm* means square centimeters, nor one-
hundredth of a square meter. The designation for 1000
cubic meters is IO m3 and for I million cubic meters is
10 m--not km3 and Mm, respectively.
Appendix C gives examples of the vital importance of
following the precise use of upper-case and lower-case
letters for prefixes and for unit symbols.
Application of the Metric System
General
SI is the form of the metric system preferred for all ap-
plications. It is important that this modernized version be
thoroughly understood and properly applied. This sec-
tion, together with Appendix material, provides
guidance and recommendations concerning style and
usage of the SI form of the metric system.
Base Quantity or
Dimension
length
mass
time
electric current* *
thermodynamic temperature
amount of substance
luminous intensity
Style and Usage
Take care to use unit symbols properly: the agreements
in international and national standards provide uniform
rules (summarized in Appendix C). It is essential that
these rules be followed closely to provide maximum ease
of communication and to avoid costly errors. Handling
of unit names varies somewhat among different countries
because of language differences, but using the rules in
Appendix C should minimize most difficulties of
communication.
Usage for Selected Quantities
Mass, Force, and Weight. The principal departure of SI
from the gravimetric system of metric engineering units
is the use of explicitly distinct units for mass and force.
In SI. kilogram is restricted to the unit of mass. The
nebtlton is the only SI unit of force, defined as I
(kg. m)/s, to be used wherever force is designated, in-
cluding derived units that contain force-e.g., pressure
or stress (N/m* =Pa), energy (N.m=J), and power
[(N.m)/s=W].
There is confusion over the use of the term weight as a
quantity to mean either force or mass. In science and
technology, the term weight ofa body usually means the
force that, if applied to the body, would give it an ac-
celeration equal to the local acceleration of free fall (g,
when referring to the earths surface). This acceleration
varies in time and space; weight, if used to mean force,
varies also. The term force of gravity (mass times ac-
celeration of gravity) is more accurate than weight for
this meaning.
In commercial and everyday use, on the other hand,
the term weight nearly always means mass. Thus, when
TABLE 1.1 - SI BASE WANTiTlES AND UNITS
SI Unit
-
meter
kilogram
second
ampere
kelvin
mole +
candela
SI Unit Symbol
(Abbreviation),
Use Roman
(Upright) Type
k
i
K
mol
cd
SPE
Letter Symbol
for Mathematical
Equations,
Use Italic
(Sloping) Type
L
m
t
r
n
The seven base unrls. two supplementary units and other terms are deiined I Appendixes A and 6. Part 1.
SPE heretofore has arbrlrar~ly used charge q. the product of sfectrlc current and time, as a basic dunenslon. In untt symbols this would be A.s. m SPE mathematical symbols. IV
tWh%nthe moleis used.the eler~ntaryentitw rWSt be Spenhed;they r~ybeatOrt~s. rm%WeS. iOnS. el8c1rOnS. other partlCla% OrSpW&l groupsof suchpartides. In petroleum work.
the terms kilogram m&.pound mole. etc., often are shortened erroneously to mole.
TABLE 1.2 - SI SUPPLEMENTARY UNITS
Supplementary Quantity or
Dimension SI Unit
SI Unit Symbol
(Abbreviation),
Use Roman
(Upright) Type
plane angle radian rad
solid angle steradran sr
The seven base umts, two supplementary units. and other terms are defmed I Appendaxes A and 8. Part 1
IS0 speafn?s these two angles as dlmensnnless wth respect to the seven base quanhties
SPE
Letter Symbol
for Mathematical
Eauations.
Use Italic
(Sloping) Type
h
58-4
Quantity
absorbed dose
acceleration
activity (of radionuclides)
angular acceleration
angular velocity
area
Celsius temperature
density
dose equivalent
electric capacitance
electric charge
electrical conductance
electric field strength
electric inductance
electric potential
electric resistance
electromotive force
energy
entropy
force
frequency
illuminance
luminance
luminous flux
magnetic field strength
magnetic flux
magnetic flux density
potential difference
power
pressure
quantity of electricity
quantity of heat
radiant flux
radiant intensity
specific heat
stress
thermal conductivity
velocity
viscosity, dynamic
viscosity, kinematic
voltage
volume*
wave number
work
PETROLEUM ENGINEERING HANDBOOK
TABLE 1.3 - SOME COMMON SI DERIVED UNITS
SI Unit Symbol
(Abbreviation), Formula,
Unit Use Roman Type Use Roman Type
gray
meter per second squared
becquerel
radian per second squared
radian per second
square meter
degree Celsius
kilogram per cubic meter
sieverl
farad
coulomb
siemens
volt per meter
henry
volt
ohm
volt
joule
joule per kelvin
newton
hertz
Iux
candela per square meter
lumen
ampere per meter
weber
tesla
volt
watt
Pascal
coulomb
joule
watt
watt per steradian
joule per kilogram kelvin
Pascal
watt per meter kelvin
meter per second
Pascal second
square meter per second
volt
cubic meter
1 per meter
joule
GY
Bq
C
..,
sv
E
S
Ii
V
n
V
J
N
HZ
lx
Im
Wb
T
V
W
Pa
C
J
W
.
Pa
.
,..
V
. .
.
J
J/kg
ml.9
1 Is
rad/s2
rad/s
m2
K
kg/m3
J/kg
A.sN ( = GN)
As
AN
V/m
V&A ( = Wb/A)
W/A
VIA
W/A
N.m
J/K
kgm/$
l/s
lm/m2
cd/m2
cdsr
A/m
vs
Wb/m2
W/A
J/s
N/m2
As
N*m
J/s
Wlsr
J(kgW
Nlm2
W/(m.K)
m/s
Pas
ml/s
WIA
m3
l/m
N.m
In 1964, the General Conference on Welghls and Measures adopted liter as a special name for the cubic decimeter but discouraged the
use of later for volume measurement 01 extreme precision (see Appendix 8).
SI
Multiplication Factor Prefix
1 000 OOLl 000 000 000 000 = 108 exa**
1 ooo 000 000 000 000 = 105 peta
1 000 000 000 000 = 102 tera
1 000 000 000 = 1 OQ giga
1000000 = 106 mega
lOOO= 103 kilo
100 = 102 hectot
10 = 10 deka$
0.1 = 10-l deci$
0.01 = 10m2 centi*
0.001 = 10m3 milli
0.000001 = 1Om6 micro
0.000 000 001 = 10eg nano
0.000 000 000 001 = lo-l2 pica
0.000 000 000 000 001 = lo-l5 femto
TABLE 1.4 - SI UNIT PREFIXES
SI Prefix
Symbol,
Use Roman
Meaning
In Other
Type
Pronunciation (U.S.) Meaning (U.S.) Countries
-
ex a (a as in a bout) one quintillion timest trillion E
P
T
G
M
k
h
da
as in p eta1
as in terra ce
jig a (a as in a bout)
as in mega phone
as in kilo watt
heck toe
deck a (a as in a bout)
as in deci mal
as in senri ment
as in mili tary
as in micro phone
nan oh (an as in an t)
peek oh
fern toe (tern as in
fern inine)
as in anafo my
one quadrillion timest
one trillion timest
one billion times7
one million limes
one thousand times
one hundred times
ten times
one tenth of
one hundredth of
one thousandth of
one millionth of
one billionth oft
one trillionth oft
one quadrillionth oft
thousand billion
billion
milliard
milliardth
billionth
thousand billionth
0.000 000 000 000 000 001 = 1Om8 atto a one quintillionth oft trillionth
The l~rsl syllable of every prehx IS accented lo assure that the prellx will retain Its Ideniiiy Therefore. the prelerred pronunxlion of kllomeler places the accent on the first syllable, not the
second.
Approved by the 15th General Conlerencs of WaghIs and Measures (CGPM). May-June ,975.
tThese terms should be avoided in technaal wrong because the denomlnatnns above 1 millon are dlflerent in most other countries. as lndlcated I the last column.
tWhtle hecto, deka.dect, and cents are St prehxes. their use generally should be avolded except for the SI UN mult~pleslorarea. volume, moment, and nontechmcal use of centmwer, as
for body and clothing measremet.
THE SI METRIC SYSTEM OF UNITS & SPE METRIC STANDARD 58-5
one speaks of a persons weight, the quantity referred to
is mass. Because of the dual use, the term weight should
be avoided in technical practice except under cir-
cumstances in which its meaning is completely clear.
When the term is used, it is important to know whether
mass or force is intended and to use SI units properly as
described above by using kilograms for mass and
newtons for force.
Gravity is involved in determining mass with a balance
or scale. When a standard mass is used to balance the
measured mass, the effect of gravity on the two masses is
canceled except for the indirect effect of air or fluid
buoyancy. On a spring scale, mass is measured indirect-
ly since the instrument responds to the force of gravity.
Such scales may be calibrated in mass units if the varia-
tion in acceleration of gravity and buoyancy corrections
are not significant in their use.
The use of the same name for units of force and mass
causes confusion. When non-9 units are being con-
verted to SI units, distinction should be made between
,forcr and mass-e.g., use Ibf to denote force in
gravimetnc engineering units, and use Ibm for mass.
Use of the metric ton, also called mnne (1.0 Mg), is
common.
Linear Dimensions. Ref. 3 provides discussions of
length units applied to linear dimensions and tolerances
of materials and equipment, primarily of interest to
engineers in that field.
Temperature. The SI temperature unit is the kelvin (not
degree Kelvin); it is the preferred unit to express ther-
modynamic temperature. Degrees Celsius (C) is an SI
derived unit used to express temperature and temperature
intervals. The Celsius scale (formerly called centigrade)
is related directly to the kelvin scale as follows: the
temperature interval 1 C= 1 K, exactly. Celsius
temperature (Tot) is related to thermodynamic
temperature (Tx) as follows: Tot =TK --To exactly,
where To =273.1.5 K by definition. Note that the SI unit
symbol for the kelvin is K without the degree mark,
whereas the older temperature units are known as
degrees Fahrenheit, degrees Rankine, and degrees
Celsius, with degree marks shown on the unit symbol
(F, R, C).
Time. The SI unit for time is the second, and this is
preferred, but use of the minute, hour, day, and year is
permissible.
Angles. The SI unit for plane angle is the radian. The use
of the arc degree and its decimal submultiples is per-
missible when the radian is not a convenient unit. Use of
the minute and second is discouraged except possibly for
cartography. Solid angles should be expressed in
steradians.
Volume. The SI unit of volume is the cubic meter. This
unit, or one of its regularly formed multiples, is pre-
ferred for all applications. The special name liter has
been approved for the cubic decimeter (see Appendix B),
but use of the liter is restricted to the measurement of liq-
uids and gases.
Energy. The SI unit of energy, the joule, together with
its multiples, is preferred for all applications. The
kilowatt-hour is used widely as a measure of electric
energy, but this unit should not be introduced into any
new areas; eventually it should be replaced by the
megajoule.
Torque and Bending Moment. The vector product of
force and moment arm is expressed in newton meters
(N m) by SPE as a convention when expressing torque
energies.
Pressure and Stress. The SI unit for pressure and stress
is the Pascal (newton per square meter); with proper SI
prefixes it is applicable to all such measurements. Use of
the old metric gravitational units-kilogram-force per
square centimeter, kilogram-force per square millimeter,
torr, etc.-is to be discontinued. Use of the bar is
discouraged by the standards organizations.
It has been recommended internationally that pressure
units themselves should not be modified to indicate
whether the pressure is absolute (above zero) or
gauge (above atmospheric pressure). If the context
leaves any doubt as to which is meant, the word
pressure must be qualified appropriately: ...at a
gauge pressure of 13 kPa, or . . .at an absolute
pressure of 13 kPa, etc.
Units and Names To Be Avoided or Abandoned
Tables 1.1 through 1.3 include all SI units identified by
formal names, with their individual unit symbols. Vir-
tually all other named metric units formerly in use (as
well as nonmetric units) are to be avoided or abandoned.
There is a long list of such units (e.g., dyne. stokes.
esu, gauss, gilbert, abampere, statvolt, angstrom.
fermi, micron, mho, candle, calorie, atmosphere, mm
Hg, and metric horsepower). The reasons for abandon-
ing the non-9 units are discussed in Appendix B. Two of
the principal reasons are the relative simplicity and the
coherence of the SI units.
Rules for Conversion and Rounding3
Conversion
Table 1.7, Appendix D, contains general conversion fac-
tors that give exact values or seven-digit accuracy for im-
plementing these rules except where the nature of the
dimension makes this impractical.
The conversion of quantities should be handled with
careful regard to the implied correspondence between the
accuracy of the data and the given number of digits. In
all conversions, the number of significant digits retained
should be such that accuracy is neither sacrificed nor
exaggerated.
Proper conversion procedure is to multiply the
specified quantity by the conversion factor exactly as
given in Table 1.7 and then round to the appropriate
number of significant digits. For example, to convert
11.4 ft to meters: 11.4x0.3048=3.474 72, which
rounds to 3.47 m.
Accuracy and Rounding
Do not round either the conversion factor or the quantity
before performing the multiplication; this reduces ac-
56-6
PETROLEUM ENGINEERING HANDBOOK
curacy. Proper conversion procedure includes rounding
the converfed quantity to the proper number of signifi-
cant digits commensurate with its intended precision.
The practical aspects of measuring must be considered
when using SI equivalents. If a scale divided into six-
teenths of an inch was suitable for making the original
measurements, a metric scale having divisions of 1 mm
is obviously suitable for measuring in SI units, and the
equivalents should not be reported closer than the nearest
1 mm. Similarly, a gauge or caliper graduated in divi-
sions of 0.02 mm is comparable to one graduated in divi-
sions of 0.001 in. Analogous situations exist for mass,
force, and other measurements. A technique to deter-
mine the proper number of significant digits in rounding
converted values is described here for general use.
General Conversion. This approach depends on first
establishing the intended precision or accuracy of the
quantity as a necessary guide to the number of digits to
retain. The precision should relate to the number of
digits in the original. but in many cases that is not a
reliable indicator. A figure of 1. I875 may be a very ac-
curate decimalization of a noncritical I xh that should
have been expressed as I. 19. On the other hand. the
value 2 may mean about 2 or it may mean a very ac-
curate value of 2, which should then have been written as
2.0000. It is theretbre necessary to determine the intend-
ed precision of a quantity before converting. 771;s
cstitnale of ititertdnl precisiorl .~/7011/rl twl w he stnul l et
thctt1 l /l ? fl rcut-fl c~\ c~ftr7f~L4.sl r~emrft txrr 1r.s14a11\ .s17014I d hc
.vt~ul /cr fhur7 one-tend7 the tcrl rrtrt7c~e ~fotw exists. After
the precision of the dimension is estimated. the con-
verted dimension should be rounded to a minimum
number of significant digits (see section on Significant
Digits) such that a unit of the last place is equal to or
smaller than the converted precision.
1. A stirring rod 6 in. long: In this case, precision is
estimated to be about % in. (+ i/4 in.). Converted. /z in.
is 12.7 mm. The convened 6-in. dimension of 152.4 mm
should be rounded to the nearest IO mm, or I50 mm.
2. SO,OO@psi tensile strength: In this case, precision is
estimated to be about t_200 psi (i I .4 MPa) based on an
accuracy of _+0.25% for the tension tester and other fac-
tors. Therefore, the converted dimension, 344.7379
MPa. should be rounded to the nearest whole unit, 345
MPa.
3. Test pressure 2OOk 15 psi: Since one-tenth of the
tolerance is + 1.5 psi (10.34 kPa). the converted dimen-
hion should be rounded to the nearest 10 kPa. Thus.
1378.9514-t 103.421 35 kPa becomes 138Oi 100 kPa.
Special Cases. Converted values should be rounded to
the minimum number of significant digits that will main-
tain the required accuracy. In certain cases, deviation
from this practice to use convenient or whole numbers
may be feasible. In that case, the word approximate
must be used following the conversion-e.g., I%
in. =47.625 mm exact, 47.6 mm normal rounding, 47.5
mm (approximate) rounded to preferred or convenient
half-millimeter. 48 mm (approximate) rounded to whole
number.
A quantity stated as a limit, such as not more than
or maximum, must be handled so that the stated limit
is not violated. For example, a specimen at least 4 in.
wide requires a width of at least 101.6 mm, or (round-
ed) at least 102 mm.
Significant Digits. Any digit that is necessuy to drjne
the specific vulue or quantity is said to he significant.
For example, a distance measured to the nearest I m may
have been recorded as 157 m; this number has three
significant digits. If the measurement had been made to
the nearest 0.1 m, the distance may have been 157.4
m-four significant digits. In each case, the value of the
right-hand digit was determined by measuring the value
of an additional digit and then rounding to the desired
degree of accuracy. In other words, 157.4 was rounded
to 1.57; in the second case, the measurement may have
been 157.36, rounded to 157.4.
Importance of Zeros. Zeros may be used either to in-
dicate a specific value, as does any other digit, or to in-
dicate the magnitude of a number. The 1970 U.S.
population figure rounded to thousands was
203 185 000. The six left-hand digits of this number are
significant; each measures a value. The three right-hand
digits are zeros that merely indicate the magnitude of the
number rounded to the nearest thousand. To illustrate
further, each of the following estimates and
measurements is of different magnitude, but each is
specified to have only one significant digit:
1 000
100
10
0.01
0.001
0.000 1.
It is also important to note that, for the first three
numbers, the identification of significant digits is possi-
ble only through knowledge of the circumstances. For
example, the number 1000 may have been rounded from
about 965, or it may have been rounded from 999.7, in
which case all three zeros are significant.
Data of Varying Precision. Occasionally, data required
for an investigation must be drawn from a variety of
sources where they have been recorded with varying
degrees of ref-mement. Specific rules must be observed
when such data are to be added, subtracted, multiplied,
or divided.
The rule for addition and subtraction is that the answer
shall contain no significant digits farther to the right than
occurs in the least precise number. Consider the addition
of three numbers drawn from three sources, the first of
which reported data in millions, the second in thousands,
and the third in units:
163 000 000
217 885 000
96 432 768
477 317 768
This total indicates a precision that is not valid. The
numbers should jirst be rounded to one significant digit
THE SI METRIC SYSTEM OF UNITS & SPE METRIC STANDARD 58-7
farther to the right than that of the least precise number,
and the sum taken as follows.
163 Ooo 000
217 900 000
96 400 000
477 300 ooo
Then, the total is rounded to 477 000 000 as called for
by the rule. Note that if the second of the figures to be
added had been 217 985 000, the rounding before addi-
tion would have produced 218 000 000, in which case
the zero following 218 would have been a significant
digit.
The rule for multiplication and division is that the
product or quotient shall contain no more significant
digits than arc contained in the number with the f ewest
si gni j cant di gi t s used in the multiplication or division.
The difference between this rule and the rule for addition
and subtraction should be noted; for addition and sub-
traction, the rule merely requires rounding digits to the
right of the last significant digit in the least precise
number. The following illustration highlights this
difference.
Multiplication: 113.2~1.43=161.876 rounded
to 162.
Division: 113.2+1.43=79.16 rounded
to 79.2
Addition: 113.2+1.43=114.63 rounded
to 114.6
Subtraction: 113.2-1.43=111.77 rounded
to 111.8.
The above product and quotient are limited to three
significant digits because 1.43 contains only three
significant digits. In contrast. the rounded answers in the
addition and subtraction examples contain four signifi-
cant digits.
Numbers used in the illustration are all estimates or
measurements. Numben that ure cxwt counts (and con-
aversion , f i r ct or s that arc exuct) at-c treated as though thq
cmsist of ot l injrzitr rumher oj.sip$cant digit.,. Stated
more simply. when a unmt is used in computation with a
measurement. the number of significant digits in the
answer is the same as the number of significant digit?, in
rhe measurement. If a count of 40 is multiplied by a
measurement of 10.2. the product is 408. However, if 40
wcrc an estimate accurate only to the nearest IO and,
hence. contained one significant digit. the product would
be 300.
Rounding Values lo
When a figure is to be rounded to fewer digits than the
total number available, the procedure should be as
follows.
When the First Digit The Last Digit
Discarded is Retained is
less than 5 unchanged
more than 5 increased by 1
5 followed only unchanged if even,
by zeros* increased by I if odd
Unless a number of rounded values are lo appear I a gfven problem, mosl roundlngs
conform lo the ,,is, two procedures - 1.e rounding upward when the llrst dlgll dw
carded IS 5 or hlger
Examples:
4.463 25 if rounded to three places would be 4.463.
8.376 52 if rounded to three places would be 8.377.
4.365 00 if rounded to two places would be 4.36.
4.355 00 if rounded to two places would be 4.36.
Conversion of Linear Dimensions
of Interchangeable Parts
Detailed discussions of this subject are provided by
ASTM, API, and ASME publications and arc
recommended to the interested reader.
Other Units
Temperature. General guidance for converting
tolerances from degrees Fahrenheit to kelvins or degrees
Celsius is given in Table 1.5. Normally, temperatures
expressed in a whole number of degrees Fahrenheit
should be converted to the nearest 0.5 K (or 0.5C). As
with other quantities, the number of significant digits to
retain will depend on implied accuracy of the original
dimension: e.g.,*
100*5F (tolerance); implied accuracy. estimated
total 2F (nearest I C) 37.7778&2.7778C
rounds to 38+3C.
1.000~50F (tolerance): implied accuracy.
estimated total 20F (nearest 10C)
537.7778k27.7778C rounds to 54Ok3OC.
Pressure or Stress. Pressure or stress values may be
converted by the same prmciple used for other quan-
tities. Values with an uncertainty of more than 2% may
bc converted without rounding by the approximate
factor:
1 psi=7 kPa.
For conversion factors see Table I .7.
Special Length Unit-the Vara. Table 1.8* Appendix
E, provides conversion factors and explanatory notes on
the problems ofconverting the several kinds of vara units
to mctcrs.
Special Terms and Quantities Involving
Mass and Amount of Substance
The Intl. Union of Pure and Applied Chemistry. the lntl.
Union of Pure and Applied Physics. and the Intl.
See Appendlx A and pnor paragraph on General Conversion.
TABLE 1.5 -CONVERSION OF TEMPERATURE
TOLERANCE REQUIREMENTS
Tolerance Tolerance
(F) (K or C)
21 X0.5
z-2 *I
-c5 +3
210 + 5.5
A15 -8.5
220 k-11
k-25 t 14
58-8
PETROLEUM ENGINEERING HANDBOOK
Organization for Standardization provide clarifying
usages for some of the terms involving the base quan-
tities mass and amount of substance. Two of these
require modifying the terminology appearing previously
in SPEs Symbols Standards.
Table 1.6 shows the old and the revised usages.
Mental Guides for Using Metric Units
Table 1.9. Appendix F, is offered as a memory jog-
ger or guide to help locate the metric ballpark
relative to customary units. Table 1.9 is not a conversion
table. For accurate conversions, refer to Table 1.7, or to
Tables 2.2 and 2.3 for petroleum-industry units, and
round off the converted values to practical precision as
described earlier.
References*
I.
7.
3
4
5
6.
The lntematmnal System of Units (Sl). NBS Special Publica-
tion 330. U.S. Dept. of Commerce, Natl. Bureau of Standards,
Superintendent of Documents. U.S. Government Printing Office,
Washmgton. D.C. (1981). (Order by SD Catalog No.
c13.10:330/3.)
S1 Units and Recommendations for the Use of Thctr Multtplca
and of Certain Other Units, wcond edition, 1981.02-15. Intl.
Standard IS0 1000. lntl. Oganlzation for Standardlzatton.
American Natl. Standards Inst. (ANSI). New York (1981).
Standard for Metrtc Practtce, E 380-82. Amencan Sot. ftir
Testing and Materials. Philadelphia. (Slmdar matcrlal published
in 1EEE Std. 268-1982.)
A Bibliography of Metric Standard,. ANSI. New York (June
1975). (Alw &ee ANSI\ annual catalog of national and intrma-
Imnal standard\.)
.&w~c Edirorid G&P. thlrd edition. American Natl. Metric
Councd (ANMC). Washington. D.C. (July 1981).
For information on any 01 these references. Cantact the Book Order Dept at SPE
headquarters
4
10.
II.
12.
13.
14.
IS.
16.
General Principles Concerning Quantities. Unirs and Symbols,
Gm~rcrl fnrroducrion rcj /SO 31. second edition. Intl. Standard
IS0 3110. Intl. Organization for Standardization. ANSI. New
York City (1981).
American National Standard Practice for Inch-Millimeter Con-
version for Industrial Use, ANSI 848.1-1933 (Rl947). IS0
R370- 1964, Intl. Organization for Standardization. ANSI, New
York. (A later edition has been issued: Toleranced Dimen-
sions--Conversion From Inches to Millimeters and Vice Versa.
IS0 370-1975.)
Factors for High-Precision Conversion. NBS LC1071 (July
1976).
Information Processing-Representation5 of SI and Other Units
for Uae in Systems With Limited Character Sets. lntl. Standard
IS0 2955-1974. Intl. Organization for Stdndardization. ANSI.
New York Ctty. (Ref. 5 reproduces the 1973 editton of this stan-
dard in its entirety.)
Supplementary Metnc Practxe Guide for the Canadian
Petroleum Industry. fourth edition. P.F. Moore (ed.). Canadian
Petroleum Assn. (Oct. 1979).
Letter Symbols for Units of Measurement, ANSI/IEEE Std.
260-1978. Available from American Natl. Standards Inst.. New
York City.
Mechtly. E.A.: The International System trt Units-Physical
Constants and Conversion Factors, NASA SP-7012. Scientific
and Technical Information Office, NASA, Washmgton. D C.
1973 edition available from U.S. Government Printing Office,
Washington. D.C.
McElwee, P.G.: The Terns Vlrrcj. Available from Commissioner.
General Land Office, State of Texas. Auatm (April 30. 1940).
APPENDIX A3
Terminology
To ensure consistently reliable conversion and rounding
practices, a clear understanding of the related
nontechnical terms is prerequisite. Accordingly, certain
terms used in this standard are defined as follows.
Accuracy (as distinguished from precision). The
degree of conformity of a measured or calculated value
to some recognized standard or specified value. This
concept involves the systematic error of an operation,
which is seldom negligible.
Approximate. A value that is nearly but not exactly cor-
rect or accurate.
Coherence. A characteristic of a coherent system of
units, as described in Appendix B, such that the product
or quotient of any two unit quantities is the unit of the
TABLE 1.6 - SPECIAL TERMS AND QUANTITIES INVOLVING MASS AND
AMOUNT OF SUBSTANCE
Old Usage Standardized Usage
Dimensions
(IS0 Symbols, SI Unit
Term See Table 1 .l) Term Symbol
atomic weight M mass of atom
kg
(SPE Symbols Standard)
atomic weight
.
relative atomic mass
.
(elsewhere)
equivalent
-
mole mol
mass of molecule M molecular mass
kg
molar
-
molar (means, divided by l/m01
amount of substance)
molar@
-
concentration mo1/m3
molecular weight M molar mass kg/mol
(SPE Symbols Standard)
molecular weight
l
relative molecular mass
l
(elsewhere)
normal - obsolete
mDimensonless
THE SI METRIC SYSTEM OF UNITS & SPE METRIC STANDARD 58-9
resulting quantity. The SI base units, supplementary
units, and derived units form a coherent set.
Deviation. Variation from a specified dimension or
design requirement, usually defining upper and lower
limits (see also Tolerance).
Digit. One of the 10 Arabic numerals (0 to 9).
Dimension(s). Two meanings: (1) A group of fun-
damental (physical) quantities, arbitrarily selected, in
terms of which all other quantities can be measured or
identified. 9 Dimensions identify the physical nature of,
or the basic components making up. a physical quantity.
They are the bases for the formation of useful dimen-
sionless groups and dimensionless numbers and for the
powerful tool of dimensional analysis. The dimensions
for the arbitrarily selected base units of the SI are length,
mass, time, electric current. thermodynamic tempera-
ture, amount of substance. and luminous intensity. SI
has two supplementary quantities considered dimension-
less-plane angle and solid angle. (2) A geometric ele-
ment in a design, such as length and angle. or the
magnitude of such a quantity.
Figure (numerical). An arithmetic value expressed by
one or more digits or a fraction.
Nominal Value. A value assigned for the purpose of
convenient designation; a value existing in name only.
Precision (as distinguished from accuracy). The
degree of mutual agreement between individual
measurements (repeatability and reproducibility).
Quantity. A concept used for qualitative and quan-
titative descriptions of a physical phenomenon. 9
Significant Digit. Any digit that is necessary to define a
value or quantity (see text discussion).
Tolerance. The total range of variation (usually
bilateral) permitted for a size, position, or other required
quantity; the upper and lower limits between which a
dimension must be held.
U.S. Customary Units. Units based on the foot and the
pound, commonly used in the U.S. and defined by the
Natl. Bureau of Standards. Some of these units have
the same name as similar units in the U.K. (British,
English, or U.K. units) but are not necessarily equal to
them.
APPENDIX B3
SI Units
Advantages of SI Units
SI is a rationalized selection of units from the metric
system that individually are not new. They include a unit
of force (the newton), which was introduced in place of
the kilogram-force to indicate by its name that it is a unit
of force and not of mass. SI is a coherent system with
seven base units for which names, symbols, and precise
definitions have been established. Many derived units
arc defined in terms of the base units, with symbols
assigned to each; in some cases, special names and unit
symbols are given-e.g., the newton (N).
One Unit per Quantity. The great advantage of SI is
that there is one, and only one, unit for each physical
quantity-the meter for length (L), kilogram (instead of
gram) for mass (m). second for time (r). etc. From these
elemental units, units for all other mechanical quantities
are derived. These derived units are defined by simple
equations among the quantities, such as tB=dLldt
(velocity), u=dv/dt (acceleration), F=ma (force),
W=FL (work or energy), and P= Wit (power). Some of
these units have only generic names. such as meter per
second for velocity; others have special names and sym-
bols, such as newton (N) for force, joule (J) for work or
energy. and watt (W) for power. The SI uni t s. f i , r j br ce,
ener gy, and power are the same regardless of \r>hether
the process is mechanical, electrid, chemiccd, or
nuclear. A force of 1 N applied for a distance of 1 m can
produce 1 J of heat, which is identical with what 1 W of
electric power can produce in 1 second.
Unique Unit Symbols. Corresponding to the SI advan-
tages of a unique unit for each physical quantity are the
advantages resulting from the use of a unique and well-
defined set of symbols. Such symbols eliminate the con-
fusion that can arise from current practices in different
disciplines, such as the use of b for both the hur (a
unit of pressure) and bar n (a unit of area).
Decimal Relation. Another advantage of SI is its reten-
tion of the decimal relation between multiples and sub-
multiples of the base units for each physical quantity.
Prefixes are established for designating multiple and sub-
multi le
P
units from exa (10) down to atto
(I 0 s) for convenience in writing and speaking.
Coherence. Another major advantage of SI is its
coherence. This system of units has been chosen in such
a way that the equations between numerical values, in-
cluding the numerical factors, have the same form as the
corresponding equations between the quantities: this
constitutes a coherent system. Equations between
units of a coherent unit system contain as numerical fac-
tors only the number 1. In a coherent system, the product
or quotient of any two unit quantities is the unit of the
resulting quantity. For example, in any coherent system,
unit area results when unit length is multiplied by unit
length (1 m x 1 m= 1 m*), unit force when unit mass* is
multiplied by unit acceleration (1 kgx 1 m/s* = 1 N),
unit work when unit force is multiplied by unit length (1
N x 1 m= 1 J), and unit power when unit work is divided
by unit time (I J+ 1 second= 1 W). Thus, in a coherent
system in which the meter is the unit of length, the
square meter is the unit of area, but the are** and hectare
are not coherent. Much worse disparities occur in
systems of customary units (both nonmetric and older
metric) that require many numerical adjustment factors
in equations.
Base Units. Whatever the system of units, whether it be
coherent or noncoherent, particular samples of some
58-10
physical quantities must be selected arbitrarily as units of
those quantities. The remaining units are defined by ap-
propriate cxperimcnts related to the theoretical intcrrcla-
tions of all the quantities. For convenience of analysis.
units pertaining to c~r-fuin hrrsc> ylrrrfztitics ~Irf by (~~171*0-
ti or7 rc~~crrrl d us di r77~~r7si ot7al l ~~ i r7tl qxwder7t; tl7c.w ur7it.s
(I~C crr//c~! basr uni rs (Table I I ). and all others (derived
units) can be cxprcsscd algebraically in temls of the base
units. In SI. the unit of mass. the kilogram, is defined as
the mass of a prototype kilogram preserved by the Intl.
Bureau of Weights and Measures (BIPM) in Paris. All
other base units are defined in terms of reproducible
phenomena-e.g., the wave lengths and frequencies of
specified atomic transitions.
Non-S1 Metric Units
Various other units are associated with SI but are not a
part thereof. They are related to units of the system by
powers of 10 and are used in specialized branches of
physics. An example is the bar, a unit of pressure. ap-
proximately equivalent to 1 atm and exactly equal to 100
kPa. The bar is used extensively by meteorologists.
Another such unit is the gal. equal exactly to an accelera-
tion of 0.01 m/s?. It is used in geodetic work. These.
however. are not coherent units-i.e., equations involv-
ing both thcsc units and SI units cannot be written
without a factor of proportionality even though that fat-
tor may be a simple power of 10.
Originally (1795). the liter was intended to be identical
to the cubic decimeter. The Third General Conference
on Weights and Measures (CGPM) in 1901 defined the
liter as the volume occupied by the mass of 1 kilogram of
pure water at its maximum density under normal at-
mospheric pressure. Careful determinations subsequent-
ly established the liter so defined as equivalent to
1.000 028 dm. In 1964. the CGPM withdrew this
definition of the liter and declared that liter was a
special name for the cubic decimeter. Thus. its use is
pemlitted in Sl but is discouraged because it creates two
units for the same quantity and its use in precision
measurements might conflict with measurements record-
ed under the old definition.
SI Base Unit Definitions
Authorized translations of the original French definitions
of the seven base and two supplementary units of SI
follow (parenthetical items added).
Mrfer cm)-The meter is the length equal to I 650
763.73 wavelengths in vacuum of the radiation cor-
responding to the transition between the levels 2p I~) and
5d5 of the krypton-86 atom. (Adopted by I lth CGPM
1960.)
Kilogmn7 (kg)-The kilogram is the unit of mass
(and is the coherent SI unit); it is equal to the mass of the
international prototype of the kilogram. (Adopted by
First and Third CGPM 1889 and 1901.)
Sc~nrzci (s)-The second is the duration of 9 192 63 I
770 periods of the radiation corresponding to the transi-
tion between the two hyperfine levels of the ground state
of the cesium- 133 atom.* (Adopted by 13th CGPM
1967.)
Atnper~~ (A)-The ampere is that constant current
which. if maintained in two straight parallel conductors
of infinite length. of ncgliglble circular cross-section.
PETROLEUM ENGINEERING HANDBOOK
and placed one mctcr apart in vacuum. would product
hctwecn these conductors a force equal to 2 x IO -
newton per meter of length. (Adopted by Ninth CGPM
lY48.)
Kchi77 (K)-The kelvin. unit of thermodynamic
temperature. is the fraction 11273. IS of the ther-
modynamic temperature of the triple point of water.
(Adopted by 13th CGPM 1967.)
MCI/C (mol)-The mole is the amount of substance of
a system which contains as many clcmcntary entities as
thcrc are atoms in 0.012 kilograms of carbon-12.
(Adopted by 14th CGPM 1971.)
Note-When the mole is used. the elementary en-
tities must be specified and may be atoms. molecules.
ions, electrons. other particles. or specified groups of
such particles.
Crrn&/u (cd)-The candela is the luminous intensity
in a given direction of a source that emits
monochromatic radiation of frequency 540 (E + 12) hertz
(Hz) and that has a radiant intensity In that direction ol
l/683 watt per steradian.
Rudiurz (rad)-The radian is the plane angle between
two radii of a circle which cut off on the circumfcrencc
an arc equal in length to the radius.
Sr~~&iu~? (sr)-The stcradian i\ the solid angle
which. having its vertex at the center of a sphere. cuts oft
an area of the surface of the sphere equal to that of a
square with sides of length equal to the radius of the
sphere.
Definitions of SI Derived Units
Having Special Names3
Physical Quantity
Absorbed dose
Unit and Definition
The gray (Gy) is the absorbed
dose when the energy per unit
mass imparted to matter by
ionizing radiation is I J/kg.
The hrcyuerrl (Bq) is the activi-
ty of a radionuclide decaying at
the rate of one spontaneous
nuclear transition per second,
The degree Ce1siu.s (C) is equal
to the kelvin and is used in place
of the kelvin for expressing
Celsius temperature (symbol
Tot) defined by Tot =T, -To,
where TK is the thermodynamic
temperature and To =273. IS K
by definition.
The si evcrt is the dose
equivalent when the absorbed
dose of ionizing radiation
multiplied by the dimensionless
factors Q (quality factor) and N
(product of any other multiply-
ing factors) stipulated by the
Intl. Commission on Radiolog-
ical Protection is I J/kg.
The&r& (F) is the capacitance
of a capacitor between the plates
of which there appears a dif-
ference of potential of I V when
it is charged by a quantity of
electricity equal to I C.
Activity
Celsius temperature
Dose equivalent
Electric capacitance
WE SI METRIC SYSTEM OF UNITS & SPE METRIC STANDARD
58-l 1
Electric
conductance
Electric inductance
Electric potential
difference, elec-
tromotive force
Electric resistance
Energy
Force
Frequency
Illuminance
Luminous flux
Magnetic flux
Magnetic flux
density
magnetic induction
The siemens (S) is the electric
conductance of a conductor in
which a current of 1 A is pro-
duced by an electric potential
difference of 1 V.
The hpn~l (H) is the inductance
of a closed circuit in which an
electromotive force of 1 V is
produced when the electric cur-
rent in the circuit varies uniform-
ly at a rate of 1 A/s.
The volr (V) is the difference of
electric potential between two
points of a conductor carrying a
constant current of 1 A when the
power dissipated between these
points is equal to 1 W.
The ohm (Q) is the electric
resistance between two points of
a conductor when a constant dif-
ference of potential of I V, ap-
plied between these two points,
produces in this conductor a cur-
rent of I A, this conductor not
being the source of any elec-
tromotive force.
The joule (J) is the work done
when the point of application of
a force of 1 N is displaced a
distance of 1 m in the direction
of the force.
The nr~r~~ (N) is that force
that, when applied to a body
having a mass of 1 kg. gives it
an acceleration of I m/s.
The hertz (Hz) is the frequency
of a periodic phenomenon of
which the period is 1 second.
The Iu.r (Ix) is the illuminance
produced by a luminous flux of I
Im uniformly distributed over a
surface of I m2
The lumen (Im) is the luminous
flux emitted in a solid angle of 1
sr by a point source having a
uniform intensity of 1 cd.
The ember, is the magnetic
flux that, liriking a circuit of one
turn, produces in it an elec-
tromotive force of 1 V as it is
reduced to zero at a uniform rate
in I s.
The teslu (T) is the magnetic
flux density of 1 Wb/m2. In an
alternative approach to defining
the magnetic field quantities the
tesla may also be defined as the
magnetic flux density that pro-
duces on a l-m length of wire
carrying a current of 1 A,
oriented normal to the flux den-
sity, a force of 1 N, magnetic
flux density being defined as an
axial vector quantity such that
Power
Pressure or stress
Electric charge,
quantity of
electricity
No other SI derived
names at this time.
APPENDIX C3**
the force exerted on an element
of current is equal to the vector
product of this element and the
magnetic flux density.
The wutt (W) is the power that
represents a rate of energy
transfer of I J/s.
The pascul (Pa) is the pressure
or stress of I Nim2.
Electric charge is the time in-
tegral of electric current; its unit,
the coulomb (C), is equal to 1
A.s.
units have been assigned special
Style Guide for Metric Usage
Rules for Writing Metric Quantities
Capitals. I/nits-Unit names, including prefixes, are not
capitalized except at the beginning of a sentence or in
titles. Note that for degree Celsius the word
degree is lower case; the modifier Celsius is
always capitalized. The degree centrigrade is now
obsolete.
Symbols-The short forms for metric units are called
unit symbols. They are lower case except that the first
letter is upper case when the unit is named for a person.
(An exception to this rule in the U.S. is the symbol L for
liter.)
Examples: Unit Name Unit Symbol
meter** m
mm
newton 6
Pascal Pa
Printed unit symbols should have Roman (upright) let-
ters, because italic (sloping or slanted) letters are re-
served for quantity symbols, such as m for mass and L
for length.
Prejx Symbols-All prefix names, their symbols, and
pronunciation are listed in Table I .4. Notice that the top
five are upper case and all the rest lower case.
The importance of following the precise use of upper-
case and lower-case letters is shown by the following ex-
amples of prefixes and units.
G for giga; g for gram.
K for kelvin; k for kilo.
M for mega; m for milli.
N for newton; n for nano.
T for tera: t for tonne (metric ton).
information Processing-Limited Character Sets-
Prefixes and unit symbols retain their prescribed forms
regardless of the surrounding typography, except for
systems with limited character sets. IS0 has provided a
standard for such systems; this standard is
recommended.
Plurals and Fractions. Names of SI units form their
plurals in the usual manner, except for lux, hertz, and
siemens.
The spellings metre and l~tre are preferred by IS0 but meter and liter are
ottlclal u s QcNernmenl spelhngs.
58-12 PETROLEUM ENGINEERING HANDBOOK
Values less than one take the singular form of the unit
name; for example, 0.5 kilogram or % kilogram. While
decimal notation (0.5, 0.35, 6.87) is generally preferred,
the most simple fractions are acceptable, such as those
where the denominator is 2, 3, 4, or 5.
Symbols of units are the same in singular and
plural-e.g., I m and 100 m.
Periods. A period is nof used after a symbol, except at
the end of a sentence. Examples: A current of 1.5 mA is
found.. The field measured 350x 125 m.
The Decimal Marker. IS0 specifies the comma as the
decimal marker9 ; in English-language documents a dot
on the line is acceptable. In numbers less than one, a
zero should be written before the decimal sign (to pre-
vent the possibility that a faint decimal sign will be
overlooked). Example: The oral expression point
seven five is written 0.75 or 0,75.
Grouping of Numbers. Separate digits into groups of
three, counting from the decimal marker. A comma
should not be used between the groups of three9 ; in-
stead, a space is left to avoid confusion, since the comma
is the IS0 standard for the decimal marker.
In a four-digit number, the space is not required unless
the four-digit number is in a column with numbers of
five digits or more:
For 4,720,525 write 4 720 525
For 0.52875 write 0.528 75
For 6,875 write 6875 or 6 875
For 0.6875 write 0.6875 or
0.687 5
Spacing. In symbols or names for units having prefixes,
no space is left between letters making up the symbol or
the name. Examples are kA, kiloampere; and mg,
milligram.
When a symbol follows a number to which it refers, a
space must be left between the number and the symbol,
except when the symbol (such as ) appears in the
superscript position. Examples: 455 kHz, 22 mg, 20
mm, lo6 N, 30 K, 20C.
When a quantity is used as an adjective, a hyphen
should be used between the number and the symbol (ex-
cept C). Examples: It is a 35-mm film; the film width is
35 mm. I bought a 6-kg turkey; the turkey weighs 6 kg.
Leave a space on each side of signs for multiplication,
division, addition, and subtraction, except within a com-
pound symbol. Examples: 4 cm x 3 m (not 4 cm X 3 m);
kg/m3; N.m.
Powers. For unit M~ZP.P, use the modifier .rquared or
cubed after the unit name (except for area and
volume)-e.g.. meter per second squared. For area or
volume, place a modifier before the unit name. including
derived units:-e.g.. cubic meter and watt per square
meter.
For unit symbols. write the symbol for the unit fol-
lowed by the power superscript-e.g., 14 m and 26
cm3.
Compound Units. For a unit name (not a symbol) de-
rived as a quotient (e.g., for kilometers per hour), it is
preferable not to use a slash (/) as a substitute for per
except where space is limited and a symbol might not be
understood. Avoid other mixtures of words and symbols.
Examples: Use meter per second, not m/s. Use only one
per in any combination of units-e.g., meter per sec-
ond squared, not meter per second per second.
For a unit symbol derived as a quotient do not, for ex-
ample, write k.p.h. or kph for km/h because the first two
are understood only in the English language, whereas
km/h is used in all languages. The symbol km/h also can
be written with a negative exponent-e.g., km. h - .
Never use more than one slash (/) in any combination
of symbols unless parentheses are used to avoid ambigui-
ty; examples are m/s*, not m/s/s; W/(m.K), not
W/m/K.
For a unit name derived as a product, a space or a
hyphen is recommended but never a product dot (a
period raised to a centered position)-e.g., write newton
meter or newton-meter, not newton.meter. In the case of
the watt hour, the space may be omitted-watthour.
For a unit symbol derived as a product, use a product
dot-e.g., N.m. For computer printouts, automatic
typewriter work, etc., a dot on the line may be used. Do
not use the product dot as a multiplier symbol for
calculations-e.g., use 6.2~5, not 6.2.5.
Do not mix nonmetric units with metric units, except
those for time, plane angle, or rotation-e.g., use
kg/m3, not kglft3 or kg/gal.
A quantity that constitutes a ratio of two like quantities
should be expressed as a fraction (either common or
decimal) or as a percentage-e.g., the slope is l/l00 or
0.01 or l%, not 10 mm/m or 10 m/km.
SI Prefix Usage. General--S1 prefixes should be used to
indicate orders of magnitude, thus eliminating non-
significant digits and leading zeros in decimal fractions
and providing a convenient alternative to the powers-
of-10 notation preferred in computation. For example,
12 300 m (in computations) becomes 12.3 km (in non-
computation situations); 0.0123 hA (12.3 x 10m9 A for
computations) becomes 12.3 nA (in noncomputation
situations).
Selection-When expressing a quantity by a numerical
value and a unit, prefixes should be chosen so that the
numerical value lies between 0.1 and 1000. Generally,
prefixes representing steps of 1000 are recommended
(avoiding hecto, deka, deci, and centi). However, some
situations may justify deviation from the above:
1. In expressing units raised to powers (such as area,
volume and moment) the prefixes hecto, deka, deci, and
centi may be required-e.g., cubic centimeter for
volume and cm4 for moment.
2. In tables of values of the same quantity, or in a
discussion of such values within a given context, it
generally is preferable to use the same unit multiple
throughout.
3. For certain quantities in particular applications, one
certain multiple is used customarily; an example is the
millimeter in mechanical engineering drawings, even
when the values lie far outside the range of 0.1 to 1000
mm.
Powers of Units-An exponent attached to a symbol
THE SI METRIC SYSTEM OF UNITS & SPE METRIC STANDARD
58-13
containing a prefix indicates that the multiple or sub-
mulripie of the unit (the unit with its prefix) is raised to
the power expressed by the exponent. For example,
1 cm3 =(10p2m)3
= 10 -6,3
1 ns- =(10P9s) -1
=109s-
1 mm*/s =(10-m)2/s = 10-5m2/s
Double Pre$xes-Double or multiple prefixes should
not be used. For example,
use GW (gigawatt), not LMW;
use pm (picometer), not ppm;
use Gg (gigagram), not Mkg;
use 13.58 m, not 13 m 580 mm.
Prefix Mixtures-Do not use a mixture of prefixes
unless the difference in size is extreme. For example,
use 40 mm wide and 1500 mm long, not 40 mm wide
and 1.5 m long; however, 1500 m of 2-mm-diameter
wire is acceptable.
Compound Units--It is preferable that prefixes not be
used in the denominators of complex units, except for
kilogram (kg) which is a base unit. However, there are
cases where the use of such prefixes is necessary to ob-
tain a numerical value of convenient size. Examples of
some of these rare exceptions are shown in the tables
contained in these standards.
Prefixes may be applied to the numerator of a com-
pound unit; thus, megagram per cubic meter (Mg/m3),
but not kilogram per cubic decimeter (kg/dm3) nor gram
per cubic centimeter (g/cm3). Values required outside
the range of the prefixes should be expressed by powers
of 10 applied to the base unit.
Unit of Mass-Among the base units of SI, the
kilogram is the only one whose name, for historical
reasons, contains a prefix; it is also the coherent SI unit
for mass (See Appendices A and B for discussions of
coherence.) However, names of decimal multiples and
submultiples of the unit of mass are formed by attaching
prefixes to the word gram.
Prefises Alone-Do not use a prefix without a
unit-e.g., use kilogram, not kilo.
Calculations-Errors in calculations can be minimized
if, instead of using prefixes, the base and the coherent
derived SI units are used, expressing numerical values in
powers-of-10 notation-e.g., 1 MJ= lo6 J.
Spelling of Vowel Pairs. There are three cases where
the final vowel in a prefix is omitted: megohm, kilohm,
and hectare. In all other cases, both vowels are retained
and both are pronounced. No space or hyphen should be
used.
Complicated Expressions. To avoid ambiguity in com-
plicated expressions, symbols are preferred over words.
Attachment. Attachment of letters to a unit symbol for
giving information about the nature of the quantity is in-
correct: MWe for megawatts electrical (power), kPag
for kilopascais gauge (pressure), Paa for pascals ab-
solute (pressure), and Vat for volts ac are not ac-
ceptable. If the context is in doubt on any units used,
supplementary descriptive phrases should be added to
making the meanings clear.
Equations. When customary units appear in equations,
the SI equivalents should be omitted. Instead of inserting
the latter in parentheses, as in the case of text or small
tables, the equations should be restated using SI unit
symbols, or a sentence, paragraph, or note should be
added stating the factor to be used to convert the
calculated result in customary units to the preferred SI
units.
Pronunciation of Metric Terms
The pronunciation of most of the unit names is well
known and uniformly described in U.S. dictionaries, but
four have been pronounced in various ways. The follow-
ing pronunciations are recommended:
candela - Accent on the second syllable and
pronounce it like de/l.
joule
Pascal
- Pronounce it to rhyme with pool.
- The preferred pronunciation rhymes
with rascal. An acceptable second
choice puts the accent on the second
syllable.
siemens - Pronounce it like sea,nerl .r.
For pronunciation of unit prefixes, see Table 1.4.
Typewriting Recommendations
Superscripts. The question arises of how numerical
superscripts should be typed on a machine with a con-
ventional keyboard. With an ordinary keyboard.
numerals and the minus sign can be raised to the
superscript position by rolling the platen half a space
before typing the numeral, using care to avoid in-
terference with the text in the line above.
Special Characters. For technical work, it is useful to
have Greek letters available on the typewriter. If all SI
symbols for units are to be typed properly, a key with the
upright Greek lower-case p (pronounced mew. not
*moo) is necessary, since this is the symbol for micro.
meaning one millionth. The symbol can be approximated
on a conventional machine by using a lower-case u and
adding the tail by hand (p). A third choice is to spell out
the unit name in full.
For units of electricity, the Greek upper-case omega
(Q) for ohm also will be useful; when it is not available,
the word ohm can be spelled out.
It is fortunate that, except for the more extensive use
of the Greek p for micro and Q for ohm, the change to SI
units causes no additional difficulty in manuscript
preparation.
The Letter for Liter. On most U.S. typewriters, there is
little difference between the lower-case cl (I) and
the numerical one (1). The European symbol for
liter is a simple upright bar; the Canadians I3 used a
script P but now have adopted the upright capital L; AN-
SI now recommends the upright capital L.
Typewriter Modification. Where frequently used, the
thllowing symbols could be included on typewriters:
superscripts and for squared and cubed; Greek p for
micro; for degree; . for a product dot (not a period) for
symbols derived as a product; and Greek Q for ohm.
58-l 4 PETROLEUM ENGINEERING HANDBOOK
A special type-ball that contains all the superscripts, FL,
Q, and other characters used in technical reports is
vailable for some typewriters. Some machines have
replaceable character keys.
Longhand. To assure legibility of the symbols m, n. and
p. it is recommended that these three symbols be written
to resemble printing. For example. write nm, not ,I~,,.
The symbol p should have a long distinct tail and should
have the upright form (not sloping or italic).
Shorthand. Stenographers will find that the SI symbols
generally are quicker to write than the shorthand forms
for the unit names.
APPENDIX D
General Conversion Factors
General
Table 1.7 is intended to serve two purposes:
1. To express the definitions of general units of
mcasurc ah exact numerical multiples of coherent
m&c units. Relationships that are exact in terms of
the fundamental SI unit arc followed by an asterisk.
Relationships that are not followed by an astcrlsk either
arc the result of physical measurements or arc only
appmximatc.
2. To provide tnultiplying factors for converting cx-
prcssions of measurements given by numbers and
2encral or miscellaneous units to corresponding new
numbers and metric units.
Notation
Conversion factors are presented for ready adaptation to
computer readout and electronic data transmission. The
factors are written as a number equal to or greater than
one and less than IO, with six or fewer decimal places
(i.e.. seven or fewer total digits). Each number is fol-
lowed by the letter E (for exponent), a plus or minus
symbol, and two digits that indicate the power of 10 by
which the number must be multiplied to obtain the cor-
rect value. For example,
3.523 907 (E-02) is 3.523 907~ IO-
or
0.035 239 07.
Similarly,
3.386 389 (E+03) is 3.386 389~ IO3
or
3 386.389.
An asterisk (*) after the numbers shown indicates that
the conversion factor is exact and that all subsequent
digits (for rounding purposes) are zero. All other conver-
sion factors have been rounded to the figures given in ac-
cordance with procedures outlined in the preceding text.
Based on ASTM Pub E380-82 @?I 3), values Of COelSlO IaCtOrs tabulated
herewth are identical with those in E380-82, generally slm~far material IS found m
Ref 4 Conversion values in earlier edltlons of E 380 (for example E 380.74) are
based on Ref 15 wh,ch has available some faclors w,,h more than seven d,g,,s
Where fewer than six decimal places are shown, more
precision is not warranted.
The following is a further example of the use of Table
1.7.
To Convert From To Multiply By
pound-force per
square foot
pound-force per
square inch
inch
Pa 4.788 026 E+OI
Pa 6.894 757 E+03
m 2.540* E-02
These conversions mean that
I Ibf/ft becomes 47.880 26 Pa,
I Ibf/in. becomes 6894.757 Pa or
6.894 757 kPa, and
I inch becomes 0.0254 m (exactly).
The unit symbol for pound-force sometimes is written Ibf
and sometimes lb, or lb/: the form Ibf is recommended.
Organization
The conversion factors generally arc liatcd alphabetically
by units having specific names and compound units
derived from these specific units. A number of units
starting with the pound symbol (lb) arc located In the
p section of the list.
Conversion factors classified by physical quantities arc
listed in Refs. 3 and 4.
The conversion factors for other compound units can
be generated easily from numbers given in the
alphabetical list by substitution of converted units. Two
examples follow.
I. Find the conversion factor for productivity in&x,
(B/D)/psi to (mj/d)/Pa. Convert 1 B/D to I.589 873
(E-01) m/d and I psi to 6.894 7.57 (E+03) Pa. Then.
substitute
[ 1.589 873 (E-01)]/]6.894 757 (E-03)]
=2.305 916 (E-OS) (m3/d)/Pa.
2. Find the conversion factor for tonf.mile/ft to
MJim. Convert I tonf to 8.896 444 (E+03) N: 1 mile to
1.609 344 (E+03) m; and I ii to 3.048* (E-01) m.
Then. substitute
18.896 444 (E+03)] [I.609 344 (E+03)]
+[3.048 (E-O])]
=4.697 322 (E+07) (N.m)/m or J/m
=4.697 322 (E+Ol) MJim.
When conversion factors for complex compound units
are being calculated from Table I .7. numerical uncer-
tainties may be present in the seventh (or lesser last
significant) digit of the answer because of roundings
already taken for the last digit of tabulated values.
Mechtly provides conversion factors of more than
\cvcn digits for certain quantities.
THE SI METRIC SYSTEM OF UNITS & SPE METRIC STANDARD 58-15
To Convert From
abampere
abcoulomb
abfarad
abhenry
abmho
abohm
abvolt
acrefoot (U.S. survey)
acre (U.S survey)
ampere hour
are
angstrom
astronomical unit
atmosphere (standard)
atmosphere (technical = 1 kgf/cm2)
bar
barn
barrel (for petroleum, 42 gal)
board foot
Elntish thermal unit (International Table)
Bntish thermal unit (mean)
Bntish thermal unit (thermochemical)
Bntish thermal unit (39F)
Bntish thermal umt (59F)
Bntlsh thermal unit (60F)
Btu (International Table)-fV(hr-ft2-F)
(thermal conductlvrty)
Btu (thermochemical)-ft/(hr-ft*-OF)
(thermal conductlvtty)
Btu (International Table)-m.i(hr-R*-F)
(thermal conductlvrty)
Btu (thermochemical)-in.(hr-RZ-F)
(thermal conductivity)
Btu (International Table)-in.i(s-Hz-F)
(thermal conductivity)
Btu (thermochemical)-in./(s-f12-F)
(thermal conductlvily)
B1u (International Table)/hr
Btu (thermochemical)/hr
Btu (thermochemical):mm
Btu (thermochemical)%
Btu (International Table)ift?
Btu (thermochemlcai)ifV
Btu (thermochemical)i(ft*-hr)
Btu (thermochemical)i(H2-min)
Btu (thermochemical)i(ft*-s)
Btu (thermochemical)/(irxZ-s)
Btu (International Table)I(hr-V-OF)
(thermal conductance)
Btu (thermochemical)i(hr-V-OF)
(thermal conductance)
Btu (International Table)i(s-R*-F)
Btu (thermochemical)@tt*-OF)
Btu (International Table)ilbm
Btu (thermochemical):lbm
Btu (International Table)i(lbm-F)
(heat capacity)
Btu (thermochemical)i(lbm-F)
(heat capaaty)
TABLE 1.7-ALPHABETICAL LIST OF UNITS
(symbols of SI units given in parentheses)
To
ampere (A)
coulomb (C)
farad (F)
henry (H)
siemens (S)
ohm (0)
volt (V)
meter3 (m3)
mete? (m)
coulomb (C)
meter* (m2)
meter (m)
meter (m)
Pascal (Pa)
Pascal (Pa)
Pascal (Pa)
meter* (m*)
meter3 (m)
meter3 (m)
joule (J)
loule (J)
joule (J)
joule (J)
joule (J)
joule (J)
watt per meter kelvin [W/(mK)]
watt per meter kelvin [W/(mK)]
watt per meter kelvin [W/(m.K)]
watt per meter kelvin [Wl(m.K)]
watt per meter kelvin [W/(m.K)]
watt per meter kelvin [Wl(m.K)]
watt(W)
watt (W)
watt(W)
watt (W)
joule per meter2 (Jim*)
joule per meter2 (Jim*)
watt per mete? (W/ml)
watt per meter2 (W/m)
watt per mete? (W/m*)
watt per mete? (W/m)
watt per meter* kelvin [W/(m.K)]
watt per meter* kelvin [W/(m*.K)]
watt per meter* kelvin [W/(m*.K)]
watt per meter2 kelvin [W/(m.K)]
joule per kilogram (J/kg)
joule per kilogram (J/kg)
joule per kilogram kelvin [J/(kg.K)]
joule per ktlogram kelvin [J/(kgeK)]
Multiply By
1 .O E+Ol
1 .O E+Ol
1 .O E+O9
1.0 E-09
1 .O E+09
1.0 E-09
1.0 E-08
1.233489 E+03
4.046 873 E + 03
3.6 E+03
1 .O E+02
1 .O E-10
1.495979 E+ll
1.013250 E+05
9.806 650 E + 04
1 .O E+05
1 .O E-28
1.589873 E-01
2.359 737 E - 03
1.055 056 E + 03
1.05587 E+03
1.054 350 E + 03
1.05967 E+03
1.05480 E+03
1.05468 E+03
1.730 735 E f 00
1.729 577 E + 00
1.442 279 E ~ 01
1.441 314 E-01
5.192 204 E +02
5.188 732 E+02
2.930711 E-01
2.928 751 E - 01
1.757250 E+Ol
1.054350 E+03
1.135653 E+04
1.134893 E+04
3.152481 E-00
1.891 489 E + 02
1.134893 E+04
1.634 246 E + 06
5.678 263 E + 00
5.674 466 E + 00
2.044 175 E + 04
2.042 808 E + 04
2.326 E+03
2.324 444 E + 03
4.186 8 E+03
4.184 000 E +03
Fence 1893 the U S bass 01 length measurement has been dewed IrOm metric standards In 1959 a small rellnement was made I the defimlmn of the yard to resolve
d,screpanc,es both I this country and abroad. which changed ,ts length from 3600 3937 m lo 0 9144 m exactly This resulted I the new value being shorter by two parts I a
rrvlnn At the same time it was deaded that any data r leet derived from and publIshed as a result of geodetic surveys withm the U S would wna~n with the old standard
(1 f, = ,200 3937 m) unt,l further dec,s,on Th,s loot IS named the U S suvey loot As a result, all U S land measurements I U S. cstoma~ 1,s WIII relate tothe meter by the
old standard All the mnvers~on factors I these tables for umts relerenced to thus loatnote are based on the U.S survey foot. ratherthaiihe inlernatu,nal loot Con&on
Iactors for me land measure glen below may be delemned from the loltowlng relatlonships
1 league = 3 miles (exactly)
1 rod = 16~ fl (exactly]
1 chain = 66 fl (exactly)
1 SectIon 1 sq mile
1 townsh,p = 36 sq m,les
@This value was adopted m 1956. Some of the older lnlernatlonal Tables use Ihe value 1 055 D4 E + 03 The exact con~ers!on factor IS 1 055 055 852 62 E + 03
58-16 PETROLEUM ENGINEERING HANDBOOK
TABLE 1.7-ALPHABETICAL LIST OF UNITS (continued)
(symbols of SI units given in parentheses)
To Convert From
bushel (U.S.)
caliber (inchj
calorie (International Table)
calorie (mean)
calorie (thermochemical)
calorie (15C)
calorie (20C)
calorie (kilogram, International Table)
calorie (kilogram, mean)
calorie (kilogram, thermochemical)
cal (thermochemical)/cm*
cal (International Table)/g
cal (thermochemical)ig
cal (International Table)/(gX)
cal (thermochemical)/(gX)
cal (thermochemical)imin
cal (thermochemical)is
cal (thermochemical)/(cmz.min)
cal (thermochemical)/(cm**s)
cal (thermochemical)~(cm+C)
capture unit (cu. = 10m3 cm-)
carat (metric)
centimeter of mercury (0C)
centimeter of water (4C)
centipoise
centistokes
circular mil
cl0
cup
curie
cycle per second
day (mean solar)
day (sidereal)
degree (angle)
degree Celsius
degree centigrade (see degree Celsius)
degree Fahrenheit
degree Fahrenheit
degree Rankine
Fshr-ft2/Btu (International Table)
(thermal resistance)
F.hr-ftVBtu (thermochemical)
(thermal resistance)
denier
dyne
dynecm
dyne/cm2
electronvolt
EMU of capacitance
EMU of current
EMU of electric potential
EMU of inductance
EMU of resistance
ESU of capacitance
ESU of current
ESU of electnc potential
ESU of inductance
ESU of resistance
erg
erg/cm%
erg/s
faraday (based on carbon-l 2)
faraday (chemical)
faraday (physical)
fathom
fermi (femtometer)
fluid ounce (U.S.)
foot
foot (U.S. survey)1
To
mete? (ml)
meter (m)
joule (J)
joule (J)
joule (J)
joule (J)
joule (J)
joule (J)
joule (J)
joule (J)
joule per meter* (J/m)
joule per kilogram (J/kg)
joule per kilogram (J/kg)
joule per kilogram kelvin [Jl(kgK)]
joule per kilogram kelvin [J/(kg.K)]
watt (W)
watt (W)
watt per meter (W/m*)
watt per mete? (W/m2)
watt per meter kelvin [W/(m.K)]
per meter (m-l)
kilogram (kg)
Pascal (Pa)
Pascal (Pa)
Pascal second (Pas)
mete? per second (m*/s)
mete? (m2)
kelvin mete? per watt [(Km*)/W]
meteP (m3)
becquerel (Bq)
hertz (Hz)
second (s)
second (s)
radian (rad)
kelvin (K)
degree Celsius
kelvin (K)
kelvin (K)
kelvin mete? per watt [(Km*)/W]
kelvin meter per watt [(K.m*)IW]
kilogram per meter (kg/m)
newton (N)
newton meter (N.m)
Pascal (Pa)
joule (J)
farad (F)
ampere (A)
volt (V)
henry U-V
ohm (0)
farad (F)
ampere (A)
volt (V)
henry 0-U
ohm (0)
joule (J)
watt per meter* (W/m>)
watt (W)
coulomb (C)
coulomb (C)
coulomb (C)
meter (m)
meter (m)
meter (m3)
meter (m)
meter (m)
Multiply By
3.523 907 E - 02
2.54 E-02
4.1868 E+OO
4.19002 E+OO
4.184 E+OO
4.185 80 E+OO
4.181 90 E+OO
4.186 8 E+03
4.190 02 E+03
4.184 E+03
4.184 E+04
4.186 E+03
4.184 E+03
4.186 8 E+03
4.184 E+03
6.973 333 E - 02
4.184 E+OO
6.973 333 E + 02
4.184 E+O4
4.184 E+02
1 .O E-01
2.0 E-04
1.33322 Et03
9.806 38 E + 01
1 .O E-03
1 .O E-06
5.067 075 E - 10
2.003 712 E-01
2.365 882 E - 04
3.7 Et10
1 .O E+OO
8.640 000 E + 04
8.616 409 E+04
1745329 E-02
T, = T,c + 273.15
r, = (T, - 32)11.8
T, = (T, + 459.67)/1.8
r, = J41.8
1.781 102 E-01
1.762 250 E - 01
1.111 111 E-07
1 .O E-05
1 .O E-07
1 .O E-01
1.602 19 E-19
1 .O E+O9
1 .O E+Ol
1 .O E-08
1 .O E-09
1 .O E-09
1.112650 E-12
3.335 6 E- 10
2.997 9 E+02
8.987554 E+ll
8.987 554 E + 11
1 .o E-07
1 .O E-03
1 .O E-07
9.648 70 E + 04
9.649 57 E + 04
9.652 19 E+04
1.828 8 E+OO
1 .o E-15
2.957 353 E - 05
3.048 E-01
3.048 006 E -01
THE SI METRIC SYSTEM OF UNITS & SPE METRIC STANDARD
TABLE 1.7-ALPHABETICAL LIST OF UNITS (continued)
(symbols of SI units given in parentheses)
To Convert From
foot of water (39.2F)
sq ft
ft*/hr (thermal diffusivity)
ftV3
cu ft (volume; section modulus)
ftYmin
W/S
ff (moment of section)@)
fUhr
ft/min
ftk
ft/SZ
footcandle
footlambert
ft-lbf
ft-lbf/hr
ft-lbfimin
ft-lbf/s
ft-poundal
free fall, standard (g)
cm/s?
qallon (Canadian liquid)
gallon (U.K. liquid)
gallon (U.S. dry)
gallon (US liquid)
gal (U.S. liquid)iday
gal (US. liquid)/min
gal (U.S. liquid)/hphr
(SFC, specific fuel consumption)
gamma (magnetic field strength)
gamma (magnetic flux density)
gauss
gilbert
gill (U.K.)
gill (U.S.)
grad
grad
grain (117000 Ibm avoirdupois)
grain (Ibm avoirdupoisi7000)lgaI
(U.S. liquid)
gram
glcm3
gram-force/cm2
hectare
horsepower (550 ft-lbfis)
horsepower (boiler)
horsepower (electric)
horsepower (metric)
horsepower (water)
horsepower (U.K.)
hour (mean solar)
hour (sidereal)
hundredweight (long)
hundredweight (short)
inch
inch of mercury (32F)
inch of mercury (60F)
inch of water (39.2F)
inch of water (60F)
sq in.
cu in. (volume; section modulus)i41
in.3/min
in4 (moment of section)13
in/s
in .I$
kayser
kelvin
To
Pascal (Pa)
meter2 (m)
mete? per second (m*is)
meter? per second (mis)
mete? (m3)
mete? per second (m1.s)
mete? per second (mVs)
mete? (ml)
meter per second (m/s)
meter per second (m/s)
meter per second (m/s)
meter per second2 (misz)
Iux (lx)
candela per meter2 (cdim2)
joule (J)
watf (W)
watt (wj
watt (W)
joule (J)
meter per second (m/s)
meter per second2 (m/s)
mete? (m3)
mete? (m3)
mete? (m3)
mete? (mJ)
mete? per second (mVs)
mete? per second (m%)
mete? per joule (mYJ)
ampere per meter (Aim)
tesla (T)
tesla (T)
ampere (A)
mete? (m3)
mete? (ma)
degree (angular)
radian (rad)
kilogram (kg)
kilogram per mete? (kg/m3)
kilogram (kg)
kilogram per mete? (kg/m3)
Pascal (Pa)
meter* (m2)
watt (W)
watt (W)
watt (W)
watt (W)
watt (W)
watt (W)
second (s)
second (s)
kilogram (kg)
kilogram (kg)
meter (m)
Pascal (Pa)
Pascal (Pa)
Pascal (Pa)
Pascal (Pa)
meter* (m*)
meteP (m)
mete? per second (m%)
meteP (ma)
meter per second (m/s)
meter per second* (m/s2)
1 per meter (1 /m)
degree Celsius
58-17
Multiply By
2.988 98 E +03
9.290 304 E - 02
2.580 640 E - 05
9.290 304 E - 02
2.831 685 E - 02
4.719 474 E -04
2.831 685 E -02
8.630 975 E -03
8.466 667 E - 05
5.080 E-03
3.048 E-01
3.048 E-01
1.076391 E+Ol
3.426 259 E + 00
1.355818 E+OO
3.766 161 E -04
2.259 697 E - 02
1.355818 E+OO
4.214 011 E -02
9.806 650 E + 00
1 .O E-02
4.546 090 E - 03
4.546 092 E - 03
4.404 884 E - 03
3.785412 E-03
4.381 264 E - 08
6.309 020 E - 05
1.410089 E-09
7.957 747 E - 04
1 .O E-09
1 .o E-04
7.957 747 E - 01
1.420 654 E - 04
1.182941 E-04
9.0 E-01
1.570796 E-02
6.479 891 l E - 05
1.711 806 E-02
1 .O E-03
1 .O Et03
9.806 650 E + 01
1 .O E+04
7.456 999 E + 02
9.809 50 E + 03
7.460 E+02
7.354 99 E+02
7.460 43 E + 02
7.457 0 E+O2
3.600 000 E + 03
3.590 170 E + 03
5.080 235 E + 01
4.535 924 E + 01
2.54 E-02
3.386 38 E + 03
3.376 85 E + 03
2.490 82 E + 02
2.488 4 E+02
6.451 6 E-04
1.638 706 E ~ 05
2.731 177 E-07
4.162 314 E-07
2.54 E-02
2.54 E-02
1 .O E+02
T., = T, - 273.15
I31 Thus sometimes IS tailed the rrwment of merha of a plane sechon about a spafled ~XIS
14 The exact c~nwrslon factor IS 1.636 706 4E-05
58-18 PETROLEUM ENGINEERING HANDBOOK
TABLE 1.7-ALPHABETICAL LIST OF UNITS (continued)
(symbols of SI units given in parentheses)
To Convert From To
kilocalorie (International Table) joule (J)
kilocalorie (mean) joule (J)
kilocalorie (thermochemical) joule (J)
kilocalorie (thermochemical)imin watt (W)
kilocalorie (thermochemical)/s watt (W)
kilogram-force (kgf) newton (N)
kgf.m newton meter (N.m)
kgfs*im (mass) kilogram (kg)
kgf/cm2 Pascal (Pa)
kgf/m* Pascal (Pa)
kgf/mm? Pascal (Pa)
km/h meter per second (m/s)
kilopond newton (N)
kilowatthour (kW-hr) joule (J)
kip (1000 Ibf) newton (N)
kip/in.* (ksi) Pascal (Pa)
knot (international) meter per second (m/s)
lambert candela per meteP (cd/m*)
lambert candela per mete? (cd/m*)
langley joule per mete? (J/mz)
league meter (m)
light year meter (m)
IiteV meter-l (ml)
maxwell weber (Wb)
mho siemens (S)
microinch meter (m)
microsecond/foot (@ft) microsecond/meter (&m)
micron meter (m)
mil meter (m)
mile (international) meter (m)
mile (statute) meter (m)
mile (U.S. survey)) meter (m)
mile (international nautical) meter (m)
mile (U.K. nautical) meter (m)
mile (U.S. nautical) meter (m)
sq mile (international)
sq mile (U.S. survey)
mileihr (international)
mileihr (international)
mileimin (international)
mile/s (international)
millibar
millimeter of mercury (0C)
minute (angle)
minute (mean solar)
mcnute (sidereal)
month (mean calendar)
oersted
ohm centimeter
ohm circular-mil per ft
ounce (avoirdupois)
ounce {troy or apothecary)
ounce (U.K. fluid)
ounce (U.S. fluidj
ounce-force
ozf.in.
oz (avoirdupois)igal (U.K. liquid)
oz (avoirdupois)/qal (U.S. liquid)
oz (avoirdupois)&?
oz (avoirdupois)/fF
oz (avoirdupois)/yd2
parsec
peck (U.S.)
pennyweight
perm (C)@)
mete? (m2)
mete? (m2)
meter per second (m/s)
kilometer per hour (kmih)
meter per second (m/s)
meter per second (m/s)
Pascal (Pa)
Pascal (Pa)
radian (rad)
second (s)
second (s)
second (s)
ampere per meter (A/m)
ohm meter (0.m)
ohm millimeter* per meter
[(0.mm2)m]
kilogram (kg)
kilogram (kg)
meter3 (m)
mete? (m3)
newton (N)
newton meter (N.m)
kilogram per meterj (kg/m>)
kilogram per metep (kgimJ)
kilogram per meterj (kg/mJ)
kilogram per meter2 (kg/m2)
kilogram per meter (kg/m)
meter (m)
mete? (m3)
kilogram (kg)
kilogram per Pascal second meter*
[kg!(Pas.m2)]
Multiply By
4.186 8 E+03
4.190 02 E+03
4.184 E+03
6.973 333 E + 01
4.184 E+03
9.806 65 E + 00
9.806 65 E + 00
9.806 65 E + 00
9.806 65 E + 04
9.806 65 E + 00
9.806 65 E + 06
2.777 778 E - 01
9.806 65 E + 00
3.6 E+06
4.448 222 E + 03
6.894 757 E + 06
5.144444 E-01
1 in E+04
3.183099 E+03
4.184 E+04
(see Footnote 1)
9.46055 E+15
1.0 E-03
1 .o E-08
1 .o E+OO
2.54 E-08
3.280 840 E + 00
1 .O E-06
2.54 E-05
1.609 344 E + 03
1.609 3 E+03
1.609 347 E + 03
1.852 E+03
1.853 184 E+03
1.852 E+03
2.589 988 E + 06
2.589 998 E + 06
4.470 4 E-01
1.609 344 E + 00
2.682 24 E +Ol
1.609 344 E+03
1 .O E+02
1.33322 E+02
2.908 882 E - 04
6.0 E+Ol
5.983617 E+Ol
2.628 000 E + 06
7.957 747 E + 01
1 .O E-02
1.662 426 E ~ 03
2.834 952 E ~ G2
3.110348 E-02
2.841 307 E-05
2.957 353 E - 05
2.780 139 E-01
7.061 552 E - 03
6.236 021 E + 00
7.489 152 E+OO
1.729994 E+03
3.051 517 E-01
3.390 575 E - 02
3.085 678 E + 16
8.809 768 E ~ 03
1.555 174 E-03
5.721 35 E-11
%, 1964 the General Conference on Weights and Measures adopted the name liter as a special name for the c,,blc decr,,eter Before ,h,s dec,s,on ,be ,,ter d,f,e,ed
slightly (prewous value, 1 WO 028 dm3 and m expression of preclslon volume measurement this lact must be kept I mind
t61Not the same as resewmr per,
THE Sf METRIC SYSTEM OF UNITS & SPE METRIC STANDARD
TABLE 1.7-ALPHABETICAL LIST OF UNITS (continued)
(symbols of SI units given in parentheses)
To Convert From
perm (23C)16
perm.in. (OC)c71
perm.in. (23C)
phol
oica (orinters)
pint (U.S. dryj
oint (U.S. liauid)
point (printers)
poise (absolute viscosity)
pound (lbm avoirdupois)@
pound (troy or apothecary)
Ibm-ftz (moment of Inertia)
Ibm-in.? (moment of inertia)
Ibmift-hr
lbmift -s
IbmW
I bm/ft3
Ibm/gal (U.K. liquid)
lbmigal (U.S. liquid)
lbmihr
Ibm/(hp hr)
(SFC, specific fuel consumption)
Ibmlin.3
lbmimin
lbmis
Ibm/yd3
poundal
poundalift
poundal-s/R2
pound-force (lbf)91
IbfWO
Ibf-ft:in.J
lbf-in.l
Ibf-rn.:ln.l
Ibf-sift
lbfift
IbfW
Ibfiin.
Ibf/itxz (psi)
lbfllbm (thrust/weight [mass] ratio)
quart (U.S. dry)
quart (U.S. liauid)
rad (radiationdose absorbed)
rhe
rod
roentgen
second (angle)
second (sidereal)
section
shake
kilogram per Pascal second mete?
[kg/( Pasm2)]
krlogram per Pascal second meter
[kg/(Pasm)]
kilogram per Pascal second meter
[kmi(Pasm)]
lumen per mete? (lm/m2)
meter (m)
metep (m3)
mete? (m3)
meter (m)
Pascal second (Pas)
kilogram (kg)
kilogram (kg)
kilogram meter (kg-m)
kilogram mete? (kg-m*)
Pascal second (Pas.)
Pascal second (Pas)
kilogram per mete? (kg/m2)
kilogram per mete? (kg/m3)
kilogram per mete? (kg/m3)
kilogram per meter3 (kg/m3)
kilogram per second (kg/s)
slug
slug/(ft-s)
slug/fV
statampere
statcoulomb
statfarad
stathenry
statmho
statohm
statvolt
stere
krlogram per Joule (kg/J)
krlogram per mete? (kg/ma)
ktlogram per second (kg/s)
kilogram per second (kg/s)
kilogram per meter] (kgim3)
newton (N)
Pascal (Pa)
Pascal second (Pas)
newton (N)
newton meter (N.m)
newton meter per meter [(N-m)/m)]
newton meter (N.m)
newton meter per meter [(N-m)/mj
Pascal second (Pas)
newton per meter (N/m)
Pascal (Pa)
newton per meter (N/m)
Pascal (Pa)
newton per kilogram (N/kg)
mete? (m3)
meter3 (m3)
gray (GY)
1 per Pascal second [ 1 /(Pas)]
meter (m)
coulomb per kilogram (C/kg)
radian (rad)
second (s)
meter2 (m*)
second (s)
kilogram (kg)
Pascal second (Pas)
kilogram per metel3 (kg/m3)
ampere (A)
coulomb (C)
farad (F)
henry (H)
sremens (S)
ohm (It)
volt (V)
mete? (m)
58-19
Multiply By
5.74525 E-11
1.45322 E-12
1.459 29 E- 12
1 .O E+04
4.217518 E-03
5.506 105 E-04
4.731 765 E - 04
3.514 598 E - 04
1 .o E-01
4.535 924 E - 01
3.732417 E-01
4.214 011 E-02
2.926 397 E - 04
4.133 789 E -04
1.488 164 E+OO
4.882 428 E + 00
1.601 846 E +Ol
9.977 633 E + 01
1.198264 E+02
1.259979 E-04
1.689 659 E - 07
2.767 990 E + 04
7.559 873 E - 03
4.535 924 E - 01
5.932 764 E - 01
1.382 550 E - 01
1.488 164 E+OO
1.488 164 E+OO
4.448 222 E + 00
1.355818 E+OO
5.337 866 E +Ot
1.129848 E-01
4.448 222 E t 00
4.788 026 E + 01
1.459 390 E t 01
4.788 026 E + 01
1.751 268 Et 02
6.894 757 E + 03
9.806 650 E t 00
1.101 221 E-03
9.463 529 E - 04
1.0 E-02
1 .O E+Ol
(see Footnote 1)
2.58 E-04
4.848 137 E -06
9.972 696 E -01
(see Footnote 1)
1.000 000 E - 08
1.459 390 E t 01
4.788 026 E t 01
5.153 788 E+02
3.335 640 E 110
3.335 640 E - 10
1.112650 E-12
8.987 554 E + 11
1.112650 E-12
8.987 554 Et 11
2.997 925 E + 02
1 .O E+OO
Not the same dlmenslons as m#!darcy-foot
BJThe exacf conversion factor IS 4 535 923 7E 01.
lgThe exact conversion factor IS 4 448 221 615 260 5E + 00
@Torque unit. see text dwzusslon of Torque and Bending Moment
Torque dlwded by length see fexf d!scuss!on 01 Torque and Bendmg Moment
58-20 PETROLEUM ENGINEERING HANDBOOK
ton (assay)
ton (tong, 2,240 Ibm)
ton (metric)
To Convert From
ton (nuclear equivalent of TNT)
ton (refrigeration)
stilb
ton (register)
ton (short, 2000 Ibm)
stokes (kinematic viscosity)
ton (long)/ydJ
ton (shott)/hr
tablespoon
ton-force (2000 Ibf)
tonne
teaspoon
torr (mm Hg, 0C)
township
tex
unit pole
watthour (W-hr)
therm
w.s
W/cm2
W/in.?
yard
yd2
Yd3
ydJ/min
year (calendar)
year (sidereal)
year (tropical)
2JOet~ned (not measured) value
TABLE 1.7-ALPHABETICAL LIST OF UNITS (continued)
kilogram (kg)
(symbols of SI units given in parentheses)
kilogram (kg)
kilogram (kg)
joule (J)
To
watt (W)
candela per meter* (cd/m*)
metep (m3)
kllogram (kg)
kilogram per mete? (kg/m3)
meter* per second (m*/s)
kilogram per second (kg/s)
newton (N)
metef (m3)
kilogram (kg)
Pascal (Pa)
mete? (m3)
mete? (mz)
weber (Wb)
kilogram per meter (kg/m)
joule (J)
joule (J)
joule (J)
watt per meter? (W/m)
watt per meter2 (W/m2)
meter (m)
mete? (m2)
mete? (m3)
mete? per second (m%)
second (s)
second (s)
second (s)
Multiply By
1 .O E+04
1 .O E-04
1.470 676 E - 05
4.928 922 E - 06
1 .O E-06
1.055 056 E + 08
2.916 667 E-02
1.016047 E+03
1 .o E+03
4.184 E+09
3.516 800 E +03
2.831 685 E + 00
9.071 847 E + 02
1.328 939 E + 03
2.519958 E-01
8.896 444 E + 03
1 .O E+03
1.33322 E+02
(see Footnote 1)
1.256 637 E - 67
3.60 E+03
1 .O E+OO
1 .O Et04
1.550003 E+03
9.144 E-01
8.361 274 E - 01
7.645 549 E - 01
1.274 258 E - 02
3.153600 Et07
3.155 815 Ei07
3.155693 E+07
APPENDIX E
TABLE 1.8 - CONVERSION FACTORS FOR THE VARA
Value of Conversion Factor,
Location Vara in Inches Varas to Meters Source
Argentina, Paraguay 34.12 8.666 E-01 Ref. 16
Cadiz, Chile, Peru 33.37 8.476 E-01 Ref. 16
California,
except San Francisco 33.3720 8.478 49 E-01 Ref. 16
San Francisco 33.0 8.38 E-01 Ref. 16
Central America 33.87 8.603 E-01 Ref. 16
Colombia 31.5 8.00 E-01 Ref. 16
Honduras 33.0 8.38 E-01 Ref. 16
Mexico 8.380 E-01 Refs. 16 and 17
Portugal, Brazil 43.0 1.09 Et00 Ref. 16
Spain, Cuba, Venezuela, Philippine Islands 33.38 8.479 E-01 Ref. 17
Texas
Jan. 26, 1801, to Jan. 27, 1838 32.8748 8.350 20 E-01 Ref. 16
Jan. 27, 1838 to June 17, 1919, for
surveys of state land made for Land Office 33-113 8.466 667 E-01 Ref. 16
Jan. 27, 1838 lo June 17, 1919, on private surveys
(unless changed to 33-113 in. by custom arising
to dignity of law and overcoming former law) 32.8748 8.350 20 E-01 Ref. 16
June 17, 1919, to present
33-113 8.466 667 E-01 Ref. 16
*It IS evident from Ref 16 that accurate defined lengths 01 the vala varied slgnlflcantly, according to hlslotlcal date and localay used For work rqulrlng accura&
Coers~~s. the user should check Closely lnlo Lhe dale and localIon of the wrveys mvolved, with due regard lo what local ,x,cl,ce may have been at that t,me
and place
This value quoted horn Websters New lnternakmal D~chona~
THE St METRIC SYSTEM OF UNITS & SPE METRIC STANDARD
TABLE l.Q-MEMORY JOGGER-METRIC UNITS
APPENDIX F
barrel
British thermal unit
British thermal unit per pound-mass
calorie
centipoise
centistokes
darcy
degree Fahrenheit (temperature difference)
dyne per centimeter
foot
cubic foot (cu ft)
cubic foot per pound-mass (fWbm)
square foot (sq ft)
foot per minute
foot-pound-force
foot-pound-force per minute
foot-pound-force per second
horsepower
horsepower, boiler
inch
kilowatthour
mile
ounce (avoirdupois)
ounce (fluid)
pound-force
pound-force per square inch (pressure, psi)
pound-mass
pound-mass per cubic foot
section
ton, long (2240 pounds-mass)
ton, metric (tonne)
ton, short
Exact aqulvalents
BallPark Metnc Values;
(Do Not Use As
Conversion Factors)
-i
4000 square meters
0.4 hectare
0.16 cubic meter
1000 joules
1 2300 joules per kilogram
2.3 kilojoules per kilogram
4 joules
1 millipascal-second
1 square millimeter per second
1 square micrometer
0.5 kelvin
1 millinewton per meter
-i 30 centimeters
0.3 meter
0.03 cubic meter
0.06 cubic meter per kilogram
0.1 square meter
{ g ~i%%&n$%cond
1.4 joules
0.02 watt
1.4 watts
750 watts (% kilowatt)
10 kilowatts
2.5 centimeters
3.6 megajoules
1.6 kilometers
28 grams
30 cubic centimeters
4.5 newtons
7 kilopascals
0.5 kilogram
16 kilograms per cubic meter
260 hectares
2.6 million square meters
2.6 square kilometers
1000 kilograms
1000 kilograms
900 kilograms
58-21
Part 2: Discussion of Metric Unit Standards*
Introduction
The standards and conventions shown in Part I are part
of the SPE tentative standards. Table 2. I presents
nomenclature for Tables 2.2 and 2.3. Table 2.2 is a
modified form of a table in API 2564 reflecting SPE
recommendations. Table 2.3 shows a few units com-
monly used in the petroleum industry that are not shown
in Table 1.7 and 2.2. The columns in these tables are
based on the following.
Quantity and SI Unit. The quantity and the base or
derived SI unit that describes that quantity.
Customary Unit. The unit most commonly used in ex-
pressing the quantity in English units.
SPE Preferred. The base or derived SI unit plus the ap-
proved prefix, if any, that probably will be used most
Prepared by John M Campbell for the subcommftfee
commonly to achieve convenient unit size. Any ap-
proved prefix may be used in combination with an ap-
proved SI unit without violation of these standards ex-
cept where otherwise noted.
Other Allowable. A small, selected list of non-3 units
that are approved temporuril~~ for the convenience of the
English-metric transition. Use of the allowable units
may be discouraged but is not prohibited. Any tradi-
tional. non-9 unit not shown is prohibited under these
standards.
Conversion Factor. For certain commonly used units, a
conversion factor is shown. The primary purpose in
these tables is to show how the preferrelf metric unit
compares in size with the traditional unit. An effort has
been made to keep the unit sizes comparable to minimize
transition difficulties.
58-22
PETROLEUM ENGINEERING HANDBOOK
A detailed summary of general conversion factors is
included as Table 1.7 in Part 1 of this report.
The notation for conversion factors in Tables 2.2 and
2.3 is explained in the introduction to Table 1.7.
Fig. 2. I shows graphically how SI units are related in
a very coherent manner. Although it may not be readily
apparent, this internal coherence is a primary reason for
adoption of the metric system of units.
The SPE Metrication Subcommittee is endeavoring to
provide SPE members with all information needed on the
International System of Units and to provide tentative
standards (compatible with SI coherence, decimal, and
other principles) for the application of the SI system to
SPE fields of interest. The tentative SPE standards are
intended to reflect reasonable input from many sources,
and we solicit your positive input with the assurance that
all ideas will receive careful consideration.
Review of Selected Units
Certain of the quantities and units shown in Tables 2.2
and 2.3 may require clarification of usage (see also the
notes preceding Tables 2.2 and 2.3).
Time
Although second(s) is the base time unit, any unit of time
may be used - minute (min), hour(h), day (d), and year
Unit
Symbol
A
4
bar
C
cd
C
d
F
GY
9
H
h
Hz
ha
J
K
kg
kn
L
Im
IX
m
min
N
naut. mile
R
Pa
rad
S
s
sr
T
v
W
Wb
Name
(a). Note that (a) is used as the abbreviation for year (an-
num) instead of (yr). The use of the minute as a &me unit
is discouraged because of abbreviation problems. It
should be used only when another time unit is absolutciy
inappropriate.
Date and Time Designation
The Subcommittee proposes to recommend a standard
date and time designation to the American Nat]. Stan-
dards Inst., as shown below. This form already has been
introduced in Canada.
76 - 10 - 03 - 16 : 24 : I4
year month
day
hour minute second
(76-IO-03-16:24: 14)
The sequence is orderly and easy to remember: only
needed portions of the sequence would be used - most
documents would use the first three. No recommenda-
tion has been made for distinguishing the century, such
as 1976 vs. 1876 vs. 2076.
Area
The hectare (ha) is allowable but its use should be con-
fined to large areas that describe the area1 extent of a por-
TABLE 2.1 -NOMENCLATURE FOR TABLES 2.2 AND 2.3
Quantitv Tvpe of Unit
ampere
annum (year)
becquerel
bar
coulomb
candela
degree Celsius
degree
day
farad
gray
gram
henry
hour
hertz
hectare
joule
kelvin
kilogram
knot
liter
lumen
Iux
meter
minute
minute
newton
U.S. nautical mile
ohm
Pascal
radian
siemens
second
second
steradian
tesla
tonne
volt
watt
weber
electric current
time
activity (of radionuclides)
pressure
quantity of electricity
luminous intensity
temperature
plane angle
time
electric capacitance
absorbed dose
mass
inductance
time
frequency
area
work, energy
temperature
mass
velocity
volume
luminous flux
illuminance
length
time
plane angle
force
length
electric resistance
pressure
plane angle
electrical conductance
time
plane angle
solid angle
magnetic flux density
mass
electric potential
power
magnetic flux
base SI unit
allowable (not official SI) unit
derived SI unit = l/s
allowable (not official SI) unit, = lo5 Pa
derived SI unit, = 1 As
base SI unit
derived SI unit = 1.0 K
allowable (not official SI) unit
allowable (not official SI) unit, = 24 hours
derived SI unit, = 1 A.sN
derived SI unit, = J/kg
allowable (not official SI) unit, = 10~3 kg
derived SI unit, = 1 Vs/A
allowable (not official SI) unit, = 3.6 x 10s
derived SI unit, = 1 cycle/s
allowable (not official SI) unit, = lo4 m2
derived SI unit, = 1 N.m
base SI unit
base SI unit
allowable (not official Sl) unit, = 5.144 444 x 10-j m/s
= 1.852 km/h
allowable (not official Sl) unit, = 1 dm3
derived SI unit, = 1 cd.sr
derived SI unit, = 1 Im/mZ
base SI unit
allowable (not official SI) unit
Allowable cartography (not official SI) unit
derived SI unit, = 1 kg,m/s2
allowable (not official SI) unit, = 1.652 x lo3 m
derived SI unit, = 1 V/A
derived SI unit, = 1 N/m*
supplementary SI unit
derived SI unit, = 1 AN
base SI unit
allowable cartography (not official 9) unit
supplementary SI unit
derived SI unit, = 1 Wb/mZ
allowable (not official SI) unit, = lo3 kg = 1 Mg
derived SI unit, = 1 W/A
derived SI unit, = 1 J/s
derived SI unit, = 1 V..s
THE Sf METRIC SYSTEM OF UNITS & SPE METRIC STANDARD 58-23
tion of the earths crust (normally replacing the acre or
section).
Volume
The liter is an allowable unit for small volumes only. It
should be used for volumes not exceeding 100 L. Above
this volume (or volume rate), cubic meters should be
used. The only two prefixes allowed with the liter are
milli and micro:
In the U.S., the -er ending for meter and liter is of-
ficial. The official symbol for the liter is L. In other
countries the symbol may be written as Y and spelled
out with the -re ending (metre, litre). Since SPE is in-
ternational. it is expected that members will use local
conventions.
Notice that API barrel or simply barrel disap-
pears as an allowable volume term.
BASE UNITS
DERIVED UNITS WITH SPECIAL NAMES
MASS
HEAT FLOW RATE
CONOUCTINCE
ELECTRIC CURRENT
INDUCTANCE
SUPPLEMENTARY UNITS
OENSITV
LUMINOUS FLUX lLLUMlNANCE
SOLID ANGLE
SOLID LINES INDICATE MULTIPLICATION.
BROKEN LINES. OIVISION
Fig. Xl-Graphic relationships of SI units with names
58-24
PETROLEUM ENGINEERING HANDBOOK
Force
Unit Standards Under Discussion
Any force term will use the newton (N). Derived units
involving force also require the newton. The expression
There are some quantities for which the unit standards
of force using a mass term (like the kilogram) is ab-
have not been clarified to the satisfaction of all parties
solutely forbidden under these standards.
and some controversy remains. These primary quantities
are summarized below.
Mass
The kilogram is the base unit, but the gram, alone or
with any approved prefix, is an acceptable SI unit.
For large mass quantities the metric ton (t) may be
used. Some call this tonne: However, this spelling
sometimes has been used historically to denote a regular
short ton (2,000 lbm). A metric ton is also a megagram
(Mg). The terms metric ton or Mg are preferred in text
references.
Energy and Work
The joule (J) is the fundamental energy unit; kilojoules
(kJ) or megajoules (MJ) will be used most commonly.
The calorie (large or small) is no longer an acceptable
unit under these standards. The kilowatthour is accep-
table for a transition period but eventually should be
replaced by the megajoule.
Power
The term horsepower disappears as an allowable unit.
The kilowatt (kW) or megawatt (MW) will be the
multiples of the fundamental watt unit used most
commonly.
Pressure
The fundamental pressure unit is the Pascal (Pa) but the
kilopascal (kPa) is the most convenient unit. The bar
(100 kPa) is an allowable unit. The pressure term
kg/cm2 is not allowable under these standards.
Viscosity
The terms poise, centipoise, stokes, and centistokes are
no longer used under these standards. They are replaced
by the metric units shown in Table 2.2.
Temperature
Although it is permissible to use C in text references, it
is recommended that K be used in graphical and
tabular summaries of data.
Density
The fundamental SI unit for density is kg/m3. Use of this
unit is encouraged. However, a unit like kg/L is
permissible.
The traditional term specific gravity will not be
used. It will be replaced by the term relative density.
API gravity disappears as a measure of relative density.
Relative Atomic Mass and Molecular Mass
The traditional terms atomic weight and molecular
weight are replaced in the SI system of units by
relative atomic mass and relative molecular mass,
respectively. See Table 1.6.
Permeability
The SPE-preferred permeability unit is the square
micrometer (pm*). One darcy (the traditional unit)
equals 0.986 923 pm*.
The fundamental SI unit of permeability (in square
meters) is defined as follows: a permeability of one
meter squared will permit a flow of I mis of fluid of
I Pa. s viscosity through an area of I m under a
pressure gradient of 1 Pa/m.
The traditional terms of darcy and millidarcy
have been approved as preferred units of permeability.
Note 11 of Table 2.2 shows the relationships between
traditional and SI units and points out that the units of the
darcy and the square micrometer can be considered
equivalent when high accuracy is not needed or implied.
Standard Temperature
Some reference temperature is necessary to show certain
properties of materials, such as density. volume. viscosi-
ty. and energy level. Historically, the petroleum industry
almost universally has used 60F [15.56C] as this
reference temperature, and metric systems have used
OC, 2OC, and 25C most commonly, depending on
the data and the area of specialty.
API has opted for 15C because it is close to 60F.
ASME has used 20C in some of its metric guides. The
bulk of continental European data used for gas and oil
correlations is at OC, although 15C is used sometimes.
The SPE Subcommittee feels that the choice between
0C and 15C is arbitrary. Tentatively, a standard of
15C has been adopted simply to conform to API stan-
dards. It may be desirable to have a flexible temperature
standard for various applications.
Standard Pressure
To date. some groups have opted for a pressure reference
of 101.325 kPa, which is the equivalent of I std atm.
The Subcommittee considers this an unacceptable
number. Its adoption possesses some short-term conve-
nience advantages but condemns future generations to
continual odd-number conversions to reflect the change
of pressure on properties. It also violates the powers-
of-10 aspect of the SI system, one of its primary
advantages.
The current SPE standard is 100 kPa and should be
used until further notice. It is our hope that reason will
prevail and others will adopt this standard.
Gauge and Absolute Pressure
There is no provision for differentiating between gauge
and absolute pressure, and actions by international
bodies prohibit showing the difference by an addendum
to the unit symbol. The Subcommittee recommends that
gauge and absolute be shown using parentheses follow-
ing p:
p=643 kPa, p(g)=543 kPa
THE SI METRIC SYSTEM OF UNITS & SPE METRIC STANDARD 58-25
[p is found from p(g) by adding actual barometric
pressure. (100 kPa is suitable for most engineering
calculations.)]
In custody transfer the standard pressure will be
specified by contract. Unless there is a special reason not
to do so, the standard pressure will be 100 kPa to
preserve the multiples of ten principle of the metric
system.
Standard pressure normally is defined and used as an
absolute pressure. So, psc = 100 kPa is proper notation.
Absolute pressure is implied if no (g) is added to denote
gauge pressure specifically.
Standard Volumes
Cubic meters at standard reference conditions must be
equated to a term with the standard SC subscript. For
example, for a gas production rate of 1 200 000 m3/d,
write
qx,y,=1.2x IO6 m3/d or 1.2 (E+06) m3/d
read as 1.2 million cubic meters per day.
If the rate is 1200 cubic meters per day, write
q,,Yc=1.2x103 m3/d.
For gas in place, one could write
G,,=11.0x10* m3.
Notes for Table 2.2
1. The cubem (cubic mile) is used in the measurement
of very large volumes, such as the content of a
sedimentary basin.
2. In surveying, navigation, etc., angles no doubt will
continue to be measured with instruments that read
out in degrees, minutes, and seconds and need not
be converted into radians. But for calculations in-
volving rotational energy, radians are preferred.
3. The unit of a million years is used in
geochronology. The mega-annum is the preferred
SI unit, but many prefer simply to use mathematical
notation (i.e., X 106).
4. This conversion factor is for an ideal gas.
5. Subsurface pressures can be measured in
megapascals or as freshwater heads in meters. If the
latter approach is adopted, the hydrostatic gradient
becomes dimensionless.
6. Quantities listed under Facility Throughput,
Capacity are to be used only for characterizing the
size or capacity of a plant or piece of equipment.
Quantities listed under Flow Rate are for use in
design calculations.
7. This conversion factor is based on a density of 1.0
kg/dm 3
8. Seismic velocities will be expressed in km/s.
9. The interval transit time unit is used in sonic log-
ging work.
10. See discussion of Energy, Torque, and Bending
Moment, Part 1.
11. The permeability conversions shown in Table 2.2
are for the traditional definitions of darcy and
millidarcy.
In SI units, the square micrometer is the preferred
unit of permeability in fluid flow through a porous
medium, having the dimensions of viscosity times
volume flow rate per unit area divided by pressure
gradient, which simplifies to dimensions of length
squared. (The fundamental SI unit is the square
meter, defined by leaving out the factor of IO-* in
the equation below).
A permeability of 1 pm* will permit a flow of
1 m3/s of fluid of 1 Pa. s viscosity through an area
of 1 m2 under a pressure gradient of lo* Pa/m
(neglecting gravity effects):
I pm2 = lo-* Pa.s [m3/(s.m2)](m/Pa)
= 10 ~ I2 Pa. s(m/s)(mlPa)
= lo-* m2
The range of values in petroleum work is best
served by units of 1O-3 pm2. The traditional
millidarcy (md) is an informal name for 10 -3 pm*,
which may be used where high accuracy is not
implied.
For virtually all engineering purposes, the
familiar darcy and millidarcy units may be taken to
be equal to 1 pm2 and 10 -3 pm*. respectively.
12. The ohm-meter is used in borehole geophysical
devices.
13. As noted in Sec. 1, the mole is an amount of
substance expressible in elementary entities as
atoms, molecules, ions, electrons. and other par-
ticles or specified groups of such particles. Because
the expression kilogram mole is inconsistent
with other SI practices, we have used the abbrevia-
tion kmol to designate an amount of substance
which contains as many kilograms (groups of
molecules) as there are atoms in 0.0 12 kg of carbon
12 multiplied by the relative molecular mass of the
substance involved. In effect, the k prefix is
merely a convenient way to identify the type of en-
tity and facilitate conversion from the traditional
pound mole withoutviolating SI conventions.
Notes for Table 2.3
1. The standard cubic foot (scf) and barrel (bbl) rem
ferred to are measured at 60F and 14.696 psia; the
cubic meter is measured at 15C and 100 kPa
(1 bar).
2. The kPa is the preferred SPE unit for pressure. But
many are using the bar as a pressure measurement.
The bar should be considered as a nonapproved
name (or equivalent) for 100 kPa.
3. See discussion of Torque and Bending Moment ,
Part I.
58-26 PETROLEUM ENGINEERING HANDBOOK
Quantity and SI Unit
TABLE 2.2-TABLES OF RECOMMENDED SI UNITS
Metric Unit
Customary SPE Other
Unit Preferred Allowable
Conversion Factor
Multiply Customary
Unit by Factor to
Get Metric Unit
Length m
SPACE: TIME
naut mile km 1.852 E+00
mile km 1.809 344* E + 00
chain m 2.011 68 E+Ol
link m 2.011 68 E-01
fathom m 1.828 8 E+OO
m m 1 .O E+OO
yd
m 9.144 E-01
fl m 3.048 E-01
cm 3.048 E+nl
in. mm 2.54 E+Ol
cm 2.54 E+OO
cm mm 1 .O E+Ol
cm 1 .O E+00
mm mm 1 .O E+OO
Length/length
Length/volume
Length/temperature
Area
Area/volume
Area/mass
Volume, capacity
m/m
m/m3
m/K
m2
m2/m3
m2/kg
m3
mil
pm
micron (f.~)
bm
fUm+ m/km
fUU.S. gal m/m3
ftw m/m3
ft/bbl m/m3
see Temperature, Pressure, Vacuum
sq mile km2
section km2
acre m2
ha m2
sq yd m2
sq fl m2
sq in. mm2
cm2 mm2
mm2 mm2
ft?in? m21cm3
cm2ig m*/kg
mYg
cubem km
acre-ft m3
m3 m3
2.54 E+Ol
1 .O E+OO
1.893 939 E-01
8.051 964 E+Ol
1.078 391 E+Ol
1.917 134 E+OO
2.589 988 E +00
2.589 988 E +00
ha 2.589 988 E+O2
4.046 858 E+03
ha 4.046 856 E-01
1 .o Ec04
8.361 274 E-01
9.290 304 E - 02
cm2 9.290 304 E + 02
6.451 8 E+O2
cm2 6.451 6 E+OO
1.0 Et02
cm2 1.0 Et00
1.0 E+OO
5.699 291 E-03
1.0 E-01
1.0 E-04
4.168 182 E+OO
1.233 489 E+03
ham 1.233 489 E-01
1 .o E+OO
cu vd m3 7.645 549 E - 01
bbl (42 U.S. aal) m 1.589 873 E-01
cu R m3 2.831 685 E-02
U.K. gal
dm3
m3
dm3
L 2.831 685 E+Ol
4.546 092 E-03
L 4.546 092 E+OO
U.S. gal
liter
U.K. qt
11s nt
U.S. pt
m3
.-tm3
dm3
dm3
rim3
dm3
3.785 412 E-03
I
37AiAl7 F+rul
-
L 1.0 E+OO
-
L 1.136 523
Finn
_ -,-I
I Q AR7 5X
_.._-__ J E-01
L 4.731 765 E-01
An asterisk cdcates that the conversion factcf IS exact using the numbers shown. all subsequent numbers are zeros
Conversion factors for length. area. and volume (and related quanblles) I Table 2.2 are based on the intemabonal foot See Footnote 1 of Table 1 7. Part 1
THE SI METRIC SYSTEM OF UNITS & SPE METRIC STANDARD 58-27
TABLE 2.2-TABLES OF RECOMMENDED SI UNITS (continued)
Conversion Factor
Metric Unit
Multiply Customary
Customary SPE Other Unit by Factor to
Quantity and SI Unit Unit Preferred Allowable Get Metric Unrt
SPACE, TIME
Volume, capacity m3 U.K. fl oz cm3 2.841 308 E+Ol
U.S. fl oz cm3 2.957 353 E+Ol
cu in. cmJ 1.638 706 E+Ol
mL cm3 1 .O E+OO
Volume/length
(linear displacement)
m31m bbliin. m31m 6.259 342 Et00
bbl/H m3/m 5.216 119 E-01
H3/H m31m 9.290 304 E - 02
Volume/mass
Plane angle
Solid angle
Time
m3ikg
rad
sr
S
U.S. gal/H m31m
dm31m Urn
see Density, Specific Volume, Concentration, Dosage
rad rad
deg (1 rad
0
min () rad
set () rad
n
sr sr
million years (MY) Ma
v
a
wk d
d d
hr h
min
min S
h
min
1.241 933 E-02
1.241 933 E+Oi
1 .O E+OO
1.745 329 E -. 02 121
1 .O E+OO
2.908 882 E - 04 12
1 .O E+OO
4.848 137 E - 06 2
1 .o E+OO
1 .o E+OO
1 .o E + 00 W
1.0 E+OO
7.0 E+OO
1 .o E+OO
1 .o E+OO
6.0 E+Ol
6.0 E+Ol
1.666 667 E-02
1 .O E+OO
S S 1 .o E+OO
millimicrosecond ns 1.0 E+OO
Mass
MASS, AMOUNT OF SUBSTANCE
U.K. ton (long ton)
Mg
US. ton (short ton)
Mg
U.K. ton kg
U.S. cwt kg
kg kg
ibm ka
t 1 ,016 047 E+OO
t 9.071 847 E-01
5.080 235 E+Ol
4.535 924 E+Ol
1 .o E+OO
4.535 924 E-01
Mass/length
Masslarea
Mass/volume
Mass/mass
Amount of
substance
kg/m
kg/m2
kg/m3
Wkg
mol
oz (troy) 9
oz (av) 9
9 9
grain m9
m9 m9
9 9
see Mechanics
see Mechanics
see Density, Specific Volume, Concentration, Dosage
see Density, Specific Volume, Concentration, Dosage
Ibm mol kmol
g mol kmol
std m3 (WC, 1 atm) kmol
std m3 (15C, 1 atm) kmol
std ft3 (6OF, 1 atm) kmol
3.110 348 E+Ol
2.834 952 E + 01
1 .o E+OO
6.479 891 E+Ol
1 .o E+OO
1 .O E+OO
4.535 924 E-01
1 .O E-03
4.461 58 E - 02 II 131
4.229 32 E - 02 II 131
1.1953 E - 03 II 131
58-28 PETROLEUM ENGINEERING HANDBOOK
TABLE 2.2-TABLES OF RECOMMENDED SI UNITS (continued)
Conversion Factor
Metric Unit
Customary
Multrply Customary
SPE Other Unit by Factor to
Quantity and SI Unit Unit Preferred Allowable Get Metric Unit
CALORIFIC VALUE, HEAT, ENTROPY, HEAT CAPACITY
Calorific value
(mass basis)
Calorific value
(mole basis)
Calorific value
(volume basis -
solids and liquids)
J/kg
Jimol
J/m3
Btuilbm
Cal/g
caklbm
kcalig mol
Btu/lbm mol
therm/U.K. gal
BtuiUS. gal
Btu!U.K. gal
BtuifP
kcal/m3
MJikg
kJ/kg
kJ/kg
J/kg
kJ/kmol
MJikmol
kJ/kmol
MJlm3
kJ/m3
MJlm3
kJ/m3
MJlm3
kJ/m3
MJlm3
kJ/m3
MJlm3
kJ/m3
2.326 E-03
Jg
2.326 E+OO
(kW.h)/kg 6.461 112 E-04
Jg
4.184 E+OO
9.224 141 E+OO
4.184 c+o33
2.326 E-0313
2.326 E + OOt3
kJ/dm3 2.320 80 E+04
2.320 80 E+07
(kW.h)/dm3 6.446 660 E+OO
kJ/dm3 2.787 163 E-01
2.787 163 E+02
(kW,h)/m3 7.742 119 E-02
kJ/dm3 2.320 8 E-01
2.320 8 E+02
(kW.h)/m3 6.446 660 E-02
kJidm3 3.725 895 E-02
3.725 895 E+Ol
(kW.h)/m3 1.034 971 E-02
kJidm3 4.184 E-03
4.184 E+OO
cal/mL MJ/m3 4.184 E+OO
Jim3
J1kg.K
J/kg.K
Jlmo1.K
Specific entropy
Calorific value
(volume basis -
gases)
Specific heat
capacity
(mass basis)
Molar heat
capacity
ft-1bfiU.S. gal
cal/mL
kcalim3
BtuiH3
Btu/(lbm-R)
cali(g-K)
kcal!( kg%)
kW-hr/(kg-C)
Btu/(lbm-F)
kcal/(kg-C)
Btui(lbm mol-F)
cal!(g mol-C)
kJ/m
kJ/m3
kJlm
kJ/m
kJi(kg.K)
kJi(kg.K)
kJi(kg.K)
kJ/(kg.K)
kJ/( kg.K)
kJ/( kg.K)
kJI(kmo1.K)
kJI(kmo1.K)
J/dm3
J/dm3
Jldm3
(kW. h)/m 3
J/b. N
J/b. K)
J/h. W
J4g K)
J/h. K)
J/b. to
3.581 692 E-01
4.184. E+03
4.184 E+OO
3.725 895 E+Oi
1.034 971 E-02
4.186 8 E+OO
4.184 E+OO
4.184 E+OO
3.6 E+03
4.186 8 E+OO
4.184 E+OO
4.186 8 E+00r3
4.184 E - 0013
TEMPERATURE, PRESSURE, VACUUM
Temperature
(absolute)
Temperature
(traditional)
Temperature
(difference)
Temperature/length
(geothermal gradient)
Length/temperature
(geothermal step)
Pressure
K
K
K
K/m
m/K
Pa
R K 519
K K 1 .O E+OO
F C (F - 32)/l .8
C C 1 .O E+OO
F K C 5i9 E+OO
C K C 1 .O E+OO
F/100 ft mWm 1.822 689 E+Ol
ft/F m/K 5.486 4 E-01
atm (760mm Hg at 0C or MPa 1.013 25 E-01
14.696 (Ibfiin.2) kPa 1.013 25 E+02
bar 1 ,013 25 E+OO
bar MPa 1 .O E-01
kPa 1 .O E+02
bar 1.0 E+OO
at (technical atm., kgf:cm*) MPa 9.806 65 E-02
kPa 9.806 65 E+Ol
bar 9.806 65 E-01
THE SI METRIC SYSTEM OF UNITS & SPE METRIC STANDARD 58-29
TABLE 2.2-TABLES OF RECOMMENDED SI UNITS (continued)
Quantity and SI Unit
Customary
Unit
Metric Unit
SPE Other
Preferred Allowable
Conversion Factor
Multiply Customary
Unit by Factor to
Get Metric Unit
TEMPERATURE, PRESSURE, VACUUM
Pressure
Vacuum, draft
Liquid head
Pressure drop/length
Density (gases)
Density (liquids)
Density (solids)
Specific volume
(gases)
Specific volume
(liquids)
Specific volume
(mole basis)
Specific volume
(clay yield)
Yield (shale
distillation)
Concentration
(mass/mass)
Concentration
(mass/volume)
Pa Ibflin.2 (psi) MPa 6.894 757 E - 03
kPa 6.894 757 E+OO
bar 6.894 757 E - 02
in. fig (32F) kPa 3.386 38 E+OO
in. Hg (60F) kPa 3.376 05 E+OO
in. Hz0 (39.2F) kPa 2.490 82 E-01
in. Hz0 (60F) kPa 2.408 4 E-01
mm Hg (0C) = torr kPa 1.333 224 E-01
cm Hz0 (4C) kPa 9.806 38 E-02
Ibf/A* (psf) kPa 4.788 026 E 02 -
v Hg (0C) Pa 1.333 224 E-01
pbar Pa 1 .O E-01
dyne/cm2 Pa 1 .O E-01
Pa in. Hg (60F) kPa 3.376 85 E+OO
in. Hz0 (39.2-F) kPa 2.490 82 E-01
in. Hz0 (60F) kPa 2.488 4 E-01
mm Hg (0C) = torr kPa 1.333 224 E-01
cm HZ0 (4C) kPa 9.806 38 E-02
m R m 3.048 E-01
in. mm 2.54 E+Ol
cm 2.54 E+OO
Pa/m psi/ft kPa!m 2.262 059 E + 01
psi/l 00 ft kPa/m 2.262 059 E - 01 w
DENSITY, SPECIFIC VOLUME, CONCENTRATION, DOSAGE
kg/m3 IbmW kg/m3 1.601 846 E+Ol
g/m3 1.601 846 E +04
kg/m3 1bmiU.S. gal kg/m3 1.198 264 E+02
g/cm3 1.198264 E-01
Ibm/U.K. gal kg/m3 9.977 633 E + 01
kg/dm3 9.977 633 E - 02
IbmlfP kg/m3 1.601 846 E+Ol
g/cm3 1.601 846 E-02
g/cm3 kg/m3 1 .o* E+03
kgidm3 1 .o E+OO
API g/cm3 141.5!(131.5+API)
kg/m3 IbmW kg/m3 1.601 846 E+Ol
ma/kg R3/lbm
m31kg 6.242 796 E - 02
m31g 6.242 796 E - 05
m%g fWlbm
dm3/kg 6.242 796 E + 01
U.K. galilbm dm31kg cmYg 1.002 242 E+Ol
U.S. galilbm dm3/kg cm3/g
8.345 404 E+OO
m3/mol Ug mol m3/kmol 1 .O E + 003
fWbm mol m3ikmol 6.242 796 E 0213 -
m31kg bb1iU.S. ton m%
1.752 535 E-01
bbl/U.K. ton m%
1.564 763 E-01
m3/kg bbliU.S. ton dm% ut 1.752 535 E+02
bb1iU.K. ton dm% Lit
1.564 763 E+02
U.S. gal/US. ton dm311 ut 4.172 702 E+OO
U.S. ga1lU.K. ton dm3/t Lit 3.725 627 E+OO
Wb
wt %
Wkg
1 .O E-02
@kg
1.0 E+Ol
w mm w/kg
1 .O E+OO
kg/m3 lbmibbl
kg/m3
gidm3 2.853 010 E+OO
g/US. gal kg/m3 2.641 720 E-01
gIU.K. gal kg/m3 9L 2.199 692 E-01
58-30 PETROLEUM ENGINEERING HANDBOOK
TABLE 2.2-TABLES OF RECOMMENDED SI UNITS (continued)
Conversion Factor
Metric Unit
Multiply Customary
Customary SPE Other Unit by Factor to
Quantity and SI Unit Unit Preferred Allowable Gel Metric Unit
Concentration
(mass/volume)
Concentration
(volume/volume)
kg/m3
m31mJ
DENSITY, SPECIFIC VOLUME, CONCENTRATION, DOSAGE
lbmilOO0 U.S. gal g/m3 mg/dmJ
IbmilOOO U.K. gal glm3 mg/dmJ
grains/US. gal gimJ mg/dm3
grains/W mg/m3
IbmilOOO bbl g/m3 mg/dm3
mg1U.S. gal g/m3 mgldm3
grains000 ft3 mgim3
bbllbbl m31m3
ftw m31m3
bbl/acreft m31m3
ma/ham
vol % m3/m3
U.K. aal/W dm3/m3 L/m3
1.198 264 E+02
9.977 633 E + 01
1.711 806 E+Ol
2.266352 E+O3
2.853010 E+OO
2.641 720 E-01
2.266 352 E+Ol
1 .O E+OO
1 .O E+OO
1.288 923 E-04
1.288 923 E+OO
1 .O E-02
1 .m=l4R7 F+fP
Concentration
(mole/volume)
mol/m3
U.S. aaW
mL/U.S. aal
mL/U.K. aal
vol ppm
dm3/m3 Urn3 i .336 An8 F+n7
dm3/m3 L/m3 2.841 720 F-n1
dm31m3 L/m3 2.199 Is2 F-01
cm3im3 1 .O E+OO
I
J.K. gal/l000 bbl
J.S. gal11000 bbl
J.K. pti1000 bbl
Ibm mo1iU.S. gal
Ibm moliU.K. gal
Ibm mol/fP
std H3 (6oF,
dm31m3
cm31m3
cm3im3
cmYm3
kmollm3
kmol/m3
kmol/m3
kmol/m3
L/m3 1 .O E-03
2.859 406 E+Ol
2.380 952 E+Ol
3.574 253 E+OO
1.198 264 E+02
9.977633 E+Ol
1.601 846 E+Ol
7.518 18 E-03
Concentration
(volume/mole)
m3/mol
1 atm)/bbl
U.S. gall1000 std W
(6OFi6OF)
bbl/million std ft3
f60Fi60F)
dm3ikmol
dm3/kmol
Ukmol
Ukmol
3.166 93 E+OO
1.330 11 E-01
FACILITY THROUGHPUT, CAPACITY
Throughput
(mass basis)
kg/s
4.535 924 E+02
1.016 047 E+OO
m3/s
million Ibm/yr
U.K. toniyr
US. toniyr
U.K. ton/D
U.S. ton/D
U.K tonlhr
U.S. tonlhr
lbmlhr
bbl/D
W/D
bbllhr
113/h
U.K. gallhr
U.S. gallhr
U.K. gal/min
U.S. galimin
ffa
t/a
t/a
Vd
t/d
t/h
t/h
kg/h
t/a
m3/h
m3/h
mJ/h
m31h
m3/h
m31h
m31h
m3/h
Mg/a
Mgla
Throughput
(volume basis)
Mgla
Mgid
t/h, Mgih
tih, Mg/h
Mg/h
Mglh
maid
m31d
L/s
US
US
US
9.071 847 E-01
1.016047 E+OO
4.233 529 E-02
9.071 847 E-01
3.779 936 E - 02
1.016 047 E+OO
9.071 a47 E-01
4.535 924 E-01
5.603 036 E+Ol I
1.589 a73 E-01
6.624 471 E-03
1.179 869 E-03
2.831 685 E-02
I.589 a73 E-01
2.831 685 E-02
4.546 092 E-03
1.262 803 E-03
3.785 412 E-03
1.051 503 E-03
2.727 655 E-01
7.576 819 E-02
2.271 247 E-01
6.309 020 E ~ 02
THE SI METRIC SYSTEM OF UNITS & SPE METRIC STANDARD
TABLE 2.2-TABLES OF RECOMMENDED SI UNITS (continued)
Conversion Factor
Metric Unit
Multiply Customary
Customary SPE Other Unit by Factor to
Quantity and SI Unit Unit Preferred Allowable Get Metric Unit
FACILITY THROUGHPUT, CAPACITY
Throughput
(mole bass)
Pipeline capacity
Flow rate
(mass basis)
Flow rate
(volume basis)
Flow rate
(mole basis)
molis
m31m
kg/s
m%
mol/s
Ibm mol!hr kmolih 4.535 924 E - 01
kmolis 1.259 979 E-04
FLOW RATE 16,
bblimile mVkm 9.879 013 E-02
U.K. tonimin kg/s 1.693412 E+Ol
U.S tonimin kg/s 1.511 974 E+Ol
U.K. tonihr kg/s 2.822 353 E-01
U.S. tonihr kg/s 2.519 958 E-01
U.K. ton/D kg/s 1.175980 E-02
U.S ton/D kg/s 1.049 982 E-02
million lbmiyr kg/s 5.249 912 E+OO
U.K. ton/yr kg/s 3.221 864 E-05
US toniyr kg/s 2.876 664 E-05
lbmls kg/s 4.535 924 E-01
lbmlmin kg/s 7.559 873 E-03
Ibm/hr kg/s 1.259 979 E-04
bbl/D m3id 1.589 873 E-01
US 1.840 131 E-03
ftVD mld 2.831 685 E-02
US 3.277 413 E-04
bbl/hr mJls 4.416 314 E-05
US 4.416 314 E-02
RVhr m% 7.865 791 E-06
US 7.865 791 E-03
U.K. galihr dmVs US 1.262 803 E-03
U.S. galihr dm% US 1.051 503 E-03
U.K. gal/min dmVs US 7.576 820 E-02
U.S. galimin dmVs US 6.309 020 E - 02
ftVmin dm3!s US 4.719 474 E-01
ftVS dm% US 2.831 685 E+Ol
Ibm molis kmolis 4.535 924 E-01=
Ibm mol/hr kmolis 1.259 979 E 045 -
million scWD kmolis 1.363 449 E - 023
Flow rate/length
(mass basis)
kgism Ibmi(s-ft) kg/(sm)
Ibm/(hr-ft) kg/(sm)
1.488 164 E+OO
4.133 789 E-04
Flow rate/length
(volume basis)
m2is U.K. gal!(min-ft)
U.S. gal!(min-ft)
U.K. gali(hr-in.)
US. gali(hr-in.)
U.K. gali(hr-ft)
m% mV(sm) 2.485 833 E - 04
m2is mV(sm) 2.069 888 E 04 -
m2/s mV(sm) 4.971 667 E-05
mVs mV(sm) 4.139 776 E-05
m*/s mV(sm) 4.143055 E-06
US. gali(hr-ft) mls m3/(sm) 3.449 814 E-06
Flow rate/area
(mass basis)
Flow rate/area
(volume basis)
kg/sm*
m/s
lbm/(s-ft)
lbmi(hr-ft2)
W(S4t~)
Wlmin-ftz)
kg/sm2
kg/sm2
mis
m/s
4.882 428 E+OO
1.356 230 E-03
m(sm*) 3.048 E-01
mV(sm*) 5.08 E-03
U.K. gaV(hr-tn2)
U.S. gal!(hr-rn2)
m/s mV(sm*) 1.957 349 E-03
m/s m3/(smz) 1.629 833 E-03
Flow rate/
pressure drop
(productivity index)
mYsPa
U.K. gal!(mm-ft)
US. gal!(mmW)
U.K. gali(hr-ft)
U.S. gal!(hr#)
bbli(D-psr)
mls
mi s
mls
m/s
mV(d.kPa)
m/(sm*) 8.155 621 E-04
mV(sm*) 6.790 972 E - 04
mV(sm*) 1.359 270 E-05
m31(sm2) 1.131 829 E-05
2.305 916 E-02
58-32
PETROLEUM ENGINEERING HANDBOOK
TABLE 2.2-TABLES OF RECOMMENDED SI UNITS (continued)
Conversion Factor*
Metric Unit
Multiply Customary
Customary SPE Other Unit by Factor to
Quantity and SI Unit Unit Preferred Allowable Get Metric Unit
ENERGY, WORK, POWER
Energy, work
Impact energy
WorWlength
Surface energy
Specific impact
energy
Power
Power/area
J
J
Jim
J/m2
J/m2
W
W/m2
quad
therm
U.S. tonf-mile
hp-hr
ch-hr or CV-hr
kW-hr
Chu
f3tu
kcal
cal
ft-lbf
Ibf-ft
J
Ibf-ftz/s2
erg
kgf-m
Ibf-ft
U.S. tonf-mileift
erg/cm2
kgf.m/cm*
Ibf+t/in.*
quadiyr
erg/a
million Btu/hr
ton of
refrigeration
ml/s
kW
hydraulic horse-
power - hhp
hp (electric)
hp (550 ft-lbfis)
ch or CV
Btuimin
ft*lbf/s
kcalihr
Btuihr
Albfimin
Btuis.ft?
cal/hrcm?
Btuihrft?
MJ
TJ
EJ
MJ
kJ
MJ
MJ
kJ
MJ
N
MJ
kJ
kJ
kJ
kJ
kJ
kJ
kJ
kJ
kJ
J
J
J
MJlm
mJlmZ
J/cm
J/cm2
MJia
TJia
EJia
TW
GW
MW
kW
kW
kW
kW
kW
kW
kW
kW
kW
W
W
W
kWlmz
kWlm2
kW/m2
.-
1.055 056 E+12
1.055 056 Et06
1.055 056 E+OO
MW*h 2.930 711 Et08
GW.h 2.930 711 Et05
TWh 2.930 711 Et02
1.055 056 E+02
1.055 056 E+05
kW.h 2.930 711 E+Ol
1.431 744 E+Ol
2.684 520 E+OO
2.684 520 E+03
kW.h 7.456 999 E-01
2.647 796 Et00
2.647 796 E+03
kW.h 7.354 99 E-01
3.6 E+OO
3.6 E+03
1.899 101 E+OO
kW.h 5.275 280 E-04
1.055 056 E+OO
kW.h 2.930 711 E-04
4.184 E+OO
4.184 E-03
1.355 818 E-03
1.355 818 E-03
1 .O E-03
4.214 011 E-05
1 .O E-07
9.806 650 E + 00
1.355818 E+OO
4.697 322 Et01
1 .O E+OO
9.806 650 E - 00
2.101 522 E-01
1.055 056 E+12
1.055 056 Et06
1.055 056 E+OO
3.170 979 E-27
3.170979 E-24
2.930 711 E-01
3.516 853 E+OO
1.055 056 E+OO
1 .O E+OO
7.460 43 E-01
7.46 E-01
7.456 999 E-01
7.354 99 E-01
1.758 427 E-02
1.355 818 E-03
1.162222 E+OO
2.930 711 E-01
2.259 697 E-02
1.135653 E+Ol
1.162222 E-02
3.154 591 E-03
THE SI METRIC SYSTEM OF UNITS & SPE METRIC STANDARD 58-33
TABLE 2.2-TABLES OF RECOMMENDED SI UNITS (continued)
Quantity and SI Unit
Customary
Unit
Metric Unit
SPE Other
Preferred Allowable
Conversion Factor
Multiply Customary
Unit by Factor to
Get Metric Unit
ENERGY, WORK, POWER
Heat flow unit - hfu
(geothermics)
Heat release rate,
mixing power
Heat generation
unit - hgu
(radioactive rocks)
Cooling duty
(machinery)
Specific fuel
consumption
(mass basis)
Specific fuel
consumption
(volume basis)
W/m3
WAN
kg/J
m3/J
~callscm2
hpift3
cal/(hpcm3)
Btu/(sft3)
Btui(hrW)
cal/(s-cm3)
Btu/(bhp-hr)
Ibm/(hp-hr)
mJ/(kW-hr)
U.S. gal/(hp-hr)
mWlm2
kWlm3
kW/m3
kW/m3
kWlm3
pWlm3
W/kW
mg/J
dm31MJ
dm3/MJ
kg/MJ
kg/(kW-h)
mm3/J
dm?(kW.h)
mm3/J
4.184 E+Ol
2.633 414 E+Ol
1.162 222 E+OO
3.725 895 E+Ol
1.034 971 E-02
4.184 E+12
3.930 148 E-01
1.689 659 E-01
6.082 774 E-01
2.777 778 E + 02
1.0 E+03
1.410089 E+OO
MECHANICS
Velocity (linear),
speed
Velocity (angular)
Interval transit time
Corrosion rate
Rotational frequency
Acceleration
(linear)
Acceleration
(rotational)
Momentum
m/s
radls
s/m
m/s
rev/s
m/s*
rad/s2
kg.m/s
knot
mileihr
m/s
fUS
ftlmin
ftihr
ft/D
in.&
in./min
revlmin
rev/s
degree/min
S/ft
in./yr (ipy)
miliyr
rev/s
revimin
revimin
ftk*
gal(cm@)
radls2
rpmis
Ibm.ftJs
km/h
km/h
m/s
m/s
m/s
mm/s
mm/s
mm/s
mm/s
radls
rad/s
radls
s/m
mmla
mmla
rev/s
rev/s
radls
m/s2
mls2
rad/s2
lad/s2
kg.m/s
cm/s
mfms
cm/s
cm/s
m/d
cm/s
cmls
KS/m
cm/s2
1.852 E+OO
1.609 344 E + 00
1 .O E+OO
3.048 E-01
3.048 E+Ol
3.048 E - 04@
5.08 E-03
5.08 E-01
8.466 667 E-02
8.466 667 E - 03
3.527 778 E - 03
3.048 E-01
2.54 E+Ol
2.54 E+OO
4.233 333 E-01
4.233 333 E ~ 02
1.047 198 E-01
6.283 185 Et00
2.908 882 E-04
3.280 840 E + OO@
2.54 E+Ol
2.54 E-02
1 .O E+OO
1.666 667 E-02
1.047 198 E-01
3.048 E-01
3.048 E+Ol
1 .O E-02
1 .O E+OO
1.047 198 E-01
1.382 550 E-01
58-34
PETROLEUM ENGINEERING HANDBOOK
TABLE 2.2-TABLES OF RECOMMENDED SI UNITS (continued)
Conversion Factor
Metric Unit
Multiply Customary
Customary SPE Other Unit by Factor to
Quantity and SI Unit Unit Preferred Allowable Get Metric Unit
MECHANICS
LI S. tonf kN 8.896 443 E+OO
kgf (kp)
Ihf
N 9.806650 Et00
N 4.448 222 E+OO
N N 1 .O E+OO
ndl mN 1.382 550 E+02
Bending moment,
torque
N.m
dyne
US. tonf-ft
kgf-m
mN
kN.m
N.m
1 .o E-02
2.711 636 E + OOO
9.806 650 E + 0001
Ibf-ft N.m 1.355 818 E + OOo
Ibf-in. N-m 1.129848
E - ,,,O
odl-ft N.m 4.214011
E- 0210
Bending moment/
length
Elastic moduli
(Youngs, Shear bulk)
Moment of inertia
Moment of section
Section modulus
Stress
N.m/m
Pa
kqm*
m4
m3
Pa
(Ibf-ft)/in.
(kgf-m)/m
(Ibf-in.)/in.
Ibf!in.
Ibm-ft2
in.4
cu in.
cu fi
U.S. tonf/in.2
kgWmm2
US. tonf/ft2
IbWin.? (osi)
Ibf/ft2 (psf)
dyne/cm2
Ibf/lOO ft2
Ibm/ft
U.S. ton/ft2
Ibm/ft2
In./(in.-F)
(N.m)/m
(N.m)/m
(N.m)/m
GPa
kg.m2
cm*
cm3
cm3
MPa
MPa
MPa
MPa
kPa
5.337 866 E + OlO1
9.806 650 E + OOO1
4.448 222 E + OOO
6.894 757 E-06
4.214 011 E-02
4.162 314 E+Ol
1.638 706 E+Ol
1.638 706 E+04
mm3 2.831 685 E+04
m3 2.831 685 E-02
N/mm2 1.378 951 E+Ol
N/mm2 9.806 650 E + 00
N/mm2 9.576 052 E - 02
N/mm2 6.894 757 E-03
4.788 026 E-02
Pa 1 .O E-01
Yield point,
gel strength
Ldrillina fluid)
Mass/length
Mass/area
structural loading,
bearing capacity
(mass basis)
Coefficient of
thermal expansion
kg/m
kg/m2
m/(m.K)
Pa
kg/m
Mgim2
kg/m2
mm/(mm.K)
4.788 026 E-01
1.488 164 E+OO
9.764 855 E+OO
4.882 428 E+OO
5.555 556 E-01
TRANSPORT PROPERTIES
Diffusivity m21s fV/S
cm2s
ft2/hr
(C-m2.hr)/kcal
(F-ft2 hr)iBtu
Btu/(hr-R*)
(Cal/s-cm2-%)/cm
Btu/(hr-ft-Fift)
mm2/s 9.290 304 E + 04
mm21s 1 .O E+02
mm2/s 2.580 64 E+Ol
Thermal resistance (k.m*)/W (K.m2)/kW
(K.m2VkW
8.604 208 E +02
1.761 102 E+O2
Heat flux
Thermal
conductivity
Wlm2
W/(m.K)
kW/mz
W/(m.K)
W/(m.K)
3.154 591 E-03
4.184* E+02
1.730 735 E+OO
-
kcali(hr-mz-Cim)
Btu/(hr-R2-Fiin.)
cal/(hr-cm-C/cm)
kJ.m/(h.m2.K) 6.230 646 E+OO
W/(m.K) 1.162 222 E+OO
W/(m.K) 1.442 279 E-01
W/(m.K) 1.162222 E-01
THE SI METRIC SYSTEM OF UNITS & SPE METRIC STANDARD 58-35
TABLE 2.2-TABLES OF RECOMMENDED SI UNITS (continued)
Metric Unit
SPE
Preferred
Other
Allowable
Conversion Factor
Multiolv Customarv
Unii dy Factor to
Get Metric Unit Quantity and SI Unit
Customary
Unit
TRANSPORT PROPERTIES
Heat transfer
coefficient
W/(m2.K) cal/(s-cm?-C)
Btu/(s-ft2-F)
cal/(hr-cm2-C)
Btu/(hr-ft2-F)
Btu/(hr-f&OR)
kcal/(hr-m2-C)
Btui(s-ft3-F)
Btu/(hr-f13-F)
dyne/cm
(Ibf-s)iin.2
(Ibf-s)ift2
(kgf-s)/m*
Ibm/(ft-s)
(dyne-@/cm2
cP
4.184 E+Ol
2.044 175 E +Ol
1.162 222 E-02
Volumetric heat
transfer coefficient
Surface tension
Viscosity
(dynamic)
W/(m3.K)
N/m
P&S
kWi(m2.K)
kW/(m*.K)
kWi(m*.K)
kW/(m3.K)
kW/(m3.K)
mN/m
Pas
Pas
Pas
Pas
Pas
Pa.s
5.678 263 E - 03
kJ/(h.m>.K) 2.044 175 E+Ol
5.678 263 E-03
1.162222 E-03
6.706 611 E+Ol
1.862 947 E-02
1 .O E+OO
(Ns)im2 6.894 757 E + 03
(N.s)/m 4.788 026 E+Ol
(Ns)/m2 9.806 650 E + 00
(Ns)/m* 1.488 164 E+OO
(Ns):m2 1 .O E-01
(Ns)/m* 1 .O E-03
Ibm/(ft.hr) Pas (N+m2 4.133 789 E-04
Viscosity m21s ft% mm% 9.290 304 E + 04
(kinematic) in.*/s mm% 6.451 6 E+02
m2/hr mm2is 2.777 778 E+O2
cm21s mm2/s 1 .o E+02
ft*/hr mm2is 2.580 64 E+Ol
Permeability m2
cst mm%
darcy
km2
millidarcy km2
ELECTRICITY, MAGNETISM
1 .O E+OO
9.869 233
E -01
9.869 233 E - 04
10m3 pm2 9.869 233 E-O,,
Admittance
Capacitance
Capacity,
storage battery
Charge density
Conductance
Conductivity
Current density
Displacement
Electric charge
Electric current
Electric dipole
S
F
C
C/m3
S
S/m
A/m2
C/m2
C
A
C*m
S
CLF
A-hr
C/mm3
S
U (mho)
S/m
u/m
mu/m
Almm
C/cm2
C
A
C.m
S
)LF
kC
C/mm3
S
S
S/m
S/m
mS/m
A/mm2
C/cm?
C
A
C.m
1 .O E+OO
1 .O E+OO
3.6 E+OO
1 .O E+OO
1 .O E+OO
1 .O E+OO
1 .O E+OO
1 .O E+OO
1 .o E+OO
1 .O E+OO
1 .o E+OO
1 .O E+OO
1 .o E+OO
1 .o E+OO
moment
Electric field
strength
Electric flux
Electric polarization
Electric potential
Electromagnetic
moment
Electromolive force
Flux of displacement
V/m Vim V/m 1 .O E+OO
C C C 1 .O E+OO
C/m2 C/cm2 C/cm2 1 .O E+OO
V V V 1 .O E+OO
mV mV 1 .O E+OO
A.m2 A.m2 A.m2 1 .O E+OO
V V V 1 .O E+OO
C C C 1 .O E+OO
58-36 PETROLEUM ENGINEERING HANDBOOK
TABLE 2.2-TABLES OF RECOMMENDED SI UNITS (continued)
Conversion Factor
Metric Unit
Multiply Customary
Customary SPE Other Unit by Factor to
Quantity and SI Unit Unit Preferred Allowable Get Metric Unit
Frequency
Impedance
Interval transit time
Linear current
densitv
HZ
n
slm
Aim
ELECTRICITY, MAGNETISM
cycles/s HZ
n n
@ft t&m
A/mm Aimm
1 .O E+OO
1 .O E+OO
3.280 840 E+OO
1 .O E+OO
Magnetic dipole
moment
Wbsm Wb.m Wbm 1 .o E+OO
Magnetic field
strength
A/m A/mm
oersted
gamma
mWb
mT
gauss
mT
A-m2
mT
A
Wbimm
A/mm
S
Aim
Aimm
Aim
mWb
mT
T
mT
A.m2
mT
A
Wblmm
A/mm
S
7.957 747
1 .O E+OO
E-04
7.957 747 E+Ol
1 .O E+OO
1 .O E+OO
1 .o* E-04
1 .O E+OO
1 .o* E+OO
1 .O E+OO
1 .O E+OO
1
1
1
Magnetic flux
Magnetic flux
density
Magnetic induction
Magnetic moment
Magnetic
oolarization
Magnetic potential
difference
Magnetic vector
potential
Magnetization
Modulus of
admittance
Wb
T
T
A*mZ
T
A
Wb/m
Aim
S
Modulus of R n n 1
impedance
Mutual inductance H H H 1
Permeability H/m pH/m PHim 1
Permeance H H H 1
Permittivity F/m WFlm kF/m 1
Potential difference V V V 1
Quantity of C C C 1
electricitv
Reactance
Reluctance
Resistance
n cl n 1
H- H-1 H- 1
n R R 1
Resistivity Darn @cm fkm 1
Dm Drn 1
W,
Self inductance
Surface density
of charge
Susceptance
Volume density
of charae
H mH mH 1
C/m* mClm* mClmz 1
S S S 1
C/m3 C/mm3 C/mm3 1
ACOUSTICS, LIGHT, RADIATION
Absorbed dose
GY
rad
GY
1 .o E-02
Acoustical enerav J J J 1
Acoustical intensity Wfm2 W/cm2 Wlm* 1 .o E+O4
Acoustical Dower W W W 1
Sound oressure N/m* Nim2 N/m2 1
llluminance
Illumination
lrradiance
lx
lx
Wlm*
1x3
cd/m*
footcandle
footcandle
W/m2
lx 1.076 391 E+Ol
lx 1.076 391 E+Ol
Wlm* 1
Light exposure footcandles 1x.s 1.076 391 E + 01
Luminance
Luminous efficacv
cd/m2 cd/m2 1
ImiW ImiW ImiW 1
THE SI METRIC SYSTEM OF UNITS & SPE METRIC STANDARD 58-37
TABLE 2.2-TABLES OF RECOMMENDED SI UNITS (continued)
Conversion Factor
Metric Unit
Multiply Customary
Customary SPE Other Unit by Factor to
Quantity and SI Unit
Unrt Preferred Allowable Get Metric Unit
Luminous exitance Im/mz
Luminous flux Im
Luminous intensity cd
Quantity of light Im.s
Radiance W/(m%r)
Radiant energy J
Radiant flux W
Radiant intensity Wisr
Radiant power W
Wave length m
Capture unit mm
ACOUSTICS, LIGHT, RADIATION
lmim2 lm/mZ 1
Im Im 1
cd cd 1
talbot tm.s 1 .O E+OO
-
Wl(m%r)
W/(m%r) 1
J J 1
W W 1
Wlsr W/sr 1
W 1
r nm 1 .O E-01
lo-km 1 m-1 1 .O Et01
10.cm- 1
Radioactivity curie 3.7 E+lO
58-38
PETROLEUM ENGINEERING HANDBOOK
TABLE 2.3~SOME ADDITIONAL APPLICATION STANDARDS
Conversion Factor
Metric Unit
Multiply Customary
Customary SPE Other Unit by Factor to
Quantity and SI Unit Unit Preferred Allowable Get Metric Unit
Capillary pressure Pa ft (fluid) m (fluid) 3.048' E-01
Compressibility of Pa- psi- Pa- 1.450 377 E-04
reservoir fluid kPa 1.450 377 E-01
Corrosion allowance m in. mm 2.54' E+Ol
Corrosion rate mls miliyr mm/a 2.54' E-02
hw)
Differential orifice Pa in. f-l,0 kPa 2.488 4 E-01
pressure (at 60F) cm Hz0 2.54' E+OO
Gas-oil ratio m3/m scfibbl standard 1.801 175
E -0,
m3/m3
Gas rate mYs sci/D standard 2.863 640 E-02"'
m31d
Geologic time S
Yr
Ma
Head (fluid mechanics) m fl m 3.048' E-01
cm 3.048' E+Ol
Heat exchange rate W Btu/hr kW 2.930 711 E-04
kJ/h 1.055 056 E+OO
Mobility m?Pas dicp ~m*/mPas 9.869 233 E-01
km21Pa.s 9.669233 E+02
Net pay thickness m fl m 3.048 E-01
Oil rate m3ls bbl/D m31d 1.589 873 E-01
short toniyr Mgla Va 9.071 847 E-01
Particle size m micron
w
1.0
Permeability-thickness m3 md-ft md.m pm2.rn 3.008 142 E-04
Pipe diameter (actual) m in. cm 2.54 E-c00
mm 2.54' E+Oi
Pressure buildup Pa psi kPa 6.894 757 E + OO*
per cycle
Productivity index m3iPes bbli(psi-D) mY(kPad) 2.305 916 E - 0212
Pumping rate m% U.S. galimin m3/h 2.271 247 E-01
US 6.309 020 E-02
Revolutions per minute
Recovery/unit volume
(oil)
Reservoir area
radls
m31m3
m2
vm
bbl/(acre-ft)
sq mile
acre
rad/s
m3/m3
km*
radlm
mYha*m
ha
1.047 198 E-01
6.283 185 E+OO
1.286 931 E-04
1.288 931 E+OO
2.589 988 E+OO
4.046856 E-01
Reservoir volume
Specific productivity
index
m3
m3/Pasm
acre-ft
bbl/(D-psi-R)
m3 1.233 482 E+03
hem 1.233 482 E-01
mY(kPa-d.m) 7.565 341 E - 02>
Surface or interfacial
tension in reservoir
caoillaries
N/m dyne/cm mN/m 1 .O E+OO
Torque N.m
Velocity (fluid flow) m/s
Vessel diameter m
Ibf-ft
ws
Nom 1.355 818 E + 0013
m/s 3.048' E-01
l-100 cm in. cm
above 100 cm ft m
An asterisk mdlcates the cowersum lactor IS exact wng the numbers shown, all subsequent numbers are zeros
See Notes 1 through 3 on page 58-E
2.54' E+OO
3.048' E-01
THE SI METRIC SYSTEM OF UNITS & SPE METRIC STANDARD 58-39
TABLE 2.4-FAHRENHEIT - CELSIUS TEMPERATURE CONVERSION CHART
- 459.67 to
-
19 -1ato53 54 to 350 360 to 1070 1990t01790 1990 to 3000
(C) (F) WI (F)
(Cl (F) (Cl (F)
-11, II -0P 0
-16, JO -,n
-10 77 -*a
-7jbbJ -410
-75, I, -470
--1S 56 -410
-740 a0 -400
--I,, I --I90
-7,n 69 --In0
-,,I I, -310
-717 7) --I60
--211 17 -150
-7u 61 -113
-701 II --lx
-19% lb --1x
-190 00 --I13
-,M 4 --loo
- - l i n 6J - m
- - I I , I I - 783
- - I 69 I , - , I , I , - I V I
- 169 BP 477 - I I 6
- b, : * - 1J Q - I a
- I 61 ?7 - 163 - 416 0
- 1 j J - 710 218 a
- , j l I I - 740 400 a
--111 56 -710 --In7 a
-10 03 -170 -,b 0
--II -710 -16 0
-179 09 200 -128 a
--17,x -100 -,,a 0
--11J 711 -I110 -?Sl a
-,\I 12 -IJO - 77 0
- - I D, 67 - 160 - 7% 0
- , a1 I / - 110 -718 0
- PI 16 -ILO -710 0
- 9000 -110 - 7070
- 8 - 170 - - I I 0
- , 880 - 110 - 1660
- I I I , - 100 - 1 10
- 70 I - OS - - I , 90
- 6, I O - 90 - 1, OQ
- bl 00 - I I - 17, 0
- 67 77 - 110 - I 170
- , P 5 - I I - - 1a, a
- 1667 - J O - 9 0
- t o 00 - 0 - 00
- , ' I I - 19 - 167
- 18 BP - , R - 36
- 1a 14 - I i - I I 6
- I I J O - 36 - I 7B
- I I 71 - I I - I I a
- , 661 - I i - 79 7
- 16 17 - I , - 7, 4
- I I I * - I I - 7i 6
- I I 00 - 31 - 11 6
- 1 4 - , Q - 770
- I I I P - 79 - 707
- 11 11 - 111 - , 114
- 17 7n - , 7 - l b6
- I I 72 - 76 - , 411
- I I I ~ I I - I , 0
- - I I I , - , - I , 7
- I Ql b - 71 - P
- , 000 - 72 - 76
- 7) 5 - 71 - I O
- 7I I 8P - I Q - 0
- 76: : - , P - I 7
-17 II --II -a
--I, I, -1J I
- 76bJ - - I 6 11
~ - **17 - - I I SO
- 75 I L - - I 4 I
- , 1bQ - 11 I 6
4 - 11 10 4
- , I OP - - I I 111
- 71 I , - 10 I 0
- 77 16 - 9 I S 6
- 7777 - 8 I J b
- 7, 6J - J I 9 1
- 7, 1, - 6 21 7
- 70 5) - I no
- 7000 - - I 716
- - I P - - I 766
- - 1nn9 - I 76
- I S31 - 1 I QI
- 27 n Q 320
- - I , 7 I 11 6
- 16 J J 316
- , b 1 I 37
- 15 6 I 317
- , \ a I I Q
- - I 6 176
- - 1, P 7 4 6
- - I I I a 6
- - I ?B ? 9 7
- 17 7 16 500
- , , I I I $1 I
- I I I 17 I I 6
- 10 1, I I
- 10 0 I 111
- 9 4 I i I V0
- 860 1* *a &
- - I I , , 11 67 *
- J I 8 111 6 1
- 1 12 10 661
- 6 6J 10 60 0
- I , 71 *( I
- I 16 27 J l 6
- 100 7, I I
- I I 75 7
- I 89 7, 770
- I I I 76 786
- 7J 6 7J I O*
- 177 76 671
I BP I V 107 1
1 4 0 I Q a
10 0 I I I ?7 a
I O6 I I 1736
77 7 I 7 l bl 6
776 I I l b,
711 I 1617
7, P J 5 1610
7 1 J 6 1616
750 J I 1736
l i d 18 1; 71
76 I J l I I 2 7
76, 80 l J 60
777 81 i l l I
I J B 87 I I 96
I 6 I 81 111
*I P 0 1617
29 I I 1850
100 a* leda
J O6 81 166 6
II I 88 IPQ 4
I I J I P I V7 I
17 7 PO l S 0
, PI 701 7
I I 0 PI 7010
II 6 Pb 704 8
, &I PI 1066
16 I 98 700 4
I , 7 PP 710 7
I I 6 100 717 D
I 1 110 ?I00
8 D 170 7111 0
I 110 J hbQ
60 0 I 0 7610
616 I S0 1070
I I I 160 17Qo
76, 110 IIBQ
677 180 , 160
nJ 0 I PP , 140
P, 1 100 197 a
PBP 710 l b0
I Q 770 478 a
, l bQ 710 LO
i I 56 710 6 0
171 I 710 670
176 J 7bQ 1000
1317 7J Q I I 80
111 I 780 116 o
1 31 790 I I 0
I 8 9 J O0 $77 0
I I 110 I PQQ
I bQ0 170 606 Q
161 6 110 b?bo
,,I 1 ,b 640
116 7 150 6670
1171 160 ,110 a
11118 110 (98 0
191 1 ,110 ' I 60
lPll I 190 I, a
10 00 7110
710 Q I Q 110 Q
tll b 170 J OB 0
771 I 410 806 Q
776J 0 674 6
717 7 l a 6 7 0
711 I I 00 l b0 a
I , 1 110 6180
7 8 9 80 I V6 a
711 TO 91 0
J QQ 100 P, ? 0
765 6 510 P19 a
7J I I 170 968 0
776J 110 VBb 0
767 I 5 0 I 0040
76J I I I I 0 I Q710
79, I 560 I Q 00
790 P 110 I O580
I Q 1 580 1 QJ b?
110 0 $90 I 0% 0
,llb 100 11170
171 1 610 I ~100
116 J 670 1. 146 0
117 7 610 l,lbbb
I , 78 60 11810
I , I ,I0 1,101 0
746 P 660 I , 7700
11 670 17160
, 600 680 I l l 60
, 656 690 I . 1740
311 I J O0 I 1970
, J bJ 110 1. 1100
387 7 770 T. 378 Q
18J I I 110 I , , 460
, 931 1 0 I , b Q
198 9 1SQ \ , 670
0 I 60 I . 000
, 100 J J Q 1. 4160
II 6 780 1. 4160
71 I J PQ I ; ! o
, 767 000 I , *0
I I 7 610 I 900
I J a 170 I 106 a
I I 010 1 116 a
8 9 10 1 140
5 010 II670
60 0 1160 I I80 0
616 810 I 118 0
I I I 880 I 6160
l b J BP0 I b, ( L)
62 I 900 1. 6170
178 910 I 6J OQ
) I 1 970 1. bR. Q
98 9 P, Q I . J o6Q
I Q 4 P b 1. 71 0
110 a PI 0 1 1 70
$15 6 960 I . ?600
I I I I PJ Q LJ J 80
$76, ( 10 l J SbQ
III I PVQ 1 1140
I I I I I 1. 000 I 8170
, I I I a,0 1.1500
, 8 T , 070 W8Q
I$ I.010 1 II6 0
lb00 1.00 l.?QQ
$65 I . 050 1. 912 0
, I \ I 1. 060 1. 9 00
I J b? I . 010 1, 956 Q
161 I UP0 I . P9 0
5911 I . 100 l . Ol ?O
I PB D I . 110 7. 0100
60 1. 110 1. 0 10
610 0 1. 110 1. 0660
615 b l.tO 2.010
6711 I . 150 ?. 16?0
676, 1 I 60 1. 1700
617 2 1 113 I . 1110
6110 , 180 ?. I ~60
611 LIP0 11160
611 P 1. 100 2. 11?0
, I 1710 I . 1100
660 0 I ?70 17760
6616 1130 7. 7460
bJ 1 I 1 740 ?. ?bl C
6J bJ 1710 ??6?0
667 f t 760 2100 a
6816 I PJ O 11180
69, I I lb0 I ,,*a
08 P 1790 7 3i O
711 I I 00 7l J 7 Q
710 c 1110 7, " OQ
7l l b 1170 2 080
, 711 1110 2 760
, 767 11 0 I 0
112 I 1150 ?. 66?0
?l J 8 I l b0 I I Q0
7 1 I 1. 310 I 980
7 8 9 1180 1. 1160
I I I HO 1 , , Q
760 0 1 400 1 II?0
J hI 6 I I O I S100
J i b 7 1 10 ? 6060
I 67 7 I , 10 7 6, 4 Q
76J I 1110 ? 6 10
7V33 I WO ? Lb0 0
790 P 1. 110 ?. 6J I 0
no4 1 1 IO 2 bPb0
llOQ I (0 1,140
8lS ,500 11110
811 1 1 510 1.1~00
8761 I I 7Q , , I 60
),I I 1,110 ?.?I* 0
811 * 150 1.10 0
83 I 1II0 78770
I 8 P 1 560 ?. 6t QO
111 I 1600 19110
8161 1610 29100
O( l l ? I . 670 19480
BSJ l l I d, 0 19160
IIPI 3 I 60 two
BOB9 lb!0 lQO?O
PO I 660 1.0700
9100 ,610 10110
9116 I.680 ,bUQ
971 1 i 600 107 0
976 ? , 100 I bP?O
9177 1JlQ 11100
v3r n , 770 31780
9 11 , ?, b I I 60
9 19 l . J o I l 6 0
PI 1. 750 11170
Pbbb L?LQ IZQQQ
9656 1.710 17190
PI I I 1, 611 11160
Vb I 1 ?90 I l l 0
I l l l l 1, 100 , 7?7Q
967 I I . 110 3 290 0
9911 I I 20 113ao
(PIT I I10 I ,I, 0
100 I I 0 I I a
10100 I 110 I lb! 3
1011 b 1.8LO I.100 0
1. 071 1 1810 l . J U 0
1076J 1110 1 160
1 al l I 1, aoa 1 1 a
I QI J I I PO0 , 117 6
1.01 1 I 910 1,410 0
,041 1 LP?b , 81 0
1QI4 4 I,?,0 ,106 0
,060 0 I 90 1.17 i
1.06, I.750 I I 7 0
1, 071 I 1 960 1160 Q
1. 016 7 1110 1. 116 Q
WI I 7. WQ , 617 :
1096 9 2 010 1610 C
I I O 1070 1661 0
l i l O0 7010 I bOb'
11116 20 0 , . J o C
I 171 I t OI 0 3. 777 C
! 176 7 1060 I . ? 0 ?
I I ) ?? 1070 37I aa
1 I I ? I 1010 l . J J 6 C
1. 1 1 I ?. OPQ , . , r r 0
I . l d, : . 100 1, l I I C
1. 15 4 I . 110 I . , , 6 0
1160 0 1.110 1.11 0
1.M 2.110 11bb 0
1, 1J 1 I 1. 1 0 , l l Q
I.176 7 I150 3.907 0
1,111 I I.160 1.910 0
I.1118 1.110 I.9190
LIT1 I 1110 3.T16 0
1.10 9 ?.llO 1.910
I.10 1100 1.9v1 0
, 710 a I . 110 4. OI OO
1, 211 ?. ??Q 028 0
1271 1 2110 0410
117J 1.10 ObP
1 111 I 1.150 ,O#? 0
I II? I I260 4.100 Q
I?,, ??JO lllQ
I ?a T l?OQ .IIb Q
1. 71 1 2. 790 15 0
1. 164 0 I I W 4, 112 0
1265 1 2. 110 190 0
I,??\ I 2170 7010
1276 7 2110 4.116 0
1.11, 1 2 10 4.1 0
l.llJ* 1,111 .I*:0
1.193 I 710 4.m 0
1.191 1 ?.I70 ,?Tl 0
1IQ 1 2.110 4.316 0
,,I00 IV0 110
1.11, 1.416 10 0
1.311 I 2500 4.117 0
l,,Pb 9 I.SIO LIZ a
I . ?, J 1. 600 4, 117 0
I 5 1 2650 ,M7 0
1.61 I *.?a0 4.197 6
1.110 0 1.116 4.w 6
I . , , 1 6 I 600 I . 011 6
1. 16, 1 2150 1.147 0
1. 191 I ?. TaQ US? 0
I , I 1 1 1. 910 I 341 0
I 6 9 l . WQ 1 37 0
Chapter 59
SPE Letter and Computer Symbols Standard
for Economics, Well Logging and Formation
Evaluation, Natural Gas Engineering, and
Petroleum Reservoir Engineering
Prepared by the Symbols Committee of the Society of Petroleum Engineers
Contents
Symbols in Alphabetical Order.. .59-Z
Quantities in Alphabetical Order .............................................. .59-18
Subscript Definitions in Alphabetical Order. ....................................... .59-52
Subscript Symbols in Alphabetical Order .59-63
59-2
PETROLEUM ENGINEERING HANDBOOK
Letter
Symbol
English
A
A
A
A
A
4
A,
4
a
a
a
a
aE
aR
B
B
4
&
b
b
b
b
c
Reserve
SPE
Letter
Symbol
Fg
F
gb
F
gb
FO
F
ob
F
ob
F,
FW
W
Symbols in Alphabetical Order
Computer
Letter
Symbol
ARA
HWF
AMP
AWT
ARA
AMPC
AMPR
AMPS
ACT
AI R
DEC
DLW
AI REX
AI RR
COR
FVF
FVFG
FVFGB
FVFGB
FVFO
FVFOB
FVFOB
FVFT
FVFW
WTH
I CP
RVF
WTH
RVFG
RVFGB
RVFO
ECQ
-
Quantity Dimensions
area
Helmholtz function (work function)
amplitude
atomic weight
cross section (area)
amplitude, compressional wave
amplitude, relative
amplitude, shear wave
activity
air requirement
decline factor, nominal
distance between like wells (injection or production)
in a row
air requirement, unit, in laboratory experimental
run, volumes of air per unit mass of pack
air requirement, unit, in reservoir, volumes of
air per unit bulk volume of reservoir rock
correction term or correction factor
(either additive or multiplicative)
formation volume factor,
volume at reservoir conditions divided
by volume at standard conditions
formation volume factor, gas
bubblepoint formation volume factor, gas
formation volume factor at bubblepoint
conditions, gas
formation volume factor, oil
bubblepoint formation volume factor, oil
formation volume factor at bubble point
conditions, oil
formation volume factor, total (two-phase)
formation volume factor, water
breadth, width, or (primarily in fracturing)
thickness
intercept
reciprocal formation volume factor, volume at
standard conditions divided by volume at
reservoir conditions (shrinkage factor)
width, breadth, or (primarily in fracturing)
thickness
reciprocal gas formation volume factor
reciprocal gas formation volume factor at
bubblepoint conditions
reciprocal oil formation volume factor
(shrinkage factor)
capacitance
L2
mL2/ t2
various
m
L2
various
various
various
various
L
L3/m
L
various
L
q2 t2/mL2
Dimensions: L=length. m=mass, q=electrical charge, t =tirne. T=temperature, and M=money.
WE LETTER AND COMPUTER SYMBOLS STANDARD 59-3
Letter
Symbol
Reserve
SPE
Letter
Symbol
C
c
C
c
C
C
C
c
C
5
CL
CL
C
02
G
p
I
ck
G
c
uk
C
w
C
Cf
5
co
CPT
CW
D
D
D
D
DC
4
D
SPC
d
d
d
4
dh
a:
E
E
G
k
c, n
u
K
c, n
C
cc1
cL,nL
co2
C
Wghg
k
,K
kfJ Kf
kg* Kg
k
o>Ko
k
Pr %
k
w> Kw
YA
CL, 6
D
Ld,L2
4
dH&
dl,Di
we
V
Computer
Letter
Symbol
I NVT
CGW
NMBC
CNC
ECN
CND
CNC
HSP
WDC
CNCCl
CNTL
WDCL
CNC02
ECNA
CNOFD
I NVI
I NVK
CNCFU
I NVUK
CNTWG
CMP
CMPF
CMPG
CMPO
CMPPRD
CMPW
DLV
DPH
DFN
DSC
oscc
DSCSP
DSCSPC
DECE
DI A
DUW
DI AAVP
OI AH
Ol Al
EFF
EMF
-
Quantity
capital investments, summation of all
coefficient of gas-well backpressure curve
components, number of
concentration
conductivity (electrical logging)
conductivity, other than electrical (with subscripts)
salinity
specific heat (always with phase or system
subscripts)
water-drive constant
concentration, methane (concentration of
other paraffin hydrocarbons would be
indicated similarly, Cc,, Cc3, etc.)
content, condensate or natural gas liquids
water-drive constant, linear aquifer
concentration, oxygen (concentration
of other elements or compounds would be
indicated similarly, Cco2, CN2, etc.)
conductivity, apparent
conductivity, fracture, dimensionless
capital investment, initial
capital investment, subsequent, in year k
fuel concentration, unit (see symbol m)
unamortized investment over year k
content, wet-gas
compressibility
compressibility, formation or rock
compressibility, gas
compressibility, oil
compressibility, pseudo reduced
compressibility, water
deliverability (gas well)
depth
diffusion coefficient
discount factor, general
discount factor, constant-income
discount factor, single-payment
[l/(l+i)k; ore-jk, j=ln(l+i)l
discount factor, single-payment
(constant annual rate) [e-jk(ej - 1)/j]
decline factor, effective
diameter
distance between adjacent rows of injection and
production wells
diameter, mean particle
diameter, hole
diameter, invaded zone (electrically equivalent)
efficiency
electromotive force
Dimensions
M
~3-2n t4n/m2n
various
tq2/mL3
various
various
L2/ t2T
L4t2/m
various
various
L4t2/m
various
tq2/mL3
M
M
various
various
Lt2/m
Lt2/m
Lt2/m
Lt2/m
Lt2/m
L3/t
L
L2/t
L
L
L
L
L
mL2/t2q
59-4
PETROLEUM ENGINEERING HANDBOOK
Reserve
SPE
Letter
Symbol
Computer
Letter
Symbol
ENG
ELMY
EFFA
Letter
Symbol Quantity Dimensions
E
E
EA
u
Y
?AFeA
energy
modulus of elasticity (Youngs modulus)
efficiency, area1 (used in describing results of model
studies only): area swept in a model divided by
total model reservoir area (see Ep)
efficiency, displacement: volume of hydrocarbons
(oil or gas) displaced from individual pores or
small groups of pores divided by the volume of
hydrocarbon in the same pores just prior to
mL*/ t*
n-l/L+
ED
EFFO
?lDJeD
Em
ED,
El
EFFOB
EFFDU
EFFI
cl
EP
efficiency, displacement, from burned portion of
in-situ combustion pattern
efficiency, displacement, from unburned portion of
in-situ combustion pattern
efficiency, invasion (vertical) : hydrocarbon pore
space invaded (affected, contacted) by the injection
fluid or heat front divided by the hydrocarbon pore
space enclosed in all layers behind the injected
fluid or heat front
Eulers number
wep
EFFP
ER 7)RpeR
EFFR
E
SP
ESSP
EV
QSP
QSSP
qv,ev
EMFSP
EMFSSP
EFFV
Em
EFFVB
efficiency, pattern sweep (developed from area1
efficiency by proper weighting for variations in
net pay thickness, porosity, and hydrocarbon
saturation): hydrocarbon pore space enclosed
behind the injected fluid or heat front divided
by total hydrocarbon pore space of the reservoir
or project
efficiency, overall reservoir recovery: volume of
hydrocarbons recovered divided by volume of
hydrocarbons in place at start of project
(ER=EpEfED=EvED)
SP (measured SP) (Self Potential)
SSP (static SP)
efficiency, volumetric: product of pattern
sweep and invasion efficiencies
efficiency, volumetric, for burned portion
EC
Ek
Ek
E
PSP
EMFC
EMFK
ENGK
EMFP
only, in-situ combustion pattern
electrochemical component of the SP
electrokinetic component of the SP
kinetic energy
pseudo-SP
-Ei (-x ) exponential integral,
m e-
s
x 7 dt, x positive
mL2/ t2q
mL2/t2q
Ei (x)
mL2/t2q
mL2/t2q
mL2/ t2
mL2/qt2
exponential integral, modified
E zO[J $dt+qfdt], x positive
-ca
L3/t
ZO,
ENC
UTLOZ
e
e%
encroachment or influx rate
oxygen utilization
SPE LETTER AND COMPUTER SYMBOLS STANDARD
59-5
Letter
Symbol
Reserve
SPE
Letter
Symbol
eE
e.
e,
ez
F
F
F
F
F
FB
FR
Fwv
F
l l F
F,
F
WF
F
WD
p/J
fL
fL
fPk
f v
P
i
G
G
G
G
G
E
lo
b
exp z
f
Q
Y
Fd
F
V
&nfshd
4Kr w
Computer
Letter
Symbol
ENCG
ENCO
ENCW
EXP
OGF
FAC
FLU
FCE
FAC
FACB
FACHR
WGTS
FACAFU
OMRS
FACWFU
FACWO
FACWOP
FRC
FON
FACF
FUG
FI GSH
FI MSHD
FI GW
r;,,ff script 1 FRCL
FL, f p scri pt 1 MFRTL
PRAPK
f Vbt vhf
4
4
0~
F
g
g
f G
4
FRCVB
FRCG
MFRTV
OLTS
GFE
GASTI
GAS
GMF
ELMS
Quantity
encroachment or influx rate, gas
encroachment or influx rate, oil
encroachment or influx rate, water
exponential function
degrees of freedom
factor in general, including ratios
(always with identifying subscripts)
fluid (generalized)
force, mechanical
ratio or factor in general (always with
identifying subscripts)
factor, turbulence
formation resistivity factor-equals
R ,,/R, (a numerical subscript
to F indicates the value R,)
specific weight
air/fuel ratio
damage ratio or condition ratio (conditions
relative to formation conditions unaffected
by well operations)
water/fuel ratio
water/oil ratio, producing, instantaneous
water/oil ratio, cumulative
fraction (such as the fraction of a flow
stream consisting of a particular phase)
frequency
friction factor
fugacity
fraction of intergranular space (porosity)
occupied by all shales
fraction of intermatrix space (porosity)
occupied by nonstructural dispersed shale
fraction of intergranular space (porosity)
occupied by water
fraction liquid
mole fraction liquid, LI(L+ v)
profit, annual, over year k, fraction of
unamortized investment
fraction of bulk (total) volume
fraction gas
mole fraction gas, V/(L+ V,
quality (usually of steam)
free energy (Gibbs function)
gas in place in reservoir, total initial
gas(any gas, including air) always with
identifying subscripts
geometrical factor (multiplier)
(electrical logging)
shear modulus
Dimensions
L3/t
L3/t
L%
various
various
mL/ t2
various
mL2/ t2
various
various
l / t
rn/Lt2
mLZ/ t2
L3
various
m/L?
59-6
PETROLEUM ENGINEERING HANDBOOK
Reserve
SPE
Letter
Symbol
Computer
Letter
Symbol
Letter
Symbol
-
Quantity Dimensions
free-gas volume, initial reservoir (=miW,;)
free gas produced, cumulative
condensate liquids in place in reservoir, initial
condensate liquids produced, cumulative
factor, geometrical (multiplier),
annulus (electrical logging)
geometrical factor (multiplier),
annulus (electrical logging)
gas influx (encroachment), cumulative
gas injected, cumulative
geometrical factor (multiplier),
invaded zoned (electrical logging)
geometrical factor (multiplier),
mud (electrical logging)
gas produced, cumulative
geometrical factor (multiplier), pseudo
(electrical logging)
gas produced from experimental tube run
gas recovery, ultimate
geometrical factor, (multiplier), true
(noninvaded zone) (electrical logging)
wet gas produced, cumulative
geometrical factor (multiplier),
flushed zone (electrical logging)
acceleration of gravity
gradient
gradient, geothermal
gradient, temperature
conversion factor in Newtons Second Law of
Motion
enthalpy (always with phase or system subscripts)
enthalpy (net) of steam or enthalpy above
reservoir temperature
bed thickness, individual
enthalpy, specific
heat-transfer coefficient, convective
height (other than elevation)
hyperboli,c declinF,,constaht (from equation)
$
L3
L3
L3
1:
L3
L/t2
various
T/L
T/L
mL2/ t2
mL2/ t2
L
L2/ t2
m/t3T
L
GFi
GFP
GL
G
LP
G
on
gF;
SF,
gL
gLP
f Gon
GASFI
GASFP
NGLTI
NGLP
GMFAN
G
an fG,n
GMFAN
G
Gi
G
GASE
GASI
GMFI
&
gi
f c,
f Gm
GMFM
GASP
GMFP
gP
f &
G
PE
Gpa
Gt
GASPEX
GASPUL
GMFT
&E
gP
f Gt
G
WP
G
x0
GASWGP
GMFXO
h- P
f Gxo
GRV
GRD
GRDGT
GRDT
GRVC
g
g
gG
gT
g,
Y
g&T
gh
I
4
HEN
HENS
d,e THK
HENS
HTCC
ZHT
HPC
hnhr
d.e
q =qi/ I,?
I I
L
L
L
L
3:
m/t3T
h
h
mc
h
h,
I
I
I
I
I
THK
THKMC
THKN
THKT
I NC
CUR
CUR
HTCI
X
thickness- (general and individual bed)
thickness, mudcake
thickness, net pay
thickness, gross pay (total)
cash income, operating
current, electric
electric current
heat transfer coefficient, radiation
index (use subscripts as needed)
i script i,i
i script i,i
J TJ ,
SPE LETTER AND COMPUTER SYMBOLS STANDARD
59-7
Reserve
SPE
Letter Letter
Symbol Symbol
I i
9 ( z ) scr i pt I
I ,
I bl
I,2
bf
IH
JR
4
lb
:f
t
I
shGR
i
i
i
i
i,
ibl
i,2
iFf
iH
iR
imaginary part of complex number z
porosity index
porosity index, primary
porosity index, secondary
free fluid index
hydrogen index
hydrocarbon resistivity index R,/R ,,
cash income, operating, after taxes
cash income, operating, before taxes
fracture index
ki
PRX
PRXPR
PRXSE
FFX
HYX
RSXH
I NCA
I NCB
FRX
I NCK
I J XS
SHXGR
RTEO
I NJ
I RCE
RTE
cash income, annual operating, over year k
injectivity index, specific
shaliness gamma ray index, (ylOg -Y~~)/(Y,,, --yo)
discount rate
injection rate
interest rate, effective compound (usually annual)
rate: discount, effective profit, of return,
reinvestment, etc; use symbol i with
suitable subscripts
h4
I RPE interest rate, effective, per period
i a
I NJ A injection rate, air
K
I NJ G injection rate, gas
4
RORI rate of return (internal, true, or discounted
4v
J
J s
j
j
K
K
j
J S
r
i b
I NJ W
POX
PDXS
I RA
BKM
KSP
cash flow) or earning power
injection rate, water
productivity index
productivity index, specific
interest rate, nominal annual
reciprocal permeability
bulk modulus
K
K
K
K
KR
K
fI tI ,
KC
k
k
k
kK
kg l b
kh
M
d
Me,,
M
MR,a,C
Mani
McXec
;;
r, j
4
Kg I &?
h
COE
DSP
EQR
COE
COER
COEANI
COEC
SUSM
PRM
RRC
PRMG
PRMGD
HCN
ko &
PRMO
coefficient in the equation of the electro-
chemical component of the SP (spontaneous
electromotive force)
coefficient or multiplier
dispersion coefficient
equilibrium ratio (Jo /x>
multiplier or coefficient
formation resistivity factor coefficient ( FR 4)
anisotropy coefficient
electrochemical coefficient
magnetic susceptibility
permeability, absolute (fluid flow)
reaction rate constant
effective permeability to gas
gas/oil permeability ratio
thermal conductivity (always with additional
phase or system subscripts)
effective permeability to oil
Computer
Letter
Symbol
I J X
Quantity
-
injectivity index
Dimensions
L4t/m
M
M
M
Lt/m
LJ/t
L3/t
L3/t
L3/t
L4t/m
L3t/m
l/L2
m/L+
mL2/t2q
various
L2/t
various
mL2/t2q
ml - / s2
L2
L/t
L2
mL/t3T
L2
59-8
PETROLEUM ENGINEERING HANDBOOK
Reserve
SPE
Letter Letter
Symbol Symbol
k
w Krg
k
I O &I
k
k,
KW
KW
kw /ko Kw /&
S(v) script L
L
L
L
L
Lf
4
L
In
log
h2
M
M
M
M
M
M
M
ML
MS
m
m
m
m
m
45
m.%
Computer
Letter
Symbol
PRMRG
PRMRD
PRMRW
PRMW
PRMWD
s, P script 1 LTH
s, P script 1 LTH
nL
MDLL
s, P script 1 LTH
Xf
LTHFH
s,,& script 1 LENS
HLTV
I
FA
F,
m
moD
MAG
MBR
MBR
MWT
NMBCP
SAD
HSPV
MWTAVL
Mm J&u
MBRSAV
Fht
MAGF
MBRT
MXP
FF
F~olFgo
FCM
MAS
MGD
A
FFE
FFE~
SLP
FCMEX
FCMEXG
-
Quantity
relative permeability to gas
relative permeability to oil
relative permeability to water
effective permeability to water
water/oil permeability ratio
transform, Laplace of y, Imy(t)e -$dt
distance, length, or lengthof path
length, path length, or distance
liquid phase, moles of
path length, length, or distance
fracture half-length (specify in the
direction or when using xf )
spacing (electrical logging)
heat of vaporization, latent
natural logarithm, base e
common logarithm, base 10
logarithm, base a
magnetization
mobility ratio, general (hdisplacing/hdisplaced)
mobility ratio, sharp-front approximation (AD/Ad)
molecular weight
number of compounding periods (usually per year)
slope, interval transit time vs. density (absolute
value)
volumetric heat capacity
molecular weight of produced liquids,
mole-weighted average
mobility ratio, diffuse-front approximation
[(AD + Ad )swept/ (b)unsweptl;
D signifies displacing; d signifies
displaced; mobilities are evaluated at
average saturation conditions behind and
ahead of front
magnetization, fraction
mobility ratio, total, [(A, )swept/ (A, )unsweptI;
swept and unswept refer to invaded
and uninvaded regions behind and ahead
of leading edge of displacement front
cementation (porosity) exponent (in an
empirical relation between FR and 4)
fuel consumption
mass
ratio of initial reservoir free-gas volume
to initial reservoir oil volume
slope
fuel consumption in experimental tube run
fuel consumption in experimental tube run
(mass of fuel per mole of produced gas)
Dimensions
L2
L
L
L
L
L
L2/ t2
da
t n
tL2/m
rn/Lt2T
m
various
m
various
m/L3
m
SPE LETTER AND COMPUTER SYMBOLS STANDARD
Letter
Symbol
Reserve
SPE
Letter
Symbol
mR
mk
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
NCR
NN
NR
NRe
N,
Np
%a
n
n
n
n
n
n
nN
"J
%
4
0
0,
P
P
P
P
PV
P,
pk
P
B
F
i!R
PD
PO
Pb
Pbh
PC
Pcf
PCS
Pd
Pt?
FFR
n,C
n
n
n
meND
N,, CG
N,,CN
NF
nP
nPQ
N
N
PC *PC
P
P
P
pR
pD
pa
Ps,ps,pb
P
bh
PC
P
CJ -
PCS
pd
pt?
Computer
Letter
Symbol Quantity
-
FCMR
AMAK
NMB
NEU
NI J MU
OI L
OI LTI
NMB
SND
NGR
NEUN
FUOR
REYQ
Ol l E
Ol l P
OI LPUL
NMB
NGW
RFX
NMB
NMB
SXP
NMBN
MOLJ
MOLPJ
NMBM
XPO
XPOU
CFL
NMBP
PRFT
CFLPV
PRSCP
PRAK
PRS
PRSAV
PRSAV
PRSAVR
PRSO
PRSA
PRSB
PRSBH
PRSC
PRSCF
PRSCS
PRSD
PRSE
fuel consumption in reservoir
amortization (annual write-off of unamortized
investment at end of year k)
count rate (general)
neutron [usually with identifying subscript(s)]
number, dimensionless, in general (always
with identifying subscripts)
oil (always with identifying subscripts)
oil in place in reservoir, initial
pump strokes, number of, cycles per unit of time
slope, neutron porosity vs. density (absolute value)
gamma-ray count rate
neutron count rate
fuel deposition rate
Reynolds number (dimensionless number)
oil influx (encroachment) cumulative
oil produced, cumulative
oil recovery, ultimate
density (indicating number per unit volume)
exponent of backpressure curve, gas well
index of refraction
number (of variables, or components, or steps,
or increments, etc.)
number (quantity)
saturation exponent
density (number) of neutrons
moles of component j
moles of component .i produced, cumulative
number of moles, total
operating expense
operating expense per unit produced
cash flow, undiscounted
phases, number of
profit, total
cash flow, discounted
capillary pressure
profit, annual net, over year k
pressure
average pressure
pressure, average or mean
pressure, reservoir average
pressure, dimensionless
pressure, atmospheric
pressure, bubblepoint (saturation)
pressure, bottomhole
pressure, critical
pressure, casing flowing
pressure, casing static
pressure, dew point
pressure, external boundary
59-9
Dimensions
dL3
M
1/ t
various
various
L3
L3/m
1/t
1/t
rn/L3t
1:
L3
l/L3
l/L3
various
M/L3
M
M
$Lt2
ZLt2
m/L?
m/L+
n-l/L?
59-10
PETROLEUM ENGINEERING HANDBOOK
Letter
Symbol
P CY,
Pf
Pi
Piwf
Piws
PPC
PPC
b
PI
P SC
PSP
pb
Qv
Qi
Qp
Qp
Q t l l
Reserve
SPE
Letter
Symbol
Computer
Letter
Symbol
P
em
Pf
pi
P
I Wf
piw3
P
PC
P
PC
PFJr
p,
psc
PSP
%
pi /
pt s
PW
P
wf
PWS
P
ws
4
4*@
QftD script 1
PRSXT
PRSF
PRY
PRSI WF
PRSI WS
PRSPC
PRSPC
PRSPRD
PRSRD
PRSSC
PRSSP
PRSTCKI
PRSTF
PRSTS
PRSW
PRSWF
PRSWS
PRSWS
CHG
HRT
ENCLTQI I
zv
4i
CEXV cation exchange capacity per unit pore volume
FLUI D pore volumes of injected fluid, cumulative,
QP, D script 1 FLUP
FLUP
ENCTOG
RTE
RTEAV
QD
RTEO
Ql l
RTEA
%vf &vi ~Qdh RTEDH
2D
RTEG
RTEGO
Qi
RTEI
ED
RTEO
RTEOCI
QF
RTEPAV
Q*
RTES
q c, # Qx
RTESC
q ml Qsc
RTESC
Q,
RTEW
Q WD
RTEWl l
PI
RES
Quantity
pressure, extrapolated
pressure, front or interface
pressure, initial
pressure, bottomhole flowing, injection well
pressure, bottomhole static, injection well
pressure, pseudocritical
pseudocritical pressure
pressure, pseudoreduced
pressure, reduced
pressure, standard conditions
pressure, separator
pressure function, dimensionless, at
dimensionless time tD
pressure, tubing flowing
pressure, tubing static
pressure, bottomhole general
pressure, bottomhole flowing
pressure, bottomhole static
pressure, bottomhole, at any time after shut-in
charge
heat flow rate
influx function, fluid, linear aquifer,
dimensionless
dimensionless
fluids, cumulative produced (where Np and
W, are not applicable)
produced fluids, cumulative (where Np
and W, are not applicable)
fluid influx function, dimensionless, at
dimensionless time tD
production rate or flow rate
production rate or flow rate, average
production rate, dimensionless
production rate at economic abandonment
volumetric flow rate downhole
production rate, gas
production rate, gas, dimensionless
production rate at beginning of period
production rate, oil
production rate, oil, dimensionless
production rate or flow rate at mean pressure
segregation rate (in gravity drainage)
surface production rate
volumetric flow rate, surface conditions
production rate, water
production rate, water, dimensionless
electrical resistivity (electrical logging)
Dimensions
m/L?
m/L?
m/Lt*
m/L?
m/L?
m/Lt*
m/L?
m/L+
rn/Lt2
m/L?
q
mL2/ t3
L3
L3/t
L3/t
L3/t
L3/t
L3/t
L3/t
L3/t
L3/t
L3/t
L3/t
L3/t
L3/t
mL3/tq2
SPE LETTER AND COMPUTER SYMBOLS STANDARD
59-11
Reserve
SPE
Letter Letter
Symbol Symbol
R
R
4 1 Cw
R N
R
Sk ) scr i pt R
Ro
Rf
RI
R,
R/r,
R,,,,
R
r r i f
RP
R,
4,
R\ / ,
4,
R, , ,
4
R, ,
R
. \ o
R,
r
r
b
rff
rd
r,.
r,
rn
f-ll.o
S
S
S
Sl.
S
17)
ss
S,,
SW
4,
s,,
s,,,
SO
S
OP
so,
4,
SW
Computer
Letter
Symbol
ARR
GOR
MRF
RRR
RESZR
GORF
RESA
RESI
RESM
RESMC
RESMF
GORP
GORS
GORSB
RESSH
GORSI
GWRS
REST
RESW
RESXO
RESZ
RAO
RST
RADI I
RAOHL
RADP
RADE
RADS
RADW
RADWA
HER
SAT
ST0
SATL
STOQ
SATG
SATGC
SATGR
SATH
SATHR
SATI W
SAT0
SATDG
SATOR
SATW
SATWC
Quantity
gas constant, universal (per mole)
gas/oil ratio. producing
molecular refraction
reaction rate
real part of complex number z
formation resistivity when 100% saturated
with water of resistivity R, , .
free gas/oil ratio, producing (free-gas
volume/oil volume)
apparent resistivity
invaded zone resistivity
mud resistivity
mudcake resistivity
mud-filtrate resistivity
cumulative gas/oil ratio
solution gas/oil ratio (gas solubility in oil)
solution gas/oil ratio at bubblepoint conditions
shale resistivity
solution gas/oil ratio, initial
gas solubility in water
true formation resistivity
water resistivity
flushed-zone resistivity (that part of the
invaded zone closest to the wall of the hole,
where flushing has been maximum)
apparent resistivity of the conductive fluids in
radius
resistance
radius, dimensionless
hydraulic radius
drainage radius
external boundary radius
radius of well damage or stimulation (skin)
well radius
radius of wellbore, apparent or effective
(includes effects of well damage or stimulation)
entropy, total
saturation
storage or storage capacity
liquid saturation, combined total
dimcnaionless fractional storage capacity
gas saturation
gas saturation, critical
gas saturation, residual
saturation, hydrocarbon
residual hydrocarbon saturation
irreducible (interstitial or connate) water saturation
oil saturation
gas-cap interstitial-oil saturation
residual oil saturation
water saturation
critical water saturation
Dimensions
mLZ/t2T
i3
m/L
mL3/tq*
mL3/ tq2
mL3/tq2
mL3/tq2
mL3/tq2
mL3/tq2
mL3/tq2
mL3/ tq2
mL3/ tq2
mL3/tq2
mL3/tq2
L
ML2/tq2
mL21t2T
various
59-12 PETROLEUM ENGINEERING HANDBOOK
Letter
Symbol
S
w
s
WI
S
WO
S
wr
s
S
S
s
S
s*
T
T
T
TR
Thh
T
T/
T,,
T.
TX
t scr i pt t
t
t l
fll2
t2
tD
tDtn
t/v
t
d
h!V
t
P
ts
t , , , scr i pt t
u
u
u
Reserve
SPE
Letter
Symbol
L
10
Q
R, V,,R,
n,,
u
Computer
Letter
Symbol
SATWG
SATWI
SATWO
SATWR
DI S
HERS
SKN
SDVES
VARES
PER
TRM
TEM
TEMR
TEMBH
TEMC
TEMF
TEMPRD
TEMRD
TEMSC
TAC
TI M
TI MRP
TI MH
TI MAV
TI MD
TI MMD
NFL
TI MD
TI MDN
TI MP
TI MS
TACSH
HTCU
FI X
VELV
VELV
GRRT
MDLV
VLT
VDL
VLF
-
Quantity
interstitial-water saturation in gas cap
initial water saturation
interstitial-water saturation in oil band
residual water saturation
Laplace transform variable
displacement
entropy, specific
skin effect
standard deviation of a random variable, estimated
variance of a random variable, estimated
period
transmissivity, transmissibility
temperature
reservoir temperature
bottomhole temperature
critical temperature
formation temperature
pseudoreduced temperature
reduced temperature
temperature, standard conditions
interval transit time
time
relaxation time, proton thermal
half life
relaxation time, free-precession decay
time, dimensionless
time, dimensionless at condition m
neutron lifetime
time, delay
decay time, neutron (neutron mean life)
time well was on production prior to shut-in,
equivalent (pseudotime)
time for stabilization of a well
shale interval transit time
heat transfer coefficient, over all
flux
flux or flow rate, per unit area
(volumetric velocity)
superficial phase velocity (flux rate of a
particular fluid phase flowing in pipe;
use appropriate phase subscripts)
gross revenue (value), total
moles of vapor phase
potential difference (electric)
volume
volume fraction or ratio (as needed, use same
subscripted symbols as for volumes; note
that bulk volume fraction is unity and pore
volume fractions are fJ)
Dimensions
L
L2/t2T
various
t
various
T
t/L
t
l / t
t
t
t
t
t/ L
m/t3T
various
L/t
L/t
M
mL2/qt2
L3
various
SPE LETTER AND COMPUTER SYMBOLS STANDARD 59-13
Letter
Symbol
v,
vRb
V
RI<
vb
vbE
V
b,,
v,
V
8.
V
mo
V
mo
V
TI P
5
V
PD
v,
V
sh
V
shd
V
shs
VU
V
V
V
vb
W
W
W
W
W,
wi
wp
W
W
t ma script t
I;:
z
X
X
zi
3i
Reserve
SPE
Letter
Symbol
V
t?,
vb
vbE
v/m
V!?l,
V,l,
V
pnr, vne
VP
v~D
vs
vsh
vshd
shs
RU
KU
VS
v, u
vb, ub
w
W
w, G
W
WP
Y
WP
Z
m
Atrn,
m
Computer
Letter
Symbol Quantity
-
VOLM
VOLRB
VOLRU
VOLE
VOLBEX
VOLBP
VOLG
VOLGR
VOLI G
VOLI M
VOLMA
VOLMA
VOLNE
VOLP
VOLPR
VOLS
VOLSH
VOLSHD
VOLSHS
GRRU
VAC
SPV
VEL
VELB
WTR
WTRTI
WGT
WRK
WTRE
WTRI
WTRP
ARR
MRT
TACMA
MRT
XEL
MFRL
MENES
molal volume (volume per mole)
volume of reservoir rock burned
volume of reservoir rock unburned
bulk volume
bulk volume of pack burned in experimental
tube run
volume at bubble point pressure
volume, effective pore
volume, grain (volume of all formation solids
except shales)
volume, intergranular (volume between grains;
consists of fluids and all shales) ( Vb - V,, 1
volume, intermatrix (consists of fluids and
dispersed shale) (Vb - V,, 1
matrix (framework) volume (volume
of all formation solids except
dispersed clay or shale)
volume, matrix (framework) (volume of all
formation solids except dispersed shale)
volume, noneffective pore <VP-V, )
pore volume ( vb - V, )
pore volume, dimensionless
volume, solid(s) (volume of all formation
solids)
volume, shale(s) (volume of all shales:
structural and dispersed)
volume, shale, dispersed
volume, shale, structural
gross revenue (value) per unit produced
acoustic velocity
specific volume
velocity
burning-zone advance rate (velocity of>
water (always with identifying subscripts)
water in place in reservoir, initial
weight (gravitational)
work
water influx (encroachment), cumulative
water injected, cumulative
water produced, cumulative
Arrhenius reaction-rate velocity constant
mass flow rate
matrix interval transit time
rate, mass flow
reactance
tensor ofx
mole fraction of a component in liquid phase
vector of x
mean value of a random variable, x, estimated
Dimensions
,i:
L3
L3
L3
L3
L3
L3
M/L3
L/t
L3/m
L/t
L/t
various
L3
mL/t*
mL*/ t*
;;
L3/m
m/t
St
ML*/tq*
59-14 PETROLEUM ENGINEERING HANDBOOK
Letter
Symbol
Reserve
SPE
Letter
Symbol
Y
Y
Z
Z
Z
Z
Z,
z
2
Z
4
Greek
CY
a
a!
CY
a
SPsh
;
Y
Y
Y
Y
+
Y&T
YO
YW
A
AL
Computer
Letter
Symbol
HOL
MFRV
ANM
ZEL
ZEL
MPO
MPDA
ZED
MFRM
VAL
ZEOPAV
ANG
COEA
HTD
RED
HTD
REDSH
BRGR
HEC
GRY
SPG
HSPR
STNS
SRT
SPGG
SPGO
SPGW
DEL
DELGASE
DELGASI
OELGASP
OELOI LE
DELOI LP
OELWTRE
DELWTRI
OELWTRP
OELRAD
DELTI MWF
OELTI MWS
Quantity Dimensions
holdup (fraction of the pipe volume filled by
a given fluid: Y, is oil hold up, y, is water
holdup, sum of all holdups at a given level
is one>
mole fraction of a component in vapor phase
atomic number
elevation referred to datum
height, or f l ui d head or elevation
referred to a datum
impedance
impedance, acoustic
gas compressibility factor
(deviation factor) (z =pV/nR r)
mole fraction of a component in mixture
valence
L
L
various
m/L2t
gas deviation factor (compressibility factor)
at mean pressure
angle
attenuation coefficient
heat or thermal diffusivity
reduction ratio or reduction term
thermal or heat diffusivity
reduction ratio, SP, due to shaliness
bearing, relative
thermal cubic expansion coefficient
gamma ray [usually with identifying subscript(s) 1
specific gravity (relative density)
specific heat ratio
strain, shear
shear rate
specific gravity, gas
specific gravity, oil
specific gravity, water
difference or difference operator,
l/L
L*/t
L2/t
l/T
various
l/t
finite (Ax =x2 -x1 or x1 -x2)
gas influx (encroachment) during an interval
gas injected during an interval
gas produced during an interval
oil influx (encroachment) during an interval
oil produced during an interval
water influx (encroachment) during an interval
water injected during an intervai
water produced during an interval
radial distance (increment along radius) L
drawdown time (time after well is opened to t
production) (pressure drawdown)
buildup time; shut-in time
(time after well is shut in)
(pressure buildup, shut-in time)
SPE LETTER AND COMPUTER SYMBOLS STANDARD 59-15
Reeerve
SPE
Letter
Symbol
Computer
Letter
Symbol
DCR
ANGH
OPR
ANGH
SKD
DPROB
DPROU
DPRWB
DI E
STN
DFS
ANGO
ANGDA
ANGC
ANG
STNV
LAM
MOB
WVL
MOBG
MOB0
MOBT
MOBW
PSN
RAZ
PAMM
MEN
VI S
VI SA
VI SG
VEGA
VI SO
VI SPAV
VI SW
VSK
VSK
DEN
RHO
DENAVL
DENFU
DENA
DENB
DENF
OENG
-
Quantity
decrement
deviation, hole (drift angle)
displacement ratio
drift angle, hole (deviation)
skin depth (logging)
displacement ratio, oil from burned volume,
volume per unit volume of burned reservoir rock
displacement ratio, oil from unburned volume,
volume per unit volume of unburned reservoir
rock
displacement ratio, water from burned volume,
volume per unit volume of burned reservoir
rock
dielectric constant
strain, normal and genera1
hydraulic diffusivity (~/c#Jc~ or A/4c)
angle of dip
dip, apparent angle of
contact angle
angle
strain, volume
decay constant (l/~,,)
mobility (k /CL)
wave length (I/CT)
mobility, gas
mobility, oil
mobility, total, of all fluids in a particular region
of the reservoir [e.g., (A,,+& +A,,.)]
mobility, water
Poissons ratio
azimuth of reference on sonde
magnetic permeability
mean value of a random variable
viscosity, dynamic
viscosity, air
viscosity, gas
viscosity, gas, at 1 atm
viscosity, oil
viscosity at mean pressure
viscosity, water
kinematic viscosity
viscosity, kinematic
density
electrical resistivity (other than logging)
density of produced liquid, weight-weighted
average
density, fuel
density, apparent
density, bulk
density, fluid
density, gas
Dimensions
various
L
q2 t2/mL3
L2/t
l/t
L3t/m
L
L3t/m
L3t/m
L3t/m
L3t/m
mL/ q*
m/Lt
d-t
m/Lt
m/Lt
m/Lt
m/Lt
m/Lt
L*/t
L2jt
m/L3
mL3jtq2
dL3
$1:
m/L3
m/L3
m/L3
59-16 PETROLEUM ENGINEERING HANDBOOK
Letter
Symbol
Pm0
PO
f sE
ot
-
<
s
>
3
Reserve
SPE
Letter
Symbol
Computer
Letter
Symbol
DENMA
DEND
DENSEX
DENT
DENW
DENXD
XSTMAC
SUM
SI G
XSTMI C
XNL
SFT
XSTMI C
sov
STS
SFT
WVN
VAR
STSS
TI MC
TI MAV
TORHL
TDRHL
TI MD
TI MD
TORE
DA2
POT
POR
POREX
PORR
PORA
PORE
PDRH
PDRI G
PORI M
PORNE
PORT
STR
DSM
AV
LT
LE
GT
GE
-
Quantity
density, matrix (solids, grain)
density, oil
density of solid particles making up
experimental pack
density, true
density, water
density, flushed zone
cross section, macroscopic
summation (operator)
conductivity, electrical (other than logging)
cross section, microscopic
cross section of a nucleus, microscopic
interfacial, surface tension
microscopic cross section
standard deviation of a random variable
stress, normal and general
surface tension, interfacial
wave number (l/h)
variance of a random variable
stress, shear
time constant
lifetime, average (mean life)
hydraulic tortuosity
tortuosity, hydraulic
decay time (mean life) (l/A)
mean life (decay time) (l/A)
tortuosity, electric
dip, azimuth of
potential or potential function
porosity (vb - vS )/ vb
porosity of experimental pack
porosity of reservoir or formation
porosity, apparent
porosity, effective (V,,/Vh)
porosity, hydrocarbon-filled, fraction or percent
of rock bulk volume occupied by hydrocarbons
porosity (space), intergranular (V, - V,, )/V,
porosity (space), intermatrix tvb - v,,,, )/ vb
porosity, noneffective (V,,,/V,)
porosity, total
stream function
dispersion modulus (dispersion factor)
angular frequency
proportional to
average or mean (overbar)
smaller than
equal to or smaller than
larger than
equal to or larger than
-
Dimensions
m/L3
m/L3
m/L
m/L3
m/L
m/L3
l/L
various
l/L
L*
m/t2
L*
m/L+
r-n/t*
l/L
m/L+
t
t
various
various
l/t
SPE LETTER AND COMPUTER SYMBOLS STANDARD 59-17
Letter
Symbol
V
V.
V2
VX
er f
er f c
lim
b
E,
Ei(x)
- Ei( -x)
ez
f
g(z)
Reserve
SPE Computer
Letter Letter
Symbol Symbol
ASYM
APPR
DEL
Y
ERF
ERFC
LM
ICP
exp z
F
EXP exponential function
FAC ratio
FRC fraction
A SLP
NUMQ
NMB
SDVES
VARES
MENES
P,T
ANG
f
MEN
POT
STR
SDV
VAR
Quantity Dimensions
asymptotically equal to
approximately equal to or is approximated
by (usually with functions)
de1 (gradient operator)
divergence
Laplacian operator
curl
error function
error function, complementary
limit
intercept
Eulers number
exponential integral, modified
kii [ s-$dt+ r:dt] , x positive
-co c
s
me-
exponential integral, -dt, x positive
t
x
imaginary part of complex number z
Laplace transform of y, imy(t)esdt
logarithm. natural, base i
logarithm. common, base 10
logarithm, base u
slope
number. dimensionless
number (of variables, or steps. or increments, etc.)
real part of complex number ,:
Laplace transform variable
standard deviation of a random variable.
estimated
variance of a random variable. estimated
mean value of a random variable. .Y. estimated
vector of I-
tensor of .r
angle
Eulers constant=0.5772
difference (Ax=x* --x t or x, --x2)
difference operator, finite
mean value of a random variable
potential or potential function
stream function
standard deviation of a random variable
variance of a random variable
various
various
various
various
59-18 PETROLEUM ENGINEERING HANDBOOK
Quantities in Alphabetical Order
Quantity
Letter
Symbol
Reeerve
SPE
Letter
Symbol
Arrhenius reaction-rate velocity constant
absolute permeability (fluid flow)
acceleration of gravity
acoustic impedance
acoustic velocity
activity
air/fuel ratio
air injection rate
air requirement
air requirement, unit, in laboratory experimental
run, volumes of air per unit mass of pack
air requirement, unit, in reservoir, volumes of
air per unit bulk volume of reservoir rock
air viscosity
amortization (annual write-off of unamortized
investment at end of year k)
amplitude
amplitude, compressional wave
amplitude, relative
amplitude, shear wave
angle
angle
angle of dip
angle, contact
angular frequency
anisotropy coefficient
annual operating cash income, over year k
annulus geometrical factor
(multiplier or fraction)
apparent interval transit time
apparent conductivity
apparent density
apparent or effective wellbore radius (includes
effects of well damage or stimulation)
apparent porosity
apparent resistivity
apparent resistivity of the conductive fluids in
an invaded zone (due to fingering)
approximately equal to or is approximated
by (usually with functions)
area
area1 efficiency ( used i n descri bi ng resul ts of
model studies only); area swept in a model
divided by total model reservoir area
(see EJ
asymptotically equal to
P
g
ZO
V
iF
0
a
aE
aR
Pa
mk
t, script f
ccl
pa rho
r,.,
40
47
R,
=E
A
EA
-
Computer
Letter
Symbol Dimensions
ARR
PAM
GAV
MPOA
VAC
ACT
FACAFU
I NJ A
AI R
AI REX
L3/m
L
L/t2
m/L2t
L/t
various
L3/t
various
L3/m
AI RR
VI SA dLt
AMAK
M
AMP
AMPC
AMPR
AMPS
ANG
ANG
ANGI I
ANGC
FQNANG
COEANI
I NCK
GMFAN
various
various
various
various
It
M
TACA
ECNA
I J ENA
RADWA
t/L
tq2/mL3
m/L3
L
PORA
RESA
RESZ
mL3/tq2
mL3/tq2
APPR
ARA
EFFA
L2
ASYM
Dimensions: Lzlength. m=maSs. q=de~tl~al charge. t=tlIllt?. 1 =temperature, and M =money.
SPE LETTER AND COMPUTER SYMBOLS STANDARD 59-19
Quantity
-
atmospheric pressure
atomic number
atomic weight
attenuation coefficient
average flow rate or production rate
average or mean (overbar)
average pressure
average reservoir pressure
azimuth of dip
azimuth of reference on sonde
backpressure-curve exponent, gas well
backpressure curve (gas well), coefficient of
backpressure curve (gas well), exponent of
base a, logarithm
bearing, relative
bed thickness, individual
bottomhole flowing pressure
bottomhole pressure
bottomhole pressure flowing
bottomhole flowing pressure, injection well
bottomhole static pressure, injection well
bottomhole pressure at any time after shut-in
bottomhole pressure, general
bottomhole pressure, static
bottomhole (well) pressure in water phase
bottomhole temperature
breadth, width, or
thickness (primarily in fracturing)
boundary pressure, external
boundary radius, external
bubblepoint formation volume factor, gas
bubblepoint formation volume factor, oil
bubblepoint (saturation) pressure
bubblepoint reciprocal gas formation volume
factor at bubblepoint conditions
bubblepoint pressure, volume at
bubblepoint solution gas/oil ratio
buildup time; shut-in time
(time after well is shut in)
(pressure buildup, shut-in time)
bulk density
bul k modulus
bulk volume
bulk volume of pack burned in experimental
tube run
bulk (total) volume, fraction of
burned reservoir rock, volume of
burning-zone advance rate (velocity of)
capacitance
Letter
Symbol
-
PO
Z
A
PC>
$6
Bob
Pb
b
d
V
2
At,,
pb rho
K
vb
V
bE
fv
VRtl
Vh
C
Reserve
SPE Computer
Letter Letter
Symbol Symbol Dimensions
A4
- a
Q
P
P
Pd
M
PC
&
F
gb
F,,
Psfs,pb
f&J;b
b
F
xsb
Arws
Db
&
vb
VbE
PRSA
ANM
AWT
COEA
RTEAV
AV
PRSAV
PRSAVR
DA2
RAZ
NGW
CGW
NGW
BRGR
THK
PRSWF
PRSBH
PRSWF
PRSI WF
PRSI WS
PRSWS
PRSW
PRSWS
PRSWW
TEMBH
WTH
PRSE
RAOE
FVFGB
FVFOB
PRSB
RVFGB
VOLBP
GORSB
DELTI MWS
DENB
BKM
VOLB
VOLBEX
FRCVB
VOLRB
VELB
ECU
m/Lt2
m
l/L
L/t
m/Lt*
nl/Lt2
L
m/Lt*
m/Lt2
m/Lt*
m/Lt2
m/Lt2
m/Lt*
m/Lt
n-l/L?
m/Lt*
T
L
m/L+
L
m/Lt*
L3
t
m/L3
m/Lt2
;:
L3
L/t
q2t2/mL2
59-20
PETROLEUM ENGINEERING HANDBOOK
Quantity
- -
capacity, cation exchange, per unit pore volume
capacity, cation exchange,
per unit pore volume, total
capacity, storage
capacity, dimensionless fractional storage
capillary pressure
capital investment, initial
capital investment, subsequent, in year k
capital investments, summation of all
cash flow, discounted (present value)
cash flow, undiscounted
cash income, annual operating, over year k
cash income, operating
cash income, operating, after taxes
cash income, operating, before taxes
casing pressure, flowing
casing pressure, static
cation exchange capacity per unit pore volume
cation exchange capacity per unit pore volume,
total
cementation (porosity) exponent (in an empirical
relation between FR and 4)
charge (current times time)
coefficient, anisotropy
coefficient, attenuation
coefficient, convective heat transfer
coefficient, diffusion
coefficient, electrochemical
coefficient, formation resistivity factor
coefficiem in the equation of the electro-
chemical component of the SP (spontaneous
electromotive force)
coefficient of gas-well backpressure curve
coefficient heat transfer, overall
coefficient, heat transfer, radiation
coefficient, thermal cubic expansion
coefficient or multiplier
combined total liquid saturation
common logarithm, base 10
component j, cumulative moles produced
component j, moles of
component, mole fraction of, in liquid phase
component, mole fraction of, in mixture
component, mole fraction of, in vapor phase
components, number of
component of the SP, electrochemical
component of the SP, electrokinetic
compressibility
compressibility factor (gas deviation factor,
z=pVlnRT)
Letter
Symbol
QV
Qv,
s
SP
PC
c,
Ch
C
P
PI;
P
h
I
42
Ib
PC!
PC,
Qv
Qbi
m
Q
K
cl,,,
h*
D
K
KR
K
C
CT
I
ii
SL
log
51
n/
X
Z
Y
C
4
Eh
c
Z
Reserve
SPE
Letter
Symbol
zv
zv,
S,Q
SD
Pc.Pc
C,
PC,
p<,
zv
44
uT, u,
IT, 1,
b
M
PL JL
nc
@c
@k
k
tK
Z
Computer
Letter
Symbol
CEXV
CEXUT
ST0
STOQ
PRSCP
I NVI
I NVK
I NVT
CFLPV
CFL
I NCK
I NC
I NCA
I NCB
PRSCF
RSCS
CEXV
CEXUT
MXP
CHG
COEANI
COEA
HTCC
OFN
COEC
COER
KSP
CGW
HTCU
HTCI
HEC
COE
SATL
MOLPJ
MOLJ
MFRL
MFRM
MFRV
NMBC
EMFC
EMFK
CMP
ZED
Dimensions
various
m/L?
M
M
M
M
M
M
M
M
M
m/Lt2
m/Lt*
9
l / L
m/t3T
L2/t
mL2/t2q
mL2/t2q
~3-21~4n/~2n
m/t3T
rn/t3T
l/T
various
mL2/t2q
mL2/t2q
Lt2/m
SPE LETTER AND COMPUTER SYMBOLS STANDARD
59-21
Quantity
-
compressibility factor or deviation factor
for gas, at mean pressure
compressibility, formation or rock
compressibility, gas
compressibility, oil
compressibility, pseudoreduced
compressibility, water
compressional wave amplitude
concentration
concentration, methane (concentration of
other paraffin hydrocarbons would be
indicated similarly, Ccz, Cc, , etc.)
concentration, oxygen (concentration
of other elements or compounds would be
indicated similarly, Ccoz, CNl, etc.)
concentration, unit fuel
(see symbol m)
condensate liquids in place in reservoir,
initial
condensate liquids produced, cumulative
condensate or natural gas liquids content
conductivity, electrical (other than logging)
conductivity (electrical logging)
conductivity (electrical), apparent
conductivity, fracture, dimensionless
conductivity, other than electrical (with subscripts)
Letter
Symbol
Reserve
SPE
Letter
Symbol
conductivity, thermal (always with additional
phase or system subscripts)
constant, Arrhenius reaction-rate
velocity constant
constant, decay (l/~d)
constant, dielectric
constant, Eulers = 0.5772
constant in general*
constant-income discount factor
constant3 hyperb,c$ic decline,
a,t
4 =a/ l+h
I I
constant: universal gas (per mole)
constant, waterdrive
constant, waterdrive, linear aquifer
consumption, fuel
consumption of fuel in experimental tube run
consumption of fuel in experimental tube run
(mass of fuel per mole of produced gas)
consumption of fuel in reservoir
contact angle
content, condensate or natural gas liquids
content, wet-gas
convective heat-transfer coefficient
c
kh
W
A
E epsilon
Y
R
c
CL
m
mE
ME,
CL
c,
h
cm94
gL
z
C
FF
FFE
FFE~
FFR
r< 9 Yc
CL.4
C
wRJnwR
hh,hT
Computer
Letter
Symbol
ZEDPAV
CMPF
CMPG
CMPO
CMPPRO
CMPW
AMPC
CNC
CNCCl
CNCOZ
CNCFU
NGLTI
NGLP
CNTL
SIG
ECN
ECNA
CNDFQ
CND
HCN
ARR
LAM
DIG
oscc
HPC
RRR
WDC
WDCL
FCM
FCMEX
FCMEXG
FCMR
ANGC
CNTL
CNTWG
HTCC
Dimensions
Lt2/m
Lt2/m
Lt2/m
Ltz/m
various
various
various
various
various
L3
L3
various
various
tq2/mL3
tq2/mL3
various
mL/t3T
L3/m
l / t
q2 t2/mL3
mL2/ t2T
L4t2/m
L4t2/m
various
I-f-l/L3
m
m/L3
various
various
m/t3T
-
*Any sunable nonconfl~crmg symbol defined m the text
59-22
PETROLEUM ENGINEERING HANDBOOK
Quantity
conversion factor in Newtons Second Law of
Motion
correction term or correction factor
(either additive or multiplicative)
count rate (general)
count rate, neutron
count rate, gamma ray
critical gas saturation
critical pressure
critical temperature
critical water saturation
cross section (area)
cross section, macroscopic
cross section, microscopic
cross section of a nucleus, microscopic
cubic expansion coefficient, thermal
cumulative condensate liquids produced
cumulative free gas produced
cumulative gas influx (encroachment)
cumulative gas injected
cumulative gas/oil ratio
cumulative gas produced
cumulative moles of component j produced
cumulative oil influx (encroachment)
cumulative oil produced
cumulative produced fluids (where NP
and W, are not applicable)
cumulative water influx (encroachment)
cumulative water injected
cumulative water/oil ratio
cumulative water produced
cumulative wet gas produced
curl
current, electric
damage or stimulation radius of well (skin)
damage ratio or condition ratio (conditions
relative to formation conditions unaffected
by well operations)
datum, elevation referred to
decay constant (l/~,j)
decay time (mean life) (l/x)
decay time, neutron (neutron mean life)
decline constant, hyperbolic, from the equation
I I
/I
q =q,/ l+T
decline factor, effective
decline factor, nominal
decrement
degrees of freedom
Letter
Symbol
Reserve
SPE Computer
Letter Letter
Symbol Symbol
C
s
b
gLP
gF,,
&
g,
FKP ? FKOP
4
NW
HP
5
We
wi
WP
g
WI,
; script i, i
4
Fd
Oh
C
td
GRVC
COR
NMB
NEUN
NGR
SATGC
PRSC
TEMC
SATWC
ARA
XSTMAC
XSTMIC
XNL
HEC
NGLP
GASFP
GASE
GASI
GORP
GASP
MOLPJ
OILE
OILP
FLUP
WTRE
WTRI
FACWOP
WTRP
GASWGP
CUR
RADS
DMRS
ZED
LAM
TIM0
TIMON
HPC
DECE
DEC
OCR
DGF
Dimensions
l / t
1/ t
1/ t
m/L+
T
L2
l/L
l/J-
L2
l/T
;i
L3
L3
L3
mL/t2
L3
L3
dt
L
L
l/t
t
t
various
SPE LETTER AND COMPUTER SYMBOLS STANDARD 59-23
Quantity
de1 (gradient operator)
delay time
deliverability (gas well)
density
density, apparent
density, bulk
density, fluid
density, flushed zone
density (indicating number per unit volume)
density, fuel
density, gas
density, matrix (solids, grain)
density (number) of neutrons
density of produced liquid, weight-weighted
average
density of sol i d particles making up
experimental pack
density, oil
density, relative (specific gravity)
density, true
density, water
depletion
deposition rate of fuel
depreciation
depth
depth, skin (logging)
deviation factor (compressibility factor)
for gas (z=pV/nRT)
deviation factor (compressibility factor)
for gas, at mean pressure
deviation, hole (drift angle)
dewpoint pressure
di ameter
diameter, hole
diameter, invaded zone (electrically equivalent)
diameter, mean particle
dielectric constant
difference or difference operator,
finite (AX =x2-x1 orxI-x2)
diffusion coefficient
diffusivity, hydraulic (k/+cp or h/$x)
dimensionless fluid influx function,
linear aquifer
dimensionless fluid influx function
at dimensionless time rD
dimensionless fractional storage capacity
dimensionless fracture conductivity
dimensionless gas production rate
dimensionless number, in general
(always with identifying subscripts)
(Example: Reynolds number, NRe)
dimensionless oil-production rate
dimensionless pore volume
Letter
Symbol
V
;
p rho
PN
Ph
PI
PW
n
PI-
Pa
PlllU
nf
pr
P\L
PO
Y
PI
p, ,
DE
NR
DP
D
s
Z
6
PC/
d
4,
4
d,,
E epsilon
A
D
r)L,D
Q I D
s,
C
I D
4x0
N
4,J D
V
PD
D
DO
&
Dl
DAYI
N
D,
4
D
1,10
-
DL
D.,E
DC,
s, F,
4
DM
NF
Y.H
>
Qp,D scripl I
SD
Kfl
Q
KD
Q oD
%D
DEL
TI MDY
DLV
DEN
DENA
DENB
DENF
DENXD
NMB
DENFU
DENG
DENMA
NMBN
DENAVL
DENSEX
DEN0
SPG
DENT
DENW
EDE
FUDR
EDP
DPH
SKD
ZED
ZEDPAV
ANGH
PRSD
DI A
DI AH
DI AI
DI AAVP
DI C
DEL
DFN
DFS
ENCLTDQ
ENCTDD
STOQ
CNDFO
RTEGD
NUMD
RTEDD
voua
t
L3/t
m/L3
m/L3
m/L
m/L3
m/L3
l/L3
m/L3
m/L3
Ill/L3
l/L3
m/L3
II-l/l--
m/L3
m/L3
m/L3
m/L3 t
L
L
m/L+
L
L
L
L
q2t2/mL3
L2/t
L2/t
Reserve
SPE Computer
Letter Letter
Symbol Symbol Dimensions
59-24 PETROLEUM ENGINEERING HANDBOOK
Quantity
dimensionless pressure
dimensionless-pressure function
at dimensionless time tD
dimensionless production rate
dimensionless quantity proportional to x
dimensionless radius
dimensionless time
dimensionless time at condition m
dimensionless water production rate
dip, angle of
dip, apparent angle of
dip, apparent azimuth of
dip, azimuth of
discount factor, constant-income
discount factor, general
discount factor, single-payment
[l/(1 +i)k; or ePJk, j = ln(1 +i)l
discount factor, single-payment
(constant annual rate)
[e- (e - 1 j / j 1
discount rate
discounted cash flow
dispersion coefficient
dispersion modulus (dispersion factor)
displacement
displacement efficiency from burned portion
of in-situ combustion pattern
displacement efficiency from unburned portion
of in-situ combustion pattern
displacement efficiency: volume of hydrocarbons
(oil or gas) displaced from individual pores or
small groups of pores divided by the volume of
hydrocarbons in the same pores
just before displacement
displacement ratio
displacement ratio, oil from burned volume,
volume per unit volume of burned reservoir rock
displacement ratio, oil from unburned volume,
volume per unit volume of unburned reservoir
rock
displacement ratio, water from burned volume,
volume per unit volume of burned reservoir
rock
distance between adjacent rows of injection and
production wells
distance between like wells (injection or
production) in a row
distance, length, or length of path
distance, radial (increment along radius) Ar
Letter
Symbol
PD
PI D
PD
P
I D
QD
RD
TD
7DM
Q M,D
ffd
ffda
Pdo
Pd
D
SPC
d
L
7)Db ? eDb
7)DTeD
1
6
wb Fdwb
LdpL2
LOJ 1
s,p script I
AR
Reserve
SPE Computer
Letter Letter
Symbol Symbol Dimensions
PRSD
f w. Taa
RTEa
RAD[ I
Tl Ma
Tl MMa
RTEWQ
ANGD
ANGDA
DAZA
DAZ
oscc
DSC
DSCSP
DSCSPC
RTED
CFLPV
DSP
DSM
DI S
EFFDB
L2j t
L
EFFDU
EFFD
DPR
DPRDB
DPRDU
DPRWB
DUW L
DLW L
LTH L
DELRAD L
SPE LETTER AND COMPUTER SYMBOLS STANDARD
59-25
-
Quantity
Letter
Symbol
divergence
drainage radius
drawdown time (time after well is opened to
production) (pressure drawdown)
drift angle, hole (deviation)
earning power or rate of return (internal,
true, or discounted cash flow)
effect, skin
effective decline factor
effective or apparent wellbore radius (includes
effects of well damage or stimulation)
effective permeability to gas
effective permeability to oil
V
rci
At,
6
I
s
d
Tma
kK
ko
effective permeability to water kw
effective porosity 4,
efficiency
E
efficiency, area1 (used in describing results of model EA
studies only): area swept in a model divided by
total model reservoir area (see EP)
efficiency, displacement, from burned portion of EDb
in-situ combustion pattern
efficiency, displacement, from unburned portion of 41,
in-situ combustion pattern
efficiency, displacement: volume of hydrocarbons 41
(oil or gas) displaced from individual pores or
small groups of pores divided by the volume of
hydrocarbon in the same pores just before
displacement
efficiency, invasion (vertical): hydrocarbon pore E,
space invaded (affected, contacted) by the injection
fluid or heat front divided by the hydrocarbon pore
space enclosed in all layers behind the injected
fluid or heat front
efficiency, overall reservoir recovery: volume of ER
hydrocarbons recovered divided by volume of
hydrocarbons in place at start of project
(ER=EI J E,E,l=Eb.ED)
efficiency, pattern sweep (developed from area1
efficiency by proper weighting for variations in
net pay thickness, porosity, and hydrocarbon
saturation): hydrocarbon pore space enclosed
behind the injected-fluid or heat front divided
by total hydrocarbon pore space of the reservoir
or project
efficiency, volumetric, for burned portion only,
in-situ combustion pattern
efficiency, volumetric: product of pattern sweep
and invasion efficiencies
elasticity, modulus of (Youngs modulus)
EP
Ebb
EV
E
Reserve
SPE Computer
Letter Letter
Symbol Symbol Dimensions
Rd
ATwf
S
,o-
R
wa
7)DbjeDb
(1DuxDu
?)DPeD
r)l,el
rlR zR
77tw
rlVbTeVb
t)vxb,
Y
RADD
DELTI MWF
ANGH
ADRI
SKN
DECE
RADWA
PRMG
PRMD
PRMW
PORE
EFF
EFFA
EFFDB
EFFDU
EFFD
EFFI
EFFR
EFFP
EFFVB
EFFV
ELMY
L
t
L
t:
L
In/L+
59-26 PETROLEUM ENGINEERING HANDBOOK
Quantity
electric current
electric impedance
electrical conductivity (other than logging)
electrical resistivity (other than logging)
electrical resistivity (electrical logging)
electrical tortuosity
electrically equivalent diameter of the invaded
zone
electrochemical coefficient
electrochemical component of the SP
electrokinetic component of the SP
electromotive force
elevation referred to datum
encroachment or influx, gas, cumulative
encroachment or influx, gas during an interval
encroachment or influx, oil, cumulative
encroachment or influx, oil, during an interval
encroachment or influx rate
encroachment or influx rate, gas
encroachment or influx rate, oil
encroachment or influx rate, water
encroachment or influx, water, cumulative
encroachment or influx, water, during an interval
energy
enthalpy (always with phase or system subscripts)
enthalpy (net) of steam or enthalpy above
reservoir temperature
enthalpy, specific
entropy, specific
entropy, total
equal to or larger than
equal to or smaller than
equilibrium ratio (y/x)
equivalent diameter (electrical) of the
invaded zone
equivalent time well was on production before
shut-in (pseudotime)
equivalent water resistivity
error function
error function, complementary
Euler number
Eulers constant = 0.5772
expansion coefficient, thermal cubic
experimental pack porosity
exponent of backpressure curve, gas well
exponent, porosity (cementation) (in an
empirical relation between FK and $)
exponent, saturation
exponential function
Letter
Symbol
I
Z,
a
p rho
R
;,
h
:
2
G
K
4
I
I
R,,,.
er . f
erfc
E,,
;
41.
I 1
m
n
e
Reserve
SPE Computer
Letter Letter
Symbol Symbol Dimensions
i script i, i CUR
MPDE
SI G
RHO
RES
TORE
DI AI
COEC
EMFC
EMFK
EMF
ZEI J
GASE
OELGASE
OI LE
OELOILE
ENC
ENCG
ENCO
ENCW
WTRE
DELWTRE
ENG
HEN
HENS
HENS
HERS
HER
GE
LE
EDR
DI AI
TI MP
RWE
ERF
ERFC
HEC
POREX
NGW
MXP
SXP
exp z EXP
q/t
mL2/tq2
various
mL3/ tq2
mL3/ tq2
L
mL2/t2q
mL2/t2q
mL2/t2q
mL2/t2q
L
ki
L3
L3
L3/t
L3/t
L3/t
L3/t
L3
L3
mL*/ t2
mL2/ t2
mL2/t2
L2/ t2
L2/tLT
mL2/t2T
L
mL/tq!
l / T
SPE LETTER AND COMPUTER SYMBOLS STANDARD
59-27
Letter
Symbol
Reserve
SPE Computer
Letter Letter
Symbol Symbol Dimensions
Quantity
-Ei (-x )
exponential integral
02 c-i
s
\
t df , x positive
Ei ( x )
m/Lt2
L
m/L?
PRSE
RADE
PRSXT
ZEO
external boundary pressure
external boundary radius
extrapolated pressure
factor, compressibility
(gas deviation factor z =a VInR T)
factor, discount
factor, effective decline
factor, nominal decline
factor, conversion, in Newtons Second Law of
Motion
factor, formation resistivity, equals R o/ R, ,
(a numerical subscript to F indicates
the value of R, , )
factor, friction
factor, geometrical (multiplier)
(electrical logging)
factor, geometrical (multiplier)
annulus (electrical logging)
factor, geometrical (multiplier)
invaded zone (electrical logging)
factor, geometrical (multiplier)
pseudo (electrical logging)
factor, geometrical (multiplier)
flushed zone (electrical logging)
factor, geometrical (multiplier)
mud (electrical logging)
factor, geometrical (multiplier)
true (noninvaded zone> (electrical logging)
factor in general, including ratios
(always with identifying subscripts)
factor, turbulence
flow rate, mass
flow rate, heat
flow rate or flux, per unit area
(volumetric velocity)
flow rate or production rate
flow rate or production rate at mean pressure
flow rate or production rate, average
flowing bottomhole pressure, injection well
flowing pressure, bottomhole
flowing pressure, casing
flowing pressure, tubing
D
d
a
%
DSC
OECE
DEC
GRVC
FK
FACHR
f
G
. f G
FACF
GMF
Go, , f cm
GMFAN
G, f G,
GMFI
GMFP
GMFXO
GMFM
G, . f G,
GMFT
F
A&-
FAC various
FB
FACB
MRT
HRT
VELV
m/t
mL*/ t3
L/t
m
49 @
J I
L3/t
L3/t
L3/t
m/Lt2
m/Lt2
m/Lt2
m/Lt2
RTE
RTEPAV
RTEAV
PRSI WF
PRSWF
PRSCF
PRSTF
59-28 PETROLEUM ENGINEERING HANDBOOK
Quantity
Letter
Symbol
flowing time after well is opened
to production (pressure drawdown)
fluid (generalized)
fluid interval velocity
fluid head or height or elevation referred
to a datum
fluid interval transit time
fluid density
fluid influx function, dimensionless, at
dimensionless time tD
fluid influx function, linear aquifer, dimensionless
fluids, cumulative produced (where NP and
W, are not applicable)
flushed-zone density
flushed-zone resistivity (that part of the
invaded zone closest to the wall of the hole,
where flushing has been maximum
flushed-zone geometrical factor
(fraction or multiplier)
flux
flux or flow rate, per unit area
(volumetric velocity)
force, mechanical
force, electromotive (voltage)
formation or reservoir porosity
formation or rock compressibility
formation resistivity factor-equals
RJ R, (a numerical subscript
to F indicates the value I?,)
formation resistivity factor coefficient
(FR @ )
formation resistivity, true
formation resistivity when 100% saturated
with water of resistivity R,
formation temperature
formation volume factor at bubblepoint
conditions, gas
formation volume factor at bubblepoint
conditions, oil
formation volume factor, gas
formation volume factor, oil
formation volume factor, total (two-phase)
formation volume factor,
volume at reservoir conditions divided
by volume at standard conditions
formation volume factor, water
fraction (such as the fraction of a flow stream
consisting of a particular phase)
fraction gas
At , ,
F
I
Z
t , / scr i pt t
P,T rho
Q ID
QL,D
QP
pxo rho
R
x0
u
u
F
E
4R
Cf
FR
KR
Rt
Ro
Tf
B
@
Bob
Bx
BO
4
B
Reserve
SPE Computer
Letter Letter
Symbol Symbol Dimensions
Arw, OELTI MWF t
FLU
VACF
ZEL
TACF
DENF
ENCTtl O
various
L/ t
L
t/ L
m/ L3
Qf , D scr i pt I
Qp, D scr i pt I
ENCLTOO
FLUP
f Gx0
DENXO
RESXO
GMFXO
m/L3
mL3/tq2
Q
V
fR. ER
$9 KJ
FLX
VELV
FCE
EMF
PORR
CMPF
FACHR
various
L/t
mL/t2
mL2/t2q
Lt2jm
MR,a,C CDEA
Of
F
gb
REST
RESZR
TEMF
FVFGB
mL3jtq2
mL3jtq2
T
Fob
FVFOB
FVFG
FVFO
FVFT
FVF
FVFW
FRC
FRCG
SPE LETTER AND COMPUTER SYMBOLS STANDARD 59-29
Quantity
-
fraction liquid
fraction of bulk (total) volume
fraction of intergranular space (porosity)
occupied by all shales
fraction of intergranular space Cporosity)
occupied by water
fraction of intermatrix space (porosity)
occupied by nonstructural dispersed shale
fracture conductivity, dimensionless
fracture half-length (specify in the
direction or when using 5, )
fracture index
free energy (Gibbs function)
free fluid index
free gas/oil ratio, producing (free-gas
volume/oil volume)
free gas produced, cumulative
free-gas volume, initial reservoir (=mNB,,)
free producing gas/oil ratio (free-gas volume/
oil volume)
frequency
friction factor
front or interface pressure
fuel concentration, unit (see symbol m)
fuel consumption
fuel consumption in experimental tube run
fuel consumption in experimental tube run (mass
of fuel per mole of produced gas)
fuel consumption in reservoir
fuel density
fuel deposition rate
fugacity
gamma ray count rate
gamma ray [usually with identifying subscript(s) 1
gas(any gas, including air) always with
identifying subscripts
gas-cap interstitial-oil saturation
gas-cap interstitial-water saturation
gas compressibility
gas compressibility factor
(deviation factor) (Z =pV/nR r)
gas constant, universal (per mole)
gas density
gas deviation factor (compressibility factor)
at mean pressure
gas deviation factor (compressibility factor,
z =p V/ nR T) (deviation factor)
gas, effective permeability to
gas formation volume factor
Letter
Symbol
.fL
f v
f$th
f &
f &hd
CJD
LJ
1,
G
IFI
RI-
G
G;
RF
:
pi
G
m
mE
4
mR
PF rho
NR
f
NGR
E
S
SZ
52
z
R
P, ~r ho
zp
Z
h
4
Reserve
SPE Computer
Letter Letter
Symbol Symbol
FL, ~, scri pt 1 FRCL
FRCVB
FI GSH
FI GW
FI MSHO
CNOFO
LTHFH
FRX
GFE
FFX
GORF
GASFP
GASFI
GORF
FON
FACF
PRSF
CNCFU
FCM
FCMEX
FCMEXG
FCMR
OENFU
FUOR
FUG
NGR
GRY
GAS
SATOG
SATWG
CMPG
ZEO
RRR
DENG
ZEOPAV
ZEO
PRMG
FVFG
Dimensions
L
mL2/ t2
l/t
m/L+
various
various
m/L3
m
m/L3
m/L3
m/L3 t
m/L+
l/t
various
various
Lt*/m
mL*/t*T
m/L3
L2
59-30
PETROLEUM ENGINEERING HANDBOOK
Quantity
-
gas formation volume factor at bubblepoint
conditions
gas fraction
gas in place in reservoir, total initial
gas influx (encroachment), cumulative
gas influx (encroachment) during an interval
gas influx (encroachment) rate
gas injected, cumulative
gas injected during an interval
gas injection rate
gas liquids, natural, or condensate content
gas mobility
gas, fraction
gas mole fraction V/(L + V)
gas/oil permeability ratio
gas/oil ratio, cumulative
gas/oil ratio, free producing (free-gas volume/
oil volume)
gas/oil ratio, producing
gas/oil ratio, solution at bubblepoint conditions
gas/oil ratio, solution (gas solubility in oil)
gas/oil ratio, solution, initial
gas produced, cumulative
gas produced during an interval
gas produced from experimental tube run
gas production rate
gas production rate, dimensionless
gas reciprocal formation volume factor
gas reciprocal formation volume factor at
bubblepoint conditions
gas recovery, ultimate
gas, relative permeability to
gas saturation
gas saturation, critical
gas saturation, residual
gas solubility in oil (solution gas/oil ratio)
gas solubility in water
gas specific gravity
gas viscosity
gas viscosity at 1 atm
gas-well backpressure curve, coefficient of
gas-well backpressure curve, exponent of
gas-well deliverability
gas, wet, produced, cumulative
general and individual bed thickness
general dimensionless number (always with
identifying subscripts)
geometrical factor (multiplier)
(electrical logging)
Letter
Symbol
Reserve
SPE
Letter
Symbol
Computer
Letter
Symbol Dimensions
&P
d,e
fG
FVFGB
FRCG
GASTI
GASE
DELGASE
ENCG
GASI
OELGASI
I NJ G
CNTL
MOBG
FRCG
MFRTV
PRMGO
GORP
GORF
GOR
GORSB
GORS
GORSI
GASP
OELGASP
GASPEX
RTEG
RTEGO
RVFG
RVFGB
GASPUL
PRMRG
SATG
SATGC
SATGR
GORS
GWRS
SPGG
VI SG
VI SGA
CGW
NGW
OLV
GASWGP
THK
NUMB
GMF
L3/t
various
L3t/m
;;
L3/t
L3
m/Lt
m/Lt
L3-2nt4n/m2n
L3/t
L3
L
SPE LETTER AND COMPUTER SYMBOLS STANDARD
59-31
Reserve
SPE
Letter
Symbol
Computer
Letter
Symbol
Letter
Symbol Quantity Dimensions
geometrical factor (multiplier),
annulus (electrical logging)
geometrical factor (multiplier),
flushed zone (electrical logging)
geometrical factor (multiplier),
invaded zoned (electrical logging)
geometrical factor (multiplier),
mud (electrical logging)
geometrical factor, (multiplier), true
(noninvaded zone) (electrical logging)
geometrical factor (multiplier), pseudo
(electrical logging)
geometrical factor (multiplier), true
(electrical logging)
gradient
gradient, geothermal
gradient operator
gradient, temperature
grain (matrix, solids) density
gravity, acceleration of
gravity, specific, relative density
gravity, specific, gas
gravity, specific, oil
gravity, specific, water
gross (total) pay thickness
gross revenue (value) per unit produced
gross revenue (value), total
half-life
heat flow rate
heat of vaporization, latent
heat or thermal diffusivity
heat, specific (always with phase or system
subscripts)
heat transfer coefficient, convective
heat transfer coefficient, overall
heat transfer coefficient, radiation
height, or fluid head, or elevation
referred to a datum
height (other than elevation)
Helmholtz function (work function)
holdup (fraction of the pipe volume filled by
a given fluid; yO is oil holdup, yw is water
holdup, C of all holdups at a given level
is one)
hole deviation, drift angle
hole diameter
hydraulic diffusivity (k /C$C p or A/+)
hydraulic radius
hydraulic tortuosity
G
Clli f can
GMFAN
G, , fGx0
GMFXO
G fc,
GMFI
Gt ?, fcm
GMFM
G, fc,
GMFT
GP
GMFP
G, f c,
GMFT
GRD
GRDGT
various
T/L
Y
4
GRDT
OENMA
GRV
SPG
SPGG
SPGO
SPGW
THKT
GRRU
GRRT
TI MH
HRT
HLTV
HTD
HSP
T/L
dL3
L/t2
gh
D
ma
L
M/L3
M
t
mL2/ t3
L2/ t2
L2/t
L2/t2T
4, @
A
ap 77h
h
u
I
z
hh, hT
UT, II,
ITJO
D.h
m/t3T
m/t3T
m/t3T
L
HTCC
HTCU
HTCI
ZEL
h
A
Y
d,e
/
ZHT
HWF
HOL
L
mL*/ t2
ANGH
DI AH
DFS
RAOHL
TORHL
dHd?i ,
RH
L
L21t
L
59-32 PETROLEUM ENGINEERING HANDBOOK
Quantity
hydrocarbon-filled porosity, fraction
or percent of rock bulk volume occupied by
hydrocarbons
hydrocarbon resistivity index R,/R o
hydrocarbon saturation, residual
hydrogen index
hyperbolic decline&constant (from equation)
I I
,.
q=qt / 1,:
imaginary part of complex number z
impedance
impedance, acoustic
impedance, electric
index (use subscripts as needed)
index, fracture
index, free fluid
index, hydrogen
index, injectivity
index of refraction
index, porosity
index, primary porosity
index, productivity
index, (hydrocarbon) resistivity
RtIR,
index, secondary porosity
index, shaliness gamma ray
(Ylog - Ycn)/(Ystl- Yen)
index, specific injectivity
index, specific productivity
individual bed thickness
influx (encroachment), cumulative, gas
influx (encroachment), cumulative, oil
influx (encroachment), cumulative, water
influx (encroachment) during an interval, gas
influx (encroachment) during and interval, oil
influx (encroachment) during an interval, water
influx function, fluid, linear aquifer,
dimensionless
influx function, fluid, dimensionless
(at dimensionless time to>
influx (encroachment) rate
influx (encroachment) rate, gas
influx (encroachment) rate, oil
influx (encroachment) rate, water
initial condensate liquids in place in reservoir
initial capital investment
initial oil in place in reservoir
initial pressure
Letter
Symbol
Reserve
SPE Computer
Letter Letter
Symbol Symbol Dimensions
fht ch
IR iR
s
hr phrpShr
IH iH
h
9 ( 2) scr i pt I
Z
ZO
ze
Z
I f
kf
IH
I
;,
h
J
IR
92
shGR
4
J S
h
G
4
K
AGe
AN,
Aw,
Q LtD
Q tLJ
e
eg
e,
e,
GL
ci
N
Pi
z, r)
i
b?I Fpi F
iFf
iH
i
P
i ,
Cpl
j
jR
MPO
MPOA
MPOE
- x
FRX
FFX
HYX
I J X
RFX
PRX
PRXPR
POX
RXSH
ilp2
PRXSE
bhGR
SHXGR
4
J S
d.e
ge
4
We
ke
An,
A%
Qpr ~scr i pt 1
I J XS
POXS
THK
GASE
Ol l E
WTRE
OELGASE
OELOI LE
DELWTRE
ENCLTDD
Qet D scr i pt 1 ENCTQO
i
s
0
L
gL
ENC
ENCG
ENCO
ENCW
NGLTI
I NVI
OI LTI
PRSI
PORH
RSXH
SATHR
HYX
HPC
various
m/L2t
mL2/ tq2
L4t/m
L4t/m
L3t/m
L3t/m
L
L3
L3
L3
::
L3
L3/t
L3/t
L3/t
L3/t
L3
M
L3
n-l/L+
SPE LETTER AND COMPUTER SYMBOLS STANDARD
59-33
Quantity
initial reservoir free-gas volume
initial solution gas/oil ratio
initial water in place in reservoir
initial water saturation
injected gas, cumulative
injected gas during an interval
injected water, cumulative
injected water during an interval
injection rate
injection rate, air
injection rate, gas
injection rate, water
injection well bottomhole pressure, flowing
injection well bottomhole pressure, static
injectivity index
injectivity index, specific
in-place condensate liquids in reservoir, initial
in-place gas in reservoir, total initial
in-place oil in reservoir, initial
in-place water in reservoir, initial
instantaneous producing water/oil ratio
intercept
interest rate, effective compound (usually annual)
interest rate, effective, per period
interest rate, nominal annual
interface or front pressure
interfacial, surface tension
intergranular porosity (space)
integral, exponential
- ,-I
s
x
t dt , x positive
integral, exponential, modified
r20 I l $dt +J $dt l , x positive
intergranular space (porosity), fraction
occupied by all shales
intergranular space (porosity), fraction
occupied by water
intermatrix space (porosity), fraction
occupied by nonstructural dispersed shale
intermatrix norositv fsnace)
Letter
Symbol
GF,
RX,
W
s
G;
AG,
wi
A Wi
i
*a
s
w
P,wf
PM
I
4
GL
G
N
W
F
wo
b
iM
.i
Pf
- Ei ( - x )
Ei oC)
f@h
few
f qbhd
+im
Reserve
SPE
Letter
Symbol
gF,
F
m
W
pwr ) %,
gi
&
wi
A Wi
P
w
pi ,
i
s
gL
g
n
W
Y
Computer
Letter
Symbol
GASFI
GDRSI
WTRTI
SATWI
GASI
DELGASI
WTRI
DELWTRI
I NJ
I NJ A
I NJ G
I NJ W
PRSI WF
PRSI WS
I J X
I J XS
NGLTI
GASTI
OI LTI
WTRTI
FACWD
I CP
I RCE
I RPE
I RA
PRSF
SFT
PDRI G
FI GSH
FI GW
FI MSHD
PORI M
Dimensions
L3
L/t2
L3
;:
L3
L3
L3/t
L3/t
L3/t
L3/t
m/L+
m/Lt2
L4t/m
L3t/m
$
L3
L3
various
m/L+
m/t2
59-34 PETROLEUM ENGINEERING HANDBOOK
Quantity
Letter
Symbol
internal energy
interstitial-oil saturation in gas cap
interstitial-water saturation in gas cap
interstitial-water saturation in oil band
interval transit time
interval transit time, apparent
interval transit time/density slope (absolute
value)
interval transit time, fluid
interval transit time, matrix
interval transit time, shale
invaded-zone diameter, electrically equivalent
invaded-zone geometrical factor (multiplier)
(electrical logging)
invaded-zone resistivity
invasion (vertical) efficiency: hydrocarbon pore
space invaded (affected, contacted) by the
injected-fluid or heat front divided by the
hydrocarbon pore space enclosed in all layers
behind the injected-fluid or heat front
i f scr i pt t
t ma scr i pt t
t , h scr i pt t
4
Gi
Ri
4
irreducible (or interstitial or connate) S/ W
water saturation
kinematic viscosity
kinetic energy
v nu
Ek
Laplace transform of y, JJJ (t)Pdf
Laplace transform variabli
Laplacian operator
larger than
latent heat of vaporization
length, path length, or distance
lifetime, average (mean life)
limit
Z?, ( v) scr i pt L
linear aquifer waterdrive constant
liquid fraction
liquid mole fraction L/ ( L +V)
liquid phase, mole fraction of component in
liquid phase, moles of
liquid saturation, combined total
liquids, condensate, in place in reservoir, initial
liquids, condensate, produced cumulative
logarithm, base a
s
V2
2
LV
i
lim
CL
logarithm, common, base 10
logarithm, natural, base e
macroscopic cross section
. f L
f L
X
L
SL
GL
G
loL;
1%
In
z
Reserve
SPE Computer
Letter Letter
Symbol Symbol Dimensions
h
s, P scr i pt 1
t
I NE
SATOG
SATWG
SATWO
TAC
TACA
SAD
TACF
TACMA
TACSH
OI AI
GMFI
RESI
EFFI
SATI W
VSK
ENGK
GT
HLTV
LTH
TI MAV
LM
WOCL
F, , f f scr i pt I FRCL
FL, f u script I MFRTL
MFRL
nL
MOLL
PL , SL
SATL
SL
NGLTI
SLP
NGLP
S XSTMAC
mL2/ t2
t/L
t/L
tL*/m
t/L
t/L
t/L
L
mL3/tq2
L*/t
mL2/t2
L2/ t*
L
t
L4t2/m
L3
l / L
SPE LETTER AND COMPUTER SYMBOLS STANDARD
59- 35
Quantity
Letter
Symbol
macroscopic cross section of a nucleus
magnetic permeability
magnetic susceptibility
magnetization
magnetization, fraction
mass
mass flow rate
matrix interval transit time
matrix (solids, grain) density
matrix (framework) volume (volume
of all formation solids except
dispersed clay or shale)
mean life (average lifetime)
mean life (decay time) (l/r)
mean or average pressure
mean or average (overbar)
mean value of a random variable
mean particle diameter
mean value of a random variable, x, estimated
mechanical force
molal volume (volume per mole)
methane concentration (concentration of
other paraffin hydrocarbons would be
indicated similarly, Cc, , Cc, , etc.)
microscopic cross section
mixture, mole fraction of component
mobility (k/k)
mobility, gas
mobility, oil
mobility ratio, general (Adisplacing/hdisplaced)
mobility ratio, diffuse-front approximation
[ ( AD +hd)swept/(hd)unswept];
D signifies displacing; d signifies displaced;
mobilities are evaluated at average saturation
conditions behind and ahead of front
mobility ratio, sharp-front approximation
(b/Ad)
o-
:
M
Mf
m
W
t ma scr i pt t
pm0 rho
V
ma
7
Td
P
-
2
x
F
%
mobility ratio, total, [(A, )swept/(AI ) unsweptl ;
swept and unswept refer to invaded
and uninvaded regions behind and ahead
of leading edge of displacement front
mobility, total, of all fluids in a particular region
of the reservoir; e.g., (A, + A, + A,)
mobility, water
modulus, bulk
modulus, dispersion (dispersion factor)
modulus, shear
modulus of elasticity (Youngs modulus)
Reserve
SPE
Letter
Symbol
s
m
;
m
A&m
D
ma
V
ma
i
td
P
4
Q
+I
F A
Mm, 4,
F,
FM
A
ES
Y
VIII
Computer
Letter
Symbol
XNL
PRMM
SUSM
MAG
MAGF
MAS
MRT
TACMA
DENMA
VOLMA
TI MAV
TI MD
PRSAV
AV
MEN
DI AAVP
MENES
FCE
CNCCl
XSTMI C
MFRM
MOB
MOBG
MOB0
MBR
MBRSAV
MBR
MBRT
MOBT
MOBW
BKM
DSM
ELMS
ELMY
VOLM
Dimensions
L2
n-L/q*
mL/q*
dst
t
t
m/Lt2
L
mL/t*
various
L2
Lt/m
L3t/m
Lt/m
L3t/m
L3t/m
m/L+
m/L+
m/L+
L3
59-36 PETROLEUM ENGINEERING HANDBOOK
Quantity
-
mole fraction gas, V/(L+ v)
mole fraction liquid, LI(Z,+ v)
mole fraction of a component in liquid phase
mole fraction of a component in mixture
mole fraction of a component in vapor phase
molecular refraction
molecular weight
molecular weight of produced liquids,
mole-weighted average
moles, number of
moles of component j
moles of component j produced, cumulative
moles of liquid phase
moles of vapor phase
moles, number of, total
mole-weighted average molecular weight
of produced liquids
mudcake resistivity
mudcake thickness
mud-filtrate resistivity
mud geometrical factor (multiplier)
(electrical logging)
mud resistivity
multiplier (factor), geometrical
(electrical logging)
multiplier (factor), geometrical,
annulus (electrical logging)
multiplier (factor), geometrical,
flushed zone (electrical logging)
multiplier (factor), geometrical,
invaded zone (electrical logging)
multiplier (factor), geometrical,
mud (electrical logging)
multiplier (factor), geometrical,
pseudo (electrical logging)
multiplier (factor), geometrical,
true (electrical logging)
multiplier or coefficient
natural gas liquids or condensate content
natural logarithm, base e
net pay thickness
neutron count rate
neutrons, density (number) of
neutron lifetime
neutron porosity/density slope (absolute value)
neutron [usually with identifying subscript(s)]
Newtons Second Law of Motion, conversion
factor in
nominal decline factor
Letter
Symbol
-
X
z
Y
R
M
ML
n
nJ
%
L
V
nt
ML,
R
mc
h
mc
R
mf
Gttl
R,
G
G
0
G
x0
Gi
GP
Gt
K
CL
In
hn
NN
nN
t N
N
N
gc
a
Reserve
SPE Computer
Letter Letter
Symbol Symbol Dimensions
4
MFRTV
FL, fp script I MFRTL
N
N
Ni
NpJ
nL
zt
pmc T r mc
dmc er nc
Pmf J mf
f Gm
pmj r m
fG
f GLVI
f Gm
f Gi
f Gm
f Gp
f Gt
M
cL,nL
4&
TN>h
mdND
MFRL
MFRM
MFRV
MRF
MWT
MWTAVL
NMBM
MOLJ
MOLPJ
MOLL
MOLV
NMBMT
MWTAVL
RESMC
THKMC
RESMF
GMFM
RESM
GMF
GMFAN
GMFXO
GMFI
GMFM
GMFP
GMFT
COE
CNTL
THKN
NEUN
NMBN
NFL
SND
NEU
GRVC
DEC
L3
m
m
m
mL3/ tq2
L
mL3/tq2
mL3/ tq*
various
various
L
l/t
l / t
L3/m
various
SPE LETTER AND COMPUTER SYMBOLS STANDARD 59-37
Quantity
Letter
Symbol
Reserve
SPE
Letter
Symbol
nucleus cross section, microscopic
number, atomic
number, dimensionless, in general (always
with identifying subscripts)
number of pump strokes, cycles per unit of
time
number (of variables, or components, or steps,
or increments, etc.)
number (quantity)
number of compounding periods (usually per year)
number of components
number of moles, total
number, Reynolds (dimensionless number)
oil (always with identifying subscripts)
oil band interstitial-water saturation
oil compressibility
oil density
oil displaced from burned volume, volume per
unit volume of burned reservoir rock
oil displaced from unburned volume, volume per
unit volume of unburned reservoir rock
oil, effective permeability to
oil formation volume factor
oil formation volume factor at bubblepoint
conditions
oil, gas solubility in
(solution gas/oil ratio)
oil in place in reservoir, initial
oil influx (encroachment) cumulative
oil influx (encroachment) during an interval
oil influx (encroachment) rate
oil mobility
oil produced, cumulative
oil produced during an interval
oil production rate
oil production rate, dimensionless
oil reciprocal formation volume factor
(shrinkage factor)
oil recovery, ultimate
oil, relative permeability to
oil saturation
oil saturation in gas cap, interstitial
oil saturation, residual
oil specific gravity
oil viscosity
operating cash income
operating cash income, after taxes
operating cash income, before taxes
operating expense
operating expense per unit produced
operator, Laplacian
z
N
N
n
L
C
ke
N
s
WV
ccl
p. r ho
6
ob
NPQ
k
s:
S
w
SO,
Yo
ko
I
4
I
0
0
V2
Computer
Letter
Symbol
XNL
ANM
NUMO
NMBPS
NMB
NMB
NMBCP
NMBC
NMBM
REYO
OI L
SATWO
CMPD
DEN0
DPROB
OPROU
PRMD
FVFO
FVFOB
GORS
OI LTI
OI LE
DELOI LE
ENCO
MOBD
OI LP
DELOI LP
RTEO
RTEOQ
RVFO
DI LPUL
PRMRO
SAT0
SATOG
SATOR
SPGO
VI SD
I NC
I NCA
I NCB
XPO
XPOU
Dimensions
L*
various
Lt*/ m
m/L3
L*
L3/t
L3t/m
$
L3/t
L3
mm
M
M
M
various
M/L3
59-38 PETROLEUM ENGINEERING HANDBOOK
-
Quantity
overall heat transfer coefficient
overall reservoir recovery efficiency: volume
of hydrocarbons recovered divided by volume
of hydrocarbons in place at start of project
(ER = EpEsEo = E,E,)
oxygen concentration (concentration of other
elements or compounds would be indicated as
CCO, , cN2, etc.)
oxygen utilization
particle diameter, mean
path length, length, or distance
pattern sweep efficiency (developed from area1
efficiency by proper weighting for varations in
net pay thickness, porosity, and hydrocarbon
saturation: hydrocarbon pore space enclosed
behind the injected-fluid or heat front
divided by total hydrocarbon pore space
of the reservoir or project
pay thickness, gross (total)
pay thickness, net
period
permeability, absolute (fluid flow)
permeability, effective, to gas
permeability, effective, to oil
permeability, effective, to water
permeability, magnetic
permeability ratio, gas/oil
permeability ratio, water/oil
permeability, relative, to gas
permeability, relative, to oil
permeability, relative, to water
phases, number of
Poissons ratio
pore volume Vb - V,
pore volume, dimensionless
pore volumes of injected fluid, cumulative
porosity ( Vb - V, )/ Vb
porosity, apparent
porosity, effective <V,/ Vb )
porosity exponent (cementation)
(in an empirical relation between FR and 4)
porosity, hydrocarbon-filled, fraction or percent
of rock bulk volume occupied by hydrocarbons
porosity index
porosity index, primary
porosity index, secondary
porosity, noneffective (VP,,/ V, )
Letter
Symbol
Reserve
SPE Computer
Letter Letter
Symbol Symbol Dimensions
uT~ u,
HTCU m/t3T
?RleR
EFFR
%
CNCOZ various
E
02
4
s,! script 1
rlP JP
UTLOL
OI AAVP L
LTH L
EFFP
vt cl-
VP
PD
4i
f> E
fht Eh
THKT
THKN
PER
PAM
PRMG
PRMO
PRMW
PRMM
PRMGO
PRMWO
PRMRG
PRMRO
PRMRW
NMBP
PSN
VOLP
VOLPtl
FLUI D
POR
PORA
PORE
MXP
L
L
t
; :
1:
ml - / q2
L3
PORH
PRX
PRXPR
PRXSE
PORNE
SPE LETTER AND COMPUTER SYMBOLS STANDARD 59-39
Quantity
-
porosity (space), intergranular (Vb - Vgr I / Vb 1
porosity (space), intermatrix (Vb - V,, / Vb )
porosity of experimental pack
porosity of reservoir or formation
porosity, total
potential or potential function
potential difference (electric)
potential energy
pressure, bottomhole
pressure
pressure, atmospheric
pressure, average or mean
pressure, average, reservoir
pressure, bottomhole, at any time after shut-in
pressure, bottomhole flowing
pressure, bottomhole flowing, injection well
pressure, bottomhole general
pressure, bottomhole static
pressure, bottomhole (well), in water phase
pressure, bottomhole static, injection well
pressure, bubblepoint (saturation)
pressure, capillary
pressure, casing flowing
pressure, casing static
pressure, critical
pressure, dewpoint
pressure, dimensionless
pressure, external boundary
pressure, extrapolated
pressure, flowing bottomhole
pressure, flowing casing
pressure, flowing tubing
pressure, front or interface
pressure function, dimensionless, at
dimensionless time tD
pressure, initial
pressure, pseudocritical
pressure, pseudoreduced
pressure, reduced
pressure, reservoir average
pressure, separator
pressure, standard conditions
pressure, static bottomhole
pressure, static casing
pressure, static tubing
pressure, tubing flowing
pressure, tubing static
primary porosity index
produced condensate liquids, cumulative
Letter
Symbol
Reserve
SPE
Letter
Symbol
Computer
Letter
Symbol
4E
4R
4r
a
V
Ep
Pbh
P
Pa
F
FR
PW
PWf
PiwJ
PW
PWS
PWW
PiWS
pb
P,
J+,t
PS
PC
Pd
PD
PP
PtW
PYf
PC/
P!f
PJ
P/D
Pi
Ppc
PPl
P,
F-R
PSP
PS
PWS
PCS
PlS
P!f
PI T
I
$1
G
LP
Pbh
P
P
_a
P
-
pR
P
ws
P
wf
P
rwf
p&V
P
ws
P
p
&,ps,pb
PCJ PC
PCJ
PCS
PC
pd
pD
p,
P
fX,
P,
P;
prJ
5
P
tD
p,
PPC
PPr
P
-
pR
PSP
PSC
P
w.s
PCS
p,
Pff
p,s
i,l
gLP
PORI G
PORI M
POREX
PORR
PORT
POT
VLT
ENGP
PRSBH
PRS
PRSA
PRSAV
PRSAVR
PRSWS
PRSWF
PRSI WF
PRSW
PRSWS
PRSWW
PRSI WS
PRSB
PRSCP
PRSCF
PRSCS
PRSC
PRSD
PRSD
PRSE
PRSXT
PRSWF
PRSCF
PRSTF
PRSF
PRSTQD
PRSI
PRSPC
PRSPRD
PRSRD
PRSAVR
PRSSP
PRSSC
PRSWS
PRSCS
PRSTS
PRSTF
PRSTS
PRXPR
NGLP
Dimensions
various
mL*/qt*
mL*/t*
m/L+
m/L+
n-l/L+
m/L+
m/L+
m/Lt2
m/Lt2
m/L9
n-l/L+
m/Lt2
m/L+
m/L+
m/L+
m/L?
m/L+
m/Lt2
m/L+
m/Lt2
n-l/L+
m/L+
m/L?
m/Lt2
m/Lt*
m/Lt2
m/Lt2
m/L?
m/Lt2
n-t/L+
m/L+
m/L+
m/L?
m/L+
m/L?
m/L+
m/Lt2
L3
59-40 PETROLEUM ENGINEERING HANDBOOK
Quantity
produced fluids, cumulative (where NP
and Wp are not applicable)
produced free gas, cumulative
produced gas, cumulative
produced gas during an interval
produced gas from experimental tube run
produced gas, wet, cumulative
produced-liquid density, weight-weighted
average
produced moles of component j, cumulative
produced oil, cumulative
produced oil during an interval
produced water, cumulative
produced water during an interval
produced wet gas, cumulative
producing gas/oil ratio
producing gas/oil ratio, free
(free-gas volume/oil volume)
producing water/oil ratio, instantaneous
production rate at beginning of period
production rate at economic abandonment
production rate, dimensionless
production rate, gas
production rate, gas, dimensionless
production rate, oil
production rate, oil, dimensionless
production rate or flow rate
production rate or flow rate at mean pressure
production rate or flow rate, average
production rate, water
production rate, water, dimensionless
production time after well is opened to
production (pressure drawdown)
production time of well, equivalent, before
shut-in (pseudotime)
productivity index
profit, annual net, over year k
profit, annual, over year k, fraction of
unamortized investment
profit, total
proportional to
productivity index, specific
pseudocritical temperature
pseudocritical pressure
pseudogeometrical factor (multiplier)
(electrical logging)
pseudoreduced compressibility
pseudoreduced pressure
pseudo-SP
Letter
Symbol
QP
GFP
GP
AGP
G
PE
G
%P
FL rho
Reserve
SPE
Letter
Symbol
Computer
Letter
Symbol Dimensions
FLI J P
GASFP
GASP
OELGASP
GASPEX
GASWGP
DENAVL
MOLPJ
OI LP
DELOI LP
WTRP
OELWTRP
GASWGP
GOR
GORF
FACWO
RTEI
RTEA
RTED
RTEG
RTEGG
RTEO
RTEOQ
RTE
RTEPAV
RTEAV
RTEW
RTEWG
DELTI MWF
TI MP
POX
PRAK
PRAPK
PRFT
POXS
TEMPC
PRSPC
GMFP
CMPPRD
PRSPRD
EMFP
L3/t
L3/t
L3/t
L3ft
L3/t
L3/t
L3/t
L3/t
t
t
L4t/m
M
M
L3t/m
T
m/Lt2
mL*/qt*
SPE LETTER AND COMPUTER SYMBOLS STANDARD 59-41
-
Quantity
pseudoreduced temperature
pseudotime (equivalent time well was on
production before shut-in)
pump strokes, number of cycles per unit of
time
quality (usually of steam)
radial distance (increment along radius)
radiation heat transfer coefficient
radius
radius, apparent or effective, of wellbore
(includes effects of well damage or stimulation)
radius, dimensionless
radius, external boundary
radius, hydraulic
radius of drainage
radius of wellbore, apparent or effective
(includes effects of well damage or stimulation)
radius of well damage or stimulation (skin)
radius, well
rate, air injection
rate: discount, effective profit, of return,
reinvestment, etc; use symbol i with
suitable subscripts
rate, flow or production
rate, gamma ray count
rate, gas influx (encroachment)
rate, gas injection
rate, gas production
rate, gas production, dimensionless
rate, influx (encroachment)
random variable, mean value of x, estimated
rate, injection
rate, interest, effective compound
(usually annual)
rate, interest, effective, per period
rate, interest, nominal annual
rate, mass flow
rate of flow or flux, per unit area
(volumetric velocity)
rate of heat flow
rate of return (internal, true, or discounted
cash flow) or earning power
rate, oil influx (encroachment)
rate, oil production
rate per unit area, flow (volumetric velocity)
rate, oil production, dimensionless
rate, production or flow
rate, production, at mean pressure
rate, production, average
rate, production, dimensionless
rate, segregation (in gravity drainage)
Letter
Symbol
T
Pr
tp
N
fs
Ar
I
r
- WI
rD
re
rH
rd
rwa
rs
rw
a
i
iM
j
W
u
Q
1,
Reserve
SPE
Letter
Symbol
n
QJ
AR
zT,z~
R
R
wll
RD
R,
RH
Rd
R
wa
RS
R W
4
Q
N&G
8
8D
i
r
m
dJ
Computer
Letter
Symbol Dimensions
TEMPRD
Tl MP
NMBPS
OLTS
OELRAD
HCTI
RAD
RADWA
RADa
RAOE
RAOHL
RAOD
RADWA
RAOS
RADW
1NJ A
RTE
RTE
NGR
ENCG
I NJ G
RTEG
RTEGa
ENC
MENES
I NJ
I RCE
I RPE
I RA
MRT
VELV
HRT
RORl
ENCO
RTEO
VELV
RTEOa
RTE
RTEPAV
RTEAV
RTEa
RTES
T
t
klh3T
L
L
L
L
L
L
L
L
L3/t
L3/t
l/t
L3/t
L3/t
L3/t
L3/t
L3/t
m/t
Lit
mL2/i3
L3/t
L3/t
Lit
L3/t
L3/t
L3/t
L3/t
59-42 PETROLEUM ENGINEERING HANDBOOK
Quantity
-
rate, shear
rate (velocity) of burning-zone advance
rate, water influx (encroachment)
rate, water injection
rate, water production
rate, water production, dimensionless
ratio, air/fuel
ratio, damage (skin conditions relative to
formation conditions unaffected by well
operations)
ratio, displacement
ratio, displacement, oil from burned volume,
volume per unit volume of burned reservoir
rock
ratio, displacement, oil from unburned volume,
volume per unit volume of unburned reservoir
rock
ratio, displacement, water from burned volume,
volume per unit volume of burned reservoir rock
ratio, equilibrium (v/x)
ratio, free producing gas/oil (free-gas
volume/oil volume)
ratio, gas/oil, cumulative
ratio, gas/oil, initial solution
ratio, gas/oil permeability
ratio, gas/oil producing
ratio, gas/oil, solution, at bubblepoint conditions
ratio, gas/oil, solution (gas solubility in oil)
ratio, mobility, general (Adisplaclng/Adisplaced)
ratio, mobility,diffuse-front approximation
[(AD + hd)swepJ(Ad)unsweptl;
D signifies displacing; d signifies displaced;
mobilities are evaluated at average saturation
conditions behind and ahead of front
ratio, mobility, sharp-front approximation
( AD/ &~)
ratio, mobility, total [(A, jSWePt/ (A, )unsweptl;
swept and unswept refer
to invaded and uninvaded regions behind and
ahead of leading edge of a displacement front
ratio of initial reservoir free-gas volume
to initial reservoir oil volume
ratio or factor in general (always with
identifying subscripts)
ratio, permeability, gas/oil
ratio, producing gas/oil
ratio, permeability, water/oil
ratio, solution gas/oil, at bubblepoint conditions
ratio, solution gas/oil (gas solubility in oil)
Letter
Symbol
Reserve
SPE
Letter
Symbol
K
RF
RI,
Rsi
kg /ko
R
R.sb
RS
M
MS
M
m
F~orF.o
MGO
F
A,R,r
Computer
Letter
Symbol Dimensions
SRT
VELB
ENCW
I NJ W
RTEW
RTEWI I
FACAFU
DMRS
1/ t
L/ t
L3/t
L3/t
L3/t
various
DPR
DPROB
DPROU
OPRWB
El l R
GORF
GORP
GORSI
PRMGO
GOR
GORSB
GORS
MBR
MBRSAV
MBR
MBRT
FAC various
PRMGO
GOR
PRMWO
GORSB
GORS
SPE LETTER AND COMPUTER SYMBOLS STANDARD 59-43
Quantity
-
ratio, solution gas/oil, initial
ratio, water/fuel
ratio, water/oil, cumulative
ratio, water/oil permeability
ratio, water/oil, producing, instantaneous
reactance
reaction rate
reaction rate constant
real part of complex number z
reciprocal formation volume factor, volume at
standard conditions divided by volume at
reservoir conditions (shrinkage factor)
reciprocal gas formation volume factor
reciprocal gas formation volume factor at
bubblepoint conditions
reciprocal permeability
reciprocal oil formation volume factor
(shrinkage factor)
recovery efficiency, reservoir overall; volume of
hydrocarbons recovered divided by volume of
hydrocarbons in place at start of project.
(ER =EpE/ED = E,ED)
recovery, ultimate gas
reduced pressure
reduced temperature
reduction ratio or reduction term
reduction, SP (general) due to shaliness
refraction, molecular
refraction index
reduction ratio, SP, due to shaliness
relative amplitude
relative atomic mass (atomic weight)
relative bearing
relative density (specific gravity)
relative molecular mass (molecular weight)
relative permeability to gas
relative permeability to oil
relative permeability to water
relaxation time, free-precession decay
relaxation time, proton thermal
requirement, air
requirement, unit air, in laboratory experimental
run, volumes or air per unit mass of pack
requirement, unit air, in reservoir, volumes
of air per unit bulk volume of reservoir rock
reservoir initial free-gas volume
(=mNBoi )
reservoir or formation porosity
reservoir pressure, average
reservoir recovery efficiency, overall;
volume of hydrocarbons recovered divided
Letter
Symbol
RN
F
UF
F
WQP
kc l k,
F
x
R
k
X(z) script R
b
4
b
c@
j
bo
ER
G
Pa
P,
7,
a!
aR
GF,
4JR
FR
ER
Reserve
SPE
Letter
Symbol
Fgsi
Kw 14,
r,j
.fJ
7)R peR
gPa
p,
Qr
N
CL
Y
SF,
gFi
~RJ ER
-
pR
77RpeR
Computer
Letter
Symbol Dimensions
FACWFU
FACWOP
PRMWO
FACWO
XEL
RRR
RRC
ML2/tq2
m/L2
L/t
RVF
RVFG
RVFGB
l/L2
RVFO
EFFR
GASPUL
PRSRO
TEMRO
RED
REDSP
MRF
RFX
REOSH
AMPR
AWT
BRGR
SPG
MWT
PRMRG
PRMRO
PRMRW
TI MAV
TI MRP
AI R
AI REX
AI RR
GASFI
PORR
PRSAVR
EFFR
t
t
L3/m
L3
m/L9
59-44 PETROLEUM ENGINEERING HANDBOOK
-
Quantity
Letter
Symbol
by volume of hydrocarbons in place at
start of project (& = Ep E, ED = E, ED )
reservoir rock burned, volume of
reservoir rock unburned, volume of
reservoir temperature
residual gas saturation
residual hydrocarbon saturation
residual oil saturation
residual water saturation
resistance
resistivity, electrical (logging)
resistivity, electrical (other than logging)
resistivity, annulus
resistivity, apparent
resistivity, apparent, of the conductive
fluids in an invaded zone
(due to fingering)
resistivity factor coefficient, formation
(FR 4)
VRb
vRu
TR
s
u
s
hr
S
0,
S
UT
i?
P
R
an
RO
RZ
resistivity factor, formation, equals
I? o/R,+ a numerical
subscript to F indicates the R,
KR
FR
resistivity flushed zone (that part of the R
x0
invaded zone closest to the wall of the
borehole, where flushing has been the
maximum)
resistivity, formation 100% saturated with
Ro
water of resistivity R,
resistivity, formation, true
resistivity index (hydrocarbon) equals R,/R,
resistivity, invaded zone
resistivity, mud
resistivity, mudcake
resistivity, mud-filtrate
resistivity, shale
resistivity, surrounding formation
resistivity, water
revenue, gross (value), per unit produced
revenue, gross (value), total
Reynolds number (dimensionless number)
rock or formation compressibility
salinity
saturation
saturation exponent
saturation, gas
saturation, gas, critical
saturation, gas, residual
saturation, interstitial-oil, in gas cap
saturation, interstitial-water, in gas cap
saturation, hydrocarbon
R,
1,
R,
R,
R
mc
R
ml
R,h
4
RW
vu
V
NRe
c/
c
S
Reserve
SPE
Letter
Symbol
Computer
Letter
Symbol
VOLRB
VOLRU
TEMR
SATGR
SATHR
SATOR
SATWR
RST
RES
RHO
RESAN
RESA
RESZ
COER
FACHR
RESXO
RESZR
REST
RSXH
RESI
RESM
RESMC
RESMF
RESSH
RESS
RESW
GRRU
GRRT
REYO
CMPF
CNC
SAT
SXP
SATG
SATGC
SATGR
SATOG
SATWG
SATH
Dimensions
$
T
ML2/tq2
mL3/ tq*
mL3/tq2
mL3/tq2
mL3/ tq*
mL3/tq2
mL3/tq2
mL3/ tq2
mL3/tq2
mL3/tq2
mL3/tq2
mL3/tq2
mL3/tq2
mL3/ tq*
mL3/ tq2
mL3/ tq2
mL3/tq2
M/L3
M
Lt2/m
various
SPE LETTER AND COMPUTER SYMBOLS STANDARD 59-45
Quantity
-
saturation, residual hydrocarbon
saturation, oil
saturation, oil, residual
saturation or bubblepoint pressure
saturation, total (combined) liquid
saturation, water
saturation, water, critical
saturation, water, initial
saturation, water (irreducible, interstitial,
or connate)
saturation, water, residual
secondary porosity index
segregation rate (in gravity drainage)
separator pressure
shale interval transit time
shale resistivity
shaliness gamma ray index
hog - ro)l (Ysh - ro)
shear modulus
shear rate
shear wave amplitude
shrinkage factor (reciprocal oil formation
volume factor)
shut-in bottomhole pressure, at any time
shut-in time (time after well is shut in)
(pressure buildup)
single-payment discount factor
single-payment discount factor
(constant annual rate)
skin depth (logging)
skin effect
skin radius (radius of well damage or stimulation)
slope
slope, interval transit time vs. density
(absolute value)
slope, neutron porosity vs. density
(absolute value)
smaller than
solid particles density of experimental rock
solid(s) volume (volume of all formation solids)
solids (matrix, grain) density
solubility, gas in oil (solution gas/oil ratio)
solubility, gas in water
solution gas/oil ratio at bubblepoint conditions
solution gas/oil ratio (gas solubility in oil)
solution gas/oil ratio, initial
SP, electrochemical component of
SP, electrokinetic component of
SP (measured SP) (Self Potential)
SP, pseudo
Letter
Symbol
S
hr
SO
S
Pi
SL
SM.
S,
$7
s, ,
S
wr
I
62
4s
P
iz script t
Rsh
I
shGR
G
3;s
bo
PW
At,,
DSP
DSPC
N
<
POE rho
K
pm0 r h 0
&
R
SW
Rsb
R*
4,
EC
6
ESP
E
PSP
Reserve
SPE
Letter
Symbol
Computer
Letter
Symbol Dimensions
SATHR
SAT0
SATOR
PRSB
SATL
SATW
SATWC
SATWI
SATI W
SATWR
PRXSE
RTES
PRSSP
TACSH
RESSH
SHXGR
ELMS
SRT
AMPS
RVFO
PRSWS
OELTI MWS
OSCSP
OSCSPC
SK0
SKN
RAOS
SLP
SAD
SND
LT
OENSEX
VOLS
OENMA
GORS
GWRS
GORSE
GORS
GORSI
EMFC
EMFK
EMFSP
EMFPSP
m/L+
L3/t
m/Lt2
t/L
mL3/tq2
m/Lt2
l/t
various
m/L+
t
L
various
L
various
tL2/m
L3/m
m/L3
L3
m/L3
mL2/t2q
mL2/t2q
mL2/t2q
mL2/t2q
59-46 PETROLEUM ENGINEERING HANDBOOK
Quantity
Letter
Symbol
SP, static (SSP)
ESSP
spacing (electrical logging)
LS
specific entropy 3
specific gravity (relative density)
Y
specific gravity, gas
Y8
specific gravity, oil
Yo
specific gravity, water
Yw
specific heat capacity (always with phase or c
system subscripts)
specific heat capacity ratio
specific injectivity index
I
specific productivity index
J ,
specific volume
V
specific weight F
WV
SSP (static SP)
ESSP
stabilization time of a well
ts
standard deviation of a random variable
CT
standard deviation of a random variable, estimated s
static bottomhole pressure, injection well
static pressure, bottomhole,
at any time after shut-in
static pressure, casing
static pressure, tubing
stimulation or damage radius of well (skin)
storage or storage capacity
strain, normal and general
strain, shear
strain, volume
stream function
stress, normal and general
stress, shear
summation (operator)
superficial phase velocity (flux rate of a
particular fluid phase flowing in pipe;
use appropriate phase subscripts)
surface production rate
surface tension, interfacial
surrounding formation resistivity
susceptibility, magnetic
temperature
temperature, bottomhole
temperature, critical
temperature, formation
temperature gradient
temperature, pseudocritical
temperature, pseudoreduced
temperature, reduced
temperature, reservoir
temperature, standard conditions
tension, surface (interfacial)
Piw
PWS
PCS
PfS
rs
s
E epsilon
Y
8
*
o-
7
z
IA
9sc
E
k
T
Tbh
T,
Tf
gT
T
PC
T
Pr
T,
TR
CC
u
Reserve
SPE Computer
Letter Letter
Symbol Symbol
EMFSSP
LENS
HERS
SPG
SPGG
SPGO
SPGW
HSP
HSPR
I J XS
PDXS
SPV
WGTS
EMFSSP
TIMS
SDV
suvEs
PRSI WS
PRSWS
PRSCS
PRSTS
RADS
ST0
STN
STNS
STNU
STR
STS
STSS
SUM
VELV
RTESC
SFT
RESS
SUSM
TEM
TEMBH
TEMC
TEMF
GRDT
TEMPC
TEMPRD
TEMRO
TEMR
TEMSC
SFT
Dimensions
mL2/ t*q
L
L2/t2T
L2/t2T
L3t/m
L3t/m
L3/m
mL2/t2
mL2/t2q
t
m/L?
m/L?
m/L+
rn/Lt2
L
various
various
m/L+
m/L+
L/t
L3/t
m/t2
mL3/tq2
mL/q2
T
T
T
T
T/L
T
T
T
T
T
m/t2
SPE LETTER AND COMPUTER SYMBOLS STANDARD 59-47
Quantity
-
tensor of x
thermal conductivity (always with additional
phase or system subscripts)
thermal cubic expansion coefficient
thermal or heat diffusivity
thickness (general and individual bed)
thickness, gross pay (total)
thickness, mudcake
thickness, pay, gross (total)
thickness, net pay
time
time after well is opened to production
(pressure drawdown)
time after well is shut in (pressure buildup)
time constant
time, decay (mean life) (l/ A)
time, delay
time difference
(time period or interval, fixed length)
time, dimensionless
time, dimensionless at condition m
time for stabilization of a well
time, interval transit
time, interval transit, apparent
time, interval transit, fluid
time, interval transit, matrix
time, interval transit, shale
time, neutron decay (neutron mean life)
time, payout (payoff, payback)
time period or interval, fixed length
time well was on production before shut-in,
equivalent (pseudotime)
tortuosity
tortuosity, electric
tortuosity, hydraulic
total (combined) liquid saturation
total entropy
total mobility of all fluids in a particular region
of the reservoir; e.g., (A, + A* + A, )
total mobility ratio [(Ar )swepJ(Ar )unsweptl;
swept and unswept refer
to invaded and uninvaded regions behind and
ahead of leading edge of a displacement front
total (gross) pay thickness
total gross revenue (value)
total initial gas in place in reservoir
total moles
total porosity
total (two-phase) formation volume factor
Letter
Symbol
Reserve
SPE
Letter
Symbol
z
X
kt,
h
mc
h
hn
t
At,
At,
7
Td
b
At
tD
tDm
ts
tscript t
t, script t
-I f script t
i m. script t
k,, script t
tdN
iP
At
b
7
Te
7H
SL
s
At
ht
V
G
3,
4
Computer
Letter
Symbol Dimensions
HEN
HEC
HTD
THK
THKT
THKMC
THKT
THKN
TI M
DELTI MWF
DELTI MWS
TI MC
TI MD
TI MD
DELTI M
TI MQ
TI MMQ
TI MS
TAC
TACA
TACF
TACMA
TACSH
TI MDN
TI MPO
DELTI M
TI MP
TOR
TORE
TDRHL
SATL
HER
MDBT
MBRT
THKT
GRRT
GASTI
NMBM
PORT
FVFT
mL/t3T
l/T
L2/t
L
L
L
L
L
t
t
t
t
t
t
t
t
t/L
t/J-
t/L
t/L
t/L
t
t
t
t
L2/tZT
L3t/m
L
M
L3
59- 48 PETROLEUM ENGINEERING HANDBOOK
Quantity
-
transfer coefficient, convective heat
transfer coefficient, heat, overall
transfer coefficient, heat, radiation
transit time, interval
transit time, apparent, interval
transit time, fluid interval
transit time, matrix interval
transit time, shale interval
transform, Laplace 0fyT.Y (t )Pdt
transform, Laplace, var:able
transmissivity, transmissibility
true density
true formation resistivity
true geometrical factor (multiplier)
(noninvaded zone) (electrical logging)
tubing pressure, flowing
tubing pressure, static
turbulence factor
two-phase or total formation volume factor
ultimate gas recovery
unamortized investment over year k
undiscounted cash flow
unburned reservoir rock, volume of
unit air requirement in laboratory experimental
run, volumes of air per unit mass of pack
unit air requirement in reservoir, volumes of air
per unit bulk volume of reservoir rock
unit fuel concentration (see symbol m)
universal gas constant (per mole)
utilization, oxygen
valence
vapor phase, mole fraction of component
vapor phase, moles of
vaporization, latent heat of
variance of a random variable
variance of a random variable, estimated
vector of x
velocity
velocity, acoustic
velocity, acoustic apparent (measured)
velocity, acoustic fluid
velocity, matrix acoustic
velocity, shale acoustic
velocity (rate) of burning-zone advance
vertical (invasion) efficiency: hydrocarbon pore
space invaded (affected, contacted) by the
injected-fluid or heat front divided by the
Letter
Symbol
h
u
I
k script t
in script t
if script r
i
ma script t
k sh scripr t
$0) script L
s
T
Pr
4
G,
PV
PI S
FB
4
60
Gk
P
V
RU
aE
aR
G
R
eo2
Z
Y
V
L
c=
S2
2
V
V
VC2
Vf
%I,
vsh
vb
El
Reserve
SPE
Letter
Symbol
T
4
wf
. f Gf
p,r
PI,
4
gPa
VRll
F
OE
F
UR
A
Computer
Letter
Symbol
HTCC
HTCU
HTCI
TAC
TACA
TACF
TACMA
TACSH
TRM
DENT
REST
GMFT
PRSTF
PASTS
FACB
FVFT
GASPUL
I NVUK
VOLRU
AI REX
AI RR
CNCFU
RRR
UTLOZ
VAL
MFRV
MOLV
HLTV
VAR
VARES
VEL
VAC
VACA
VACF
VACMA
VACSH
VELB
EFFI
Dimensions
m/t3T
rn/tT
m/t3T
t/J-
o-
t/L
t/L
t/L
various
m/L3
mL3/tq2
m/L+
m/Lt=
L3
M
L3
L3/m
various
mL2/t2T
L2/ t=
L/t
L/t
L/t
L/t
L/t
L/t
L/t
SPE LETTER AND COMPUTER SYMBOLS STANDARD 59-49
Quantity
-
hydrocarbon pore space enclosed in all layers
behind the injected-fluid or heat front
viscosity, air
viscosity at mean pressure
viscosity, dynamic
viscosity, gas
viscosity, gas, at 1 atm
viscosity, kinematic
viscosity, oil
viscosity, water
volume
volume at bubblepoint pressure
volume, bulk
volume, bulk, of pack burned in
experimental run
volume, effective pore
volume fraction or ratio (as needed, use same
subscripted symbols as for volumes; note
that bulk volume fraction is unity and pore
volume fractions are +I
volume, free-gas, initial reservoir
(=mNb,; )
volume, grain (volume of all formation solids
except shales)
volume, intergranular (volume between grains;
consists of fluids and all shales)
<vb-v,r>
volume, intermatrix (consists of fluids and
dispersed shale) (vb - V,,,, >
volume, matrix (framework) (volume of all
formation solids except dispersed shale)
volume, noneffective pore (VP -V, )
volume of reservoir rock burned
volume of reservoir rock unburned
volume per mole (molal volume)
volume, pore (Vb-V,)
volume, pore, dimensionless
volume, shale, dispersed
volume, shale, laminated
volume, shale, structural
volume, shale(s) (volume of all shales:
structural and dispersed)
volume, solid(s) (volume of all formation
solids)
volume, specific
volumetric efficiency for burned portion only,
in-situ combustion pattern
volumetric efficiency: product of pattern sweep
and invasion efficiencies
Letter
Symbol
K
V
GFi
V
gr
vim
V
ma
V
ne
vRb
vRu
VM
VP
V
PD
V
shd
vxhf script i
V
shs
V
sh
VS
V
EVb
Ev
Reserve
SPE Computer
Letter Letter
Symbol Symbol
VI SA
VI SPAV
VI S
VI SG
VI SGA
VSK
vi sa
VI SW
VOL
VOLBP
VOLB
VOLBEX
VOLG
VLF
GASFI
VOLGR
VOLI G
VOLI M
VOLMA
VOLNE
VOLRB
VOLRU
VOLM
VOLP
VOLPQ
VOLSHO
VSHLAM
VOLSHS
VOLSH
VOLS
SPV
EFFVB
EFFV
Dimensiona
m/ Lt
mm
m/ Lt
mm
m/ Lt
L2/t
m/Lt
gLt
$
L3
L3
various
L3
L3
L3
L3
L3/m
59-50
PETROLEUM ENGINEERING HANDBOOK
-
Quantity
volumetric flow rate
volumetric flow rate downhole
volumetric flow rate, surface conditions
volumetric heat capacity
volumetric velocity (flow rate or flux,
per unit area)
water (always with identifying subscripts)
water compressibility
water density
water displaced from burned volume, volume
per unit volume of burned reservoir rock
waterdrive constant
waterdrive constant, linear aquifer
water, effective permeability to
water formation volume factor
water/fuel ratio
water, gas solubility in
water in place in reservoir, initial
water influx (encroachment), cumulative
water influx (encroachment) during an interval
water influx (encroachment) rate
water injected, cumulative
water injected during an interval
water injection rate
water mobility
water/oil permeability ratio
water/oil ratio, cumulative
water/oil ratio, producing, instantaneous
water produced, cumulative
water produced during an interval
water production rate
water production rate, dimensionless
water, relative permeability to
water resistivity
water saturation
water saturation, critical
water saturation, initial
water saturation (interstitial) in oil band
water saturation in gas cap, interstitial
water saturation, interstitial, connate,
or irreducible
water saturation, residual
water specific gravity
water viscosity
wave length (l/cr)
wave number (l/h)
weight (gravitational)
weight-weighted average density
of produced liquid
weight, atomic
-
Letter
Symbol
4
qdh
4sc
M
U
S
NV
Yw
PN
A
o-
W
PL rho
A
Reserve
SPE Computer
Letter Letter
Symbol Symbol Dimensions
RTE L3/t
RTEOH L3/t
RTESC L3/t
HSPV m/Lt2T
VELV
L/t
WTR
CMPW
DENW
DPRWB
various
Lt2/m
m/L3
WDC
WDCL
PRMW
FVFW
FACWFU
GWRS
WTRTI
WTRE
DELWTRE
ENCW
WTRI
DELWTRI
I NJ W
MOBW
PRMWO
FACWOP
FACWO
WTRP
DELWTRP
RTEW
RTEWQ
PRMRW
RESW
SATW
SATWC
SATWI
SATWO
SATWG
SATI W
L4t2/m
L4t2/m
L2
various
LI
L3
$lt
L3
L3/t
L3 t/m
mL3/tq2
SATWR
SPGW
vi sw
WVL
WVN
WGT
DENAVL
m/ I - t
L
l/L
m/Lt2
dL3
AWT m
SPE LETTER AND COMPUTER SYMBOLS STANDARD 59-51
Quantity
Letter
Symbol
Reserve
SPE
Letter
Symbol
Computer
Letter
Symbol
weight, molecular
well radius
well radius of damage or stimulation (skin)
well stabilization time
wellbore radius, effective or apparent (includes
effects of well damage or stimulation
wet-gas content
wet gas produced, cumulative
width, breadth, or thickness
(primarily in fracturing)
work
Youngs modulus (modulus of elasticity)
zone diameter, invaded, electrically equivalent
zone resistivity, invaded
C
w
G
+%P
b
W
E
4
Ri
Dimensions
RV
Rs
Ts
R
wo
C
dhg
g
WkTP
W
MWT
RADW
RADS
TI MS
RADWA
CNTWG
GASWGP
WTH
WRK
ELMY
DI AI
RESI
m
L
L
:.
various
L3
L
mL2/ t2
m/L+
L
mL3/ tq2
59-52 PETROLEUM ENGINEERING HANDBOOK
Subscript Definitions in Alphabetical Order
Subscript Definition
abandonment
acoustic
activation log, neutron
active, activity, or acting
after taxes
air
air/fuel
altered
amplitude log
angle, angular, or angular coordinate
anhydrite
anisotropic
annulus apparent (from log readings;
use tool description subscripts)
apparent (general)
apparent wellbore (usually with wellbore radius r,)
area1
atmosphere, atmospheric
average or mean pressure
average or mean saturation
band or oil band
bank or bank region
base
before taxes
bond log, cement
borehole televiewer log
bottomhole
bottomhole, flowing (usually with pressure or time)
bottomhole, static (usually with pressure or time)
boundary conditions, external
breakthrough
bubble
bubblepoint conditions, oil at (usually with
formation volume factor, Bob)
bubblepoint conditions, solution at (usually
with gas/oil ratio, Rsb)
bubblepoint (saturation)
bubblepoint or saturation (usually with
volume, I/bJ
bulk (usually with volume, VL,)
burned in experimental tube run (usually
with volume, V&
burned or burning
burned portion of in-situ combustion pattern,
displacement from (usually with efficiency,
Em)
burned portion of in-situ combustion pattern,
volumetric of (usually with efficiency, Em)
Letter
Subscript
a
iA
a
a
a
aF
;
0
anh
ani
an
a
wa
A
a
P
s
b
b
b
b
CB
TV
bh
Wf
ws
ilT
b
ob
sb
b
bp
b
bE
b
Db
Vb
Reserve
SPE
Subscript
A
A
tcY
na
A
a
AN
w
A
--
$1 P
B
r* P
B
cb
tv
w,BH
xt
s, bp
B,t
B
Computer
Letter
Subscript
A
A
NA
A
A
A
AFU
A
A
THE
AH
ANI
AN
A
WA
A
A
PAV
SAV
B
B
B
B
CB
TV
BH
WF
ws
E
BT
B
OB
SB
BP
BP
B
BEX
B
DB
VB
SPE LETTER AND COMPUTER SYMBOLS STANDARD
59-53
Subscript Definition
burned reservoir rock
burned volume, oil from (usually
with displacement ratio, Sob )
burned volume, water from (usually
with displacement ratio, &+b )
calculated
caliper log
capillary (usually with capillary pressure, PC )
capture
carbon dioxide
carbon monoxide
casing or casinghead
casing, flowing (usually with pressure)
casing, static (usually with pressure)
cement bond log
chemical
chlorine log
clay
clean
coil
compaction
compensated density log
compensated neutron log
component(s)
component j
component j produced
(usually with moles, nP, )
compressional wave
conditions for infinite dimensions
conductive liquids in invaded zone
connate (interstitial, irreducible)
constant
contact
(usually with contact angle, Bc )
contact log, microlog, minilog
convective
conversion (usually with conversion factor in
Newtons law of motion, g,)
core
corrected
critical
cumulative influx (encroachment)
cumulative injected
cumulative produced
cumulative produced free value
(usually with gas, GF~)
cumulative produced liquid
(usually with condensate, CL,)
damage or damaged (includes skin conditions)
decay
-
Letter
Subscript
Rb
ob
wb
C
C
C
cap
(32
co
c
cf
CS
CB
C
CL
Cl
cn
C
cP
CD
CN
C
j
Pj
C
c-2
Z
i
C
C
ML
C
C
COT
C
e
i
P
FP
LP
zi
Reserve Computer
SPE Letter
Subscript Subscript
talc
C
C
cg
cb
Cl
da
cln
C
cd
cn
C
I NF
ir, 1 iota,
i Script i
C
C
ml script 1
C
cr
i
RB
OB
WB
CA
C
CP
c
co2
co
CS
CF
cs
CB
C
CL
CL
CN
C
CP
CD
CN
C
J
PJ
C
I NF
Z
I R
C
C
ML
C
C
C
cot7
CR
E
I
P
FP
LP
S
0
59-54 PETROLEUM ENGINEERING HANDBOOK
Subscript Definition
deep induction log
deep laterolog
delay
density
density log, compensated
density log
depleted region, depletion
dewpoint
differential separation
differential temperature log
diffusivity
dimensionless pore value
(usually with volume, I/pD)
dimensionless quantity
dimensionless quantity at condition m
dimensionless time
dimensionless water
dip (usually with angle, LYE)
diplog, dipmeter
directional survey
dirty (clayey, shaly)
discounted value, present worth, or present value
dispersed
dispersion
displaced
displacement from burned portion of in-situ
combustion pattern (usually with efficiency,
Em)
displacement from unburned portion of in-situ
combustion pattern (usually with efficiency,
ED, )
displacing or displacement (efficiency)
dolomite
downhole
drainage (usually with drainage radius, rd)
dual induction log
dual laterolog
earth
effective (or equivalent)
electric, electrical
electrochemical
electrode
electrokinetic
electrolog, electrical log, electrical
survey
electromagnetic pipe inspection log
electron
empirical
encroachment (influx). cumulative
Letter
Subscript
I D
LLD
d
CD
D
d
d
d
DT
rl
PD
D
Dm
tD
WD
d
DM
DR
4
PV
d
K
d
Db
Du
D
dol
dh
d
DI
DLL
e
e
e
;
k
EL
EP
el
E
e
Reserve Computer
SPE Letter
Subscript Subscript
id
PPd script I 1
6
cd
d
s
dt
dm
dr
dty
PV
D
d
s,D
DH
di
dPP script 11
E
E
ec
e
ek
el, ES
ep
4P script el
EM
I O
LLO
I I
RHO
CD
I I
D
D
0
OT
ETA
Pa
a
QM
TO
wa
0
DM
OR
OY
PV
D
K
DO
OB
DU
DN
DL
DH
D
01
DLL
E
E
E
C
E
K
EL
EP
E
EM
E
SPE LETTER AND COMPUTER SYMBOLS STANDARD 59-55
Subscript Definition
entry
epithermal neutron log
equivalent
estimated
ethane
experimental
experimental value per mole of produced gas
(usually with fuel consumption, m,)
external, outer boundary conditions
extrapolated
fast neutron log
fill-up
finger or fingering
flash separation
flowing bottomhole (usually with pressure or time)
flowing casing (usually with pressure)
flowing conditions, injection well (usually with
pressure, P iwf>
flowing conditions, well (usually with time)
flowing tubing (usually with pressure)
fluid
fluids in an invaded zone, conductive
flushed zone
formation 100% saturated with
water (used in R. only)
formation (rock)
formation, surrounding
fraction or fractional
fracture, fractured, or fracturing
free (usually with gas or gas/oil ratio quantities)
free fluid
free value, cumulative produced,
(usually with gas, GF/, )
free value, initial (usually with gas, GF, )
front, front region, or interface
fuel, mass of (usually with fuel concentration, C,, )
fuel (usually with fuel properties, such as pi)
gamma-gamma ray log
gamma ray log
gas
gas at atmospheric conditions
gas at bubblepoint conditions
gas cap, oil in (usually with saturation, S,)
gas cap, water in (usually with saturation, S,,)
gas, dimensionless
gas/oil, solution (usually with gas/oil ratios)
gas/water, solution
(usually with gas solubility in water, I?,,)
geometrical
Letter
Subscript
f;,E
e4
E
c2
E
&
e
ext
NF
f
f
wf
Cf
iwf
wf
tf
f
Z
x0
0 zero
f
;
f
F
Ff
FP
Fi
f
F
GG
CR
g
w
gb
a
w
gD
S
SW
G
Reserve
SPE
Subscript
E
PV
est
EX
0
nf
f
F
F
f
f l
zr
f m
F
gg
gr
G
Computer
Letter
Subscript
E
NE
EV
ES
C2
EX
EXG
E
XT
NF
F
F
F
WF
CF
I WF
WF
TF
F
Z
x0
ZR
F
S
F
FR
F
FF
FP
FI
F
FU
FU
GG
GR
G
GA
GB
OG
WG
Ga
S
SW
G
59-56 PETROLEUM ENGINEERING HANDBOOK
Subscript Definition
geothermal
grain
grain (matrix, solids)
gravity meter log
gross (total)
guard log
gypsum
half
heat or thermal
heavy phase
hole
horizontal
hydraulic
hydrocarbon
hydrogen nuclei or atoms
hydrocarbon, residual
hydrogen sulfide
imbibition
induction log, deep investigation
induction log
induction log, dual
induction log, medium investigation
infinite dimensions, conditions for
influx (encroachment), cumulative
initial conditions or value
initial free value (usually with gas, G,+-,)
initial solution (usually with gas/oil ratio, R,V,)
injected, cumulative
injection, injected, or injecting
injection well, flowing conditions (usually with
pressut=, phf)
injection well, static conditions (usually with
p-sure, pi,>
inner, interior, or internal
interface, front region, or front
interference
intergranular
intermatrix
internal
interstitial
intrinsic
invaded
invaded zone
invaded zone, conductive liquids in an
invasion (usually with invasion efficiency, 4 1
irreducible, interstitial, or connate
jth component
jth component, produced (usually with moles, np;)
junction
-
Letter
Subscript
G
gr
ma
GM
G
gYP
l/2
h
HP
h
H
H
h
H
hr
HI S
I
I D
1
Dl
I M
00
Fi
si
iwf
i WS
f
I
jg
im
int
I
j
P.i
Reserve Computer
SPE Letter
Subscript Subscript
I
inj
T
gm
T
g
T, 8
hp
H
h
H
i script i
id
i
di
im
i
L, i script i
F
i, i script i
i,i script i
1,i script i
I
I
i
ir, L, i script i
GT
GR
MA
GM
T
G
GY
H
HT
HP
H
H
HL
H
HY
HR
H2S
I
I O
I
I l l
I M
I NF
E
I
FI
SI
I
I
I WF
I WS
I
F
I
I G
I M
I
I
I
I
I
2
I
I R
J
PJ
J
SPE LETTER AND COMPUTER SYMBOLS STANDARD 59-57
Subscript Definition
laminar
laminated, lamination
lateral (resistivity) log
laterolog (add further tool configuration
subscripts as needed)
laterolog, dual
lifetime log, neutron, TDT
light phase
limestone
limiting value
linear, lineal
liquid or liquid phase
liquids, conductive, invaded zone
liquid produced, cumulative (usually with
condensate, GLp)
location subscripts, usage is secondary to that for
representing times or time periods
loI?
lower
magnetism log, nuclear
mass of fuel (usually with fuel concentration,
cm )
matrix (solids, grain)
matrix [solids except (nonstructural)
clay or shale]
maximum
mean or average pressure
mean or average saturation
medium investigation induction log
methane
microlaterolog
microlog, minilog, contact log
microseismogram log, signature log, variable
density log
minimum
mixture
mobility
molal (usually with volume, V$,,)
Mth period or interval
mud
mudcake
mud filtrate
net
neutron
neutron activation log
neutron lifetime log, TDT
neutron log, compensated
neutron log
neutron log, epithermal
Letter
Subscript
P script 1
Pscript 1
L
LL
DLL
NL
LP
is
lim
L
L
LP
1, 2, 3, etc.
l og
P script I
NM
m
ma
ma
max
F
s
I M
Cl
MLL
ML
VD
min
M
A
M
M
m
mc
mJ
lb
NA
NL
CN
N
NE
Reserve Computer
SPE Letter
Subscript Subscript
L
L
P script I
PP script I 1
d@ script I I
nk? script 1
Fp script I
1st
P script 1
I script I
1%
L
nm
St P
im
m@ script I I
mP script 1
vd
z,m
M
m
n
na
nP script I
Ct l
n
ne
LAM
LAM
L
LL
DLL
NL
LP
LS
LM
L
L
2
LP
L
L
NM
FU
MA
MA
MX
PAV
SAV
I M
Cl
MLL
ML
VD
MN
M
LAM
M
M
M
MC
MF
N
N
NA
NL
CN
N
NE
59-58 PETROLEUM ENGINEERING HANDBOOK
Subscript Definition
Letter
Subscript
neutron log, fast
neutron log, sidewall
neutron log, thermal
nitrogen
noneffective
nonwetting
normal
normal (resistivity) log
(add numerical spacing to subscript to N; e.g., N16)
normalized (fractional or relative)
nth year, period, income, payment, or unit
nuclear magnetism log
numerical subscripts (intended primarily
to represent times or time periods;
available secondarily as location
subscripts or for other purposes)
observed
oil at bubblepoint conditions (usually with formation
volume factor, Bob)
oil, dimensionless
oil (except when used with resistivity)
oil from burned volume (usually with displacement
ratio, 6,,/, 1
oil from unburned volume (usually with displacement
ratio, 6,,,, 1
oil in gas cap (usually with saturation, S,,,)
outer (external) boundary conditions
oxygen
particle (usually with diameter, dp)
particular period, element, or interval
pattern (usually with pattern efficiency, EP)
payout, payoff, or payback
permeability
phase or phases
pipe inspection log, electromagnetic
pore (usually with volume, I$)
pore value, dimensionless ( usual l y wi th vol ume, I ' , ?, , 1
porosity
porosity data
pressure, mean or average
primary
produced
produced componentj (usually with moles, n,,i)
produced, cumulative
produced free value, cumulative
(usually with gas, G,,, )
produced in experiment
produced liquid, cumulative
(usually with condensate, Cl.,,)
NF
SN
NT
N2
ne
nw
k
nf
sn
nt
NW
n
NF
SN
NT
N2
NE
NW
N
N
n
hl
1,2,3, etc.
r,R
N
nm
N
N
NM
OB
ob
OB
OB
OD
0
ob
N
00
0
08
011
ou
og
e
02
P
k
P
P
k
P
EP
P
PD
4
4
P
1 one
P
pj
P
41
0
K
PO
ep
P
pm
P
OG
E
02
P
K
P
PO
K
P
EP
P
PQ
PHI
P
PAV
PR
P
PJ
P
FP
PE PEX
LP
LP
Reserve
SPE
Subscript
Computer
Letter
Subscript
SPE LETTER AND COMPUTER SYMBOLS STANDARD 59-59
Subscript Definition
produced water/oil (cumulative)
(usually with cumulative water/oil ratio, F,,)
production period (usually with time, tp)
profit - unamortized investment
proximity log
pseudo
pseudocritical
pseudodimensionless
pseudoreduced
pseudo-SP
radius, radial, or radial distance
rate
rate of return
ratio
recovery (usually with recovery efficiency, ER)
reduced
reference
relative
reservoir
reservoir rock, burned
reservoir rock, unburned
residual
residual hydrocarbon
resistivity
resistivity log
Reynolds (used with Reynolds number
only, NKJ
rock (formation)
sand
sandstone
saturation, mean or average
saturation or bubblepoint
saturation or bubblepoint (usually with
volume, Vbp)
scattered, scattering
secondary
segregation (usually with segregation
rate, 4%)
separator conditions
shale
shallow laterolog
shear
shear wave
sidewall
sidewall neutron log
signature log, microseismogram log,
variable density log
silt
single payment
Letter
Subscript
WOP
P
Pk
P
P
PC
PD
pr
PSP
r
R
z
R
r
r
k
Rb
Ru
r
hr
R
R
Re
f
sd
ss
s
b
bp
SC
2
s
SP
sh
LLS
S
i
SN
VD
sl
SP
Reserve Computer
SPE Letter
Subscript Subscript
P
P
H
R
b
PP
R
r
R
fm
sa
sst
SJ P
s, bp
s, set
S
ru
sha
QPs script I 1
i-
iW
sn
vd
sit
WOP
P
PK
P
P
PC
PO
PRO
PSP
R
R
R
RO
R
R
R
RB
RU
R
HR
R
R
F
SO
ss
SAV
BP
BP
SC
SE
S
SP
SH
LLS
S
S
SW
SN
VD
SL
SP
59- 60 PETROLEUM ENGINEERING HANDf3OOK
Subscript Definition
skin (stimulation or damage)
slip or slippage
slurry (mixture)
solid(s) (all formation solids)
solids in experiment
solids (matrix, grain)
solution at bubblepoint conditions (usually with
gas/oil ratio, Rsb)
solution in water (usually with gas solubility
in water, I?,,)
solution, initial (usually with gas/oil
ratio, R,i)
solution (usually with gas/oil ratios)
sonde, tool
sonic velocity log
SP
spacing
specific (usually with J and I)
SSP
stabilization (usually with time)
standard conditions
static bottomhole (usually with pressure or time)
static casing (usually with pressure)
static conditions, injection well (usually with pressure)
static or shut-in conditions (usually with time)
static tubing (usually with pressure)
static well conditions (usually with time)
steam or steam zone
stimulation (includes skin conditions)
stock-tank conditions
storage or storage capacity
strain
structural
surface
surrounding formation
swept or swept region
system
TDT log, neutron lifetime log
televiewer log, borehole
temperature
temperature log
temperature log, differential
thermal (heat)
thermal decay time (TDT) log
thermal neutron log
time, dimensionless
times or time periods
tool-description subscripts: see individual entries
such as amplitude log, neutron log, etc.
Letter
Subscript
s
z
S
SE
ma
sb
SW
si
T
SV
SP
SSP
s
SC
WS
cs
i WS
WS
t s
WS
S
st
s
E
st
S
S
S
s
NL
TV
T
T
DT
h
NL
NT
tD
1, 2, 3, etc.
Reserve Computer
SPE Letter
Subscript Subscript
S s
u S
2, m M
CT S
SEX
MA
SB
SV
SP
SW
SI
S
sv
SP
S
SSP
S
S
o- SC
ws
cs
I WS
S ws
TS
S ws
S S
S S
ST
4 o- S
e EPS
S ST
o- S
S
S
ru S
u S
nl script 1 NL
tv TV
h, e T
t, h T
dt OT
T, e HT
ne script I NL
nt NT
TO
SPE LETTER AND COMPUTER SYMBOLS STANDARD 59-61
Subscript Definition
tool, sonde
total initial in place in reservoir
total (gross)
total, total system
transmissibility
treatment or treating
true (opposed to apparent) (electrical logging)
tubing flowing (usually with pressure)
tubing or tubinghead
tubing, static (usually with pressure)
turbulence (used with F only, FB 1
ultimate
unamortized
unburned
unburned portion of in-situ combustion pattern
displacement from (usually with efficiency, EDU)
unburned reservoir rock
unburned volume, oil from (usually with
displacement ratio, 6,, )
unit
unswept or unswept region
upper
vaporization, vapor, or vapor phase
variable density log, microseismogram log,
signature log
velocity
velocity, sonic or acoustic log
vertical
volumetric of burned portion of in-situ combustion
pattern (usually with efficiency, EVb)
volume or volumetric
water
water, dimensionless
water from burned volume (usually with displacement
ratio, aWb)
water/fuel
water in gas cap (usually with saturation, S,,)
water/oil (usually with instantaneous producing
water/oil ratio, F,,)
water/oil, produced (cumulative)
(usually with cumulative water/oil ratio, F,,,)
water, solution in (usually with gas solubility
in water, R,,.)
water-saturated formation, 100 %
weight
well conditions
well, flowing conditions (usually with time)
well, injection, flowing conditions
(usually with pressure, piwzf)
Letter
Subscript
T
ti
t
t
T
t
t
tf
ts
B
ul
U
LU
RU
ou
VD
iv
V
Vb
V
W
WD
wb
wF
w
wo
SW
0 zero
W
W
wf
iwf
Reserve
SPE
Subscript
a!
a
u
u
u
u
V
vd
V
SV
v
V
W
zr
W
f
Computer
Letter
Subscript
T
TI
T
T
T
T
T
TF
T
TS
B
UL
U
U
ou
RU
ou
U
U
U
V
vo
V
sv
V
VB
V
W
WCI
WB
WFU
WG
wo
WOP
SW
ZR
W
W
WF
I WF
59-62
PETROLEUM ENGINEERING HANDBOOK
Subscript Definition
well, injection, static conditions
(usually with pressure, piws)
well, static conditions (usually with time)
wellbore, apparent (usually with wellbore
radius, rwO 1
wellhead
wet gas (usually with composition or content,
Gg )
wet gas produced
wetting
Youngs modulus, refers to
zero hydrocarbon saturation
zone, conductive fluids in an invaded
zone, flushed
zone, invaded
Letter
Subscript
iws
WS
wa
wh
wg
wgp
W
Y
0 zero
z
x0
i
Reserve
SPE
Subscript
s
th
W
zr
I
Computer
Letter
Subscript
IWS
ws
WA
WH
WG
WGP
W
Y
ZR
Z
X0
I
SPE LETTER AND COMPUTER SYMBOLS STANDARD
59-63
Subscript Symbols in Alphabetical Order
Reserve
Letter SPE
Subscript Subscript
Greek and Numerical
0 zero
1
1,2,3,etc.
1,2,3,etc.
1,2,3,etc.
l/2
2
m
English
A
A
a
a
a
a
a
a
a
a
at;
an
anh
ani
B
BT
b
b
b
e
u
p, pri
s, set
a
A
A, a
A
ap
A
AN
bt
B
6 P
Computer
Letter
Subscript Subscript Definition
EPS
ETA
THE
LAM
RHO
PHI
P
ZR
PR
H
SE
I NF
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
AFU
AN
AH
ANI
B
BT
B
B
B
strain
diffusivity
angle, angular, or angular coordinate
mobility
density
porosity
porosity data, derived from
tool-description subscripts: see individual entries
such as amplitude log, neutron log, etc.
formation 100% saturated with water (used in R. only)
primary
location subscripts, usage is secondary to that for
representing times or time periods
numerical subscripts (intended primarily to represent
times or time periods; available secondarily as
location subscripts or for other purposes)
times or time periods
half
secondary
conditions for infinite dimensions
amplitude log
area1
abandonment
acousti c
active, activity, or acting
after taxes
air
altered
apparent (general)
atmosphere, atmospheric
air/fuel
annulus apparent (from log readings:
use tool description subscripts)
anhydrite
anisropic
turbulence (used with F only, FB)
breakthrough
band or oil band
bank or bank region
base
59-64
PETROLEUM ENGINEERING HANDBOOK
Reserve Computer
Letter SPE Letter
Subscript Subscript Subscript
b
b
b
b
b
bE
bh
bp
c
c
c
C
C
Cl
c2
CB
CD
CL
CN
co
co2
C
c
c
c
c
C
C
c
C
c
CUP
cb
Cf
Cl
Cfl
car
CP
CS
D
D
D
DI
DLL
DM
DR
B
s, bp
B,t
B
w,BH
talc
C
C
cb
cd
cl
cn
C
cg
C
C
C
C
cr
ec
CB
cla
cln
d
s, u
di
dfiscript 11
dm
dr
Subscript Definition
B
B
B
B
B
BEX
BH
BP
CA
C
C
C
C
Cl
c2
CB
CO
CL
CN
CO
co2
CP
cs
C
C
C
C
C
Ll
C
e
CB
CF
CL
CN
COR
CP
cs
0
a
DN
01
DLL
DM
OR
before taxes
bubble
bubblepoint (saturation)
bulk (usually with volume, V,)
burned or burning
burned in experimental tube run (usually
with volume, V,,)
bottomhole
bubblepoint or saturation (usually with
volume, VbP)
calculated
caliper log
coil
component(s)
convective
methane
ethane
bond log, cement
compensated density log
chlorine log
compensated neutron log
carbon monoxide
carbon dioxide
capillary (usually with capillary presssure, P,)
casing or casinghead
chemical
compressional wave
constant
contact (usually with contact angle, 0,)
conversion (usually with conversion factor in
Newtons law of Motion, gC)
core
critical
electrochemical
capture
cement bond log
casing, flowing (usually with pressure)
clay
clean
corrected
compaction
casing, static (usually with pressure)
density log
dimensionless quantity
displacing or displacement (efficiency)
dual induction log
dual laterolog
diplog, dipmeter
directional survey
SPE LETTER AND COMPUTER SYMBOLS STANDARD
59-65
Reserve Computer
Letter SPE Letter
Subscript Subscript Subscript
DT
Db
Dm
DU
d
d
d
d
d
d
d
d
d
dh
dol
4
E
E
E
E
Es
EL
EP
C
e
e
e
e
e
e
e
el
eq
ext
F
F
F
FP
Ff
Fi
;
f
;
f
dt
D
0
DH
dtv
iM
est
EX
el, ES
ep
ec
0
!E
E
E
0
&script el
EV
F
;
f m
F
Subscript Definition
DT differential temperature log
DB displacement from burned portion of in-situ
QM
DI J
combustion pattern (usually with efficiency, EDb)
dimensionless quantity at condition m
displacement from unburned portion of in-situ
D
cl
0
D
0
0
D
0
0
DH
DL
DY
E
EM
ES
EX
EXG
combustion pattern (usually with efficiency, ED,)
decay
delay
depleted region, depletion
dewpoint
differential separation
dip (usually with angle, ad)
dispersed
displaced
drainage (usually with drainage radius, Ye)
downhole
dolomite
dirty (clayey, shaly)
electrode
empirical
estimated
experimental
EL
EP
C
E
E
E
E
E
E
E
E
EV
XT
F
F
FU
FP
FF
FI
F
F
F
F
F
FR
experimental value per mole of produced gas
(usually with fuel consumption, m& )
electrolog, electrical log, electrical survey
electromagnetic pipe inspection log
electrochemical
boundary conditions, external
cumulative influx (encroachment)
earth
effective (or equivalent)
electric, electrical
entry
external or outer boundary conditions
electron
equivalent
extrapolated
fill-up
free (usually with gas or gas/oil ratio quantities)
fuel (usually with fuel properties, such as nF)
cumulative produced free value (usually with gas, GFP)
free fluid
free value, initial (usually with gas, GFi)
finger or fingering
flash separation
fluid
formation (rock)
fraction or fractional
fracture, fractured, or fracturing
59-66
PETROLEUM ENGINEERING HANDBOOK
Letter
Subscript
f
f
G
G
G
GG
GM
GR
g
@
m
gb
gr
UP
H
H
H
H2S
HP
h
h
h
h
hr
I
I
I
I
I D
I M
i
i
i
i
i
i
i
ig
im
int
iwf
iws
ws
j
j
K
k
k
Reserve Computer
SPE Letter
Subscript Subscript Subscript Definition
T
g
gg
gm
gr
G
h
b
T, 8
H
H
T, Q
i script i
i, i script i
i
id
im
inj
b,i script i
I
I
ir, b,,i script i
s
d
ek
K
F
F
G
GT
G
GG
GM
GA
G
GQ
GA
GB
GR
GY
H
HL
HY
H2S
HP
HT
H
H
HT
HR
I
I
I
1
I D
I M
I
I
I
I
I
I
I R
I G
I M
I
I WF
I WS
ws
J
J
K
K
K
front, front region, or interface
rock (formation)
geometrical
geothermal
guard log
gamma-gamma ray log
gravity meter log
gamma ray log
gas
gas, dimensionless
gas at atmospheric conditions
gas at bubblepoint conditions
grain
gypsum
horizontal
hydraulic
hydrogen nuclei or atoms
hydrogen sulfide
heavy phase
heat or thermal
hole
hydrocarbon
thermal (heat)
hydrocarbon, residual
imbibition
induction log
interference
invasion (usually with invasion efficiency, E,)
induction log, deep investigation
induction log, medium investigation
cumulative injected
initial conditions or value
injection, injected, or injecting
inner, interior, or internal
invaded
invaded zone
irreducible, interstitial, or connate
intergranular
intermatrix
intrinsic
injection well, flowing conditions (usually with
pressure, pjWf 1
injection well, static conditions (usually with
pressure, P& )
well, static conditions (usually with time)
jth component
junction
dispersion
electrokinetic
particular period, element, or interval
SPE LETTER AND COMPUTER SYMBOLS STANDARD
59-67
Letter
Subscript
k
P script 1
P script 1
L
L
L
p script I
LP
LL
LLD
LLS
LOG
LP
LP
lim
IS
M
M
M
E
ML
MLL
m
m
ma
ma
max
me
mf
min
N
N
N
N2
NA
NE
NF
NL
NM
NT
n
n
n
n
ne
nw
4
Reserve
SPE
Subscript
Computer
Letter
Subscript
L
L
! script I
0 script 1
0 script 1
L
@script N
ppd script N
1ps script I 1
log
Pp script 1
1st
m
z, m
z,m
m P script 1
mPP script N
n
n
n
na
ne
nf
n! script 1
nm
nt
r,R
N
NW
K
LAM
LAM
L
L
L
L
LP
LL
LLO
LLS
L
LP
LP
LM
LS
M
M
M
M
M
ML
MLL
FU
M
MA
MA
MX
MC
MF
MN
N
N
N
N2
NA
NE
NF
NL
NM
NT
N
N
N
N
NE
NW
02
-
Subscript Definition
permeability
laminar
laminated, lamination
lateral (resistivity log)
linear, lineal
liquid or liquid phase
lower
cumulative produced liquid
(usually with condensate, GLP)
laterolog (add further tool configuration subscripts
as needed)
deep laterolog
shallow laterolog
log
light phase
liquid produced, cumulative (usually with
condensate, GLp)
limiting value
limestone
Mth period or interval
mixture
molal (usually with volume, V,>
mud
slurry (mixture)
contact log, microlog, minilog
microlaterolog
mass of fuel (usually with fuel concentration, C,,,)
mud
grain (matrix, solids)
matrix [solids except (nonstructural) clay or shale]
maximum
mudcake
mud filtrate
minimum
neutron
neutron log
normal (resistivity) log
(add numerical spacing to subscript N; e.g., N16)
nitrogen
neutron activation log
neutron log, epithermal
neutron log, fast
neutron lifetime log, TDT
nuclear magnetism log
neutron log, thermal
net
normal
normalized (fractional or relative)
nth year, period, income, payment, or unit
noneffective
nonwetting
oxygen
59-68 PETROLEUM ENGINEERING HANDBOOK
Reserve Computer
Letter SPE Letter
Subscript Subscript Subscript Subscript Definition
OB
0
ob
ob
OD
W
011
P
P
NL
PV
Pk
;
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
PD
PD
PE
PSP
PC
Pj
pr
R
R
R
R
R
R
Rb
RM
Re
r
rl P
R
R
LIB
N 0
OB
OB
OD
OG
ou
P
P
P
nP script 1 NL
PV
PV
PK
P
P
PO
PO
P P
PAV
P P
P
P P
P
PQ
PQ
PEX
PSP
PC
PJ
PRD
R
R
R
R
RB
RU
b, P
R
R
R
RD
R
R
observed
oil (except when used with resistivity)
oil at bubblepoint conditions (usually with formation
volume factor, Bob)
oil from burned volume (usually with displacement
ratio, & )
oil, dimensionless
oil in gas cap (usually with saturation, S,,)
oil from unburned volume (usually with displacement
ratio, 6,, 1
phase or phases
proximity log
neutron lifetime log, TDT
discounted value, present worth, or present value
profit-unamortized investment
particle (usually with diameter, dp)
pattern (usually with pattern efficiency, EP)
payout, payoff, or payback
pore (usually with volume, VP)
pressure, mean or average
produced
produced, cumulative
production period (usually with time, tp )
pseudo
pore value, dimensionless (usually with volume, VPD)
pseudodimensionless
produced in experiment
pseudo-SP
pseudocritical
produced componentj (usually with moles, npj)
pseudoreduced
rate
ratio
recovery (usually with recovery efficiency, ER 1
reservoir
resistivity
resistivity log
reservoir rock, burned
reservoir rock, unburned
Reynolds (used with Reynolds number only, NRe)
radius, radial, or radial distance
rate of return
reduced
reference
relative
SPE LETTER AND COMPUTER SYMBOLS STANDARD 59-69
Reserve Computer
Letter SPE Letter
Subscript Subscript Subscript Subscript Definition
r
s
S
S
s
SN
SP
SSP
sv
SWN
s
s
s
s
S
S
S
S
S
S
S
S
S
S
s
S
S
s
s
SE
sb
SC
SC
sd
sh
si
Sl
SP
SP
ss
st
St
SW
&VP
T
T
T
T
TV
sv
swn
d
S
S
S
u
s, 0
u
o-
sa
sha
sit
sst
S
h, 0
t,h
t
t
tv
R
SAY
SW
S
SAV
SN
SP
SSP
sv
SWN
S
S
S
S
s
S
S
S
S
S
S
S
S
S
S
S
s
S
SEX
SB
SC
SC
SD
SH
SI
SL
SP
SP
ss
ST
ST
SW
GY
T
T
T
TV
residual
saturation, mean or average
sidewall
storage or storage capacity
average or mean saturation
neutron log, sidewall
SP
SSP
sonic, velocity or acoustic log
sidewall neutron log
damage or damaged (includes skin conditions)
formation, surrounding
gas/oil ratio, solution
segregation (usually with segregation rate, qs )
shear
shear wave
skin (stimulation or damage)
slip or slippage
solid (usually with volume or density)
solution (usually with gas/oil ratios)
spacing
specific (usually with J and Z)
stabilization (usually with time)
steam or steam zone
stimulation (includes skin conditions)
surface
surrounding formation
swept or swept region
system
solids in experiment
solution at bubblepoint conditions (usually with
gas/oil ratio, Rsb)
scattered, scattering
standard conditions
sand
shale
solution, initial (usually with gas/oil ratio, R,;)
silt
separator conditions
single payment
sandstone
stock-tank conditions
structural
solution in water (usually with gas solubility
in water, R,,)
gypsum
temperature
temperature log
tool, sonde
transmissibility
televiewer log, borehole
59-70
PETROLEUM ENGINEERING HANDBOOK
Reserve
Letter SPE
Subscript Subscript
t
t
t
t
f
tD
tf
ti
ts
U
U
U
u
U
ul
V
V
VD
Vb
V
V
V
W
W
W
WD
WF
wa
wb
wf
Wf
w&T
wg
WP
Wh
wo
WOP
ws
ws
X0
Y
Z
Z
T
T
7
tr
t&T
u
u
I i
u
a
V
V
vd
V
V
W
W
W
f
th
-
Computer
Letter
Subscript
T
T
T
T
T
TO
TF
TI
TS
u
U
U
U
U
UL
V
V
VD
VB
V
V
W
W
W
W
WQ
WFU
WA
WB
WF
WF
WG
WG
WGP
WH
wo
WOP
ws
ws
X0
Y
2
Subscript Definition
gross (total)
total , total system
treatment or treating
true (electrical logging) (opposed to apparent)
tubing or tubinghead
time, dimensionless
tubing flowing (usually with pressure)
total initial in place in reservoir
tubing, static (usually with pressure)
unamortized
unburned
unit
unswept or unswept region
upper
ultimate
vertical
volume or volumetric
microseismogram log, signature log,
vari abl e density log
volumetric or burned portion of in-situ combustion
pattern (usually with efficiency, EVb)
vaporization, vapor, or vapor phase
velocity
water
weight
well conditions
wetting
water, dimensionless
water/fuel
wellbore, apparent (usually with wellbore radius, rwa )
water from burned volume (usually with displacement
ratio, ENah )
bottomhole, flowing (usually with pressure or time)
well, flowing conditions (usually with time)
water in gas cap (usually with saturation, S,,,)
wet gas ( usual l y with composition or content, C,, )
wet gas produced
wellhead
water/oil (usually with instantaneous producing
water/oil ratio, F,,)
water/oil, produced (cumulative)
(usually with cumulative water/oil ratio, F,$,,)
static bottomhole (usually with pressure or time)
well, static, or shut-in conditions (usually with time)
flushed zone
Youngs modulus, refers to
conductive liquids in invaded zone
zone, conductive invaded
Author Index
A
Abbott, W.A.. v, 4-11
Abernathy, B.F., 4431, 44-51
Abou El-Now, F., 25-24
Abou-Kassem, J.H., 48-11, 48-19
Abou-Sayed, A..%, 55-10, 55-11
Abram, A., 54-12
Ache, P.S., 44-29, 44-50
ACS Industries Inc., vi, 12-43
Addington, D.V., 48-20
Adenev. W.E.. 25-22
Aepelbaum. V.A., 25-22
Afanaseva, N.L., 25-25
Afoeju, B.1. ~ 46-45
Agarwal. R.G., Y-10
Aguilera, A., 51-45, 51-52
Aguilera, R.. 29-9
Ahmed, U., 55-10
Aho. G.E., 47-26
Ahrens. G.. xii. 51-51
Ainley, B.R., 55-10
Air Products and Chemical Inc., 39-28
Ajitsaria, N.K., 20-9, 20-18
Akbar, A.M., 48-20
Akstinat, M.H., xi, 47-25
Alaska Oil & Gas Conservation
Commission, viii
Alberta Energy Resources Conservation
Board. 48-18
Alcauska, J.B., 25-21
Alder. S.B.. viii. 25-23
Alexander. J.D.,46-13, 46-43
Aluer. R.P.. 49-41, 49-42, 51-50, 51-51
AlyHussainy. R., 35-10, 35-21
Aliev, S.N., 12-43
Allen. D-R., 46-45
Allen. F.H.. 23-13, 39-13, 39-28
Allen, L.S.. 50-38
Almond, S.W., 55-10
Al-Saadoon, F.T. 37-21, 37-27
Althouse, W.H., 4-1 I
American Assn. of Petroleum Geologists
(AAPG), 24-22, 29-9, 40-2, 40-37
American Bureau of Shipping. 18-21, 18-52
American Gas Assn. (AGA), vi, 13-8.
13-59. 33-13. 33-23, 40-38
American Gear Manufacturers Assn.
(AGMA), IO-12
American Hot Dip Galvanizers Assn.. vi.
II-14
American Inst. of Mining, Metallurgical and
Petroleum Engineers (AlME), 12-43
American Meter Co., vi, 13-41. 13-59
American Nail. Metric Council (ANMC).
58-2, 58-8
American Nail. Standards Inst. (ANSI),
58-2, 58-8, 58-22
ANSI 816.5, 15-l 1, 15-34
ANSI B26.5, vii
ANSI 831.1, 15-11, 15-34
ANSI B31.8, 15.11. 15-34
ANSI B48.1, 58-8
ANSI/API 2530, vi, 13-3, 13-59
ANSIiASME 831.3 & 31.4. 15-11, 15-34
ANSI/ASME SPPE-1 & lb, 3-34, 3-39.
340
ANSI/IEEE Std. 260, 58-8
American Petroleum Inst. (API), 24-3. 39-27.
40-2, 40.37, 40-38. 41-37, 58-2, 58-7
API Bull. D-14. 40-37. 40-38
API Bull. 2N. 18-52
API Bull. 5C2. 2-46.2-60. 2-74. 3-l. 3-40
API Bull. 5C4, 2-74
API Bull. I lL3, 9-3, 9-4, 9-14
API Circ. PS-1360, 2-46, 2-74
API Circ. PS-1398, 2-74
API Code 25, 17-l
API Code 27, 26-10. 26-11, 26-33
API Committee on Standardization of Steel
Tanks for 011 Storage, 11-3
API Committee on Standardization of
Valves and Wellhead Equipment, 3-3
API Fundamental Research on Occurrence
and Recovery of Petroleum, 39-27
API Manual 14BM, 6-21, 6-72
API Manual of Petroleum Measurement
Standards, ix. 16-16. 17-l. 17-3. 17-S.
19-6, 19-34. 32-16
API Manual on Disposal of Refinery
Wastes, vii, 15-19, 15-24. 15-34
API Petroleum Safety Data 2210, 1 l-9
API Pub. 2563 and 2564, 58-8
API RP 2A, 18-25, 18-27
API RP 2K, 18-17. 1X-52
API RP 2P. 18.16, 18-52
API RP 20, 18-17, 18-52
API RP 5C1, 3-l. 3-40
API RP 5C2, Y
API RP 5C3, v
API RP 6F. 3-38, 3-40
API RP 7C-IIF, 10.19. lo-37
API RP IOE, 15-10, 15-34
API RP IIAR, 8-10
API RP llBR, vi, 9-14
API RP IIER, 10-12, lo-37
API RP IlG, vi, 10-7, 10-12, 10-13, lo-37
API RP IIL. vi, 8-10. 9-2, 9-3, 9-14, 10-7,
IO-37
API RP IlR. 7-17
API RP 11s. 7-17
API RP IlU. v
API RP 12L, 19-7
API RP l2RI. II-14
API RP 148, 3-40
API RP l4C. 3-40, 12-43, 18-46, 18-52,
19-28, 19-34
API RP 14E, vit, 12-43, 15-7, 15-33, 19-34
API RP l4F, 3-34, 340, 18-44, 18-46, 18-52
API RP 14H. 3-40
API RP 36. 32-3, 32-16
API RP 38. 4444, 44-51
API RP 39M. 55-6
API RP 44. 39-5. 39-27
API RP 45, 19-34, 24-5, 24-22, 44-51
API RP 49, 18-20, 18-52
API RP 53. 18-12. 18-20. 18-52
API RP 66. 6-72
API RP 5008, vi, 10.37. 18.46, 18-52
API RP 520, 11-7
API Spec. 5A, v. 2-74, 3-2. 3-14, 3-40
API Spec. 5B, v, 2-64, 2-74
API Spec. 5AC. 2-74
API Spec. 5AQ, 2-74
API Spec. SAX, 2-74
API Spec. 5L. v, 2-74. 3-2, 3-40, 15-10, 15-34
API Spec. 5LE. 15.10, 15-33
API Spec. 5LP, 15-10. 15-33
API Spec. SLR. 15-10, 15-34
API Spec. 5LX, 15-12
API Spec. 6A, v. 3-l. 3-5, 3-18, 3-36.
3-38. 3-40, 15-13, 15-34
API Spec. 78-l IC. 10-17. IO-37
API Spec. I IAX. v, 8-2. 8-6. 8-10
API Spec. IlB. vi. 9-l. 9-14
API Spec. IIC. vi. 9-14
API Spec. IlN, 16-16
API Spec. 128, vi
API Spec. 12D, 11-2, 11-14
API Spec. 12F, 11-I, II-14
API Spec. 125, 12-44
API Spec. 12K. 19-34
API Spec. l2L, 19-34
API Spec. 14A. 3-34, 3-40
API Spec. 14D, 3-34, 3-39, 3-40
API Standardtzation Conference, 2-46,
2-60, 2-63, 2-74
API Standing Subcommittee on
Secondary Recovery Methods. 39-28
API Std. 5B, 2-57
API Std. 12B. 11-3. 1 l-14
API Std. 510. 12-43
API Std. 620. 11-7. 11-14
API Std. 650. 11-2, 11-7, 11-9. II-14
API Std. 1101, ix, 16-6. 16-16, 17-4,
17-7, 32-16
API Std. 1104, 12.44, 19-34
API Std. 2000, vi, 11-6, II-14
API Std. 2500, 17-I
API Std. 2531 & 2533, 17-4
API Std. 2534, 17-4, 17-7
API Std. 2543, 17-5, 17-S
API Std. 2545, 17-3, 17-8
API Std. 2550 to 2556, 17-3
API Technical Data Book, 21-3, 21-20
API Vocational Training Series, v. 5-57
American Sot. of Mechanical Engineers,
(ASME) 46-45, 58-2, 58-7, 58-8
ASME Code for Boilers and Pressure
Vessels, vi, 12-38 to 12-41, 12-43
ASME B31, 15-11, 15-33
American Sot. for Testing and Materials,
(ASTM) l-80,24-3,24-5,24-22,58-2.58-7
ASTM A 123, II-14
ASTM D 1250, 17-5. 17-6
ASTM D 1298, 17-5
ASTM D 2887. 21-l. 21-20
ASTM D 4051,.17-5
ASTM E 380-82, 58-8. 58-14
ASTM Standards on Petroleum Products
and Lubricants, vii
ASTM Steam Tables, x
Amero. R.C., 25-27
Amirijafari. B., 25-26
Amyx, J.W., 24-23, 26-l
Anders, E.L. Jr., 43-19
Anderson, A.E., 49-41
Anderson, B.W., 54-13
Anderson, D.F., 47-25
Anderson, G.. 52-31
Anderson, G.L., 16-16
Anderson, M.A., 26-33
Anderson, R.A., 51-52
Anderson, T.. 5144, 51-52
Andresen, K.H., 44-51
Angier, J.D., 6-72
Angino, E.E., 24-19. 24-23
Anthony, R.G., 25-26, 25-27
Antoine, C.. 20-13. 20-17, 20-18
Aoyagi, K., 25-12, 25-23
Apache Santa Fe Intl. Corp., vii
Archer, D.L.. 28-11, 28.15, 47.20, 47-26
Archie, G.E., 26-28 . 26-29. 26-31, 49-4,
49-5. 49-4 1
Ardittv, P.C., xii, 51-51
Arnold, D.M.. xi. 50-32. 50-38
Arnold, K.E., 15-l. 19-I. 19-33
Arnold. M.D.. 48-20
Arnold, R.B.. 4-l I
Aron. J.. 51-51. 55-10 API Bull. 5C3. 2-74 API Spec. I IE. IO-I. 10-4. 10-5. 10-7. lo-37
PETROLEUM ENGINEERING HANDBOOK 2
Aronofsky, J.S., 44-19, 44-20. 44-29.
4434, 4449, 4450
Arps, J.J., 30-9. 30-15, 30-16, 37-14,
37-15. 37-27, 40-1, 40-19. 40-32,
40-37, 40-38. 41-l. 41-5. 41-23, 41-37,
4450, 44-5 I
Arrow Specialty Co., vi
Arthur. M.G., 39-26. 39-28
Aruna. M., 36-10
Aseltine, R.J., 46-44
Ashby, W.H. Jr., 24-14, 24-23
Ashford, F.E., ix, 28-I I. 28-15
Asymyan, K.D., 25-26
Atkinson, A., 51-44, 51-52
Atkinson, H., 44-40, 4451
Atkinson, M.H.. 16-16
Attra. H.D., 43-4, 43-16, 43-19
Au, A.D.K., 48-19
Ausburn, B.E., 29-1, 51-52
Ausburn. J.R., xii, 51-51
Auvenshine. W.L., 39-16, 39-28
Azarnoosh, A., 25-25
Aziz. K., vii, 20-5, 20-9, 20-15, 20-18,45-14,
48-l I, 48-16 to 48-19, 54-14, 55-l I
B
Babson. E.C., 34-55. 40-9. 40-38
Bagley, J.W. Jr., 36-10
Bailey. N.J.L., 24-22
Baiton, N., 45-15
Baker. J.R., 54-14
Baker, 0.. viii, 22-17. 22-22
Baker Oil Tool Div., v, 4-I I
Baker Performance Chemicals Inc., vii
Baldwin, J.. 50-38
B8lint. A.M., 28-15
Ballard, D., 25-23
Baltosser, R.W., xii, 51-52
Bansal. P.P.. 48-20
Bansback, P.L., 19-33
Banthia, B.S., 51-6, 51-50
Barakat, Y., 47-25
Barb. C.F.. 24-22
Barber, A.H. Jr., 36-10
Barbrow. L.E., I-l, 1-68
Bardgette, J.J., 18-52
Bardon, C., 28-11, 28-15
Barduhn, A-J., 25-26. 25-27
Barfield, E.C.. 4417, 4449
Barham, R.H., 38-20
Barker, C.. 24-22
Barlyaev, E.V.. 25-25
Barnes, D.F., 51-51
Barnes, K.B., 44-51
Barnes, V.E., 24-22
Barrett, M.L. Jr.. 16-16
Barrett, R.. 12-43
Barron, A.N., 54-12
Barry, A.F., 12-43
Barstow, W.F., 39-28
Bartell. F.E., 442, 4449
Bartholome. E., 25-2 I
Bartlesville Energy Technology Center, vii
Bartlett, E.P., 25-22
Barton, J.R., 25-21
Barton, W.C. Jr.. 43-16
Bass. D.M. Jr., 24-23, 26-1
Basset. J., 25-22
Bassiouni. Z.. 28-12, 28-16
Bateman, R.M.. xi, 53-1, 53-26
Bates, G.O., 39-28
Bates, R.L., 29-9
Battmo, R., 25-23
Batycky, J.P.. 28-12, 28-15
Baucum. A.W., 40-16. 40-38
Baugh, E.G., 45-15
Baumgaertner, M.. 25.16, 25.17, 25.23
Baumgartner, S.A., 55-l I
Bavly. D., 48-18
Baxendall, P.B., 34-37, 34-55
Bayless, C.R., 16-16
Beach, F.W., 16-16
Beal, C., 22-14 to 22-16, 22-22, 46-45
Bear, J., 28-15
Beardon. P.L., 38-20
Be&y, J.W., 44-51
Bebout, D.G., 29-9
Becher, P., 19-34
Beck, R.L., ix, 34-46, 34-55
Becker, H.G., 25-22
Beebe. W.B., 29-9
Be&r, H.S., 24-22
Beeson. C.M., 26-33
Beestecher, E., 24-22
Beggs, H.D., 5-57, 7-9, 7-17, 22-1, 22-7 to
22-12, 22-15, 22-16, 22-22, 34-55,
46-7. 46-43. 46-45
Behie, A., 48-20
Beider, S.Y ., 25-26
Beirute. R., 55-l 1
Belknap, W.B., 50-38
Bell, C.A., 6-34. 6-72
Bell, C.R., vii
Bell, W.E., 4451
Bellotti, P., 52-31
Benedict, M., 20-7, 20-18
Benham, A.L., 34-5.5, 46-16, 46-45
Ben-Naim, A.. 25-21, 25-24
Benner, F.C., 44-2, 44-49
Bennett, C.O., 55-11
Bennett, E.N., 39-16. 39-28
Bennett. E.O., 39-26, 39-28
Bennett, K.E.. 47-25
Bennion, D.W., 48-18
Benson, B.B., 25-22
Berg, R.A., 36-10
Berg, R.R., 36-10
Berger, W.R., 24-22
Bergman, J.C., ix, 30-16
Bergstrom, J.M., 54-14
Berkshire, D.C., 54-13
Bernard, G.G.. 45-14. 47-25
Bernard, H.A., 36-3, 36-10
Bernard, W.J , 44-51
Berry, D.W., 48-10. 48-19
Berry, F.A.F.. 24-23
Berry, I.E., 51-6, 51-50
Berry, J.F.. 28-16
Berry, P., 36-10
Berry, V.J. Jr.. 37-23, 37-25, 37-27, 40-38,
43-4, 43-16, 43-19, 46-43
Berryman. I.E., 39-15. 39-28
Bertiger, W.I., 48-19
Bertozzi, W., 50-38
Bertuzzi, A.F.. 34-1, 34-55
Bertuzzi. W.. xi
Beson, J., 3-I
Bessler, D.U., 19-33, 19-34
Best, D.L., xi. 4941
Biggs, W.P., 49-42
Bijl, A., 25-21
Bilhartz, H.L., 4451
Billett, F.. 25-2 I
Billings. G.K., 24-23
Billingsley. R.H.. 46-44
Billitzer. .I., 25-24
Bily, C., 25-18. 25-24
Binckley, C.W., 33-1, 33-23, 34-27, 34-29,
34-55
Binder, G.G. Jr.. 45-14. 46-43
Bingham, M.G.. 52-24, 52-31
Biot. M.A.. 51-8. 51-11, 51-36, 51-47,
51-49. 51-51
Birch, F., 51-50
Bird, R.B , 47-24
Birdwell Div. of Seismograph Service
Corp., xii. 51-52
Birdwell Technical Pamplet, xii
Bissey, L.T., 25-26
Black, C., 25-25. 25-26
Black, C.J.J., 28-16
Black, H.N., 54-12
Black, W., 19-34
Blackwell, R.J.. 28-2, 28-4, 28-15, 45-14
Blair, C.M., 19-34
Blair, E.A., 43-16
Blair, P.M., 4429, 44.50, 48.14, 48-20
Blanton. J.R., 45-15
Blaskovich, F.T., 48-5, 48-18
Bleaklev, W.B., 4-1, 6-34, 6-72, 45-15.46-44
Blevins; T.R., 46-44
Bloomquist, C W , 48. I8
Boatright, B.B., 39-26, 39-28
Bobek, J.E., 44-49
Boberg, T.C., 46-9,46- 11,46- I3,4643,48-19
Bobrowski, F.P., 37-27. 40-38
Bockmeulen, H., 24-22
Bodine, J.A., 18-I
Bodvarsson, G.S., 48-20
Bogdanov, M.I., 25-25
Bogdanov, V.S., 28-1 I, 28-15
Bohr, C., 25-21
Boley, D.W., 44-50
Boling, D.R., II-1
Bondareva, M.M., 25-27
Bone, M.P., 36-10
Boone, D.M., 6-72
Borden, G. Jr., 22-22
Borger, H.D.. 24-22
Boston, J.F., 25-24
Botset, H.G., 28-2, 44-49
Bouma, H., 29-9
Bourrel, M., 47-25
Bowen, J.F., 55-12
Bowler, J., xii, 51-51
Bowman, R.W., 46-44, 46-45. 47-24
Boyd, W.L., x. 41-31, 41-37
Boyd, W.S., 25-21
Boyle, W.G., 3-1, 3-40
Bozeman, J.F., 39-28
Brace, W.F., 5143, 51-52
Bradbury, E.J., 25-24
Bradley, H.B., iii, 24-12, 39-1, 44-20.
44.50, 58-2
Bradstreet. E.B., 25-21
Bragg, J.R., 47-25
Brainerd, H.A., 16-16
Brandt, H., 51-6. 51-50
Brannan, G.. 45-15
Braun, E.M., 28-2, 284. 28-15
Braun, P.H., x, 44-49, 45-13
Braunstein. J.. 29-9
Breeding, C.W., 41-37
Breitenbach, E.A.. 48-l4,48-16,48-18.48-20
Brewer, S.W., 4645
Brian Watt Assocs., vii
Brigham, W.E., 45-15, 4645
Bright, J., 24-22
Brill, J.P., 34-37, 34-55
Brill, T.P., 46-7, 46-43
Brinkley, T.W., 37-27, 39-20. 39-23, 39-28
Brinkman, F.H., 40-38
Briscoe. C.F., 25-21
Bristol Co., The, vi
Britt, H.I.. 25-24
Britton, M.W., 46-45
Broddus, E.C.. 54-12
Broding, R.A., xii, 51-50, 51-52
Brons, F., 35.16, 35-21, 40-38, 41-37
Brooks, F.A.. 56-9
Brooks, R.H.. 28-12, 28-15. 46-31, 46-34,
46-45
Brooks, W.B., 25-26
AUTHOR INDEX 3
Broussard, W.F., 12-43
Brown. A.A.. 51-49
Brown, A.R., 36-10
Brown. F.B., 6-1, 6-36, 6-66, 6.69, 6-12
Brown, G.A., 53-26
Brown. G.G.. vii. ix, x, 20-5. 20-18,
3455. 40-38. 45-13
Brown, H.D., 51-52
Brown. H.W., 26-24, 26-25, 26-33
Brown. J.N., 44-51
Brown, K., 6-28, 6-34, 6-37, 6-38, 6-72
Brown, K.E.. 7-17, 34-37, 34-55
Brown. R.B., 36-11
Brown, R.J.S., 51-8, 51-51
Brownlow, 47-26
Brownscombe. E.R., 25-23, 30-16, 38-9,
38-20
Bruce, W.A., 26-33
Bruist, E.H., 56-9
Brunsmann. J.J.. 15-34
Bryan, G.M., 25-24
Buchanan, R.D., 39-28
Bucklev. S.E.. 24-22. 28-3. 28-6, 28-7.
28.-15, 39.15, 39-28, 40-13, 40-16 to
40-18, 40-38, 43-3, 43-4, 43-16, 43-19,
447, 4410, 44-11, 44-26, 44-29,
44-49, 47-2, 47-24, 48-1, 48-18
Buckwald, R.W. Jr., 46-45
Buehner. L.O.. 6-72
Bull, A.D.. 46-45
Bunge, A.L., 47-21, 41-26
Bunting, E.N., 26-4 to 26-6, 26-33
Burcik, E.J., viii, 39-2, 39-27
Bureer. J.G.. 46-43
Burke. B.C., 18-52
Burke, R.E.. 46-45
Burkill, G.C.C., 54-12
Burkleca, L.F., 54-13
Burnett, E.S., 20-4, 20-18
Burns, G.E., 18-l
Burrell, G.R., 16-l
Burrows, D.B., 20-15, 20-18, 39-27
Bursell, C.G., 46-44
Burt, R.A. Jr., 45-15
Burton, M.B., 4418, 44-20, 44-21, 4449
Busch, D.A., 29-9
Bush, D.C., 50-38
Bush, J., 47-26
Buthod, P., 21-t
Buxton, T.S.. 46-44
Byk, S.S., 25-23, 25-28
Byth, NJ., 54-14
C
Cady, G.H.. 25-3. 25-21
Cady, G.V., 46-43, 4645
Cairns, R.J., 19-34
Calahan, D.A., 48-20
Calder. J.A.. 25-27
Calhoun, J.C. Jr., ix. 32-16, 39-28, 40-38,
4429, 4450, 45-14
California Dept. of Natural Resources, 29-9
California Research Corp., vii, viii
Cahngeart, G., 20-13, 20-17, 20-18
Callahan, M.J., 55-l I, 55-12
Callanan, J.E., 25-27
Callaway, F.H., 38-20, 44-51
Callawav. R.E.. 54-14
Calver, j.c, xi
Camacho, C.A., 3440, 34-55
Cameo Inc., v
Cameron, R.C., 54-13
Camilleri, D., 47-25
Campbell. A.W., 45-15
Campbell, F.L., 4942, 52-31
Campbell, J.B., 45-15
Campbell, J.L.P., 50-I
Campbell. J.M.. VI, 12-43, 12-44. 13-l.
13-59. 14-6. 14-22, 25-23. 25-26.
41-37. 58-2. 58-21
Camobell. R.A.. 58-2
Campbell, W.P.; 24-22
Canadian Petroleum Assn. (CPA), 58-2. 58-8
CanOcean Resources Ltd., vii
Capell. R.G., 25-27
Caraway, W.H., 26-33
Cardwell, W.T. Jr., 39-28, 40-38
Carlile, R.E., 58-2
Carll, J.F., 44-1, 44-49
Carlson, F.M., 28-12, 28-15
Carmichael, L.T., 25-27
Carmichael, R.S., 51-30. 51-52
Carothers, W.W., 24-22
Carpenter, C.W., 44-50. 44-52
Carpenter, P.G.. ix, 34-37, 34-55
Carr. A.H., 48-19
Carr, N.L., 20-9, 20-10. 20-15, 20-16,
20-18, 39-4, 39-13, 39-27
Carraway, P.M., 46-45
Carroll, H.B., 55-12
Carson, D.B., 25-5, 25-23, 25-28
Carter, R.D., 38-2, 38-3, 38-20, 55-10
Casale, C., 25-21
Case, C.H., 43-16
Case, C.R., 50-38
Case, R.C., 16-16
Casst. F.J., 46-45
Cassingham, R.W., 43-17, 45-15
Cato, R.W., 46-44
Caudle, B.H., 43-10. 43-19. 4417,
44-19, 44-20, 44-29, 44-34, 44-37,
44-49 to 44-51, 45-14, 46-17,
46-45. 47-24
Cayias, J.L., 47-25
CBI Industries Inc., vi
C-E Natco, vi, vii
Chaddock, R.E.. 25-25
Chambers, A., 26-33
Chan, A.F.. 47-24
Chart, S.A., 41-37
Chantey, D.G., 17-l
Charm. SK., 51-52
Chappelear, J.E.. 48-20
Charles, G.J., 55-10
Chase, C.A., 48-18
Chastain, J.. IO-37
Chatas, A.T., 38-20
Chatelain. J.C., 54-12
Cheek, R.E., 44-20, 44-49
Chemineer-Kenics, vii
Chen. C.-C., 25-18, 25-24
Chen, W:H., 46-43, 48-18
Chenault, R.L.. 8-l
Cheng, C.H.. xi. xii, 51-50, 51-51
Chepkasov, V.M.. 12-43
Cherskii, N.V., 25-24
Chew, J.. 6-72, 7-12, 7-17, 22-14 to 22-16,
22-22, 39-4, 39-21. 46-45
Chierci, G.L., 28-12, 28-15. 34-55
Chilingar, G.V., 46-45
Chilton, C.H., vii. 20-18, 25-15
Chou. J.C.S.. 24-13. 24-14. 24-23
Christ, F.C., 6-34. 6-38, 6-72
Christensen, D.M., 51-50. 51-51
Christian, L.D., 45-15
Christie. M.A.. 4X-19
Chu, C.. 46-1, 46-13 to 46.19, 46-21,
46-43 to 4646
Church, D.C., 54-12
Cinco-Ley, H., 55-l 1
Ciucci, G.M., 34-55
Clampitt. R.L., 47-24
Clapeyron, B.P.E., 20-11 to 20-13, 20-16.
20-17
Claridge, E.L.. 45.14, 47-24
Clark. C.R., 6-72
Clark. G.A., 46-44
Clark, G.J., 54-12
Clark. J.A.. 55-l I. 55-12
Clark, J.B. Jr., 57-l
Clark, J.D., 58-2
Clark. K.M.. 6-34. 6-72
Clark, N.J., 45-13, 45-14
Clark, P.E.. 55-l I
Clark, S.P., 51-30, 51-52
Clausius, R.. 20-12, 20-16, 20-17
Claussen, W.F., 25-21
Clavier, C., 49-41
Clayton, J-M.. 4451
Clayton, R.N.. 24-23
Cleary, M.B , 55-11
Clementz, D.M.. 52-30
Clifton, R.J., 55-l I
Clinedinst, W.O., 2-1, 2-60, 2-74
Clinkenbeard. P., 39-25, 39-28
Closman, P.J., 38-20
Cloud, J.E., 55-l I
Coan, C.R.. 25-21
Coates. G.R.. xi. 49-41, 51-52
Coats, K.H., 39-22. 39-28, 43-17, 45-14,
46-11, 46-12. 46-43, 46-45. 48-l.
48-16, 48-18 to 4X-20
Coberly, C.J., 6-l. 6-66. 6-69. 6-72
Cobb, T.R., 44-50
Cobb, W.M.. 31-7. 48-18. 52-31
Coffin, C.R., 24-22
Coker, F.B., 51-52
Colegrove, G.T., 48-19
Coleman. C.F., 25-26
Coleman, H.J., 21-20
Coleman, J.M., 29-9
Coll, R.. 25-25
Collie, B., 19-34
Collins, A.G., viii, 24-1, 24-22
Collins, F.A., 38-9, 38-20
Collins. F.R.. 51-50
Collins, R.E., 44-50
Colpoys, P.J., 55-12
Combaz, A., 50-38
Combs, G.D.. 43-16
Concus, P.. 48-20
Conley, F.R., 47-26
Conlon, D.R., 30-16
Connally, C.A. Jr., 6-72, 7-12, 7-17, 22-14
to 22-16, 22-22, 39-4, 39-27, 46-45
Connell. J.G., 49-42
Connolly, J.F.. 25-26
Conway, M.W., 54.14, 55-l I
Cook, A.B., 37-23, 37-27, 39-12, 39-28.40-38
Cook, G.W., 48-20
Cook, H.L., 5-57
Cook, R-E., 43.17. 48-19
Cooke, C.E. Jr., 31-7, 4451. 47-20. 47-26,
55-l 1
Cooper, F.E.. 1243
Cooper, H.E. Jr., 44-49
Cooper, R.J., 44-51
Copeland, C.T., 54-12, 56-9
Coppel. C.P., 19-34, 54-12
Cordell, J.C., 37-25, 37-27
Core Laboratories Inc., viii, x, 26-5. 26-33
Corey, A.T., 28-8, 28-12. 28-15.46-34, 4645
Cornelissen, J., 15-34
Cornell, D.. 26-28, 26-33, 34-9, 34-10 to
34-22, 34-24, 34-55
Correia, R.J., 24-23
Corteville, J., 48-19
Cosgrove, J.J., 44-29, 44-5 1
Cotter, W.H.. 43-16
Cotton, W.J. Jr.. 53-26
Coulter, A.W. Jr., 54-1, 54-12 to 54-14,
55-1, 56-l
Coulter, G.R.. 54-12
4 PETROLEUM ENGINEERING HANDBOOK
Counihan T. M , 46-44
Courand. G., 36-10
Cox. E.R., 20-12. 20-13
Cozzolino. J.M., 41-37
20-17, 20-18
Craft. B.C., x. 37-27. 39-27, 43-16, 43-17.
43-19, 44-6. 44-16, 4417, 44-49, 48-18
Craig, F.F. Jr., 43-16. 43-17. 43-19. 44-9,
44-l I, 44-19. 4420,44-27 to 44-32.44-34,
4449 to 44-S 1145.13,46-43,4644.47-24
Craigie, L.J., 55-10
Crane Co., 15-33
Crawford, D.L.. 54-12
Crawford, J.G.. 24-22
Crawford, P.B.. 35-21, 44-18, 44-20.
44-21, 44-25. 4449, 4450, 46-46
Crawley, A.B., 55. I 1
Craze,R.C., 36-1, 40-16, 40-17, 40-38
Crenshaw, P.L., 54-12, 54-14
Crichlow. H.G., 48-17
Crichton, J.A., 40-38
Cracker, F.. 6-34. 6-72
Croft, H.O.. 26-33
Cronquist, C. I x, 37-22, 37-23, 37-27
Crookston. H.B.. 48-18
Crookston. R.B., 46-12, 46-43
Crosby, C.C., 4451
Cross, J.H.. 51-50
Crowe, C.W., 54-4, 54-12. 54-14
Crowell, D.C., 28-10, 28-15
Crowell, R.F., 55-12
Crazier, T.E., 25-21
Grump, J.S., 39-28, 45-13
Culberson, O.L.. 25-17, 25-21, 25-24
Culham, W.E., 46-43, 48-18
Cullender. M.H., 5-37, S-38, 5-57, 33-4,
33-6, 33-10, 33-15, 33-23. 34-24.
34-25, 34-27, 34-29, 34-55
Culver, R.B.. 50-38
Cunningham, R.G.. 6-36, 6-38, 6-72
Curtis. s.. IO-14
Cuthbert, J.F.. 53-26
Cutler. R.A., 55-l 1
Cutler. W.W. Jr.. 40-29, 40-38
Cyca. L.C., 45-15
D
Dahm, C.G.. ix, 36-11
Dake, L.P., 32-16, 35-21, 37-3, 37-27
Dalati, R.N., 32-1
Dalton, R.L., 4451, 48-20
Daly. A.R.. 52-30
Daneshy. A.A.. 55-l I
Daniel, E.F.. 55-12
Daniel Industries Inc.. vii
Danniel, A., 25-24, 25-26
Dardaganian, S.G., 43-16, 43-19
DaShanzer, W.A., 569
Daugherty, R.L., 15-33
Davidson. C.D.. 45-15
Davidson, D.W., 25-4, 25-9, 25-23, 25-27
Davidson. J.F., 34-55
Davidson, R.D., 39-28
Davies. E.E., 12-43
Davis, D.H., 26-33
Davis, D-S., 20-13, 20-17, 20-18
Davis, G.J., ix. 34-55
Davis, H.T , 47-25
Davis, J.B., 24-22
Davis, J.E., 25-21. 25-24
Davis, J.J., 54-13
Davis, R.E., 41-37
Day, J.H. Jr., 10-l
De. G.S., 51-49
Dean. M.R.. 25-25
Dean, P.C., 44-49
Deaton, W.M., viii, 25-2, 25-5, 25-10.
25-14. 25-20. 25-23
DeFord. R.K.. 24-22
DeGolyer, E.L., 41-7. 41-37
deHaan, M.J., 46-45
Deibert. A.D., 46-44
DeKlss. A.V., 25-21
deKlerk, F., 55-11
DeLoos. T.W.. 25-25
Delshad, M.. 28-11. 28-15
Demaison, C.J.. 52-30
DeMott, D.N., 54-13
Dempsey, J.R.. 48-19
Denekas, M.O.. 44-49
Denoo, S.A., 51-52
Deppe. J.C., 44-29, 4433, 44-34, 44-50
Derr, R.B., 25-27
Desbrandes, R., 50-38
DesBrisay, C.L., 45-15
DeSitter, L.U.. 24-20, 24-23
DeVerter, P.L., 16-16
devries, D.A.. 22-22
DeVries, W., 54-13
Dew, J.N., 46-43
deWitte, A.J., 26-30, 26-31, 26-33, 49-41
DeWitte, L.. 49-41
Deysarkar, A.K., 54.13, 55-12
deZabala, E.F., 47-26, 48-19
Dharmawardhana, P.B., viii. 25-9, 25-11,
25-23, 25-27
Dia.Log Co.. The. xiii
Dias-Couto. L.E.. 37-21. 37-27
Dick, J.W.L.. 25.18, 25-24
Dickey, P.A., 24-21. 24-22, 44-49. 4451
Diepen, G.A.M., 25-24. 25-25, 25-27
Dietz, D.N., 35-6, 35-21, 46-43, 47-24
diFranco. R.. 48-20
Dill. W.R., 54-13
Dingman, R.J.. 24-23
Dixon, P.C.. 12-43, 39-26, 39-28
Dixon, T.N.. 48-18
Dobkins, T.A., 55-l 1
Doble. P.A.C.. 16-16
Dodds, W.S., 25-21
Dode, M., 25-22
Dodson. C.R., viii, 22-22, 25-17, 25-21,
37-21. 39-2. 39-27, 41-38
Doh, C.A., 51-50, 51-51
Doherty, W.T., lo-37
Dolan, J.P., 30-13, 30-17
Doll, H.G.. 49-l. 49-41
Dollarhide, F.E., 54-14, 55-l 1
Domenico, S.N., xii, 51-52
Dominquez, J.G., 47-24
Donaldson, A.B., 4645
Donaldson, E.C., 47-26
Donaruma. L.C.. x, 47-24
Donohoe, C.W., 39-1, 39-28
Donohue, D.A.T., 43-17, 45-14
Dorsey. N.E., 24-13, 24-23
Doscher. T.M.. 46-9, 46-43
Dotson. B.J.. iii. 26-33
Dotson, C.R., 24-13, 24-23, 41-5, 41-7
Dotterweich. F.H., S-57, 12-43
Douglas, E., 25-22
Douglas, J. Jr., 44-29, 44.31, 4450, 44-51,
48-14, 48-16, 48-18, 48-20
Dow Chemical Co., viii, 25-24
Dowdle, W.L., 31-7, 52-31
Dowell Schlumberger, xiii
Downie, J., 45-14
Drake, E.. 18-l
Draper, A.L., 45-14
Dresser-Atlas, xii. xiii, 49-41, 50-38, 51-52
Dresser Industries, v. vi
Driscoll. V.J., 36-10. 48-6, 48-18
Droschak, D.M.. 51-50
Dubrevil. L.R.. 4451
Duda, J.L., 47-24
Duerksen. J.H., 46-45. 48-18
Dutfy. J.R.. 25-21
Duggan, J.O., 34-46, 34-55
Dukler, A.E.. 34-55
Dumanoir, J.L., xi, 49-41
Dumitrescu. D.T., 34-38. 34-55
Dumort. J.M., 37-27
Dunham, C.L.. 16-16
Dunlap, H.F., 49-41
Dunlap, P.M., 54-13
Dunn, K.J.. 51-49
Dunning, H.N., 39-16, 39-28. 45-51
Duns, H. Jr., 34-36. 34-37, 34-40, 34-55
Dupal, L., xii, 51-51
DuPont Co.. 14-9
Dyes, A.B., 30-17, 35-15, 35-21. 43-8.
43-19, 44-20, 44-25, 44-49, 44-50.
45-14, 47-24
Dykstra, H., 40-18, 40-19. 40-38, 44-7 to
44-9, 4426. 44-29, 4430, 44-32.
4449, 45-14, 47-17, 47-24
Dysart, G.R., 55-12
E
Eakins, J.L., 39.16. 39-28
Earlougher, R.C. Jr., x, 30-17, 32-16.
35-19. 35-21, 36-10, 44-29 to 44.31,
445 I. 46-6. 46-43. 46-44
Eaton, B.A., 51-39, 51-52
Eaton, J.R., 6-72
Ebert. C.K., 37-25, 31-27
Eckles, W.W., 39-28
Eddy, H.D., 53-26
Edmondson, T.A.. 44-5 I
Edmundson, H., xi, SO-32, 50-38
Edwards, A.T.W.. 25-22
Edwards, C.A.M., xii, 51-52
Eganhouse, R.P., 25-27
Eggleston, W.S., 41-37
Ehrlich, R., 44-51. 46-43, 47-26
Eichenberg, R., v
Eichmeier, J.R., 4-l I
Eikerts. J.V., 55-l 1
Eilers, H., IS-34
Eilerts, C.K., x. 39-2, 39-4, 39-S. 39-27
Einarsen, C.A., 30-17
Elbel, J.L., 55-12
Elfrink, E.B., 37-27, 40-38
El-Hattab, M.I., 44-51
El-Khatib, N.A.F., 37-27
Elkins, L.E., 55-l I
Ellenberger, A.R., 44-51
Elliott Co. Bull. P-l I, 14-9
Elliott, F.B. Jr., 10-l
Elliott, L.S., 56-9
Ellis, A.J., 25-21
Ellis, D.V., xi, 50-I. 50-38
Ellis Engineering Inc., vi, 12-43
Ellis, G.O., 12-27, 12-43
Ellison, W.F.. 15-l
Elworthy, R.T., 24-22
Ely, J., 54-13
Emanuel, A.S., 48-19, 48-20
Emery, L.W.. 44-51
EnDean, H.J., 16-16
Energy Resources and Conservation Board.
27-9, 34-55, 35-21
Engineering Specialties Inc., vii
Engle, D.D., IS-52
Enick, R.M., 40.38, 47.24
Enns, T., 25-21
Enright, R.J., 4451
Erbar, J.H., 14-22, 25-16, 25-24
Erickson, D.D., 25-9, 25-23, 43-19
Erickson, J.W.. 6-72
Erickson, R-A., 43-10. 44-49. 45.14, 47-24
Ersoy, D., 4-l I
Espanol, J.H.. 34-37. 34-55
AUTHOR INDEX 5
Essley, P.L. Jr.. 40-38
Eubank. P.T.. 25-21
Eucken, A., 25-21
European Continental Shelf Gutde, 27-9
Evans, H.J., 13-59
Evans, J.G., 46-43
Evans, L.B., 25-24
Evans. R.D.. xi, 50-38
Everett, J.P., 45-14
Everhart, A.H.. 51-52
Evinger. H.H., 32-4, 32-16, 34-31, 34.55,
37-19, 37-27
Ewmg. B.C., 54-14
Ewing, J.. 25-24
Ewing, R.E., 48-19
Ewing, W.M., 51-50
EXLOG. xiii
Exploration Logging Inc., xii, 52-30. 52-3 I
F
Fagin, K.M., 41-5, 41-37
Fagin, R.G., 48-14, 48-18
Falabella. B.J., 25-23
Fan, S.K., 47-24
Fancher. G.H. Jr.. 34-55
Farhi, L.E.. 25-22
Farkas. E.J., 25-26
Farouq Ah, SM., x, 46-7, 46-13, 46-14,
46-43. 46-46
Farshad. F.F., 35-13. 35-21, 40-38
Fash. R.H., 24-22
Fassihi. M.R.. 46-37, 46-45
Fast, C.R., 55-2, 55-10
Fatt. I.. 26-7. 26-33, 28-10. 28-15. 51-50
Faulkner. B.L., 45-14
Fay. C.H., 44-20, 44-49
Fayers, F.J., 48-18
Feillolay, A., 25-21
Fekete. L.A.. 12-43
Felsenthal. M., 44-29. 44-50
Feldman, W., 6-72
Fenix & Scisson Inc., vi, I I-13
Fenninger, W.D.. 25-2 I
Ferrero, E.P.. 21-20
Ferrier. J.J., 4645
Fertl. W.H.. 50-38, 51-52, 55-l 1
Fetkovich. M.J., 34-l, 34-3 I. 34-33, 34-55,
38-8, 38-20
Fettke, C.R.. 24-i. 24-21
Fillipone, W.R., 51-52
Finch. E.M., 44-51
Firoazabadi, A., 48-19
Fischer, F., 25-2 I
Fischer Governor Co.. vi
Fischer, K.F., 56-l
Fischer, M.J.. 4425, 44-50
Fisher Controls Co., vi
Fiske. L.E., 41-2. 41-37
Fiskm. J.M.. viii. 23-13
Fitzgerald. P.E.. 54-l. 55-l. 56-l
Flaim. C.. 50-38
Fleming, P.D. III, 48-18
Fletcher, C.R., xii. 51-51
Flid. R.M., 25-24
Flippen. F.F.. 54-12
Flock, D.L., 44-20, 44-50
Fluor Subsea Services. vii
Fogler. H.S., 54-13
Fomina. V.I.. 25-23. 25-28
Fong, D.K.. 48-18
Forts, L.. 51-52
Fontaine, E.T.. 19-34
Ford, G., l-69
Ford, W.G.F.. 54-13
Forsyth, P.A.. 48-20
Forcer. H.P. Jr., 48-19
Fwtcr. J.H.. 3-l
Foster, K.W., 16-16
Foster. V.. 41-37
Fowler. E.D., 3-40
Fowler, F.C., 34-4, 34-55
Fowler, P.T.. 52-22, 52-31
Fox, C.J.J.. 25-22
Fox, K.B., 54-12
Fox, R.L., 46-45
Frailing, W .G.. 40-38
Franck, E.U., 25-21, 25-22. 25-24
Franklin, P., l-l, I-68
Franks, J.E., 55-10
Fraser, H.J., viii, 26-33
Frauenthal, J.C., 48-11. 48-20
French, W.S., 36-11
Frick, T.C., iii, 46-45
Fried, A.N., 45-14, 47-25
Friedman, R.L., 25-18, 25-24
Fritsch, D.R.. 16-16
Friz, H., 25-21
Frnka, W.A., 46-44
Froelich. B., 51-52
Froltch, P-K., 25-21
From, K.T., 45-15
Froning, H-R., 25-27, 47-25
Frost. E., 50-38
Frost, E.M., viti, 25-2, 25-5, 25-10, 25.14,
25-20, 25-23
Frost. J.B.. 54-13
Fuhner, H., 25-26
Fulcher. R.A.. 28-12, 28-16
Fuller, K.L., 48-18
Fulton, K.. 36-10
Funkhouser. H.J., 24-22
Fussell, D.D.. 48-18. 48-19
Fussell. L.T.. 48-18
G
Gaddy, V.L., 25-15, 25-17, 25-22, 25-23
Gadelle, C.P., 46-45
Gainar, I., 25-22
Galbraith, M., 36. I I
Gale. R.P., 25-26
Gall, J.W., 47-24
Galley, J.E., 29-9
Galloway, J.R., 46-44
Galloway, T.J.. viii, 25-2, 25-20, 29-9
Garb, F.A., 40-l. 40-37. 41-l. 41-5, 41-37
Garder, A.O. Jr., 37-2 I, 37-27. 48-14,
48-18
Gardner, D.C., 55-l I
Gardner, F.H., 25-22
Gardner, G.H.F.. xi, xti, 26-28, 26-33,
36-11. 45-14, 45-15, 51-7, 51-47.
51.50, 51-52
Gardner, J.S.. xi, xii, 49-41, 50-38, 51-35,
5 l-52
Gardner, L.W.R., xi, 51-50
Garms, K.M., 43-l
Garon, A.M., 46-43
Garrison A D , 24-2. 24-22
Garthwaite. D.L.. 43-16
Gartner. J., 51-45, 51-52
Gas Processors Suppliers Assn. (GPSA) vi,
vii. viii. 12-43. 13-59. 14-17, 14-22,
20-18, 23-11. 23-13. 39-12, 39-27
Gash, B.H.. 47-24
Gaskell, M.H.. 45-14
Gaskell. T.F., 12-43
Gassmann. F.. 51-8. 51-11. 51-36, 51-49,
51-51
Gates, C.F., 46-15 to 46-17. 46-19. 46-44.
46-45
Gates. G.L.. 26-33. 44-51
Gatlm. C.. 45-13
Gearhart. 49-41
Gecrtsma, J.. 26-7.26-33. 51-E. 51-51. 55-l I
Geffen, T.M., 39-15, 39-28. 43-17, 43-19.
44-29, 44-50, 45-13, 46-13. 46-14,
46-43
General Conference of Weights and
Measures (CGPM), 58-4, 58-10, 58-18
Gentry, R.W., 41-37
Geophysics, 51-50
George. C.J., 36-10
George, R.A., 4451
Geotimes, 25-24
Gernet, J.M., 45-15
Gester, G.C.. 25-26
Geyer, R.L.. xti, 51-51
Ghassemi, F., 46-9, 46-43
Ghauri, W.K., 44-51
Giacca, D., 52-3 I
Gibbs, G.B., 25-26
Gibbs, J.W., 25-I. 25-20
Gibbs, S.G., IO-37
Gidley, J.L., 54-11, 54-12. 56-9
Gilbert, W.E.. 34-45, 34-46, 34.55
Gilchrist, W.A. Jr., 50-38
Gillespie, P.C., 25-15, 25-21
Gilliland, H.E., 47-26
Gillund, G.N., 45-15
Gilman, J.R., 48-5, 4X-18
Giussani, A , 25-27
Giustt, L.E., 4643
Gjaidbaek, J-C., 25-21, 25-25
Gladfelter, R.E., 38-20
Glaister, R.P., 24-22
Glasser, S.R., 45-15
Glew. D.N.. 25-23
Glinsmann, G.R., 47-25
Clover, C.J., 47-25
Goetz, J.F., xii, 51-20, 51-51
Gogarty, W.B.. 45-13. 47-25, 48-18
Golan, M., 37-21, 37-27
Gelding, B.H., 21-10. 21-11. 21-13, 21-15,
21-16, 21-20
Golding, R.M., 25-21
Goldman, R., 51-50
Goldsmith. R.G.. 52-31
Goldup, A., 25-26
Golub, G.H.. 48-20
Golynets, Y. F., 25-24
Gomaa, E.E., 4617,46-18.46-45.48.6,48-I8
Gondouin, M., 49-40
Gooch, F.W. Jr., 45-14
Goodman, J.B., 25-22
Goodman, M.A.. IS-52
Goodwill, D., 22-22
Goodwill. W.P.. 51-52
Gordon, W.C., 24-2, 24-22
Gosline. J.E., 6-36, 6-37. 6-72, 22-22,
34-55
Gottfried. B.S. 48-18
Goudouin, M., 49-4 I
Gould, T.L., 3440, 34-55, 34-56
Govier, G.W., 40-38, 55.11
Goyal. A., 47-26
Grabowski. J.W., 46.12, 46-43
Graciaa, A.. 47-25
Graebner. R.J., ix, 36.10, 36-l I
Graham, D.E.. 19-34
Graham, J.W.. 54-13. 55-12
Granberry, R.J.. 50-38
Grant, A.A., 6-72
Grant, B.R.. 46-43
Graton, L.C., viii, 26-33
Graue. D.J., 23- 13.445 I. 47-26.48-6. 48- I8
Graves. R.M., 26-9. 26-33
Gravia. C.K.. 12-43
Gray. K.E.. 30-17
Greaser, G.R., 46-44
Grew. G., 25-2 I
Green. E.B.. 54-13
Greenberger, M.H.. 40.38.4429.4432,4451
6 PETROLEUM ENGINEERING HANDBOOK
Greenkorn, R A. / 36-10
Greenwalt. W.A., 41-37
Gregory, A.R.. xi, xii. 26-33, 51-8, 51-36.
51-50. 51-51
Grever, J., 25-21
Griffcth, B.L., 45-14
Griffin, F D., 10-l
Griffith, J.D.. 45-15, 48-19
Griffith, P.. ix, 34-37 to 34-39, 34.55
Griffith, T.D., 47-24
Grigoriou. G.C.. 25-28
Griialva, V.E., 51-52
C&m. R.E., 41-26
Griswold, .I.. 25-27
Griswold. W.T., 24-1, 24-21
Grocneveld, H., 4451, 58-2
Groschuff. E., 25-27
Grosmangin, M., 51-52
Grossling, B.F., 41-37
Grosso, D.S., 53-26
Grove, M.L., 39-28
Grovenhurg. W.W., 16-17
Gruy, H.J., 40-38, 41-5. 41-37
Guhbins. K.E., 25-21
Guckert, L.G., 44-21, 44-50
Guerrero, E.T., x, 12.43, 37.15, 37.27,
44-29 to 443 1, 44-5 1
Guimard, A., ix. 30-16
Gum, J.A., 54-14
Gulati. MS.. 56-9
Guler, N., 55-11
Guppy, K.H.. 55-11
Gurley. D.G., 56-9
Gustavson. F.G., 48-20
Gusto, B.V., vii
Guthrie, R.K., 40-38, 44-29, 44-32, 44-51
Guyed, H., xii, 4941. 51-50
H
Haafkens, R., 54-13. 55-l I
Haas, N.C., 25-22
Habermann, B., 4420. 4450, 45-14
Hachmuth, K-H., 25-25
Hadley, K., 51-11, 51-51
Haehnel, 0.. 25-21
Hafemann. D.R., 25-25, 25-27
Hagedorn. A.R., 34-37, 34-55
Hagernan, P.S., 30-16
Hagenar. D.S.. ix
Hagoort. J., 28-l 1, 28-15, 47-24
Halbouty, M.T., 29-9
Hail. A.H., 16-17
Hall, A.L., 46-44
Hall, B.E., 54-13
Hall, C.D. Jr., 55-11
Hall, H.N., 26-7 to 26-9, 26-33, 45-13
Hall, K.R., 20-8, 20-9, 20-18. 25-21,
33-18, 33-23
Hamilton Bras. 011 Co., vii
Hammerlindl, D.J.. 4-l 1. 26-8, 26-33
Hammerschmidt, E.G., 25-23
Hancock, G.L. Jr., 40-38
Hand. J.H.. 25-24, 25-28
Handy, L.L., 37-27
Hanna. M.A.. 29-9
Hannah. R.R.. 55-l I
Hansen, D.N.. vii
Hansen, P.W., 45-15
Hanson, J.M., 55-l 1
Hanson, M.E.. 55-11
Hanzlik. E.J.. 48-6. 48-18
Harbert. L.W.. 28-12, 28-16
Harder. A.H.. 25-21
Harder. M.L.. 32-3. 32-16
Hardy, G.W. III. 57-12
Hardy, 1-H.. 45-15
Hardy. W.C., 46-44, 46-45
Harouaka, A., 44-51
Harpole, K.J., 48-10, 48-19
Harrington, L.J., 55-l I
Harris, C.D., 48-18
Harris, D.G., 36-10
Harris, F.N., 54-13
Harris, L.E., 54-13
Harris, L.W.. 55-l I
Harris, M.H.. xii, 51-35, 51-47, 51-52
Harris, O.E., 54-13
Harris, P.C., 55-11
Harris, W.E., 24-22
Harrisberger, W.H., 54-12
Harrison, N.H., 39-28
Hatting, P., 25-24
Hartley, K.B., xii, 51-34, 51-52
Hartman, J.A., 36-10
Hartsock, J.H., 4450
Harvey. A.H.. 48-20
Harvey, M.T., 45-15
Harvey, R.P., 53-26
Harwell, J.H., xi, 47-25
Hasiba, H.H., 47-26
Hassan, M., 50-38
Hassler, G.L., 28-2, 28-3, 28-5 to 28-7,
28-15
Hatch, M.J., x, 47-24
Hauber. W.C.. 44-29. 44-50
Haughn, J.E., 25-25
Havlena, D.. 37-2, 37-3, 37-6, 31-7, 37-27.
38-12, 38-20
Hawes, R.I., 48-18
Hawkins, M.F. Jr., x, 23-1, 24-14, 24-23,
37-27, 39-27, 40-38, 43-16, 43.17,
43-19, 44-6, 44-16, 4417, 4449, 48-18
Hawthorne, H.R., 49-41
Hayduk, W., 25-22
Hazebroek, P.. 35-16. 35-21, 4435, 44-51
Heald, K.C., 31-7
Healy, R.N., xi, 47-13, 47-25
Hearn. C.L., 46-44, 47-24, 48-8, 48-10,
48-19
Heaviside, J.. 28-12, 28-16
Hebard, G.G., 16-16
Hegner. J.S., 54-13
He&a. A.A., 28-12, 28-16
Heinemann. Z.E.. 48-19
Heins, C., 25-23
Helander, D.P., 51-43, 51-52
Helfferich, F., 47-25
Heller. J.P., 44-50
Hellums. L.J., 48-19
Hempkins, W.B., xi, 51-51
Henderson, J.H., 46-19. 48-6, 48-18
Hendrick, J.O. Jr., 56-Y
Hendrickson, A.R.. 54-I. 54-12 to 54-14
Hendrickson, G.E., 44-28, 4429, 44-50
Hendrix, J.R.. 8-l
Henley, D.H., 4449
Henry, J.R., 34-46. 34-55
Henshaw, T.L., 6-72
Henson, W.L., 38-20
Hepp, V.R., 53-26
Herald, F.A., ix, 29-9
Herbeck, E.F., 45-15, 48-18
Hermanson, D.E., 9-1
Herrera, A.J. ( 46-44
Herrera. J.Q., 48-6, 48-18
Herring, E.A., xii, 51-52
Herron. E.H. Jr., 48-18
Herron. M.M., 50-38
Herschel, W.H., 22-22
Hertzberg, G., 25-21
Hertzberg, R.H.. 4645
Hertzog, R.C.. xi, 50-38
Herzfeld. J.R., 41-37
Hestenes. M R., 48-20
Heuer. G.J.. 44-50
Hewitt, C.H., 36.10, 46-44
Hewlett-Packard, 22-17, 22-22
Hiatt, W.N.. 44-29, 44-51
Hickman, B.M., 44-50, 46-45
Hicks, A.L.. 38-3, 38-20
Hicks, W.G., 51-6, 51-19, 51-50, 51-51
Higgins, R-V., x, 40.38, 4428 to 44.30,
44-32, 44-50, 45-17
Highland Pump Co. Inc., Y
Hilchie, D.W., 50-38, 51-52
Hildebrand, M.A.. 25-28
Hildebrand, S.M., 16-17
Hill, D.G., 54-13
Hill, G.A., 30-17
Hill, H.G.. 41-37
Hill, H.J., 26-30, 26-31, 26-33, 47-26, 49-41
Hill, K.E., 41-37
Hill, R., 51-51
Hill, R.W., 16-16
Hillestad, J.G., 48-20
Hilterman, F.J., 36-l I
Hiltz, R.G., 43-17
Hmds, R.F., 37-23, 37-21, 40-38, 45-l
Hiraoka, H., 25-24
Hirasaki, G.J., 47-5,47-9, 47-24.47-25.48-20
Hitchon, B., 24-22, 24-23
Hobson, G.D., 40-38
Hock, R.L., 39-28
Hockaday, D., 4451
Hocott, C.R., 24-22, 39-28
Hodgson, H., 53-26
Hoenmans, P.J., 44-51
Hoffman, A.E., 39-12, 39-28
Hoffman, S.J., 46-45
Hake, S.H., 24-22
Holbren, J.H., 44-51
Holbrook, S.T., 47-25
Holden, W.R., 25-21
Holden, W.W., 39-28
Holder, G.D., 25-18, 25-24, 25-28
Holditch, S.A., 55-12
Hollingsworth. F.H., 54-12
Holloway, C.C., 48-19
Hollrah, V.M., 45-14
Holm, L.W., 45-l. 45-13. 45-14, 45-15,
47-9, 47-25
Holman, G.B., 54-13
Holmes, B.G., 46-19. 46-45
Holmes, C.S., 34-55
Holmgren, C.R., 44-49
Holste, J.C., 25-21
Holt, O.R.. 53-26
Homma, T., 25-22
Hon. M.S., 20-7, 20-18
Honarpour, M., 28-16
Hood, J.T., 10-l
Hopkins, E.A., 52-30
Hopkinson, E.C., 50-38
Horn, A.B., 25-21
Home, A.L., 45-15
Homer, D.R., 30-9, 30-10, 30-17, 35-15,
35-16, 35-19, 35-21
Hoskold, H.D., 41-16, 41-18, 41-20 to
41-22, 41-37
Hoss, R.L., 43-17
Hossin, A., 50-38
Hottman, C.E., 51-39, 51-52. 52-30
Houghton, G., 25-22
Houston Geological Society. ix. 29.9
Howard, D.S. Jr., 38-20
Howard, G.C., 55-2. 55-10
Howard, J.V.. 46-45
Howe, L.S., 25-23
Howell, J.C., 46-42
Howell, J.V., 24-21
Howell, R.G.. 36-10
Hoyer, W.A., 50-38
Hoyt, W.V., ix, 29-l
AUTHOR INDEX
Hsiao, L., 44-5 1 Jacuzzi. R., 6-34, 6-72 Kazemi. H.. 48-5. 48-18. 4X-19
Hsu, C.C., 25-21 Jageler, A.H., 51-51 Keeney, B.R., 54-13
Hsu, W., 47-25 Janzen, H.B., 44.19, 4420, 4434, 4449 Keese, J.A.. 46-45
Huang, W.. 46-43 Jaragua S.A. Industrias Mechanicas, vi Kehn, D.M.. 45-14
Hubbard. M.G.. 34-55 Jardetzkv. W.S.. 51-50 K&man. S.. 25-22
Hubbard; R.A.,41-37 Jardine,D.. 36.5. 36-10 Keller, G.V., 49-42
Hubbert. M.K.. 26-33, 29-9, 5144, 51-52 Jea, N.C.. 48-20 Kelley, H.S.. 16-16
Hubby, L.M., 16-16 Jeffries-Harris, M.J., 44-51 Kelley, L., 6-72
Hudock. K., 54-13 Jenkins, R.A. Jr., 54-14 Kelly, J.L., 51-50
Hughes, D.S., 51-50 Jenkins, R.E., 27-1, 50-38 Kelly, P., 43-17
Huh, C., 47.13, 47-25 Jenks, L.H., 45-15 Kelm, C.H., 45-15
Hung, J.H., 25-21
Hunt, E.R.. xii, 51-52
Hunt, J.M., 23-13
Huntington, R.L.. 25-27, 40-38
Hurd, C.O., vii
Hurdle, J.M., 43-17, 45-15
Hurford, G.T., 45-15
Hurst, R.E., 55-10, 55-l 1
Hurst. W.. 30-10. 30-14. 30-17. 35-l
35-21, 38-l. 38-E. 38-20, 39-20, 39-28,
40-37, 4417, 44-20, 44-29, 44-49, 45-15
Jennings, A.R., 54-13
Jennings, H.Y. Jr., 47-19. 47-20,
Jennings. R.R., 47-24
Jensen, C.M., 23-13
Jensen, J., 24-22
Jessen, F.W., 24-22
Jhaveri, I.. 25-28
Jines, W.R., 48-18
Joffe, J., 20-7, 20-18. 48-18
Johansen, R.T., 4451
John, V.T.. 25-28
41-26
Kelton, F.C., 26-7, 26-33
Kemp, C.E., 38.20, 4450
Kempton, E.A., 6-72
Kendall, H.A., 45-14
Kennedy, G.C. 25-22
Kennedy, H.T., viii, 26-21, 26-33, 39.13,
39-28
Kennedy, S.L., 43-17
Kern, L.R.. 43-4. 43-16. 43-19. 55-2. 55-10
Kersch, K.M., 30-17
Kershaw, D.S., 48-20
Hutchinson, C.A. Jr., x. 30-17, 35-15, Johnson. C.E. Jr., 40-19, 40-38, 44-9, Kerver, J.K., 4942
35-21. 44-25, 44-50, 45-13, 45-14 4432, 4449, 44-51, 45-14, 47-24, Kesler, M.G., 20-13, 20-17, 20-18
Hutchinson, T.S., 38-20 47-26. 48-18 Kestin, J., 24-16, 24-23
Hutton, J.M., 25-28 Johnson. C.R.. 36-10 Khalifa, H.E., 24-23
Huygen, H.H.A., 46-43 Johnson, D.H., xi, 51-50 Khan, S.A., x, 47-25
Huzarevich. I.E., 43-17 Johnson, E.F., 45-14 Kharaka, Y.K., 24-23
Hvizdos. L.J.. 46-45 Johnson, G.A., 48-6. 48-18 Khitarov, N.I.. 25-22
Hwang, M.K., 48-18
Hvdraulic Inst.. 6-50, 6-72
Hydrocarbon Research Inc., vii
I
Illiyan, IS., 53-26
Imai, S., 25-25
Independent Petroleum Assn. of America
(IPAA), 41-37
Inga. R.F., 25-25
Ingersoll, A.C., 15-33
Ineram. J.D.. 51-51
Inks, C.G., 4451
Inst. Francais du P&role, 28-7, 28-15
Inst. of Electrical and Electronic Engineers
(IEEE):
IEEE Std. 117, IO-37
IEEE Std. 260, 58-8
IEEE Std. 268, 58-8
Interscience Encyclopedia Inc., vii
Interstate Oil Compact Commission, 33-13,
33-23, 39-27
Intl. Bureau of Weights and Measures
(BIPM), 58-10
Intl. Organization for Standardization
(ISO), 12-43, 58-3, 58-11, 58-12
IS0 31/O, 58-8
IS0 1000, 58-8
IS0 R370. 58-8
IS0 2955, 58-8
KWIC Index of Intl. Stds., vi
Intl. Union of Pure and Applied Chemistry, 58-7
Intl. Union of Pure and Applied Physics, 58-7
IPAA, 41-37
Irick, J.T., 18-52
Isenhower, W.M., IS-52
Ivey, D., 5149
Iyoho, A.W., 46-13, 46-14, 46-43
Izabakarov. M. 25-21
J
Jacks, H.H., 48-19
Jackson, J.A., 29-9
Jacobs, W.L., 47-25
Jacoby, R.H. 20-8, 20-18, 25-27, 37-23 to
37-25, 37-27, 40.38, 43-4, 43-16,
43-17, 43-19, 45-14, 48-19
Johnson, H.M., 49-42
Johnson, J.P., 36-10, 44-29, 4450
Johnson, L.A., Jr., 46-3, 46-43, 4645
Johnson, O.C., 45-14
Johnson, R.K., 51-39, 51-52, 52-30
Johnson, W.M., Jr., 53-26
Johnston, N., 26-33
Jones, A., 55-10
Jones, K.E., 40-38
Jones. L.G.. 56-9
Jones, R.G., viii, 26-33
Jones. S.B.. xi, 51-50
Jones, S.C.. 28-15
Jones, T.J., 19-34
Jordan, C.A., 44-37, 44-51
Jordan, D., 25-26
Jordan, J.K.. 44-51
Jorden, J.R., 49-42, 52-24, 52-31
Joris, G.G., 25-25
Jorque, M.A.. 445 1
Josendal, V.A.. 45-14
Joseph, C., 46-45
Jossi, J.A., 20-18
J. Cdn. Pet. Tech., 46-45
Judson, L.V.. l-l. l-68
Jung, K.D., 4644
Justen, J.J., 4451, 45-14
Justus, J.B., 43-16
Justus. W.W., 6-63. 6-72
K
Kamp, A.W., 53-26
Kandarpa, V., 4451
Kane, A.V., 45-15
Kansas State Corp. Commission, 39-27
Kasamovskti, J.S., 25-17, 25-24
Kasch, J.E., 25-27
Kasic, M.J. Jr., 48-20
Katz, D.L., vii, 12-43, 20-5, 20-9, 20-10,
20-18, 22-4, 22-17, 22-21, 22-22, 25-2.
25-3, 25-5, 25-10, 25-l 1, 25-16 to
25-18. 25-20, 25-21, 25-23, 25-24,
25-28, 26-28, 26-33, 34-55, 34-56,
39-1, 39-27, 40-15, 40-38, 45-14,
48-18. 48-19
Kavvadas, M., 55-l 1
Kay. W.B., 20-5, 20-10
Kazaryan, T.S., 25-25, 25-26
Khoury, F., 25-20
Khristianovitch, S.A., 55-2, 55-10
Khurana, A.K., 48-20
Kieschnick, W.F. Jr., 45-14
Killian, J.W.. 4425, 4450
Killough, J.E., 48-19. 48-20
Kilmer, J.W., 39-28
Kim, J.J., 25-24
Kimball, C.V., 51-51
Kimbler, O.K., 44-2 I, 44-49
Kimmel, J.D., 32-l
Kimmell, G.O., vi, 12-43
Kincheloe, R.L., 54-13
King, A.D. Jr., 25-21
King, G.E., 54-12, 54-13, 55-l 1
King, M.S., xi, 51-S. 51-9, 51-50 to 51-52
King, R.E.. 29-9
King, W.R., v, 5-12
Kinra, R.K.. 18-52
Kirby, I.E. Jr., 43-16
Kircher, C.E. Jr., 21.10, 21-20, 22-22
Kirk, R.S., 46-44
Kirkpatrick. C.V., v, 5-l. 5-37
Kithas, B.A., xii, 51-52
Klaus, E.E., 47-24
Klausutis. N.A.. 25-25
Kleppinger, K.B., 16-17
Klinkenberg, L.J., viii, 26-18. 26-33. 28-13
Kloepter, C.V., 45-15
Kloth, T.L., 4645
Klots, C.E., 25-22
Klotz, J.A., 56-9
Klovan. I.E., 24-23
Knapp, H., 25-18, 25-24
Knezek, R.B., 43-16
Knopoff, L.. 51-46, 51-52
Knox, J.A., 54-12. 54-13
Kobayashi, R., viii, 20.15, 20.18. 25-l to
25-3. 25-5, 25-10, 25-l 1, 25-15, 25-17.
25-18, 25-20, 25-21, 25-23, 25-24,
25-28, 39-21
Kobe, Inc., v, 26-6
Kobe, K.A., 25-22, 25-24
Koch, H.A. Jr., x, 43-19, 45.13, 45-14
Koch, R.L., 4643, 46-45
Koeller, R.C., 40-38
Koepf, E.H.. 27-l
Koerperich, E.A., 51-24, 51-25. 51-51
Kokesh, F.P., 51-51. 51-25, 51-51
a PETROLEUM ENGINEERING HANDBOOK
Kokesh. F.P.. 51-51. 51-52
Kolodzie, P.A.. 44-51, 47-26
Konen, C.E., 53-26
Koppers Co. Inc., 1 l-14
Kornfeld. J.A.. 44-5 1
Korringa, J., 51-8, 51-51
Kortekaas, T.F.M., 28-12, 28-15
Koshelev. V.S.. 25-28
Kotcher, J.S.. 36. I I
Krase. N.W., 25-22
Krause, D.J., 25-22
Krautkrimer, H., xi, 51~50
Krautkramer, J., xi, 51-50
Krebill, F.K.. 43-16
Krebs, H.J.. 44-51
Kreft, A., SO-38
Krejci-Graf, K.. 24-22
Kresheck, G.C., 25-26
Krichevskii, I.R., 25-17, 25-22, 25-24
Krishnan. C.V.. 25-18. 25-24
Krueger, R.F.. 56-9
Krueger, W.C. Jr., 36-10
Krug, J.A., 26-9, 26-33
Kruk, K.F., 54-12, 5414
Krumbein, W.C., viii, 26-7, 26-33
Krutter, H., 4421. 44-50
Krynine, P.D., 29-9
Kuba, D.W., 48-20
Kufus. H.B.. 4429. 4450
Kuhn, C.S., 46-43
Kunerth, W., 25-22
Kunkel, G.C., 36-10
Kuntz, E.. 57-12
Kunz, K., 4941
Kunze, K.R., 54-13. 54-14
Kurovskaya, N.A., 25-24
Kuster, G.T., 51-34. 51-52
Kvenvolden. K.A.. 25-18, 25-24
Kwan, T.V., 48-20
Kwong. J.N.S., 20-7, 20-8, 20-18, 23-12.
23-13, 39-28
Kyte, J.R., 44-49, 48-10, 48-19
L
Labrid, J., 54-13
Lacey, J.W., 45-14
Lacey, W.N., x, 21-10, 21-20, 22-22,
23-13, 25-20, 39-2, 39-21, 45-14
Lachance, D.P., 26-9, 26-33
Lackland, S.D., 45-15
Lagers, G.H.C., vii
Lahring, R.I., 44-51
Lajtai, I., 25-2 I
Lake, L.W., xi, 28-15, 47-1, 47-24 to
47-26, 54-14
Lam, KY., 55-11
Lamborn, R.E., 24-22
Lamont, N., 49-41
Lampe, H.W., 48-20
Land, C.S., 28-12, 28-15, 44-49
Landrum, B.L., 44-25, 44-50
Lane, A.C., 24-2. 24-22
Lane, L.C., 45-15
Langenheim, R.N., 46-7 to 46-9. 46-43
Langston, E.P.. 4436, 4451
Langton, J.R., 43-17
Lannung, A., 25-2 I
Lantz, R.B., 46-9, 46-1 I, 46-43, 48-10,
48-19
Larson. R.G., 47-25
Larson. S., 25-23
Larson. T.A., 41-1
Lasater, J.A., 7-9. 7-17, 22-5 to 22-10,
22-22
Las&r, R.H., 15-l
Lasater, R.M., 54-13
Last, G.J., 43-17
Laulhere. B.M., 25-2 I
Laumbach. D.D.. 46-43
Law. J., 39-28
Lawrence. L.L., 1244
Laws, W.R., xii, 51-52
Lawson, J.B., 47-9, 47-25, 47-26
Lawson, I.D.. 34-37. 34-55
Lea, J.F., 5-52, 5-57
Leach, R.O., 44-40, 44-51, 47-26
Leas, W.J., 44-50
Lease, W.O.. 28-7, 28-12, 28-15
LeBlanc. R.J., 36-3, 36-10
LeBreton, J.G., 25-26
Ledbetter, R.L., 3820
Ledlow, L.B., 54-13
Lee, B.D., 4417, 4449
Lee, B.I.. 20-13, 20-17. 20-18
Lee. J.. 35-12. 35-21
Lee. M.H., 54-13
Lee, S.T.. 46-31. 4645
Lee, W.J., 55-12
Lefebvre du Prey, E.J., 28-10. 28-15
Letkowitz, H.C., 40-38
Leggett, B., 54-13
Leibrock. R.M.. 43-17
Leighton. A.J., x, 44-28 to 44-30, 44-32,
44-50. 45-14
Leland, T.W. Jr., 25-24
Lemanczvk. R.. 55-12
Lents, M.R., x, 39-19, 39-20, 39-23, 39-28
Lentz, H., 25-24. 25-25
Leonardon, E.G., 31-7, 51-50
Lerner. B.J., 12-43
Lescarboura, J.A.. 55-12
Lesem, L.B., 39-25, 39-28
Lester, G.W.. 44-35, 44-51
Letkeman, J.P., 48-20
LeVelle, J.A.. 16-16
Leverett, M.C., 26-24, 26-33, 28-2. 28-3,
28-6. 28-7. 28-15. 40-13. 40-17. 40-18.
40-38, 43-3, 43-4, 43-16, 43-19; 444,
44-7. 44-9 to 44-l 1. 44-26. 44-29.
4449, 47-2, 47-24, 48-1, 48-18
Levesque, J.M., 48-20
Levine, J.S.. 37-21, 37-22, 37-27
Levorsen, A.1.. 29-9
Lewin and Assocs. Inc., 46-4, 46-13,
46- 14, 46-43
Lewis, C.R., 52-31
Lewis, J.O., 40-15, 40-38, 44-49
Lewis, P.E., 55-I I
Lewis, W.B., 44-4, 44-49
Lewis, W.K.. 22-22
Lewis, W.M., 37-27
Li, C.C., 25-25
Liabastre, A.A., 25-26
Lien, C., 48-19
Lin. C., ix, 28-12, 28-15
Lindbad, E.N., 39-27, 45-15
Lindsey, W.C., 18-52
Lipson, L.B , 49-42
Lisbon, T.N., 3446, 34-55
Little, L.A , IO-I
Little, T.P., 46-44
Lockhart, R.W., 34-37, 34-55
Loa Analyst, The, xiii
Logan. J.i., 4- 11
Logan, J.M.. 55-12
Lo&. R.E., 43-17
Loncaric, I.G., 44-20, 44-37, 44-50
Lone Star Steel. 2-46, 2-74
Longeron, D.G.. 28-l I, 28-15
Longstaff, W .J.. 48 19
Loomis. A.G., 28-10, 28-15
Loprest, F.J., 25-22
Lorenz, P.B.. 47-26
Lotter. Y.G.. 25-26
Loveless, G.W.. 51-52
Lovell, F.P.. 25-25
Low, J.W., 52-9. 52-30
Lowe, R.M., 38-20
Lay. M.E.. 49-41
Lubinski, A., 4-l 1
Lubojacky, R.W., 36-10
Lucas, M.. 25-21
Lufkin Industries Inc., vi
Lumpkin, W.B.. 43-17
Lund, K., 54-13
Luque, R.F., 54-13
Lybarger, J.H., 54-13
Lynch, E.J., xii, 44-29, 4450, 51-51
M
Maas, 0.. 25-22
MacDonald, R.C., 48-14, 48-20
Mace, C., x, 4644
MacLean. M.A.. 46-44
MacNaughton. L.W., 41-37
Macon, R.S., 45-15
Macrygeorgos. C.A., 40-38
Maddox, R.N., 14-l. 14-22
Maerker, J.M.. 47-6, 47-24
Maharijh, D.M., 25-27
Maher, l.c., 52-9, 52-30
Maini. B.B., 28.12, 28-15
Majani, P., 51-52
Makogon, Y.F., 25-18, 25-23, 25-24
Malesinska. B.. 25-22
Malik, V.K., 25-22
Malinin, SD., 25-22, 25-24
Maly, G.P., 56-9
Mantillas, G., 54-13
Mandl, G.. 46-8, 46-9, 46-15, 46-43
Maney, E.. 47-26
Mann, L.D., 48-6, 48-18
Manning, R.K., xi, 47-6, 47-24
Mansurov, RI.. 19-34
Mapes, G.J., 1243
Markham, A.E.. 25-22
Markhasin, IL., 28-11, 28-15
Marrs, D.G., 45-15
Marshall, D.L., x, 39-20, 39-21, 39-28
Marshall, D.R., viit, 25-2, 25-5, 25-20,
25-24
Marshall, P.W., 18-52
Martin, F.D., x, 47-22, 47-24, 47-26
Martin, J.C., 35-2. 35-21, 43-16, 44-50
Martin, J.J., 20-8, 20-18, 39-28, 48-18
Martin, J.W., 7-17
Martin, M., 49-1, 49-41
Martin, R.C., 54-12
Martin, W.A.. 40-38
Martin, W.L., 4643, 46-45
Martinelli, R.C., 34-37, 34-55
Martinez, S.J., 54-l. 55-1, 56-l
Marx, J.W., 46-7 to 46-9. 46-43
Marzetta, T.L., 51-51
Maslennikova. V.Y., 25-22, 25-23, 25-26
Matheny, S.L. Jr., 16-16
Mathews, J-D., 48-18
Mathews, M.A., 51-52
Matous, J., 25-22
Mattax. C.C.. 44-49. 48-19. 48-20
Matthews, C.S., 35-16, 35-21. 40.38,
4425, 44-50. 44-51
Matthews, T.A., vii, 20-9, 20-10, 20-18
Matthies, E.P., 36-10
Mauerer, O., 25-18, 25-24
Maurette, C., 51-50
Mayer, C.. 49-42
Mayer, E.H., iii, 22-22. 47-26
Mayhill, T.D., 54-12
Mayland, B.J., x, 46-37. 46-45
Mayorga, G., 25-24
Mazzullo. S.J.. 29-9
AUTHOR INDEX 9
Meww. E.S.. 26-24
Metcalfe. R.S.. 20-I. 23-9. 23-13. 45-10.
McAdams, W-H.. 46-43
McAuliffe, C.D.. 24-23, 25-21. 47-20. 47-26
McBain. J.W.. 25-25
McBean. W.N. 1 46-44
McBride. J.R., 54-13
McCaffery. F.G., 28-11. 28-15
McCann. C.. 51-52
McCann, D.M.. 51-52
McCarter. E.D.. 48-18
McCarty, D.G.. 44-17. 44-49
McCarty, E.L., 25-2 I
McCarty. G.M.. 44-17, 44-49
McCaskill, N.. 45-15
McCay. R.C., 25-22 Miller, B., 25-27
McClaflin. G.G.. 6-72. 19-34 Miller, B.D., 54-12. 54-14
45. I4
Meter, D.M.. 47-4. 47-24
Meyers. D.C.. 16-16
Michaelis, A.M., 54-12
Mtchels, A., 25-21
Mid~Continent Dist. Study Commission,
24-22
Mid-Continent Oil and Gas Assn., 41-37
Mtkesha, F.J.. 16-16
Milburn, J.D.. 26-30. 26-31, 26-33
Miles, L.H.. 56-9
McClellan, J.H., xii. 51-51 Miller. C.C., 30-9. 30-12, 30.17, 35.15.
McClendon, R.. 52-54. 52-31 35-2 I
McCormick. G.W.. viii Miller, F.G., 43-17
McCord, D.R.. 43-16 Miller. M.A., 28-12, 2X-16
McCracken. T.A.. 48-11. 48-19 Miller, M.G.. x. 39.19, 39.20, 39-23,
McCray. A.W.. 41-37
McGarry.
McCrossan, R.G., 24-22
M.W. Jr.,
McCulloch. R.C.. 43-17
40-37.
McCune. C.C., 44-37. 4451. 54-13
41-38
McCurdy, R.C.. 26-33
McDaniel, R.R.. 55-I I, 55-12
McGhee.
McDonald, A.E., 48-20
E.. 16-16,
McDonald, G.H.F., 51-46, 51-52
19-34
McDonald, J.A.. 36-l I
McDow. G.. 54-13
McElwee, P.G.. 58-S
McEvoy Co., v
McFarlane, R.C.. 43-17
39-28
Miller. S.L., 25.25, 2527
Mtllican, M.L., 49-42
Millikan, C.V., 30-l. 30-16, 31-l
Mills, F. van A.. 24-l. 24-22
Mime. J.H., 24-23
Milton, H.W. Jr., 47-25
Minear, J.W.. xii, 51.34. 51-51, 51-52
Minnich. B.H.. 25-22
Minor, H.E., 24-22
Minor, S.S., 54-12
Minssieux, L.. xi. 41-26
Mintz. F.. 41-37
McGinty, J.E., 54-14
McGrain, P., 24-22
McGraw. J.H.. 43-17
McGuire, W.J., 54-9, 55-10
McKelvey. J.G.. 24-23
McKetta. J.J.. 25-l. 25-16. 25-17, 25-21.
25-23. 25-24. 25-25. 25-26, 25-27
McKinley, D.C., 16-16
McKinney. O.B.. 24-22
McKay. V., 25-5, 25-23
McLaughlin. W.A.. 54-13
McLean, A.M.. 25-22
McLeod, H.D. Jr., 25-23
McLeod, H.O., 54-13, 54-14
McLeod, H.O. Jr., 55-12
McMahon, J.J., 37-27, 38-9, 38-l I. 38-20
McMahon, W.F., 6-34. 6-72
McMenamin. M.A.. 25-18. 25-24
Modine. A.D.. 48-20
Modular Production Equipment Inc., vii
Mohanty. K.K.. 28-12. 28-15, 28-16. 47-25
Moilliet, J.L., 19-34
Molokowu, F.W., 36-10
Misk. A.. xii, 51-22, 51-51
Monroe, R.R., 22-22
Montadert. L., 36-10
Moody, L.F., ix, 34-38, 34-52. 34-55
Moore, C.H., 29-9
Mitchell, R.W., 4451
Moore, E.W., 54-14
Moore, G.T., 29-9
Moore, J.C.. 25-21
Moore, J.L., 45-l
Moore, J.W., 25-27
Moore, T.V., 32-3, 32-16, 34-37
Moore, W.D., 38-20
Moorwood, R.A.S., 25-23
Moran, 1.. 49-41
McNeal, R.P., 52-9, 52-30
McNeil, J.S., x, 46-14, 46-19,
46-45
McNellis, J.M., 24-19, 24-23
Meabon. H.P., 47-25
Mead. H.N., 7-17
46-43 to
Meads, R., 28-16
Mechem, O.E., 26-33
Mechtly. E.A., 58-8, 58-14
Meckei, L D., 36-10
Meenta, W.F.. 24-22
Megyesy, E.F., vi. 12-43
Mehta, B.R.. 25-28
Meijerink, J.A., 48-14, 48-20
Melcher, A.F., 26-3
Meldau. R.F., 46-45, 46-46, 48-6, 48- I8
Melnyk, J.D., 54-13
Melrose. J.C., 24-16, 44-51
Meltzer, B.D., 43-17, 45-15
Mennie. J.H., 25-22
Mennon. V.B., 19-34
Menten. P.D., 25-27
Menzie, D.E., 44-20, 4449
Merrill, L.S., 48-19
Maser, P.H., 34-55
Moranville, M.B., 48-18
Morel-Seytoux. H.J.. 4429, 44-51, 47-24
Moreland. E.E., 33-23
Morgan, C.O., 24-19. 24-23
Morgan. J.T.. 46-44
Morkill, D.B., 41-16, 41-19, 41-22, 41-37
Morris, C.F., xii, 51-51
Morris, F.C.. 26-33
Morris, J.K., 12-43
Morris. R.L., 49-42
Morrisey. N.S., 41-37
Morrison, J.B., 4451
Morrison. T.J., 25-21
Morse, R.A.. 43-17. 4429. 44-49, 45-13
Mortada, M., 38-1, 38-20, 44-25, 44-50
Mosburg, L.G. Jr., 57-12
Moscrip, R. III, 43-16
Moseley. N.F.. 4-10. 4-11
Moses, P.L., 39-l. 39-16, 39-28
Moshfeghian, M., 25-16, 25-18. 25-24
Moss. J.T., x, 4420. 44-50 4643, 46-44
Moughamian. J.M.. 48-6, 48-18
Mounce, W.D., 49-41, 51-50
Mower, L.N., 5-57
Mrosovsky, I.. 40-38. 48-17. 48-20
Muecke. T.W.. 54-14. 56-2. 56-9
Mueller, T.D.. 38-20. 43-17
Mulac. A.J.. 46-45
Miiller. G.. 51-51
Miiller. H.G.. 25-5. 25-23
Mullins. L.D., 37-27. 40-38
Mungan, N.. x, 44-51, 48-19. 54-12
Munjal. P.K., 25-22
Munn. M.J.. 24-1, 24-21
Murphy, G.B.. 21-20. 39-27
Murray, C.N.. 25-22
Murray, J.. 51-51. 55-10
Murzin. V.I.. 25-25
Muskat, M., 6-37, 6-39. 6-72, 28-2. 28-5.
28-15, 30-9. 30-I I. 30-16, 30-17. 32-4,
32-16. 34-3 I. 34-55. 37-7, 37.10.
37-13. 37-14. 37-19. 37-27. 39-19.
39.20, 39-27. 39-28, 40-9. 40.10.
40-18. 40-38, 43-17. 43-19, 44-13,
4414, 44.16, 44.17. 44-20. 44-21.
44-26. 44-29, 44-33, 44-49. 4450,
45.14, 45.15, 48.17, 48-18
Myhill, N.A., 46-9. 46-15. 46-43
Myung, J.I.. xii, 51-43, 51-51. 51-52
N
Naar, J., 28-15
Nabor, G.W., 38-20. 44-25, 44-50
Nagata, I.. 25-5, 25-23
Naw, B.. 25-2 I. 25-22
Nario Chemical Co. CTS-V3. 19-34
Namiot. A.Y., 25-21. 25-26. 25-27
Nath. A.K.. 51-52
Nations, L.F., xii. 51-35, 51-51
Natl. Aeronautical and Space Admin, (NASA):
NASA SP-7012. 58-8
Natl. Assn. of Corrosion Engmeers
(NACE). 12-43, 19-34,
NACE Std. MR-01-75, 3-36. 3-37.
3-40. 9-14
NACE Std. RP-01-75, I I-14
NACE Std. RP-03-72, I l-14
NACE Std. RP-05-75. I I-14. 19-34
NACE Std. TM-01-73, 44-51
NACE Std. TPC-5, 19-34
Natl. Bureau of Standards (See U.S. Natl.
Bureau of Standards)
Natl. Electrical Code (NEC), 3-34, 3-40,
10-26, 18-44, 1846, 18-52
Nat]. Electrical Manufacturers Assn.
(NEMA). vi, IO-17 through 10-20,
10-24, 10-25, 10-27. IO-37
Natl. Fire Protection Assn. Bull. 496.
1846, 18-52
Natl. Oilwell. v
Natl. Petroleum Council, 1 S-52
Natl. Production Systems, 6-72
Natural Gas Assn. of America (NGAA).
39-12, 39-27
Natural Gas Supply Mens Assn.
(NGSMA), vi
Navone, R., 25-21
Neal, E.A., 55-12
Needham, R.B., 47-24
Negri, G.. 25-21
Neilsen, R.F., 35-l
Neilson. I.D.R., 44-20, 44-50
Neinast, G.S.. 46-42
Nelson, C.C., 6-34, 6-72
Nelson, D.E.. 4451
Nelson. E.F.. 21-20. 39-27
Nelson, R.C.. 23-13. 47-20, 47-25. 47-26.
48-18
Nelson, T.W., 46-14, 46-19. 46-45
Nelson, W.L.. vii, 21-9, 21-20, 22-22
Nemeth, L.K., 39-13, 39-28
Neuman, C.H.. 46-9, 46-43
10 PETROLEUM ENGINEERING HANDBOOK
Neustadter, E.L., 19-34
Newburg, A.H., 16-16
Newendorp, P.D., 41-37
Newman, G.H.. 26-8, 26-33
Newman, S.A., 25-18, 25-24
New Mexico Oil Conservation Commission,
39-27
Nezdoiminoga, N.A., 25-22
Ng, H.J., 25-5, 25-9, 25-l I, 25-20, 25-23,
25-24, 25-28
Nghiem, LX., 48-18
Nichols, D.T., 21-20
Nichols, E.A., 31-7
Nicholson, R.W., 4451
Nicklin, D.J.. 34-39, 34-55
Niebrugge, T.W., 6-72
Nielsoi.-R.F., 25-26
Niemann, H., 25-25
Nierode. D.E.. 54-12. 54-14
Nikolaeb, N.A., 12-4;
Ninth Oil Recovery Conference, 39-28
Nisle, R.G., ix, 34-28, 34-55
Noad, D.F., 24-22
Noaker, L.J., 25-5, 25-23
Nobles, M.A., 4419, 4420, 44-34, 44-49
Nolan, T.J. III, 54-14
Nolen, J.S., 48-20
Nolte, K.G., 55-12
Nordgren, R.P., 55-12
Norman, L.R., 54-14
Northern, T.P., 16-16
Northrup. D.A., 55-l 1
Norton.A.E., 22-22
Nosov, E.F., 25-25
November, M.H., 13-59
Novotny, E.J., 5414
Nowak, T.J., 44-35, 44-51
Nur, A.M., 51-51
Nute, A.J., 45-15
Nutting, P.G., 26-3, 26-33, 44-40, 4451
0
OBrien, L.J., 45-15
OBrien, M.P., 6-36, 6-37, 6-72
OConnor, J.J., 25-25
OCS Order No, 5, U.S. Dept. of the
Interior, 3-34, 3-40
Odeh, AS., 28-15, 32-16. 33-23, 37-2,
37-3, 37-6, 37-7, 37-19, 37-27, 38-12,
38.20, 48-2, 48-18, 56-9
ODell, P.M., 48-18, 48-19
Offeringa, J., 45-14
Offshore Services and Technology, 12-43
Oglesby, K.D., 46-44
Oil and Gas I., vii, x, 16-16, 16-17, 19-34,
Parsons, R. W. ) 46-44
Pasternack, E.S., 51-52
Pate], C., 45-15
Patnode, H.W.. 49-41
Patterson, D.R., 16-1, 16-16
Patton, C.C., 24-22, 445 1
Patton, E.C. Jr., 39-28, 43-9, 43-17, 43-19
Patton, J.T., 47-8, 47-25, 48-19
Patton, L.D., v, 4-1, 4-11
Paul, G.W., 47-25, 47-26
Pauley, P.O., 54-12
Paulsell. B.L., 44-20, 44-50
Pavlova, S.P., 25-26
Pavnter. D.D.. 36-10
Paiton, E.. 29-9
Peaceman, D.W., 4451, 45-14, 48-16 to
21-21, 40.38, 46-3, 46-43 to 46-45
Oilfield Publications Ltd., viii
Oilwell Div. of U.S. Steel Corp., v
Oilwell Research, 26-6
Olds, R.H., 21-10, 21-11, 21-20, 23-13,
48-20
Pearson, A.J., 52-1, 53-l
Peerless Manufacturing Co., vi, 12-43
Peery, J.H., 48-18
Peni, D.Y., ix, 20-7, 20-8, 20-18, 23-13,
25-2, 25-l I, 25-20
Oleinikova, A.L., 25-25
Oliver, D.W., 50-38
Oliver, F.L.. 29-l
Oliver, L.R., x, 39-20. 39-21, 39-28
OMeara, D.J. Jr., 28-7, 28-12, 28-15
Omnes, G., 51-52
ONeil, R.K., 7-17
Organick, E.I., 21-10, 21-11, 21-13, 21-15,
21-16, 21-20, 39-4, 39-27
Orkiszewski, J., 7-12, 7-17, 34-37 to 3440,
34-55
Orr, F.M. Jr., 23.l,23-13,45-14,48-9,48-19
Osborn, F.E. III, 54-12
Osif, T.L.. 24-13, 24-23
Osoba, IS., 28-15
25-8, 25-16, 25-17, 25-23, 39-28, 48-18
Penick, D.P., 12-43
Pennbaker, P.E.. 53-26
Penny, G.S., 55-12
Perkins, T.K., 44-49, 45-14, 4643
Perkins, T.K. Jr., x, 55-2. 55-10
Perry, C.W.. 25-25, 46-45
Perry Equipment Co., vi1
Perry, J.H., 20-18, 22-22
Perry. R.H., vii, 25-15
Pet. Engr., 16-16
Pet. Equipment. 16-16
Peters, B.A., 1243
Peterson, A.V., 39-16, 39-28
Peterson, M.E.. 46-44
Ostroff, A.G., 24-22, 4451
Peterson, R.A., 51-52
Peterson, R.E., 25-22
OSullivan, T.D., 25-21
Otis Engineering Corp., v
Otsuka, E.. 25-24
Otto. F.D.. 25-23. 25-28
Ovchinnikov, A.A.. 12-43
Overbeek, J.Th.G., x, 47-25
Overton, H.L., 49-42
Owen, J.D., 26-33
Owen, L.B., 55-l 1
Owen, W.W., 28-11, 28-15
Owens, W.W., 45-13, 47-20, 47-26
P
Paasch, R.D., 41-37
Pabley, A.S., 54-14
Pacific Energy Assn., 13-59
Packard, H.C., 16-16
Padmanabhan. L., 48-19
Paillet, F., 51.13, 51-51
Paine, P., 41-37
Palmer, F.S., 45-15
Palmer, I.D.. 55-12
Palmour. H.H., 6-72
Pankov, A.G., 25-25
Panteleev, V.G., ix, 28-15
Panvelker, S.B., 40-38, 47-24
Paragon Engineering Services Inc., vii
Paratella, A.A., 25-22
Pardue, G.H., 51-52
Parent, C.F., 44-51
Parker, P.D.M., 25-22
Parks. A.S., 12-43
Parks, T.W., xii, 51-51
Parmley, J.L., 55-12
Parrish, D.R., 46-40, 46-43, 46-44
Parrish, W.R., 25-2,25-5.25-S, 25.20,25-27
Parsons, R.L., 39-28, 40-18, 40-19, 40-38,
44-7 to 449, 4426, 4429, 44-30,
44-32, 4449, 45-14. 45-15
Peterson. R.L., 45-15
Petrie, H., 6-l. 6-34. 6-72
Petrie, T.A., 41-37
Petroleum de Venezuela S.A.. 27-9
Petroleum Publishing Co.. 18-52
Petrov, A.N., 19-34, 25-25
Petrunia, J.P., 25-28
Peveraro, R., 53-26
Pickett, G.R., 51-50
Pierce, H.R., 30-8, 30-16
Pierre, M.L., 54-12
Pierson, N.O., 54-14
Pierson, R.G., 48-18, 48-19
Pinson. J., 4450
Piper, A.M., 24-19, 24-23
Pirie, G., 50-38
Piros, J.J.. 16-16
Pirson, S.J., ix, 29-9, 39-28, 40-17. 40-38.
43-16, 43-17, 4449, 4942
Pittman, D., 51-52
Pittman, G.M., 46-44
Pittman, R.W., 34-55
Pitzer, K.S., 20-13, 24-15, 24-23, 25-24
Plasek, R.E., xi, 50-38
Platt, C.R., 37-27
Platteeuw, J.C., 25-2, 25-5, 25-6. 25-10,
25-20, 25-23
Plenty Metro1 Ltd., vi, 12-43
Plisga, G.J., 30-1, 31-l
Plummer, F.B., 24-22
Poettmann, F.H.. ix, x, 25-25, 34-1, 34-4,
34-9, 34-28, 34-37, 34-46, 34-55.
34-56, 39-28, 46-13, 46-14. 46-16.
46-37. 46-44, 46-45
Polglase, M.F., 25-21
Pollak, A., 12-43
Pollard, P., 54-14
Pollard, T.A., 39-l. 40-38, 58-2
Pollitzer, F., 25-22
Pollock, C.B., 46-44, 55-10
Pontious, S.B., 45-15
Pontius, P.E., l-71
Pope, G.A., xi, 23-13, 47-5. 47-24 to
47-26, 48- 18
Pope, S.H., 16-16
Porta-Test Systems Ltd., vi. 12-43
Postgate, J.R., 24-22
Poston, S.W., 36-1, 36-10, 46-37, 46-45
Pottier, J.. 45-15
Poupon, A., 49-4 1
Powers, W.J., 7-l
Pozzi, A.L., 45-14
Prats, M., 37-20 to 37-22, 44-20, 44-25,
44-28 to 44-32, 44-34, 4449, 4450,
46-43, 46-45, 46-46
Prausnitz, J.M., 20-18, 23-13, 25-2, 25-5,
25-8. 25.14, 25-20, 25-21
Pray. H.A., 25-22
Prehn, W.L. Jr., 26-33
Prentice-Hall Inc., 57-12
Press, F., 51-50
Price, H.S., 43-17, 45-14, 48-16, 48-20
Price, P., 24-22
Prince, L.C., 24-23
Prokop, C.L., 49-42
Province of Manitoba, 24-22
Province of Saskatchewan, 24-22
Pruess, K., 48-l 1, 48-20
Pryor, J.A., 4645
Pryor, W.A., 36-10, 46-42
Puerto, M.C., 47-25
Pujol, L., 46-13, 46-43
Pursley, S.A., 46-43
Purvis. S.B.. 54-12
Pusch, W.H., 46-45
Pushkar, P., 24-22
Pye, D.S., 56-9
Pyndus, G.T., 45-14
AUTHOR INDEX 11
Q
Quadir, J.A., 55-l I
Quirein. J.A., SO-38
Quisenberry. J.L., 54-12
R
Rachford, H.H. Jr., 38.20, 4451, 45-14,
48-16, 48-18, 48-20
Rachinskii, MA, 25-21
Radar, D., 51-51, 53-26
Radke, C.J., 47-21, 47-26
Raghavan, R., 34-9, 34-55, 55-11
Rahme, H.D., 44-29, 4450
Railroad Commission of Texas, ix, 34-55
Raimondi, P., 47-26
Rambow. H.. 4451
Rail. C., 24-22
Ramagost, B.P., 35-13, 35-21, 40-38
Ramakrishnan, T.S., 47.26
Ramesh, A.B., 48-19
Ramey, H.J. Jr.. 4-11, 28-12, 28-16, 30-17.
33-23, 34-9, 34-55, 35-10, 35-21, 36-8,
36-10. 43-16, 4420. 44-29, 44-34,
4450, 46-S, 46-6. 46-8, 46-15 to 46-17,
46-19, 46-43 to 46-45, 55-I I
Ransom, R.C., xii, 51-51
Rapoport, L.A., 44-29, 4450, 4452
Rathbone, M.J., 54-13
Rathmell, J.J., 44-49
Rau. R., xi
Rawlins. EL., ix, 30-8, 30-16, 33-3, 33-5.
33-13, 33-23, 34-45, 34-55
Raymer. L.L.. xi, xii, 49-42, 50-38, 51-33,
51-34, 51-52
Raynal, J.C., 53-26
Rayne, J.R., 45-14
Reader, P.J., 43-17
Reading, H.G., 36-10
Reamer, H.H., viii, 23-13, 25-24, 25-26,
25.27, 25-28
Records, J.R., 25-10, 25-12, 25-23
Redlich, O., 20-7, 20-8, 20-18, 23-12,
23-13. 39-28
Reed, C.D.. 25-26
Reed, G.A., 16-16
Reed. R.L., xi. 47-13, 47-25
Reeds, C.B., 18-I
Reese, C.P., 16-16
Regier, 8. 39-28
Reheis, G.M., 43-17
Rehkopf. B.L., 46-44
Rehm, B.. 52-24, 52-31
Reid, L.S., 25-21, 25-27
Reid, R.C., 20-18, 23-13
Reid, T.B., 47-24
Reid. W., 33-1, 33-23
Reineck, H.E., 36-10
Reistle, C.E., 24-19, 24-23
Renon, H., 25-18, 25-24
Republic Bank of Dallas, x
Resen. L., 16-17
Reudelhuber, F.O., 37-23, 37-27, 40-38
Reuss, A.. 51-51
Reynolds, A.C.. 55-l 1
Reynolds, F.S., 41-7, 41-37
Reznik, A.A., 40-19, 40-38, 47-24
Rhodes, A.E., 3-40
Rice. J.D.. 38-20
Rice. P.A.. 25-26
Rich, J.L.. 24-2. 24-22
Richards, L.A., 28-2, 28-6. 28-15
Richards. W.L., 25-27
Richardson, E.A., 54-13
Ridings, R.L., 37-13, 37-21. 37-27, 48-20
Rigby, M., 25-14, 25-21
Riley, J.P., 25-22
Rintoul, B., 18-52
Ripmeester, J.A., 25-27
Ritchie, P.D., 25-22
Ritterbusch, W.H. Jr., 9-l
Rittenhouse, G., 24-22
Roberts, G.I., 54-14
Roberts, G. W., 46-45
Roberts, L.D., 54-13, 54-14
Roberts, 0.L. 25-23
Roberts, S.J., 48-20
Roberts, T.G., 37-14, 37-15, 37-27, 40-38,
44-29. 44-50
Robinson, D.B., viii, 20-7, 20-8, 20-18,
23-13. 25-5, 25-8, 25-9, 25-11, 25-16,
25-17, 25-20, 25-23, 25-24, 25-28,
39-28, 40-38, 48-17
Robinson, F.M., 51-51
Robinson, G.E., 48-19
Robinson, J.. 12-43
Robinson, J.D., 51-47, 51-52
Robinson, J.R., 22-15, 22-16, 22-22, 46-31,
46-45
Robinson, R.L. Jr., 20-8, 20-18
Roddy, J.W., 25-26
Rodgers, J.K., 39-15, 39-28
Roe, R.P., 23-13, 39-13, 39-15, 39-28
Roebuck, IF. Jr., 43-l
Roger, P.S.Z., 24-15, 24-23
Rogers, G.S., 24-22
Rogers, H.D., 24-21
Rogers, J.H., 47-24
Rogers, R.E., SS- 12
Rogers, W.B., 24-21
Roland, C.H.. vii, 20-18
Rollins, J.T., 55-10
Rolshausen, F.W., 24-22
Romero-Juarez, A., 3 l-7
Romocki, J.M.E., 54-14
Ronk Electrical Industries Inc., vi
Roof, W.E., II-1
Ros, N.C.J., 34-36, 34-37, 34-40, 34-46,
34-55, 34-56
Rosbaco, J.A.. 37-21, 37-27
Rose, SC., 52-31
Rose, W., ix, 28-1, 28-3, 28-5, 28-15
Rosenbaum, J.H., 51-47, 51-51
Rosenbaum, M.J.F., 4451
Rosenberg, R.J., 55-12
Rosene, R.B., 54-13, 55-12
Rosepiler, M.H., 55-12
Rosman, A., 45-14, 48-19
Ross, J S., 24-22
Ross, W.M., 54-14
Roszelle, W.O., 28-15
Rouher, 0.8, 25-27
Rowan, G.. 54-14
Rowe, A.M. Jr., 24-13, 24-14, 24-23
Royle, R.A., 54-14
Rubin, L.C., 20-7, 20-18
Ruble, D.B.. 44-36, 44-51
Rushing, M.D., 45-14
Russel, W.L., 29-9
Russell, D.G., 35-21
Russell, G.B.. 25-21
Russell, G.F., 25-27
Russell, J.T., 25-28
Russell, T.F., 48-19
Russell, W.L., 26-3, 26-4, 26-33
Rust, C.F., 26-33
Rust, W.M. Jr., 49-41
Ryabtsev, N.1.1 25.25. 25-26
Ryan, J.C., 54-12
Rzasa, M.J.. 22-22, 34-55, 39-1, 39-27, 45-14
S
Sackash, M.L., 7-17
Saddington, A.W., 25-22
Sage. B.H.. viii. x, 21-10, 21-11. 21-20.
-23-13, 25-20, 25-27, 45-14
Sage, W.H., 22-22, 39-2. 39-27
Sagramora, G., 25-22
Sahuquet, B.C., 46-43, 46-45
Saito,.S., viii, 25-2, 25-5, 25-20, 25-23,
25-24
Salter, S.J., 28-12, 28-15. 28-16, 47-25
Salthiel, W.M., 54-14
Samaniego-V., F., 55-11
Sams, H., ix, 29-9
Sanchez, M., 25-24, 25-25
Sandberg, C.R., 40-38
Sander. W.. 25-22
Sandiford, B.B., 44-39, 44-51
Sandier, 8, 25-18. 25-24
Sandmeyer. D.J., 4-I 1
Sanyal, SK., 51-52
Saref, D.N.. 28-10, 2X-15
Sarem, A.M., 28-10, 28-15
Sargent, E.C., 24-22
Sargent Oil Well Equipment Co., vi
Sarmiento, R., 51-50
Sass, L.C., 24-22
Satman, A., 46-14, 46-45
Satter, A., 46-6, 46-43
Sattler, A.R., 55-l 1
Saucier, R.J.. 56-6, 56-9
Saunders, C.D., 55-12
Sauve, E.R., 18-l
Saveleva, NJ., 25-22
Savins, J.G., 47-24
Sawabini, C.T., 46-37, 46-45
Saye, H.A., 16-17
Scala, C., 49-41
Scarborough, R.M., 4645
Scauzillo, F.R., viii, 12-44, 25-24
Schaaf, D., 24-22
Schatz, J., 55-10
Schauer, P.E., 44-29, 44-51
Schechter, R.S., 47-24, 47-25, 54-12, 54-14
Scheffer, F.E.C., 25-24, 25-27
Scheidegger, 28-5, 28-7, 28-15
Schellhardt, M.A., ix, 33-23
Schenk, L., 46-45
Scheraga, H.A., 25-25
Scherubel, G.A., 544, 54-12
Scheuerman, R.F., 56-9
Schilling, J.R., I243
Schilthuis, R-1.. 22-22, 24-2. 24-22, 34-37,
37-S, 37-27, 38-8, 38-20, 40-37
Schlumberger, xii, xiii, 50-38, 51-51. 51-52
Schlumberger Ltd., 53-26
Schlumberger Offshore Services, xiii
Schlumberger Well Services, xi, 49-4 I,
49-42, 53-26
Schlumberger Well Surveying Corp., 49-41
Schmalz. J.P., 44-29, 44-50
Schneider, F.N., 28-11, 28-15
Schneider, H.. 25-25
Schneider, R.D., 44-51
Schnitz. L.B., 43-16
Schoewe, W.H., 24-22
Scholander, P. F.. 25-2 1
Scholle, P.A., 29-9. 36-10
Schoonovers. L.G.. 53-26
Schrider, L.A., 44-29, 44-50
Schrteter, F.E., 54-12
Schroeder, W., 25-2 1
Schroeter, J.P., 25-28
Schueler, S.. 33-23
Schuetze. H., 25-24
Schultz, H.E., 7-17
Schultz. W.P., 42-l. 45-14
Schulze, R.P., xi. 49-41
Schweickent. C.E.. 25-22
Sclocchi. G.. 34-55
Scott, A.C., 53-26
12 PETROLEUM ENGINEERING HANDBOOK
Scott, J.O., 16-17
Scott, V.B.. 16-17
Scovill, W.E., 16-16
Striven. L.E. 47-25
Sears. F.W., xi, 51-50
Seelv. D.H. Jr., 25-10. 25-12, 25-22. 25-23
Se&an, B.. 51-51, 51-52
Seaesman, F., 49-l. 49-41, 50-15. 50-38
Sejnfeld, J.H., 48-19
Selleck, F.T., 25-27
Selley, R.C., 36-10
Sells, R.L., 50-38
Selly, R.C.. 36-10
Seright, R.S., 47-24
Serra. 0.. 50-38
Sessions, R.E., 45-15
Settari. A., 45-14, 48-16, 48-17, 48-20.
55-12
Shah. P.C., 48-19
Shane. L.E., xii, 51-50
Shank, G.D., 48-18
Shari@, A., 25-16, 25-24
Shatto. H.L., 16-17
Shaughnessy, C.M., 54-13, 54-14
Shaw, J.K., 44-51
Shaw, M.S., 54-12
Shaw, S.F.. 34-55
Shearin. H.M., 42-1, 45-14
Sheffield, M., 48-18
Sheffield, R., IS-52
Shehabi, J.A.N., 43-17
Sheil. A.G.. 6-72
Sheldon, J.W., 4814, 48-18
Sheldon, W.C., 39-28, 45-15
Shell Development Co.. vii
Shell Oil Co., 36-10
Shelton, J.L., 45-14, 45-15, 48-19
Shen, J., 44-51
Sherwood, T.K., 20-18, 23-13
Shiba, F.F., 45-10
Shipley, R.G.. 46-45, 48-18
Shirer. J.A., 4451
Shirley, H.T.. 39-28
Shirley, O.J., 52-24, 52-3 1
Shut. K.S.. 5-57
Shoor. SK., 25-21
Shore, R.A., 46-44, 46-45
Showalter, E., IO-14
Showalter, W.E., 46-13, 46-16, 46-17,
4643, 46-44
Shreir, L.L.. 19-34
Shreve. D.R.. 43-4, 43-16, 43-19
Shtof. 1.K.. 19-34
Shumaker. E.G., 55-12
Shupe, R.D.. 47-24
Shutler. N.D.. 48-18
Sibbit, A.. 49-42
Sibbitt. W.L., 25-22
Srfferman. T.R.. 52-30, 55-12. 6-72
Sigmund. P.M.. 28-11. 28-15
Sikora. V.J., 38-l. 38-20
Stkora. V.J., 37-l. 37-14, 37-23, 37-27,
54-9. 54-10
Silberberg. I.H., 44-50. 46-45, 54-12
Silcox. W.H.. 18-1, 18-52
Silva. M.K.. 45-14, 48-19
Simandoux. P.. 48-19
Simard, G.L.. 49-41
Simmons. G., 51-30, 51-43, 51-51. 51-52
Simmons, J., 44-50
Simon. R.. 45-14. 48-19
Simpson. L.B.. 25-25
Sims. W.P.. 40-38
Simulation Sciences Inc.. vi, 12-33. 12-43
Sinaiskii. E.G.. 12-44
Sinanoglu, 0.. 25-5, 25-23
Sinclair. A.R.. 55-12
Singh. D.. x. 37-15. 37-27
Singh. I B., 36-10
Singhai, A.K., 46-43
Skelton. N., 54-13
Skiba. F.F., 45-14
Skinner, W. Jr., 25-12, 25-23
Skirvin, R.T., 29-l
Sklar, I.. 46-44
Skripka, V.G., 25-21, 25-26
Slattery. J.C., ix. 28-12. 28-15
Sleinikova, A.L., 25-25
Slider, H.C.. 4430, 44-32, 44-50
Sloan, E.D., viii. 25-l. 25-2, 25-4, 25-9,
25-10, 25-20, 25-23, 25-27
Sloan, J.P., 39-1, 39-27
Sloat, B., 44-51, 47-26
Slobod, R.L., x, 26-25, 26-33, 43-19, 44-17,
44-19. 44-20. 44-49. 45-13. 45-14
Slonneger, J.C., 10.18, IO-37
Sloss. L.L., viii, 26-7. 26-33
Smart, E.E.. 6-72
Smart, G.T., 48-19
Smeaton, R.W., vi
Smith, A.E.. 30-9. 30-16
Smith, C.F.. 5414
Smith, F.W., 46-43
Smith, G.L., 40-l
Smith, H.D. Jr., xi, 50-38
Smith, H.V., 12-1, 19-I
Smith, M.B., 55-12
Smith, N.A.. 25-21
Smith, N.O., 25-21, 25-22
Smith, O.E.. 48-19
Smith, R.C.. 31-7
Smith, R.H.. 40-15. 40-38
Smith, R.L., 21-11. 21-20
Smith, R.S., 12-43
Smith, R.V., 5-37, 5-38, 5-57, 33-l. 33.15,
33-18, 33-23, 34-24 to 34-27. 34-29,
34-46. 34-55, 34-56. 46-44
Smith, R.W., x
Smith, S.S., Y, 5-57, 25-27
Smits, L.J.M., 49-41
Sneider, R.M., 36-6, 36-10
Snell, L.E., 25-23
Snyder, L.J.. 48-18
Snyder, R.W.. 43-16, 44-29, 44-50
Soave, G., 20-7, 20-8. 20-18, 23-13, 48-18
Sot. of Automotive Engineers Inc., IO-12
Sot. of Petroleum Engineers (SPE), 12-42.
23-13, 35-21, 39-27, 40-2. 40-37,
41-37. 45-14. 46-44. 46-45
Board of Directors, 58-l
Metrication Subcommittee, 58-22
Metric Standard, 17-7
Symbols Committee, 59. I
Sot. of Professional Well Logging Analysts
(SPWLA), 52-3
Soldate, A.M., 25-25
Sollami. B.J., 25-21
Somasundaran. M.C., 47-26
Somerton. W.H., 46-37. 46-45, 47-26
Song, K.Y.. viii, 25-l. 25-10, 25-15. 25-23
Spalding, J.S.. 51-51
Spangler. M.B.. 26-33
Sparlin, D.D., 56-9
Spearing, D., 36-10
Spence. K., 48-19
Spencer, C.F., viii. 25-23
Spencer. G.B.. 37-27. 39-28. 40-38
Spillette, A.G.. 48-14, 48-20
Spisak. C.D., 6.34. 6-72
Spivak. A.. 43-17
Squire, K.A , 54-13
Squires. F., 44-40. 44-5 1
Squires, L., 22-22
Staadt, H.E.. 54-l
Staal, J.J., 51.47. 51-52
Staggs. H.M., 48-18
Stahl, C.D.. 4417. 44-49
Stahl. R.F., 40-38
Stalkup, F.I. Jr., 23.13, 45-14
Stamm, H.E. III, 43-16
Standing, M.B., vii, viii, 6-21, 6-38, 6-39,
6-72, 7-9. 7-12, 7-17. 20-5, 20-9,
20-18, 21-9, 21-16, 21-18 to 21.20,
22-l. 22-5, 22-6, 22-8 to 22-l 1, 22-13,
22-14, 22-21, 22-22, 23-13, 24-13,
24-23, 25-17, 25-21, 34-34, 34-35,
34-55, 37-19 to 37-21. 37-27, 39-2.
39-11 to 39-13, 39-15, 39-19, 39-27,
39-28, 40-38, 45-15
Starling, K.E.. 20-7, 20-18
Staron. Ph., xii, 51-51
State of Kansas, 33-13. 33-23
Steanson, R.E., 55-l
Steel, G., 36-10
Steffensen, R.J., 31-7, 37-1, 45-15
Stegemeier, G. L., 46-9, 46-13, 46-15,
46-43, 47-25
Stein, N.. 51-52, 56-9
Steinle, P., 40-16, 40-38
Stelzer, R.B., x, 39-20 to 39-22, 39-28
Stenmark, D.G., 47-25
Stephenson, E.A., 41-37
Stephenson, R.E., 48-18
Stevens, A.B.. viii, 26-4 to 26-6
Stewart, C.H. Jr., 48-14, 48-18
Stewart, F.M., 38-20. 43-16
Stewart, M., 19-33
Stewart, P.B.. 25-22
Stiefel, E., 48-20
Stiel, L.I., vii, 20-18
Stiff, H.A. Jr., 24-19, 24-23
Stiles, L.H., 36-7, 36-10
Stiles, W.E., 36-6, 36-10, 40-18. 40-19,
40-20, 40-38, 43-7, 43.19, 44-7 to 44-9,
44-26, 4428 to 44-32, 44-39. 44-49,
44.51, 45-14
Stock, L.G., 47-26
Stockwell, A , 19-34
Stokes, D.D., 46-43. 46-44
Stall, R.D., 25.18, 25-24
Stone, H.L.. ix, 28-8. 28-15, 37-21. 37-27.
45-13. 48-14, 48-16, 48-18, 48-20
Stormont, D.H., 16-17
Stosur, J.J., 46-45
Stout, W., 24-22
Stovall, S.L., 46-43
Strange, L.K., 46-20. 46-45
Strawn, J., 55-10
Strebel. E., 25-22
Strickland, R.F., 43-17
Strickler, W.R., 44-50
Stright, D.H. Jr., 48-18
Strong, E.R. Jr., 25-27
Stubbs, B.A., 54-12
Stutz, R.M., 16-16
Stutzman, L.F., 25-21, 43-16
Suau. J., 51-45, 51-52
Suciu. S.N., 25-22
Suder, F.E., 44-29, 44-50, 45-14
Suti, A.H., 28-12, 28-15
Sukkar, Y.K.. 34-9, 34-10 to 34-22. 34-24,
34-55
Sultanov, R.G., 25-21. 25-26
Suman, G.O. Jr., 56-9
Summers, G.C., 51-50
Sunwall, M.T., 24-22
Surface, R.A., 46-44
Sustek, A.J., 46-44
Suter, H.H.. 24-22
Swan Wooster Engineering Ltd., vii
Swanson, B L.. 54-14
Swearingen. J.W.. 44-17. 44-49
Swendenborg. E.A., 24-22
Swerdloff, W., viii. 22-17, 22-22
AUTHOR INDEX 13
Swetnam. J.C.. 7-17
Sydansk. R.D.. 47-26
Symbols Committee of SPE. 59-l
Szasz, S.E., 46-43
Taber. J.J.. 23-1, 44-5 I, 47-22, 47-26
Taggart, MS. Jr., 24-22
Takahashi. S., 25-23
Takenouchl. S., 25-22
Tan, T.B.S., 48-20
Tanguy, D.R., 49-41
Tannahill. C.A.. IX-52
Tamer. J.. x. 37-7. 37.10. 37.27, 40.9,
40-10. 40-38
Taylor. D.M., 16-17
Taylor, H.S.. 25-25
Taylor, M.O.. 37-10, 37-13, 37-14, 37.27,
40-38
Taylor, T.J.. xi), 51-52
Tek. M.R.. 34-50, 34-55, 34-56
Templeton. C.C., 54-4, 54-12
Terry, L.F., 41-37
Terry. W.M.. 45-14
Terwilliger. P.L.. 40-38. 46-45
Teubner. W.G., 45-15
Teufel. L.W.. 55-12
Texas Railroad Commission. 36-10. 39-27
Thakur, G.C.. 48-6. 48-18
Tham. M.J., 45-15
Thiercelin. M.. 55-12
Thqssen. H.A.C.. 22-22
Thodos. G., vii, 20-9, 20-10, 20-15. 20-16,
20-18. 43-16
Thomas, C.P.. 48.18
Thomas. D.H., xii. 51-17, 51-51
Thomas, E.C.. 49-41
Thomas. C.B., 30-10, 30-17
Thomas. G.R.. 24-22
Thomas. G.W., 48-14. 48-17, 48-20
Thomas. J.E., 48-6. 4X-18
Thomas, L.K.. 34.1,43-17.48.5.48-18.48-19
Thornab. R., 34-55
Thomas. R.D., 47-26
Thomas, R.L., 54-4, 54-12, 54-13, 55.12
Thompson, D.D.. xi. 51-50
Thmmon. E.S.. 25-25
Thomson, I.. 6-72
Thornhill-Craver. 5-8
Thrash, J.C., 45-15
Thrasher. W-B.. 12-43
Threikeld. C.B.. 47-24
Throop. W H., xi. 49-41
Thurnau. D.H.. 48.14, 48.18, 48-20
Thury. G., 25-21
Tickell, F.G.. 24-19. 24-23. 26-2, 26.33
Tldman. J.. xi
Tiffin. D.L.. 45-14
Till. M.V.. 54-13
T~mmerman. E.H., 37-27. 38-9. 38-l I.
3X-20, 40-37, 44-28. 445 I
Timur. A.. xi. xii. 51-l. 51-4. 51-50, 51-51
Tinker. C.N., 36-10
Tinker. GE.. 47-24
Tinnemcyer. A.C., 54-13
Tinhley, J.M.. 55-12
Tittle. R.M., 45-15
Tixler. M.P.. 26-29, 26-33, 49-l. 49-41.
49-42. 51-50 to 51-52
Todd, M.. 16-17
Todd. M.R.. 48-11. 48-18. 48-19
Todheide. K.. 25.21. 25-22. 25-24
Tokstiz. M.N.. xi. xii. 51-35. 51-50 to
5 I-52
Torcaao. M.A.. 40-38
Tarp. S.B.. 4X-IY
Torrey, P. D., 24-I. 24-3 I. 24-22, 4439.4452
Tosch. W.D.. 45-13
Towler, B.F., 4X-20
Tracy. G.W.. 30-17. 37-7 to 37-10, 37-21.
37-27. 38-2. 38-3, 38-20, 43-17
Tramer. R.R.. 22-22
Trantham, J.C., 46-43
Traverse, E.F., 46-44
Travis, R.H., 16-17
Trebin. F.A.. 25-23
Tretolite Div.-Petrolite Corp., 19-34
Trico Industries, v
Trimble. A.E., 46-18, 46-45
Trimble. R.H., 48-20
Tripp. H.A.. 9-14
Trofimuk, A.A., 25-18, 25-24
Troatel, E.G., 46-35
Trube, A.S. 20-11. 20-16, 20.18, 22.11,
22-12. 22-22
Trushenskl. S.P.. 47-25
TRW Energy Product Group, Reba Pump
Div., v
Tsang, L.. 51-51
Tsarev. V.P., 25-24
Tsaturyanta. A.B.. 25-21
Taaur. K.. 47-24
Tsiklis. D.S., 25-22, 25-23, 25-26
Turner, J.. 54-13
Turner. R.G., 34-46. 34-55
Tyler. J.C.. 48-18
U
Udell, K.S.. 46-45
Underwood, P.J., 54-13
Underwr&cra LaboratorIes Inc., IO-27
University of Texas, I l-14, 12-43, 19-34
University ot Tulsa, 24-22
Unruh, C.H., 25-5, 25-23
U.S. Bureau of Mines IUSBM). l-80.
13-45, 19.34. 24.21, 24-23, 30-8, 30-16
U.S. Bureau of Standards, 14-9
USCG Regulation 30CFR, 18.52
USCG Regulation 33CFR. IS-52
USCG Regulation 46CFR, 18.44. 18.52
U.S. Dept. of Commerce. 25-15
U.S. Dept. of Energy (DOE). x, 40.38.
46-21, 46-45. 48-18
U.S. Dept. of Interior. 12-43, 18-52, 57.11,
57-12
U.S. Fdter, Fluid System Corp., vii
U.S. GeologIcal Survey (USGS), 3-39
U.S. Natl. Bureau of Standards (NBS),
I-68, l-69, I-71. I-80, 58-9
NBS LC 1071, 58-8
NBS Special Pub. 330. 58-8
U.S. Securities and Exchange Comm., 40-38
U.S. Steel Corp., Bull USS, v
U.S. Weather Bureau, IX
V
Valleroy. V.V., 46-44
van Cleeff. A., 25-23. 25-24. 25-27
Van der Knapp. W.. 26-8. 26-33.51-50.51-51
van der Poel. C.. 44-25. 44-50. 45-19
van der Waala. J D.. 20-17. 20-18. 23-12,
25-2, 25-5. 25-6. 25-10, 25-20. 25-23
Van Der Worst. H.A.. 48-20
Vanderzee, C.E.. 25-22
VanDljlk. W.J.D.. 32-13
van Dijk, C.. 46-44
van Domaelaar, H.R.. 47-25
van Everdmgen. A.F., 30.14, 30.15. 32-5.
32-16, 3.5-l. 35-21, 37-5. 37-27. 38-1,
38-9. 3X- 1 I. 38-20. 39-28, 40.37, 40-38
Van-Guy, N , 48-19
VanMeter. O.E.. viii. 26-33
Van Oratranil, C.E.. 31-7
Vanpce. M.. 25-23
Van Poollen. H.K.. 48-18. 48-20. 51-45.
51-52. 55-12
van Wineen. N.. 43-16
van Wjik: W.R., 22-22
Varga. R.S.. 48-16. 48-20
Var;,en. J.P.. 36-6, 36-10
Vasquez, M.. 7-9, 7-17. 22-7 to 22.12.
22-16, 22-22
Vatalaro, F.J., 7-17
Vdovina, N.A., 25-22
Veatch. R.W., 55-12
Verbeek, C.M.J., 55.12
Verma, V.K., 25-18, 25-24. 25-28
Vernado, S.G., 53-26
Verrien, J.P., 36-6, 36-10
Vestal, C.R.. 48-18
Vetter, O.J., 44-5 1
Vilcu, R., 25-22
Villard. P., 25-2, 25-20
Villarreal. J.F., 25-26
Vine, J.D., 24-23
Vink, D.J., 21-16, 21.20. 22-22
Vinsome, P.K.W.. 48-19, 48-20
Vispatch. 19-34
Vivian, T.A., 54-14
Vizilog Inc., xiii
Vogel, C.B., 51-50
Vogel, J.V., 7-9, 7-17, 34-3 I. 34-32.
34-34, 34-35, 34-55. 37-19. 37-21,
37-27, 46-9. 46-43
Voigt, W., 51-51
Volek. C.W.. 46.8.46.9,46-15.46-43. 46-45
Vondy. D.. 12-31, 12-43
van Rosenberg, D.V.. 45-14
van Stackelbcrg. M.. viii, 25.5. 25.23
Vortec Inc., 12-43
W
Wachter, A., 25-27
Wade, R.P.. 54-14
Wade, W.H., 47-25
Wagner, O.R., 44-40, 44-5 1. 46-2 I, 46-45,
47-26
Wagner, R.J., 44-29. 44-50
Wahl, H.A., 55-12
Wahl, J.S.. xi. 50-38
Wahl, W.L., 37-27, 40-38
Walker, C.J.. 39-28
Walker, R.D. 25-21
Walker, T., xii, 51-44. 51-52
Walkley, J.. 25-27
Wallace, W.E.. 24.22
Wallis, G.B.. vii, 34-37 to 34-39. 34-55
Wallis. J.R., 48-20
Walsh, J.B.. 51-43. 51-52
Walsh, M.P.. 54-14
Walstrom. J.E.. 53-26
Walters, I.D., 44-51
Walton. D.L.. 38-l
Wang, H.. 5 l-30, 5 I-52
Ward, D., IO-37
Warembourg. P.A., 54.12. 54.14
Warner. B.J.. 12-44
Warner, H.R. Jr.. 45-15
Warpinski, N.R., 55-12
Warren. F.H., 16-17
Warren. J .E.. 44-29. 44-5 I, 45. II. 49-4 1
Washburn. E.W., 26-J to 26-6. 26-33
Wasicek. J.J.. 16-17
Wason, C.B.. 36-10
Wassan, D.T , 19-34. 47-26
Wasserman. M.L.. 4X-19
Wasson. J.A., 44-29. 44-50
Waters, A.B.. 55-12
Watkins. D.R.. 54-14
Watkins. J.W.. 24-l. 24-22
14 PETROLEUM ENGINEERING HANDBOOK
Weaver. E.G., 16-17
Weaver, R.H., 56-9
Webb, G.B., 20-7, 20-18
Weber, A.G., 38-20
Weber, K.J., 36-6, 36-7, 36-10
Websters New International Dictionary,
58-20
Weeks, L.G., 29-9
Wegner, R.E., 44-50
Wehe, A.H., 25-l. 25-21, 25-25
Weidner, C.R., ix, 34-55
Weidner, R.T., vii, 50-38
Weijdema, J., 46-43
Weiler. B.E.. 25-9. 25-23
Weinaug, C.F., 20-1, 40-38, 48-14, 48-20
Weinbrandt, R.M., xi, 46-37, 46-45, 51-51
Weinstein, H.G., 48-16, 48-18, 48-20
Weiss, R.F., 25-22
Welch, L.W. Jr., 43-4, 43-16, 43-19
Welchon, J.K., 34-1, 34-55
Welex Inc., 49-41
Welge, H.J., 26-24, 26-33, 40-14, 40-17,
40-38, 43-4. 43-16, 43-19, 44-7, 44-11,
44-32, 44-49, 45-14, 48-18
Weller, W.T., 37-19. 31-22, 37-27
Wellington, S.L., 47-24
Wells, L.E., xi, 51-30, 51-52
Wen, W.-Y., 25-21
Wendorff, C.L., 55-12
Wenzel. H., 25-16, 25-23
West, R.C.C., 46-11, 46-43
West, T.J., 47-24
Westaway, M.T., 25-26
Westawav. P.. 50-38
Wetlaufe;, D.B., 25-26
Wharton, J.B. Jr., 40-37
Wharton, R.P., 49-41
Wheeler, D., 4451
Wheeler, J.A., 48-18, 55-12
Wheeler, M. F., 48- 19
Whinery, K.F., 12-44
Whitaker, A.H., 52-l
Whitaker, S., 28-16
White, D.E., 24-1, 24-22
White, J.E., 51-13, 51-50, 51-51
White, J.L., 55-12
White, P.D., 4644
White, P.E., 4450
White, V.C., 24-22
Whiting, R.L., 24-23
Whitsitt, N.F., 55-12
Whitson, C.H., 39-11, 39-27, 48-19
Whittingham, K.P., 19-34
Whittington, H.M. Jr., 45-15
Wharton, L.P., 45-14
Wichert, E., vii, 20-5, 20-9, 20-15, 20-18
Wichmann, P.A., xii, 51-52, 53-26
Wiebe. R., 25-15, 25-17, 25-22, 25-23
Wieland, D.R., 54-12 to 54-14
Wiggins, W.R., 22-22
Wijen, A.J.M., 25-25
Wilcock, R.J., 25-23
Wilcox, W.I., 25-5, 25-23
Wilde, H.D. Jr., 34-37
Wiley, C.B., 54-14
Wiley, R., xii, 51-52
Wilf, J., 25-21
Wilhelm, O., 29-9
Wilkes, J.O., 34-55
Willard, R.O., 56-9
Willhite, G.P., 46-6, 46-43, 47-24
Williams, B.B., 56-9
Williams, D., 55-11
Williams, D.M., xii, 51-47, 51-52
Williams, H.L., 18-1
Williams, R.E., 44-51, 47-26
Williams, R.L., 48-6, 48-18
Willis, D.G., 51-44, 51-52
Willis, M.E., 51-51
Willits, K.L., vii, 18-52
Willman, B.T., 46-4, 46-12, 46-43
Willmore, C.B., 25-27
Wilson, D.L., 18-l
Wilson, G.M., 25-15, 25-18, 25-21, 25-24
Wilson, J.F., 45-14
Wilson, J.M., 54-14
Wilson, K., 39-16, 39-28
Wilson, P., 6-72
Wilson, P.M., 6-28, 6-34, 6-72
Wilson, W.W.. x. 41-31. 41-37
Winkler, H.W., v, 5-1, 5-57
Winkler, L.W., 25-21, 25-23
Winsauer, W.O., 26-29, 26-33, 49-4, 49-41
Winsor, P.A., 47-l 1, 47-12, 47-25
Winter, W.K.. 48-18
Witherspoon, P.A., 38-20
Witte, M.D., 44-29, 44-34, 44-50
Wittick, T.R., 51-52
Wong, J.Y ., 48-20
Wang, T.C.T.. 54-12
Woo, P.T., 46-45, 48-16, 48-19, 48-20
Wood, J.W., 41-37
Wood, M.D., 55-12
Wood, P.M., 12-43
Woodard, R.G., 57-12
Wooddy, L.D. Jr., 26-33, 38-20, 43-16
Woodland, A.W., 29-9
Woodroof, R.A. Jr., 54-14
Woods, E.G., 36-10, 48-18, 48-20
Woods, R.W., 37-27, 40-13, 40-38
Woodward, P.J., 21-20
Wooley, G.R., 31-7
Work, L.T., 12-43
Worley, S.M., 12-44
Wright, F.F., 44-51
Wright, H.T. Jr., 26-33
Wright, J., 24-22
Wright, J.W., 53-26
Wrightman, L.S., 16-17
Wroblewski, S., 25-22
Wu. B.-J., 25-23
Wycoff, R.D., 30-11, 30-15. 30-17, 44-14,
44-16, 4417, 44-19 to 44-21, 44-49
Wygal, R.J. Jr., 46-43
Wyllie, M.R.J., xi, xii, 24-23, 26-20,
26-28, 26-30. 26-31, 26-33, 28-l. 28-8,
28-10, 28-15, 40-38, 49-41, 49-42,
51-6, 51-29, 51-47, 51-50
Wyrick, J., 11-13
Y
Yaacobi, M., 25-21, 25-24
Yamamoto, S., 25-21
Yanosik, J.L., 48-11, 48-19
Yarborough, L., 20-7 to 20-9, 20-18, 23-9,
23-13, 33-18, 33-23, 45.14, 48-19
Yashida, F., 25-24
Yasunishi, A., 25-24
Yeh, S.-Y., 25-22
Yellig, W.F., 45-14
Yen, T.F., 50-38
Yoelin, S.D., 46-45
Yokoyama, Y., 28-11, 28-15
Youmans, A.H., 50-38
Young, A., 29-9
Young, D.M., 48.16, 48-20
Young, E.C., 14-1
Young, L.C., 48-18
Young, P.J., 54-14
Youngren, G.K., 46-12, 46-43, 48-18
Yuster, S.T., 28-15, 39-16, 39-28, 44-29,
44-50
Zaba, J., lo-37
Zana, E.T., 23-13, 45-14, 48-6, 48-19
Zanker, K.J., 19-34
Zapata, V.J., 47-24
Zarrella, W .M . 24-22
Zawisza, A., 25-22
Zeilo, GA, 36-6, 36-10
Zelevskii, Y.D., 25-22
Zemanek, J., 51-52
Zemansky, M.W., xi, 51-50
Zerbe, C., 25-21
Zerpa, C., 25-25
Zhavoronkov, N.M., 25-22
Zheltov, Y.P., 55-2, 55-10
Zinc Institute, vi, 1 l-14
Zlomke, D., 47-26
Zublin, J.A., 6-34, 6-72
Zudkevitch, D., 20-7, 20-18, 48-18
Subject Index
A
Abandonment pressure, 39-8, 39-10, 39-11.
39-14, 39-16, 39-23. 40-8, 40-10,
40-16, 40-24, 40-33, 40-34
Abandonment time, 41-21 to 41-23, 41-27
ABC transaction, 41-8, 57-7
Abrasion-resistant coatings, 1 l-6
Abrasive jet cleaning, 56-1
Abrasive well fluids, 6-34
Absolute open flow, 33-6 to 33-10. 34-33.
34-35
Absolute ownership.
control, 57-2
definition, 57-1
theory, 57-l
Absolute permeability, effect of temperature
on. 46-37, 46-38
Absolute pipe roughness, 15-4, 34-2, 34-24,
34-27
Absolute viscosity, definition, 22-13
Absolute zero, definition, 20-l
Absorbed dose, unit and definition, 58-10,
58-23, 58-36
Absorption, 26-11, 39-27
Absorptive interactions, 50-9
Abstract of API manual, 17-3 to 17-S
Abstracts examination, 57-9
Acceleration head, 6-50, 6-5 1
Accelerometer, 534
Accessory equipment for liquid hydrocarbon
metering systems, 17-4
Accounting method of valuation, 41-16,
41-17, 41-19, 41-22 to 41-24
Accumulator, 18-13 to 18-15, 18-50, IS-51
Accuracy and rounding of numbers, 58-5,
58-6
Accuracy, of bubblepoint pressure
correlations, 22-8, 22-9
of Organick-Golding correlation, 21-15
vs. precision, 58-S. 58-9
Acentric factor, 20-13
Acetic acid (HAc), as sequestering agent,
54-7
in acidizing, 54-3, 54-8, 54-10
Acetylene water system, 25-24
Acid,
concentration, effect on limestone
dissolved, 54-2
emulsions, 54-8
major types for acidizing, 54-l
primary requirements for acidizing, 54-l
solubility test, 54- 11
solution of limestone in, 54-2
strength, estimated in field, 54-3
treatment design, 54-9 to 54- 11
Acid additives,
alcohols, 54-8
corrosion inhibitors, 54-6
gelling and fluid-loss agents, 54-8
iron-control agents, 54-7, 54-8
liquefied gases, 54-8
retarded acids, 54-8
sequestering agents. 54-7
silicate-control agent, 54-7
surfactants, 54-6, 54-7
thickeners, 54-8
Acid concentration. effect on acid reaction
rate, 54-5
Acid fracturing, 54-8, 54-9
Acid gases removal. 14-21, 14-22
Acid-in-oil emulsion, 54-8
Acid inhibitor, 54-10
Acid number, 47-19, 47-23
Acid penetration of matrix. 54-10
Acid reaction rates, factors affecting,
acid concentration, 54-5
area/volume ratio, 54-5
flow velocity, 54-5
formation composition, 54-6
pressure and temperature, 54-4, 54-5
Acid solubility, 5416
Acid solubility tests, 54-9
Acid-soluble &ales, 54-6, 56-2
Acid solvent, 56-2
Acid strength, 54-2
Acid-swellable synthetic polymers, 54-10
Acid-thickening additives, 54-8
Acid treatment design,
fracture acidizing-carbonate formations,
54-11
matrix acidizing-carbonate formations,
54-10, 54-l 1
matrix acidizing-sandstone formations,
54-11
Acids used in acidizing!. 54-l to 54-4
Acidizing,
acid reaction rates, 54-4 to 54-6
additives, 54-6 to 54-8
critical wells, 54-l 1, 54-12
general principles, 54-l to 54-4
general references, 54-12 to 54-14
introduction, 54-l
laboratory testing, 54-9
references, 54-12
solutions, 54-3
summary, 54- 12
techniques, 54-8, 54-9
treatment design, 54-9 to 54-l 1
well treatment, 6-3, 354. 56-3
Acme thread profiles, 2-1, 2-38
Acoustic array logging, 51-25
Acoustic array sonde, 51-27, 51-28
Acoustic backup system, 18-15, IS-16
Acoustic beacons, 18-2 1
Acoustic energy, 51-I. 51-11, 51-20. 51-24,
5141
Acoustic impedance, 5146, 5147
Acoustic intensity, 51-3
Acoustic log correlation, 51-30
Acoustic log vs. core analysis porosity,
51-32
Acoustic logging,
acoustic wave propagation in rocks, 514
to 51-l 1
acoustic wave propagation methods, 51-l 1
to 51-14
applications, 51-28
conclusions, 5147, 5148
elasticity, 51-l to 514
introduction, 5 l-l
methods of recording acoustic data, 51-14
to 51-28
nomenclature, 5 148
references, 51-50 to 51-52
theory of elastic wave propagation in
rocks, 5149, 51-50
Acoustic logs, 41-8, 51-30 lo 51-33, 51-37.
51-38
Acoustic positioning beacons, 18- 10
Acoustic properties of rock, 514, 51-5
Acoustic signal transmission system, 18-3
Acoustic telemetry, 53-l
Acoustic transit (travel) time, 5 l-16 to
51-33, 51-35, 51-39, 5140, 5145,
51-47, 53-l
Acoustic velocities, 3445, 3446, 51-29,
51-31, 5143
Acoustic velocity log, 5 l-5
Acoustic wave propagation in rock,
acoustic properties, 514, 51-5, 5143
borehole modeling, 5 l-25
fluid composition, 51-7, 51-8
introduction to, 514
porosity, 5 l-5
rock composition, 51-5
stress, 51-6, 51-7
studies, 51-34
summary of, 51-11
temperature. 5 1-7
texture, 51-S to 51-11
understanding of, 5 148
Acoustic wave propagation logging, 5 l-27
Acoustic wave propagation methods,
in fluid-filled borehole. 51-12
introduction to, 51-l 1
reflection, 51-2
transmission, 5 l-2
Acoustic wave propagation properties, 5 1- 1
Acoustic wave train analysis, 27-l
Acoustic waveform, 51-12, 51-14, 51-18,
51-24. 51-26, 51-27, 5140 to 5143,
51-45, 5147, 5148
Acoustic waves,
characteristics. 51-3
compressional, 5 l-2
information contained in, 5 I- 18
shear, 51-2
transit time of, 51-29, 51-30
Acoustical survey, 540, 49-l
Acoustical well sounder, 30-7
Acoustics, units and conversions, 58-36
Acquisition and acquisition costs, 4 l-13,
41-15
Acre-feet diagram, 404
Acrylamide polymer, 44-39
Activated aluminas, 14-21
Activation energy, 46-12
Activation gamma ray, 50-3
Activity coefficient of water, 25-3
Activity coefficient plot, 254
Activity of radionuclide, unit and definition,
58-10, 58-23
Actuator ratio, 3-27
Actuator specifications, 3-27
Ad valorem taxes, 39-27, 41-1, 414, 41-7,
41-9, 41-12
Adapter, 3-9, 3-39
Adapter flange, 3-8, 3-9, 3-13
Adaptive implicit formulation, 48- 14
Adiabatic horsepower, 3442, 34-44, 3445
Adjustable choke, 5-54, 14-3
Adjustment factors, critical flow prover,
33-13 to 33-15
Administration and supervision costs, 41-12
Administrator of an estate, definition, 57-3
Adsorption approach, statistical mechanics
for, 25-5
Adsorption cycle, 14-10
Adsorption dehydration unit, 14-20
Adsorption ion exchange, 48-5
Adsorption rate of an emulsion, 19-5
Adsorption reaction, Darcys law, 26-l I
16 PETROLEUM ENGINEERING HANDBOOK
Advanced Ocean Drilling Program, 18-15
Advantages. of batch-type meters, 32-10,
32-l I
of gas lift. 5-l. 5-2
of positive-displacement meters. 32. I I,
32-12
of Sl units. 58-9
Adverse moblllty ratio waterfloods, 48-1 I
Adverse possession, 57-2
Aeolian dune sandstones, 36-4
Aerobic bacteria, 24-16, 24-17
After breakthrough performance, 44-20 to
44-25
Afterflow, 30-9, 30-10, 31-6
Agglomerator. 12-12
Agitation. in crude oil emulsions. 19-6 to
19-9. 19-12, 19-13, 19-27
in foaming oils, 12-7
in removing nonsolution gas, 12-13
in separation of water from oil, 12-27
Agitation of stored product, evaporation
loss. I I-12
Air-balanced pumping units, IO-1 to 10.3,
IO-X, IO-9
Air buoyancy, effect of, I-70. I-71
effect on mass, l-70
Air-buoyancy risers. 18-15
Air circuit breaker, IO-28
Air compressors, 46-20
Air counterbalance diagram, 10-3
Air flotation process, 15-27
Air injection, fireflood. 46-28, 46-29,
46-3 I, 46-32
Air injection rate, tireflood, 46-19. 46-28.
46-33
Air motor engine starters. IO-19
Air/oil ratio. 46-17. 46-19, 46-28 to 46-30
Air Products-Greenwich, 46-3 I
A)r requirements, firefloods, 46-13. 46.16,
46-19
An-steam injection, 46-23
Air/steam ratio. 46-23
Air/water ratio, 46-33
Airy phase. 51-12, 51-13
Alabama. 24-20, 4436
Alarm-signal loops, 16-9
Alaska, 18-3, 18-38, 1X-41, 18-42, 24.20,
24-21, 27-9, 27-19, 51-8, 57-11
Alberta, characteristics of produced waters,
table, 24-8, 24-12
ptlot proJect, 44-40
Redwater D-3 reef reservoirs, 40-2, 40.20
reservoirs, water-oil displacements, 48-6
sedimentary strata in, 24-19
Alcohols, in acidizing, 54-8
in hydrate Inhibiting, 14-6
in phase environment shifts, 47-13
in removing water blocks, 56-2
Algae, 4442. 4444
Algorithms, for applicability in jet pump
performance, 6-46, 6-47
for computing dipmeter plots, 53-16
for computing relative permeability, 28-14
for screening of micellaripolymer
flooding, 48-6
Alkaline flooding 48-5, 48-7
Alkaline processes, 47-l
Alkaline water breakthrough, 4440
Alkalinity, 44-44
Alkanolamine condensates, 19-10
Allowable depletion, 41-13. 41-14
Allowable gas velocity, 12.22
Allowable loading, 9-4
Allowable stress, 94, 9-8, 9-13, 12-38,
12-41
Allowable working pressure, maximum,
12-40
Allowable working pressures for piping,
15-l I
Allowables,
discovery. 32-2, 32-3, 32-15
history of. 41-9
production rate. 32-l. 43-2, 43-10
Texas rule, 32-l
yardstick schedule, 32-3
Allowance factor. 39.24
All-welded screens, 56-7, 56-8
Alpha emitter, SO-6
Alpha radiation, 50-2
Alternative minimum tax, 41-14, 41-15
Alternative subsea control systems, 18-49,
18-50
Alternating-direction iterative methods
(ADI), 48-16
Aluminum, 12-41, 24-9, 50-3, 50-4. 50-8,
50-18. 50-23. 50.34, 50-35
Aluminum bolted tanks. II-9
Aluminum pellets, 55-S
Alundum, 26-6
Amagatr law, 20.4
Amerada gauge temperature element, 3 I 1
Amerada pressure gauges, 30-I. 30-2, 30-4,
32-6
American Assn. of Petroleum Geologists
(AAPG). 40-2
American Gear Manufacturers Assn.,
10-12, IO-13
American Natl. Standard Inst. (ANSI),
piping pressure ratings, 15-14
American Petroleum Inst. (API),
API analysis of oilfield waters, 24-5,
4443
API barrel, 58-23
API casing and tubing threads, 6-2
API casing hangers. 3-39
API circumferential displacement values,
9-9
API commtttee. gamma ray calibration
standards. 50-20
API committee, standardization of steel
tanks for oil storage, I l-3
API committee, statistical study of
recovery efficiency, 44-32
API esttmation of oil and gas reserves,
40-12
API flanged or clamped wellhead equipment,
adapters. 3-9
backpressure valves. 3-8
bottomhole test adapter, 3-13
casing hangers. 3-5, 3-6
casinghead and tubing-head flanges, 3-4
Christmas-tree fittings, 3-13
clamp-type connectors, 3-5
crossover flange. 3-9
flange data, 3-18 to 3-25, 3-27
intermediate casmg hangers, 3-8
intermediate casing heads, 3-6 to 3-8
joint gaskets, 3-28 to 3-32
lowermost casing heads, 3-2 to 3-5
multiple-completion equipment, 3-13 to
3-18
physical properties, 3-2 to 34
thread limitations, 3. I
tubing hangers. 3-8, 3-9
tubing-head adapter flange, 3-9 to 3-l I
tubing heads, 3-8
valves, 3-11 to 3-15
wellhead assembly, 3-2
working and test pressure terminology,
3-1, 3-2
working pressure ratings, 3-2
API flanges, 3-39
API gravity, 58-24
API gravity. correction of observed value,
17-5. 17-6
API gravity of crude petroleum, 17-5
API gravity of fluid columns. 6-22. 6-23.
6-26
API gravity of light hydrocarbons, 17-5
API gravity of liquid petroleum products,
17-5
API gravity scale hydrometer test method,
17-l
API horsepower rating curves. IO-17
API independently screwed wellhead
equipment, 3-39
API joint committee. proved reserve
definition. 40-2
API magnetic tape standard. 49-37
API maximum working pressure ratings,
casinghead and tubing-head flanges. 3-4
flanged-end connection, 3-4
valves, 3-l 1
wellhead assembly, 3-3
wellhead equipment, 3-3
API Midwest Research Inst., IO-7
API modified Goodman diagram, 94.
9-5, 9-8, 9-9
API oil-water separator, 15-25
API pin thread, 9-12
API piping pressure rating. 15-14
API preferred metric tutus. 17-7
API pump barrel tolerance, 8-5
API pump designation. 8-2
API recommended practice for design
calculations for sucker rod pumping
systems, 8-10, 9-2. 9-3
API Research Project 25, 3 I-1
API rod grades, 9-5. 9-X
API safety and pollution prevention
equipment (SPPE), 3-39
API scale, relative density, l-80
API separators, 15-23. 15-24
API spec. for bolted productton tanks,
11-l
API spec. for pumping units, IO-4
API spec. for reinforced plastic sucker
rods. 9-t I
API spec. for shop-welded tanks for
storage of production liquids. I l-l
API spec. for sucker rods, 9-l
API spec. for wellhead and Christmas-tree
equipment. 3-36
API std. for hydraulic pumps, 6-21
API study on well spacing. 40-16
API Subcommittee on Recovery
Efficiency, 40-12, 40-17
API subsurface pump bores, 8-l
API subsurface pump classification. 8-3,
8-4
API subsurface pumps and fitttngs, 8-2,
83, 8-6
API sucker rod pins, 9-10
API sucker rod pumping system design
book, 9-4
API task force on performance properties,
2-54
API test method, 55-5
API threading data, 2-64 to 2-72
API torque rating, IO-5
API unit of radioactivity, 50-15, 50-20,
50-24
API valve rods, 8-2
American Sac. of Mechanical Engineers
(ASME),
ASME code for unfired pressure vessels,
12-38
ASME qualification as SPPE certificate
holder, 3-39
SUBJECT INDEX
American Sot. for Testing Materials
(ASTM).
ASTM, API scale approved, l-80
ASTM. Committee D-19 standardizes
methods of analyzing oilfield waters.
24-S
ASTM distillation method. 26-22
ASTM RVP technique, 14-13
ASTM std. viscosity/temperature charts,
19-x
ASTM viscosity charts, 6-67
ASTM wood-back or corrosion-resistant
metal cup case, 17-l
American Standards Assn.. valves. 3-l I
American wire gauge. 7-S
Amine gas desulfurizer, 14-21
Ammeter chart record, 7-6
Ammeter spikes, 7- 14
Ammonia, 14-8, 14-9
Ammonium fluoride. 54-4
Amoco, 16-13. 46-14, 46-15, 4618, 46-30,
46-33. 47-22
Amortization, 41-5, 41-7, 41-16 to 41-18,
41.20, 41-21, 41-23, 41-24
Amount of substance, 58-7. 588, 58-23,
58-27
Amphoterics. 47-7
Amplitude attenuation, 51-14
Amplitude log, 51-45 to 51-48
Amplitude/time recording. 5 I I8
Anaerobic digestion, 25-18
Analog computer, 9-2
Analog methods for areal sweep efficiency,
44-17
Analog model, 39-22, 4418
Analogies, single-phase value to multiphase
equivalent, 35-2
Analogy technique for reserve estimation.
40-l
Analysis methods, for oilfield waters. 24-S
for water drive reservoirs, 38-4 to 38-9
Analysis, of a reservoir. 42-3
of condensate liqurd and gas. 21-8
Analytic models for pump performance,
7-12
Analytical-appraisal method for fair market
value, 41-2
Analyzing crude oil emulsions, 19-6
Anchor line tension, IX-IO
Angle-averaging method of calculating
directional surveys, 53-5
Angles of incidence, Sl- I2
Angles, Sl units for. 58-5
Angular velocities. conversion of, table,
I-76
Anhydrite, 50-34, 50-35, 51-31
Aniline point, 21-3 to 21-5. 21-9
Anion exchange capacity (AEC), 52-21
Anionic repulsion, 47-3
Anionics, 47-7. 47-8, 47-21
Anions, 24-9, 24-12, 24-17. 44-45
Anions conversions, 49-4
Anisotropy of strata. 49-S
Annual deferment factors, 41-27, 41-30
Annuity. tables,
amount of, l-63
amountmg to a given sum (sinking fund),
l-65
present worth of an, l-66
provided for by a given capital, 1-66
Annular preventers, 18-I I, 18-12, 18-15
Annular temperature, 53-2, 534
Annular velocities, 52- I8
Annulus, effect on induction log, 49-17
Antelope field, Texas, 16-12
Anticlinal folds, 29-2
Antisludge agents. 54-7
Antoine equation, 20-13. 20-17
Appalachian area. 24. I. 24-6. 24-7
Appalachian oil fields, 44-44
Apparent convergence pressure, 39-l 1
Apparent formation resistivity factor, 26-30.
26-3 I
Apparent formation thickness, 53-15, 53-16
Apparent limestone porosity. 50-21. 50-28.
50-30
Apparent liquid density, definition, 22-20
of natural gases, 22-4
Apparent mole weight. 20-14
Apparent molecular weight of gas mixtures,
20-4
Apparent viscosity, 47-S. 55-5
Apparent water-filled porosity, 49-34
Application and selection, of gas scrubbers,
12-35. 12-38
of separators, 12-35
Application of acousttc logging,
cased-hole evaluation, 51-42, 5 143
cement bond quality. 5140
fracture evaluation, 51-45 to 51-47
geopressure detection. Sl-39, 51-40
hydrocarbon content. 51-35 to 51-38
introductron to, 5 l-28
lithology, 51-35
mechamcal properties, 51-43 to 51-45
permeability. 51-47
porosity, 5 l-29 to 51-35
seismic and geologrcal interpretation,
51-28. 51-29
Application of metric system,
general, 5X-3
style and usage, 58-3
units and names to be avoided, 58-5
usage for Gelected quantrties, 58-3 to 58-5
Applications, of BHP. 30-8 to 30-15
of caliper logs. 53-17
of dipmeter and directional data, 53-10 to
53-16
of ESP system, 7-1, 7-2
of fiberglass sucker rods, 9-12
of floating production facilities, 18-34,
18-35
of gas Itft. 5-l
of range of jet pumps, 6-46, 6-47
of stzing of jet pump, 6-41, 642
of sucker rods, steel, 9-2
of wellhead equtpment. 3-36 to 3-39
Appraisal equations, or1 and gas reserves.
41-17, 41-18
Appraisal value: methods for computation,
Intermediate interest rate, 41-8
safe interest rate, 41-3. 41-5, 41-6
speculative interest rate. 41-6 to 41-8
Approach factor, 13-2, 13-3
Approximate methods for water drive
behavior. 38-8. 38-9
Appurtenances, II-6
Aquathermal pressuring, 52-22
Aqueous phase relative permeability, 47-9
Aqueous/volatile gas systems. 25-3
Aquifer conductivity. 38-9
Aqutfer geometry, 38-1, 38-4. 38-5, 38-8
Aquifer material balance, 38-8
Aquifer permeability. 38-9
Arabian Gulf. 18-2
Aramid fiber, 6-50
Archie equation, 26-3 I, 49-5
Arctic,
drscovery, commercial, 18-3
environmental conditions, IS-38 to 18-40
production structures, 1840 to 18-42
special considerations, 18-43
transportation systems, 18-42, 18-43
I7
Arctic Marine Hydrocarbon Production
project, I X-3
Arctic mobile drilling structure. 18-42
Arctic Ocean, 18.38, 18-43
Arctic oil fields, 18-43
Arctic Pilot Project, 18-3
Arctic pipelines, 18-43
Arctic polar pack, 18-39
Area equivalents, table, 1-73
Area ratio, jet pump, 6-36 to 6-43. 646
Area units, SI metric system, 58-22. 58-23
Area/volume ratio, effect on acid reaction
rate, 54-5
Area1 coverage, 44-39
Area1 coverage factor, 44-7, 448
Areal cusping. 48-10
Areal pattern efficiency. 44-S. 44-12 to
44-2s
Area1 sweep, 46-14, 46-21. 46-30. 46-31
Area1 sweep efficiency. 39-15. 39-t 7 , .*,
39-18, 39-22. 39-23, 43-3, 43-7 to 4 3
44-2, 44-28. 46-24. 47-2
Area1 sweep efficiency.
at breakthrough, 44-20, 44-25
by analog investigations. 4417
by mathematical analysis, 44-13 to 44. -1
by numerical models, 4417
directional permeability effects, 44-25
methods of determining, 44-13 to 44-2
mobility ratio effects, 44-17 to 44-24
reservoir dip effect, 44-25
9,
7
15
reservoir fractures effect. 4425, 44-26
Areas of circles by eighths, table, l-28,
l-29
Areas of circles by hundredths. table, l-26.
l-27
Areas of circles, sq ft. table, I-30
Argentina, 51-33. 58-20
Arithmetic average temperature. 34-8
Arkansas, 21-4, 21-7, 24-8, 24-21. 27-2,
27-3, 46-3, 46.15, 46-24 to 46-26
Arkose sediments, 29-7. 29-8
Aromatic solvents, 56-2
Arrhenius equation, 46-12
Arrhenius reaction rate, 48-5
Arrow mot. 53-10. 53-l I
Arsenic, in emulsion-treating chemicals.
19-10
Arsenic inhibitors, 54- 1
Articulated loading tower. 18-30
Articulated tower, 18-34, 18-35
Artificial ignition devices, 46-20
Artificial islands, 18-40
Artificial lift, 5-l. 5-28, 6-l. 6-6, 6-7.
6-60, 6-69. 1844. 39-16. 40-4
Artificial lift system, 36-2
Artificial lifting, 30-S. 30-14. 30-15
Artificial lifting equipment. 41-3
Artificial radiation, 50-6
Asbestos-cement pipe, 15-7, 15-10
Asphalt quality. 2 l-7
Asphalt Ridge field. Utah, 46-16, 46-30,
46-31. 46-33, 46-34
Asphalt seals, 29-S
Asphaltene buildup, 46-22
Asphaltenes. 19-10, 19-30
Asphaltic-based oils, 19-5
Asphaltic crudes, 6-67
Asphaltic oils, 24-18
Asphalts, 39-l
Assignments hy landowner, 57-6
Assignments by lessee, 57-7
Associated/dissolved gas, 40-3
Associated gas, 40-3
Asymmetrical anticlines, 29-2
Athabasca tar sand, 46-34
Atlantic Refining Co., 38-4
PETROLEUM ENGINEERING HANDBOOK
Atomic C/O density ratio, 50-2, 50-35
Atomic densities, 50-35
Atomic H/C ratio, 46-16
Atomic number, 50-2, 50-3. 50-7
Attenuation, 51-3, 51-4. 51-11. 51-12,
51-38, 51-47
Attenuation curve, 49-34, 49-35
Attenuation factor, 49-33, 49-34
Attenuation rate, 49-32
Attic oil, 43-l. 43-2
Austin chalk, 36-l
Australia, 12-39, 27-9, 27-19
Austria, 12-39
Authority for expenditure (AFE), 15-31
Automated water jets, 19-29
Automatic backwash, 16-14
Automatic casing hanger, 3-6
Automatic control, installations, 16-10
of dry-desiccant-type gas dehydrators,
16-15
of injection-pumping rate, 16-15
of water-supply wells, 16-15
valves, 164, 16-11, 16-12, 16-15
Automatic controller, 13-50
Automatic controls,
for rod-pumped wells, 16-l I
of gas-lift well, 16-l I
Automatic custody transfer (ACT), 12-3,
16-2, 16-5, 16-6, 16-13
Automatic cycling of desiccant beds, 16-15
Automatic lease process control, 16-14
Automatic positive choke. 13-57
Automatic production-control equipment,
16-2 to 164
Automatic production programmers. 16-3
Automatic quantitative liquid measurement,
16-5
Automatic safety shut-in system, 18-47,
IS-48
Automatic sampler. 16-7
Automatic tank battery, 32-14
Automatic water-treating plant, 16-14
Automatic well manifolds, 16-l 1, 16-12
Automatic well testing, 16-12
Automatic wellhead controls, 16-10
Automatic wellhead safety controls, 16-10
Automatic well-testing system, 16-12
Automatically controlled valves and
accessories, 16-2. 16-3
Automation of lease equipment,
BS&W monitor, 16-7
control installations, 16-10 to 16-12
gas measurement, 16-6, 16-7
general references, 16-16
introduction, 16-1, 16-2
netail computer, 16-7, 16-8
production control equipment. 16-2 to
16-4
production safety controls, 16-4, 16-5
quantitative measurements, 16-S. 16-6
references, 16-16
sampler, 16-7
supervisory control and data transfer
(SCADA) systems, 16-S to 16-10
temperature measurement, 16-7
well testing, 16-12 IO 16-16
Autotransformer converter, 10-35, IO-36
Average annual ROR method, 41-17, 41-19,
41-21, 41-23, 41-24
Average book method of valuation, 41-22
Average deferment factor, 41-25, 41-29,
41-31
Average GOR, 32-15
Average reservoir pressure, 30-S. 30-9
Average reservoir pressure, determination,
35-16
Avogadros number, 50-6, 50-35
Avogadros principle, 5- 1 I
Axial-flow pump, 6-1, 15-15
Axial-flow turbine meter, 1348
Axial load(s) or loading, 2-2. 2-20 to 2-28,
2-34, 2-35, 18-6. 18-17, 18-22, 18-24
Axial stress, 2-3, 2-34, 2-35. 246. 2-55,
2-56, 9-9
Axial stress on casing, 2-20 to 2-28, 2-32,
2-35
Azimuth,
of hole, 53-1, 53-2, 53-7, 53-10, 53-17
of hole deviation, 53-10
of reference electrode, 53-10
Azimuth angle, 53-5, 53-6, 53-8
Azimuth frequency diagrams, 53-12
B
Bachaquero field, Venezuela, 24-13
Backflow, 44-35
Backflow method, 56-5
Backpressure controller, 13-51. 13-58
Backpressure curve, 34-3. 34-31 to 34-34,
34-46
Backpressure equations, 33-5. 34-30 to
34-35
Backpressure regulation, 13-54
Backpressure test data, 39-23
Backpressure testing, 33-3 to 33-6, 33-10,
33-20
Backpressure valve mandrel. 3-9
Backpressure valves, 3-8, 3-9, 11-10, 13-56
Backsurging method, 56-5
Backup control systems offshore, 18- 15
Backwash cycle, 16-14
Backwashing, 39-26, 44-43, 4447
Bacteria, 18-30. 44-46
Bacteria control equipment, 24-2
Bactericide, 44-41 to 44-44
Baffle plates. 19-12, 19-13
Baffling, 12-7. 12-13
Bahama Islands, 29-8
Balance line valve, 3-27
Balanced tangential method of calculating
Base conditions for natural gas fluids, 17-7
directional surveys, 53-5. 53-6
Balanced-type gas lift valves, 5-39
Base
Ball bearings. 13-48
Ball joint angle, 18-17
of
Ball sealers, 55-9
crude
Ball valve seat, 5-14, 5-15
oil,
Ballasting systems, 18-7
21-1,
Ballooning effect of tubing string, 4-9, 4-10
21-3
Baltic Sea, 24-19
Bat&line-Owen field, Texas, 40-33
Barge-launched jacket, 18-25
Barge-mounted deck, IS-23
Barges, measurement and calibration, 17-3
Barium, 24-9, 44-44, 4445, SO-16 to 50-18
Barn. definition, 50-6
Barrier bar, 36-4
Barrier-island sandstones, 364
Bartlesville Energy Technology Center
(BETC), 21-9 to 21-11
Bartlesville sand, 44- 1, 444
Basic orifice factors, 33-13
Basic orifice flow factor. 13-3 to 13-11
Basic sediments and water (BS&W), 16-2,
16-7, 16-13, 17-2, 19-1, 19-6, 19-10,
19-15, 19-31, 32-6, 32-7, 32-10
BS&W monitor, 12-16
Batch treatment method, 19-l I
Batch-type meters, 32-6. 32-9 to 32-11
Bathymetry. 18-16, 18-39
Battrum No. 1 field, Saskatchewan, 464
Baum& scale, relative density, l-80
Bauxite, sintered particles, 55-8
Bay Marchand field, Louisiana, 44-37,
44-38
Beals correlation for dead-oil viscosity.
22-14
Beam-balanced pumping units, 10-I to IO-3
Beam-type pumping unit, 10-16, IO-23
Bean, 34-45
Bearings in turbine meters, 1348
Bed detection and definition of well logs.
49-25 to 49-36
Bed thickness, effect on acoustic velocity
logging device, 51-16
Beggs and Brill correlation, 46-7
Beggs and Robinson correlation, 22-15,
22-16
Behavior index. 55-5
Bell Creek MP flood, Montana, 47-16
Bellamy field, Missouri, 46-3
Bellevue field, Louisiana, 46-4, 46-15.
46-18, 46-19, 46-34
Bellows-assembly load rate, 5-16, 5-17,
5-37
Bellows BHP element, 30-l. 30-6, 30-7
Bellows-charge pressure, 5-16, 5-17, 5-33
Bellows-charged dome pressure, 5-3. 5-6,
5-7, 5-18, 5-19, 546, 549
Bellows-charged gas lift valves, 5-6, S-12.
Binary liquid/vapor system, 23-3
5-16, 5-17, S-20, 5-21, 5-23, 5-37,
S-39, 542
Bellows guide tube, 5-12
Binary
Bellows meter, 13-36. 13-37
Bellows PD meter, 32-12
uhase
Bellows protection. 5-16
diagrams.
Bellows-type chari recorder, 16-6
23-2
Bending failure, 18-39
to
Bending load fracture strength of casing,
23-6
2-61
Bending moment, Sl unit for, 58-5, 58-34
Bending stress, 18-13, 18-17
Benedict-Webb-Rubin EOS, 20-7
Benzene, 244, 24-18
Berea cores, 47-8
Berea sandstone, 28-8, 28-9, 28-11, 51-6,
51-8
Bering Sea, 1842
Berl saddles, 12-10
Bernoullis theorem, 15-l. 15-2
Beryllium, SO-6
Bessel factor, l-61
Beta radiation, 50-2
Bid shopping, 15-31
Bimetallic corrosion. 3-36
Base pressure, 32-14 Bino&l coefti&nts, table, l-37
Base units, SI metric system, l-69, 58-3, Binomial distribution, SO-5
58-9, 58-10, 58-21. B&ides, 47-5, 47-10
Basic data required, solution-gas-drive Biofouling, IS-51
reservoirs, Biogenesis, 25-18
OIP, 37-3 Bioherm reefs, 36-5, 36-6
pseudorelative permeability, 374, 37-5 Bioherms, 294, 29-8
PVT. 37-3 Biological degradation, 47-5
relative permeability, 37-3 Biological surveys, IS-5
saturations, initial fluid, 37-3 Biopolymers, 47-4
Basic energy equation, 34-2, 34-9 Biostrome reefs, 36-5, 36-6
SUBJECT INDEX
Biostromes, 29-4, 29-8
Biot theory, 51-8
Birdwell, 51-18, 51-27
Bi-rotor PD meter, 32-l 1, 32-12
Bit guide, 3-6 to 3-8
Bittern, 24-20
Bitumen, 19-30, 46-31
Black iron sulfide scale, 9-8
Black-oil material balance, 37-25, 37-26
Black-oil model, 484 to 48-7, 48-9, 48-14
Black-oil reservoirs, 48-2, 48-8
Black-oil rings, 39-5, 39-22
Black-oil simulator, 36-10, 45-13
Black oils, 37-22, 37-23, 37-25, 37-26,
39-17, 39-26, 40-13
Black Sea, 24-19
Blank runs, 26-21
Blanking tool, 6-48
Bleed-type sensors, 3-34
Blender iar. 52-9. 52-10
Blenders, 55-9
Blind and test flanges, 3-25
Blind-shear ram, 18-l 1, IS-20
Blind zone on lateral curves, 49-13, 49-14
Block-and-bleed-type sensors, 3-34
Block diagram, 15-30, 51-28
Blocking agent, 56-l
Blocking fluids, 56-2
Bloomer field, Kansas, 16-12
Blotter model, 39-2 1, 44 17
Blowdowns, 1 l-6
Blowout, 18-l 1, 56-3
Blowout preventer (BOP), 3-2, 3-6, 3-9,
3-38, 3-39, 7-13, 18-4, 18-6, 18-9,
18-11 to 18-21, 18-34
Blowout preventers,
annular, 18-11, 18-12
hydraulic connectors, 18-12
kill and choke (K&C) valves, 18-12
ram. 18-11
unitized stack, 18-12
Blowout preventer stack, 18-11 to 18-19,
18-31, 18-34
Bluff body, 16-6
Boberg and Lantz method, 46-9
Boberg and West correlation, 46-l 1
Bodcau field, Louisiana, 46-21
Boiling point,
cubic average, 21-12, 21-15
definition of types of, 21-11, 21-12
mean average, 21-11, 21-15
molal average, 21-6, 21-11, 21-13 to
21-15, 21-17
molar distribution of SCN groups, 39-l 1
of hydrocarbons, 19-7
of six refrigerants, 14-10
volumetric average, 21-11, 21-12
vs. K-value, 39-12
Boise sandstone, 51-8. 51-9
Boll-weevil casing hanger, 3-6
Boll-weevil tubing hanger, 3-9
Bolted-steel tanks, 11-l to 11-3. 11-6, 11-9,
11-11
Bonding conditions, cement, 51-40 to 5 l-42
Bonus, oil and gas lease, 57-4, 57-7
Booster application, ESP, 7-2, 7-3
Booster pump, 15-17, 44-47
Borehole acoustic measurements, 51-28,
51-29, 51-44. 51-45, 51-47, 51-48
Borehole-compensated (BHC) acoustic log,
51-1.5
Borehole-compensated device, 50-15
Borehole-compensated sonde, 5 l- 15
Borehole-compensated sonic log, 49-15,
51-16, 51-17, 51-24, 51-26, 51-30,
51-32, 51-37
Borehole-compensated sonic tool, 49-32
Borehole-compensated sonic travel time,
5 1-22
Borehole-compensated transit time, 51-21
Borehole configuration, 53-16, 53-17
Borehole corrections, IL, 49- 18
Borehole, fluid-filled, acoustic wave
propagation in, 51-12 to 51-14
Borehole geometry, 51-19, 51-28
Borehole geometry log, 53-17
Borehole geophysical devices, 58-25
Borehole measurement of transit times,
5 1-26
Borehole reflection method, 51-46
Borehole size effects, 51-19
Borehole televiewer, 51-27 to 51-29, 5141,
51-46, 53-17
Borehole televiewer log, 51-46 to 51-48
Boron, 24-4, 24-5, 24-12, 50-6, 50-l 1,
50-12, 50-14, 50-32, 50-36
Borosilicate glass, 244
Boscan field, Venezuela, 6-24, lo-18
Bottle tests, 19-10, 19-15
Bottom discharge application, ESP, 7-2, 7-3
Bottom gas lift valve, selecting, 5-26
Bottom intake application, ESP, 7-2, 7-3
Bottom-seating holddown, 8-3
Bottom-seating stationary-barrel rod pumps,
8-8
Bottom-unloading gas lift valve, 5-51
Bottomhole assembly (BHA), 6-3 to 6-6,
6-3 1, 6-39
Bottomhole bumper spring, 5-52, 5-53
Bottomhole collar lock, 5-52
Bottomhole GOR, 37-23, 37-24
Bottomhole pressure (BHP):
gas wells, 34-3 to 34-27
gas-condensate wells, 34-27, 34-28
gas injection wells, 34-28 to 34-30
liquid injection wells, 34-28
Bottomhole pressure buildup analysis, 40-27
Bottomhole pressure calculations,
by Cullender-Smith method, 34-25, 34-26
by Sukkar-Cornell method, 34-9 to 34-24
flowing gas wells, 34-23, 34-24
gas-condensate wells, 34-27
static gas well, 34-8, 34-9
Bottomhole pressure gauge, 3 I- 1
Bottomhole pressure instruments, 30-l to
30-6, 30-15
Bottomhole pressure, steamflood, 46-17
Bottomhole pressures, 30-I to 30-15
Bottomhole test adapter. 3- 13
Bottomhole valve temperature, 5-46
Bottom-water, 24-2
Bottomwater drive, 40-15, 41-10, 48-4
Bounded reservoirs, shape factors, 35-5
Bounding additive, 46- 19
Bourdon tube, 13-38, 13-56, 16-4, 16-7.
30-1, 30-2, 304, 30-6, 30-7, 31-1
Box and pin entrance threads, extreme-line
casing joint, 2-64, 2-69, 2-70
Box and pin subcoupling, 9-4
Boyles law, 20-1, 20-2, 26-6, 26-7, 27-1,
30-B
Boyles-law-type porosimeter, 26-4, 26-6
Bradford field, Pennsylvania, 24-I) 24-2,
44-1, 44-4, 47-22
Brake horsepower, 10-9, 10-17, IO-19
Brazil, 12-2, 12-21, 46-3, 46-4, 58-20
Brea field, California, 46-16, 46-18, 46-24,
46-25
Brea-Olinda field, California, 46-15, 47-22
Breakdown pressures, 44-3, 4446, 56-l
Breakthrough of free gas, 40-10
Breakthrough of gas, 40-14
Breakthrough of inert gas, 39-17
Breakthrough of polymer, 44-40
19
Breakthrough of water, 40-18, 40-19, 44-4.
44-7, 44-9, 44-11, 44-12, 44-14, 44-15,
44-34
Breakthrough sweep efficiency, 44-15,
44-16, 44-25
Breast mooring system, 18-2
Breathing losses in tanks. I l-12, 1 J-13
Breccia, 29-8
Bridge plugs, 55-9
Bridging in flow channels, 54-l 1
Brightness of emulsions, 19-5
Brine displacement of product method of
solution mining, 11-13, 11-14
Brine/oil ratios, 47-14
Brine salinity, 47-3 to 47-5, 47-10, 47-l 1,
47-13, 47-21
Brinnell hardness. 2-2, 2-37, 9-5
British Commonwealth countries, l-69
British imperial gallon, l-69, l-70
British system of weights and measures,
l-69, l-70
Bromide, 19-10, 24-9, 24-12, 24-18, 24-20
Bromine, 24-5, 24-20, 24-21
Brownscombe-Collins method of water-drive
predictions, 38-9
Bubble flow, 34-36 to 34-39
Bubble Reynolds number, 34-38, 34-39
Bubble rise coefficient, 34-38, 34-39
Bubble rise velocity, 34-38, 34-39
Bubble size range of foams, 47-8
Bubblepoint c&e, 20-2
Bubblepoint equation, constants for, 22-8
Bubblepoint liquid, definition, 22-21
Bubblepoint of a system, definition, 22-20
Bubblepoint of crude, 6-21
Bubblepoint pressure, 6-39, 22-1, 22-5 to
22-9, 22-11, 22-12, 22-21, 23-3, 23-11,
24-12, 24-14, 24-15, 34-31, 34-33,
34-34, 35-2, 37-1, 37-3, 37-5, 37-6,
37-8 to 37-10, 37-15, 37-22, 39-6, 40-6,
40-7, 40-10 to 40-13, 40-19, 44-5
Bubblepoint pressure correlations,
accuracy, 22-8
empirical, 21-9, 21-10
Lasater, 22-5 to 22-7
Standing, 22-5
Vasquez and Beggs, 22-7, 22-8
Bubblepoint pressure factor, 22-7
Bubblepoint viscosity, 22-16
Buckley-Leverett calculations, 48- 1
Buckley-Leverett equation, 28-3
Buckley-Leverett frontal-drive method,
40-13
Buckling,
of ice, 18-39
of pipe, 18-37
of tubing string, 4-9, 4-10
Buildup curve, 30-9 to 30-13, 30-15
Buildup test, 354, 35-14 to 35-16, 35-19
Bulk density, 50-l to 50-4. 50-7, 50-8,
50-17, 50-26 to 50-28, 50-30, 50-33,
51-14, 51-37
Bulk modulus, 6-55, 51-1, 51-2, 51-4,
51-14, 51-43, 51-44, 51-49
Bulk pore compressibilities, 51-43
Bulk volume (BV), 26-l to 26-7, 26-22.
27-1, 37-11
Bumper subs, 18-13, 18-14, 18-18
Bundle of capillary tubes model, 28-12
Buoyancy effect, 2-2, 13-51, 18-2, 18-15 to
18-17, 18-24, 18-25, 18-29, 18-37,
18-49, 24-2
Buoyancy, effect on water-drive recovery,
40-20
Buoyancy method of gravity measurements,
52-19, 52-20
Burbank unit, Oklahoma, 44-4 I
70
Bureau of Land Management, 57-12
Buried bar with shale drape. 53-12. 53-13
Burners for emulsion-treating equtpment,
19-28
Butane as IC engine fuel, IO-16
Butterfly charts, 49-28
Butterfly diagram, 24-19
Butterfly valve, 13-58
Buttress-thread casing and coupling, 2-l.
2-5, 2-7. 2-9. 2-11. 2-13, 2-15, 2-17,
2-19. 2-29 to 2-31. 2-57 to 2-61, 2-63,
2-64
Buttress thread profile, 2-38
Bypass valve. 13-59
C
Cabimas field, Venezuela, 24-13
Cable junction box. 7-13
Cable-tool cores, 26-20, 26-2 1
Cable tray, 1846
Cabled transmission system, 17-4
Cablmg systems for SCADA, 16-9
Caddo Lake field, Louisiana. 18-l
Cadiz. 58.20
Cadmium. 50-15
Caisson-retained production island, 18-40
Caisson tutus, 18-41
CAL wzllsite analysis. 49-37
Calcimeter, 52-9, 52-21
Calcite. 19-5, 5L-5. 51-6
Calcium acetate, 54-3
Calcium aluminate cement, 46. I9
Calcium carbide leg tests, 52-l I
Calcium carbonate. 194.. 24-2, 4444,
44-45
Calcium chloride, 8-9, 54-2
Calctum citrate precipitation, 54-7
Calcium fluorides, 54-4, 56-5
Calcium formate, 54-3
Calcium magnesium carbonate, 54-2
Calcium scale. 4444
Calcium sulfate, 44-44, 44-45
Calculated bottomhole pressure. 30-7, 30-S
Calculation methods. directional surveys,
53-5 to 53-7
Calculation of relative permeabihty,
automated centrifuge technique, 28-7
lnstitut Fran& du Petrole method, 28-7
Calculation procedure, Jacoby and Berry
method. 37-23 to 37-26
Calculation sequence and supplemental
equations. jet pump.
power-fluid flow through nozzle, 6-42
programming considerations. 6-46
pump performance and return flw, 6-42.
6-43. 646
sizing considerations. 6-46
worksheets, 6-44, 6-45
Calculations for sizing prime movers, IO-17
to IO-19
of standard of mass. I-70
Calculations for sucker rods. O-2 to 9-4
Calculattons: see also example problems
Calculator programs,
for HP-4 I C. 22-17
Calibrate tails, 49. I8
Calibration, of barges. 17-3
of bellows meter. 13-36
of bottomhole gauges, 30-2, 30-3. 30-5
of capacity standard, l-7 I
of conventional acoustic logs, 5 l-17
of dipmeter tool, 53-8
of gas measurement equipment, 13-l
of horizontal tanks. 17-3
of induction lop. 49-18
of spheres and spheroids. 17-3
of tank cars. 17-3
of tanks, liquid method, 17-3
of upright cylindrical tanks. 17-3
standards, 50-20. 50-29
California. 6-5, 6-24, 6-59, 17-2. 18-l to
18-3, 19-2, 19-5, 21-2, 21-4, 21-7,
24-7, 24-8, 24-20, 26-19, 26-23, 26-30,
27-4, 27-5, 29-2, 29-8. 34-41, 34-45,
40-15, 40-22, 40-23, 41-5, 44-37,
44-39, 4440, 46-3, 46-4. 46-14 to
46-16. 46-18. 46-19, 46-22 to 46-25,
46-35. 47-22. 58-20
California condensate systems, 2 l-12
California otl systems, 22-5
Californium. 50-35
Calingeart and Davis equation, 20-13. 20-17
Caliper curve and surveys, 49-1, 49-34,
49-35, 49-38, 49-39
Caliper log, 51-16. 51-19, 51-23, 51-24,
51-26, 51-33. 51-38, 51-45, 51-46
Caliper logs.
borehole configuratton. 53-16. 53-17
for casing and tubing inspection, 53-17,
53-18
interpretation and application, 53-17
introduction, 53-l. 53-16
methods of recording. 53-16
types. 53-16 to 53-18
Calorific value, 58-28
Caltex, 46-4
Calvin field. Illinois. 40-33
Canada, l-70. 12-10, 12-39, 18-2, 18-3,
18.38. 18.30, 19-2. 24-6, 24-8, 24-l I,
24-19. 24-20, 21-9. 27-20, 33-5, 44-40,
46-3. 46-4. 46.18, 46.21, 51-1, 52-12,
58-22
Canadian Arctic Islands, 18-3
Canadian Beaufon Sea, 18-3
Cap rock, 20-6. 29-7
Capacitance kilovars. IO-35
Capacitance of a process, 13-50
Capacitance probes, 16-2, 16-7, 16-8,
16-12, 19-31
Capacities of orifice well testers. 13-38 to
13-44
Capacities ot separators. 12-21 to 12-25
Capacities of spherical separators, 12-30 to
12-32
Capacitive reactance, IO-34
Capacitive transducer, 30-5, 30-6
Capacitor converter. IO-35
Capacitors, 10-25, IO-32 to IO-35
Capacity curves for separators, 12-27 to
12-32
Capacity distribution, 45-10. 45-12
Capacity-dtstribution curve. 44-8
Capacity equivalents, table, l-73
Capacity, of a process, 13-5 1
t;f API bolted steel tanks, I l-3
of API shop-welded tanks. I l-5
of eqmpment , 58-25, 58-30, 58-31
venting requirement, I l-7
Capactty. standard of. I-71
Capillary desaturetion curve (CDC), 47-9,
47-10
Capillary discontinmty, 28-3
Captllary forces, 37-l I, 44-31, 46.13. 47-9
43-6
Capillary imbibition, 48-4
Capillary number, 47-9, 47-17
Capillary pressure. as threshold pressure.
2X-6
averaging of data, 26-25 to 26-27
converting to reservoir conditions, 26-25
curves. 26-24. 26-26. 28-5
definition, 26-23, 26-27. 28.3
effect on unit dtsplacement efficiency,
PETROLEUM ENGINEERING HANDBOOK
end effect, 28-7
forces, 22-16, 22-17. 40-14
gradient, 40-17, 4410
laboratory measurements. 26-24 to 26-27
relative permeability calculation based on.
28-8
saturation data, 26-26
standards. 58-38
tests. 44-4
water saturation from, 26-22, 26-25,
27-8, 446
Capillary tube concepts, 47-5
Capillary tubes. bundle of, 26-10, 26-20
Capillary tubes for flow network, 26.19,
26-20
Capital expenditure. 57-l I
Capital gains. definition, 57. I 1
Capital to drill a well, 57-8
Capture cross section, 50-l I, 50-22
Capture gamma rays, 50-3, 50-4. 50-22
Carbon dioxide (CO,). 3-35 to 3-37, 4-4,
4-5, 6-4, 6-62, 8-9, 9-5, 9-8, 9-9.
10-16, 12-3, 12-X. 14-3. 14-13, 14-17.
14-20 to 14-22, 15-29. 19-29, 19-31.
20-5, 20-6. 22-5, 22-17, 23-7, 23-12,
23-13, 24-4, 24-5. 24-16, 24-17. 26-18.
28-10, 37-24, 39-2, 39-5, 39-6, 39-14.
39-16, 40-22, 42-2. 43-2. 44-42, 44-43,
45-1, 45-4 to 45-6. 45-9. 46-12, 46-22.
46-28, 48-5 to 48-11, 52-4 to 52-7, 52-Y
to 52-11. 52.13, 52-16
CO, analyzer, 19-28
CO, content, 25-5, 25-8. 25-13 to 25.15.
25-20
COJcrude oil systems. 23.10
COJdecane system, 23-9
CO, floods. 19-28
CO2 in acidizing, 54-8 to 54-10
CO, injection, 48-2, 48-7, 48-8
CO,/methane/decane system, 23-13
COhrouane system. 23-9
CO$k,k,, system, 23-9
CO, density required for miscible
displacemen;, 45-6
CO, miscible process, 45-5, 45.6
COJwater system, 25-3, 25-14. 25-15
Carbon/oxygen ratio: see C/O ratio
Carbon steel pipe, I l-2, 15.10, 15-12
Carbon steel, properties of materials. 12.41
Carbon-to-hydrogen ratto, 21-3, 2 1-5
Carbonate banks or shoals. 36-5. 36.6
Carbonate reservoirs.
bioherm reefs, 36-5
biostrome reefs, 36-5
nearshelf deposits. 36-6
shelf carbonates, 36-6
steamflood. 46-27
types. 29-8
Carbonate rocks, laboratory measurement of
porosity. 26-6, 26-7
Carbonic acid. 9-8
Carbonylsulfide (COS), 14-22
Carboxymethylhydroxyethyl cellulose
(CMHEC), 47-3
Carnot cycle. 14-10
Carr-Kobayashi-Burrows method for natural
gas viscosny, 20-9, 20-10. 20-15. 20-16
Carried interest, 41-1, 41-2. 57-10
Carrter fluid, 56-8
Carthage field. Texas, 39-3
Cartography, 58-5
Cartridge filters, 15-20, 44-47
Carved-out production payment, 4 I- 1
Case cup thermometer, 17-I
Case histories of gravity drainage,
Lakeview pool, 40- 15
Oklahoma Cny Wtlcox reservoir, 40-15
SUBJECT INDEX
Case histories. thermal recovery.
Fireflood projects,
Asphalt Ridge, 46-30. 46-31. 46-33.
46-34
combination reverse/forward
combustion, 46-30, 46-31. 46-33.
46-34
deepest. 46-28 to 46-30
Forest Hill, 46-3 I, 46-34
Gioriana, 46-29 10 46-32
largest, 46-28, 46-29
oxygen-enriched air, 46-3 I, 46-34
Sloss. 46-30. 46-33
Suplacu de Barcau. 46-15. 46-28, 46-29
thinnest producing reservoir. 46-29 to
46-3 1
West Heidelberg, 46-28 to 46-30
wet combustion, tertiary recovery,
46-30. 46-33
Steamflood projects,
Brea, 46-24. 46-25
carbonate reservoir, 46-27 to 46-29
distillation drive. 46-24. 46-2.5
fracture-assisted. 46-26 to 46-28
gas-cap reservoir. 46-24 to 46-26
Kern Rover, 46-23, 46-24
Lacq Sup&ieur, 46-27 to 46-29
largest. 46-23. 46-24
Slocum, 46-26. 46-27
Smackover, 46-24 to 46-26
Street Ranch. 46-26 to 46-28
watersand reservoir, 46-26. 46-27
Cased-hole completions, 56-9
Cased-hole evaluation, 5 l-42. 5 1-43
Cased-hole logging. 50-I
Cash contributions to drilling well. 57-9
Cash flow, multiwell template effect on.
IS-32
Cash-flow prqjection preparation. 41-3. 41-4
Casing anchor. 8-9
Casing and tubing inspection by caliper
logs. 53-17. 53-18
Casing and tubing leaks, 33-21, 33-22
Casing,
API liners. 2-1, 2-2
API types, 2-l
axial stress on, 2-20 to 2-28, 2-32, 2-35
centralizers, location of, 53-17
collapse, 53-18. 56-3
collapse pressure. 2-l IO 2-3, 2-20 to
2-28. 2-32. 2-34. 2-35. 2-46. 2-55.
2-56, 18-20
collapse pressure under axial-tension
stress, 2-55
collapse resistance. 2-l to 2-4, 2-6, 2-8,
2-10, 2-12, 2-14. 2-16. 2-18. 2-32.
2-46. 2-55. 2-56
collapse resistance under axial load, 2-20
to 2-28, 2-34, 2-35
collar-locator log, 53-26
combination strings. 2-2 to 2-4
design of strings. 2-1, 2-2
dimensions, 2-28. 2-29, 2-57 to 2-59.
2-63. 2-64. 2-66
elongation, 2-2
equations for calculating performance
properties, 2-46. 2-54 to 2-56
extreme-line, 2-l. 2-4, 2-6, 2-8, 2-10.
2-12. 2-14. 2-16. 2-18. 2-29 to 2-31.
2-62 to 2-64. 2-67, 2-68
extreme-line joint, 2-5. 2-7. 2-9, 2-l 1.
2-13. 2-15, 2-17. 2-19. 2-60. 2-63. 2-67
to 2-72
flow (annular) installation design, 5-37,
5-38
gross linear footage from net footage.
2-29, 2-31
hanger, S-5. 3-6. S-X. 3-l I, 3-37, 33-39
hanger bowl. 3-2, 3-6. 3-8
hanger-seal assembly, 18-20
injection-gas pressure. 5-54
internal pressure leak resistance. 2-5, 2-7,
2-Y. 2-l I, 2-13. 2-15. 2-17, 2-19. 2-57
to 2-59, 2-64
internal pressure resistance, 2-5. 2-7, 2-9,
2-11, 2-13, 2-15. 2-17. 2-19
joint strength, 2-2. 2-5, 2-7, 2-9, 2-l I,
2-13, 2-15. 2-17. 2-19, 2-60. 2-61
leak. 31-5. 31-6
long thread, 2-S. 2-7. 2-9. 2-11, 2-13,
2-15, 2-17. 2-19, Z-31. 2-58. 2-64
minimum-ID calipers, 53-18, 53-19
multiplication factor, 2-29, 2-31
non-API steel grade. 2-5, 2-7, 2-9. 2-11,
2-13, 2-15. 2-17, 2-19
non-API weight and grades. 2-4. 2-6, 2-8.
2-10
performance properties, 2-4 to 2-19
plain-end liner. 2-32
potential profile. 53-20
profile calipers, 53-18. 53-19
range lengths, 2-3
round-thread. 2-l. 2-5. 2-7, 2-9, 2-l I,
2-13, 2-1.5. 2-17. 2-19. 2-28, 2-30,
2-57, 2-58. 2-61, 2-64
round-thread height dimensions, 2-66
safety factors, 2-l to 2-3. 2-34, 2-35
short-thread. 2-5, 2-7, 2-9, 2-11. 2-13,
2-15, 2-17. 2-19, 2-29, 2-57, 2-64
single-weight string suspended in rotary
mud. 2-37
sizes. F, values for. 34-25
special ,joint?. 2- 1
stress in, 2-36
stretch in. 2-35 to 2-37
tensile strength, 2-2
threads, 3-2
tolerance. 2-28. 2-29
travel time, Sl-41
weight. 2-28, 2-29
with helical glrakes, IX-21
yield strength, 2-2
Casing head\. 3-2 to 3-6. 3-8. 3-l I. 3-13,
3-37, 3-39
Casing inspection logs,
caliper logs for, 53-17
electrical potential logs. 53-19
electromagnetic devices. 53-19, 53-20
introduction. 53-l. 53-17
Casing/tubing annulus, 3-8
Casinghead bowl. 3-5 to 3-7
Casinghead flange, 3-5, 3-6, 3-8
Casinghead gas, definition. 40-3. 57-5
Cast-iron pipe. 15-10
Cat Canyon field, California, 46-34
Catalyst poisoning. 56-2
Catalyst selection, guidelines, 15-30
Catalysts, 24-5
Catalytic combustion detector (CCD), 52-3
to 52-5, 52-l I
Catalytic converters. 15-16
Catalytic ignition systems. 46-20
Catenary mooring configuration, 18-10,
18-16
Cathodic protection, 3-36. I l-6, 15-10,
18-29, 1X-33. 18-34. 53-19, 53-20
Canon exchange, 24-20, 47-20. 47-21
Cation exchange capacity (CEC), 50-15.
52-2 I
Cationics. 47-7
Cations. 24-9. 24-19, 4445
Cations conversions. 49-4
Caustic Roodmg. 19-28. 44-40, 48-5, 48-7
Caustic soda. 14-22
Cavern storage application. ESP, 7-l. 7-2
Cavmgs. 33-2 1
Cavitation, 6-32 to 6-36, 6-41 to 6-43,
6-45, 6-46, 6-50. 6-60
Cavitation area, 6-37
Cavitation correction, 6-38
Cavity pumps. 19-5
Cellophane diaphragm, 26-24
Cellulose derivative thickener, 55-5. 55-6
Celsius scale. 58-5, 58-39
Celsius temperature, umt and definitmn.
58-7, 5X-10
Cement bond, 35-4, 56-4
Cement bond logging, 51-40
Cement bond quality;
bond to casing and to high velocity
formation. 5 l-40. 51-4 I
bonding conditions summary. 5 l-42
free pipe. 5 I-40
good bond to casing and formation, 51-40
partial bonding, 5 I-41
Cement evaluation log. 5 l-42
Cement Evaluation Tool. 5 I-4 I
Cement lining for steel pipe, IS-IO
Cement sheath, 51-40. 51-41
Cement slurry, 56-4
Cementation, 26-2. 40-8. 40- 1 I, 5% I
Cementation factor, 26-29
Central America, 25 18. 58-20
Central battery systems, 6-60, 6-62. 32-7
Centralized control room, 18-46
Centrifugal compressor. 14-8
Centrifugal compressor efficiencies, 14-9
Centrifugal force, 6-63. 12-7. 12-8. 12.10,
12-13, 12-14, 12-19. 12-20. 13-45.
14-3. 19-6, 19-15
Centrifugal gas scrubbers, 12-20, 12-21
Cenlrifugal (elbow) meters. 13-45, 13-49
Centrifugal pump. 6-l. 6-34. 6-49, 6-S I,
6-62. 7-2. 7-3. 15-15, 15.17. 19-S.
44-42. 4447
Centrifugal separator. 12-20
Centrifuge extraction method. 26-22
Centrifuge method for determining water
and sediment in ml, 17-1, 17-5
Centrifuge method of capillary pressure
measurement, 26-24. 26-25
Centrifuge technique for determining
relative permeability. 28-7. 28. Il. 28-12
Centrifuges, 15-20, 19-6, 26-22
Cenlripetal flow, 12-20
Cerveza platform. 18-2. 18-23
Chain drives, lo-12
Chain rule for derivatives. 37. I3
Chaining, 19-13
Chamber installations. gas lift. 5-19, 5-50 to
5-52
Chamber length equation, 5-51, 5-52
Chamber operating gas lift valves. 5-51
Channel cut and fll. S3-12. 53-13
Channeling, m acidizing, 54-8, 54-10
in cement bonding, 51-41
in emulsion treater, 19-23
in glass wool packing, 19-14
of injection water, 44-3
Channels. permeability of, 26-15. 26-16
Chanslor-Western Oil and Development
Co., 46-15, 46-19
Chapel Hill field, Texas, 39-3, 39-20 to
39-22
Characteristics of well fluids. 12-3, 12-21
Characterization factor, 21-3 to 21-l I.
21.13, 21.14. 21.21. 39-l 1
Characterization of the reservoir.
engineering, 36-6 to 36-8
geology, 36-3 to 56-6
geophysics, 36-8, 36-9
PETROLEUM ENGINEERING HANDBOOK
Charge pump, 6-62
Charged particle accelerators, SO-6
Charles law, 20-1, 20-Z
Charpy impact values, 18-21
Charpy tests, 12-41
Charpy V-notch impact requirements, 3-38
Chart Rcor- I, 49-21
Chart Rcor-2, 49-21, 49-24
Chart Rcor-4, 49-18
Charts used in BHP gauges, 30-2
Chase water, 47-2, 47-11
Chatter condition, 5-16
Cheater bars, 9-10
Checklist, deck and subsea BOP testing,
18-12
Chelating agents, 44-45
Chemical absorption, 48-2
Chemical alteration of formation, 51-20
Chemical analyses, interpretation of, 24-18
Chemical analyses of produced waters, 24-2
Chemical analysis, 21-1, 21-2
Chemical and mechanical properties of
plastic sucker rods, 9-l 1
Chemical corrosion inhibitor, 8-9
Chemical degradation, 47-5, 47-22, 48-2
Chemical demulsifiers, 19-9 to 19-12, 19-32
Chemical destabilization, 19-7, 19-8
Chemical diffusion. 28-13
Chemical distributor for flowlines, 19-11
Chemical flood model, 48-4, 48-5, 48-7
Chemical flooding,
chemical agent numerical dispersion,
48-10
high-pH processes, 47-18 to 47-22
improved (enhanced) recovery, 40-4, 48-2
introduction, 47-1
low-IFT processes, 47-9 to 47-18
mobility control processes, 47-1 to 47-9
production, 46-3
ieferences, 47-24 to 47-26
summary, 47-22, 47-23
Chemical jnhibitors, 3-35, 6-55, 44-42
Chemical injection valves, 3-35
Chemical kinetics, 46-12, 46-13, 46-37
Chemical potential, 25-6, 25-9
Chemical potential sink, 47-1.5
Chemical properties of oilfield waters, 24-5
Chemical reaction kinetics, 46-1 I, 46-12
Chemical reservoirs, 29-6, 29-8
Chemical scavengers, 15-29
Chemical stain kit, 52-9
Chemical stoichiometry, 46-12
Chemicals in oil and gas separation, 12-7.
12-13
Chevron, 46-14, 46-15, 46-18, 47-22
Chevron Oil Field Research Co., 5149
Chevron packing, 18-15
Chew and Connally method, 22-14, 22-15
Chile, 58-20
Chiller, 14-8 to 14-10
China, Peoples Republic of, 12-39
Chloride stress cracking, 3-35, 3-36
Chloride test, 27-l
Chlorides, 24-9, 24-18, 44-44
Chlorine, 44-43, 46-20, 50-3, 50-4. 50-11.
50-12, 50-18, 50-21, 50-34
Choke capacity chart, 5-8
Choke-control operation, 5-41 to 5-44
Choke nipple, 13-56
Choke performance curve, 34-46, 34-50
Christmas-tree assembly, 3-8 to 3-l 1, 3-13,
3-17, 3-39
Christmas-tree tittings, 3-13
Christmas trees, offshore, 18-3, 18-28,
18-31, 18-32, 18-34, 18-37, 18-38
Chromatogram interpretation, 52-16
Chromatograph/thermaI conductivity
detector, 52-6
Chromatography, 39-6
Chromic acid, 11-6
Chromium, 9-5
Circuit breakers, 10-28, lo-30
Circular conduits, fluid flow in, 26-10
Circular drainage area, 35-6
Circular flotation chamber, 15-27
Circumferences of circles by eighths, table,
l-28, 1-29
Circumferences of circles by hundredths,
table, l-24, 1-25
Circumferential bond image, 51-42
Circumferential displacement, 9-9, 9-10
Cities Service, 46-14, 46-15, 46-18, 46-20,
46-2 1
Citric acid as sequestering agent, 44-45,
54-7
Clamp-type connectors, 3-2, 3-5
Clamp-type permeameter, 26-18
Clamp-type riser coupling, 18-15
Clapeyron equation, 20-12, 20-13
Clarification of water produced with
emulsions, 19-28
Classification of oil and gas separators by,
application, 12-17 to 12-19
configuration. 12-16
function, 12-16
operating pressure, 12-16, 12-17
principle used to accomplish primary
separation, 12-19, 12-20
Classifications,
of hazardous areas, 10.36, lo-37
of insulation for motors, lo-26
of material balance equation, 40-7
of NEMA, for control enclosures, lo-27
of production packers, 4-1
of reservoir rocks, 29-6 to 29-8
of surfactants. 47-7
Clastic porosity, 29-8
Clastic reservoirs, 36-3, 36-4
Clastic rocks, 29-7
Clastic sedimentary deposits, 29-4
Clastic sediments, 36-3
Clathrates, 14-2
Clausius-Clapeyron equation, 20-12, 20-16,
20-17, 46-13
Clay control, 56-5, 56-6
Clay hydration, 51-19
Clay minerals, 44-2, 50-37
Clay stabilization, 56-3
Clay types, identification and quantification,
50-2
Clay yield, 58-29
Clean-sand points, 50-34
Cleaning vessels, 12-42, 19-28, 19-29
Cleanup, remedial,
abrasive jet cleaning, 56-l
large-volume injection treatments, 56-2
mud removal, 56-l
paraffin removal, 56-2
reperforation, 56- 1
scale deposits, 56-2
steam injection, 56-2
water blocks and emulsions, 56-2
Clearance volume, definition of. 6-21
Climatological data, 31-2, 31-3
Closed aas lift installation, 5-2, 5-3
Closed linear system, 38-9
Closed-loop control, 16-2
Closed power-fluid system, 6-4, 6-5, 6-25
to 6-28, 6-30, 6-55. 6-59, 6-60, 6-63
Closed radial system, 38-9
Closed regeneration system, 14-l 1, 14-12
Closed, rotative, gas-lift system, 5-l to 5-3,
5-11, 5-24. 5-38
Closure, 29-3, 29-8
Closure stress, 55-8
CLUSTER log analysis, 49-37
CO&O ratio in produced gas. 46-16
Coal caving, 52-19
Coal tar coating, I l-5
Coal tar epoxy internal coatings, 6-62
Coal-tar-epoxy system, 15- 10
Coalescence, 12-8, 12-10. 12-11, 12-19,
12-35, 15-22, 15-23, 19-1, 19-3 to 19-7,
19-9, 19-12 to 19-15, 19-17, 19-19.
19-21, 19-23, 19-25, 19-26, 19-28
Coalescing material, 19-14
Coalescing packs, 12-10
Coalescing-type mist extractor, 12-8, 12-l 1
Coanda effect, 12-20
Coastal interdeltaic environment, 36-3
Coatings, corrosion prevention, 18.29.
18-33, 18-34
Coatings for bolted tanks, 11-l
Coatings, protective, 3-36
Code authorities for various countries,
12-39
Code vectorization, 48-17
Codes and regulatory authorities, 18-44
Coefficient, of adsorption, 51-4
of compressional wave attenuation, 5 1-4
of expansion, 26-20
of isothermal compressibility, 20-l 1,
20-16
of shear wave attenuation, 5 l-4
of thermal expansion, 58-34
Coefficients, for choke nipple, 34-45
interaction, 28-3
transport, 28-1, 28-3
COFCAW pilot or process. 46-2. 46-14,
46-33
Cogeneration of steam and electricity, 46-19
Cognac platform, 18-2, 18-23
Coherence, definition and usage SI metric,
58-8, 58-9, 58-22
Co-injection of gas and steam, 46-22, 46-23
Coke, 19-29, 46-12, 46-21
Cold drawn steel, 9-2
Cold electric grid, 19-25
Cold environment, 18-21
Cold Lake field, Alberta, Canada, 46-4.
46-34
Cold oil productivity, 46-10, 46-l 1
Cold-separation unii, 12-1
Collapse equation factors, 2-54 to 2-56
Collabse pressure equations, 2-46
Collapse pressure, of casing, 2-l to 2-3,
2-20 to 2-28, 2-32, 2-34, 2-35, 2-46,
2-55, 2-56
of line pipe, 2-48, 2-49
of tubing, 2-39, 2-41, 2-43, 246
Collapse pressure under axial load, 2-32
Collapse pressure under axial-tension stress,
2-55
Collapse resistance, of casing, 2-1 to 2-4,
2-6, 2-8, 2-10, 2-12, 2-14, 2-16, 2-18,
2-32, 2-46, 2-55, 2-56
of line pipe, 248
of tubing, 2-39, 241, 243, 246
Collapse resistance under axial load, casing,
2-20 to 2-28, 2-34, 2-35
Collapse safety factor, 2-l to 2-3, 2-32,
2-34, 2-35, 2-39, 2-45, 2-46
Collar locator, 53-26
Colombia, 21-2, 46-3, 58-20
Color of emulsions, 19-5, 19-6
Colorado, 24-8, 24-l 1, 24-20, 40-23
Colorado School of Mines, 25-9, 25- 11
Column-stabilized drilling vessel, 18-2
Combination casing strings, safety factors,
collapse, 2-2, 2-3, 2-34
SUBJECT INDEX 23
internal yield, 2-32, 2-34
joint strength, 2-32, 2-34
pipe-body yield strength, 2-32, 2-34
Combination drive reservoirs, 43-16, 45-8
Combination recovery procedures, 39-24
Combination reverse/forward combustion,
46-30, 46-31, 46-33, 46-34
Combination thermal and epithermal neutron
device, 50-37
Combination traps, 29-5
Combination valve operators, 16-3
Combustible-gas detectors, 1847
Combustion efficiency, 19-28
Combustion, in-situ,
dry forward, 46-1, 46-2
production by, 46-4
reverse, 46-2
wet, 462, 46-3
Combustion of coke, 46-12
Combustion tubes, 46-13, 46-15, 46-19
Comlith log analysis, 49-37
Common fractions of an in. to mm, table,
1-72
Common logarithms, table, 1-38 to 1-41
Common subsurface point, 53- I5
Common surface point, 53-15, 53-16
Communication adapter, 16-8 to 16-10
Communication facilities for SCADA, 16-9,
16-10
Compaction, 55-I
Compaction correction factor, 5 l-33
Compaction disequilibrium, 52-21, 52-22
Compaction, effect on porosity, 26-7
Compaction of porous rocks, 26-7 to 26-10
Comparison of fluid saturation measurement
methods.
averaging capillary-pressure data, 26-25 to
26-27
converting laboratory data, 26-25
introduction, 26-24, 26-25
water saturation from capillary-pressure
data. 26-25
Comparison of predicted vs. actual reservoir
performance, 37-25, 37-26
Comparison of project execution formats,
15-32
Comparison of separators, 12-21
Comparison of Tamers and Tracys
method, 37-10
Compatibility of coatings, 11-4
Compatibility tests, 19-10
Compensated density device, 50-17
Compensated Formation Density (FDP),
49-23, 49-24, 49-36, 49-38
Compensated formation density log, 46-21
Compensated Neutron Log (CNLTM), 49-36.
49-38, SO-29
Complementary error function, 46-8
Complementary metal-oxide silicon
(CMOS), 16-9
Completion costs, 41-9
Completion factor, 40-27
Completion flow efficiency, 37-21
Completion intervals in firefloods and
steamfloods, 46-17
Completion string inspection, 53-17
Completion/workover system controls,
1 B-48
Complex propagation factor, 49-33
Complexing agent, 56-3
Component parts of a pumping unit, 10-4,
IO-5
Composite reservoir, 35-7
Composition of oiltield waters,
Appalachian area, 24-6, 24-7
California, 24-7, 24-8
Canada, 24-8, 24-12
Illinois basin. 24-7, 24-9
midcontinent area, 24-8 to 24-10
Rocky Mountain area, 24-8. 24-1 I
U.S. Gulf Coast, 24-7, 24-8
Venezuela, 24-9, 24-13
Composition of produced stream, GC
system, 39-14
Composition ranges, GC systems, 39-2
Compositional analysis, 17-7
Compositional-balance equation, 43-6
Compositional material balance, 39-8
Compositional model, 43-2, 484, 48-6,
48-7, 48-9, 48-14
Compositional simulator, 36-10, 45-10,
45-13
Compound interest, 41-25
Compound interest factor, 41-17
Compound interest, table, l-62, l-63
Compound units, Sl metric system, 58-12 to
58-14
Compressed air, 3-3 1
Compressed vapor recovery unit, 11-13
Compressibility factor,
of ethylene, 17-7
of gas. 20-4, 20-7, 20-8, 20-10, 20-l 1,
20-14, 34-28, 40-22
of injected dry gas, 39-24
of natural gas, 5-4. 20-5, 20-6, 40-21
of nitrogen, 39-16
of pure compounds, 20-5
Compressibility factor charts, 20-5, 20-6,
40-2 1
Compressibility of CO*, 45-5
Compressibility of formation. 40-7
Compressibility of formation water, 24-12,
24-15
Compressibility of gas. 51-37
Compressibility of hydrocarbon liquids,
22-3, 22-5
Compressibility of natural gas mixtures,
17-7
Compressibility of oil, 40-7
Compressibility of pore fluid, 51-30. 51-31,
51-37 -
Compressibility of porous rocks, 26-7 to
26-10
Compressibility of reservoir fluid, 58-38
Compressibility tests, 51-44
Compressibility, total, 35-2
Compression, 39-27
Compression loading, 9-13
Compression packer, 4-2 to 4-4, 4-8
Compression plant, 39- 17, 39-24
Compression ratio, 6-10, 6-21, 8-9, 8-10,
10-15. 18-14, 39-24
Compression refrigeration system, 14-9
Compression stress in pipe, 2-35
Compression stroke, lo-14
Compression system. 1 l-13
Compression-type seal, 3-6
Compressional energy, 34-28, 34-29, 39-40
Compressional forces, 29-2, 29-3
Compressional transit time curves, 5 l-29
Compressional-wave attenuations, 51-2,
51-6
Compressional-wave transit time, 51-19,
51-24 to 51-27, 51-29 to 51-31, 51-35 to
51-37, 51-39, 51-43
Compressional-wave velocities. 5 l-l. 5 1-2,
51-4 to 51-9. 51-12, 51-15, 51-20,
51-24. 51-25. 51-30. 51-34, 51-35.
51-37, 51-38. 5143
Compressional-wave velocity log, 51-28
Compressional waves, 51-2, 51-3, 51-12 to
51-15, 51-25, 51-27, 51-28, 51-30,
51-35, 51-46
Compressive load, 18-22
Compressive strength of cement, 5140,
51-42
Compressor, field booster, 13-57
Compressor fuel consumption, 39-24
Compressor-oil carry-over, 39-24
Compressor suction pressure, 13-58
Compton scattering, 50-6 to 50-8, 50-12 to
50-14, 50-16
Compton tail, 50-13, 50-14
Compulsory unit operations. 57-8
Comsand log analysis, 49-37
Concentration, definitions of, 48-5
Concentration, units and conversions, 58-29,
58-30
Conceptual studies, 15-30
Concrete dust, 1 l-5
Concrete (gravity) structures, IS-l, 18-2,
18-23, 18-25
Condensable vapors, 12-3, 12-8
Condensate content, 39-23
Condensate (distillate) liquids, 22-20, 39-23
Condensate-liquids recovery, 39-6
Condensate properties and correlations,
21-8, 21-10 to 21-16
Condensate well fluids, 20-7, 34-4
Condensates, 11-12. 12-3. 12-32. 14-1.
14-3, 14-5 to 14-8, 14-11, 14-14, 18-28,
39-10, 39-11. 40-3. 57-5
Condensing-gas drive. 45-l to 45-4, 45-l 1.
45-12
Conductance ratio, 44-34
Conduction, 46-25
Conductive cloth model, 44-20
Conductive solids, effect on electrical
properties of rock, 26-30, 26-31
Conductivity, 44-33 to 44-35
Conductivity log, 51-38
Conductivity units, 49-1
Conductor casing, 18-18, 18-19
Conductor strings, 3-3
Cone-bottom tanks, I l-2, 1 l-3
Configurations of separators. 12-16, 12-22,
12-31, 12-35
Confining pressure, 5 l-7
Conformance efficiency, 39-9, 43-3, 43-5 to
43-7, 43-9, 44-9, 44-32, 45-6, 45-7,
45-10, 45-13
Conformance factor, 39-18
Conformity of flood, 44-46
Congo, 46-3
Conjugate gradient, 48-17
Connate water: see also interstitial water
Connate water, 24-2. 24-16, 24-18, 24-19
Connection gas indicating underbalance,
52-17, 52-18
Conoco Inc., 46-15, 46-26
Conservation, 43-l
Conservation commission, 30-8
Conservation commission completion, 41-8
Conservation equations, steam injection model,
energy balance, 46-12
mass balance of coke, 46-12
mass balance of H,O. 46-12
mass balance of hydrocarbons, 46-12
mass balance of inert gases, 46-12
mass balance of oxygen, 46-12
Conservation laws, 39. I6
Conservation of mass, 34- 1
Consistency index, 55-5
Consolidated rocks, porosity of, 5 l-29 to 5 I-3 1
Constant-composition expansion, 39-7
Constant-enthalpy expansion, 14-l. 14-2
Constant-enthalpy expansion system, 14-3 to
14-8
Constant-flow control valve. 6-5 I, 6-54, 6-56
Constant percentage decline, 40-28 to
40-32, 41-9, 41-10, 41-12, 41-17
24 PETROLEUM ENGINEERING HANDBOOK
Constant-percentage-decline deferment
factor, 41-24, 41-27, 41-28
Constant-pressure controller, 6-5 1, 6-54
Constant-pressure cycling, 39-23, 39-24
Constant-rate case for DCF-ROR, 41-18,
41-22, 41-23
Constant-rate deferment factor, 4 l-24,
41-25, 41-27 to 41-29
Constant-rate income, 41-18, 41-21
Constant-rate production, 41-5, 41-I 1, 41-12
Constant ratio of net profit. 41-20
Constant surface closing, gas-lift valve. 5-44
Constant-terminal-pressure case, 38-I to 38-3
Constant-terminal-rate case. 38-l. 38-2
Constant valve surface closing pressure,
5-46, 5-47
Constant-volume gas reservoirs, 40-34
Constraint equations, 48-4
Construction codes for separators,
ASME code for unfired pressure vessels,
12-38
ASME design equations for separators,
12-38
materials of construction for separators,
12-38
Construction design factor, 15-I I, 15-13
Construction materials for separator, 12-38,
12-39. 12-41
Constructton of meters, 13-37
Construction types for underground storage,
1 l-13
Contact angle, 28-10
Contact log, 443
Contact resistivity devices, 26-3 1
Containers for samples, 24-4
Containment of fracture, 55-5
Contaminants of water, IS-30
Continental sediments, 36-3
Continental shelf, 29-7, 53-12, 53-14
Continental slope and abyssal environments,
53-12, 53-14
Continuity of reservoir rock, 44-3
Continuity principles. 37-2
Continuous compounding, 41-26, 41-28,
41-30, 41-35
Continuous dipmeter surveys, 53-3
Continuous-flow gas lift,
bottom valve, selecting, 5-26
casing (annular) flow in&llation design, 5-37
depth of top valve, 5-24, 5-25
design procedures, 34-40 to 34-45
flowing pressure gradient curves, 5-25,
5-26
flowing temperature at depth. 5-26
installGion design. 5-22, 5-26 to 5-35
introduction, 5-2 I, 5-22
multiphase-flow correlations, 5-25, 5-26
operations, 5-24, 541
ortfice-check valve for the operating gas-
lift valve, 5-23, 5-24
production pressure (flurd)-operated
valves. 5-35 to 5-37
safety factors in simplified installation,
5-22, 5-23
slope of static load fluid traverse. 5-25
us& gas energy fully, 5-I
Continuous-flow installations, 5-21 to 5-26,
5-30. 5-31, s-34, 5-35, 5-37, 5-43
Contraction of pipe, lateral, 2-35
Control agent, gas regulation. 13-50
Control circuit logic, 3-27
Control curves, gas regulation, 13-52, 13-53
Control Data Corp. 1 48 I7
Control enclosures for motors. 10-26. IO-27
Control fluids, subsea control systems, 18-49
Control for odtield motors, IO-27 to lo-29
Control fuses for oilfield motors, IO-29
Control-head compression packer, 4-2, 4-3,
4-9
Control-head tension packer, 4-2, 4-9
Control lines in subsea completions, 18-33,
IS-34
Control manifolds, 6-54
Control of field compressors, 13-57
Control of subsea production facilities, IS-48
Control system, 3-31, 3-33, 3-34
Control systems offshore,
alternate approaches, 18-49, IX-50
control fluids, 18-49
direct hydraulic control. 18-50
discrete-piloted hydraulic. 18-51
drilling, 18-15. 18-16
introduction, 18-43 to 18-48
multiplexed electrohydraulic, 18-52
operational considerations, 1849
redundancy, 18-48. It-49
reliability/mamtainability, 18-48
safety systems, 18-47
sequential-piloted hydraulic, 18-51, 18-52
subsea productton facilities, IS-48
umbdtcals, 1849
Control-valve travel, 13-55
Controlled~solubility particulate solids, 54-10
Controller types, 16-3 to 16-5
Controllinginjection-pumping rate, 16-14
Controls nomenclature, 13-49, 13-50
Convection. 46-4, 46-12. 46-25
Convection heat-transfer coefficient, 46-5
Conventional acoustic logging.
calibration. 51-17, 51-18
curves recorded, 5 I - 16
cycle skipping and triggermg on the
noise, 51-16. 51-17
log presentation, 51-16
tool characteristics, 51-15, 51-16
tool span. 51-16
Conventional acoustic loas, 51-19, 51-20,
51-22 to 51-25, 51-35
Conventional coring procedures, 27-9
Conventional crank-balanced pumping units,
10-l to 10-4. 10-8. IO-9
Conventional gas-lift equipment, 5-2
Conventional lay barges. 1837, 1838. 18-43
Conventional (black-orI) material balance,
37-25. 37-26
Conventional mooring system. 18-4
Conventional mud logging. 52-1, 52-16
Conventional resistivity devices, 49-12, 49-25
Conventional resistivity logs. application, 49-14
Conventional steel pipe. 18-36, 18-37
Conventional tubing mandrel, 5-12
Conventional wireline cores. 27-9
Conventionally mined caverns, 1 l-13
Convergence pressure, 23-l 1
Conversion factors. for density units,
table, l-79
for permeabtlity. 26-14, 58-35
Conversion factors, Sl uniti,
for vara, 58-20
general, 58-14. 58-22
memory joggers, 58-21
notation, 58-14
organization. 58-14
tables of, 58-15 to 58-21
Conversion of temperature-tolerance
requirements, 58-7
Conversion of units in Darcys law,
gases ar base pressure and average
tlowmg temperature. 26-13, 26-14
linear-flow liquids. 26-13
permeabtlity conversion factors. 26-14, 26-15
radial-flow liquids. 26-13
Conversion rules. 585 to 587
Conversion, tables of,
angular velocity, l-76
areas, 1-74
capacities, l-74
density, 1-79
energy, l-78
heat, l-78
heat flow, l-79
lengths, I-7 1
linear velocity, l-76
masses, 1-75
power, 1-78
pressures, l-76
relative densities, l-80
thermal conductance, l-79
thermal conductivity, l-79
volumes, 1-74
work, I-78
Conveyances, tax consequences related to,
41-15, 41-16
Convolutions, 5-16
Cook Inlet, Alaska, 18-3
Cooling, creates hydrates, 14-3
cycles, 14-11
gas to condense hydrocarbon vapor, 14-5
in condensate removal, 14-1, 14-2
in gas-to-gas heat exchangers, 14-I 1
load, 14-10
with refrigerants, 14-Y
Copper electrodes, 39-21
Coquinas, 29-4, 29-8
C/O ratio, 50-l to 50-4, 50-9. 50-22,
50-24, 50-35, 50-36
Core analysis and core analysis data, 24. I,
26-l, 26-7, 26-22. 26-23. 36-3, 37-3.
39-18, 40-l. 40-3. 40-5, 40.12. 40.16,
40-19. 40-25, 41-8. 424. 446, 46-21,
50-26, 50-35 to 50.37, 51.31, 51-32, 52-26
Core analysis, average values,
gravity, 27-5, 27-7, 27-l 1. 27-13, 27-15.
27-17. 27-19
interstitial water saturation. 27-3. 27-5,
27-7, 27-11, 27-13, 27-15, 27-17.
27-19, 27-20
oil saturation, 27-3, 27-5.27-7. 27-9, 27-1 I,
27-13, 27.15, 27-17. 27.19, 27-20
permeability. 27-3 to 27-6. 27-8. 27-10 to
27-17, 27-19, 27-20
permeability, 27-3 to 27-6, 27-8. 27-10 to
27-17, 27-19, 27-20
porosity, 27-3. 27-5. 27-7, 27-8, 27-l 1,
27-13, 27-15, 27-17. 27-19, 27-20
total water saturation, 27-5, 27-7. 27-I 1.
27-13, 27-15. 27-17
water saturation, reservoir. 27-20
Core analysis of different formations,
data from non-U.S. areas. 27-S
data from U.S. areas, 27-9
liquid saturations, 27-8
percussion sidewall core data, 27-9
permeability, 27-l
porosity, 27-l
Core-barrel sample, 56-7
Core barrels, rubber-sleeve, 56-3, 56-6
Core-sample resistivity cell, 26-28
CORIBAND log analysis, 49-37
Coring data, 4 l-8
Coring program,
core analyses, 46-2 I
during and after project. 46-20
log analyses. 46-2 I
microscopic studies. 46-2 1
mineral analyses of cores, 46-2 1
photographic and visual examination. 46-2 1
tracers, 46-2 I
Corner well producing cuts, 4424, 44-25
SUBJECT INDEX 25
Correction,
of observed API gravity to API gravity at
60F. 17-5, 17-6
of observed density to density at 15OC, 17-6
of observed relative density to relative
density at 60/60F, 17-5, 17-6
of volume to 15C against API gravity at
60F, 17-6
of volume to 15C against density at
WC, 17-6
of volume to 60F against relative density
at 60/60F, 17-5, 17-6
of volume to 15C against thermal
expansion coefficients at 15C, 17-6
of volume to 60F against thermal
expansion coefficients at 6OF, 17-6
Correction factor,
for dead-end oil IFT, 22-17
for gas flow, 33-2
for gas mixtures, 20-6
Correlation index, 21-9, 21-I 1
Correlation length, dipmeter, 53-10, 53-l 1
Correlation(s).
accuracv of, 22-89, 22-9
acot& log. 5 I-30
Baker and Swerdloff, 22-17
Beal, 22-14 to 22-16
Beggs and Brill. 46-7
Beggs and Robinson, 22-15. 22-16
between AOR and WAR, 46-19
between diaphragm and dynamic capillary
pressure methods, 26-25
between interstitnrl water and log of
permeability, 26-23
between maximum friction pressure and
maximum total flow rate, 6-19
between oil recovery and pore volume
burned, 46- 17
Boberg and West, 46-11
bubblepoint pressure, 21-9. 21-10, 22-5 to
22-9
carbon/oxygen, 50-l to 50-4, 50-9, 50-22,
50-24. 50-35, 50-36
Carr-Kobayashi-Burrows, 20-9, 20-10.
20-15. 20-16
chart, 40-22
Chew and Connolly. 22-14 to 22-16, 394
Cullender and Smith. 5-37
dead-oil viscosity. 22-14
dewpoint pressure, 21-10 to 21-15
Dykstra-Parsons, 44-9
empirical, of electrical properties, 26-29
to 26-3 I
empirical. ultimate recovery, 40-13
equilibrium ratios, 39-15
flow temperature gradient, 5-26, 5-27
llutd flow. 44-20, 44-21
for approximating true vapor pressure, 14-13
for liquid and gas properties, 647
formation resistivity factor, 26-29
formatton volume, 21-15 to 21-20
gamma ray log. well-to-well. 50-2
gas-plus-liquid FVF, empirical, 6-38
Gates and Ramey. 46-15
geological, 51-29, 51-30
Hall, 26-8, 26-9
Hammerlindls, 26-8
K-value, 39-12
Lasater, 22-5 to 22-7, 22-9, 22-10
multiphase flow, 5-22, 5-25. 5-26. 5-38,
5-40, 34-37 to 3440
Muskats. 39-20
of capillary pressure data, 26-26
of solubility ratios with IFT, 47-14
of steam stimulation results, 46-11
of water saturation wtth permeability, 26-27
of well logs, 49-25. 49-26
oil formation volume factor, 22-10 to 22-13
oil systems, 22-l to 22-21
oil viscosity, 22-13 to 22-16
Organick and Gelding. 21-I 1 to 21-15
Orkiszewski, 34-37 to 34-40
permeability with tube wave data, 51-48
petrophysical, 28-13
Poettmann and Carpenter, 34-37
porosity compressibility with depth, 26-8
predicts cavitation damage, 6-36
productivtty index-permeability, 32-4
recovery factor from statistical data, 40-16
relatmg fuel content to API gravity, 46-16
resistivity index vs. saturation, 26-3
Sage and Old. 21-1 I
sand-by-sand, 36-7
Showalter. 46-16
sour water stripper, 25-17, 25-18
Standing, 22-5. 22-8 to 22-1 I, 22-13, 22-14
Thodos, 20.11. 20-16
total formation volume, 21-15 to 21-20
transit time/pressure, 5 I-40
Trube. 20-I I, 20-16
undersaturated systems, oil viscositv. 22-16
Van der Knapp,. 26-8
vapor/liquid equilibrium, GC systems.
39-1 I t0 39.i3
Vasquez and Beggs, 22-7 to 22-13
velocity/porosity. 5 l-34
vertical multiphase flowing gradient, 6-43,
6-45
viscosity of gas. 20-9
water-saturated rock conductivity vs.
water conductivity, 26-30
waterflood recovery, 44-8. 4432
Correlative right. 57-2
Correlogram, dipmeter, 53-10
Corrosion, attacks, 9-l
by iron sulfide deposits. 1 I-IO
cathodic protection, 19-3 1
caused by microbiological growth, 44-44
cell. 9-2
control procedures, 39-26
electrochemical, 3-36
in casing, tubing and cement jobs, 39-24
in dry desiccant dehydration, 14-21
in ethanolamine sweetening units, 14-22
in oil and gas separators. 12-3. 12-B. 12-40
in pipe. 14-17
in power oil plunger pumps. 6-33
in reverse flow systems, 6-5
in subsurface sucker-rod pumps, 8-9
in surface system and injection wells, 44-43
in water-injection systems, 24-2
increased with CO, increase, 44-42
minimized by internal coatings, 19-31
minimized by use of plastics, 44-47
on tank bottoms, 1 l-2
oxygen exclusion, 19-30
pits, 9-5, 9-8 to 9-10
problems. 6-55. 46-22
products, 6-48. 6-59
products carryover, 39-24
protection, 1 l-l. II-3
resistant alloys, 3-36
spectal metallurgy, 19-31
Corrosion of wellhead equipment, 3-35
electrochemical. 3-36
external, 3-36
internal, 3-36
material selection, 3-36
oxygen, 3-36
weight loss, 3-36
wellhead aspects, 3-35, 3-36
Corrosion inhibitors. 3-36, 6-5, 6-55, 9-I.
9-5. 9-8, 9-10, 9-13, 19-30, 19-32,
4445. 4446, 53-18. 54-6
Corrosion rates, 4441, 4442, 58-38
Corrosive fluids in separator, 12-40
Corrosive well fluids, 4-4. 4-5
Corrugated plate interceptor (CPI), 15-24 to
15-26
Cost accounting system, 19-32
Cost and profit margin relationship, 36-2
Cost/benefit analysis, 52-30
Cost comparison, production packers, 4-6
Cost-depletion allowance. 41-5, 41-13, 41-14
Cost justification, 52-29, 52-30
Cost of emulsion treating, 19-33
Cost of engine equipment. 10-16, lo-17
Cost-plus format, 15-32
Cosurfactants, 47-5, 47-11. 47-13
Cotton Valley Bodcaw reservoir, Texas,
39-19, 39-23
Cottonwood Creek field. Wyoming, 24-18
Coulter counter. 4445
Counterbalance, 10-I to 10-3, 10-6, 10-7, IO-9
Counterflow imbibition, 28-13
Counterweight, 9-2
Counting rate, gamma ray. 50-15, 50-16,
50- 19, 50.20, 50-28
Coupling failures, 9-9
Couplings and subcouplings. sucker rods,
9-3, 94
Coverage, 40-18, 44-9
Cox chart, 20-12, 20-13. 20-17
Cracked-gas/water system, 25-26
Cracking, 46-3
Crank-balanced units, 104, IO-6
Cray-IS computer, 48-17
Creep compaction, 28-l 3
Crestal-gas injection, 40-14. 43-3
Cricondenbar, 39-3
Cricondentherm, 23-6. 39-3. 45-2. 45-4
Crnerion of reservoir performance, 32-15
Critical breakthrough pressure, 44-36
Critical constants of hydrocarbons, 20.2, 20.3
Crrtical constants of solvent gases, 45-5
Critical-flow conditions. 13-53, 34-45 to 34-49
Critical-flow prover, 13-37. 13-45, 33-6.
33-7, 33-13
Critical gas mixture, 45-4
Critical gas saturation, 28-9, 34-3 I, 37-1,
37-3, 374, 48-13
Critical hydrate formation loci, 25-3
Critical locus, 23-3. 23-4. 45-3
Critical micelle concentration (CMC),
47-10, 47-l I, 47-15
Critical point, 14-2, 20-2. 23-l. 23-2, 25-1,
39-2, 39-3, 39-15
Critical pressure, 20-2, 20-3, 20.5,40-21,443
Critical ratio for flow prover, 13-37
Critical saturation, 49-30
Critical state, detimtion, 22-20
Critical temperature. 20-2, 20-3. 20-5.
22-20, 39-1, 39-4. 40-21, 45-5
Critical thickness, 49-13
Critical volume, 20-3
Critical wells m acidizing, 54-l I, 54-12
Critique of unsteady-state k, methods, 28-7
Cross imbtbitton, 48- I3
Cross plot of photoelectric factor vs.
density, 50-33
Cross rails, motor mounts, IO-19
Cross section of interactton. 50-6
Cross sections. 41-X
Cross yoke, IO-2
Cross-yoke bearing, 10-3. IO-4
Crossbedding. 44-3
flow, 44-29
Crossflow, 39-19, 39-20, 447, 448, 48-10
Crossflow devices, 15-25, 15-26
Crosshead, IO-14
Crosslinked aqueous fluid. 55-6
26 PETROLEUM ENGINEERING HANDBOOK
Crosslinked gels, 55-5, 55-7, 55-8
Crossover flange, 3-7 10 3-9
Crossover seat, 5-16, 5-37
Crossover tool, 56-8
CRT screen display of fracturing data, 55-9
Crude-oil analysis, 2 l-7 to 21-9
Crude Oil Analysis System (COASYS), 21-9
Crude oil, API gravity loss vs. temperature,
19-9
Crude oil as semidiesel fuel, IO-16
Crude oil, definition, 12-3, 40-3
Crude oil, differences between natural gas, 362
Crude-oil disposal, 18-29, 18-30
Crude-oil emulsions,
description of treatment equipment. 19-16
to 19-28
economics of treating, 19-32
general references, 19-33, 19-34
introduction, 19-I
methods used in treating, 19-6 to 19-15
operational considerations for treating
equipment, 19-28 to 19-32
sampling and analyzing, 19-6
theories of, 19-l to 19-6
treating equipment and systems, 19-15. 19-16
Crude oil, measuring, sampling, and testing,
17-l to 17-8
Crude-oil properties, 21-1 to 21-10
base, 21-1, 21-3
evaluation, 21-1, 21-2, 214
Crude-oil reservoirs, 39-l. 39-2
Crude oil, viscosity/temperature
relationships, 19-7, 19-8
Crude oil, volume loss vs. temperature, 19-9
Crude-oil/water emulsion, 19-6
Crude oils, temperature corrections for,
17-5. 17-6
Crude price, gross, 41-9
Crude stabilization, 40-13
Crude viscosity, effect of solution gas, 6-68
Crystalline porosity, 29-8
Crystallization temperatures, 25-19
Cuba, 58-20
Cube roots of certain fractions, table, l-18
Cube roots of whole numbers, table, l-7,
1-14 to 1-18
Cubes of numbers, table, l-7 to I-10
Cubic average boiling point, 21-12, 21-15
Cubic packing of spheres, 26-1. 26-2
Cullender and Smith correlation, 5-37
Cullender and Smith method of determining
BHP in gas wells, 34-24 to 34-26
Cumulative-gas/cumulative-oil curve, 40-32
Cumulative logarithmic diagram (S-plot),
56-6, 56-7
Cumulative oil production vs. GOR, 37-25
Cup-type plunger, 8-6
Current bedding, 53-12, 53-13
Current status of thermal recovery,
geographical distribution of projects, 46-3
major projects, 46-3
potential for incremental recovery, 46-3
production mechanisms, 46-4
reservoirs amenable to, 46-3
U.S. oil production by EOR, 46-3
Curve shapes, 49-12, 49-13
Custody transfer, 13-48
Customary units (English), 17-7, 58-2 1,
58-26 to 58-38
Cutoffs on engine installations, lo-19
Cut-out rams, 7-12
Cut test, 52-10, 52-14, 52-16
Cuttings evaluation, 52-19
Cuttings gas, 52-17
Cuttings gas analyzer, 52-1 I
Cuttings, representative sample, 52-8, 52-9,
52-11
Cuttings sample geological log, 52-l
Cyberdip log analysis, 49-37
Cyberlook, pass one log, 49-37, 49-38
pass two log, 43-39
Cycle efficiency of refrigerants. 14-10
Cycle frequency, maximum, 5-40
Cycle skipping, 51-16, 51-17, 51-24, 51-45
Cycles of steam stimulation, 46-9
Cyclic load,
derating factor, lO- 18
of oilwell pumping unit, lo-25
Cyclic load factor, lo-25
Cyclic steam injection, 46-21
Cyclic steam stimulation, 46-22, 48-46
Cycling operations, 39-4, 39-6, 39-15 to
39-24, 39-27
Cycling operations prediction with model
studies, 39-20 to 39-22
Cycling performance, CC reservoir,
areal sweep efficiency, 39-17
displacement efficiency, 39-18
effectiveness, 39-17
invasion efficiency, 39-17, 39-18
pattern (h&S-weighted) efficiency, 39-17
permeability distribution, 39-18 to 39-20
reservoir efficiency, 39- 17
Cycling to improve recovery, 40-4
Cyclohexanelwater system, 25-26
Cyclone separator (desander), 660 to 6-63,
12-20, 15-19
Cyclonic flow, 12-19
Cyclopropaneiwater system, 25-25, 25-27
Cylindrical shell equations, 12-38
Cylindrical tanks, 11-2
D
Daily production rate, continuous-flow gas
lift, 5-54
Daily production rates, prediction of, 5-40
Daltons law, 20-4, 23-11
Damage,
by fluid jet, 8-7
ratio, 30-13
Damaged casing, 51-29
Damkiihler number, 47-21
Darcy head loss. 15-l
Darcys law or equation, 26-10, 26-11,
26-13, 26-15, 26-16, 26-18, 26-19,
28-1, 28-2, 32-4, 35-10, 37-11, 39.20,
43-3, 44-9. 44-13, 44-17. 45-13, 48-2,
48-3, 56-4
Data acquisition system, 52-25, 52-27, 52-28
Data gathering and handling, 42-3
Data of varying precision, 58-6. 58-7
Data required to estimate recovery from
injection operations, 42-2
Data requirements for engineering analysis
of gas-injection operations, 43-17
Data requirements for GC cycling study,
39-22, 39-23
Data transmission schematic for MWD, 53-2
Date designation SI metric system, 58-22
Dead basins, 52-22
Dead-end oil IFT, 22-17
Dead-oil viscosity, 22-14, 22-15, 40-12
Dead oils, 45-5
Dead Sea, 24-19
Dead space of separator, 12-26, 12-30
Dead time of a process, 13-50
Dead-weight gauge, 33-6
Dead-weight regulator, 13-54
Dead-weight tester, 5-53, 13-37, 30-2
Dean-Stark extraction, 46-21
Debris or solids in well, ESP, 7-16, 7-17
Decay constant, exponential. 50-22
Decay times. 50-22
Decimal equivalents, table, 167
Decimal relation in SI metric system, 58-9,
58-22
Decimals of an in. to mm, table, 1-72
Deck drainage, skim pile sizing, 15-26
Decline-curve analysis, 40-27
Decline tables for constant-percentage
decline, 40-28 to 40-32
Decline-trend analyses, 40-l
Decreasing-injection-gas-pressure installation
design method, 5-22
Deep dual laterolog (LLD), 49-19, 49-20
Deep marine sediments, 36-3
Deep Sea Drilling Project, 25-18
Deep-seated domes, 29-5, 29-6
Deepwater drilling, 18-10, 18-20, 18-21
Deerfield field, Missouri, 46-14
De-ethanizer, 14-8
Deferment-factor (weighted-average) charts,
41-23
Deferment factors, 41-5 to 41-8. 41-20,
41-21, 41-24 to 41-35
Definitions, for valuation of oil and gas
reserves, 40-3, 40-4
of fluid properties, 22-l
of gas/oil ratio terms, 32-14
of petroleum reserves, 40-2, 40-3
of pump parts, 8-2
of water-drive oil reservoir terms, 38-1
Defoaming plates, 12-6
Deformations of acoustic waves, 5 l-2
Degasser boot, 19-22
Degassing, 19-18
Degassing efficiency, 52-2
Degassing elements, 12-22
Degradation of an oil accumulation, 24-17
Degrees and minutes expressed in radians,
table, l-42
Degrees of freedom, 25-1, 25-2
Dehydration by adsorption. 14-20, 14-2 1
Dehydration efficiency, 14- 19
Dehydration, storage tank used for. 19-18
Dehydration units, 14-17. 14-19
Dehydration with organic liquid desiccants,
14-17 to 14-20
Dehydrator, 14-10, 14-13, 14-18
Dehydrator pots, 13-53
Delaware-Childers field, Oklahoma, 463
Delaware effect, 49-11, 49-22
Delay rentals, 41-1, 41-13, 57-4, 57-5, 57-7
Deliverability of gas-lift well, 5-40
Deliverability of gas to compressor plant, 13-58
Deliverability of gas wells, 34-3, 34-9
Deliverability plot approach, 35-12
Deliverability testing, 35-10
Delta-bar sediments, 36-3
Delta-delta transformer, 10-30, 10-3 1
Delta-wye transformer, IO-30
Deltaic bar deposits, 36-4
Deltaic channel deposits, 36-4
Deltaic environment, 36-3
Demand-pressure regulator, 3-33
Demethanizer, 14-8
Demulsifiers, 17-2, 19-9 to 19-13. 56-5
Dendritic fingers. 45-7
Density, apparent liquid, definition of, 22-20
Density comparison method, 52-20
Density, definition of, l-80
Density difference (gravity separation).
12-8, 12-9, 12-19
Density equivalents, table, 1-79
Density gradient method, 52-20
Density in SI metric system, 58-24, 58-29
Density log, 44-3, 49-25, 49-26, 49-34,
49-38, 50-24, 51-14, 51-19, 51-31,
51-33, 51-43
SUBJECT INDEX
Density meters, installing and proving, 17-7
Density/neutron crossplot, 51-36
Density of crude petroleum, 17-5
Density of formation water, 24-14
Density of gaseous hydrocarbons, 20-3
Density of light hydrocarbons, 17-5
Density of liquid petroleum products, 17-5
Density of N&l solutions, 24-14
Density of natural gas, 20-14, 20-15
Density porosity, 50-31, 50-33
Density/pressure relationship, 26-12
Density, pseudoliquid, 22-2 to 224
Denton field, New Mexico, 6-24
Deoxygenating control equipment, 24-2
Dept. of Commerce, l-69
Dept. of Energy (DOE), 40-2, 46-16,
46-30, 46-31, 46-33, 46-34
Dept. of the Treasury, 41-15
Dept. of Transportation, 15-13
Departure curves, 49-7, 49-27
Depletion, 41-13, 41-16, 41-17, 47-21 to
47-24, 57-11
Depletion allowance, 41-13 to 41-15
Depletion-drive calculation, 43-13, 43-14,
43-16
Debletion-drive process, 42-5
Depletion-drive recoveries, 37-24
Depletion-drive performance, 37-16 to 37-18
Design standards of electric motors, 10-19,
IO-20
Destabilization of emulsions. 19-6, 19-7
Desulfurization unit, 14-21, 14-22
Det norske Veritas, 1844
Detail engineering, 15-31
Detection efficiency, 50-12 to 50-14
Detection of nonhydrocarbon gases, 52-5 to
52-7
Detector resolution, 50-14
Deterministic analysis, 18-27, 18-28
Detrital, 29-6, 29-8
Detrital environment, 56-2
Detrital porosity, 29-8
Detrital reservoirs, 29-7, 29-8
Deuterium ion, SO-6
Development costs,
tangible and intangible, 41-l 1
well spacing, 4 I - 11
Development drilling, 36-2, 36-3, 36-6, 40-l
Development, historical, thermal recovery,
46-3
oil and gas differences, 36-2, 36-3
prediction of performance, 36-9, 36-10
Development of waterflooding, 44-l
Development plan for oil and gas reservoirs,
characterization of the reservoir, 36-3 to 36-9
introduction, 36-1, 36-2
Diesel index, 21-7
Diethanolamine (DEA), 14-21, 14-22
Diethylene glycol (DEG), 14-7, 14-18,
14-19, 25-19, 25-20
Differential compaction, 29-3 to 29-6
Differential gas liberation, definition, 22-20
Differential gas separation, 37-l
Differential head loss, 13-3
Differential liberation, 40-6
Differential-opening pressure valve. 5-13,
D&&l age, 49-36 to 49-39
Digital computer program,
5-14, 5-43
14-16
Differential-pressure control valve, 6-63
Differential-pressure gradients, 34-42
Differential-pressure taps, 13-3, 13-8
Differential-pressure transducers, 16-6, 46-21
Differential process, definition, 22-20
Differential separation (vaporization), 12-32,
37-3, 45-8
Diffuser, 6-32, 6-35, 6-36, 7-3
Diffusion baffle, 19-24
Diffusion length, 50-I 1, 50-20, 50-21
Diffusion theory, 50-17
Diffusivity. 38-9, 58-34
Diffusivity equation, 35-1, 35-2, 35.10,
36-8, 38-l
Digit, definition, 58-9
Depletion equation, 37-10 references. 36-10, 36-11 DigitaJ computer systems, 16-10
Depletion mechanism, 40-8, 40-10, 40-12, Development wells, 41-I 1 Digital computers, 40-10. 40-13
40-13, 40-15
Depletion performance, volatile oil
reservoirs, 37-22, 37-23
Depletion-recovery factors, 40-10, 40-11
Depletion technique,
dry gas reservoir, example problem, 36-3
gas reservoirs, 36-2, 36-3
oil reservoirs, 36-2
Depletion-type gas wells, 41-10
Depletion-type reservoir, 29-8, 40-8 to
40-12, 40-16, 40-32, 40-33
Depositional environment, 36-3 to 36-7
Depreciation, 41-11, 41-13, 41-21, 41-22,
57-l 1
Depression of metnstable dewpoint, 25-12,
25-14
Depth micrometer, 5-16
Depth of top gas-lift valve, 5-24
Depthoaraph, 30-7
Debating factors of motor, 10-24, 10-25, 10-31
Derivation of an orifice equation, 13-2, 13-3
Derivative response, 13-50, 13-52, 13-53
Derived units, SI metric system, l-69, l-71,
58-2. 584, 58-10, 58-11, 58-21
Derrick barges, 18-26
Desalting crude oil, 19-26, 19-27
Description needed for oilfield water
sample, 24-5
Design engineering, 15-3 1
Design features,
common to steamfloods and tirefloods, 46-17
pertaining to tirefloods only, 46-18, 46-19
pertaining to steamfloods only, 46-18
Design methods, intermittent gas lift, 542
Design of casing strings,
oil, water, and mud-weight factors, 2-1
safety factor, 2-l to 2-3, 2-34, 2-35
single-weight and -grade casing string,
2-1, 2-2
Design of gas-lift installation, 5-32 to 5-35
Design of hydraulic fracturing treatment,
55-9, 55-10
Design operating gas-lift valve depth, 5-54
Design properties for piping, 15-l 1
Design safety factors for casing, 2-l to 2-3,
2-32, 2-34, 2-35
Design slip of motor, IO-24
Developments in wellbore heat losses, 46-7
Deviation angle, 53-7
Deviation, definition, 58-9
Deviation factor, 39-7, 39-8, 39-10, 39-14,
39-23
Deviation of hole, 53-2, 53-3, 53-10, 53-17
Deviation survey computations, 53-7
Deviation surveys, 49-1, 53-1, 53-7 to 53-9
Dewatering of gas wells, 6-34, 39-15, 39-16
Dewpoint boundary, 39-3
Dewpoint chart, 25-11
Dewpoint curve, 14-l. 20-2
Dewpoint cycling, above or below, 48-7
Dewpoint depression. 12-20, 14-17, 14-18,
14-20
Dewpoint of a system, definition, 22-20
Dewpoint pressure, 22-20, 22-21, 23-3,
23-12, 39-5, 39-7 to 39-11, 39-13,
39-14, 39-16, 39-18, 39-23
Dewpoint pressure correlations, 21-10 to 21-15
Dewpoint reservoirs, 23-7
Dewpoint temperature, 14-l
Dewpoint water content chart, 25-12
Dextran, 47-3
Diagenesis, 24-2, 24-20, 52-21
Diagenetic alteration, 50-37
Diagenetic history, 36-3
Diagenetic water, definition, 24-18
Dia-Log caliper tools, 53-18
Diamond cores, 27-9
Diaphragm BHP element, 30-6, 30-7
Diaphragm control valve, 16-4, 16-11
Diaphragm gas-engine starters, lo-19
Diaphragm motor oil-control valves, 12-6, 12-7
Diaphragm motor valve, 1349, 13-53
Diaphragm operators, 16-3
Diaphragm pressure, 13-54, 13-56
Diaphragm pump, 15-15
Diaphragm-&weight-loaded valve, 13-55
Diatomaceous earth filters, 15-20, 15-22,4447
Diatomic gases, 13-37
Dielectric constants, 16-7
Dielectric measurements, 5 l-19
Dielectric permittivity, 49-32
Dielectric strength, 7-3
Diesel engines, 6-1. 10-15, 10-16, 1845
Diesel fuel, IO-15
Digital signal-processing technology, 5148
Digital sonic logs comparison, 5143
Diglycolamine (DGA), 14-2 1, 14-22
Dikes, 11-l 1
Dilution caused by weighted-average
Permeability profile, 39-19
Dilution plane, 23-10
Dimensionless pressure values, 38-4
Dimensionless pressures for aquifer systems,
384 to 38-6, 38-12 to 38-19
Dimensionless water-influx values, 384
Dimensions,
definition, 58-9
of buttress-thread casing and coupling,
2-29, 2-59, 2-64
of casing long thread, 2-58
of casing round-thread height, 2-66
of casing short thread, 2-57
of chemical, electrical, and physical
quantities, 59-2 to 59-51
of external-upset tubing coupling, 243,2-66
of extra-strong threaded line pipe, 2-50
of extreme-line casing threading and
machining, 2-63
of integral-joint tubing thread, 2-65
of integral-joint tubing upset, 2-45
of line-pipe lengths, 247
of line-pipe thread, 247, 2-58, 2-62, 2-65
of line-pipe thread height, 2-62
of nonupset tubing coupling. 242, 2-66
of plain-end line pipe, 2-50 to 2-53
of round-thread casing coupling, 2-28, 2-58
of round-thread tubing coupling, 2-58
of threaded line pipe, 247, 2-58
of tubing round-thread height, 2-66
Din azimuth, 53-7. 53-9. 53-10
Dib vectors, 53-10, 53-12
Dipmeter, 49-25. 49-36, 49-37
DiPmeter logging,
application of dipmeter and directional
data, 53-10 to 53-16
calibration, 53-8
computed dipmeter log, 53-9, 53-10
device, 53-6
interpretation rules, 53-12
introduction, 53-1, 53-7
oil-based muds, 53-8, 53-9
28 PETROLEUM ENGINEERING HANDBOOK
principles of TVD, TST, and TVT plots,
53-15. 53-16
survey computattons. 53-9
tools available, 53-8
Dtpmeter patterns, 53-10, 53-12 to 53-15
Dipmeter surveys. 49-I
Direct-acting spring-loaded regulator, 13-55
Direct-acting weight regulator, 13-55
Direct costs (expenses), 41-11 to 41-14
Dnect-current (DC) motor, IO-21
Direct-fired heater, 19-2 I
Direct hydraulic subsea control, IS-50
Direct lifting costs, 41-3
Direct line drive, 44 13 to 4416,4422,4433
Direct phase determination, 51-25
Direction of dip, 53-7
Dtrection of hole drift, 53-10
Directional drtlling, 18-30
Directional permeability effect. 44-25
Directional permeability test, 27-1
Directional surveys,
available tools, 53-3, 53-4
computation of results, 53-4 to 53-7
introduction. 53-l
legal requirements, 53-4
MWD-data listing, 53-6
Directional well survey, 41-8
Directional wells, 53-l
Disadvantages,
of batch-type meters, 32-10. 32-11
of positive-displacement meters. 32-11, 32-12
Discharge coefficient, 13-8
Discharge (return) gradient, 6-26, 6-29
Discharge piping, 15-17
Discharge pressure, 39-24
Discounted cash flow (DCF) method, 41-3,
41-17 to 41-22
Discounted future net cash income, 41-5
Discounted present worth, 44-5
Discovery allowable, 32-2, 32-3, 32-15
Discrete-piloted hydraulic control, subsea,
18-50 to 18-52
Discrete remote control, subsea, 18-50, 18-5 I
Dispersed-gas drive, 37-I
Dispersed-gas injection, 43-2, 43-8 to
43.15. 43-17
Dispersed-gas units, 15-27, 15-28
Dispersion. 15-22. 19-1, 45-6, 45-7
Dispersion curves. 51-13. 51-14
Dispersion of clay particles, 56-5
Displacement calculation procedures,
Dykstra-Parsons. 448, 449
frontal advance, 44-9 to 44-l I
Stiles. 447. 448
Welge, 44-11. 44-12
Displacement efficiency, 39-9, 39- 15,
39-17. 39.18, 39-22, 39-23, 40.34,
43-3, 43-5. 43-6, 43-9, 4439. 45-6 to
45.10, 47-1. 41-2, 47-17
Displacement equations, 43-4 to 43-6, 43-8
to 43-10
Displacement fronts for different mobility
ratios. 45-7
Displacement mechanisms, 36-10, 47-19, 47-20
Displacement meter systems, 17-4
Displacement of downhole pumps, 6-21,
6-24
Displacement process, 28-6, 28-7
Displacement-type controller, 13-5 I. 13-53
Displacement-type liquid-level controls, 13-53
Displacement volumes, 4423, 4424, 4428
Displacement volumes injected, 43-3, 43-7.
43-8
Disposal water. 24-5
Dissociation of water, 47- I8
Dissolved acid gases, 4447
Dissolved gas(es). 22-l. 22-20, 24-17, 40-3.
44-43
Dissolved-gas drive, 22-20. 442, 44-4
Dissolved-gas effect on oil viscosity, 22-14.
22-15
Dissolved-gas removal, 15-28, 15-29
Dissolved-gas systems, 2 l-18
Dissolved-gas units, 15-27
Dissolved salt, 24-7, 24-8
Dissolved solids, 19-1, 24-3, 24-15, 24-16,
24-18 to 24-20, 44-45
Dissolved-solids removal, 15-29
Distillates, I l-12, 12-32, 57-5
Distillation method, for water in crude oil, 17.5
Distillation, removing water from crude oil
emulsions, 19-15
Distributary channel sediments, 36-3
Distributary channels, 36-4, 36.6
Distributing piping specs., 15-12
Distribution of fluids in permeable
formations Invaded by mud filtrate, 49-5
to 49-7
Distribution system. 12-10, 12-l I
Distribution transformers. types of, 10.30,
IO-31
Divalent cations. 47-13. 47-15, 47-21
Divalentihydroxide compounds, 47-20
Diverging vortex separator, 12-14, 12-20
Diverless subsea tree and running tools, 18-32
Diverting agents, 54-S. 54-10, 56-2, 56-3, 56-5
Division-order interest, 4 l-2
Dixon plates, 12-25
Dog-and-groove riser coupling, 18-15
Dogleg, 7-1, 7-9, 10-3. 10-6, 53-6
Dolomite,
acid reaction rate. pressure effect, 54-4
clays and silts in, 54-7
effect of corrosion inhibitor on acid
reaction rate. 54-6
laboratory tests for acidizing, 54-9
silica in crystal structure of, 54-4
treated with HCL, 54-2
Doiomitization, 24-18. 24-20. 26-2
Dosage, units and conversions, 58-30
Dose eqmvalent, unit and definition, 58-10
Double-acting downhole unit, 6-9, 6-20
Double-acting pump, 6-8, 6-9, 6-16, 6-18
Double-deck shaker, 52-8
Double-flanged head, 3-8
Double-port diaphragm motor valve, 13-57
Double-ported valves, 13-55, 13-58
Double-studded adapter, 3-9
Double-studded crossover flange, 3-9
Double-valve arrangements, 8-7
Double-welded butt joints. 12-40
Doughnut tubmg hanger. 3-39
Douleb oil held, Tunisia, 24-18
Dow Chemtcal Co., 54-l
Downcomer pipes, 1 l-13
Downcomer/spreader, 19-19
Downdip gas flow, 43-I I
Downflow filters, 15-20
Downhole assembly, MWD, 53-2
Downhole dtgitizer, 5 l-27
Downhole jet pump accessories,
dummy pumps, 6-48
pressure recorders, 6-48
safety valves, 6-48, 6-49
screens and filters. 6-48
standing valves, 6-48
swab cups (noses), 6-47. 6-48
Downhole pumps,
closed power-fluid systems, 64, 6-5
displacement of, 6-21, 6-24. 6-25
handling of formation-fluid volumes, 6-67
installation. 6-2
jet free completions, 6-34
PIE ratto. 6-27
pressure recorders, 6-48
pressures and force balance in. 6-16 to 6-19
reciprocating, 6-5 I, 6-55
reverse-flow systems. 6-5
TFL installations. 6-6
types of installations, 6-2 to 6-4
with wireline-retrievable safety valve, 6-49
Downhole sensor. 53-4
Downhole sensor sub, 53. I
Downhole steam generators, 46-4, 46-19
Downhole temperature profiles, 46-21
Downkickmg, 6-31
Downstream taps. 13-30 to 13-34, 13-37
Downtime analysis, 18-7, 18-8
Downtime gas. 52-17
Drag-body flowmeter, 32. I3
Drain cylinders, 12-12
Drainage area. 35-l, 35-5, 35-6, 35-13,
35-16 to 35-18, 36-8, 55-4, 56-l
Drainage-area shape, 37-2 1
Drainage channels for tanks. 1 I-I I
Drainage channels. mist extractor, 12-l 1, 12-12
Dramage curve, 28-5, 28.9. 28-l I, 2X-12
Drainage relative-permeability data. 28. I4
Drainage shapes. 35-4, 35-5. 35-16
Drainage tests. 26-24
Drawdown effects 39-25
Drawdown pressure. 30-10 to 30-13
Drawdown tests. 35-3, 35-4. 35-14, 35-15,
44-4 I
Dresser Atlas, 49-2. 49-36, 49-37. 51-18
Drift, 13-50
Drift diameter, 3-12 to 3-14
Drill-time log, 52-l
Drilling clause, 57-4. 57-5
Drilling contractor, I8- 16
Drilling data analysis. 52-28
Drilling efficiency, 52-28
Drilling engineer. 18-4
Drilling engineering services, 52-2, 52-27,
52-28
Drilling-equipment considerations offshore,
backup control systems, 18-15, IS-16
BOP. 18-11, 18-12
control systems, 18.15
extended water-depth capability. 18-16
flex joints, 18-12, 18-13
K&C systems, 18-15
marine riser. 18-14, 18-15
motion compensator, 1X-13. 18-14
reentry systems, 18-14
riser tensioner. 18-13
slip joints. 18-13
Drilling fluid, offshore, 18-12 to 18.14,
18-18, 18-41
Drilling funds, 57-l 1
Drilling, high-current, 18-21. 1X-22
Drilling models, 52.24 to 52.26
Drilling motion compensator, 18-14
Drilling mud, acoustic velocity in, 51-31
Drilling offshore,
mooring and riser analyses, 18-16, 18-17
operating manual and emergency
procedures, 18-16
planning and preparations, 18-3 to 18-5
rig selection, 18-5 to 18-16
Drilling operations, 18-28, 18-29. 18-31,
18-32. 18-39. 18-40
Drilling optimization. 52-29, 52-30
Drilling porosity, 52-26
Drilling riser, 18-16. 18-18, IX-34
Drilling vessels: see specific type
Drilling wells, estimation of BHT, 31-6
Drillships, 18-3, 18-4. 18-7, 18.14. 18-15,
18-20
SUBJECT INDEX 29
Drillstem test or testing, 6-34. 18-20.
18-34, 24-3, 27-8, 30-S. 30-l 1, 30-13,
30-15. 41-8, 42-4. 48-8, 49-31
Drillstem tests, openhole, 53-17
Drillstring motion compensators, 18-13
Drip pots, 13-37, 13-53
Drip-proof motor, IO-26
Drips, 39-26
Drive mechanism, effects on recovery, 36-3
Drop method, surface-tension measurement,
24-16
Droplet size distribution. 15-23
Drowned gas wells, 39-16
Dry chambers for subsea completions, 18-31
Dry-desiccant dehydration, 14-20, 14-21
Dry-desiccant dehydrators, 13-56. 14-10, 16-15
Dry forward combustion, 46-l to 46-3,
46-14. 46-18, 46-19
Drv eas. 10.16. 39-l. 39-16. 39-18 to
-3;.20. 39-23, 39-24
Dry-gas breakthrough, 39. I7 to 39-20, 39-22
Dry-gas front, 39-17, 39-18, 39-21 to 39-23
Dry-gas injection, 39-16. 39-21 1 39-25,
.3%26 -
Dry-gas reservoir, 35.3, 36-3. 39-l. 40-24,
40-25
Dry-gas/wet-gas cycling operation, 39-23
Dry-gas/wet-gas interfaces, 39-2 1, 39-22
Dry reverse combustion, 46-2
Dry vs. wet combustion, 46-18. 46-19
Dual-detector compensated-neutron device,
50-20
Dual-detector thermal device, 50-30, 50-32
Dual-element fuses, lo-28
Dual-fuel engines, IO-16
Dual induction-laterolog 8 (DIL), 49-15 to
49-20. 49-28 -
Dual induction-laterolog log, 46-2 1
Dual intermittent gas-lift installations, 540,
545
Dual laterolog, 49-l I, 49-20. 49-23, 49-24,
49-28
Dual laterologigamma ray tools, 49-20
Dual-parallel-string installations, 3-l 1, 3-13
Dual-tube separator, 12-9, 12-10. 12-16. 12-18
Dual-vessel system, 6-63
Dual-water model, 49-38
Dual wells or zones, 6-7, 6-8
Dual-wing well manifold, 16-l I, 16-12
Dummy pumps, 6-48
Dummy valve, 3-35
Dump cycles, 19-30
Dump valves, 18-50, 19-20, 19-22. 19-23
Dun and Ros method, 34-37, 3440
Duplex pumps, 15-14
Dura Rod, 9-13
Duri field, Indonesia. 46-4
Dykstra-Parsons calculation. 44-8. 44-9
DykstraParsons coefficient, 47-17
Dykstra-Parsons method, 40-19, 44-7, 44-9
Dynamic amplification factor, 18-26, 18-27
Dynamic-capillary-pressure method, 26-24,
26-25
Dynamic elastic constants, 51-4
Dynamic lag, 13-51
Dynamic miscibility. 45-l. 45-2, 45-4.
45-5, 48-5
Dynamic positioning, 18-2, 18-10, 18-14,
18.20, 18-21
Dynamic stresses, 18-17
Dynamic viscosity, 24-16, 58-35
Dynamite, 56-l
Dynamometer card analysis, 10-5, IO-6
Dynamometer cards, 10-6
Dynamometer test, 40-27
E
E-core transformer, 30-6
Early-time region (ETR). 35-3, 35-4, 35-6,
35-8. 35m I5
Earth resistivities, 49-l
East Coalinga field, California, 46-18
East Texas area, 27-2. 27-3
East Texas field, 29-5. 29-6.40-2. 40.34,41-5
East Venezuela field, 46-16
Eccentric orifices, 13-45. 1348
Eccentricity. 6-69, 6-72
Echometer, 30-7, 32-6
Economic analyses, 39-10, 39-15, 44-32
Economic balance. 19-15
Economic considerations of stage separation,
12-33
Economic evaluation, 24-21, 44-7, 45-10
Economic justification of automation, 16-2
Economic limit, 40-12. 40-19, 40-20,
40-27. 40-32, 41-10. 41-11
Economic-limit rate. 40-25, 40-27
Economics. Impact of offshore leasing, 57-12
Economics, letter and computer symbols,
59-2 to 59-51
Economics of CC reservoir operations, 39-26
Economics of injection operations, 42-6
Economics of treating crude-oil emulsions,
19.32, 19-33
Eddy currents. 13-2. 13-36, 13-48, 19-12,
53-20, 53-22, 53-26
Edge water, 24-2
Edgewater drive, 40. I5
Edgewater encroachment, 28-4
EDTA, sequestering agent. 547
Effective annual interest rate, 41-25, 41-26
Effective decline rates, 40-27. 41-27
Effective formation permeability, 55-4
Effective gas permeability, 39-25
Effective grain volume, 26-4, 26-6
Effective hydrocarbon porosity, 40-25
Effective interest rate, 41-17. 41-20, 41-21,
41-26, 41-27
Effective isopermeability map, 39-22
Effective mobility ratto, 47-18
Effective molecular weight, 22-7
Effective permeability. 26-15, 28-l to 284,
28-6, 28-8, 28-13, 39-17, 4432, 44-33,
46-2 I
Effective porosity, 26-2 to 26-6, 28-2, 40-5,
55-4
Effective salmity. 47-13
Effective shear rate. 47-5
Effective stress, 51-30, 51-31, 51-35, 51-43
Effectiveness of cycling. 39-17
Efficiency factor in orifice equation, 13-3
Efficiency of cycling, 39-17
Efficiency of ESP system, 7-l
Efficiency of gas lift, 30-14, 30-15
Efficiency of motor, IO-25
Effictency of permeability variation, 448
Effictency of separation, 12-21
Effluent fluids quality, 12-16
Effluent oil from separator, 12-15
Effluent water fromseparator, 12-15
El Dorado field, Kansas, 46-14
Elastic collapse-pressure equatton. 2-55
Elasttc limit, 51-I. 51-2
Elastic limit of material, 2-46
Elastic moduli, 51-I to 51-3. 51-12, 51-30,
51-31, 51-43. 51-44, 58-34
Elasttc parameters. relationships among, 51-2
Elastic properties. 51-44
Elastic scattermg, 50-9, 50-10
Elastic transition zone, 2-55
Elastic wave propagation, 51-6, 51-8,
51-12. 51-14, 51-29. 51-49
Elastic wave velocities. 51-7
Elastictty.
characteristics of acoustic waves, 5 l-2, 5
introduction, 51-1, 51-2
Elastomeric hoses, 18-49
Elastomeric jomts, 18-13
Electric charge, unit and definition. 58-l I
58-23
Electric conductance, umt and definition,
58-l I, 58-23, 58-35
Electric dipole moment, 49-32
Electric generating systems, IO-2 I
Electric inductance, unit and definition.
58-l I, 58-23
Electric-log analysis, 26-22, 26-25
Electric-motor valve operators. 16-3
Electric motors for oilwell pumping,
design standards. 10-19, IO-20
direct current (DC), IO-21
generating systems, IO-2 1
horsepower ratings of. IO-20
multiple-horsepower rated, IO-20
multiple-size rated. IO-2 1
performance factors of, IO-23
selecting size of, lo-21
single-phase type. IO-2 I
ultrahigh-slip, lo-22
voltage frequency of, 10-21. IO-23
Electric porosimeter, 26-4
Electric potential difference. unit and
definition, 58-l I
Electric power supply, ESP, 7-9 to 7-12
Electric pressure control, 12-39
Electric resistance, umt and definition.
l-3
58-l I, 58-23, 58-36
Electric-solenoid valves, 16-3
Electric-starter motors. lo-19
Electric submersible pumps (ESP).
application, 7-l. 7-2
general references, 7-17
handling. installation, and operation, 7-12
to 7-14
installation, 7-l. 7-2
performance curves, 6-35
references, 7- I7
selection data and methods, 7-9 to 7-12
system, 7-1. 7-2
system components. 7-3 to 7-9
troubleshooting, 7-14 to 7-17
Electric submersibles, 18-44
Electrical capacitance in electronic interface
controllers, 19-3 1
Electrtcal capacitance, unit and definition,
58-10, 58-23, 58-35
Electrtcal conductiwty in electromc interface
controllers, 19-31
Electrrcal conducttvity of flmd-saturated rocks,
fundamental concepts, 26-28, 26-29
introduction. 26-27. 26-28
resistivity measurement of rocks, 26-29
Electrical conductiwty, units and
conversions, 58-35
Electrical distribution system,
grounding of, 10-31, lo-32
open delta transformer, 10-30, IO-3 1
phase converters, types of, 10.35, IO-36
power factor and use of capacitors, IO-33
to IO-35
primary system and voltage, IO-29
secondary system, 10-29. IO-30
transformers, lo-30
voltage drop in, lo-32
Electrical logging,
electromagnetic propagation tool, 49-32 to
49-36
focused-electrode logs, 49-18 to 49-22
fundamentals. 49-l to 49-7
30 PETROLEUM ENGINEERING HANDBOOK
general references, 49-41, 49-42
induction logging, 49-14 to 49-18
microresistivity devices, 49-22 to 49-25
nomenclature, 49-39 to 49-41
references. 49-41
resistivity logging devices, 49-l 1 to 49-14
SP log, 49-l& 49-l 1
the digital age, 49-36 to 49-39
typical log. 49-3
uses and interpretation of well logs, 49-25
to 49-32
Electrical one-line diagram, IS-45
Electrical parameters used in characterizing
porous media, 26-31
Electrical potential logs, 53-17. 53-19
Electrical properties of reservoir rocks,
empirical correlations,
conductive-solids effect, 26-30, 26-31
introduction, 26-29
parameters used in characterizing, 26-31,
2632
resistivity of partially water-saturated
rocks, 26-31
Electrical resistivity measurement of rocks,
26-29
Electrical survey (ES), 49-l 1, 49-19
Electrical systems offshore,
code and regulatory authorities, 1844
distribution system, 18-4.5, IS-46
equipment enclosures, 1846
hazardous areas, 1846
introduction, 18-43, 1844
layout of facilities, 18-44
platform loads, IS-44
primary electric power, 18-44, 1845
secondary/back-up power, 18-45
wiring methods, 18-46
Electrically controlled valves, 16-3
Electrically equivalent diameter of invasion,
49-6
Electricity, units and conversions, 58-35,
58-36
Electrochemical corrosion, 3-36
Electrochemical potential, 49-8 to 49-10
Electrode array, 53-7
Electrofiltration potential, 49-10
Electrohydraulic control system, 18-l 1
Electrohydraulic subsea controls, 18-49
Electrohydraulic systems, 3-31
Electrokinetic effects, 28-1
Electrolvtic conduction. 26-28
ElectroGtic corrosion, 12-40
Electrolytic model, 39-20, 39-21, 44-17,
44-18, 4420, 44-21
Electromagnetic e-mode telemetry, 53-l
Electromagnetic force (EMF), 53-16
Electromagnetic inspection devices, 53-17,
53-19 - .
Electromagnetic propagation log, 49- 1, 49-2
Electromagnetic propagation tool (EPT),
49-32 to 49-36
Electromagnetic radiation, 50-3
Electromagnetic thickness log, 53-21
Electromagnetic thickness tools, 53-19 to
53-2 1, 53-23
Electra-mechanical timers, 164
Electromotive force, 58-11, 58-23, 58-35
Electron density, 50-16, 50-17
Electron-density index, 50-7, 50-26 to 50-28
Electron microscopy, 27-1
Electronic-casing caliper log, 53-19
Electronic chart scanners, 30-2
Electronic computers, 40-9
Electronic (solid-state) controller, 16-4
Electronic interface controllers, 19-31
Electronic model, 39-20
Electronic timers, 5-55
Electropneumatic operators, 16-3
Electrostatic coalescing, 19-13
Electrostatic coalescing treaters, 19-25, 19-26
Electrostatic emulsion treaters, 19-2, 19-10,
19-13. 19-25 to 19-27, 19-31
Elemental models, 46-1 I to 46-13
Elevated separator. 12-17 to 12-19
Elf Aquitaine, 46-27, 51-25
Elk Basin field, Wyommg, 26-23, 39-16
Ellipsoidal head equations, 12-38
Elongation,
of API body and bonnet members, 3-2, 3-3
of API casing and liner casing, 2-2
of API tubing, 2-37
of line pipe, 246
of sucker-rod types, 9-5
Embayments, 29-7
Embedment, 55-S
Emergency disconnect conditions, 18-21
Emergency power, 1845
Emergency procedures offshore, 18-16
Emergency shutdown system (ESD), 3-33,
3-34, 18-47, 18-48
Emergency venting of storage tanks, 11-7 to
1 l-9
Empirical correlation factor, 27-8
Empirical equations, ice movement rate and
shape, 18-39
Emulsification of oil, IO-13
Emulsified water, 19-3
Emulsifying agent, 19-2 to 19-5, 19-9, 19-14
Emulsion breakers, 19-10, 46-22
Emulsion-breaking agents, 56-2
Emulsion conditions, ESP chart, 7-16
Emulsion, definition of, 19-l
Emulsion, effect on oil viscosity, 6-27
Emulsion flood, 47-2 1
Emulsion formation, 47-19
Emulsion plugging, 6-56
Emulsion treater, I l-12, 12-3, 124, 12-13
Emulsion-treating equipment, 19-15, 19-16,
19-21. 19-27 to 19-32
Emulsion treating, overall system
performance, 19-33
Emulsion-treating system, 19-6, 19-7, 19-9,
19-11, 19-13, 19-15, 19-16, 19-30, 19-32
Emulsion viscosity, 6-67
Emulsions,
as mixed-base fracturing fluids, 55-5, 55-7
chances of forming, 8-6
decreases injection cycles/day, 5-40
effect of silicate control agents, 54-7
effect of surfactants, 54-7
gas lift can intensify, 5-2
in lirefloods and steamfloods, 46-2 1, 46-22
prevents application of gradient curves,
5-25
Emulsions, methods used in treating.
agitation, 19-12, 19-13
centrifugation, l9- I5
chemical demulsitier, 19-9 to 19-12
distillation, 19-15
electrostatic coalescing, 19- I3
fibrous packing, 19-14
filtering, 19-14
gravity settling. 19-14, 19-15
heating, 19-7 to 19-9
water washing, 19-13
Emulsions theories: See Theories of emulsions
Enclosed motor, totally. lo-26
Enclosures for motors; 10-26, IO-27
End effects, 28-3, 28-5. 28-7
End-to-end flowline valves, 3-12 to 3-14
Endicott development, 18-3
Endogenetic subsurface water, definition, 24-19
Endpoint displacement data, 28-8
Endpoint mobility ratio, 47-l
Endurance limit, 9-l I
Energy balance, 13-I. 34-36, 46-12
Energy-balance equation, 34-I) 34-2. 34-9
Energy, definition, 22-2 1
Energy equivalents, table, 1-77
Energy loss, 13-2, 13-3
Energy relationships for flowing fluid. 34-1,
34-2
Energy, SI unit for. 58-5. 58-l 1, 58-23,
58-24, 58-32
Engine displacement, 6-30
Engine efficiency, 6-3 1
Engine selection,
calculations for, IO-17 to lo-19
equipment life and cost, 10-16, IO-17
fuel availability, lo- 16
horsepower, IO-17
installation, lo-19
safety controls, lo-17
Engineering, analysis, 42-3
appraisal method, 41-2. 41-3
computer simulation methods, 36-7
in developing oil and gas reservoirs, 36. I,
36-6 to 36-8
interference testirg, 36-7, 36-8
material-balancp studies, 36-7
net-pay/net-connected-pay ratio, 36-7
England, 18-25
Enhanced oil recovery (EOR), 23-l. 23-7.
24-16, 25-1, 25-14, 46-3, 47-1, 47-2,
47-6, 47-7, 47-18, 47-22, 48-2, 48-4,
48-6, 48-8
Enhanced-oil-recovery (EOR) projects, 19-28
Enhanced-recovery methods, 404
Enhanced-recovery operation, 5 l-42
Enos Creek field. Wyoming, 24-18
Enriched-gas drive, 45-2, 45-3, 45-5
Environment, 11-4, 13-1
Environmental conditions (forces), 1 l-6,
18-1, 18-3, 18-4, 18-7 to 18-10, 18.17,
18-21, 18-25, 18-31, 18-36, 18-44, 1847
Environmental conditions,
ice characteristics, 18-38, 18-39
ice loading, 18-39
permafrost, 18-39
waves, 18-39
Environmental corrections,
gas effect, 50-30, 50-31
matrix effect, 50-28 to 50-30
shale effect, 50-31 to 50-33
Environmental criteria, 18-26
Environmental factor, 1 l-8
Environmental impact, 24-9
Environmental load predictions, 18-22
Environmental regulations, 44-41
Environments, wellhead equipment, 3-36 to
3-39
Epigenetic interstitial water, definition, 24-18
EPILOG log analysis, 49-37
Epipressure contours, 44-15, 44-16
Epithermal counting rate, 50-20, 50-29
Epithermal detector, 50-19, 50-20, 50-2 1
Epithermal diffusion coefficient, 50- 19
Epithermal matrix effect, 50-30
Epithermal neutron flux, 50-15, 50-20
Epithermal neutrons. 50-S. 50-9. 50-14,
50-17, 50-19, 50-30
Epithermal porosity device, 50-28, 50-32
Epoxy resin coating, 11-6
Epoxy thermoset resin, 9-12
Equal-payment-series present-worth factor,
41-25
Equalizer for tank battery, I l-9
Equalizing valves, 3-29
Equation factors for collapse pressure
equations, 2-54 to 2-56
SUBJECT INDEX
31
Equation, general for critical-flow prover,
13-45
Equations for computing subsurface
pressures, 33-15
Equations for jet pumps, 6-36, 6-37
Equations for oil and gas separator,
gas capacity, 12-23
sizing for &IS capacity, 12-23 to 12-25
Equations for valuation methods, 41-18.41-19
density, 1-79
energy, 1-11
length, l-7 1
mass, 1-75
power. 1-78
pressure, 1-77
velocity, 1-76
volum& l-73
work, 1-77
Equations for water-drive reservoirs, 38-I to Erection of pumping units, 10-7, 10-12
38-4 Erosion, pump cavitation damage, 6-36
Equations
to 20-8, 23-10, 23-12, 23-13, 25-8,
25-16, 39-16, 48-4, 48-5, 48-9
in
Equilibrium behavior, GC systems, 39-2 to
Sl metric system, 58-13
39-4
Equations of state (EOS), 14-16, 20-4, 20-6
Equilibrium constants, 14-16, 23-l I, 37-23
Equilibrium data sources, 25-l to 25-4
Equilibrium dewpoint, 14-18
Equilibrium dewpoint locus, 25-1, 25-2
Equilibrium dewpoint water content, 25-2
Equilibrium flash calculations, 12-33, 12-34,
Erythorbic acid, reducing agent, 54-7
Escalation clauses, 41-3, 41-9
Esso. 46-4, 46-14
Error anaiysis,
Estimating reserves. 40-l
Ethanelwater system, 25-17, 25-18, 25-24,
- 50-28
Errors in basic data, 38-7, 38-8
14-16
Equilibrium flash separation, 14-16
Equilibrium gas. 39-7, 39-8, 39-14
E&libriumg&saturation,40-11,40-12,43-11
Equilibrium phase diagrams, 23-1, 45-2
Equilibrium ratios, 21-11, 21-16, 23-1 I,
25-5, 39-6, 39-9, 39-11 to 39-13, 39-15
Equilibrium vaporization constants, 46-12,
46-37, 46-39
Equilibrium vaporization ratios. 37-23
Equilibrium water dewpoint, 14-18
Equipment coordination, surface/downhole, 4-1
Equipment enclosures offshore, 18-46
Equipment for control of oiltield motors,
handoff-auto switch, lo-27
line disconnect switch, lo-27
local remote switch, lo-27
motor starter contactor, IO-28
programmer, 10-27, IO-28
sequence-restart timer, IO-27
Equipment selection, reciprocating pumps, 628
Equipment used in emulsion treating,
clarification of water produced, 19-28
desalting crude oil. 19-26, 19-27
electrostatic coalescing treaters, 19-25,
19-26
EOR projects, 19-28
free-water knockouts, 19-17, 19-18
horizontal treaters, 19-23 to 19-25
reverse emulsions, 19-27
settling tanks, 19-18 to 19-22
storage tanks, 19- 18
vertical treaters, 19-22, 19-23
Equivalent circular pipe, 34-27
Equivalent conductivity, 49-34
Equivalent formation-water resistivity, 49-l 1
Equivalent hydraulic gradient. 26-l 1
Equivalent length of &es and fittings, 15-4
Equivalent limestone porosity, 50-28, 50-30
Equivalent linear permeability. 26-18
Equivalent liquid permeability, 26-18, 27-1,
27-8
Equivalent methane in air (EMA), 52-3 to
52-5
Equivalent molecular weights. modified
weight average. 21-12 to 21-15
Equivalent mud density (EMD), 52-25
Equivalent proton masses (EPM). 24- 19
Equivalent slowing-down length, 50-29
Equivalent water conductivity. 49-39
Equivalent wellbore radius, 35-4
Equivalents, tables,
areas, 1-73
capacity, 1-73
25-27
Ethanolamine, 14-21
Ethylene density, 17-6
Ethylene glycol (EG), 14-7, 14-18, 14-19
Ethylene glycol, hydrate inhibition, 25-19,
25-20
Ethylene glycol monobutyl ether, 54-7, 56-5
Ethylene/water system, 25-24, 25-27
Ethylenediaminet&raacetic acid (EDTA), 56-2
European countries, concrete gravity
structures, 18-23
Evaluation of fracturing prospects, 5 l-45
Evaporation method of capillary-pressure
measurement, 26-24
Evaporation, preventing, 11-12, 11-13
Evaporites. 49-25
Evinper-Muskat equation, 34-3 I
Example problems:
casing, tubing, and line pipe. 2-36. 2-37.
2-55, 2-56 -
. .
cmde-oil properties and condensate properties
and correlations, 21-15 to 21-20
electric submersible pumps, 7-17
estimation of oil andgasreserves, 40-8,
40-9, 40-12 to 40-14, 40-16, 40-17,
40-3 1
gas-condensate reservoirs, 39-10, 39-11,
39-23, 39-24
gas lift, 5-4 to 5-8, 5-10 to 5-12, 5-15,
5-20, 5-25, 5-26, 5-29 to 5-37. 546.
5-47, S-49, 5-50, 5-52
gas measurement and regulation, 13-8
gas properties and correlations, 20-13 to
20-17
hydraulic pumping, 6-20, 6-21, 6-24,
6-29. 6-30, 6-44 to 6-46
miscible displacement. 45-10 to 45-13
mud logging, 52-29
phase behavior of water/hydrocarbon
systems, 25-13. 25-14
properties of reservoir rocks, 26-3, 26-5,
26-6, 26-14, 26-15, 26-17, 26-26, 26-27
pumping units and prime movers for
pumping unit, IO-8 to 10-11, 10-18,
io-14. io-21 to 10-24, IO-31
solution-gas-drive oil reservoirs, 37-24,
37-25
subsurface sucker-rod pumps, 8-5
sucker rods, 9-4
water-drive oil reservoirs, 38-5 to 38-7
well-performance equations. 35-7 to 35-9,
35-13. 35-14, 35-19, 35-20
wellbore hydraulics. 34-8, 34-9, 34-23 to
34-26. 34-30, 34-32 to 34-35, 34-41 to
3445
Excelsior packs, 19-23, 19-31, 19-32
Excess-flow valves, 3-29
Excitation, BHP gauges, 30-5, 30-6
Executor, definition. 57-3
Exhaust-gas turbocharger, 15-16
Exhaust power fluid, 6-25
Exogenehc subsurface water, definition, 24-19
Exothermic reaction, 31-6
Exotic metals for pipe, 15-l 1
Expander, 14-8
Expansion-drive gas reservoirs, 40-26
Expansion factor, 13-2, 13-8, 13-26 to 13-34
Expansion separator or vessel, 12-1
Expansivity, 24- I5
Experimental procedure,
steady-state k, methods, 28-3 to 28-7
unsteady-state k, methods, 28-7
Exploration geologists, 18-3
Exploration hazards, 46-22
Exploratory well, 4 I-I 1
Explosion proof, 3-34
Explosion-proof motors, 10-27, 1@36, IS-46
Exponent of backpressure curve, 33-5 to
33-13
Exponential-integral solution, 35-3, 35-4
Exponentials, table, l-55
Extended flanged outlets, 3-3
Extended flanges, 3-8
Extended water-depth capability, 18-16
Extension nipple, 8-1, 8-4
Extensive properties. definition, 22-21
External boundary conditions, definitions, 38-I
External coatings, Il.6
External corrosion, 3-36, 18-33
External gas-injection pressure maintenance,
43-16
External-upset tubing, 2-38 to 245,2-64. 2-66
Externally adjustable secondary seal, 3-6
Extra-strong threaded line pipe, Z-46, 2-50
Extracting-liquid drive, 45-5, 45-6
Extraction method for determining sediment
in oil, 17-5
Extraction methods for determining water
saturation, 26-22
Extraction of minerals, 24-20
Extraneous materials in well fluids. 12-3
Extreme-line casing, 2-1, 2-4, 2-6, 2-8,
2-10, 2-12, 2-14, 2-16, 2-18, 2-29 to
2-31, 2-62 to 2-64, 2-67, 2-68
Extreme-line casing joint, 2-5, 2-7, 2-9,
2-11, 2-13, 2-15, 2-17, 2-19, 2-60,
2-63, 2-67 to 2-72
Extruded-plastic system, 15-10
Exxon Co. U.S.A., 16-13, 47-22
Exxon Corp., 20-S
F
F Pairs log analysis
Facies, 29-5, 29-8
Facilities,
for fireflood, 46-20
for steamflood, 46-19, 46-20
Facility throughput, 58-25, 58-30, 58-31
Factor analysis, 24-20
Factor, gas-pressure-at-depth, 5-5, 5-6
Factors affecting oil viscosity, 22-14
Factors affecting permeability
measurements,
gas slippage. 26-18
overburden pressure, 26-19
reactive fluids, 26-18, 26-19
Factors contributing to vapor and gravity
losses in tanks,
agitation, 1 l- 12
breathing, 11-12
filling, 11-12
storage size, 1 l-12
surface area, 11-12
tank pressures, 11-12
37 PI:1 IN,1 I:lIM I:N(;INI:I.HINf, IIASl,l!r,~,K
temperature. I I- I2
vapor prewlre, I I I2
Factors for test-preshurc cquationh. 2-63
Factors in design of injection opcratlons. 42-2
Factor> in evaluation oI permeability lrom
other parameter.\. 26-19. 26-20
Factory-baked coatmgh. I I-I
Fail-safe hydraulic actuatow 18-3
Fail-safe valves. 3. IX
Failure diagram. 9-4
Failure5 of sucker rods, 9-8. 9-9. 9- I3
Faw market value. 40-I
Fair-market-value determination, 41-2. 4 l-3.
41-S. 41-S
Fanning friction factor, 34-24
Fannings equation. 26-10
Farmouts. 57-9. 57-10
Fathometer. 18-5
Fatigue analysis, IX-27
Fatigue cracks or cracking. 9-l. IS-16
Fatigue damage, 18-27
Fatigue failure. 9-9. IS-21
Fatigue life. 9-l I
Fatty amine compounds. 44-45
Fault traps. 29-3
Feasibility analysis, 39. I7
FED DDL wellsite analysis. 49-37
Federal excise taxes. 41-l. 41-3, 41-4,
41-9. 41-12
Federal income taxeb. 41-5. 41-6. 41-S. 41-12
Federal Power Commission (FPC) approval
certificates. 4 l-9
Federal Register, 57-12
Federal taxes. 41-5. 41-7, 41-12 to 41-16,
44-5
Fee ownership,
control, 57-2
definition, 57-l
Fee simple interest, 41-I
Fence diagram, 45-8, 45-9
Ferric hydroxide, 56-3
Ferrous sulfide precipitation, 54-7
6FF28 IES tool. 49-15
6FF40 IES logs and tool, 49-15.49-17, 49-18
Fiber-reinforced plastic pipe, 15-10
Fiberglass casing and tubing, 4446
Fiberglass filaments, 12-12
Fiberglass-lined steel tanks, 19-31
Fiberglass-reinforced polyesters (FRPs), 11-9
Fiberglass/steel rod string, 9-12
Fiberglass sucker rods,
application, 9-12, 9-13
body. 9-12
care, handling. and storage, 9-13, 9-14
chemical and mechanical properties, 9-l I
end-fitting grades, 9-12
expected life, 9- I3
failures, 9-13
general dimensions, 9-l 1
introduction, 9-10
manufacture of. 9-12
physical dimensions, 9-l 1
rod-body-to-steel connector-joint design, 9-12
stress-range diagram, 9- 13
Fibrous filters. 39-26
Fibrous packing, 19-14
Fibrous-type nust extractors, 12-12
Field behavior vs. predicted performance,
waterfloodmg, 44-31
Field capillary number, 47-17
Field compressors, control of, 13-57
Field development, 36-1, 46-l 1
Field development plan offshore, I S-25, IS-26
Field engineers, 39-l
Field examples, deviation survey, 53-7, 53-8
Field facilities.
tireflood.
pencratlon and inlcclion. 4h-IY
water trcatnacnt. 40-20
Field-fil~crcd hampIe. 24-4
Field flltcring cqulpmcnt, 24-4
Field instrumentation lor SCADA. 16-9
Field operations olfshorc.
drillstem testing, IX-20
introduction. 18-17
locatwn, establishing. I& I8
plug and abandonment, IS-20
running BOP, IS-18 to IS-20
running ZO-in. casing. IX-18
running 30.in. casing. IS-18
spudding the well, IS-18
Fieid performance, 48-6. 48-7
Field-performance data. 37-7
Field &lot tests, 48-13
Field pilots, 46-I I
Field projects. thermal recovery,
dry vs. wet combustion, 46-18, 46-19
reservw performance, 46-14 to 46-17
screening guides, 46-13
Field response, MP ilooding, 47-16
Field results,
chemical flooding, 47-21, 47-22
foam injection, 47-9
high-pH processes, 47-21. 47-22
polymer floods, 47-6
Field sampling. CC reservoir, 39-5
Field separation conditions, optimum, 39-5
Field titration kit, 54-3
Field-welded tanks, 11-2. 1 l-9
Filing losses, storage tanks, I I-I 1 to 1 l-13
Fill-up, 44-9. 44-34, 44-39. 4441, 44-46
Film thickness of coatings, II-4
Filter/separator. 12-l. 12-2
Filter-type mist extractor, 12-l I
Filtering, 12-8, 12-11. 19-7, 19-14, 19-28
Filters, 15-20, 15-21
Filtration, 15-20
Finger in gas displacement, 43-7
Fingering of miscible slug, 45-6
Finite-closed aquifer, 38-5, 38-6, 38-8,
38-13. 38-18
Finite-closed boundary, 38-1
Finite-difference equations, 48-l, 48-2, 48-13
Finite-difference method, 43-13 to 43-15
Finite-difference simulator, 45-10
Finite-element simulator, 45-10
Finite linear aquifers, 38-2
Finite-outcropping aquifer, 38-5, 38-8,
38-10, 38-11. 38-14 to 38-19
Finite-outcropping boundary, definition, 38-l
Fire detectors and detection systems, 18-47
Fire hazard. IS-46
Fire tests for valves, 3-38
Fire tubes. 19-28
Fireflood, 46-1, 46-3. 46-4, 46-13 to 46-28
Fireflood pots, 46-13
Firewall, 11-9, 11-11
First-contact miscible flooding, 45-1, 45-2,
45-5
First law of thermodynamics, 34-I
First-stage separator gas, 39-6, 39-10
Fishing characteristics of packers, 4-6
Fissility, 52-20
Fitting factor, 38-7
Five-point difference scheme. 48- 1 I
Five-spot pattern, 43-2, 43-8, 44-1, 448,
4413 to 44-20, 44-22. 4423, 4425,
44-26 to 4429, 4433. 44-34, 44-37,
44-38. 4440, 45-7, 46-13, 46-17,
46.18, 46-23. 46-25. 46-26, 46-28.
46-30. 47-10
l,lVC VIIYL. milnlll~ltl, 11 17
l,~xctl choke, 5 S4
Fixed drilling platlorrn\, l&2, IX-24
Fixed-pad Kingsbury Ihrwt bcarmg, 7-3
Fixed platli)rm drilling, ?-3X, 3.3Y
Fixed pump mstallation. 6-2. h-3
Fixed-roof tanks. I l-2
Flagging the bottom valve, gas IlIt, 5-44
Flame arrcstcrs, I l-6, I I-X to I l-10. 19-2X
Flame ionization detector (FID). 52-4. 52-5.
52. IO, 52. I I
Flammable gases, IO-36
Flammable liquids, IO-36
Flange data, 3-16 to 3-25, 3-27
Flange taps, 13-3 to 13-8, 13-14 to 13.19,
13-26, 13-27. 13-30, 13-31, 13-33, 13-34
Flank waterflood, 4% I3
Flare boom, IS-20
Flash calculations for separators, 12-33.
12-36, 12-37
Flash calculations. multlcomponent. 40. I3
Flash chamber. trap or vessel, 12-l
Flash distillation system. 19-15, 19. I6
Flash gas liberation. definition, 22-20
Flash gas separation. 37-l
Flash liberation process. 32-7
Flash point, I l-7 to I l-9
Flash process, definition. 22-20
Flash separation (vaporization), 12-32. 21-4,
37-3. 45-8
Flat-bottom tanks, I l-2
Flat-plate orifice, 13-2
Flat-sided tanks (non-API), 1 l-2
Flex joints. 18-12. 18-13. 18-19, 18-25
Flexible pipe. 18-36, 18-37
Flexural failure, 18-39
Float-actuated pilot-operated valve. 13.53
Float-and-sink (density) method, 52-20
Float cages, 13-54
Float-operated controller, 13-54
Float-operated controls, 12-18
Float-operated mechanical oil valves. 13-53
Float-operated pilot, 12-5, 12-39
Float-operated trap, 13-58
Float traps. 13-53. 13-54
Floating barges, IS-34
Floating drilling operation or system. 18-3,
18-11, 18-14, IS-16
Floating drilling rigs or vessels, 18-2, 18-6.
18-10, 18-13, 18-17. 18-20, 18-31, 18-34
Floating drilling, subsea systems. IS-19
Floating platforms. 3-38
Floating drilling vessels, 3-39
Floating production facilities (FPF).
applications, 18-34, IS-35
disposal of oil, gas, and water, 18-36
semisubmersibles vs. tankers, 18.35, 18-36
under Coast Guard jurisdiction, 18-44
Floating-roof tanks, 11-2. I l-6
Floatless level controller, 13-53
Floatless level controls, 13-54
Flocculation, 19-9, 19-10, 19-28. 44-46
Flood coverage, 39-18, 44-18
Flood efficiency. 39-18, 44-46
Flood fronts, 4416
Flood pot tests, 40-16. 40-17
Florida, 24-20. 24-21, 29-7, 29-8, 44-36
Flotation, 15-20, 19-28
Flow-after-flow, 33-4
Flow channels, 26-10. 55-l
Flow coefficient, 34-3 I
Flow computer. 5-53
Flow conductivity. 28-2
Flow-control devices, safety shut-in systems.
control systems, 3-31. 3-33. 3-34
introduction. 3- I8
production platform, 3- I9
SUBJECT INDEX
regulations, 3-34
sensors, 3-34
subsurface safety valves, 3-26, 3-27,
3-29, 3-31
surface safety valves. 3-21
with hydra&c and pneumatic valves, 3-20
Flow-control valve, 16-l 1
Flow-direction change to remove oil from
gas, 12-9
Flow m annulus. 41-42
Flow in tubing. gas, 34-9 to 34-27
Flow-measurement pulsed-data transmission
systems, 174
Flow nozzle flowmeter, 32-13
Flow provers. 32-14
Flow rate, eqmvalent total, 35-2
Flow rate. units and conversions, 58-31
Flow regimes. 34-36 to 34-38, 34-40
Flow-strmg sizes, table, 34-23
Flow-string weights, table. 34-23
Flow surges, 12-20
Flow systems of combinations of beds,
26.14, 26-15
Flow systems of simple geometry,
horizontal flow. 26. I I, 26-12
radial flow, 26-13
vertical flow, 26-12. 26-13
Flow-temperature gradient correlation, 5-26,
5-21
Flow-test data on a well, 30-l I 10 30-13
Flow through chokes. 34-45. 3446
Flow through pores of various sizes. 54-10
Flow velocities for pumps, 15-17
Flow velocity change to remove oil from
gas, 12-9
Flow velocity. effect on acid reaction rate, 54-5
Flowing BHP. gas, calculation of, 34-9 to
34-27
Flowmg gas column, 34-9
Flowing gas wells, 34-23, 34-29
Flowing-pressure-at-depth traverse. 5-23, 5-26
Flowing pressure gradient, 5-l. 5-32, 5-43.
44-33
Flowing pressure gradient curves, 5-25,
S-26, 5-30, 5-43
Flowing pressure surveys, 5-43
Flowing pressure traverses, 5-21, 5-23
Flowing production pressure at depth, 5-45
Flowing production pressure. gas-lifl valve.
5-17 to 5-19, 5-21, 5-23, S-24, 5-26 to
5-28, 5-30 to 5-33. 5-35. 5-36. 5-41 to
543, 545, 546, 5-48
Flowing production transfer pressure, 5-33,
5-34, 5-36
Flowing temperature adjustment factor. 33-15
Flowing temperature factor, 13-3. 13-13
Flowing wellhead backpressure, 5-54
Flowing wellhead production pressure, 5-53
Flowlme backpressure, 6-25
Flowline breaks. I6- 11
Flowlme choke. 5-53, 5-54
Flowline headers, 3-21
Flowlme pressure, 6-25, 6-43
Flowline-pressure term, 6-28
Flowline sampling. 24-3, 24-4
Flowline temperature, 52-22 lo 52-24
Flowlines m subsea completions, 18-33.
18.34, 18-36 to 18.38
Flowmeters, 32-6. 32-10, 32-13
Flue gas, 45-1, 45-4, 45-6, 46-21
Fluid channel gradient, 3 l-5
Fluid coefficient, 55-2 to 55-4
Fluid columns, specific gravities and unit
pressure of, 6-22, 6-23
Fluid composition. 51-7. 51-8
Fluid conductivity. 26-10. 26-28
Fluid-content investigation, 49-26, 49-27
Fluid-controlled valves, 16-3. 16-4
Fluid controls, 6-51
Fluid data, ESP, 7-9
Fluid distributions. 442 to 44-4, 44-l 1
Fluid-electric-controlled valves, 16-3
Fluid-flow effects on waterflooding. 44-29
Fluid-flow model, 4420, 4421
Fluid/fluid interstitial configurations. 28-3
Fluid friction in hydraulic pumps, 6-19, 6-20
Fluid friction in sandstone reservoirs, 56-2
Fluid friction in tubular and annular flow
passages, 6-26
Fluid-friction losses, 6-5, 6-25, 6-47, 6-49
to 6-5 I, 6-67. 6-69
Fluid-gradient calculations, 6-26
Fluid identification. 50-2, 50-3
Fluid incompressibility, 51-49
Fluid-inventory equations, 43-9
Fluid jet, 8-7
Fluid level in well, 30-7, 30-8, 30-15
Fluid-loss additives, 55-4
Fluid-loss agents, 54-8
Fluid-loss characteristics of fracturing
fluids, 55-2, 55-7, 55-8
Fluid-loss-controlled fluids, 55-4
Fluid mapper, 44-20
Fluid mobility. 39-20. 44-7, 51-47, 52-14
Fluid pound, 10-5, IO-6
Fluid power, 6-15
Fluid pressure differences, 56-2
Fluid pressure regulator, 13-54
Fluid properties,
data, 37-16
gas and liquid FVF, 6-67 to 6-69
gravity, 6-67
introduction. 6-66
oil systems. 22-l
viscosity, 6-67
Fluid pumpoff chart, ESP, 7-15
Fluid sample analysis, 41-8
Fluid saturation configurations. 28-2
Fluid saturation distributions. 28-2, 46-2
Fluid saturations,
comparison of methods of measurement,
26-24 to 26-27
determination from rock samples. 26-2 I,
26-22
interstitial water, 26-22 to 26-24
laboratory measurement of capillary
pressure, 26-24
of cores, factors affectmg, 26-20, 26-21
of reservoir for waterflooding, 46-3, 46-4
Fluid viscosrty, 6-27
Fluids in motion,
energy relatlonships, 34-1, 34-2
irreversibility losses, 34-2, 34-3
Flume pope. 19-21
Fluoboric acid system, 54-4, 54-l 1
Fluorescence X-ray, 50-7
Fluoride, 19-10, 56-I
Fluoride mtensitier, 54-4
Fluosilicates, 54-4, 56-4
Flushing agent, lo- 13
Flushing efficiency. 39-18
Flux-gate magnetometer, 5 l-28
Flux leakage. 53-20 to 53-23, 53-26
Flywheel, 10-15. IO-19
Foam, 18-47. 19-23. 32-7. 45-8
Foam flooding, 47. I, 47-6 to 47-9
Foam quality. 55-6
Foam separator, 12-18
Foam stability. 47-7
Foaming agents. 39-16. 55-6
Foaming in desulfurizer. 14-22
Foaming oil, 12-3. 12-6, 12-7, 12-13,
12.17. 12-19 to 12.22, 12.32, 12-35
33
Focused electrical-resistivity devices, 26-31
Focused-electrode devices, 49-l I. 49-18
Focused-electrode logs, 49-18 to 49-22
Folded structure, 53-12
Force balance equations, 5-13
Force balance m downhole 6-16 to 6- 19 pumps,
Force of gravity, 58-3
Force summing devices, 30-1, 30-2, 30-6
Force, unit and definition, 58- 1 I, 58-23,
58-24, 58-34
Forced-circulation heating. 19-22
Forced-draft burners, 19-28
Forchheimer equation, 35. I I
Fordoche field, Louisiana, 39-16
Forecast of future rate of production,
constant percentage decline, 41-9, 41-10
declining production, 41-9
harmonic decline, 41-10
hyperbolic decline, 41-10
part constant rate-part declining
production, 41-10, 41-11
produced product prices, 41-I 1
proration of market curtailment. 41-I I
Foreign objects in flow string, 33-20, 33-22
Forest Hill field, Texas, 46-3 1, 46-34
Formation.
analysis, in sand control, 56-3
damage, 56-4, 56-8
properties, in sand control, 56-2
sampling, in sand control. 56-3
Formation alteration, effect on log
measurements, 51-20 to 5 l-23
Formation balance gradient, 52-25, 52.26
Formation compaction, 26-8
Formation composition, effect on acid
reaction rate, 54-6
Formation compressibility, 40-34
Formation compressibihty vs. depth, 26-7
Formation conductivity. 54-8, 54-9
Formation damage, 4-9. 30-8, 35-4, 39-25,
51-21, 54-8 to 54-10
Formation density log. 52-20
Formation drillability exponent, 52-24
Formation evaluation, 5 l-l, 5148
Formation evaluation letter and computer
symbols, 59-2 to 59-51
Formation evaluation services, 52-2 to 52-l 1
Formation factor,
dependence on porosity and lithology, 49-4
evaluation, 49-14, 49-26, 49-30
Formation fluid pressure, 51-39
Formation fracturing,
fluid-loss-controlled fluids, 55-4
formations fractured, 55-2
fracture area, 55-2, 55-3
fracture planes, 55-2
fracturing equipment. 55-9
fracturing materials. 55-5 to 55-8
fracturing techniques, 55-8, 55-9
general references, 55-10 to 55-12
hydraulic fracturmg theory, 55-l. 55-2
introduction, 55-l
multiple-zone fracturing, 55-9
operations. 8-8
references. 55-10
reservoir-controlled fluids, 55-2, 55-4
, stimulation results, 55-4. 55-5
treatment planning, 55-9. 55-10
viscosity-controlled tluids, 55-4
Formation of an emulsion, 19-2. 19.3
Formation permeability. 50-2
Formation pore pressure, 52-17
Formation pressure gradient, 5 l-39
Formation resistivity factor, 26-28 to 26-31,
49-4
Formation shear-wave velocity, 51.25
Foams as fracturing fluids, 55-6. 55-7, 55-9 Formation tests. 40-3
PETROLEUM ENGINEERING HANDBOOK
Formation transit time, 51-19, 51-20
Formation volume,
of gas plus liquid phases, 21-19
of well production at reservoir conditions,
21-20
total. gas-condensate system, 21-16, 21-18
total by Standings correlation, 21-19
Formation volume correlations, 21-15 to 21-20
Formation volume factor (FVF) of gas,
6-67, 20-11, 20-16. 22-13, 22-20.
37-16, 39-14, 39-23, 40-5, 40-7, 40-9,
40-22 to 40-24
FVF of gas plus liquid phase, 6-47
FVF of oil, 6-67. 22-l. 22-10 to 22-13,
22-20, 37-16, 40-6, 40-8, 40-9, 40-l 1,
40-16
FVF of water, 24-15, 24-16
FVF, total (two-phase), 6-47, 6-68, 22-l.
22-13, 22-14; 22-20
FVFs vs. pressure, 37-16
Formation water, definition, 24-18
Formation water density, 24-14
Formation water resistivity, 24-14, 24.16,494
Formation water sample, 24-3
Formation water viscosity. 24-16, 24-17
Formations fractured, 55-2
Formazin polymer, 44-44
Formazin turbidity units (FTU), 44-44
Formic acid (HCOOH) in acidizing, 54-3,
54-8, 54-10
Forms of meter, 13-2
Formulation sequential. 48-14
FORTRAN IV, 17-6, 17-7
FORTRAN card deck, 17-5
FORTRAN source code listing, 9-3
Fossil water. 24-2
Foster field, Texas. 44-30
Foundations for pump and prime mover, 15-18
Foundations of pumping units, IO-7
Four-arm caliper, 53- I7
Four-arm dipmeter tools, 53-8, 53-10
Four-cycle engine, IO-14 to 10-16, IO-19
Four-stage separation, 12-34
Four-way engine valves, 6-9
Fourier heat equation, 26-16
F, values for various annuli, 33-17
F, values for various flow strings, 33-16
Fractional analyses, 39-2
Fractional-flow curve, 40-14, 43-10, 43-l I,
44-12
Fractional-flow equation, 40-17, 43-3, 43-5,
43-10, 44-4, 44-9, M-10
Fractional flow of gas. 40-14, 43-6, 43-8
Fractional horsepower motors, 18-46
Fractional oil recovery, 44-9
Fractional water cut, 44-8
Fractionation, 39-27
Fractionation equipment, 39-5
Fracture acid&g: 54-9, 54-l 1
Fracture area, 55-2, 55-3
Fracture-assisted steamflood, 46-26
Fracture conductivity, 54-8, 54-9. 55-4,
55-8. 55-9
Fracture conductivity ratio, 55-4
Fracture evaluation, 5145 to 51-47
Fracture flow capacity, 55-8
Fracture-fluid efficiency, 55-4
Fracture geometry, 55-5, 55-9
Fracture gradient, 55-2
Fracture of pipe, 2-60
Fracture penetration, 55-4, 55-9
Fracture planes. 55-2
Fracture porosity. 44-2
Fracture pressures, 44-3, 44-46, 5 1-44
Fracture strength of casing, 2-61
Fractured-matrix imbibition. 48-9
Fractured matrix model. 48-5
Fractured porosity, 29-8
Fractures, perme&ility of, 26- I6
Fracturing: See Formation fracturing
Fracturing, 26-2. 40-23, 40-24. 51-44, 56-l
Fracturing efficiency, 55-9
Fracturing equipment, 55-9
Fracturing fluids, comparative efficiency, 55-9
early treatments with, 55-l
effective volume of, 55-2
foams, 55-6. 55-7
gelled-oil, 55-7
heavy oil-in-water emulsions, 55-7
high-viscosity, 55-8
leakoff, 55-4
mixed-base, 55-7
oil-base, 55-5
oil-in-water dispersion, 55-7
rate of leakoff controlled by viscosity, 55-4
viscosity of, 55-2
viscous emulsion, 55-8
volume of, 55-3
water-base, 55-5 to 55-7
Fracturing materials,
fluids, 55-5 to 55-8
propping agents, 55-8
selection, 55-9
Fracturing pressure, 54-10, 54-l 1, 56-5
Fracturing pressure gradients, 55-2
Fracturing techniques, 55-8, 55-9
France, l-68, 12-39, 46-3, 46-27 to 46-29
Frangible-roof tanks, I l-2
Frax log analysis, 49-37
Free condensate, 14-5
Free gas, 6-2, 6-38, 6-39, 6-47, 6-50, 6-57,
6-62, 8-10. 12-3, 22-1, 22-9, 37-1,
37-2, 37-5, 40-5, 40-8, 40-13, 40-22 to
40-24, 40-33, 44-4
Free-gas cap, 40-6 to 40-8, 40-10
Free-gas production, 37-2
Free-gas production rate, 37-11
Free-gas saturation, 37-22, 40-19, 44-4,
44-5
Free pump cycle, 6-3, 6-6
Free pump installations, 6-3, 6-4
Free-standing risers, 18-15
Free-stretch factor of casing, 2-35
Free water. 14-3, 14-5, 14-6, 14-17, 14-20,
19-9, 19-17, 19-24. 19-25
Free water knockout (FWKO), 12-3, 12-4,
12-13, 15-21, 18-28, 19-9, 19-17 to
19-19, 19-22, 19-32
Freezing point, 14-2, 14-6. 14-10, 14-19,
21-19, 25-19
Freezing problem, 13-53
French design, concrete structures, 18-23
French Nat]. Assembly, l-68
Freon 12. 14-9
Frequency of wave, 51-14
Frequent; response. 30-5, 30-6
Frequency, unit and definition, 58-11.
J8-23; 58-36
Fresh core techniques, 44-5
Fresh mud, 49-20, 49-25, 49-27
Fresh water, 44-41, 44-42
Freshwater buffer, MP flooding, 47-10
Freshwater recharge, 24-20
Friction coefficient, 9-9
Friction factor, 15-l to 15-3. 15-5 to 15-7,
15-10, 34-2, 34-3, 34-24, 34-38, 34-39,
39-25
Friction in downhole pumps, 6-21
Friction loss, 13-2
Friction loss curves, 55-6, 55-7
Friction loss gradient, 34-36, 34-38 to
34-40
Friction losses, 46-29
Friction pressure, 55-5, 55-6
Friction pressure-drop curves, 6-26, 6-70,6-7 1
Friction relationships,
annular sections-flow between tubing and
casing, 6-69 to 6-72
circular sections-tubing, 6-69
pressure drop in tubing annular flow,
6-70, 6-71
Friction wheel engine starters, IO-19
Frictional horsepower, 10-18, lo-19
Frictional press&e drop or loss, 6-1, 6-18
to 6-20, 6-25, 6-35, 46-7
Fritted glass, 26-6, 26-24
Front displacement models,
Mandl-Voleks refinement of Marx-
Langenheim method, 46-8
Marx-Langenheim method, 46-7, 46-8
Rameys generalization of Marx-
Langenheim method, 46-8
Frontal-advance applications, 43-16
Frontal-advance calculation, 43-12, 44-9 to
44-11
Frontal-advance equation, 40- 14, 40- 17,
40-18, 4410
Frontal-advance performance, 43-12
Frontal advance theory, 44-7
Frontal-drive method, for oil reservoir with
gas-cap drive, 40-13, 40-14
for oil reservoir with water drive, 40-17,
40-18
Frost heaving, 18-41
Frost point, 25-5
Fry pool, Texas, 44-1
Fuel availability for engines, lo-16
Fuel consumption, 10-17, 58-33
Fuel content as performance indicator,
tirefloods, 46-16
Fuel-gas scrubbers, 19-28
Fugacity coefficient, 25- 11
Fugacity of hydrate, 25-l 1
Full-bore flowline valves, 3-12 to 3-14
Full-capacitv relief valves, 12-40
Full-dime&r core analysis, 27-1, 27-8
Full-diameter core method, 26-17
Full diesels, lo-15
Full-interest wells, 57-9
Full-line injection-gas pressure, 5-53
Full-load rating of motor, 10-26, 10-28,
IO-30 -
Full-load slip, lo-24
Fullerton-Clearfolk unit, California. 36-7
Fully implicit formulation. 48-14
Fungi, 44-43, 44-44
Funicular distribution, 26-24
Fuses for motors, lo-28
Fusible plugs for fire detection, 18-47
Future inflow performance, 34-34, 34-35
Future net cash income, 41-5, 41-6
Future performance calculations, 43-10 to 43-16
Future performance, water-drive reservoirs,
pressure gradient between new and
original front positions, 38-13, 38-14
reservoir above bubblepoint pressure, 38-14
reservoir below bubblepoint pressure,
38-14 to 38-16
reservoir simulation models, 38-16
G
Galling, 6-50
Galvanic anodes, 19-3 1
Galvanic corrosion, 3-36
Galvanized coating, 1 l-6
Galvanized wire armor, 18-49
Gamma-gamma density devices, 50-7, 50-15
to 50-17, 50-26 to 50-28, 50-37
Gamma probability function, 39-l 1
Gamma radiation, 50-3
SUBJECT INDEX
3.5
Gamma ray absorption, 50-2, 50-13
Gamma ray attenuation, 50-2, 504
Gamma ray curve and log, 364, 46-27,
49-15, 49-19, 49-20, 49-25, 49-38,
49-39, 50-15, 50-24 to 50-27, 51-16,
51-17, 51-19, 51-23, 51-26, 51-27,
51-33, 51-38, 5145, 53-2, 534, 53-26
Gamma ray detection, 50-14, 50-23
Gamma ray devices, 50-15, 50-16
Gamma ray emission spectra, 50-15, 50-17
Gamma ray energy, 50-7, 50-13, SO-15
Gamma ray flux, geometry for, 50-16
Gamma ray index, 50-24
Gamma ray interactions, 50-6 to 50-8,
50-12, 50-14
Gamma ray measurements, 50-24 to 50-26
Gamma ray spectroscopy, 50-2, 50-3,
50-12, 50-13, 50-22, 50-24, 50-35
Garden Banks platform, 18-2
Gas analysis, 52-17, 52-18
Gas analysis system, 52-3
Gas anchors, 8-9, S-10
Gas and oil differences, 36-2
Gas backpressure valve, 124, 12-5, 12-9
Gas boot, 6-33, 6-57 to 6-59, 19-13, 19-18,
19-21
Gas break-out, 16-14
Gas breakthrough, 43-3, 43-5, 43-8, 43-9
Gas cap, 37-2, 37-3, 37-5 to 37-8, 37-13 to
37-17, 39-5, 40-5
Gas-cap drive, 36-2, 37-1,40-g, 40-13, 40-14
Gas-cap-drive reservoirs, 43-9, 42-5
Gas-cap encroachment, 36-2
Gas-cap expansion, 43-12, 43-15, 43-16
Gas-cap gas expansion. 37-5
Gas-cap gas production, 37-5
Gas cap in vessel, 6-62
Gas-cap injection, 43-3
Gas cap/oil production, 37-10
Gas-cap reservoir, 46-24 to 46-26
Gas capacity chart, 5-8
Gas capacity of separators, 12-23 to 12-25,
12-27 to 12-29, 12-31, 12-32
Gas chromatography, 27-1, 52-5
Gas compressibility, 36-2
Gas compressibility factor, 5-8, 5-l 1,
12-22, 12-23, 12-25, 12-26, 12-29,
12-30, 20-4, 20-7, 20-8, 20-10, 20-11,
20-14, 22-13, 4645
Gas/condensate ratio, 39-5
Gas-condensate recovery, 39-13
Gas-condensate reservoirs,
economics of operation, 39-26, 39-27
formation and fluid data for, 39- 11
general operating problems, 39-24 to
39-26
introduction, 39-1
nomenclature, 39-27
operation by pressure depletion, 39-10 to
39-15
operation by pressure maintenance or
cycling, 39-15 to 39-24
properties and behavior, 39-l to 394
references, 39-27, 39-28
sample collection and evaluation, 39-6 to
39-10
well tests and sampling, 394 to 39-6
Gas condensate systems. 20-4. 21-16 to
21-20, 22-l -
Gas-condensate wells, 3-36, 3-37, 334.
34-37, 34-28, 34-36
Gas condensates, 20- 11, 40- 13, 40-24
Gas coning, 32-3, 37-2, 37-13, 48-6
Gas cushion, 19-17, 19-18
Gas cutting, 1847
Gas cycling, 34-28, 45-13, 45-14
Gas cyclone, 12-20
Gas deliverability approach, 35-12
Gas-depletion drive, 29-7
Gas de&ion factor, definition, 22-20
Gas-discharge counters, 50-12
Gas discharge radiation detector, 50-12
Gas displacement, 43-3 to 43-6, 43-8, 43-16
Gas disposal, 18-30
Gas distribution system, 12-38
Gas drive, 46-3, 46-5
Gas effect, on acoustic log, 51-37
on velocity ratio, 51-38
Gas effect on neutron porosity, 50-30,
50-31
Gas eliminators, 15-14
Gas evolution, 37-22, 37-23
Gas expansion, 37-6
Gas expansion factor, 39-l 1, 40-7
Gas-expansion method of determining
porosity, 26-6
Gas-expansion porosimeter, 26-6
Gas exsolution, 52-14
Gas extraction methods. 52-2
Gas filter, 12-1, 12-2
Gas-tired crude oil heating unit, 19-28
Gas flaring, 18-30
Gas flotation units, 15-27
Gas-flow computers, 16-6, 16-12
Gas flow, Weymouth formula, chart, 15-8,
15-9
Gas formation volume factor (FVF), 6-67,
20-l 1, 20-16, 22-13, 22-20, 37-16,
39-14, 39-23, 40-5, 40-7, 40-9, 40-22 to
40-24
Gas-free hydraulic loop, 18-34
Gas-free viscosity, 22-14. 22-15
Gas fuel consumption, 39-24
Gas fundamentals as applied to gas lift,
gas pressure at depth, 5-3 to 5-6
gas volume stored in conduit, 5-11, 5-12
introduction. 5-3
temperature effect on confined bellows-
charged dome pressure, 5-6 to 5-8
volumetric gas throughput of a choke or
gas lift valve port, 5-8 to 5-10
Gas/gas interface, 39-21
Gas-gathering facilities, 5-53
Gas-gathering system, 12-10, 12-11, 12-33
Gas gravities of natural gases, table, 25-6
Gas-gravity/condensate-gas ratio, 34-28
Gas gravity, definition, 22-20
Gas handling, approximation for, 6-38, 6-39
Gas-hydrate equilibrium locus, 25-2
Gas hydrate region, oil and gas reservoirs
that exist in, 25-18, 25-19
Gas in effluent oil, 12-15, 12-16
Gas in place,
by material balance, 40-6, 40-7
by volumetric method, 40-5, 40-6
in reservoir containing nonassociated gas
and interstitial water but no residual oil,
40-23
Gas injection, 42-5, 43-16
Gas injection, BHP calculation, 34-28 to
34-30
Gas injection data, 39-23
Gas-injection operations, 43-2, 43-3, 43-7,
43-9, 43-17
Gas-injection performation, 43-5, 43-16
Gas injection pressure maintenance in oil
reservoirs,
calculation of performance. 43-8 to 43-10
efficiencies of oil recovery by gas
displacement, 43-3
example calculations of future
performance, 43-10 to 43-16
introduction, 43-I. 43-2
methods of evaluating areal sweep
efficiency, 43-7, 43-8
methods of evaluating conformance
efficiency. 43-6, 43-7
methods of evaluating displacement
efficiency, 43-3 to 43-6
nomenclature, 43- 18
optimal time to initiate, 43-3
references, 43-16, 43-17, 43-19
types of gas-injection operations, 43-2,43-3
Gas interference, 6-21, 6-22, 6-24
Gas law constants, 20-2
Gas liberation, 37-3
Gas lift, charts, 643
continuous flow, 5-21 to 5-38, 3440 to 3445
design procedures, 3440. 34-41
designing installations, 34-28
gas fundamentals as applied to, 5-3 to 5-12
intermittent flow, 5-38 to 5-53
introduction, 5-l to 5-3
nomenclature, 5-55
operations, description of. 5-I
performance, 34-44
references, 5-57
unloading procedures and proper
adjustment of injection gas, 5-53 to 5-55
valve mechanics, 5-12 to 5-21
valves, 6-2, 6-6, 18-28, 18-34
well control, 16-11
wells, energy losses, 34-37
wells, tubing profile caliper, 53-17
Gas-lifting methods, 44-42
Gas/liquid/hydrate equilibrium, 25-5
Gas/liquid ratio (GLR), 5-23, 5-25, 5-26,
5-34, 5-36, 5-38, 543, 6-27, 6-29,
6-30, 6-35, 641, 642, 644, 12-21,
12-22, 39-2 to 39-6, 39-10
Gas/liquid relative permeability data, 39-7
Gas lock, 7-4, 7-6, 7-10, 7-15, 7-16
Gas lock breakers, 6-21
Gas lock chart, ESP, 7-15
Gas locking, 6-10, 6-21, 8-9
Gas measurement, automatic. of lease
equipment, 16-6, 16-7
flow nipple and pitot tube for, 33-2
general references, 13-59
instruments, 33-13
introduction, 13-l
metering systems, 13-37
orifice constants, 13-3 to 13-35
physical setup of system for, 13-36, 13-37
references, 13-59
velocity meters, 13-l to 13-3
Gas mobility, 37-3, 39-25, 43-7
Gas motor engine starters, IO-19
Gas/oil contact, 26-25, 404, 40-14, 40-15.
41-9, 46-26
Gas/oil flow through chokes, 34-47 to 3449
Gas/oil interface, 1847, 50-36
Gas/oil interfacial tension (IFT), 22-16, 22-17
Gas/oil ratio (GOR). 5-25, 5-26, 6-24,
6-25, 6-29, 6-30, 6-38, 6-39, 6-44,
6-47, 12-35, 22-20, 34-41 to 3443,
3447 to 3449, 38-16, 39-1, 39-2,
40-33, 41-8, 44-39, 58-38
Gas/oil relative permeability, 28-9
Gas/oil relative permeability ratio, 37-1,
37-2, 39-13
Gas/oil separator, 22-20
Gas override, 48-12
Gas passage charts, 5-8 to 5-10
Gas payment, definition. 41-l
Gas permeability, 39-13, 39-25, 47-9
Gas-plus-liquid FVF, 6-38
Gas pressure at depth,
charts, 5-3, 5-6
factors for approximating, 5-5, 5-6, 5-l I
36
injectton curves. 5-S
static injection calculations, 5-3 to 5-6
Gas-pressure-at-depth factor, 5-5, 5-6, 5-49
Gas pressure function. 37-8 to 37-10
Gas pressuremaintenance performance. 43-8
to 43- 10
Gas price. gross, 41-9
Gas processing plants. 40-3
Gas Processors Assn. (CPA), 20-8, 25-9
Gas Processors Suppliers Assn. (GPSA), 20-S
Gas-producing intervals, location of, 31-4,
31-6
Gas properties and correlations,
Amagats law, 20-4
Calingeart and Davis equation, 20-13
coeffictent of isothermal compressibility.
20-11
Cox chart, 20-12, 20-13
critical temperature and pressure, 20-2.
20-3
Daltons law, 20-4
equations of state, 20-6, 20-7
example problems, 20-13 to 20-17
formation volume factor, 20. I 1
ideal gas, 20-l. 20-2
Lee-Kessler equation, 20- 13
mole fraction and apparent MW of gas
mixtures. 20-4
molecular weight, 20-I. 20-3
natural gasoline content of gas, 20-10,
20-11
principles of corresponding states, 20-4
real gases. 20-4 IO 20-6
references. 20-18
van der Waals equation, 20-7 to 20-9
specific gravity (relative density), 20-4
specific gravity of gas mixtures, 20-4
vapor pressure, 20-3, 20-l I . 20- I2
viscosity, 20-9
viscosity correlations, 20-9, 20-10
Gas properties, effect on gas well
performance. 35-10
Gas property ownershtp, 41-1, 41-2
Gas-purchase contracts, 41-3, 41-9
Gas quality from scrubbers, 12-15
Gas recoveries by natural water drive or gas
Injection, 39-16
Gas regulation,
definitions, 1349. 13-50
field compressors, control of, 13-57 to
13-59
high-pressure service, 13-55, 13-56
liquid-level control, 13-53, 13-54
lowpressure service, 13-55
principles of control. I349
process characteristics, 13-50 to 13-53
references, 13-59
regulators. types of, 13-54 to 13-57
Gas regulator, IO-19
Gas relative permeability, 28-8 to 28-12,
40-25, 40-26
Gas relative permeability vs. total wetting-
thud saturation, 28-8
Gas reserves: See also Reserves
Gas reservoir,
development plan for, 36-l to 36-l 1
infinite acting, 35-l 1, 35-12
Gas reservoirs, depletion technique, 36-2, 36-3
free gas in, 40-5
in gas hydrate region. 25-18, 25-19
nonassociated, material balance recovery
estimates. 40-33, 40-34
nonassociated, volumetric recovery
estimates, 40-2 1 to 40-26
with water drive, 40-7, 40-26
without water drive, 40-24, 40-25, 40-33
Gas richness indicator, 524
PETROLEUM ENGINEERING HANDBOOK
Gas sales contract, 12-33, 14-l Gelled-oil fracturing fluid, 55-7
Gas sales Ime. 3-19 Gelled water in acidizing. 54-12
Gas-saturated crude oil. 22-15 Gelling agents, 54-8
Gas scrubbers, 12-l. 12-10. 12-I 1, 12-20 to Gels as fracturing fluids, 55-5, 55-6
12-22, 12-35. 12-38. 1828 General Conference on Weights and
Gas separator to remedy gas locking. 7-16 Measures. l-69
Gas shows. total, 52-13 to 52-16, 52-18 General crude. 46-16. 46-18. 46-21
Gas sizing of separator. 12-30 General flow equations, 13-I
Gas slippage. effect on permeability General overhead (GO), 41-14
measurements. 26-18, 26-19 General Petroleum Co.. 46-14 to 46-15
Gas-slippage effects, study required, 28-13 General principles of acidizing,
Gas solubility. 40-9 acetic and formic acids, 54-3
Gas solubility in oil, 22-21 hydrochloric acid, 54-l to 54-3
Gas stripping, 15-29 hydrofluoric acid, 54-3. 544
Gas sweeteners. 12-35 General references: See also References.
Gas throughput performance, 5-22 acidizing, 54-12 to 54-14
Gas-to-gas heat exchanger, 14-5 to 14-8,
14.il. 14-14, 14-15, 14-20
automation of lease equipment. 16.16. 16.17
crude oil emulsions, 19-33. 19-34
Gas-transmission-line pressure, 14- 15 electric submersible pumps, 7.17
Gas transmission lines, 12-38 electrical logging, 49-4 1, 49-42
Gas transmission piping specs., 15-12 estimation of oil and gas reserves, 40.38
Gas trap, 52-2 formation fracturing, 55-10 to 55-12
Gas-treating systems, 14-17 IO 14-22 gas-injection pressure maintenance in oil
Gas turbine meters, 16-6 reservoirs, 43-16, 43-17
Gas turbines. 15-16, 15-17, 46-19 gas measurement and regulation, 13.59
Gas-vent string, 6-4 hydrate/volatile-gas systems, 2527. 25-28
Gas venting passage, 6-2. 6-5 miscible displacement, 45-15
Gas viscosity. 40-9, 44-6 mud logging, 52-30
Gas volume stored. in casing annulus. oil and gas leases, 57-12
within a conduit. 5-l I. 5-12, petroleum reservoir traps. 29-9
Gas/water contact, 39-2 I phase behavior of water/hydrocarbon
Gas/water flow. 34-27 systems, 25-24 to 25-28
Gas/water interface. 39-21. 39-22 relative permeability. 28-16
Gas well inflow equation, 33-5 to 33-7 reservoir simulation, 48-20
Gas well performance, sucker rods. 9-14
deterioration causes. 33-20 to 33-22 temperature in welis. 31-7
gas properties, effect of, 35-10 thermal recovery. 46-45. 4646
Infinite-acting gas reservoir, 35-l 1. 35-12 valuation of oil and gas reserves, 41-37
long-term forecast, 35-12 water-drive oil reservoirs. 38-20
non-Darcy flow. 35-10. 35-l I water-injection pressure maintenance and
pseudosteady-state solutions. 35-12 waterflood processes. 44-52
Gas wells. water/volatile-gas systems. 25-24 to 25-27
Bow through tubing-casing annulus, 34-27 wellhead equipment and flow-control
flowing BHP calculation, 34-9 to 34-27 devices, 3-40
not suitable for TFL servtce, IS-34 Generator voltage, IO-2 I
openflow, 33-l to 33-23 Geochemical analysis, 52. I, 52-2
static BHP calculation, 34-3 to 34-9 Geochemical model, 24-20
Gasoline as four-cycle engine fuel, lo-15 Geochemical parameters. 50-37
Gasoline content, 39-1, 39-5 Geochemical water analyses, 24-5
Gasoline-driven engine starters, IO-19 Geochemistry. 50-36, 50-37
Gasoline-plant recovery effictency, 45- 12 to Geochronology, 58-25
45-15 Geodetic surveys, l-69
Gasoline plants, 11-13, 40-13, 41-3, 57-5 GEODIP log analysis. 49-37
Gasoline/water system, 25-27 Geographical distribution of thermal
Gassmann-Blot theory, 5 l-36 recovery projects, 46-3
Gassmanns theory, 51-8 Geological analysis, 52-2, 52-7 to 52-9, 52-28
Gassy conditions. ESP chart. 7-16 GeologIcal correlation, 5 l-29, 5 I-30
Gassy fluid, 6-21 Geological interpretation. 51-28. 51-29
Gassy wells, 6-28. 6-34 Geological map, 40-4
Gate valves, 3-l 1 to 3-13, 3-21 Geologists, 57-8
Gathering systems, I I-13. 40-l Geology, in oil and gas reservoirs
Gauge cocks. 12-42 development,
Gauge glasses, 12-42 carbonate reservoirs, 36-5, 36-6
Gauge location factor, 13-8. 13-35 elastic reservoirs, 36-3, 36-4
Gauge tables, correcting for incrustation, 17-3 paleo-environments, interpretanon of, 36-3
Gauging petroleum and petroleum products, shale stringers. extent of, 36-6
17-3 Geology in sand control. 56-2
Gaussian elimination. 48-16 Geometric-mean air permeabilities. 4437
Gear pump, 19-5 Geometric progression, 6-39
Gear reducer, IO-2 to 10-6, 10.12, lo-13 Geometric series. 40-30
Gear reduction units, 6-50 Geometric spread of energy, 5 l-3
Gearhart, 49-2. 49-36. 49-37 Geometric spreading, 51-12. 51-13
Geiger-Mtiller tube. 50-16 Geometrical factor, 49. I6 to 49. I8 1 49-22
Gel or gelatin model, 39.21, 4417. 44-18. Geometrical spreading factor. 5 1~ I3
4420, 4421 Geometrical spreading loss. 49-34
Gel slugs. 54-10 Geophysics, in characterizmg reservoirs,
Gel strength. 58-34 3b-8. 36-Y
SUBJECT INDEX 37
Geopressure detection, 5 l-39
Geopressure evaluation, 52.2, 52-16 to 52-26
Geopressure gradient, 52-25
Geopressure transition zone, 52-24
Geopreasured shales, 52-22
Geopressured zone, 52-22 to 52-24
Geoiechnical analysis, 18-41
Geothermal gradient,
assumed to estimate BHT, 31-6
basis for pressure-at-depth curves, 5-5
definition of, 52-22
in sedimentary basins, 31-2
in southwest U.S.. 31-3
increased, 5-23
linear, 46-5
temperature protile, 4-6
Geothermal temperature. 5-26
Geothermal temperature gradient, 5-6
Geothermics, 58-33
Germanium (Ge) detector, 50-14. 50-23
Germany. 12-39. 46-3
Getting ;he well drilled, 57-8
Gettv Oil Co.. 46-4, 46-14, 46-15, 46-18,
46-20, 46-23. 46-24
Gibbs theory, 47-8, 47-l I
Gilberts equation. 34-45. 34-46
Gippsland basin. Australia, 27-19
Clash wool. 19-14
Glauconite. 46-21
Glen Hummel field. Texas, 46-15, 46-18
Glenpool field. Oklahoma, 54-l
GLOBAL log analysis. 49-37
Gloriana field, Texas. 46-15, 46-29 to 46-32
Glossary of terms, reserves estimation.
crude oil, 40-3
Gravity drainage, 28-l I, 29-7, 37-1, 37-2,
37-5, 37-7, 37-17. 40-14, 40-15, 40-29,
41-l 1. 43-l to 43-3. 43-5 to 43-7,
43-16, 44-36, 44-39. 47-8, 484. 48-12
Gravity dump piprng, 6-62
Gravity faults, 29-3
Gravity forces, 37-l I. 44-31
Gravity losses, preventing, 1 l-12. I l-13
Gravity platform construction, 18-23, 18-24
Gravity segregation, 12-3, 37-2, 37-4, 40-8,
43-5, 43-7. 43-16. 45-7, 45-8, 48-8
Gravity separation, 6-56 to 6-59, 12-8,
improved recovery, 40-4
natural gas, 40-3
natural gas liquids, 40-3
possible reserves, 40-4
probable reserves, 40-4
reservoir, 40-3
12-19, 12-21, 12-23, 15-21, 19-6, 19-7,
19-13
Gravity separation devices, 15-23
Gravity settling, 15-18, 19-14, 19-15, 19-28
Gravity stabilization, 45-8
Gravity structures. 18-2, 18-3, 18-23,
Glossary of terms, petroleum reservoir 18-4 I, 18-42
traps, 29-8, 29-9
Glossary of terms. reservoir engineering
phase behavior, 22-20, 22-21
Glucan. 47-3
Gravity systems ID piping design, 15-14, 15. I5
Graywacke sediments, 29-7
Great Britain. l-70
Great Lakes. 18-l
Gluconic acid, 44-45
Glycol absorbers. 13-54. 14-18
Glycol-condensate separator, 14-7
Glycol dehydrators, 12-35. 14-18
Glycol foaming, 14-20
Glycol injection LTS system. 14-6 to 14-8,
Great Salt Lake, 24-19
Grid network, 44-17
Grid orientation effects, 48-10 to 48-13
Grid spacmga. 48-8
Gridblocks, 37-2. 48-2 to 48-8, 48-10 to
14.14. 14-15
48-12. 48-14. 48-15, 48-17
Gridded multiphase reservoir simulators.
Glycol rcboiler, 14-6. 14-7. 14-15
Glycol/water mixture, 39-5
Glycols, 12-35. 13-36, 14-6 IO 14-E. 14-15,
37-11. 37-13, 37-14
14-18 to 14-20
Government authorities or agencies, 12-39,
18-44
Governmental regulations. 3-34
Governors. IO-14
Graben. 29-3, 29-8
Gradlent curves. 5-25. 5-36. 5-37
Gradienr flmd tlow, 31-4
Gradlent gas flow, 31-4
Gradient of power tluid, 6-25. 6-26, 6-29.
Gridded reservoir models. 37-2, 37-5
Gridded simularor equations, 37-l I, 37-22
Gridded SLmulator studies. 37-2
Groningen gas field. Netherlands, 51-47
Grooved pin-end plunger, 8-4
Grounding of electrical system, 10-31, IO-32
Guar as thickening agent, 55-5 to 55-7
Guard-electrode device, 49-20
Guarding of pumping units. IO- I2
Guatemala. 25. I8
Guide posts, 18-19, 18-32
Guide, to number of digits to retain, 58-6
6-43. 6-44
Gradient of return Huid. 6-43
Gradient of well servicing fluid, 4-7
Grain density, 50-28, 50-33
Grain density test. 27-l
Grain roundness factor. 55-8
Grain-bize distribution, 56-3, 56-7
Grain size of proppants. 55-X
Grain size test. 27-l
Grain volume: See Sand grain volume
Granting clause. 57-3. 57-4
to style for metric usage. 58-l 1
Guidebase, ocean floor, 18-18. IS-19
Guidecones, 18-14
Guided wave, 51-13
Guideline tensioning systems, 18-l I, 18-13
Guidelineless drilling systems, 3-39
Guidelineless re-entry systems, 18-14
Guidelines,
for marine cargo Inspection, 17-8
for offshore structure selection. 18-25
for running down BOP stack. 18-16
Graphic plots.
Introduction, 24-18
Reistle diagram, 24-19
Stiff diagram. 24-19
Tickell diagram, 24-19
Graphic relationships for SI units, 58-23
Graphical correlations, 22-5, 22-7. 22-8
Grabhite. 12-41
Graphite impregnated cloth model, 39-2 I
G&e-tlowpack, 46-19
Gravel-pack completions, 47-6
Gravel-pack failure, 56-6
Gravel-pack permeabdlty improvement, 56-6
Gravel packing, 56-3. 56-5 to 56-9
Gravel quality. 56-6. 56-7
Gravel selection. 56-6. 56-7
Gravel sizes available. 56-6
Gravimetric determination of BV, 26-3
Gravimetric system, 58-3
Gravitational forces. 26-12. 26-24, 29-3
Gravitational units. 58-5
Gravity conservation with storage tanks,
II-12 to II-14
for selection of storage tanks, 1 I-l
for use of SI units, 17-7
for wire-rope, spudding offshore wells. 18-18
susbsea system, 18-19
to BOP testing procedures, 18-12
to surveys to be performed and analyzed
for offshore drilling permit, 18-5
Guides for using metric units. 58-8
Guides to acid fracture treatment design, 54-l I
Gulf BHP gauge, 30-l
Gulf coast. 18-2. 24-7, 24-8, 29-3, 33-21.
41-5, 47-3. 51-38, 51-39
Gulf of Mexico, 18-2, 18-3, 18-7, 18-24.
19-5, 19-15, 25-18. 29-7. 51-34, 57-l 1.
57-12
Gulf of Thailand. 36-9
Gulf Oil Corp.. 16-12, 46-15, 46-16, 46-18,
46-28 to 46-30
Gunbarrel tank, 19-20 to 19-22
Gunbarrels. 19-7, 19-18, 19-32
Guyed towers, 18-2, 18-3, 18-24. 18-25
Guyline system, 18-24, 18-25
Gypsum (gyp), 56-I. 56-2
Gyroscopes for dxectional surveys, 53-3
Gyroscopic orientation, 53-7
H
h-mode telemetry, 53-I
Habendum clause, 57-4
Halite, 24-20
Hall-Yarborough equation, 20-8
Hammer lugs, 3-39
Hand-held calculator, 20-7, 20-9, 20-13,
40.30
Hand-off-auto switch, IO-27
Handling ESP equipment, 7-12
Hard-wired logic, 16-1, 16-8
Hardness. 4444, 47-5, 47-10, 47-l I. 47-13
Harmonic decline. 40-29, 40-3 I, 40-32,
41-l 1, 41-12
Harmonic-decline deferment factor, 41-29.
41-31, 41-35
Harmonic voltages, 10-30. IO-32
Harrisburg field, Nebraska, 44-40, 47-22
Hassler method, 28-3, 28-5 to 28-7
Hastalloym . 7-3
Havlena and Odeha method for OIP. 37-3.
38-12
Hazardous area classification, 10-36, IO-37
Hazardous areas, electrIcal syslems
offshore, 18-46
Hazen-Williams equation, 15-2
HCI: See Hydrochloric acid
Head, definition, 34-2
Head loss due to friction, 15-l
Head meters, 13-2
Heading, in separators, 12-22. 12-31, 12-35
Heading conditions, 5-22. 5-24. 5-25, 6-60
Heading of wells. 34-46, 34-50
Heads of well fluids, 12-1, 12-32
Heal of fracture. 55-2
Healing, 47-8
Heat capacity.
of rock. 46-7
of steam. 46-5
of water. 46-2
Sl units. 58-28
volumetric. 46-7. 46-10
Heat conduction, 46-4. 46-12. 48-5
Heat conductiun. transient. 46-6
Heat content. of petroleum fractions. 2 l-6
of natural gas. 14-17
Heat exchange rate. 58-38
Heat exchangers, I I-12. 1 I-13, 12-13, 14-5
to 14-8. 14-11. 14-14, 14-18. 14-21.
14-22. 19-8. 19-21, 19-23, 19-28
38 PETROLEUM ENGINEERING HANDBOOK
Heat flow, conversion of units, table, 1-79
Heat flow distortion, 52-22
Heat flow rate, 58-23
Heat in oil and gas separation, 12-7, 12-13
Heat injection rate, 46-8
Heat losses, factor in pattern selection,
46- 17
higher steam rate required in steamfloods,
48- 18
surface lines, 46-4
wellbore, 46-5. 46-19
with thermal stresses, 46-19
Heat of reaction, 46-12
Heat of vaporization, 14-21
Heat transfer. 9-1. 14-1, 14-3, 14-20, 28-13
Heat tra,.sfer coefficient, 58-35
Heat treating, 9-1, 9-2
Heated gunbarrel emulsion treater, 19-22
Heat treater, 15-21, 16-3 to 16-5, 16-12
Heating capacity, 19-29
Heating efficiency, 19-28
Heating in treating emulsions, 19-7, 19-11
Heating value, gross, of natural gas
mixtures, 11-7
Heats of combustion, 52-3
Heavy oil-in-water emulsion-type fracturing
fluid, 55-7
Heavy viscous oil, 12-17
Heidelberg field, Mississippi, 46-15, 46-18
Helical spring BHP element, 30-l
Helium, 14-17, 50-14, 52-5, 52-6, 52-10,
52-13
Hemispherical head equations, 12-38
Hempel distillation, 21-3
Hencky-van Mises theory of yielding, 2-55
Henrys law constants, 25-17
Hercules wellhead, 7-7
Heterogeneity effects on waterflooding,
44-29
Heterogeneous system, definition, 22-21
Hewitt field, Oklahoma, 44-35, 44-36
Hewlett Packard BHP gauge, 30-4, 30-7
HF: See Hydrofluoric acid
Hibernia development, 18-3
Higgins-Leighton method, 44-28, 44-30,
44-31
High-capacity operation of separator, 12-42
High-frequency phase analysis, 27-1
High injection-gas cycle frequency, 5-5 1
High-liquid-level control, 12-39
High-pH chemistry in chemical flooding,
47-18. 47-19
High-pH field tests, 47-21 to 47-23
High-pH processes,
consumption, 47-22
displacement mechanisms, 47-19, 47-20
high-pH chemistry, 47-18, 47-19
rock/fluid interaciions, 47-20, 47-21
High porosity presentation, 49-40
High-pressure gas engine starters, IO-19
High-pressure gas injection, 45-4, 45-l 1,
45-12 -
High-pressure gas wells, 33-4
High-pressure models, 46-13
High-pressure seals, 3-36
High-pressure service regulators, 13-55
High-bressure steamfloo&, 25-4
High-resolution spectroscopy, 50-4, 50-35,
-50-37 --
High-slip motors, 9-3
High-speed engines, lo-14 to lo-19
High-voltage megger, 7-13
High yield strength pipe, 15-12
Hirask-Lawson theory, 47-9
Histogram of acid numbers, 47- 19
Historical background of relative
permeability, 28-2
Historical performance of reservoir, 36-10
Historical review of offshore operations,
18-1 to 18-3
History matching, 48-9, 48-13
History of reservoir simulation, 48-1
Holddown, 8-2, 8-3
Hole azimuth, 53-1, 53-2, 53-7, 53-8,
53-10, 53-17
Hole casing programs, 1841
Hole deviation, 52-13, 53-2, 534, 53-10,
53-17
Hole deviation, angle of, 53-3
Hole direction, 534
Hole enlargement, effect on acoustic
velocity logging tools response, 51-15
Hole rugosity. X-19
Homestead statutes, 57-3
Homogeneous system, definition, 22-21
Hondo platform, 18-2, 18-23
Honduras, 58-20
Hookes law, 51-1, 51-2
Horizontal emulsion treater, 19-21, 19-23,
19-25, 19-26
Horizontal flow system, 26-11, 26-12
Horizontal force vs. displacement curve, 18-10
Horizontal fractures, 44-26, 44-28, 55-2
Horizontal FWKO, 19-18
Horizontal gas flow, 43-10, 43-11
Horizontal permeability, 39-17 to 39-19
Horizontal pressure vessel sizing, 15-24
Horizontal scrubber, 12-38
Horizontal separator, 12-1, 12-6, 12-7,
12-10, 12-16 to 12-18, 12-20 to 12-31,
12-35, 12-40, 16-15, 18-28
Horizontal separator sizing, 12-30
Horizontal stresses, 55-l
Horizontal three-phase separator, 19-17
Horizontal three-phase oil/gas/water
separator. 12-4
Horizbntal vessels, 13-53
Homer plot, 30-9, 35-15, 35-16, 35-19
Homer-type analysis of static BHT, 3 l-6
Horsehead, 10-2 to 10-4, lo-12
Horsepower at prime mover, lo-18
Horseuower, definition, 6-14, 58-24
Horsepower of engines, lo-17 to 10-19,
10-32, 10-33, lo-35
Horsepower of pumping unit, 9-11
Horsepower-rated motors, lo-21
Horsepower rating of motors, 10-17, 10-19,
10-20
Horsepower requirements, 34-41, 34-42,
3444, 34-45
Hot-water stimulation,
Horsepower vs. injection pressure, 34-44
Horst, 29-3, 29-8
48-2
Hoskold method, 41-16,41-18,41-20 to 41-22
Hot-dip process, 1 l-l, 11-6
Hot dolomites, 50-16
Hot waterflood. 46-4,
Hot electric grid, 19-25
Hot oil prodiction, 46-9, 46-10
46-5,
Hot oil productivity, 46-11
46-13,
Hot
46-23,
oil treatments, 46-21, 56-2
Hot-rolled steel, 9-l
Hot spots, 7-1
Hot water, cooling of, 46-6
Hot-water iniection, 46-I
Hydraulic ivcompressibility method, 26-8
Hydraulic radius, 34-27, 34-39
Hydraulic-set packer, 4-3, 4-5, 4-6
Hidraulic
Hydraulic subsea controls, 1849
transmissionsystem,
Hydraulic surface safety valves, 3-20,
18-3
3-21
Hydraulic transformer, 6-19
Hvdraulic transformer orocess. 6- 16
Hydraulic turbine, 6-1
Huntington Beach field, California, 19-5,
46-22, 46-23
Husky Oil Co., 46-22, 46-23
Hutton platform, 18-24
Hydrate depression, 25-19
Hydrate dissociation model, 25-9
Hydrate dissociation predictions, 2.5-5 to 25-9
Hydrate dissociation pressure, 25-6
Hydrate formation, 12-3, 14-1, 14-2, 144
to 14-7, 14-17
Hydrate formation, condition of methanol
propane mixture, 25-20
conditions, effect of GOR, 25-19
conditions for paraffin hydrocarbons, 25-4
on expansion of gas, 25-l 1
pressure, procedure for determining, 25-8,
25-9
temperature, 12-40
Hydrate inhibition, 25-19, 25-20
Hydrate inhibitors, 14-3, 14-5 to 14-8, 14-17
Hydrate problem, 13-53
Hydrate stability conditions, 254 to 25-9
Hydrate temperature, 14-2, 14-3, 14-5 to
14-7, 14-17
Hydrate/volatile-gas systems, 25-3
Hydrated iron oxide, 14-22
Hydrates, 5-12, 5-24, 14-2, 14-3, 14-5,
14-6, 33-20, 33-21, 39-24, 39-25
Hydration of cementation material, 26-18
Hydraulic actuators, 3-2 1, 18-28
Hydraulic BOP control system, 18-21
Hydraulic connectors, 18-12. 18-18. 18-34
Hidraulic control circuit, 3-33
Hydraulic control system, 18-l 1, 18-15
Hydraulic currents,-24-2
Hydraulic forces, 4446
Hydraulic fracturing theory, 55-1, 55-2
Hydraulic head, 26-10, 26-12
Hydraulic horsepower, 6-45, 10-17, lo-18
Hydraulic installations, system pressures and
losses,
in calculation of fluid gradients, 6-26
in closed power-fluid system, 6-26
in fluid friction in tubular and annular
flow passages, 6-26, 6-27
in open power-fluid system, 6-25
Hydraulic power transmission, 6- 1, 6- 15
Hydraulic pressure, 55-I
Hydraulic-pumped-well control, 16-11
Hydraulic pumping,
downhole pumps, 6-2 to 6-7
fluid properties, 6-66 to 6-69
frictional relationships, 6-69 to 6-72
introduction, 6-1, 6-2
jet pumps, 6-34 to 649
principles of operation-reciprocating
pumps, 6-8 to 6-33
references, 6-72
surface equipment, 6-49 to 6-63
46-24
Hot-wire detector, 52-3
Huffnpuff method, 46-1. 47-10, 56-2
Hugoton field, Texas, 33-1, 33-7, 33-9,
33-22, 34-46
Humble formula (relation), 26-29, 26-31,
494, 49-32
Humble gauge temperature element, 31-1
Humble 30-l pressure gauge,
Hidrocarbon analyses, crude oil and gas
condensates, 39-2
formation evaluation service, 52-2 to
52-7, 52-13
of produced well stream, 39-7
of separator products and calculated well
stream, 39-7
used in pressure depletion predictions,
39-10, 39-11
SUBJECT 1NDEX 39
Hydrocarbon chromatogram, 52-16
Hydrocarbon content of samples, 52-9, 52-10
Hydrocarbon content from logs, 5 l-35 to 5 1-38
Hvdrocarbon gas viscositv. 15-6
H;drocarbon/cquid conddnsation, 39-13
Hvdrocarbon liquid recovery, 37-22, 37-23
Hidrocarbon liquid recove; calculations,
14-16
Hydrocarbon liquid recovery system, 14-8
Hydrocarbon liquid saturations, 39- 10
Hydrocarbon mixtures, 39-2, 394, 39-12
Hydrocarbon pore space, 39-8, 39-9, 39-l 1,
39-18
Hydrocarbon recovery systems, lease-
operated,
gas treating for removal of water vapor,
CO, and H,S, 14-17 to 14-22
l OW-t emper at ur e separation (LTS), 14-l to
14-17
references, 14-22
Hydrocarbon recovery unit, 14-10, 14-11
Hydrocarbon reservoir, definition, 39-l
Hvdrccarbon-rich phase at three-phase
critical conditi&, 25-5 _
Hydrocarbon saturation, 49-27, 50-2
Hidrocarbon stabilization, 14-13 to 14-17
Hydrocarbon/water phase diagrams, 25-l to
25-4
Hydrocarbon/water systems, 25-3, 25-27
Hydrocarbon Well Log Standards
Committee, 52-30
Hydrocarbons in place, ownership of, 57-1
Hydrocarbons presence detection, 50-1, 50-3
Hydrocarbons, removing from solids, 15-30
Hydrocarbons, treating from water, 15-2 1
Hydrochloric acid (HCL),
acidizing treatments, 54-1, 54-2
as synthetic polymer gel, 55-5
channeling and wormhole effect, 54-8
combined with HF. dissolving action. 54-9
density at 6OF, 54-2
dissolution of concentrated, 54-3
dissolving limestone, 54-2
in acidizing, 54-l to 54-3
in matrix acid stimulation, 56-5
inhibited, as mud-dissolving acid, 56-l
inhibitors used with, 54-1, 54-6
matrix treatment of carbonates, 54-10
organic inhibitors in, 54-6
reaction rate, effect of,
acid concentration, 54-5
area/volume ratio, 54-5
flow velocity, 54-5
formation composition, 54-6
pressure, 54-4
retardation of, 54-8
rubber lining protection from, 11-6
temperature, 54-4, 54-5
to acidize pH, 24-4
to clean tubing, 56-3
to dissolve corrosion products, 39-26
to remove scale, 56-2
used in combination with HF, 54-3,54-9
Hydrocyclone, 6-62
Hydrocyclone operation, 15-19, 15-30
Hydrodynamic forces, 18-17, IS-25
Hydroelectric valve operators, 16-3
Hydrofluoric acid (HF) in acidizing, 54-3,
54-4, 54-9, 54-l 1
Hvdrofluoriclhvdrochloric acid (HF/HCl)
mixNreS in-acidizing, 54-11
Hydrogen, l-80, 26-18, 50-1, 50-3, 50-4,
50-9, 50-13, 50-17, 50-18, 50-20,
50-26, 50-31, 50-34, 51-31
Hydrogen density, 50-32
Hydrogen embrittlement, 3-36
Hydrogen flame detector, 52-4
Hydrogen sulfide (H,S), 3-36, 3-37, 4-4,
4-5. 6-4, 6-54, 7-11, 7-14. 8-9, 9-1,
9-5, 9-8, 11-6, 12-3, 12-8, 14-3, 14-13,
14-17. 14-20 to 14-22. 15-28. 15-29.
18-20. 18-47, 20-5, 20-6, 22-5, 24-5,
24-17, 39-5, 39-6, 40-22, 44-36. 44-42 to
4444, 45-5, 52-4 to 52-7, 52-13, 547
Hydrogen sulfide content, 25-5, 25-8,
25-13, 25-20
Hydrogen sulfide fumes, lo-13
Hydrogen sulfide gas detectors, IS-47
Hydrogen sulfide/water system, 25-27
Hydrolysis of methyl formate, 54-4
Hydrolyzed polyacrylamide (HPAM), 47-3
to 47-6
Hydrometer, l-80, 54-3
Hvdrometer test method, 17-5
Hidrophile, 47-7
Hydrophobe/hydrophile balance, 19-10
Hidrobhobic surface, 47-8
Hydropneumatic tensioning units, 18-13,
18-14
Hydrostatic equilibrium, 26-l 1
Hydrostatic gradient, 58-25
Hydrostatic head, 6-25, 6-28, 6-51, 55-7,
55-8
Hydrostatic pressure, 3-29, 3-31, 18-17,
29-1, 51-39, 5144
Hydrostatic PV compressibility technique,
26-8, 26-9
Hydrostatic test pressure, 2-62, 3-1,3-2, 3-13
Hydroxyethyl cellulose (HEC), 47-3
Hydroxyfluoboric acid, 54-4
Hydroxyl reactions, 47-21
Hydroxypropyl guar as thickening agent,
55-5, 55-6
Hyperbolic cosines, table, l-59
Hyperbolic decline, 40-28, 40-29. 40-31,
40-32, 41-10, 41-11, 41-29
Hyperbolic-decline deferment factor, 41-29
to 41-31
Hyperbolic sines. table, l-58
Hyperbolic tangents, table, l-60
HypercleanTM technique, 46-2 1
Hysteresis, 28-2, 28-3. 28-6, 28-10, 28-13,
30-3, 30-6, 30-7, 33-6
I
I-wire, 7-5
Ice characteristics, 18-38
Ice-class rigs, 18-2 1
Ice impact, 1843
Ice islands, 18-39
Ice loading, 18-39
Ice management. 18-43
Ice point, 25-l to 25-3, 25-5
Icebergs, 18-39
Icebreaker assistance vessels. 1843
Ideal equilibrium ratios, 23-l 1
Ideal gas, 20-l to 20-3, 26-12
Ideal-gas law, 13-8, 20-2, 204, 20-6, 20-7,
39-8, 40-21, 47-13
Ideal productivity index (PI), 32-3
Ideal solution principles. density from, 22-2,
22-5
Idealized pore models, 26-28
IFP-ICPP, 46-4, 46-15. 46-18, 46-28, 46-29
Igneous rock, 29-3, 29-8
Ignition devices, 46-20
Illinois, 40-16, 40-32, 40-33. 44-41, 44-42,
46-3, 46-4, 46-15
Illinois basin, 24-6, 24-7, 24-9, 4444
Illite, 46-21,50-21,50-32,50-34,50-37,52-21
Illuminance, unit and definition, 58-l 1,
58-23, 58-36
Imbibition curves, 26-24, 28-5, 28-9 to 28-12
Imbibition effect, 40-20
lmbibition of water, 40-20
Imbibition without relative permeability
data, 28-4
Immiscibility of methane gas and oil, 45-2
Immiscible disulacement. 42-2
Immiscible d&lacement fluid, 40-4
Immiscible fluids. 28-2. 28-12. 28-13
Immiscible gas drive, 45-4
Immiscible gas injection, 43-1, 43-2
Immiscible liquids, 19-1, 19-2, 19-14
Immiscible processes, 39-18
Impact energy, 58-32
Impact kinetic energy, 13-l
Impact loading or loads, 3-1, 18-5
Impact pressure, 13-45 to 13-48, 33-l to 33-4
Impact requirement, wellhead equipment, 3-38
Impedances, IO-30
Impingement, 12-S to 12-11, 12-13, 12-19
Implicit-pressure/explicit-saturation
formulation (IMPES), 48-14, 48-15
Implied covenant, 57-6
Impressed-current system, 11-6
Improved recovery reserves, 40-3, 40-34
Impurities in well fluids. 12-3
In-transit deck-load capability. 18-8
Inaccessible pore volume (IPV), 47-5
Inbreathing (vacuum relien of storage tanks.
11-6, 11-7
Incident flux, 50-5 to 50-7
Incident gamma ray, 50-7, 50-12. 50-13
Inclination angle, 53-5, 53-6
Inclinometer, 53-8
Inclinometer section, 53-7
InconelO, 7-3, 15-21
Incremental gas production, 37-10
Incremental oil production, 37-9, 37-17
Incremental oil recovery (IOR), 47-6, 47-2 1
to 47-23
Incremental recovery, potential for, 46-3
Incrustation, 17-3
Independent oil company, 57-8
Independent screwed wellhead, 3-39
Indian Petroleum Corp., 18-1
Indiana, 24-7
Indirect beater, 14-3, 14-5, 14-6
Indirect-fired heaters, 19-2 1
Indonesia, 12-39, 46-3, 46-4
Induced-gamma-ray spectroscopy, 50-4,
50-34, 50-35, 50-37
Induced hydraulic fractures, 54-l 1
Induced porosity, 26- 1, 26-2
Induced radiation, 50-6
Induction conductivity curve, 49-15
Induction device, deep-reading (ID), 49-15,
49-17, 49-20
Induction device, medium-reading (IM).
49-15, 49-17, 49-18
Induction-electrical log (IEL), 49-27. 49-29
to 49-3 1
Induction-electrical surveys (IES), 49-11,
49-15
Induction log (IL), 49-l, 49-2, 49-5, 49-6,
49-14 to 49-18, 49-25 to 49-27, 49-29,
49-30
Induction log resistivity, 51-17, 51-26,
51-37, 51-38, 5146
Induction motors, lo-19 to 10-21, lo-23 to
10-25, 10-30, 10-32, lo-36
Induction motor poles vs. synchronous
speeds, lo-23
Induction spherically focused log (ISF), 49-15,
49-16, 49-19. 49-20. 49-34, 49-36
Inductive couplers, 18-52
Inelastic gamma-ray spectroscopy, 50-35
Inelastic neutron reactions, 50-13
Inelastic scattering, 50-9, 50-23
40
PETROLEUM ENGINEERING HANDBOOK
Inelastic spectrometry. 50-22
Inert-gas injection. 39-16
Inertial effects, 35-10
Inerttal forces, 35-l I
Industrial multitube boilers, 46-19
Inferential meters, 16-5
Infiltration by permeation, 24-18
Infinite-acting pressure solution, 35-3, 35-4.
35-7. 35-12. 35-14
Infinite aquifer. 38-3, 38-6. 38-9
Infinite boundary, definition, 38-l
Infinite linear aquifers, 38-2, 38-8
Infinite radial aquifer, 38-3. 38-5 to 3X-8
Inflation factor. 41-15
Inflow performance relationship (IPR), 6-4,
6-25, 6-41 to 6-43, 6-46, 6-47. 34-30 to
34-35, 34-46. 34-50. 37-17 to 37-21
Inflow well performance, 5-22
Influence-function curves, 38-3
Infrared (IR) absorbance, 12-16
Infrared absorption detector, 52-5 to 52-7
Infrared absorption method, 46-21
Infrared detectors, 3-34
Infrared fire sensors. 18-47
Inglewood field, California, 46-14
Initial fluid saturations, 37-3
Initial gas saturation, 446, 4438
Initial hydrate formation conditions, 25-l. 25-2,
25-5, 25-6. 25-l I. 25-12. 25-15, 25-19
Initial hydrate formation, estimating, 25-5
Initial oil saturation. 44-4
Initial saturation conditions. 43-5
Initial saturations. effect of, 44-6
Initial water distribution. 44-l I, 44-37
Injection application, ESP, 7-2
Injection, BHP calculation, 34-28 to 34-30
InjectIon fluids, 42-2, 42-5
Injection-gas breakthrough, 5-52
Injection gas cycle, 5-12, 5-43, 5-48, 5-52
Injection-gas-cycle frequency, 5-55
Injection-gas cycles per day, 5-40 to 5-42,
s-54. 5-55
Injection gas-line pressure, 5-48, 5-54. 5-55
Injection-gas/oil ratio (GOR), 3441 to 3443
Injection-gas opening pressure, 5-18 to
S-20, 5-26, S-28, S-29, S-33, 5-39.
5-40, 5-51
Injection-gas operating pressure, 5-48, 5-53
Injection-gas pressure, 5-20, 5-2 I, S-24,
5-26, 5-28. 5-31. 5-32, 5-35. 5-37. 5-39
to 5-41, 5-44, S-46, 5-48 to 5-54
Injection-gas-pressure-at-depth Curves, 5-5
Injection-gas-pressure-at-depth traverse, S-36
Injection-gas rate, proper adjustment, 5-53
to 5-55
Injection-gas requirement for intermittent
lift, S-40 to 5-42
Injection-gas throughput. maximum, 536,543
Injection-gas volume per cycle, S-S 1
Injection-gas volumetric rate, 5-3, 5-54
Injection-gas volumetric throughput, 5-37, 540
Injection-gas volumetric throughput profiles,
5-20
Injection operations. 42-1 to 42-6
Injection pressure effect on horsepower,
3442
InJeCtiOn-preSSUre-Operated gas lift Valve,
5-13, 5-14, 5-16 to 5-24, 5-27, 5-32.
5-33, S-36, 5-40, 5-54
Injection profile, foam, 47-9
Injection profiles, 4-6 to 4-8
Injection-pumping rate, controlling, 16-14
Injection quill, 19-I 1
Injection treatments, large-volume, 56-2
Injection water, 24-5
Injection well plugging, 39-26
Injection wells.
gas. 34-28 to 34-30
liquid. 34-28
lnlectivity. 44-29. 44-33 to 44-35. 44-43.
46-22
Injectwy, effect of damage on, 54-8, 54-9
Injectivity index. 4434, 44-35
lnjectivityiproductiwty ratio, 46-17
Injectivity profile. of water-injection well,
31-4
Injectivity testing. 39-25. 39-26, 44-46
Inner-valve assembly. 13-49
Inorganic constituents.
anions, 24-9, 24-12
cations. 24-9
Inorganic solids. 19-5
Input safety valves (ISVs), 3-35
Insert pump. 8-l
In-situ analyses, IX-26
In-situ combustion, 19-28, 48-2. 48-5 to
48-7
In-situ combustion models, 46-12
In-situ combustion processes.
chemical reactions. 46-37
dry forward combustion, 46-1, 46-2
production by, 46-4
reverse combustion, 46-2
wet combustion, 46-2, 46-3
In-situ static analysis, 18-27
Insoluble reaction products, 54-1
Inspection of tubing and casing by caliper
logs. 53-17. 53-18
Installation design calculations, gas lift, 5-29
to s-32
Installation design considerations. gas lift,
5-22
Installation design. contmuous flow gas lift,
calculation of test rack-set opening
pressure, 5-29. 5-33
determmation of valve depths, 5-28, 5-29,
5-32. 5-33
example calculations. 5-29 to 5-35
selection of port size. 5-28
Installation design, intermittent gas lift,
calculation of test rack-set opening
pressure, 5-46. 5-49
determination of valve depths, 5-45, 5-46,
5-48, 5-49
example calculations, 5-46. 5-47, 5-49,
5-50, 5-52
lift chamber application. 5-50 to 5-52
percent tubing load, 5-48
selection of port size. 544
Installation design methods, gas lift, 5-22
Installationimamtenance system controls, 1848
Installation of ESP equipment, 7-12 to 7-14
Installation of prime mover, IO-19
Installation of pumping units, 10-7, IO-12
Installation of safety devices, 12-40
Institut Franqais du P&role method, 28-7
Instrument-adjustment factor, 13-52
Instrumentation for liquid hydrocarbon
metering systems, 17-4
Instrumentation systems offshore, 18-43 to
1 a-47
Insulating additive. 46-19
Insulation classification, IO-26
lnsulatlon for oilwell pumping motors,
classification of. IO-26
winding materials for, IO-26
Insulation materials, winding of, to-26
Intangible drilling costs, 57-I 1
Intangibles and intangible cost, 41-l I.
41-13, 41-14, 41-15
Integral flange, 3-16, 3-22, 3-24
Integral joint tubmg, 2-38 to 2-45, 2-64,
2-65
Integral \,aluCs, tabulated. 34-5 to 34-7,
34-10 to 34-22
Intensified acid, 54-3, 54-S
Intensity/time recording. 51-18
Intensive properties. 22-2 I. 39-2
Interaction coefficient. 28-3
Interest,
carried, 57-10
landowners, 57-1. 57-2
mineral, 57-6
net profits. 57-10
royalty, 57-5 to 57-8
working. 57-5. 57-7, 57-9, 57-10
Interest tables, 4 l-25 to 4 I-34
Interface level controller. 19-23
Interfacial buildup, 19-30
Interfacial sludge, 19-32
Interfacial tension (IFT)
deadend oil, 22-17
defimtlon. 22-l. 24-16
effects on relative permeability. 28-10,
28-l 1
gas/oil. 45-4. 45-6
liquid/gas, 22-16
of acid solutions, 54-6
of condensate and water, 34-50
oil/water, 47. I, 47-9. 48-5
reduced by surface-active agents, 44-39
results in spherlcal form of water
droplets. 19-I
units and conversion factors, 58.38
Interfacial tension reducer. 56-5
Interfacial tension reduction. 44.40, 48-2
Interference, 44-33
Interference effects, 38-1, 38-3
Interference tests and testing, 30-S. 36-7,
36-8, 42-4
Intergranular porosity. 26-1, 26-3, 5 I-3 I
Intermediate domes, 29-5. 29-6
Intermediate packers, 4-11
Intermittent controller. 16-4
Intermittent flow, skim pde. 15-26
Intermittent gas lift.
comparison of time cycle to choke control
of injection gas, 5-41. 5-42
cycle of operation, 5-38
daily production rates, 5-40
disadvantages of, 5-38, 5-39
gas-lift valves, 5-42, 5-43
heads or slugs in, 12-32, 12-35
injection gas requirement. 5-40, 5-41
installation design methods, 5-39, S-42.
5-44 to 5-50
introduction, 5-38
lift chamber application and installation
design, 5-50 to 5-52
operation, 5-1, 5-3, 5-l 1, 5-13, 5-19.
5-37 to 5-53
percent tubing load installation designs, 548
plunger applications, 5-52
pressure-gradient spacing factors. 5-43, 5-44
surface closing pressure of valves, 5-44
types of installations. 5-39, 5-40
unloading Injection-gas pressure. effect of
installation design methods, 5-39
valve port size, 5-44
Intermittent pressure-gradient spacmg factor,
5-42, S-43
Intermittent spacing factor, 5-45
Intermittent spacing factor gradient, 5-44,
s-45, s-47
Intermittent spacing factor traverse, 5-46, 5-47
Internal coatings, 11-4. II-5
Internal-combustion-engine driven
generators, 18-45
Internal-combustion engmes.
diesel, 10.15, IO-16
four-stroke cycle, IO-15
SUBJECT INDEX 41
in inert gas injection, 39-16
installation, IO-19
multiplex pumps analogous, 6-49
oil engine, 10-15. IO-16
selection of, IO-16 to IO-19
two-stroke cycle. 10-14. IO-15
Internal corrosion, 3-36
Internal energy. 13-I
Internal floating roofs, I l-2, 1 l-6
Internal flushing efficiency, 39-18
Internal gas drive. 37-1, 40-E
Internal gas-driven reservoir, 32-15, 32-16
Internal injection, 43-2
Internal pressure leak resistance, of casing,
2-5. 2-7, 2-9, 2-l I, 2-13, 2-15. 2-17,
2-19. 2-57. 2-58, 2-64
Internal pressure, of casing, 2-1, 2-61
of pipe, 2-59
of line pipe, 2-56, 2-63
Internal pressure resistance of.
casing, 2-5, 2-7, 2-9, 2-11, 2-13, 2-15,
2-17, 2-19
line pipe. 2-56
tubing, 2-46
Internal rate of return (ROR) method, 41-17
Internal Revenue Code, 41-14. 41-15
Internal Revenue Service, 41-2
Internal spiral element, 12-19
Internal water weir, 12-35
Internal yield pressure of pipe and
couplings, 2-5, 2-7, 2-9, 2-l 1, 2-13,
2-15, 2-17, 2-19, 2-32, 2-56, 2-57,
2-63, 3-l
Internal yield pressure safety factor, 2-2,
2-32, 2-34, 2-35, 2-45, 2-46
Internally coated pipe, 39-26
Internally plastic-lined tubing, 44-46
International atomic weight table, 20-l
Intl. Bureau of Weight and Measures, l-69
to l-71
Intl. Commission on Radiological
Protection, 58-10
International foot, l-69
Intl. Metric Convention. l-68, 1-69
Intl. prototype kilogram, l-69, I-70
Intl. Standards Organization (ISO). IO-12
Intl. system of units, guidelines for use, 17-7
Interpretation.
chart for Rocky Mountain method, 49-3 I,
49-32
chart for R,,IR, and shaly sand method,
49-28
IEL method, 49-30, 49-31
of caliper logs, 53-17
of casing inspection log, 53-23 to 53-26
of chemical analyses, 24-18, 24-19
of EPT log, 49-34 to 49-36
of rmcrolog, 49-23
of paleo-environments, 36-3
of pipe analysis log, 53-13 to 53-26
of rules of dipmeter, 53-10, 53-12
of well logs, 49-25 to 49-36
quantitative, of hydrocarbon saturation,
49-21
stratigraphic, 53-13, 53-14
Interpretation of nuclear logs,
gamma ray measurements, SO-24 to SO-26
introduction, 50-23, 50-24
lithology determination, 50-33 to 50-35
porosity determination, 50-26 to 50-33
saturation determination, 50-35 to 50-37
Interstate Oil Compact Commission, 33-15
Interstitial clay, effect on formation
resistivity factors, 26-30
Interstitial water, 24-2, 24-3, 24-16, 24-18.
26-30, 27-8, 40-8, 40-10, 40-13, 40-16,
40- 19. 40-23
lnterstltlal water content, 39-17, 39-18,
39-21 to 39-23. 40-12
Interstltlal water saturation. 26-26. 28-4,
28-14, 37-3, 37-4, 37-15, 37-17, 39-10,
40-5 lo 40-10, 40-12. 40-15. 40-16,
40.19. 40.24. 42-4, 43-5, 44-4, 446,
449, 4436
Interstitial water saturations,
capillary pressure, 26-23. 26-24
oil-based mud. 26-22, 26-23
Interval transit (travel) time, 51-15, 51-17.
51-19, 51-23. 51-24, 51-27, 51-43,
58-25, 58-33, 58-36
Interzonal hydrostatic head, 7-2
Intrawell continuity, 36-l. 36-6, 36-7
Invaded-zone correction, 49-22
Invariant point, 47-12
Invasion effects on IL. 49-17
Invasion efficiency, 39-15, 39-17, 39-18,
39-22, 39-23. 40-34, 47-l
Inverse emulsion, 19-l
Inverse lever rule. 23-3. 23-8
Inverse simulation, 48-9
Inverted bucket traps, 13-53
Inverted nine-spot well patlern. 45-10,
46.17, 46.18, 46-28
Investors method, 41-17
Involute element, 12-19
Iodide. 19-10, 24-9
Iodine, 24-5. 24-20, 24-21
Ion diffusion, 24-19
Ion exchange, 24-19, 24-20
Ion-exchange conduction, 49-4
Ion-exchange reactions, 52-21
Ion-exchange resins. 15-29
Ionization, 50-3
Ionized-gas counter, 50-12
Iran, 29-6
lron bacteria, 44-43
Iron chelating agents, 56-l
Iron-control agents, 54-7, 54-8
Iron sponge sweetening. 14-22
Iron sultide, 14-22, 19-4, 19-9, 44-44
Iron sulfide deposits, 1 l-10
Irreducible saturation, 28-5, 28-8
Irreducible water saturation, 44-6, 44-l I,
44-12, 46-34. 46-37, 46-38, 47-9
lrreversibihty losses, 34-2
Isobaric contour maps, 39-23
Isobutaneiwater system, 25-25, 25-27
Isochronal backpressure test, 34-31
lsochronal test data, 39-25
Isochronal testing, 33-4 to 33-6, 33-10 to
33-13
Isoelectric point, 54-7
Isolation packer, 4-2, 4-3
Isometric of fractures, 51-28, 51-29
Isopachous maps. 39-2 I, 40-5, 41-8, 46-30,
46-31
Isopentaneiwater system, 25-26
Isoporosity map, 39-22
Isoporosity maps, 44-3
Isopotential lines, 4415 to 4417
Isopropyl alcohol in acidizing, 54-E
Isothalic thermoset resin, 9-12
Isothermal coefficient of compressibility, 55-4
Isothermal compositional model, 48-5
Isothermal model, 48-4
lsovol map, 39-17
Italy. 12-39
Iterative method or solution. 37-8, 37-9,
37-11. 48-l. 48-13
J
J function, definition, 26-25, 26-26 Kerosene/water system, 25-27
J-lay first-end connection, 18-38 Kettleman Hills field, California. 6-24, 29-2
Jackson candle units (JCU). 44-44
Jackup rig, 3-38
Jackups, 1X-2 to IX-6
Japan. 12-39
Jay/Little Escambla Creek field. 44-36, 44-37
Jefferson limestone. Kentucky, 54. I
Jet pump, 6-l. 6-2. 6-4, 6-7
application range, 6-46, 6-47
application sizing, 6-41. 6-42
approximation for handling gas, 6-38, 6-39
calculation sequence and supplemental
equations, 6-42
cavitation in, 6-35, 6-36
downhole pump accessories, 6-47 to 6-49
hydraulic, 6-6
installation. 6-43
mathematical presentation, 6-36 to 6-38
nomenclature. 6-35
nozzle and throat annulus area, 6-4 I
nozzle and throat size. 6-39, 6-41
performance characteristics. 6-34 to 6-37
production unit performance. 6-42
ratios and throat annulus areas, 6-40
reverse-flow casing type, 6-5
single seal, 635
subsurface. 6-32, 6-47
worksheet and summary of equations,
6-44, 6-45
Jetting wells. 32-15
Jobo field, 46-4
Johnson pressure gauge, 30-2
Johnston-MaccoiSchlumberger BHP gauges,
30-4
Joint efficxncy. 12.38. 12-40
Joint-interest owner, 4 l-2
Joint-operating agreements, 57-9
Joint strength of.
casing, 2-2. 2-5, 2-7. 2-9. 2-l I, 2-13,
2-15, 2-17, 2-19. 2-60. 2-61
line pipe, 2-48, 2-61 to 2-64
tubing, 2-39. 2-41, 2-43, 2-61
Joint strength safety factor, 2-2. 2-32, 2-34,
2-35, 2-45, 2-46
Jostling decrement. 5 l-47
Joule-Thomson effect, 12-17, 14-2
Jug heater, 19-21
Jumpout load of casing. 2-61
Junction box, ESP, 7-7. 7-8
Jurassic, 36-2
Juvenile water. 24-2
K
K&C systems, 18-15
K-MonelO , 4-4. 4-5, 7-3. 7-6
K-value correlation, 39-12
K-values. 23-10. 23-l I. 25-5, 39.12, 48-4,
48-5
Kalman filtering, 50-S
Kalrez@, 4-5
Kansas, 16-12, 16-13. 19-3. 21.2, 24.8,
24-9. 27-8, 27-10 to 27-13, 33-1, 39-25.
40.23, 44-42, 46-4, 46-14
Kansas Corp. Commission, 33-15
Kaolinite, 46-2 I, SO-2 I, 50.32, 50.34.
50-37
Karma vortex trail, 13-49
Kays rule, 20-5
Kentucky, 24-6, 24-7. 41-l 1, 46-16, 54-l
Kern River field, California, 46-4, 46-14,
46-15, 46-18, 46-20, 46-23. 46-24,
46-34, 46-39
Kerogen, 52-16
Kerosene, 19-4
PETROLEUM ENGINEERING HANDBOOK 42
Kick-off injection-gas pressure, 5-24. 5-25,
5-28, 5-33
Kickover tool, 5-2
Kihara potential, 25-5, 25-8, 25-9
Kill and choke (K&C) valves, 18-12
Kill fluid, S-24, IS-33
Killed steel, 12-41
Kilogram, definition of, I-69
Kilogram of the Archives, 1-69
Kilovoltamp reactive (WAR), 10-31, lo-33
to IO-35
Kilovoltamps (WA) rating of transformers,
IO-30 to 10-35
Kinematic viscosity, 6-67, 669, 19-8,
22-13, 24-16, 58-35
Kinetic energy, 6-34, 13-1, 1345, 20-1,
20-2, 34-9, 34-29, 34-36, 50-3, 50-8,
SO-13
Kinetic mixer, 19-l 1, 19-12
Klinkenberg corrections, 27-1
Knife-edge blade electrodes, 53-8, 53-9
Knitted-wire-mesh coalescing pack, 12-10,
12-11
Knitted-wire-mesh fibrous packs, 12-12
Knitted-wire-mesh mist extractor, 12-7,
12-8, 12-10
Knocking, 6-33, 6-50
Knockout drum, trap or vessel, 12-1, 12-4
Kobe porosimeter, 26-4, 26-6
Kozeny equation. 26-20
Krypton-85, 46-21
Krypton-86, l-69, l-70
Kuparuk field, Alaska, 18-3
Kuster pressure gauges, 30-2
Kyrock field, Kentucky, 46-!6
L
La Concepcidn field, Venezuela, 24-13
La Paz field, Venezuela, 24-13
Laboratoty coreflood, 47-17, 47-21
Laboratory curves,
for lateral sonde, 49-13
for normal sonde, 49-12
Laboratory depletion recovery, 39-14
Laboratory-derived data, 39-10, 39-l 1
Laboratory displacement tests, 4440
Laboratory experimentation,
elemental models, 46-12, 46-13
fuel content, tirefloods, 46-16
of AOR and WAR, 46-17
partially scaled models, 46-13
use of water in firefloods, 46-18, 46-19
Laboratory layout for performing routine
core analysis, 26-22
Laboratory-measured relative-permeability
data, 374
Laboratory measurement of capillary
pressure,
centrifuge method, 26-Z
dynamic method, 26-24
evaporation method, 26-24
mercury-injection method, 2624
porous-diaphragm method, 26-24
Laboratory measurement of porosity,
bulk volume, 26-3
carbonate rocks, 26-6, 26-7
pore volume, 26-5, 26-6
precision of measurement, 26-6
sand-grain volume, 26-3 to 26-5
Laboratory measurement of transit times,
5 l-26
Laboratorv pressure-depletion studv. 39-13
Laboratory PVT analysis, 39-13 .
Laboratorv PVT data. 37-3
L.aborato~ restored-state floods, 444
Laboratory solubility tester, 54-10
Laboratory testing of formation rock for
acidizing, 54-9
Labyrinth path design, 7-4
Labyrinth path protector, 74, 7-5, 7-11
Lacq Superieur field, France. 46-27 to
46-29
LACT systems or units, 11-13, 15-14, 174
Lactic acid as sequestering agent, 54-7
Lag, 13-50
Lag stroke, 52-8
Lag time, 52-8, 52-14, 52-18, 52-22
Lagoonal clays, 364
Lagoven, 46- 14
Lagunillas field, Venezuela, 24-13, 464
Lake Maracaibo field, Venezuela, 18-l
Lakeview pool, California, 40-15
Laminar-flow regime, 28-13
Laminar-flow region, 34-3
Landman, 57-8
Landowners interest, 57-1, 57-2
Landowners royalty, 41-1
Langmuir constants, 25-9
Laplacian interblock flow terms, 48-15
LaSalle anticline, 24-7
Lasater correlation, 22-5 to 22-7, 22-9,
22-10
Laser liquid particle spectrometer, 12-15,
12-16
Last-chance hydraulic stab system, 18-15,
18-16
Last-stroke method, hydraulic pumping,
6-28
Latched packers, 4-3
Late-time region (LTR), 35-3, 35-6 to 35-8,
35-11, 35-12
Latent heat, factor in refrigeration cooling
load, 14-10
Latent heat from sensible heat, 19-15
Latent heat of steam. 46-5
Latent heat of vaporization, 46-2
Lateral device, 49-12, 49-19, 49-31
Lateral loading or loads, 18-S. 18-6
Lateral-sweep factor, 40-16, 40-17
Lateral wave loading or loads, 18-23, 18-26
Laterals in hard formations, 49-13
LaterologTM (LL). 49-1, 49-5, 49-6, 49.11,
49-18, 49-21, 49-23, 49-25, 49-27
Laterolog 3 (LL3), 49-18 to 49-22
Laterolog 7 (LL7), 49-18 to 49-22
Laterolog 8 (LLS), 49-15, 49-17. 49-20,
49-27
Layout drawings, 15-30
Layout of electrical offshore facilities, 1844
Leaching, 24-20, 26-2
Lead acetate, 52-6
Leak resistance, casing joints, 2-l
Leak resistance limit, 2-59
Leakage,
fluid, 6-21
fluid-seal plunger, 6-33
in downhole unit, 6-55
in pump plungers, 84, 8-5
of field gas-condensate samples, 39-5
of pump, 6-24
of tubing pressure, 6-3
pressure-relief valve, 6-33
Leakoff of fluids, 54-8, 55-2, 554, 55-8
Leaky modes of acoustic waveforms, 51-12,
51-13
Leap-frog formulations, 48-14
Lease, and assignment provisions, 41-9
automatic custody transfer (LACT), 16-1,
16-7, 16-12, 16-13
bonus, 41-1, 41-13
broker, 57-8
facilities, 4 l-9
location data, 41-8
problems, 57-10
purchases, 57-8
tank battery installation, 1 I-10
Lease-operated hydrocarbon-recovery
systems,
gas treating for removal of water vapor,
-CO,, andH,S, 14-17 to 14-22 .
low-temperature separation (LTS), 14-1 to
14-17 -
references, 14-22
Leasehold costs, capitalized, 41-13
Leases, oil and gas, 57-1 to 57-12
Least-squares fit, 38-10
Lee-Kesler equation, 20-13, 20-17
Legal requirements, directional surveys,
53-4
Lena platform, 18-24
Length equivalents, table, 1-71
Length, standard of, l-70
Lenticular deposits, 49-25
Lessor, in the oil and gas lease, 57-3
LETC field site, Utah, 4633
Letter subscripts, SPE std., 59-52 to 59-70
Letter symbols for mathematical equations,
58-3
Letter symbols in alphabetical order, SPE
std., 59-2 to 59-17
Leutert pressure gauge, 30-2
Level controllers and gauges, 19-31
Lever-operated dump valves. 19-22
Lever rule, 23-5
Lever-type valve, 12-6, 12-18
Leverage, 41-8
Life of engine equipment, 10-16, lo-17
Lift equipment, effectiveness of, 40-27,
41-9
value of BHP measurements, 30-14
Lifting potential concept, 34-50
Lifting surface flowmeter, 32-13
Light, units and conversions. 58-36
Lightning arresters, 10-28 to IO-32
Lignites, 49-25
Liguera platform, 18-2
Limestone sonde, 49-14, 49-26, 49-27
Limit switches, 16-3, 16-13
Limitations of gas lift, 5-1, 5-2
Limited character sets, 58-l 1
Limited Entry@ technique, 55-9
Limiting tie line, 45-3 to 45-5
Line disconnect switch, lo-27
Line drive pattern, 44-1, 44-20, 44-25,
46-17, 46-18
Line pioe,
and- coupling, schematic, 2-54
axial stress, 2-48. 2-49
collapse pressure, 2-48, 249
collapse pressure under axial-tension
stress, 2-55
collapse resistance, 248
collapse resistance under axial load, 248,
249
dimensions, 2-47, 2-50 to 2-53
elongation, 246
equations for calculating performance.
246, 2-54 to 2-56
hydrostatic test pressure, 2-62, 2-63
internal-pressure leak resistance, 2-57 to
2-59
internal-pressure resistance, 2-56
internal yield pressure, 2-56
joint strength, 248
plain-end, 2-50 to 2-53
safety factors, 2-32
tensile strength, 246
test pressure, 247, 2-50 to 2-53, 2-62
thread dimensions, 2-58, 2-65
thread form, 2-62
SUBJECT INDEX 43
thread height dimensions, 2-62
threaded or threads, 2-47, 2-48, 3-2
tolerance on lengths, 247
weight, 247, 2-50
yield strength, 246
Line scale, 12-2
Line sink, 39-20
Line source, 39-20
Line-source solution. 35-4
Line tension, maximum, 18-10
Linear-absorption coefficient, 50-7
Linear aquifers, 38-2, 38-4, 38-18
Linear diffraction analysis, 18-39
Linear dimensions, conversion of, 58-7
units applied to, 58-5
Linear-flow system, 26-13 to 26-15
Linear frontal advance, 38-13
Linear gels, 55-5, 55-6
Linear geometry, definition, 38-l
Linear parabolic difference equations, 48-15
Linear partial differential equation, 35-1,
35-10
Linear variable differential transformer,
51-5
Linear velocities, conversion of, table, 1-76
Lined pipe, 39-26
Liners in steel pipe, 15-10
Lipophiles, 47-7, 47-11, 47-19
Liquefaction, 12-3
Liquefied gases in acidizing, 54-8
Liquefied petroleum gas (LPC), as
injection fluid, 42-2, 45-1 to 45-3, 45-6 to
45-9, 45-12, 45-13
Liquefied petroleum products, density of,
17-5
Liquid block or blocking, 39-26, 46-1, 46-3
Liquid (oil) capacity of separators, 12-28,
12-29, 12-31
Liquid carryover, from compressor, 39-26
in mist extractor, 12-40
in separator, 12-42
Liquid contents of GC systems, 39-4
Liquid desiccants, 14-17
Liquid-discharge control valves, 12-42
Liquid-distribution coefficient, 34-39. 34-40
Liquid entrainment, 34-36
Liquid fallback, 5-40, 5-43, 5-44, 5-48,
5-52
Liquid/gas ratio, 12-35, 39-2, 39-5
Liquid holdup, 34-36, 34-37, 34-46
Liquid hydrocarbon, 12-33, 12-35
Liquid-hydrocarbon content, 12-15
Liquid-hydrocarbon recovery, 11-13
Liquid injection, BHP calculation, 34-28
Liquid knockout, 12-l
Liquid-level control, 3-19, 13-51, 13-53,
13-54
Liquid-level controller. 12-2, 12-5 to 12-7,
12-9, 12-18, 12-35, 12-39, 14-3, 14-14,
14.18, 19-17 to 19-20, 19-31, 32-7
Liquid-level controls, 16-4, 16-5
Liquid/liquid equilibria, 23-l
Liquid loading in wells, 34-46, 34-50
Liquid measurement, 16-S
Liquid mist, 12-8 to 12-12, 12-20, 12-22
Liquid natural gas (LNG), 17-4, 17-7
Liquid petroleum, calculation of quantities
measured by turbine or displacement
meters, 17-7
Liquid petroleum (LP) gas, 10-15, 10-16,
17-4
Liquid-phase distribution, 39-25
Liquid-phase shrinkage, 39-4
Liquid production per cycle, 5-52
Liquid recovery, maximum, 5-51, 12-32
Liquid recovery per cycle, 5-40
Liquid-saturation data, 27-8
Liquid saturations, 27-8
Liquid seal in separator, 12-5
Liquid slug process, 45-l
Liquid slugs, 5-1, 5-11, 5-19, 5-38 to 544,
5-51, 5-52, 5-54
Liquid-storage facilities, 12-33
Liquid surges, 12-2, 12-20
Liquid turbine meters, 1348
Liquid/vapor equilibrium, 23-1, 23-5
Liter, definition of, l-69
Lithium, 24-9, 24-20, 24-21, 50-6, 50-14
Lithological log, 52-14, 52-19
Lithology determination,
direct measurement, 50-37
induced-gamma-ray spectrometry, 50-34,
50-35
introduction, 50-2
neutron/density combination, 50-33
photoelectric factor, 50-33, 50-34
Lithology, effect on formation factor, 49-4
effect on water-injection efficiency, 44-2
estimation from logs, 51-35
parameters, 50-18
Lithostatic pressure, 26-8
Lloydminster field, Canada, 46-34
Lloyds of London, 18-44
Load analyses, offshore facilities, 1844
Load capacity, ultrahigh-slip motor, lo-22
Load fluid gradient, 5-25, 5-28, 5-33, 545,
546
Load fluid production rate, 5-53
Load fluid traverse, 5-25
Load production pressure, 549
Loading or load up of wells, 32-15, 34-46,
34-50. 39-16
Loan payout calculation factors, 4 l-32 to
41-35
Loan payout, calculation of, 41-31 to 41-36
Local control loops, 1847
Local remote switch, lo-27
Location surveys offshore, 18-5
Lock screws, 3-3, 3-5, 3-6, 3-8, 3-9
Lockout cap, 3-27
Log analyses, company computer centers,
49-37
in coring program, thermal recovery, 46-21
Log-linear grid, 49- 15
Log mean temperature, 34-8, 34-9
Log-normal permeability distribution, 44-8
Log presentation, acoustic logging, 51-16
Log (electric) presentation and scales,
49-15, 49-16, 49-22, 49-23
Log-probability graph paper, 40-18
Logarithmic decrement, 514, 51-47
Logarithmic energy decrement, average,
50- 10, 50-l I, 50-22
Logarithmic probability diagram, 56-6, 56-7
Logarithmic sensitivity scale, 49-27
Logarithms of equivalents, l-73, l-75, 1-77
Logging engineer, 52-30
Logging geologist, 52-9, 52-18, 52-30
Logging-system schematic, MWD, 53-2,
53-3
Logging umt systems, 52-25, 52-26
Logistics considerations offshore, 18-4, 18-5
Long Beach crude oil, 47-20
Long, gross, or shippers ton, l-70
Long-range planning, 42-1
Long-spaced acoustic logging,
borehole-size effects, 5 I-19, 51-20
formation-alteration effect, 51-20, 5 l-21
introduction to, 51-19
summary of. 51-23, 51-24
tool, 51-21 to 51-23, 51-47
Long-spaced acoustic logs. 51-22
Long Spacing SonicTM tool, 51-21
Long-term forecast, gas-well performance,
35-13
Long-thread casing, 2-5, 2-7, 2-9, 2-l 1,
2-13, 2-15, 2-17, 2-19, 2-31, 2-58, 2-64
Longitudinal capillary imbibition, 28-12
Longitudinal dispersion, 45-6
Longitudinal waves, 51-2
Looped networks in gathering and
distribution systems, 15-14
Lorenz coefficient, 44-36
Los Angeles, 46-24
Loss-free propagation time. 49-32 to 49-34
Loss-ratio method, 40-32
Louisiana, 18-1, 18-2, 214, 24-7, 24-8,
24-20, 26-7, 26-23, 27-6 to 27-8, 29-3,
32-1, 36-4, 37-25, 39-16, 40-23, 41-1,
44-37, 46-3, 46-4, 46-15, 46-18, 46-19,
49-29, 574, 57-10, 57-l 1
Louisiana Dept. of Conservation, 32- 1
Louisiana gulf coast, 27-6 to 27-8, 44-37,
51-22, 51-23
Louvered baffles, 19-23
Low-alloy steel, 12-41
Low-interfacial-tension (IFT) processes,
lowering ROS, 47-9, 47-10
MP flooding, 47-10 to 47-18
Low-liquid-level control, 12-39
Low-pressure service regulators, 13-55
Low-pressure waterflooding, 42-2
Low-temperature fractional distillation, 39-6
Low-temperature operation of separator,
12-40
Low-temperature separation (LTS),
temperature, 14-17
with hydrate inhibitor, 14-6 to 14-8
without hydrate inhibitor, 14-3 to 14-6
Low-temperature separation (LTS) systems,
compression refrigeration, 14-9, 14-10
constant-enthalpy expansion, 14-3 to 14-8
cooling, 14-1, 14-2
hydrate formation, 14-2, 14-3
hydrocarbon stabilization, 14-13 to 14-17
mechanical refrigeration, 14-8, 14-9
retrograde condensation, 14-l
selective absorption, 14-10 to 14-13
theoretical considerations, 14-1 to 14-3
turbine expansion, 14-8
Low-temperature separation (LTS) unit,
12-1, 13-57, 18-46
Low-temperature separator, 12-17. 14-5
Low-temperature stabilization, 14-7
Low-tension ignition, lo-17
Lower explosive limit (LEL), 1847
Lower marine riser package (LMRP),
18-12, 18-15, 18-17, 18-19
Lubricating oils, temperature correction for,
17-6
Lubrication of pumping units, lo-12
Lubricator, 648, 6-54, 6-57
Luminous flux, unit and definition. 58-11,
58-23, 58-37
Lump-sum deferment factors, 41-20, 41.21,
41-24, 41-25
Lump-sum payment, 41-25
Lynes BHP gauges, 30-4
M
Machining details, extreme-line casing joint,
2-64, 2-67, 2-68
Macrodevices, 49-7, 49-14
Macroresistivity curves, 49-26
Macroscopic anisotropy, 49-5
Macroscopic convective dispersion, 45-6
Macroscopic cross section, 50-10, 50-21,
50-23, 50-36
Macroscopic fluid velocity, 35-10
44 PETROLEUM ENGINEERING HANDBOOK
Macroscopic photoelectric cross sectton.
50-17. 50-33. so-34
Macroscoptc thermal absorption cross
section, 50-10 to 50-12, 50-21, 50-30,
50-33
Magnelog. 53-19
Magnesium, 24-5, 24-6, 24-8 to 24-13,
24-18. 24-20. 24-21, 4444, 4445.
47-13
Magnesium chloride, 8-9, 19-29, 54-l
Magnetic collar locator, S3- 18
Magnetic compass for hole deviation, 53-3,
53-4
Magnetic flux, 53-21 to 53-23
Magnetic flux density, unit and deftnmon.
58-l I, 58-23. 58-36
Magnettc flux, untt and definition, 58-l I,
58-23. 58-36
Magnetic induction, unit and detinitton.
SE- I I, SE-36
Magnetic permeability, 49-33. 53-23
Magnetic relative permeability, 53-20
Magnetic sensor, 13-48
Magnetic tape recordings. 49-36, 49-37
Magnetic trip capability of circuit breakers,
IO-28
Magnetic valve operators, 16-3
Magnetism, units and conversions, 58-36
Magnetometer. 18-S
Magnetos. IO- I7
Magnolia Petroleum Co.. 46-14, 46-16
Main Reservoir field, Louisiana. 37-25
Maintenance and operation of tank batteries,
II-IO. II-11
Maintenance cost, emulsion treating, 19-33
Major thermal recovery projects, 46-3. 46-4
Makeup gas, 39-23, 39-24, 4441
Mandl-Volek model, 46-15
Mandl-Volek refinement of Marx-
Langenheim method, 46-8, 46-9
Mandrel and boll-weevil tubing hangers,
3-16
Mandrel hanger, 3-39
Manganese, 3-3. 24-4, 24-S. 24-9, 4444,
50-12, 50-18, SO-35
Manifolds, high-pressure. 55-9
Mamfolds in subsea completions, 18-32
Mamtoba, Canada, 24-8
Manometer factor. 13-8. 13-35
Manual adjustable positive choke, 13-57
Manual casing hanger, 3-6
Manual emergency shut-down valve, 3-19
Manufacture. of fiberglass sucker rods. 9- 12
of steel sucker rods. 9-l. 9-2
Manufacturers field representative, 7-13
Manufacturers pumps,
multiplex-plunger type, 6-52 to 6-55
nozzle and throat stzes. 6-39
nozzle vs. throat annulus area, 6-41
throat annulus areas and area ratios. 6-40
types of. 6-10 to 6-17
Manufacturers rated capacities for
separators, 12-32
Manways, 1 l-6. 12-42
Marathon Oil Co.. 46-15
Maraven. 46-4. 46-15
Marginal well tests, 12-17
Maricopa field, Califorma. 6-24
Marine bulk carriers. metering systems for
loading and unloading. 17-4
Marine cargo inspection, guidelines for,
17-E
Marine environment. 56-2
Marine measurement, 17-E
Marine pipelines, 18-43
Marme risers. 18-14 to 18-16. 18-19
Marine terminals. 18-43
Marine water. 24-19, 24-20
Mark II crank-balanced pumping units, 10-t
to 10-4, 10-6, 10-E. IO-9
Market capacity. 32-l
Market value. 41-3, 41-5, 41-6
Market-value yardstick, 41-5
Marx-Langenheim method, 46-7 to 46-9
Mass-absorption coefficient, 50-8
Mass-balance equations, 48-3
Mass balance of hydrocarbons, 46-11
Mass balance of oxygen, 46-12
Mass balance of water. 46-11
Mass-conservatton equation, 48-3. 48-S
Mass equivalents, table, l-75
Mass flowmeter, 32-13
Mass flow ratio, 6-36 to 6-38, 6-45
Mass or force as weight quantity, 58-3,
58-S
Mass, special terms and quantities
involving, 58-7, SE-8
Mass spectrometry, 27-l
Mass, standard of. I-70
Mass, unit and definition, 58-3, 58-5,
58-23. 58-27
Mass vs. weight, I-70
Massachusetts Inst. of Technoloav, 51-49
Material balance, 14-16, 38-4, 38-S
Material-balance calculations, 22-13, 28-t I,
35-16, 37-13. 40-1, 40-13, 40-24, 42-3,
43.12, 43-16. 48-l. 48-14
Material-balance equation, 35-8, 37-2, 37-5
to 37-7, 37.10. 37-13 to 37.17, 38-4,
38-8. 38-9, 38-12 to 38-14, 40-6, 40-7,
40-9, 40.10, 40.12, 40-33, 40.44, 43-4,
43-6. 43-X. 43-12, 43-13
Material-balance method, for average
reservoir pressure, 3.5-3
for nonassociated gas reservoirs, 40-33
for oil in place, 40-2, 40-6 to 40-E
Material-balance studies, 36-7
Materials of construction for separators,
12-38, 12-39
Materials of construction for storage tanks,
1 l-9
Mathematical analysis of areal pattern
efficiency, 44-13 to 4417
Mathematical analysis. water-drive oil
reservoirs, 38-i to 3X-17
Mathematical modeling, 28-7, 28-10
Mathematical models.9.3, 36-10. 39-17,
39-18, 48-l
Mathematical reservoir simulatton, 39-24,
45-10
Mathematical reservoir simulators, 39-22
Mathematical-simulation models, 38-16
Mathematical simulators. 39-17, 45-13
Mathematical iables, 1-2 to 1-67
Matrix acid stimulation, 56-5
Matrix acidizing.
A/V ratio high. 54-5
carbonate formations, 54-10, 54-l 1
definition of. 54-8
overflush. 54-t 1
sandstone formattons. 54-l 1
with surfactants. 54-6
Matrtx blocks. 48-5
Matrix compactron. 26-7
Matrix correctton chart. SO-29
Matrix, definition, 26-2
Matrix density. 50-l. 50-27, 50-28
Matrix effect on neutron porosny, 50-28 to
50-30
Matrix identification chart, 50-19
Matrix permeability, 26-15. 27-18
Matrix porosity, 26-7. 44-2
Matrix steam injection. 46-27, 4628
Matrix transit time. 51-30, 51-35
Matrix treatment with acid, 56-5
Maximum efficient rate (MER), 32-2, 41-9
Maximum-indicating pressure gauge, 30-4
Maximum present worth, 42-2
Maximum producible oil index, 49-28
Maximum theoretical valve spread, 542
Maximum transfer pressure, 5-32
Maxwells equation, 49-33
May Libby field, Lomsiana, 46-15
Mean average boiling point, 21-l 1, 21-12.
21-15
Mean free path. 50-10. SO-22
Mean hydrauhc radius, 26-31
Means field. Texas, 36-5, 36-7
Measured phase compositions, 23-12
Measurement,
of barges, 17-3
of horizontal tanks, 17-3
of liquid hydrocarbons by displacement
meter systems, 17-4
of petroleum by weight, 17-7, 17-8
of petroleum liquid hydrocarbons by
positive-displacement meter, 17-4, 17-5
of spheres and spherotds. 17-3
of tank cats, 17-3
of upright cylindrical tanks, 17-3
Measurement control charts 17-7
Measurement methodologies of relative
permeability, -
calculation methods, 28-7
capillary-pressure and endpoint-
displacement method, 28-8
critique of methods, 28-7
stationary-fluids methods. 28-8
stead-,-state methods. 28-3 to 28-7
unsteady-state methods, 28-7
Measurement tickets, 17-7
Measurement-while-drilling (MWD),
data listing for, 53-6
data-transmission schematic. 53-2
directional vs. multishot directional, 53-S
downhole assembly, 53-2
log, 53-2, 53-4
logging system, 53-3
measuring systems, 53-l
rotary-drilling log, 53-4
services, 52-1, 52-28
Measuring crude oil. 17-I to 17-8
Measuring natural-gas fluids, 17-7
Measuring quality of separated fluids,
12-15, 12-16
Measuring temperature of petroleum and
petroleum products, 17-5 to 17-7
Mechanical damage, 5 I-20
Mechanical data, electric submersible pump
(ESP), 7-9
Mechanical degradation. 47-S
Mechanical energy, 22-21, 51-2, 51-3
Mechanical-energy gradients, 28-13. 28-14
Mechanical fail&, -39-25
Mechanical flow sheets, IS-31
Mechanical lock holddown, 8-8
Mechanical losses in hydraulic pumps, 6-19.
6-20, 6-21
Mechanical power. 6- I5
Mechanical pressure control, 12-39
Mechanical properties.
elasttc module, 5 I-43
fracturing. 51-44
sand control, 5 145
Mechanical recording BHP gauges, 30-2
Mechanical refrigeration. I I-13
Mechanical-refrigeration systems, 14-8 to
14-10
Mechamcal trmers, 164
Mechanical wave propagation. 5 l-2
Mechamcally operated valve. 13-53
SUBJECT INDEX 45
Mechanically set packer, 4-3, 4-4, 4-6
Mechanics, units and conversions, 58-33,
58-34
Mediterranean Sea, 24-19
Medium-slip motors. 9-3
Melcher-Nutting grain-volume method, 26-3
Melting curve, 23.l( 23-2
Membrane-filterability tests, 4443
Membrane filtration, 24-18 to 24-20
Memory jogger, metric units, 58-21
Mene Grande field, 24-13
Mene Grande Oil Co.. 46-16
Mene Grande tar sand, Venezuela, 46-3
Mercaptans, 14-17
Mercury. 26-3, 26-4, 26-24. 39-8
Merc&njection method of capillary-
pressure measurement, 26-24, 26-25
Mercury manometers, 13-3, 13-36
Mercury method of calculating directional
surveys. 53-6
Mercury porosimeter, 26-22
Mercury-pump method, 52-19
Mercury-pump porosimeter, 26-6
Mercury test site, Nevada, 53-5
Mercury-type meters, 13-8, 13-35 to 13-37
Mercury valve switch, 16-3
Metal-on-metal seal ring, 18-18
Metal spray coupling, 9-9
Metal-to-metal plungers, 8-4
Metallic storage tanks, 1 l-9
Metamorphosed rock, 29-3, 29-8
Metastable dewpoint locus, 25-1, 25-2
Metastable equilibrium, 14-4
Metastable-equilibrium locus, 25-2
Metastable liquid water, 25-10
Meteoric water, 24-2
Meter, definition, 1-69
Meter factor or multipliers, 32-10, 32-12,
32-13
Meter loops, 6-54
Meter model. 474
Meter proving, 16-6. 16-14, 17-4
Meter-tank-type LACT system, 16-12,
16-13
Meter tube, 5-53
Metering and metering assemblies, 17-4,
17-5
Metermg separator, 12-17 to 12-19, 32-13,
32. I4
Metering systems,
critical flow provers, 13-37. 13-45
orifice well tester. 13-37
pitot tube, 13-2, 13-45
velocity, other meters using, 13-45,
13-48. 13-49
Metering trim. 13-53
Meters using velocity,
centrifugal (elbow) meters, 13-45
eccentric orifices, 13-45
rotameter, 13-45
segmental orifices, 13-45
sonic meters, 13-48
turbine meters, 1345
vortex shedding meter. 13-48
Methaneibutaneldecane system, 23-5
Methane/butane system, 23-6
Methaneidecane system. 23-6
Methane hydrates, 25 10
Methane/propane hydrates, 25-10
Methane/propane system, 25-9
Methane/propane/water system, 25-10
Methane-rich gas, 25-13
Methane/water system. 25-l. 25-2. 25-17.
25-18
Methanol, as hydrate inhibitor. 25-19. 25-20
for freezing and corrosion protection,
3-3.5
Method of least squares. 26-3 1. 40-6
Methyl alcohol, in acidizing, 54-8
in in-situ formation of hydrofluoric acid,
54-4
Methyl orange end point, 54-3
Methyldiethanolamine (MDEA), 14-21,
14-22
Metric Conversion Act of 1975, l-69
Metric standard for orifice equations and
constants, 13-3
Metric system,
definition. origin, and development, l-68,
l-69
Intl. Bureau of Weights and Measures,
I-69
present status in U.S., l-69
units and standards of, 1-69
Metric ton, l-70
Mexico, 12-39, 21-2. 58-20
Micellar floods, 19-28, 48-5. 48-7
Micellar fluids, 28-l 1
Micellarlpolymer (MP) flooding, 47- 1, 47-9
to 47-22, 48-6
formulation, 47-13, 47-15
phase behavior, 47-l 1, 47-13, 47-20
slug, 47-10, 47-15 to 47-17
surfactants, 47-7, 47-17
Micelles, 47-10, 47-1 1
Microannulus, 51-41
Microbiological growth, 44-44
Microcaliper curve. 49-1, 49-l I, 49-22,
49-25, 49-26, 49-29, 49-31
Microcaliper log, 53-16
Microcomputers, 16-1, 16-6, 16-8
Microdevices, 49-7, 49-14
Microemulsion, 28-1 I, 45-l
Microemulsion flooding, 47-10
Microemulsion phase, 47-l 1 to 47-14
Microfiche, 17-5
Microfilm, 17-S
Microinverse, 49-23
Microlaterolog (MLL), 49-22, 49-24 to
49-26. 49-28
Microlog (ML), 26-31, 443, 49-22 to
49-29, 49.31. 49-32
Microlog shaly-sand method. 49-28
Micrometer screw, 26-3, 26-4
Micronormal. 49-23
Microprocessor-based instrument system,
18-47
Microprocessors, 16-l
Microresistivtty. 51-19
Microresistivity devices, 49-1, 49-22 to
49-25, 49-26
Microresistivity survey, 49-11
Microscopic anisotropy, 49-5
Microscopic convective dispersion, 45-6
Microscopic cross section, 50-6
Microscopic displacement of fluids, 39- I8
Microscopic efficiency, 40-34
Microscopic pore volumes, 39-17
Microscopic studies, 46-2 1
Microscopic sweep efficiency, 47-2
Microseismogram, 5 l-24, 51-35, 51-45,
51-46
Micro-Seismogram LogTM. 51-18
MJCROSFL (MSFL), 49-20, 49-22, 49-24,
49-25
Microswitch valve switch, 16-3
Mid-American trench, 25-18
Mid-Continent, 21-4, 21-6, 24-8 to 24-10,
29-3. 40-19, 41-5, 44-4
Middle East, 27-9, 27-20. 52-22
Middle-time region (MTR). 35-3, 35-4,
35-6. 35-8, 35-10 to 35-12, 35-14.
35-15
Midway field, California, 29-2
Midway Sunset field, California, 4614,
46-15, 46-18, 46-19
Midwest Research Inst., 8-10
Midyear compound-interest factor, 4 1 17
Midyear lump-sum deferment factor, 41-6 to
41-8, 41-27 to 41-29
Miga field, Venezuela. 46-15, 46-18
Migration length, 50-12, 50-20, 50-21,
50-29, 50-30, 50-32
Migration of clay particles, 56-5
Migration of oil and gas, 24-l
Migration of oil, 24-17
of water, 24-18
Mile Six Pool, Peru, 40-14
Mill scale, I l-5
Mill varnish, 51-41, 56-3
Miller-Dyes-Hutchinson (MDH) plot, 35-15,
35-17 to 35-20
MilliporerM filter test, 44-45
Mineral,
analyses of cores, 46-2 1
deeds, 57-6
dissolution, 47-20
interests, 41-1, 41-15, 57-6
owner, 57-1, 57-6
severance, 57-2
Mineral Management Service, 3-34
Mineralogy, 56-3
Minerals, in water, 4444, 44-45
in a lease or a conveyance, definition,
57-2
recovery from brines, 24-20, 24-21
Miners rule, 18-27
Minicomputer, 5 l-4
Minifrac job, 55-9
Minimum hydrodynamic potential, 29-3.
29-B
Minimum miscibility pressure (MMP), 45-6.
45-8, 45-9
Minimum pump intake pressure, 7-10
Minor isostatic adjustment, 29-7, 29-8
Miscibility, definition, 45. I, 45-6
development, 45-4, 45-5
maintaining, 45-7
of methane gas and propane liquid, 45-2
of propane liquid and oil, 45-2
of refrigerants with water. 14-10
pressure, 22- 17
providing to improve recovery, 39-15
Miscible displacement,
engineering examples, 45-10 to 45-13
engineering study, 45-8 to 45-10
factors affecting displacement efficiency,
45-6 to 45-8
fluids, 40-4
general references, 45-15
introduction, 45-1
methods. 44-19
nomenclature, 45-13
numerical dispersion effect in, 48-10
processes, 23-7
references, 40-13 to 40-15
theoretical aspects, 45-l to 45-6
Miscible-drive projects, 42-5
Miscible flood, 39-23, 48-2, 48-10
Miscible-fluid displacement. 43-7
Miscible-phase displacement, 39-16
Miscible processes, 39-18
Miscible slug process, 42-2. 45-l to 45-3,
45-6 to 45-9, 45-12, 45-13
Mississippi, 24-20, 24-21, 26-19, 40-23,
46-3, 46-4, 46-15. 46-18, 46-28 to
46-30, 54. I
Mississippi River, 36-4
Missour), 24-B, 46-3, 46-14
Mist eliminators, 12-12, 39-26
46 PETROLEUM ENGINEERING HANDBOOK
Mist extractors. 12-l to 12-5, 12-7 to 12-9, Lasater, 22-5 to 22-7, 22-9, 22-10 Mooring analysis, 18-9, 18-16, 18-17,
12-11, 12-12. 12-1.5, 12-19, 12-21. Mandl-Volek. 46-15 18-21
12-23 to 12-26, 12-31, 12-40, 19-22.
19-24, 19-25, 39-26
Mist flow, 34-27, 34-36, 34-37, 3440
Mix-based fracturing fluids, 55-7, 55-8
Mixed-lithology rocks, 51-35
Mixing efficiency, 19-27
mm to decimals of an in., table, l-72
Mobil Corp., 46-4, 46-15, 46-18
Mobile analyzer, 24-4
Mobility, 58-38
Mobility-buffer drives, 47-l
Mobility buffer, MP flooding, 47-10, 47-17
Mobility-buffer salinity, 47-15
Mobility-control processes,
effect of low mobility on oil recovery,
47-1, 47-2
foam floodine, 47-6 to 47-9
polymer flooding, 47-2 to 47-6
Mobility improvement, 44-39, 44-40
Mobility of hisplacing fluid, 44-17
Mobility of foams, 47-8, 47-9
Mobility ratio, 39-15, 39-18, 39-21, 40-18,
40-19, 43-7, 43-8, 44-4, 44-8 to 44-10,
4415, 44-17 to 4425, 4427, 44-29,
4433 to 44-40, 45-4, 45-7, 45-9, 45-l 1,
47-1, 47-2, 47-20
Mobility-ratio effects, 44-17 to 44-24,
44-34, 4436
Mobility. total, 35-2
Model assumptions, 48-9
Model basin, 18-7
Mode1 formulation, 48-14 to 48-16
Model grid selection, 48-7
Model input data, 48-6
Model, radial flow, 35-6
Model(s).
analog, 39-22, 44 18
analytical for pump performance, 7-12
analytical for steam injection, 46-7 to
46-l 1
assumptions, 48-9
black oil, 48-4 to 48-7, 48-9, 48-14
blotter, 44 17
bundle of capillary tubes, 28-12
chemical flood, 48-4, 48-5, 48-7
composItional, 43-2, 48-4, 48-6, 48-7,
48-9, 48m 14
computer, 39-4, 44-38
conductive cloth, 44-20
dispersed clay, 5 1-34
drilling, 52-24 10 52-26
dual-water, 49-38
electrolytic, 39-20, 39-21, 4417, 4418,
44-20, 44-2 1
electronic. 39-20
elemental, 46-11 to 46-13
fluid flow, 44-20. 44-21
fluid mapper, 4420
fractured matrix, 48-5
framewood structural. 5 l-34
frontal displacement, 46-7 to 46-9
future interpretation, 50-36
gel or gelatin, 39-2, 44-17, 44-18, 44-20,
44-2 1
geochemical, 24-20
grain boundary structural, 51-34
graphical, 22-5, 22-7, 22-8
graphite-impregnated cloth. 39-2 1
aridded reservoir, 37-2. 37-5. 37-l I
high-pressure. 46-13
hydrate dissociation, 25-9
idealized pore, 26-28
in-situ combustion, 46-12
isothermal, 48-4
Kuster-Toksdz. 5 1-34
laminated. 5 1-34
mathematical, 9-3, 36-10, 39-17, 39-18,
48-1, 48-16, 48-17
mathematical simulation, 38-16
meter, 47-4
numerical, 44-17. 44-20, 46-l 1, 46-20
numerical simulation, 40-2
partially scaled, 46-l 1 to 46-13
perforation prediction, 37-19
physical, 46-1 1 to 46-13
porous reservoir, 44-17
positive seal double-bag, 7-l 1
potentiometric, 39-21, 39-22, 4417,
44-19, 44-34
power law, 47-4, 55-5
process, 28-3
randomized network, 28-12
reservoir simulation, 38-16, 40-34, 43-2,
43-17, 48-1 to 48-6
resistance network, 44-20
rock flow, 44-20
sand, for fluid flow, 26-l 1 to 26-13
scaled physical, 45-10
scaled porous, 44-17, 44-34
shalv sand, 51-34
simple two-mineral, 50-33
simulation, 44-31, 44-32, 48-7 to 48-9
steam chest, 46-9
steam injection, 46-l I, 46-12
streamtube, 45-10
tandem labyrinth path, 7-11
tank-type, 37-2, 37-4, 37-5, 37-l 1, 37-14,
37-17
theoretical, 5 l-8
thermal, 48-4 to 48-7, 48-14
thermal numerical, 46-12
vacuum, 46. I3
Modems, 16-10
Modified black-oil simulator, 45-10
Modified Griffith and Wallis method, 34-37
Modified Stiles permeability-block method,
40-20
Modified turnkey format, 15-32
Modulus of elasticity, 9-3, 9-l 1, 9-12
Moisture-resistant coatings. I l-6
Molal average boiling point. 21-6, 21-11,
21-13 to 21-15
Mole, definition, 22-21
Mole fraction gas mixtures, 20-4
Mole, unit and definition, 58-25
Molecular diffusion, 45-6
Molecular sieves, 14-21
Molecular weight, 20-1, 20-3, 204, 20-9,
20-10
Molecular weight, effect on water content in
vapor phase, 25-16
Molybdenum, 9-5
Moment of inertia, 58-34
Monatonic gases, 13-37
Monel@ , 3-36, 7-5, 15-21, 30-4
Monel bellows, 5-16. 5-17
Monitor log, 53-8. 53-l 1
Monitoring programs, thermal recovery,
46-20, 46-2 I
Monoethanolamine (MEA), 14-2 1, 14-22
Monotube separator, 12-16, 12-21, 12-22
Monovalent cation. 47-15
Monovalent/divalent ratios, 47-13
Montana, 24-8. 24-l 1. 24-20, 40-23
Montmorillonite, 442, 47-2 1, 52-2 I, 52-22
Moody diagram, 15-2, 15-3. 15-7
Moody friction factor, 34-24, 34-38
Moonpool, 18-2, 18-23, 18-42
Moored buoy, 18-30
Moored positioning, 18.2, 18.9
Mooring systems, 18-4, 18-8 to 18.10,
18-16, 18-18, 18-21, 18-24
Morkill method, 41-16. 41-19, 41-22
Mother Hubbard clause, 57-6
Motion characteristics, drilling vessels, 18-7
Motion compensators, 18-2
Motion-response curves, 18-l
Motor control centers (MCCs), 18-44,
1846
Motor, control for, IO-27 to lo-29
cyclic load factor of, lo-25
derating factors for. IO-25
direct current. IO-21
drip-proof, 10-26, 18-46
efficiency of, IO-25
electric, for oilwell pumping, lo-19 to
10-37
enclosures for, lo-26
explosion-proof, 10-27, 18-46
fr&tional horsepower, 18-46
fuses for, IO-28
horsepower ratings of, IO-20
induction, lo-19 to 10-21, IO-23 to lo-25
insulation for, IO-26
multiple-horsepower rated, lo-20
multiple-size rated, IO-21
oiltield, control for and protection of,
lo-27 to lo-29
performance factors of, IO-23 to IO-26
power factor of, IO-25
power triangle for, lo-33
rated voltage, 10-2 1
selecting size of, lo-21
service factor of. 10-25. lo-26
single-phase, 10-2 I
slip of, 10-23, IO-24
speed variations of, 10-24, IO-25
splash-prmf, IO-26
starter contactor for, lo-28
temperature rise of, lo-26
torque of, IO-25
totally enclosed, 10-26, 18-46
ultra-slip, IO-24
voltage frequency of, IO-2 I, IO-23
winding temperature sensors, lo-29
Motor flat cable, ESP, 7-5
Motor horsepower, IO-36
Motor load transducers, 46-2 I
Motor rated voltage, IO-21
Motor torque, IO-24
Motor valve diaphragm pressure, 13-54
Motor winding temperature sensor, lo-29
Motor windings. lo-26
Mount Poso field, California, 46-4, 46-15,
46-18
Movable oil, 46-8
Mud acid, 56-5
Mud acid preflush, 54-4
Mud acid system, 54-4, 54-l 1
Mud contamination, 56-l. 56-3
Mud damage, 35-4
Mud-dispersing agents. 56-l
Mud log, 49-23
Mud-log data, 52-26
Mud-log format, 52-l I to 52-16
Mud-log services, 52-1, 52-2
Mud logger, 52-30
Mud logging, 52-l to 52-30
Mud logging contractor services, 52-28
Mud removal, 56-l
Mud-removal acid, 54-3, 54-4, 54-l I
Mud transit time, 51-20, 51-23
Mud weight, 30-15
Mud-weight factors, 2-1 I 2-3, 2-33, 2-38
SUBJECT INDEX 47
Multicomponent Rash method, 37-23 to
37-26
Multicylinder diesel engines, lo-17
Multicylinder gas engine. 6-l
Multicylinder pump, 4447
Multifingered caliper logs, 53- I7
Multilayer prediction method, 44-31
Multiphase displacement experiments. 28-3
Multiphase flow, Buckley-Leverett
description of, 28-6
continuous-flow gas-lift design, 3440 to
34-45, 34-50
correlations, 5-22, 5-25, 5-26, 5-38, 5-40,
34-37, 37-40
gas plus liquid, hydraulic pumping, 6-27
immiscible fluids, no gravity forces, 28-2
in heterogeneous porous media, 48-1,
48-2
introduction, 34-35, 34-36
modeling of, 28-12
pseudosteady-state behavior. 35-6
theoretical considerations, 34-36, 34-37
well-performance equation, 35-2
Multiphase flowing gradient calculations,
6-72
Multiphase flowing pressure-gradient
curves, 5-2 1
Multiphase inflow performance relationship
Natl. Electric Code (NEC), IO-26
Natl. Electrical Code, 18-46
Natl. Electrical Manufacturers Assn.
(NEMA), classification for control
enclosures, 7-5, 7-6, IO-27
D-electric motors, 10-17, lo-18
rated motors. IO-24
specifications for motors, IO-20
Natl. Science Foundation. IX-15
Natural cosecants, table, l-48, l-49
Natural cosines, table, l-44, l-45, l-50 to
I-54
(IPR) equation, 34-32
Multiphase pressure-drop correlations, 34-37
Multipiece structure, 18-23
Multiple-bore mandrel tubing hanger, 3-14,
Natural cotangents, table, l-46, l-47, l-50
to l-54
3-16
Multiple-bore riser, 18-35
Multiple-completion equipment, 3-13
Multiple completions, 56-5
Multiple-contact miscibility, 39-16, 45-1,
45-5, 45-6. 48-5, 48-10
Multiple-cylinder engines, IO-15
Multiple-horsepower-rated motors, lo-20
Multiple-motor installation, IO-36
Multiple-parallel tubing strings, 3-14
Multiple-regression equation, 2-60
Multiple-seal pumps, 6-39
Multiple-segment tubing hanger, 3-16
Multiple-size-rated motors, lo-21
Multiple-stage separation, 12-16, 12-32,
Natural gamma ray activity, 50-2, 50-15
Natural-gas container, 36-2
Natural-gas. definition, 12-3, 40-3
Natural-gas engineering letter and computer
symbols. 59-2 to 59-51
Natural-gas engines, 15-16
Natural-gas fluids measurement, 17-7
Natural-gas fuel. lo-15
Natural-aas liquids (NGL). 40-3. 40-4
Natural-gas m;xtures. 17-7
Natural Gas Policy Act, 43-2
Natural-gas/water-system, 25-3
Natural gases. compositions and gas
gravities. 25-6
Natural gasoline, 40-3
Natural gasoline content of gas, 20-10,
20-11
12-33
to 6-59, 6-62
Multiple thrusters, 18-10
Multiple tubing strings, 3-8
Multiple-zone fracturing, 55-9
Multtples of 0.4343, table, l-60
Multiples of 2.3026, table, l-60
Multiplex BOP control system, 18-21
Multiplex pumps, 6-28, 6-49 to 6-55. 6-57
Natural gasoline plants, 4 I- I 1
Natural gums in acidizing, 54-8
Natural logarithms, table. I-56, 1-57
Natural secants, table, l-48, 149
Natural sines, table, l-44, l-45, l-50 to
l-54
Natural tangents, table. l-46, l-47, l-50 to
1-54
442
Natural water drive, 39-15 to 39-17, 39-26,
Multiplex transmission systems, 18-3 Nearshore carbonate deposits, 36-6
Multiplexed electrohydraulic control, Nebraska, 24-8, 24-20, 40-23, 44-40,
subsea, 18-52
Multiplication factor,
46-14, 46-15, 46-18, 46-21, 46-30,
4633, 47-22
for casing joint length, 2-29. 2-3 1
for tubing joint length. 2-45
Multipoint backpressure test, 34-31
Multipoint gas injection, 5-32, 5-36
Multipoint testing, 334 to 33-13, 33-22
Multipool aquifers, 38-16
Multishot survey, 53-3
Multistage centrifugal pumps, 6-l
Multistage emulsion, 19-2. 19-3
Multiwell templates, 18-32
Multiyear ice, 18-39
Muskat material balance, 37-13
Muskat method, 37-10 to 37-13, 37-21
Muskats correlations, 39-20
Muskats method, 40-9
Nederlandse Oil Co., 46-14
Negative gas show, 52-14
Negotiated turnkey format, 15-32
Neopentane/water system, 25-26
Neothene, 52-20
Nephelometer, 4444
Nephelometric turbidity units (NTU). 4444
Net cash flow, 41-3, 41-5 to 41-8
Net-oil computers, 16-2, 16-7, 16-8, 16-12
Net-pay/net-connected-pay ratio, 36-7
Net positive suction head (NPSH), 15-17
Net-profit/initial-investment ratio, 41-22
Net-profit/unreturned-investment-balance
ratio, 41-22
Net-profits interest, 41-1, 41-2, 57-10
Netherlands, 12-39, 46-3, 46.14, 51-47
N
n-Butane/water system, 25-26
nDecane/water system, 25-26
n-Hexaneiwater system, 25-26
n-Pentane/water system, 25-26
Naphtha, 26-22
Naphtha/water system, 25-26
Naphthenic base. 19-27
Napierian logarithms, l-56, 1-57
Natl. Assn. of Corrosion Engineers
(NACE), 4-4
Natl. Bureau of Standards (NBS), 1-68 to
l-71, 17-4
Natl. Conference of Weights and Measures,
17-7, 17-8
Neuquen basin, Argentina, 51-33
Neutron absorption. 50-2
Neutron cross section, total, 50-9
Neutron/density combination, 50-30, 50-31,
50-33
Neutron-density crossplot, 50-30, 50-33
Neutron detectors. 50-14. 50-I 5
Neutron energy, 50-8 to 50-10, 50-23
Neutron/gamma-ray tool, 49- 19
Neutron interactions, 50-E to 50-12
Neutron log, 44-3. 49-26. 49-34. 49-38,
51-31, 51-33
Neutron porosity, 50-24. 50-31, 51-20,
51-33
Neutron-porosity devices, 50-17 to 50-21.
50-28 to 50-33
Neutron-slowing-down properties, 50-2,
50-4, 50-l I
Nevada, 24-2 I, 53-6
New England, 29-7
New Hampshire, 51-45
New Mexico, 6-24, 21-4. 24-8, 24.20,
27-16, 27-17, 36-8, 39-25, 40-23, 44-40
New Mexico Conservation Commission.
33-15
New York, 24-l, 44.1
Newton-Raphson iteration procedure, 23-l I,
48-14, 48-15
Newtonian fluid, 22-13
NEXUS log analysis, 49-37
Ni-Resist, 7-3
Ni-Span C@ , 30-3
Nickel, 9-5
Nigeria, 50-26
Nigerian reservoirs, offshore, 48-6
Nikurodse friction-factor equation. 34-24
Nine-point difference scheme, 48-l I
Nine-spot grids. 48- 11 1 48-12
Nine-spot pattern or network, 43-2, 44-13,
44-14, 44-21, 44-23 to 44-25, 4434,
46-17, 46-25, 46-28
Nipple-up operations, 3-6
Niralloy. 7-3
Nitric acid (HNO,). 24-4
NitrileO , 4-5
Nitrogen (NJ I-70, 5-6, 5-7, 12-3, 14.13,
14-17, 16-3, 20-5, 22-5, 22-17, 23-7,
25-14, 26-18, 37-24, 39-2, 39-6, 39-14,
39-16, 40-22, 43-2, 45-1, 45-4, 45-6,
45-12, 48-5, 48-6, 48-9, 52-6, 55-6,
55-9, 56-5
Nitrogen-charged dome pressure, 5-7
Nitrogen-charged gas-lift valves, 5-16, 5-17.
5-26
Nitrogen in acidizing. 54-8
Nitrogen/water system, 25-3
Nitroglycerin, 24-1, 56 I
Nitrox solution, 46-22
Nominal decline rate, 40-27 to 40-29
Nominal interest rate, 41-25 to 41-35
Nominal rate-of-return (ROR), 41-18
Nominal value. definition. 58-9
Nomograph, 22-5, 22-6. 22-10, 22-13
Non-API, pumps, 8-9
steel-grade casing, 2-5, 2-7, 2-9, 2. I I,
2-13, 2-15. 2-17, 2-19
weights and grades of casing, 2-4. 2-6,
2-8, 2-10, 2-12. 2-14. 2-16, 2-18
Non-Darcy flow, 34-31, 34-32. 34-34,
35-10, 35-11
Non-Darcy flow factor, 33-5
Non-Newtonian effects, polymers, 47-4
Non-Newtonian rheology, 28-13
Non-S1 metric units, 58-10, 58-21
Non-upset tubing, 2-38 to 2-44, 2-64, 2-66
Non-US. areas, core analysis data from,
27-9
48 PETROLEUM ENGINEERING HANDBOOK
Nonassociated dry gas reservoir. 40-24
Nonassociated gas. 40-3. 40-23, 40-33,
40-34
Noncircular drainage area, 32-S
Noncollinear flow, 28-12
Nonequilibrium gas displacement, 43-16
Nonideal effects, micellaripolymer (MP)
flooding, 47-13
Noninjection gas requirements in cycling,
39-23
Noninteractive scattering theory, 51-8. 51-9
Nonionics, 47-7, 47-8
Nonlinear partial differential equation, 35-2
Nonmetallic storage tanks, I l-9
Nonmetric units, 58-S
Nonownership theory, 57-l
Nonsymmetrical aquifers, 38-3
Nonsymmetrical geometry, definition, 38-l
Nonwetting immiscible fluids, 28-3, 28-5,
28-6
Nonwettine phase. 26-24, 40-26, 47-9
Normal ammeter chart, electric submersible
pump (ESP), 7-14, 7-16
Normal boiling point, 20-I I
Normal brass standards, I-71
Normal compaction trend line, 51-39
Normal device, 49-12, 49-19, 49-20
Normal fault with drag, 53-12
Normal faults, 29-3, 29-8
Normal-flow installations, 6-6
Normal startup chart, electric submersible
pump (ESP), 7-14
Normal venting capacity of tanks, 1 l-7
Normalized total gas. 52-18
Normals in hard formations. 49-13
North America, 24-6, 29-3
North Anderson Ranch field, New Mexico,
36-8
North Atlantic, 18-38
North Burbank unit, Oklahoma, 47-6
North Dakota, 24-20, 57-10
North Louisiana area, 27-4, 27-5
North Sea, 18-2, 18-3, 18-18, 18-23 to
18-26, 18-36, 18-41. 1844. 27-9,
27.20, 36-2, 44-37, 44-46, 50.24,
50-25, 51-39, 51-40. 52-16, 52-26
North Slope, 18-3
North Tisdale field. Wyoming, 46-15
Northward-Estes field, Texas. 47-22
Northwest Atkinson field, Texas, 29-4
Norway, 12-39, 18-25, 21-9
Norwegian fields, 18-23
Nozzle flow gradient, 6-37
Nozzle of jet-pump, 6-32, 6-34 to 6-39,
6-411 6-42, 6-46, 6-62, 6-63
Nozzle loss coefficient, 6-37
Nozzle size, jet pumps, 6-35 to 6-39, 6-43,
6-44
Nozzle/throat-area ratio, jet pumps, 6-35
Nuclear counting rates. SO-5
Nuclear log, 53-26
Nuclear logging techmques,
interpretation of nuclear logs, 50-23 to
50-37
introduction, 50-l to 50-3
nomenclature, 50-37. 50-38
nuclear physics for logging applications,
50-3 to so-15
nuclear radiation logging devices, 50-15
to SO-23
references, 50-38
Nuclear magnetic logging (NML), 52-26
Nuclear magnetic relaxation analysis, 27-l
Nuclear magnetic resonance (NMR), 28-10,
50-2
Nuclear measurements, 50-24
Nuclear physics for logging applications,
fundamentals of gamma ray interactions,
50-6 to SO-8
fundamentals of neutron interactions, SO-8
to 50-12
nuclear radiation, SO-3 to SO-6
nuclear radiation detectors, SO-12 to 50-15
Nuclear radiation,
in wireline logging, 50-l
introduction, 50-2 to 50-5
nuclear reactions. 50-6
particle reactions, 50-S. 50-6
Nuclear-radiation detectors,
gamma ray, 50-12 to 50-14
neutron, 50-14, SO-15
Nuclear-radiation logging devices,
gamma-gamma density, 50-16, SO-17
gamma ray, 50-15, SO-16
inelastic and capture gamma ray
spectrometry, 50-22, 50-23
neutron porosity, 50-17 to 50-21
pulsed-neutron logging, 50-21. 50-22
Nuclear reactions, 50-6
Nuclear spectrometry. 49. I
Nucleonic densitometer, 12-16
Number groupings, Sl metric system, 58-12
Numerical dispersion, 48-10 to 48-12
Numerical models, 44-17. 44-20
Numerical simulation, in-situ combustion
models, 46-12
models. 40-2
of chemical flood performance, 48-6
of thermal recovery processes, 46-l I,
46-12
steam injection models, 46-l I. 46-12
Numertcal simulators, 3D and 3-phase,
46-7, 46-I 1
Nutating disk positive displacement (PD)
meter. 32-11, 32-12
NuTriTM, 46-22
0
Obigbo field, Nigeria, 36-7, 36-8
Obsidian, 19-S
Obstruction in tubing, 33-21
Occurrence, origin, and evolution of oilfield
waters,
introduction, 24-19, 24-20
membrane filtration, 24-20
quantities of produced water, 24-20
shale compaction, 24-20
Ocean enuineers. 18-3
Ocean sahwater, 44-42
Oceanographer, 18.4, 18-26
Octane number, 21-4, 21-7
Off-lap deoosition, 29-8
Offset: 41:11, 41-15
Offset-drilling rule, 57-2
Offset of controller, 13-52
Offshore bars, 36-3
Offshore field operations.
drillstem testing, IS-20
establishing location, 18-18
introduction, 18-17
plug and abandonment, 18-20
running
20-m. casing, 18-18
30-m. casing, 18-l 8
BOP, 18-18 to 18-20
spudding well, IS-18
Offshore installations, 6-5 to 6-7, I l-6
Offshore leasing,
economic impact, 57-12
jurisdiction, 57-l I
procedure, 57-11
producing history. 57-l I
Offshore operations,
arctic. 18-38 to 1843
drilling, 18-3 to IS-17
electrical, instrumentation, and control
systems, 18-43 to 18-52
field, 18.17 to 18-20
historical review, 18-l to 18-3
introduction. 18-I
production, 18-27 to 18-38
references, 18-52
special considerations. 18-20 to 18-22
structures, 1822 to 18-27
Offshore pipelines.
expensive element, 18-29
flowlines for subsea wells, IS-36 to 18-38
larger lines, 18-38
Offshore platforms, rigs, or structures, 5-2,
6-55, 6-59, 6-63. 7-l. 7-2. 12.16,
12-18, 12-20, 12-21, 12-35. 12-39, 18-l
to 18-7, 18-22 to 18.25. 18-28 to 18-30.
18-40 to 18-42, 18-44
Offshore production operations,
floating production facilities, 18-34 to
1836
introduction. IS-27
pipelines, 18-36 to 18-38
platform production, 18-28 to 18-30
subsea completions, IS-30 to 18-34
Offshore, special considerations,
cold environment, 18-2 I
deepwater drilling. 18-20, IS-2 I
high-current drilling, 18-2 I, 18-22
Offshore structure classification,
concrete gravity, IS-23
gravity platform construction, 18-23,
18-24
template/jacket, 18-22
template/jacket construction, 18-22. 18-23
Offshore Technology Conference, 18-38
Oficina field, Venezuela, 24-13
Ohio, 24-6, 24-7, 26-23, 43-l
Ohmtc potential drop. 49-13
Ohms law, 26-16, 26-29. 39-20, 4417.
49-14
Oil and gas differences,
best depletion techniques, 36-2, 36-3
sales method, 36-2
Oil and Gas Inst., 41-7
Oil and gas leases, 57-I to 57-12
Oil and gas separators,
accessories, 12-39, 12-40
capacity curves, 12-27 to 12-32
centrifugal gas scrubbers, 12.20, 12-21
centrifugal separators, 12-20, 12-21
classification, 12-16 to 12-20
comparison of horizontal, spherical, and
vertical types, 12-2 I
computer sizing, 12-25 to 12-27
construction codes, 12-38. 12-39, 12-41
controls, 12-39, 1240
estimated quality of separated fluids.
12-13 to 12-16
estimating sizes and capacities, 12-21 to
12-25
general references, 12-43
illustrations of, 12-2 I
introduction, 12-l to 12-3
measuring quality of separated fluids,
12-15, 12-16
methods used to remove gas from oil,
12-13
methods used to remove oil from gas,
12-8 to 12-l 1
mist extractors for, 12-11. 12-12
nomenclature, 1242, 1243
operation and maintenance considerations.
12-40
SUBJECT INDEX 49
practical consideratton in sizing, 12-32
primary functions of, 12-3, 12-4
references, 12-43
safety features. 12-39, 1240
secondary functions of, 124, 12-5
selection and application of separators and
scrubbers, 12-35 to 12-38
special problems in. 12-6 to 12-8
stabilization of separated liquid
hydrocarbons, 12-33. 12-35
stage separation of oil and gas, 12-32 to
12-35
summary, 12-l
valves, 12-39, 1240
well fluids and their characteristtcs, 12-3
Oil bank, 44-l 1, 4433
Oil-base (based) muds, 26-21 to 26-23.
40.19, 444. 53-8, 53-9
Oil-based fluids, 18-49, 18-52
O&based fracturing fluids, 55-5
Oil-bucket construction. 12-35
Oil carrying agent, 56-2
Oil changing in pumping units, lo-13
Oil collectors. 19-20
Oil coning, 48-9
Oil cut, 47-18
Oil density, definition, 22-1
Oil-density determination from ideal-solution
principles,
composition known, 22-2 to 22-4
composition unknown, 224, 22-5
Oil-discharge control valve, 12-5, 12-6,
12-9, 12-39
Oil-displacement efficiencies, 4439
Oil-displacement rate, 46-8
Oil engines, IO-15
Oil equivalent volumes, 41-13
Oil-external microemulsion. 47-12. 47-15
Oil foam. 12-6
Oil formation volume factor (FVF) 6-67,
22-1, 22-10 to 22-13, 22-20, 37-16,
40-6, 40-8, 40-9, 40. I 1, 40-16
Oil FVF, constants for, 22-l 1
Oil FVF correlations,
saturated systems, 22-10
Standing. 22-10
undersaturated systems, 22-l I to 22-13
Vasquez and Beggs, 22-10, 22-11
Oil/gas/water separator, 12-4, 12-5, 12-21
Oil gravity,
effect on air requirements, 4616, 46-17
effect on fuel cc&nt, 46-16, 46-17
test, 27-l
Oil in effluent gas. 12-15, 12-16
Oil in effluent water, 12-15, 12-16
Oil-in-place (OIP), 37-2 to 374, 37-6, 40-5
IO 40-8
Oil-in-water dispersion-type fracturing fluid.
55-7
Oil-in-water emulsions, 6-27, 19-l to 19-3,
19-11, 19-27, 24-2, 55-7
Oil isoperms. 28-7
Oil isothermal compressibility,
Ttube method, 22-11, 22-12
Vasquez and Beggs method. 22-12, 22-13
Oil mist, 12-19. 44-4
Oil mobility, 43-7
Oil mobilization, 28-12, 484
Oil payments, 41-1, 445
Oil power fluid, 6-27, 6-29, 6-44, 6-47,
6-55, 6-56, 6-60. 6-61. 6-63
Oil pressure function, 37-8 to 37-10
Oil production above bubble point, 37-6
Oil production, time required for, 37-21
Oil property changes, steamfloods, 46-15
Oil property ownership, 41-l. 41-2
Oil-rate-vs.-time plot, calculation of, 47-17
Oil recovery.
by chemical flooding. 47-13. 47-16,
47-17. 47-19. 47-20
by gas displacement, 43-3
by solution-gas drive. 37-2, 37-5, 37-6,
37-10, 37-11, 37-13 to 37-1s. 37-17,
37-19, 37-21, 40-18. 40-20, 444
by water injection, predtcting,
areal sweep and pattern efficiency.
44- I2 to 44-25
dtsplacement calculation procedures,
44-7 to 44-12
reservoir fractures, effect of, 4425,
44-26
waterflood performance method
selection, 44-3 1, 44-32
waterflood performance prediction
methods, 44-26 to 44-3 1
by waterflood. 445. 44-S
effect of low mobility, 47-1, 47-2
efficiency. 4430, 4432, 47-16
estimation, 48-l
process, 48-3. 48-4. 48-12
thermal, 46-14, 46-15
vs. volume of fuel burned, 46-15
Oil relative permeability, 28-6, 28-8 to
28-13, 44-12, 46-37, 46-38
Oil-removal efficiency, 15-28
Oil reserves: see reserves
Oil reservoir, development plan for, 36-I IO
36-l I
Oil reservoir volume factor, 37-10
Oil reservoir with gas cap, 40-7
Oil reservoirs, depletion technique, 36-2
Oil reservoirs in gas-hydrate region, 25-18,
25-19
Oil reservoirs under gravity drainage,
case histories after pressure depletion,
40-15
occurrence of, 40-14, 40-15
Oil reservoirs with gas-cap drive, 40-13,
40-14
Oil reservoirs with water drive,
average recovery factor, 40-16. 40-17
buoyancy and inhibition effect, 40-20
general discussion, 40-15. 40-16
permeability distribution effect, 40-18 to
40-20
recovery-efficiency factor. 40. I6
unit recovery computed by frontal-drive
method, 40-17, 40-18
unit-recovery equation, 40-16
Oil retention time, separator, 12-3, 12-15,
12-25 to 12-30
Oil saturation, 26-22, 37-9. 37-10
Oil Show AnalyzerTM (OSA), 52-10, 52-l 1
Oil shrinkage, 37-l. 37-6, 37-22, 37-23,
40-S
Oil sizing of separator. 12-30
Oil-soluble coating. 9-10
Oil-soluble paint, 9-2
Oil-soluble resins, 54-8
Oil specific gravity, 6-67
Oil stainmg. 52-9. 52-10
Oil/steam ratio, 46-9, 46-15. 46-23
Oil storage,
appurtenances, I l-6
capacity, 18-30, 18-36
general references, 1 ll14
gravity conservation, 11-12, II-13
gravity structure, 18-41
materials of construction, I l-9
production equipment. 1 l-9 to 1 l-l I
references, 1 I - 14
tank corrosion protection, I I-4 to II-6
tank types, 11-l to 11-4
tanks, 11-6, 11-7, 18-43
temporary. 18-2
underground storage, 1 l-13. 1 I-14
vapor control, 11-12, II-13
vapor losses, 11-11, II-12
vapor-recovery system, 11.12. 11-13
venting atmospheric and low-pressure
storage tanks. I1 -6 to 1 l-9
Oil surge chamber. 19-23, 19-24
Oil system correlations,
bubblepoint pressure, 22-5 to 22-9
density determination, 22-2 to 22-5
empirical, 22-7
FVF, 22-10 to 22-13
gas/oil IFT. 22-16. 22-17
general references, 22-22
glossary, 22-20, 22-21
graphical, 22-5, 22-7. 22-8
introduction, 22- 1
pseudoliquid density. 22-2
references, 22.21, 22-22
oil FVF, 22-10 to 22-13
solution GOR for saturated oils, 22-9.
22-10
total FVFs, 22-13
viscosity, 22-13 to 22-16
Oil viscosities, 22-1, 22-13 to 22-16, 37.12,
37-16, 40-9, 40-17, 40-32, 46-31.
46-34, 46-35
Oil-viscosity correlations,
factors affecting, 22-14
introduction, 22-13
saturated systems, 22-14 to 22-16
undersaturated systems, 22-16
Oil/water capillary pressure, 26-29
Oil/water contact (OWC). 41-9, 44-39
Oil/water interface. 12-39. 18-47. 19-4,
19-5, 19-9, 19-11, 19-18 10 19-20,
19-22, 19-23, 19-30, 19-31. 40-15
Oil/water interfacial tension. 4440, 47-9
Oil/water mobility ratio, 48-5
Oil/water relative-permeability curve, 47-18
Oil/water separator. 24-3
Oil/water system, 25-27. 25-28, 39-20
Oil/water viscosity ratio, 40-19, 44-6. 44-9
Oil-weight factors, 2-l. 2-33. 2-38
Oil wells,
computing inflow rates, 34-32
future inflow performance, 34-34, 34-35
inflow performance, 34-30 to 34-33
single- and two-phase 1PR equation.
34-33, 34-34
Oil-wet, 19-9, 44-6
Oilfield brines, 24-5
Oiltield motors,
equipment for control of, 10-27, lo-28
protection equipment for, 10-28, IO-29
Oilfield steam generators, 46-19
Oilfield waters,
analysis methods, 24-5
chemical properties, 24-5 to 24-13
composition, 24-6
definition, 24-18
evolution, 24-19. 24-20
occurrence, 24- 19, 24-20
origin, 24-19, 24-20
pH, 24-16
physical properties, 24-12 to 24-l 8
sample description, 24-5
Oilwell performance,
infinite-acting pressure solution, 35-3,
35-4
production rate variation (superposition),
35-8, 35-9
pseudosteady-state behavior, 35-6 to 35-8
skin effect. 35-4
superposition, example problem, 35-9
so PETROLEUM ENGINEERING HANDBOOK
transient and pseudosteady state, example
problem, 35-7, 35-8
well pressure performance-closed
reservoir. 35-2, 35-3
wellbore storage effect, 35-4 to 35-6
Oilwell production-meter installation. 32-13
Oilwell Research porosimeter, 26-6
Oklahoma, 6-24, 16-13, 21-2, 21-4, 21-10,
24-8. 24-10. 24-21, 27-8, 27-9 to 27-12.
33-1, 33-7. 33-9, 33-12, 40-15, 40-23,
441, 444, 4436, 4441, 44-44, 46-3,
46-14, 46-16, 47-6, 57-10
Oklahoma City field, 6-24, 40-2
Oklahoma City Wilcox reservoir, 4s 15
Oleic phase, 47-l I, 47. I5
Olympic pool. Oklahoma, 44-41
On-lap deposition. 29-8
Oolicast, 29-9
Oolicastic porosity, 29-8. 29-9
Oolith. 29-9
Oolitic porosity, 26-l
Open-cycle selective hydrocarbon adsorption
system, 14-12
Open delta transformer, 10-30, IO-31
Open-flow capacity, 30-10, 33-3
Open flow of gas wells. 33-l to 33-23
Open-flow potential, 33-5 to 33-S. 33-10,
33-11
Open-flow testing of gas wells, 13-45
Open-flow tests, 33-3, 41-9
Open gas-lift installation, 5-2, 5-3
Open-loop control, 16-2
Open power-fluid system, 6-17, 6-18, 6-25
to 6-28. 6-30, 6-57 to 6-59, 6-63
Open regeneration system, 14-l 1, 14-12
Openhole completions, 47-6, 56-8, 56-9
Openhole logging, 50-I
Operating agreements, 41-9
Operating costs, emulsion treating, 19-33
Operating downtime offshore, 18-8
Operating equipment, BHP gauges, 30-3,
30-4
Operating expenses,
ad valorem taxes, 41-12
average cost per barrel, 41-l 1, 41-12
breakeven, 40-32
check list item for evaluation, 41-9
cost per well-month, 41-l 1
direct, 41-l 1
direct lifting, 41-l 1
field or district, 41-12
range of, 41-12
recompletion, 41- 12
stimulation, 41-12
trucking charges, 4 I 12
Operating gas-lift valve, 5-39 to 5-42, 5-44,
5-51 to 5-53, 5-55
Operating injection-gas pressure, 5-23, 5-26
to 5-28, 5-30, 5-32, 5-35. 5-36, 5-38,
5-39, 5-44. 5-48, 5-49, 5-53, 5-54
Operating interest, 41-2, 41-13
Operating limits,
drilling vessels, table, 18-E
riser, table, 18-18
Operating manuals, offshore. 18-16
Operating pressures, of separators, 12-16
of wellhead equipment, 3-l
Operating problems, gas condensate (GC)
reservoir,
number of wells required, 39-26
well injectivity, 39-25. 39-26
well productivity and testing, 39-24,
39-25
Operation and maintenance considerations
for separators.
cleaning of vessels, 12-42
corrosive fluids, 1240
gauge cocks and glasses. 12-42
high-capacity operation, 12-42
insulation of safety devices, 12-40
low temperatures, 12-40
mist extractors. 12-40
paraffin, 12-42
periodic inspection. 12-40
pressure gauges, 12-42
pressure shock loads, 1242
safety heads (rupture disks), 12-40
throttling discharge of liquid, 12-40
Operation factor, 12-22
Operation of ESP equipment, 7-12
Operational considerations for emulsion
treating equipment,
burners and fire tubes, 19-28
cleaning vessels, 19-28, 19-29
corrosion, 19-30. 19-31
excelsior packs, changing of, 19-31,
19-32
interfacIal buildup, 19-30
level controllers and gauges, 19-3 I
removing sand and other settled solids,
19-29, 19-30
safety features for electrostatic treaters,
19-3 I
water-in-oil detectors (BS&W monitors),
19-3 I
Operational considerations, subsea control
systems, 18-49
Operational problems and remedies,
problems common to steam and
tirefloods,
emulsions, 46-21, 46-22
sanding, 46-2 1
well productivity, 46-21
problems plaguing ftrefloods only,
corrosion, 46-22
exploration hazards, 46-22
poor injectivity, 46-22
problems plaguing steamfloods only,
steam placement, 46-22
steam splitting, 46-22
Operational well modes, 4-6 to 4-8
Optical emission spectrographic analysis,
56-3
Optimal conditions, generating for
micellar/polymer (MP) flood. 47.14,
47-15
Optimal economic recovery, 42-l. 42-2
Optimal time to waterflood, 44-5
Optimization, of injection operations, 42.1,
42-3
Optimization studies, 48-7
Optimum efficiency of fracturing, 55-9
Optimum pressure on separator, 124
Orcutt Hill field. California, 47-22
Organic constituents of oiltield water,
24-17, 24-18
Organic inhibitors, 54-6
Organic liquid desiccants. 14-17 to 14-20
Organic phosphates, 44-45
Organic solvents, 56-2
Orgamck and Golding correlation, 21-I 1 to
21-15
Orgamsms, 44-43
Orientation curves, 53-9
Orifice check valve, 5-10, 5-22 to 5-24,
5-26, 5-28, 5-31. 5-35, 5-36
Orifice coefficient for provers, 13-45
Orifice constants.
basic ordice factor, 13-3
expansion factor, 13-8
flowing-temperature factor, 13-3
gauge-location factor. 13-8
manometer factor, 13-8
pressure-base factor, 13-3
Reynolds-number factor. 13-8
specific-gravity factor, 13-3
supercompressibility factor, 13-8
temperature-base factor, 13-3
thermal-expansion factor. 13-S
Orifice equations, 13-3
Orifice location, 13-36
Orifice meter, 5-53, 13-8, 13-36, 13-45,
1348, 16-6, 16-S. 33-6, 33-13
Orifice metering of natural gas, 17-7
Orifice-plate flowmeter. 32-l 3
Orifice plates, 14-2. 17-7
Orifice well tester, 13-37 to 13-44, 32-6.
32-14
Original oil in place (OOIP). 38-9 to 38-13
Orkiszewski correlation, 34-37 to 34-40
Orogenic movements, 29-7
Orthogonal-wave equation migrations, 36-8
Onhomin technique, 48-17
Oscillating piston PD meter, 32-l I
Oscilloscope, 51-3, 51-12
Osmotic effects, 24-19
Ossum field, Louisiana. 26-7
Otto cycle, IO-15
Outbreathing (pressure relief) of storage
tanks, 11-6, 11-7
Outer continental shelf (OCS). 3-34, 57-l I,
57-12
Oval gear positive displacement (PD) meter,
32-l I
Overall displacement efficiency, 39-18
Overall economic analysis, 39-27
Overall efficiency of miscible displacement,
45-7
Overall efficiency of pumping system, lo-25
Overall heat-transfer coefficient. 46-4 to
46-7
Overall instantaneous cycling efficiency,
39-18
Overall oil recovery, 46-14
Overall particle-removal efficiency, 15-27
Overall recovery efficiency, 43-3, 45-8
Overall recovery factor, 40-23
Overall reservoir recovery efficiency, 40-34
Overbalance condition, 52-l 8
Overburden heat loss, 48-5
Overburden pressure. 26-9. 26-19, 5 l-4 to
51-7, 51-25, 51-44, 51.47, 52-26. 55-8,
56-2, 56-3
Overburden stress, 28-4, 28-13, 514,
51-30, 5143
Overflow connections for tank, 1 l-9
Overflush agent, 56-5
Overflush in acidizing. 54. I 1
Overhead, 41-12, 41-13
Overhead allocation, 41-9
Overhead costs, 36-2
Overload shutdown conditions, ESP chart.
7-16, 7-17
Overloading separators with liquid. 12-10
Overpressure, of storage tanks. I l-4
Overpressured formations, 35- 1
Overpressured gas reservoir, 40-34
Overpressuring of separator, 13-58
Overriding royalty interest, definition. 41-l
to 41-3
Overtemperature lockout circuit, IO-29
Overtensioning of pipe, 18-37
Overtorquing, 9-9
Overtravel of fiberglass rods, 9-l I, 9-12
Overturned anticlines. 29-2
Ownership maps, 41-8
Ownership of hydrocarbons in place, 57- 1
Oxidation potential, 24-16
Oxyalkylated phenols, 19-10
SUBJECT INDEX 51
Oxygen (O,), 6-55, 9-8, 14-3, 14-17,
14-20, i4-22, 15-28, 15-29, 19-30,
19-31, 24-4. 24-5, 24-16, 24.17, 24.20,
39-16, 44-42, 4443, 44-47, 46-12,
46.22, 46-34, 48-5, 50-1, 50-13, 50-18,
50-35
Oxveen analvzer. 19-28
Ox$gen corrosion, 3-36
Onvaen-enriched air fireflood, 46-31, 46-34
Oxygen injection, 42-6
Oxygen scavengers, 15-29, 47-5, 47-10
Oxygen utilization efficiency, 46-15, 46-2 I
P
p-x diagrams for mixtures of CO,, 23-10
P-wave critical angle, 51-12
P-wave modulus for drv rock. 51-49
P-wave modulus for rock frame, 51-49
P-wave velocity, 51-l I, 51-37
P-waves, 51-2to 51-5, 51-11, 51-36, 5147
Pack gravel, 56-4
Packer mechanics, 44
Packer operations, modes of, 4-1
Packer seats, location of, 53-17
Packer selection, considerations for,
corrosive well fluids, 4-4
fishing characteristics, 4-6
packer mechanics, 44
purchase price, 4-6
retrievability, 4-5
sealing elements, 4-5
surface/downhole equipment coordination,
4-4
through-tubing operations, 4-6
Packer utiltzation, 4-1 to 4-3, 4-6
permanent packers, 4-3
retrievable packers, 4-2, 4-3
success, 4-6
Packing of uniform spheres, 26-l
Packoff element. 3-6
Painter field. Wyoming, 39- 16
Pair production, 50-6 to 50-8, 50-13, 50-14,
56-16
Paleo-environments, interpretation of, 36-3,
36-7
Paleontologists, 57-8
Paloma field, California, 26-30
Paluxy gas-condensate reservoir, Texas,
39-20, 39-2 I
Pan AmericaniCasper Oil Co., 46-14, 46-18
Panama Canal, 18-7
Panhandle equation, 15-7
Panhandle field, Texas. 44-30
Paper-tape-type H,S detector, 52-7
Parachor, definition, 22-16
Parachors,
for hvdrocarbons. 22-18
for pure substances, 22-17
Paraffin, 5-25, 5-52, 5-53, 6-31 to 6-33.
7.13. 11-13. 12-3. 12-7, 12-8. 12-10.
12-li. 12-40, 12-42, 19-4, 19-5. 19-9,
19-10, 19.30. 26-3. 32-l I, 44-4
Paraffin hvdrocarbons. 20-13. 39-2
Paraffin inhibitors, 56-2
Paraffin problem, 3-27
Paraffin removal. 56- 1. 56-2
Paraffin scrapers, 18-33
Paraffintc hydrocarbon series, 20-5
Paraffinic o&. 6-67. 24-18
Paraguay, 58-20
Parallel-bore valves. 3-15
Parallel-plate interceptor (PPD. 15-24, 15-25
Paris Academy of Science, l-68
Paris Valley field, California. 46-22, 46-23
Paroscientitic digiquartz. 30-7
Parrish and Prausnitz development, 25-5 to
25-9
Partial buildup curve. 30-9
Partial cement bonding, 51-41, 51-42
Partial differential equations, 48-2
Partial penetration, 35-4
Pantal pressure maintenance, 42-3, 43-9 to
43-17
Partial pressure of gas, 20-4
Partial water drive, 39-24
Partial water-drive reservoir, 40-6
Partially scaled models,
high-pressure, 46. I3
physical types. 46-11, 46-12
vacuum, 46-13
Particle reactions, 50-5, 50-6
Particle-size distribution, 26-2, 4445
Partition, 57-2
Past performance analysis, gas pressure
maintenance, 43-9
Pattern effects on waterflooding, 4429
Pattern efficiency, 44-15, 44-18, 45-6, 45-8
to 45-10
Pattern (h@weighted) efficiency, 39-15,
39-17, 39-18, 39-20 to 39-23, 39-26
Pattern floods, 46-l
Pattern injection, 43-2
Pattern selection, thermal recovery, 46-17
Pattern types in firefloods and steamfloods,
46-18
Payout, 41-3, 41-35, 41-36
Payout schedule, 41-31
Peace River field, 46-34
Peak crank torque, 9-2, 9-3
Peak polished-rod load, 9-2
Peak torque, IO-26
Pendular rings, 26-24
Penetration of acid, 54-8
Peng-Robinson equation, 20-8, 23-13
Penn State arrangement, 28-5
Pennsylvania, 18-l. 21-2, 24-1, 24-2, 24-6,
24-l. 44-1, 444, 47-22
Pennsylvania Oil Producers, 17-1
Penultimate layer, 364
Percent factor, assigned spacing
design line, 5-33
Percent-load design method, 5-42
Percent-load intermittent-gas-lift
installation designs, 544
Percent-load production pressure, 548
Percent-tubing-load installation design, 548
Percentage depletion, 57. I I
Percentage-depletion allowance, 41-5,
41-13, 41-14
Percentage factor, gas lift, 5-32
Percentage-time controller, I64
Percentage timer. LO-28
Percussion-sampling techniques, 27-9
Percussion sidewall core data, 27-9
Perforated-interval completion, 5-5 I
Perforating gun, 53-26
Perforating operations, 5 I40
Perforating pipe. 56-l
Perforation ball sealers, 54-10
Perforation cleaning methods,
backflow, 56-5
backsurging. 56-5
HCI preflush, 56-5
matrix acid stimulatton, 56-5
matrix treatment with acid, 56-5
overflush, 56-5
perforation washing, 56-5
underbalance, 56-5-
Perforation, sand control, 564, 56-5
Perforation tunnels. 56-l. 564, 56-5, 56-8
Perforation washing. 56-5
Perforations. locating. 53-26
Performance calculations, reciprocating
pumps, 6-28 to 6-30
Performance characteristics, jet pumps, 6-34
Performance coefficient, of backpressure
equation, 33-5 to 33-10, 33-12
of refrigerants, 14-l I
Performance curves,
abandonment contour vs. cumulative oil,
40-34
cumulative gas vs. cumulative oil, 40-32,
40-33
improved recovery reserves, 40-34
material balance method for nonassociated
gas reservoirs, 40-33, 40-34
of jet pump, 6-35, 6-36, 6-38, 641 to
6-43, 646, 6-47
of tubing and choke, 34-5
oil percentage in total fluid vs. cumulative
oil, 40-32
water/oil contact (WOC), 40-34
Performance evaluation of rigs, 18-7, 18-8
Performance factors for mot&s.
cyclic load, lo-25
efftciency, IO-25
power, IO-25
service, 10-25, IO-26
slip, 10-23, lo-24
speed variation, 10-24, IO-25
temperature rise, IO-26
torque, IO-25
Performance indicators,
common to both steamfloods and
firefloods,
changes in oil property, 46-15
oil recovery, 46-14, 46-15
sweet efftciencv , 46- 14
p&a&g to firefloods only,
air/oil ratio (AOR), 46-17
air requirements. 46-16
fuel content, 46-16
pertaining to steamfloods only,
steam/oil ratio (SOR), 46-15
Performance of solution-gas-drive
reservoirs, 37-1, 37-2
Performance predictions,
models, 37-19
of micellar-polymer flooding, 47-17
of oil and gas reservoirs, 36-9, 36-10
of solution-gas drive, 37-14 to 39-18
of volatile oil reservoir, 37-22 to 37-26
Performance uroiiles, 5-20, 5-2 I
Performance properties,
of casing, 2-l, 2-4 to 2-19. 2-32
of pipe,-2-46, 2-54 to 2-56
of tubing, 2-38 to 2-43
Performance technique for reserve
estimation, 40-I
Performance-time predictions, 43-9, 43-10
Performax plate pack, l9- 13
Periodic inspection of separators, 12-40
Periodic production tests, 12-17
Peripheral flood, 44-2, 44-13, 44-17. 44-36
Permafrost, 18-38, 1X-39, 18-41 to 18-43
Permafrost cement, 18-4 1
Permafrost problem, 3-27
Permanent packers, 4-l to 4-6, 4-8
Permeability-block method, 40-19. 40-20.
40-24, 40-26
Permeability, calculations, 26-16
changes, effect on radial flow, 54-9
consideration in waterflooding, 442
conversion of units in Darcys law, 26-13
to 26-15
correlation with tube-wave data, 51-48
damage. 30-13, 30-14
definition of, 27-l. 28-l. 55-1
distribution. 26-26, 36-3, 36-7, 39-16,
39-18 to 39-20, 40-12, 40-18 to 40-20,
40-24. 40-25, 44-8. 44-15, 45-11. 45-12
distribution factor. 40-16. 40-17
52
effective, 26-15, 28-l to 28-4, 28-6, 28-8.
28-13, 39-17, 44-32, 44-33, 46-21
factors affecting measurement, 26-18,
26-19
factors in evaluation of, 26-19, 26-20
tlow systems of simple geometry, 26-t 1
to 26-13
from pressure-buildup curve, 30-12
in acoustic logging, 51-47
interstitial-water relationships, 26-23
introductory theory, 26-10, 26-11
limits of formations, 55-2
measurement of, 26-17, 26-18
net thickness product, 39-21
of channels and fractures, 26-15, 26-16
of matrix, 55-9
of uack, 55-8
of propping agents, 55-2, 55-8
of reservoir rocks, 30-I 1, 39-13. 44-3
physical analogies to Darcys law, 26-16
pinchout, 4439
prediction, 50-2
profile, 314, 364, 39-19, 44-3, 45-10.
51-47
ratio, 37-14, 37-15
reduction, 47-3 to 47-5, 55-8
reduction factor. 35-5
relative, 28-1 to 28-3, 28-6, 28-8 to
28-14, 28-16, 30-11, 39-13, 44-2, 44-4.
44-5, 44-9, 55-X
SPE preferred unit, 58-24, 58-25
stratification, 39-18, 39-20
transforms, 50-37
unit in SI metric system, 58-24. 58-35,
58-36
variation, 39-19, 39-20, 39-23, 39-26.
40-18, 40-19, 443, 448 to 4410,
4436, 45-7
viscosity ratio, 47-8
Perm-plug method of permeability
measurement. 26-17
Permeameter, 26-17, 26-18
Permian Basin. 49. I 1
Persian Gulf, 4437
Personal computer, 39-l I, 39-12
Personal property, definition, 57-l
Personnel protectton at wellsite, lo-31
Peru, 40-14. 58-20
Peters factor, l-61
Petrographic analysis. 56-3
Petroleum engineering servtces, 52-2, 52-16
to 52-27
Petroleum engineers, 22-1, 22-14
Petroleum Engineers Club of Dallas, 41-5
Petroleum liquid, acoustic velocity in, 51-3 I
Petroleum measurement subsidiary, 17-6
Petroleum reserves-definmons and
nomenclature,
possible, 40-2
probable, 40-2
proved, 40-2. 40-3
proved developed, 40-3
proved undeveloped, 40-3
Petroleum reservoir engineering, 42-l
Petroleum reservoir engineering letter and
computer symbols, 59-2 to 59-51
Petroleum reservoir traps, 29-l to 29-9
Petroleum sulfonates, 47-7
Petrophysical and physical parameters,
relationship to nuclear logging,
clay types, 50-2
fluid identification, 50-2
hydrocarbon saturation, 50-2
lithology, 50-2
permeability. 50-2
porosity. 50-1, 50-2
presence of hydrocarbons, 50. I
Petrophysical correlations. 28-12
Petrophysical descriptors, 50-2, 50-3
Petrophysical measurements, 52-2, 52-26,
52-27
Petrophysical properties, 28-8, 47-20
Petrophysical work, 48-8, 48-9
pH, 244, 24-5, 24.16, 24.17, 4444
pH control, 4440, 4442
Phase analysis, high-frequency, 27-l
Phase behavior, and interfacial tension,
47-14, 47-15
definition. 22-2 I, 23-I
of COJC,IC,, mixture, 23-9
of gas/condensate system, 39-2 to 39-4,
39-12, 39-13
of pure component, 23-2
of surfactantlbrineioil system, 47-11 to
47- 13
of water/hydrocarbon systems, 25-l to
25-28
Phase-boundary curves, 45-3, 45-4
Phase compositions, calculation of, 23-10 to
23-13
Phase converters, types of, IO-35
Phase diagrams, by measuring liquid
volumes at several temperatures, 39-7
of Eilerts fluids, 39-3
of gas condensate fluids, 394
of reservoir-fluid systems, 23-6, 23-7
of single component, 23-1, 23-2
of surfactant/brine/oil system, 47.11,
47-12
ternary, 23-5, 23-6
types of, 23-2 to 23-10
Phase equilibrium, 12-2 1
Phase equilibrium calculations, 20-10
Phase lag, 53-20
Phase loss relay, lo-28
Phase rotation, 7- I3
Phase rule, 23-2, 23-8, 25-t
Phase shift angle. 53-20
Phenolic-resin gravel packing, 46-21
Philippine Islands, 58-20
Phillips Petroleum Co., 16-13, 45-15,
46-24, 46-26
Phosphoric acid. 11-6
Photoelectric absorption, 50-4, 50-7, 50-12
to 50-14, 50-17
Photoelectric absorption factor, 50-7, 50-17,
50-24, 50-33, 50-34
Photoelectric effect. 50-6 to 50-S
Photographic history of injection-fluid
fronts, 44-18
Photographs and visual examination of
cores. 46-2 I
Photometry. I-69
Photomicrographs, 19-2 to 19-5
Photomultiplier. 50-12 to 50-14
Physical analogies to Darcys law, 26-16,
26-17
Physical dimension of fiberglass sucker
rods, 9-l I
Physical models, 46-1 I to 46-13
Physical parameters and nuclear radiation,
50-2, JO-3
Physical-properties data of liquid
hydrocarbons, 17-5
Physical properties of foams, 47-8, 47-9
Physical properties of oil, 21-3 to 21-8
Physical properties of oil systems, 22-l
Physical properties of produced waters,
compressibility, 24-12 to 24-14
density, 24-14, 24-15
dissolved gas, 24-17
formation volume factor (FVF), 24-15,
24-16
organic constituents, 24-17, 24-18
PETROLEUM ENGINEERING HANDBOOK
pH, 24-16
redox potential (Eh), 24-16, 24-17
resistivity, 24-16
surface (interfacial) tension, 24-16
viscosity, 24-16
Phystcal properties of wellhead equipment,
3-2, 3-3
Phystcal setup of metering system,
orifice location, 13-36
recorder, 13-36
size of orifice and metering run, 13-36
straightening vanes. 13-36
Physico-chemical changes, 46-12, 46-13
Piercement domes, 29-5. 29-7
Piezoelectric element, 5 l-3
Piezoelectric transducer, 30-5, 30-6
Pig launcher, 15-14
Pig trap, 15-14, 15-16
Pigging, 18-29
Pile hammers, 18-23
Pile jacking, 18-41
Piled structures, 18-42, 1843
Pilings, 3-3
Pilot floods, 4437 to 44-39
Pilot-gas-control manifold, 16-15. 16-16
Pilot-loaded regulators, 13-55
Pilot-loaded valves, 13-55
Pilot LPG flood, 45-14
Pilot-operated control valve. 13-53
Pilot-operated diaphragm motor valve,
13-55
Pilot-operated dump valves, 16-5
Pilot-operated gas-lift valve, 5- 13, 5-43,
5-44, 5-51
Pilot-operated relief valve, I l-8, 12.40
Pilot operation, 45-10, 42-6
Pilot plug, 13-54
Pilot project, 40-3
Pilot relay, 13-50
Pilot valve, 3-34
Pilot valve diaphragm failure, 11-S
Piloted union-type rise coupling, 18-15
Pin-and-socket connectors, 18-52
Pinchouts, 29-8
Pinnacle reefs, 36-5
Pipe analysis log (PAL), 53-20, 53-24,
53-25. -
Pipe analysis tool, 53-23
Pipe body safety factor, 2-2, 2-32. 2-34,
2-35
Pipe-body yield strength, 2-2, 2-4, 2-6, 2-8,
2-10, 2-12, 2-14, 2-16, 2-18, 2-32, 2-56
Pipe coils, 19-21
Pipe diameters,
choosing in gas lutes, 15-7
choosing in liquid lines, 15-2
Pipe dope as formation contaminant, 56-3,
564
Pipe-laying reels, 18-37
Pipe rams, 18-11, 18-15, 18-20
Pipe storage, 11-2, I l-4
Pipe taps, 13-3, 13-8 to 13-11, 13-20 to
13-25, 13-28, 13-29, 13-32
Pipe-wall thickness, 15. I 1
Pipeline, gas, 36-2
Pipeline metering systems, 17-4
Pipeline run statements, 41-9
Pipeline trunk lines, 16-2
Pipeline valve, 1 I-l I
Pipeline valve switches, 16-3
Piper diagram, 24-19
Piping,
design considerations, 15-13
drawings, 15-31
on offshore platforms, 15-l 1
pressure breaks, 15-13
pressure rating classes, 15-13
SUBJECT INDEX 53
pressure/temperature ratings, 15-13
system design, IS-1 to 15-14
system materials, 15-7 to 15-l 1
Pisolith. 29-9
Plsolitic limestone, 29-8
32-13,
Piston-and-valve assembly, 6-5 I
32-14, 33-l
Flston BHP element, 30-I
to 33-4
Piston effect of tubing string, 4-9, 4-10
Piston gauge, 33-6
Piston-like displacement, 447, 44-9
Plain-end,
Piston pneumatic/hydraulic pump ratio, 3
Piston/stem area ratio, 3-21
liner casing,
Piston-type actuators. 3-2 1
2-32
Pitcher niaule. 18-14. 18-15
Pitman siie members, 10-3, 10-4, IO-12
Pitot tube. 13-2. 13-37, 13-45 to 13-48,
Pneumatic actuators, 3-2 I, 3-27, 18-28
Pneumatic control valves. 16-3
Pneumatic controls, 13-49
Pneumatic/hydraulic relay, 3-33
Pneumatic pilots, 13-56
Pneumatic/pneumatic relay, 3-33
Pneumatic pressure control, 12-39
Pneumatic surface safety valve, 3-20, 3-21
Poettmann and Carpenter correlation, 34-37
Poettmanns method, 34-9
-33 Point bars, 36-6
Poiseuilles equation, 26-10, 26-15. 26.19,
26-20
Poisonous-gas sensors, 18-47
Poisson distribution, 50-5
Poissons ratio, 51-2, 51-4, 51-13, 51-37,
51-43, 5144, 51-50
Polar packs, 18-39
Pore-size distribuhon, 26-19, 26-24. 4427.
47-5. 47-10, 51-30, 54-6
Pore structure of rock, 26-10
Pore-throat-blocking effect, 47-9
Pore throats, 47-21
Pore volume (PV), 26-l to 26-7. 26-22
Pore-volume compressibility, 26-7 to 26-10,
47-37, 47-38
Pore volume, laboratory measurement, 26-5
to 26-7
by electromagnetic-propagation tool,
Porosimeter, 26-4 to 26-6
49-36
Porosity,
apparent water filled, 49-34
balance check, 49-30
by density log, 49-26, 49-34, 49-36,
49-38
line pipe, 2-46, 2-G to 2-53
Plait point, 23-5, 23-8 to 23-10, 47-l 1 to
47-13
Planar view. directional data presentation,
53-6
Planning and preparations offshore, 18-3 to
18-5
Plant costs, 39-l
Plant products, 39-9 to 39-l 1, 39-23
Plastic blanket, 9-14
Plastic-coated sand grains, 55-8
Plastic-collapse pressure equation, 2-54,
2-55
Plastic lining for steel pipe, 15-10
Plastic-packed secondary seal, 3-6
Plastic-packed-type seal, 3-9
Plastic pipe, 15-10
Plasticity, 52-20
Plate coalescers, 15-23 to 15-26
Plate-count method, 44-44
Plate heat exchanger, 19-23
Plate-type heating elements, 19-21
Platform deck layout for process facilities,
18-30
Platform jacket, 18-28, 18-34
Platform loads. 18-44
Platform production.
crude oil disposal, 18-29, 18-30
gas disposal, 18-30
process equipment, 18-28
water disposal, 18-30
well completion, 18-28
well servicing, 18-28, 18-29
well workovers, 18-28, 18-29
Platform rigs, 36-2
Platform vibration, 12-23
Platform well bay, 18-29
Platinum-iridium standard, l-70
Plot of buildup with afterflow, 30-10
Plot of water FVF vs. pressure, 24-15
Plow steel, 304
Plug and abandonment of well, 18-20
Plug valves, 3-l 1 to 3-14
Plugback operations, 33-2 1
Plugging, 5-16, 5-23, 5-53, 14-2, 19-15,
19-30, 24-2, 39-25, 39-26, 44-36, 44-42
to 44-45, 56-6
Plugging agents, 29-5, 39-26
Plugging materials, 54-10
Plunger application for intermittent gas lift,
5-52, 5-53
Plunger-arrival detector, 5-52
Plunger clearances, 8-6
Plunger/engine (P/E) area ratio, 6-l 1 to
6-13. 6-15, 6-16, 6-18, 6-27, 6-28, 6-30
Plunger lift, 5-38
Plunger overtravel, IO-25
Plunger pumps, 6-50, 6-52 to 6-55, 8-5
Plunger stroke, 9-2
Polar blots, 53-12
Polished-joint tubing hanger, 3-9
Polished rod, 8-10, 9-1, 10-1, 10-2, 10-5,
10-7
Polished-rod coupling, 9-4
Polished-rod horsepower, 9-2, 9-3, IO-18
Polished-rod velocities and acceleration,
1 o-7
Polished-sealbore packer. 4-3, 4-8. 4-9
Polyacrylamide (PAM), 47-3
Polyacrylamide polymer, 44-39, 44-40
Polyamine derivatives, 19-10
Polyemulsions, 55-8
Pol;ethylene. 1 l-9, 24-4, 24-5
Polyethylene bedding jacket, 18-49
Polyethylene line pipe, 15-10
Polyethyleneoxide (PEO), 47-3
Polyglycol esters, 19-10
Polymer-driven flood, 47-2 1
Polymer-flood statistics, 47-6
Polymer flooding, 19-28, 47-l to 47-6,
47-10, 47-18. 47-22, 48-7
Polymer gels. 55-5
Polymer properties,
biological degradation, 47-5
chemical degradation, 47-5
mechanical degradation, 47-5, 47-6
non-Newtonian effects, 47-4, 47-5
permeability reduction, 47-5
polymer retention, 47-5
viscosity relations, 47-4, 47-5
Polymer retention, 47-5
Polymer-solution viscosity, 47-4
Polymerisurfactant incompatibility, 47-13
Polymer types, 47-3
Polymer waterflooding, 48-5
Polymerized oils, 19-10
Polyphosphates, 44-15
Polypropylene, I l-9. 12-12
Polysaccharides, 47-3
Polyvinyl alcohol (PA), 47-3
Polyvinyl chloride, 1 l-9
Polvvinvl chloride (PVC) &tic, 18-46
Pony rids, 9-l. 9-3, 9-11
Pooling clause, 57-5, 57-6
Poorly consolidated rocks, 51-33, 51-34
Pop-off safety release valve, 5-53
POP-Off valve, 13-59
Porcelain diaphragm, 26-24
Pore aspect ratio, 51-9, 51-12
Pore compressibility, 26-7
Pore configuration, 26-2
Pore-fluid compressibility, 5 l-4
Pore-fluid pressure, 28-4, 51-4, 51-5, 51-7,
51-8, 51-25. 51-30, 51-39, 51-44
Pore geometry, 28-2, 54-6
Pore liquid saturation, 27-9
Pore pressure, 52-18, 52-21, 52-22, 52-24
to 52-27
by neutron log, 49-26, 49-34, 49-36.
49-38
by sonic log. 49-26, 49-27
compaction and compressibility of porous
rock, 26-7 to 26-10
compressibility, 26-8
definition of, 27-l
distribution, carbnate reservoirs, 36-6
effect on formation factor. 49-4
estimating, 51-5, 51-33
evaluation from acoustic log. 5 l-30
factor to consider in waterflooding, 44-2,
44-3
index, 49-38
introduction, 26-1, 26-2
investigation, 49-26
laboratory measurement of, 26-3 to 26-7
logs, 49-11, 51-29, 51-31, 51-32
measurement comparisons, 26-6
methods of determining, 26-4, 26-5
of consolidated rocks, 51-29 to 51-32
of poorly consohdated rocks, 51-33,
51-34
of secondary porosity. 51-31. 51-33
of shaly sand, 51-34, S 1-35
profile, 36-4
Rocky Mountain method, 49-31, 49-32
velocity relationship, 5 l-5
Porosity determination,
bulk-density measurement, 50-l. 50-2
gamma-gamma density devices, 50-26 to
50-28
neutron-porosity devices, 50-28 to 50-33
Porous-diaphragm method of capillary-
pressure measurement, 26-24, 26-2.5
Porous diaphragm or membrane, 26-24
Porous reservoir models, 44-17
Port configurations, gas-lift valve, 5-15
Port size, selection for gas-lift valves, 5-28
Port-to-bellows area ratio, 5-15
Portable well testers, 32-6 to 32-8
Portland cement, 46- 19
Portugal, 58-20
Position-sensing valve switch, 16-3
Positive-death indicator, 56-5
Positive-displacement meter, 12-6, 12-18.
12-19, 16-2, 16-5 to 16-7, 16.12. 17-4
to 17-6, 32-6 to 32-8, 32-10 to 32-12
Positive-displacement meter, measurement of
petroleum liquid hydrocarbons by, 17-4
Positive-displacement-meter prover tanks,
tables, 17-6
Positive-displacement-meter-type LACT
system, 16-13
Positive-displacement pumps. 6- 1, 6-34,
6-49 to 6-51, 6-62, 13-54, 15-14, 15-17,
28-4, 44-47
Positive-seal double-bag model, 7-11
Positive-seal protector. 7-4, 7-5
54
Positive-volume dump meters, 16-13
Positive-volume meters, 16-2, 16-5, 16-7
Possible reserves, definition, 404
Posted barges, 18-2
Potassium, 24-5, 24-9. 24-18. 24-20. 50-2
to 50-4, 50-16, 50-18, 50-24 to 50-27,
50-34, 50-35
Potassium chloride for control of clay
swelling, 46-20
Potential distribution, 39-20
Potential energy, 6-1, 6-34, 13-1, 13-2,
34-28, 34-29, 34-36
Potential function, 26-l I
Potential gradient, 26-I I, 39-2 1
Potential of a process, 13-50
Potential tests, 12-17, 41-19
Potential tests of oil wells, 32-l to 32-16
Potentiometric model, 39.21, 39-22, 44.17,
4419, 4434
Potentiometric model studies, 39-20, 39-21
Potentiometric transducer, 30-5, 30-6
Poth A sand, 46-29 to 46-32
Pothead, 7-5
Pounding, 6-33, 6-34
Pour point, 21-7, 21-9, 21-10, 46-27,
46-3 1, 46-33
Power cable, ESP, 7-5, 7-6
Power control manifold module, 6-54, 6-56
Power, definition of, 6-14
Power-distribution system, offshore, 18-45
Power equivalents, table, 1-78
Power-factor correction, lo-35
Power factor of motor, 10-25, IO-33 to
IO-35
Power fluctuations, ESP, 7-14
Power fluid, 6-l to 6-5, 6-9, 6-10, 6-20,
6-21, 6-24 to 6-30, 6-34, 6-37, 6-38,
6-41, 6-42, 648, 6-51, 6-60, 6-62
Power-fluid discharge-pressure friction, 6-27
Power-fluid flow thyough nozzle, 6-42
Power-fluid friction, 6-30
Power-fluid friction pressure, 6-27
Power-fluid gradient, 6-25, 6-26, 6-29, 6-30
Power-fluid pressure, 6-7, 6-9, 6-16 to
6-18, 6-25, 6-27, 6-28, 641 to 6-43
Power-fluid systems, 6-54 to 6-57
Power-fluid tubing friction pressure, 6-42
Power-fluid tubing string, 6-2, 6-3
Power-law coefficient, 47-4, 47-9
Power-law model, 47-4, 55-5
Power method for parameter determination,
48-16
Power-oil emulsion, 6-31
Power-oil plunger pumps, 6-33
Power-oil tank and accessories,
closed system, 6-59
open system, 6-57 to 6-59
Power stroke. IO-14
Power supplies, uninterruptable (UPSs),
1845
Power triangle of motor, lo-33 to IO-35
Power, unit and detinmon, 58-11, 58-23,
58-24, 58-32
Powers of numbers, three-halves table,
l-19, l-20
Powers of numbers, two-thirds table, I-20
Powers of SI units, 58-12
Pozzolan, 46-19
Precision of gas meter, 13-l
Precision vs. accuracy, 58-8, 58-9
Predicted reservoir performance. 42-5. 42-6
Pre-exponential factor, 46-12
Preferred metric unit, 58-21, 58-26 to 58-38
Preflush,
hydrochloric acid, 56-5
micellar/polymer flooding, 47-10, 47-15
systems, 56-3
PETROLEUM ENGINEERING HANDBOOK
PREOS. 25-R. 25-9, Z-16
Preparation of well for testing, 33-6
Present value or present worth, 41-3 to
41-8, 41-12, 41-16, 41-17, 41-23.
41-25, 41-27, 41-29, 42-6
Present-worth factor, 41-25
Present worth of an annuity, table, l-66
Pressure and force m static plunger and
cylinder assembly. 6-18
Pressure, average drainage-region, 35-19,
35-20
Pressure-gradient traverse, 5-25
Pressure-hydrometer test method, 17-J
Pressure hysteresis, 48-10
Pressure-loaded balanced diaphragm valve,
13-56
Pressure-balanced valves, 13-55
Pressure-base factor, 13-3, 13-12
Pressure behavior, constant rate in closed
reservoir, 35-2, 35-3
Pressure bombs, 304
Pressure-buildup analysis, 39-18, 39-19
Pressure-buildup behavior, 30-14
Pressure-buildup data, 6-48
Pressure-buildup tests, 42-3, 424, 48-8
Pressure changes in wellbore, calculations
including, 46-6
Pressure log, 52-1, 52-26
Pressure maintenance. 23-1, 40.4, 40.14.
43-11 to 43-16, 48-2, 48-4
Pressure-maintenance operations, 18-44,
34-28, 43-l to 43-3. 43-8
Pressure maintenance or cycling of GC
reservoirs.
choosing between, 39-26
combination recovery procedures, 39-24
reservoir cycling, gas injection, 39-16 to
39-24
water drive and water inJection, 39-15,
39-16
Pressure-composition phase diagram, 23-2,
23-3, 23-6, 23-8, 23-9
Pressure control for high-pressure well,
13-56
Pressure controls, separators, 12-39
Pressure conversions. 58-7, 58-28. 58.29
Pressure correction for gas viscosities, 20-9
Pressure decline, rapid, 37-1, 37-2
Pressure dependence,
of compressional- and shear-wave
attenuation, 51-6
of compressional- and shear-wave
velocities, 51-5
of porosity, 5 l-6
Pressure-multiplier pump, 55-9
Pressure-operated gas-lift valve, 5-24
Pressure, optimum of separator, 12-4
Pressure/permeability data, 44-3
Pressure prlot, 13-56
Pressure/production history, 37-3, 37-6
Pressure profiles, 4-6, 35-4
Pressure pulses, 53-l
Pressure radius, 4433
Pressure range, GC reservoirs, 39-2
Pressure rating classes of fittings, 15-13
Pressure ratings for steel pipe, 15-l 1
Pressure ratio, 6-36, 6-37, 6-45
Pressure recorders, 6-48
Pressure-recording charts, two-pen, 5-18,
5-23, 5-39, 5-41
Pressure depletion, 26-21, 39-7 to 39.16,
39-23, 39-24, 39-26, 44-l
Pressure-depletion behavior, 39-4
Pressure-depletion operation of GC
reservoir,
hydrocarbon/liquid-condensation effect,
39-13
prediction with laboratory-derived data
and hydrocarbon analysis, 39-10, 39-l 1
prediction with vapor/liquid equilibrium
calculation and correlation, 39-l 1 to
39-13
Pressure-reducing regulator, 5-13. 12-39
Pressure-reducing valve, 13-55
Pressure reduction in gas analysis, 52-17
Pressure-reduction regulation, 13.54
Pressure regulators, 13-54
Pressure relationships used to estimate
producing BHP, 6-28
Pressure relief of storage tanks, 1 l-7
Pressure-relief valve, 6-5 1, 1 l-8, 1 l-9,
12-39, 19-28
pressure drawdown at wells, effect on
productivity and recovery, 39-13
relative merits of measured vs. calculated
behavior, 39-13, 39-15
Pressure-depth diagram, 5-21
Pressure distribution, 35-6, 4417, 44-30
Pressure drawdown, 6-48, 34-31, 34-34,
35-6, 37-2, 37-19 to 37-21, 48-10
Pressure drop, across sand-tilled
perforations, 564
in flowing gas column, 34-9
in gas lines, 15-5, 15-7
in liquid lines, 15-2, 15-3
in tubing, 6-70, 6-71
Pressure, effect on acid-reaction rate, 544,
54-5
effect on gas-saturated crude oils, 22-16
effect on tubing string. 4-9
Pressure equivalents, table, l-77
Pressure evaluation, 52-26 to 52-28
Pressure filters, 4447
Pressure for hydrate formation, 25-8
Pressure, force and flow in dynamic plunger
and cylinder assembly, 6-18
Pressure function, 34-35, 37-8
Pressure gauges, 1242
Pressure gradient, 2-39, 34-29, 38-13,
39-21, 44-3, 44-6, 44-15
Pressure-gradient curves, 34-36
Pressure ridges, 18-39
Pressure-sensing instrument (PSI), 7-7, 7-8
Pressure shock loads, 12-42
Pressure, SI unit for, 58-5, 58.11, 58-23 to
58-25, 58-28, 58-29
Pressure storage of products, 1 I - I2
Pressure, surface closing, gas-lift valves,
5-44 to 5-46
Pressure surveys, 5-2
Pressure switches, 16-4
Pressure/temperature diagram, 14-2
Pressure/temperature phase diagram, 23-6
Pressure/temperature rating of steel, 3-38
Pressure-transducer technology, 30-6 to 30-E
Pressure transducers, 46-21
Pressure-transient behavior, 354
Pressure-transient tests, 5-3
Pressure transition zone, 52-2 I
Pressure traverses, 34-36, 34-41 to 34-44,
41-41 to 41-44
cell, 39-13
Pressure/vacuum relieving system, 11-13
Pressure/vacuum valves, 1 l-8, 11-9
Pressure/volume (PV), compressibility,
51-49
diagram for pure components, 20-2
equilibrium cell, 204
method for waterflood water
requirements, 44-41
relation, 20-2, 20-6, 39-7
Pressure-volume-temperature (PVT),
analysis, 22-1, 22-5, 22-10, 22-13, 40-21
SUBJECT INDEX 55
data, 7-9, 37-3, 37-22, 40-6
properties, 44-37, 48-2, 48-13
Pressure waves, 51-2
Pressures and forces in reciprocating
pumps. 6-10, 6-14 to 6-16
Pressures and losses.
in closed power-fluid installation, 6-26
in open power-fluid installation, 6-25
Pressures, forces and flows m hydraulic
transformer, 6- 19
Pressures in downhole pumps. 6-16 to 6-19
Pressurized ball joints. 18-12, 18-13
Preventton of emulsions, 19-5
Primary cementing, 56-4
Primary depletion, 37. I, 42-2
Primary drainage, 28-12
Prtmary electric power, 1X-44, I X-45
Prrmary electrical system, IO-29
Primary functions of 011 and gas separators,
removal of gas from oil, 12-3
removal of oil from gas, 12-3
separation of water from oil, 12-3, 12-4
Primary oil recovery, 24-3, 40-33
Primary performance, injection operations,
42-3. 42-4
Primary-performance predictions, volatile oil
reservoirs, 37-23
Primary porosity, 26-l, 29-3. 36-6
Primary production. 41-12
Primary recovery. 42-l. 45-9
Primary-recovery methods and operations.
44-1. 44-2, 445, 44-36
Primary separation m separator, 12-19,
12-20
Primary separator gas, 39-6, 39-9. 39-10.
39. I4
Primary stratigraphic traps, 29-4, 29-5
Primary term. habendum clause, 57-4. 57-5
Primary waves. 5 l-2
Prime movers for pumping units,
electric motors, IO-19 to IO-37
internal-combustion engines, IO-14 to
IO-19
Principal amounting to a given sum, table,
l-64. l-65
Principle of additive volume, 20-l I
Principle of corresponding states, 20-4,
20-5. 20-9. 20-13
Principle of flux-leakage tool, 53-22, 53-23
Principle of operation. reciprocating pumps.
6-8 to 6-32
Principle of superposttion, 38-l to 38-3
Principles of regulation control.
derivative response, 13-52. 13-53
nomenclature of process controls, 13-49,
13-50
process characteristics, 13-50
proportional control, 13-5 I, 13-52
reset, 13-52
Principles of TVD. TST, and TVT plots.
53-15, 53-16
Prism diagram, 47-12, 47-13
Probabrhty theory, 26-28
Probable error. factors for computing, table,
l-61
Probable reserves, 40-4
Problem examples: see Example problems
Problems.
common to steamfloods and firefloods,
46-2 I. 46-22
plaguing tirefloods only, 46-22
plaguing steamfloods only, 46-22
Problems, special in or1 and gas separators,
corrosion, 12-S
paraffin, 12-7. 12-8
sand. silt, mud, salt. etc. 12-8
separating foaming crude oil, 12-6, 12-7
Process characteristics, 13-50 to 13-53
Process control computer. 16-10
Process equipment and facilities offshore,
18-28. 18-30, 18-32, 18-42
Process flow for expansion process. 14-8
Process flow sheets, 15-31
Process model, 28-3
Process selection, 15-30 to 15-32
Processing plant, 11-13
Procurement, an engineering effort, 15-31
Pro-Dip log and wellsite analysis, 49-37
Produced-fluid gradient, 6-25, 6-26, 6-29,
6-44
Produced-product prices. 41. I I
Produced water, 12-3. 24-5
Producer BHP, steamfloods, 46-17
Producibdity of well, 39-5, 39-6
Producing efticrency, 30-15
Producing gas/oil ratio (GOR), 6-27, 37-l
to 37-3, 37-5, 37-7. 37-9 to 37-14,
37-22. 37-23, 37-26, 39-2
Producing properties. check list of data
required for oil and gas, 41-8, 41-9
Producing wells,
gas, 34-3 to 34-27
gas-condensate, 34-27, 34-28
gas/water flow, 34-27
Product thread form, extreme-line casing
joint, 2-64, 2-71. 2-72
Production casing string, 3-S
Production data, ESP. 7-9
Production decline, 41-9 to 41-l 1
Production decline curves, constant-
percentage, 40-28 to 40-32
decline tables for constant-percentage
decline, 40-30 to 40-32
economic limit. 40-27
general principles, 40-26, 40-27
harmonic, 40-29, 4 L 10
hyperbolic, 40-28
loss-ratio method. 40-32
nominal and effective decline, 40-27
relatronship between effective and nominal
decline. 40-29
reserves and decline relationship, 40-32
straightening curves, 40-3 I
to evaluate pilot flood performance, 44-39
types of, 40-28. 40-29
types of plots. 40-3 1
Production discharge friction pressure, 6-27
Production equipment,
tank battery, I l-9 to 1 l-l I
tank grades, I l-l 1
Production fluid gradient, 5-40
Production history. 41-9
Production loans, 44-5
Productton logging, 53-17
Production mechanisms, 46-4
Production packers,
classification and objectives, 4-l
combination tubing/packer systems, 4-l I
considerations for packer selection, 4-4 to
4-6
in production packing, 56-8, 56-9
referencea, 4-I 1
tubmg/packer forces on intermediate
packers. 4-I 1
tubing/packer systems, 4-6 to 4-9
tubing response characteristics, 4-8 to
4-l 1
tubing-to-packer connections. 4-1
utilzation and constraints, 4-I to 4-3
Production payments. 41-1, 41-2, 41-t.
41-9. 41-15. 57-7
Production-pressure effect. 5-18, 5-30
Production-pressure factors, 5-14, 5- I7 to
5-22. 5-24. 5-26. 5-27. 5-32. 5-33,
S-35, S-39, S-40. 5-42. 5-44, 5-48, 5-54
Production-pressure-operated gas-lift valve.
5-13, 5-16, 5-17. 5-21. 5-32, 5-33. 5-35
to 5-37, 540, 5-54
Production profile, 40-l
Production-rate allowables. 32-1, 43-2,
43-10
Production-rate and time calculations,
solution-gas-drive.
introduction, 37-17
rates based on IPR, 37-19 to 37-21
rates based on PI, 37-19
time required for oil production, 37-21.
37-22
Production rate of gas wells, 33-20
Production rate variation (superposition),
35-8, 35-9
Production response from high-pH flood,
47-22
Production safety controls, 16-4
Production separator, 12-17
Production string, 3-39
Production structures offshore,
artificial islands, 18-40, 18-41
gravity type, 18-41, 18-42
piled, 18-42
Production taxes, 41-l. 41-3, 41-4, 41-12
Production tests, 18-34
Production-transfer-pressure traverse, 5-36
Productive stringer. 36-7
Productivity, decline or loss, 39-25
Productivity, effect of damage on, 54-8,
54-9
Productivity, from drawdown tests. 4442
Productivity index (PI), 5-38, 5.39, 5.45,
641, 6-46, 30-10 to 30-13, 30-15, 32-2
to 32-6, 34-30 to 34-36, 35-6. 35-10.
37-19 to 37-21, 40-27, 42-4. 46.10.
58-14, 58-38
Productivity index for different GORs, 32-5
Productivity-index/permeability correlation,
32-4
Productivity ratio, 30-13. 30-14
Productivity test, 24. I, 39-25
Products of crude oils, temperature
correction for, 17-5, 17-6
Profile calipers, 53-17. 53-18
Profile of a gravity system, 15-15
Profiles, injection-gas volumetric
throughput. 5-20
Profit margin. 41-6
Profit margin and cost relatronship, 36-2
Profit-to-investment ratio, 41-7
Profitability, 39-17
Programmable calculators, 6-34, 6-38, 6-4 I,
6-46, 20-7, 20-9
Programmable controllers, 16-4, 18-47
Programmable logic controllers, 19-29
Programmer for oilfield motors, lo-27
Project control, 15-32, 15-33
Project definition, 15-30
Project design, thermal recovery.
features common to both steamfloods and
firefloods,
completion intervals, 46. I7
pattern selection, 46-17
producer BHP, 46-17
features pertaining to firefloods only.
air injection rate, 46-19
dry vs. wet gas combustion, 46-18
WAR, 46-19
features pertaining to steamfloods only,
steam injection rate. 46-18
steam quality, 46- 18
Project execution format. 15-31, 15-32
Project inspection and expediting, 15-31
Project management, 15-30 to 15-32
Projected oil recovery. 42-2. 42-3
56 PETROLEUM ENGINEERING HANDBOOK
Prolog wellsite analysis, 49-37
Pronunciation of metrjc terms, 58-13
Propagarion time, 49-32, 49-34
Propane as IC engine fuel, IO-16
Propane as refrigerant, 14-9
Propane compressibiliiy table, 17-7
Propane critical pressure, 25-3
Propane/water system. 25-2. 25-3. 25-17,
25-25. 25-21
Properties and behavior of gas condensate
tluids,
composition ranges, 39-2
gas/liquid ratios, 39-4
introduction, 39-l
liquid contents, 39-4
phase and equilibrium behavior, 39-2 to
39-4
pressure and temperarure ranges. 39-2
properties of separated phases, 39-4
viscosities, 39-4
Properties of construction materials for
pressure vessels, 12-41
Properties of crude oils and gas
condensates, 39-2
Properties of produced waters,
analysis methods for oilfield water, 24-5
chemical properties of oilfield waters,
24-5 to 24-13
morgamc constituents, 24-9, 24-12
interpretation of chemical analyses, 24-18,
24-19
introduction and history, 24-I to 24-3
nomenclature, 24-20
occurrence. origin. and evolution of
oilfield waters, 24-19. 24-20
physical properties of oilfield waters.
24-12 to 24-18
recovery of minerals from brmes. 24-20.
24-2 1
references, 24-21, 24-22
sampling, 24-3 to 24-5
Properties of separated phases, CC streams,
39-4
Properties of ternary diagrams, 23-4
Proportional action of controller, 13-52
Proportional control, 13-49, 13-51 to 13-53,
13-56
Proportional counter, 50- 14
Proportional pilot for pneumatic service,
13-56
Proportional/reset controller, 13-52
Proportionality constant for rock, 26. II
Proppant,
density, 55-8
grain roundness factor. 55-8
grain size, 55-8
grain-size distribution. 55-8
grain strength, 55-8
permeability. 55-8
placement, 55-8
quality, 55-8
transport. 55-7, 55-9
Proppant-transport properties, 55-5
Propping agent,
amounts used. 55-l
definition of, 55-2
grain size of, 55-8
grain strength of, 55-8
permeability, 55-4
placement of, 55-8
Propylene. 14-9
Propylene compreasdxlity table, 17-7
Propylene/water system. 25-25
Propyneiwater system, 25-25
Proration, 41-3, 41-10, 41-11
Proration records, 13-3
Protected~slope production island, 1X-40
Protectmn equipment for oilfield motors.
air circuit breaker, lo-28
control fuses, IO-29
lightning arresters, IO-28
motor fuses, IO-28
motor-winding temperature sensors, 10-29
over-temperature lockout circuit, 10.29
phase loss relay. 10-28, IO-29
pumping-unit vibratmn switch, lo-29
thermal-overload relay, lo-29
under-voltage relay, lo-28
Protective coatings, 9-10
Proved developed reserves, definitmn, 40-3
Proved reserves definitmns, 40-2
Proved undeveloped reserves, definition,
40-3
Proving systems, 17-4
Proximity log (PL), 49-22 to 49-25, 49-27
Prudhoe Bay field. Alaska. 18-3, 18-39,
18-41, 48-17
Pseudo-Rayleigh waves. 51-12 to 51-14.
51-25. 51-27
Pseudobinary diagram, 23-9
Pseudocomponenta, 47-I 1
Pseudocritical calculations,
from gas analysis, 40-21
from specific gravity, 40-22
Pseudocritical constants, corrected, 20-5
Pseudocritical density, 20-10, 20-15
Pseudocritical pressure, 20-5. 20-7, 20-10,
20-16. 22-12, 40-21, 40-22
Pseudocritical properties, 22-2 I, 34-4
PseudocrItical properties of C, + , 20. IO
Pseudocritical temperature, 20-S, 20-7,
20-10. 2I)-16. 22-12, 40-20, 40-21
Pbeudocrltical-temperature gradient factor.
20-7
Pseudocriticals. for heptanes and heavier,
21-17
of gases and condensate well fluids, 21-19
Pseudogeometrical factors, 49-22, 49-25
Pseudoliquid density, 22.2 to 22.4
Pseudophase theory, 47-13
Pseudoreduced compressibility, 20-I 1,
20-12, 22-12, 22-13
Pseudoreduced pressure, 20.5. 20-9, 20-l 1,
20-12. 22-13, 22-21. 40-21
Pseudoreduced properties, 22-21, 34-5 to
34-7, 34-10 to 34-22. 34-24
Pseudoreduced temperature, 20.5. 20.9,
20-11. 20-12, 22-13, 40-21
Pseudorelative-permeability curves, 37-4,
48-8 to 48-10, 48-12
Pseudorelative-permeability data, 37-4, 37.5
Pseudostatic SP. 49-9, 49-10. 49-28
Pseudosteady state, 35-2, 35-3, 35-7, 35-8,
35-10. 35-12 to 35-14. 35-16
Pseudosteady-state aquifer productivity
index. 38-8
Pseudosteady-state behawor. 35-6 to 35.8,
35. I5
Pseudosteady-state flow. 5.25. 32.3 to 32-6,
33-5 to 33-7, 34-30, 34-31, 37-19,
37-2 I
Pseudoternary diagram, 45-2. 45-3, 45-5
Public Law 93-380, Aug. 21, 1974, 1-69
Public Law 94-168. Dec. 23, 1975, 1-69
Puffer, 52-6
Pull bar. 7-12
Pull curves. casing-hanger. 3-6, 3-7
Pull-m procedure, IS-37
Pull sheet, 53-17
Pull tube, 8-4
Pulling and running sucker rods, 9-10
Pullout strength of line-pipe joint, 2-62
Pulsation dampers, 6-50. 6-51, 6-61. 15-17
Pulse testing or testa, 36-7. 36-8, 48-8
Pulsed-data transmission systems, 17-4
Pulsed nuclear magnetic resonance analyzer,
52-26
Pulsed-neutron logging. 50-36
Pulsed-neutron logging devices, 50-2 1,
50-22
hltrusion process, 9- 12
Pump discharge pressure, 6-17, 6-25 to
6-21, 6-28, 6-41 to 6-43, 6-47, 6.49,
6-5 1
Pump displacement, 6-I 1 10 6-13, 6-15,
6-16. 6-21, 6-24. 6-29, 6-30, 6-52 to
6-55, 8-5. 8-9, 9-2
Pump drivers, 15-15, 15-16
pump efficiency, 6-24. 6-3 1, 6-37, 6-38,
6-49, 46-2 1
Pump-efficiency equations, 6-68
Pump-end volumetric efficiency, 6-2 I, 6-22
Pump intake, 7-4, 7-5
Pump-out method of solution mming, I l-13,
II-14
Pump performance curve, 7-10, 7-l 1
Pump piping and installation, 15.17
Pump-protector motor unit, 7-2
Pump selection, 8-2 to 8-4
Pump-selection table. 7-10
Pump speed, maximum rated, 6-I I to 6.13.
6-15, 6-16, 6-21
Pump submergence. 6-25. 6-26
Pump suction gradient, 6-42, 6-44
Pump-suction (intake) pressure, 6-4, 6-17.
6-25, 6-26, 6-38, 6-43. 6-47
Pump terminology, 8-2. 8-6 to 8-9
Pumpdown pressure recorders, 6-34
Pumped-off well, definition of, 10-27
Pumping equipment for fracturing, 55-9
Pumping speed factor. IO-6
Pumping speed, maximum practical. 9-4,
9-5
Pumping-unit bearings, IO-5
Pumping-unit design calculations, IO-8 to
10-l I
Pumping-unit geometry, 9-2. IO-2
Pumping-unit loading, IO-5
Pumping units, 10-I to IO-13
Pumpoff, 7-6. 7-10, 7-16
Pumpoff controls, lo-27
Pumpstroke counter, 52-I I
Pure Oil Co., 54. I
Purging offshore distribution system, IS-46
Pycnometer, 26-3
Pycnometer method, 52-19
Pyo&type thermocouple, 16-7
Pyramidal rule, 40-5
Pyrenees Mts., 46-27
Pyroanalyzers, 52-28
Pyrolysis. 52-l
Q
Quadruple point. 25-15
Quality control. 12-38
Quality factor. 5 l-4
Quality of foams, 47-8
Quality of separated fluids. 12-13, 12-15
Quality power oil, 6.55
Quantities (chemical, electrical, and
physical) in alphabetical order, 59.18 to
59-5 I
Quantity, definition. 58-9
Quartzose sediments. 29-7
Quaternary compounds. 44-45
Quaternary diagrams. 24-19
Quench water. 46-2 I, 46-22
Quick-cycle units, 14-10, 14.13
Quintaplex pump, 55-9
Quintiplex positive-displacement pump, 6-I.
6-49. 6-5 1
SUBJECT INDEX
57
R
Rabbiting, 56-3
Radial aquifers, 38-2 to 38-4, 38-8 to 38-19
Radial differential temperature log, 31-7
Radial-flow equation, 30-12
Radial-flow pumps, 15-15
Radial-flow system, 26-13 to 26-15
Radial frontal advance, 38-13
Radial geometry, definition, 38-l
Radial gridded simulator, 37-21
Radial pseudogeometrical factors, 49-20
Radians expressed in degrees, table, 1-43
Radiation, 46-4
Radiation detector. 50-14
Radiation heat-transfer coefficient, 46-5
Radiation log. 49-25
Radiation, units and conversions, 58-37
Radio frequency, 19-3 I
Radio-frequency preheater, 9-12
Radio triangulation systems, 18. I8
Radioactive capture, 50-9
Radioactive decay, 50-4, 50-6, 50-21
Radioactive isotopes, 50. I5
Radioactive rocks. 58-33
Radioactive tracers. 284, 46-2 I
Radioactivity logging and logs, 41-8, 5142
Radioactivity surveys, 49-l
Radiograph, of areal sweepout efficiency.
44-18
of welded pipe, 1241
Radioisotopes, 46-2 I
Radionuclide. 58-10
Radium. 50-4. 50-6, 50-15
Radius of circumscribed circle, equation,
I-36
Radius of curvature method of calculating
directional surveys, 53-5
Radius of inscribed circle. equation. l-36
Ram preventera. 18-l I, 18-12, 18-15
Rameys equation for wellbore heat
transmission, 46-5. 46-6
Rameys generalization of Marx-
Langenheim method, 46-8
Random flood pattern or network, 44-13,
44-14. 44-17
Randomized network model, 28-12
Range lengths. API casing and liner casing,
2-3
API tubing, 2-37
line pipe, 2-47
Rangeability of gas meter, 13-I. 13-45,
13-48
Rangely field. Colorado, 23-9. 23-10.
26-23, 48-6
Raoults law. 23-l 1
Rarefactions, 51-2
Rasching rings, 12-10
Rate/cumulative curve or relationship,
40-25. 40-27 to 40.29, 40.31, 40-32
Rate-dependent skin factor, 35-10
Rate of frontal advance, 39-17
Rate-of-penetration (ROP). 52-l I, 52-13.
52-18. 52-24. 52-25. 52-27 to 52-29
Rate-of-penetration log. 52-1
Rate of return (ROR), 41-6 to 41-8. 41-16
to 41-24, 442
Rate/pressure curves. 44-36
Rate/time curve or relationshlp, 40-27 to
40.29, 40.31, 40.32, 41-10
Ratio(s).
air/water, 46-33
compression, 6-10, 6-21, 8-9, 8-10.
10-15, 18-14, 39-24
conductance, 4434
damage. 30-13
equihbrium, 21-1 I, 21-16. 23-11, 25-5,
39-6, 39-9. 39-1 I to 39-13, 39-15
equilibrium vaporization, 37-23
gas-gravity/condensate-gas, 34-28
gas/oil, 5-25, 5-26. 6-24, 6-25, 6-29,
6-30, 6-38, 6-39, 6-44. 6-47, 12-35,
22.20, 3441 to 34-43, 34-47 to 34-44,
38-16, 39-l, 39-2. 40-33, 41-8, 4439,
58-38
injectivity/productivity, 46-17
liquid/gas, 12-35, 39-2, 39-5
methods. 49-28
net-pay/net-connected-pay, 36-17
net-profit/initial-investment, 41-22
net-profit/unreturned-investment balance,
41-22
of differential pressure to absolute
pressure, 13-8
of epithermal counting rates, 50-20, SO-29
of gas-cap/oil-zone volume, 37-5, 37-6,
37.13, 37-14
of net profit. constant, 41-20
of nozzle area to throat area, 6-34
of orifice to pipe diameter, 13-36
of pump displacement to engine
displacement, 6-18
oil/steam, 46-9. 46-15, 46-23
permeability. 37-14, 37-15
permeability/viscosity, 47-8
piston/engine (P/E), 6-l I to 6-13, 6-15,
6-16. 6-18. 6-27, 6-28, 6-30
piston pneumatic/hydraulic pump, 3-33
pore aspect. 51-9. 51-12
pressure. 6-36. 6-37. 6-45
producing gas/oil, 6-27, 37-l to 37-3,
37-5, 37-l. 37-9 to 37-14, 37-22, 37-23,
37-26, 39-2
productivity, 30-13, 30-14
profit-to-investment, 41-7
sand. 36-4
solubilizatlon, 47-13, 47-14, 47-20
stage compression, 39-24
stage pressure, 12-33
steam/oil. 46-8, 46-14, 46-15, 46-23,
46-24. 46-27
steam/tar. 46-27, 46-28
sulfur/oxide. 52-7
surface~gas~gravity/weKtluid~gravity,
21-17
tube amplitude, 51-47, 5148
velocity. 51-38
viscosity, 43-5, 43-6, 45-7, 45-l I
viscosity vs. pseudoreduced temperature,
20-9
viscous/gravity forces. 44-25
volumetric, 55-6
water/oil, 19-17, 24-20, 28-5, 34-41,
40-18 to 40.20, 447, 44-9. 441 I.
44-3 I, 44-32. 44-39. 46-33
water/oil mobility. 43-7. 448, 47-6
water/oil viscosity, 40-18, 44-10
Reaction kinetics, 48-2
Reaction-rate equation. 46-12
Reaction rate of acids, factors affecting,
acid concentration. 54-5
area/volume ratio, 54-5
corrosion inhibitors. 54-6
flow velocity, 54-5
formation composition, 54-6
pressure, 54-4
temperature. 54-4. 54-5
Reactive tluids. effect on permeability
measurements. 26-18. 26-19
Reactive power rating of transformers
(kVAR). 10-31, lo-33 to IO-35
Real-gas law, 20-4. 20-I I
Real-gas pseudopressure, 35-10
Real gases. 20-4
Real property, definition. 57-l
Receipt and delivery tickets, 17-7
Receiver of sonic meter, 13-49
Reciprocal gas formation volume factor,
40-22, 40-23, 40-33, 40-34
Reciprocal mobility ratio, 44-19. 4422,
44-23
Reciprocal of numbers. table, I-21 to 1-23
Reciprocated induction curve, 49-15
Reciprocating oilwell pumps, 8-l
Reciprocating piston positive-displacement
meter, 32-l I
Reciprocating pump,
displacement of downhole pumps, 6-2 1,
6-24
equipment selection and performance
calculations, 6-28
fluid friction and mechanical losses in
hydraulic pumps. 6-19 to 6-21
for waterfloods, 15.14. 15.15, 15.17,
15-18
gas/liquid ratio in vented systems, 6-27
in closed power-fluid systems. 6-4
in reverse-flow systems, 6-5
manufacturer speciticatlons, 6-l 1 to 6-13,
6-15, 6-16
multiphase flow and pump discharge
pressure, 6-27
pressure and force balance in downhole
pumps, 6-16 to 6-19
pressure and forces in, 6-10, 6-14 to 6-16
pressure relationships used to estimate
producing BHP, 6-28
principle of operation, 6-8 to 6-10
subsurface troubleshooting guide, 6-3 I
system pressures and losses in hydraulic
installations, 6-24 to 6-27
turbulence in, 19-5
worksheets and summary of equations,
6-29, 6-30
Recoil electron ejection, 50-12
Recombined separator samples, 39-5
Recommended practices before unloading,
5-53
Recompletion costs. 41-9, 4 I 12
Recompletions. 41-9, 44-7
Recorder for metering system, 13-36. 13-37
Recording acoustic data. methods of.
acoustic-array logging, 5 l-25 to 5 I-27
amplitude/time recording, 51-18
conventional acoustic logging, 5 I I5 to
51-18
intensity/time recordmg. 51. I8
introduction, 5 I I4
long-spaced acoustic logging, 5 I- I9 to
51-24
reflection, 51-27. 51-28
shear-wave logging, 5 l-24, 5 1-25
Recording ammeter, 7-14
Recording caliper logs, 53-16
Recoverable gas reserves, 40-24, 40-27
Recoverable gasoline content. 20-I I
Recoverable hydrocarbon reserves, 4 l-3
Recoverable hydrocarbons, 39-26
Recoverable oil, 40-27, 44-32, 4437. 44-38
Recovery by miscible displacement, 45-9.
45. IO
Recovery by pressure maintenance, 39-9
Recovery efficiency, 39-l I, 39-15. 42-5.
43-2, 43-6, 43-9. 44-3. 45-B. 45.12.
45-13, 46-14, 46-27. 47-16, 47-17
Recovery-efficiency factor, 40-16. 40-17
Recovery estimates. 40. I
Recovery factor, 40-l. 40-I 1. 40-19. 40-20.
40-23, 40-25 to 40-27
58 PETROLEUM ENGINEERING HANDBOOK
Recovery factor, average from correlation
of statistical data, 40-16, 40-17
Recovery factor vs. reserv~lr pressure,
37-14, 37-15
Recovery from gas reservoirs with water
drive, 40-26, 40-27
Recovery of LPG products, 45-12
Rectangular tanks, 1 l-2
Rectilinear flow of compressible fluids,
26-11
Red Sea, 24-19
RedalertTM motor controller, 7-6, 7-16
Redlich and Kwong equation, 20-7, 20-8,
23-12, 23-13
Redox potential (Eh), 24-4, 24-5, 24-9,
24-16, 24-17
Reduced properties, definition, 22-2 1
Reduced-state relationships, 22-2 1
Reduced vapor pressure, 20-13
Reducing agents, 54-7, 56-3
Reduction factor or ratio, 6-50, 49-9
Redundancy, subsea production facilities,
1848
Redwater D-3 pool, Alberta, Canada, 40-20
Redwater field, Alberta, Canada, 40-Z
Reel barges, 18-37, 1X-38
Re-entry systems, 18-14
References (see also General References),
acidizmg, 54-12
acoustic well logging, 51-50 to 5 l-52
automation of lease equipment. 16-16
bottomhole pressures, 30.16. 30-17
casing, tubing, and line pipe, 2-74
chemical floodmg, 47-24 to 47-26
crude-oil properties and condensate
properties and correlations, 2 i-20
development planning for oil wells,
36.10, 36-l 1
electric submersible pumps, 7-17
electrical logging, 49-41
estimation of oil and gas reservoirs,
40.37. 40-38
formation fracturmg. 55-10
gas-condensate reservoirs, 39-27. 39-28
gas-injection pressure maintenance in oil
reservoirs, 43-19
gas lift, 5-57
gas measurement and regulation, 13-59
gas properties and correlations, 20-18
hydraulic pumping, 6-72
lease-operated hydrocarbon-recovery
systems, 14-22
measuring, sampling and testing crude oil.
17-8
mixable displacement, 45. I3 to 4% 15
mud logging, 52-30
nuclear logging techniques, 50-38
offshore operations, 18-52
oil and gas separators. 12-43
oil storage, 1 I- 14
oil-system correlations, 22-21, 22-22
open flow of oil wells, 33-23
other well logs. 53-26
petroleum reservoir traps. 29-9
phase behavior of water-hydrocarbon
systems. 25-20 to 25-24
phase diagrams, 23-13
potential tests of 011 wells, 32-16
production packers, 4-l I
properties of produced water, 24-21 to
24-23
propertles of reservoir rocks, 26-33
pumping units and prime movers for
pumpmg units. IO-37
relative permeability, 28-15. 28-16
remedial cleanup and other stimulation
treatments. 56-9
reservoir simulation, 48-17 to 48-20
solution-gas-drive oil reservoirs, 37-27
subsurface sucker-rod pumps, S-10
sucker rods. 9-14
surface facilities for waterflooding and
saltwater disposal, 15-33, 15-34
temperature in wells, 31-7
thermal recovery, 46-43 to 46-45
typical core analysis of different
formations, 27-9
valuation of od and gas reserves, 41-37
water-drive oil reservoirs, 38-20
water-Injection pressure maintenance and
waterflood processes, 44-49 to 4452
well-performance equations, 35-21
wellbore hydraulics, 34-55, 34-56
wellhead equipment and flow-control
devices, 3-40
Reflected conical wave, 51-12
Reflection method, acoustic-wave-
propagation logging. 51-I I, 51-27.
51-28
Reflection peak, 49-13
Refrigerants, comparison of common types,
14-9
Refrigerants, properties of six types. 14-10
Refrigerated storage, 1 l-12
Refrigeration process, 14-9
Regeneration cycle, 14-10
Regeneration gas, 14-l 1 to 14-14, 14-20,
14-21
Regeneration-rate controller, 16-15
Regeneration system, 14-6, 14-7, 14-l 1,
14-12
Regression equations, 46- 15 to 46-17
Regular polygons, table, 1-36
Regulator types, 13-54 to 13-57
Regulatory agencies, 16-1, 16-2, 18-12,
19-28. 32-1, 32-2, 32-15. 33-5, 40-1,
40-3, 40-4. 41-3. 43-2
Regulatory agency form, 32-2
Regulatory codes. 18-44
Reid vapor pressure (RVP), 12-33, 14-13.
17-3, 21.1Y
Reiatel diagram, 24-19
Relationship,
between bending and curvature radius of
casing, 2-61
between total and external load of casing,
2-6 1
Relative atomic mass, 58-24
Relative bearing, dipmeter. 53-10
Relative density, correction of observed
value, 17-5, 17-6
definition of, l-80, 58-24
hydrometer test method, 17-5
of C,+ fraction. 20-10
of crude petroleum, 17-5
of liquid petroleum products, 17-5
of natural gas, 20- I3
Relative dielectric permittivity. 49-32
Relative molecular mass, 58-24
Relative oil volume, definition, 22-21
Relative permeability,
calculating cumulative gas production,
31-10
conclusions, 28-13, 28-14
critique of recent work. 28-10 to 28-12
curves, 28-6, 28-8 to 28-13
definition. 2X-l
effect of GOR or WOR changes, 30-l I
factor in waterflooding, 44-2
framework ideas, 28-2, 28-3
general references, 28-16
historxal background, 28-2
in determining mobdity in a layer, 44-9
in two-phase fluid flow, 55-8
introduction, 28-1, 28-2
measurement methodologies, 28-3 to 28-9
nomenclature, 28-14
of reservoir rock, 44-4, 44-5
ramifications needing attention, 28.12,
28-13
recent literature, 28-9, 28-10
references, 28-15, 28-16
Relative-permeability characteristics, 37-2,
37-19, 44-27
Relative-permeability curves, 28-6, 28-8 to
28-13, 34-31, 39-13, 44-6, 46-13,
46-34, 46-37
Relative-permeability data, 37-3, 37-4,
37-10, 39-9, 40-13, 43-11, 46-12
Relative-permeability-ratio data, 37-23
Relative-permeability ratios, 40-8 to 40.12,
40-14, 43-5 to 43-7. 43-12
Relative pipe roughness, 15-2. 15-3, 15-7
Relative-roughness factor, 34-2, 34-3,
34-38, 34-40
Relaxation pressure, 40-34
Relays for motors, IO-28
Reliability/maintainability, subsea production
facilities, 18-48
Reliability of gas meter, 13-l
Reliability of sensors. 3-3 1
Remedial operations, 4-9, 33-22
Remedial work, 41-8
Remedial workover operations, 39-24
Remote, closed-loop controls, 18-46
Remote control of subsea equipment, 18-48
Remote-control valves, 18-3
Remote-controlled SSV system. 3-34
Remote terminal umt (RTU), 16-4, 16-6,
16-8 to 16-l 1
Removal of acid gases, 14-21, 14-22
Removal of CO,, 14.17, 14.21, 14-22
Removal of gas from oil, 12-3
Removal of gas from oil in separators,
methods used,
agitation, 12.13
baffling, 12-13
centrifugal force, 12-13
chemicals, 12-13
heat, 12-13
settling, 12-13
Removal of HZS, 14.17, 14.21, 14-22
Removal of oil from gas, 12-3
Removal of oil from gas in separators,
methods used,
centrifugal force, 12-9, 12-10
coalescence, 12-10, 12-l I
density difference (gravity separation),
12-8
filtering, 12-l 1
flow-direction change, 12-9
flow-velocity change, 12-9
impingement, 12-9
Removal of water vapor, 14-17 to 14-21
Repeatability of BHP gauges, 30-4. 30-6
Repeatability of meters, 13-48
Reperforation, 56-l
Representative-element simulation, 48-7
Reproducibility, 13-50
Reserve SPE letter symbols, 59-2 to 59-51
Reserve SPE subscripts. 59-52 to 59-70
Reserved production payment, 4 I - 1
Reserves.
and decline relationship, 40-32
cost of developing. 42-1, 42-2
possible, 36-l. 40-4
probable, 36-1, 40-4
proved, 36-l. 40-2. 40-3
proved developed, 40-3
proved undeveloped, 40-3
ultimate depletion of. 42-2
SUBJECT INDEX 59
Reserves, oil and gas,
definition and nomenclature, 40-2, 40-3
estimating, 40-1, 40-2, 40-12
general references, 40-38
glossary of terms, 40-3, 40-4
nomenclature, 40-35 to 40-37
nonassociated-gas reservoirs. 40-2 1 to
40-26
oil- or gas-in-place computation, 40-5 to
40-S
oil reservoirs under gravity drainage,
40-14. 40-15
oil reservoirs with gas-cap drove, 40-13.
40- 14
oil reservoirs with water drive, 40-15 to
40-2 I
performance curves, 40-32
production-decline curves, 40-26 to 40-32
references, 40-37, 40-38
reservoir-volume computation, 40-4, 40-5
saturated depletton-type oil reservoirs,
40-8 to 40-12
undersaturated oil reservoirs without water
drive. 40-12
volatile 011 reservoirs, 40-13
Reservoir above bubblepoint pressure. 38-13
Reservoir anisotropy, 36-8
Reservoir below bubblepoint pressure, 38-13
Reservoir continuity, 36-6 to 36-8
Reservoir-controlled fluids, 55-2, 55-4
Reservoir coverage. 39. I8
Reservoir cycling efticlency, 39-17, 39-18,
39-22, 39-23
Reservoir cycling, gas injection,
calculation of cycling performance, 39-17
to 39-20
dry-gas injection, 39-16
inet--gas injection, 39-16. 39-17
noninjection-gas requirements, 39-23,
39-24
prediction of operations with mathematical
reservoir simulator, 39-22, 39-23
prediction of operations with model
studies. 39-20 to 39-22
ultimate recovery, 39-23
Reservoir cycling operations, efficiency
terms, 39-l 8
Reservoir, definition, 40-3
Reservoir deliverability, 5-23
Reservoir depth, 442, 443
Reservoir description, uncertain data, 48-12
Reservoir-dip effect, 4425
Reservoir discontinuities, 36-4, 36-5
Reservoir engineer, 22-10, 26-7, 36-10,
39-3, 39-24, 44-7, 4.431
Reservoir-fluid characteristics, 36-1, 36-2,
424, 42-5
Reservoir-fluid compositions, 37-24
Reservoir-fluid properties, 43-10
Reservoir-fluid recovery. 39-23
Reservoir-fluid samples, 424
Reservoir-fluid systems, phase diagrams,
23-6, 23-7
Reservoir-fracture effect, 4425. 4426
Reservoir geometry, 44-2
Reservoir-geometry factor, 38-13
Reservoir heterogeneities, 28-l 1, 30-14
Reservoir identification from mud log,
52-15
Reservoir interference, 38-3, 38-4
Reservoir limit tests, 32-5
Reservoir performance, calculating under
steam stimulation, 46-9
indicator pertaining to steamfloods, 46-15
indicators common to both steamfloods
and firefloods, 46-14, 46-15
Indicators pertaming to firefloods. 46-16
prediction of. 36-9, 36-10
Reservoir performance data, 37-7
Reservoir productivity guide, 52-16
Reservoir-rock characteristics, 36-l. 36-2.
42-4, 42-S
Reservoir-rock heterogeneity, 28-l 1
Reservoir-rock properties,
continuity of, factor in waterflooding,
44-2. 44-3
electrical conductivtty of fluid-saturated
rocks, 26-27 to 26-29
empirical correlatton of electrical
properties. 26-29 to 26-32
fluid saturations, 26-20 to 26-27
nomenclature, 26-32
permeabihty, 26-10 to 26-20
porosity, 26-l to 26-10
references, 26-33
Reservoir simulation, as extension of
material-balance technique, 36-7
general references, 48-20
htstory of, 48-1. 48-2
introduction, 48-1
mathematical models for, 43-17
models, 38.16, 40-34, 43-2, 43-17, 48-l
to 48-9
nomenclature, 48-17
purpose of. 48-6, 48-7
references, 48- 17 to 48-20
studies of gas-condensate reservoirs,
39-22
technology, 48-13 to 48-17
validity of results, 48-9 to 48-13
Reservoir-simulation models, 38-16, 40-34,
43-2, 43-17, 48-1 to 48-9
Reservoir simulators, 28-14, 36-7, 36-10,
46-11
Reservoir traps, 29-1 to 29-9
Reservoir volume, computation of, 40-4,
40-5
Reservoir-volume estimation, 38-9, 38-11
Reservoir with watersand, 46-26
Reservoirs amenable to thermal recovery,
46-3. 46-4
Reset. 13-50, 13-52, 13-53
Residual free-gas saturation, 40-8
Residual gas saturation, 36-3, 40-16, 44-25,
49-26
Residual hydrocarbon saturation. 446
Residual liquids, defimtion, 27-8
Residual oil after waterflooding,
effect of initial saturations, 44-6
fresh-core techniques, 44-5
influence of wettability. 44-6, 44-7
interpretation of conventional core-
analysis data, 445
relative-permeability curves, 446
restored-state technique, 44-5. 446
Residual oil, definition. 22-21
Residual oil saturation (ROS), 28-5, 28-8,
28-11, 373, 40-16, 40-17, 40-19, 42-2,
42-4, 442, 44-4 to 44-6, 449, 4411,
4432, 4446, 46-21, 46-37, 47-1, 47-9,
47-10, 47-17, 49-26, 49-27, 49-36
Residual-resistance factor, 35-5
Residual-viscosity function. 20-9
Residual wellbore storage, 35-19
Residue gas. 10-16, 39-16
Resilient-type seal, 3-9
Resin-coated gravel packing. 56-3
Resin derivatives, 19-10
Resistance factor, 47-5
Resistance function, 38-4
Resistance-network model, 44-20
Resistance networks, 4434
Resistance of a process, 13-50
Resistance thermal detector (RTD), 16-7
Resistivity.
annulus region, 49-6, 49-7
apparent, 49-7
devices, requirements for and types. 49-7
formation factor. 49-4
formation, relation to saturation. 49-5
formation waters. 49-4, 49-26
in permeable formations invaded by mud
filtrate. 49-5 to 49-7
index. 49-5. 49-26
invaded zone 49-6. 49-7
logging devices, 49-l 1 to 49-14
mud, 49-4
mud-filtrate, 49-4
mudcake, 49-4
ranges of. 49-5
scales, 49-2 1
true, determination of. 49-27
uncontaminated zone, 49-27
units, 49-2
versus NaCl concentration, 49-3
water,
dependence on salinity and temperature.
49-3
relation to formation resistivity, 49-5
Resistivity index, 26-28, 26-29, 26-3 I, 44-6
Resistivity log, 51-33
Resistivity of a material, definition, 26-28
Resistivity of formation water, 24-14. 24-16
Resistivity of partially water-saturated rocks,
26-3 I, 26-32
Resolution of BHP gauge, 30-2, 30-4, 30-6,
30-7
Response time, subsea valves, 18-49 to
18-51
Responses of normals and laterals in hard
formations, 49-13
Restored pressure measurement, 5 l-31
Restored-state capillary-pressure method,
26-24, 26-25, 284, 28-10
Restored-state technique, 44-5, 44-6
Restoring forces, 18-9. 18-10, 18-16
Retarded acids, 54-8. 54-1 I
Retention time for coalescence, 19-9, 19-15.
19-18, 19-22, 19-23
Retort method, 26-2 I
Retorting, 27-8
Retrievability, of packers, 4-4, 4-5
Retrievable gas-lift valve, 5-2, 5-34
Retrievable packers,
all latched, 4-3
control-head compression, 4-2
control-head tension. 4-2
hydraulic set, 4-3
isolation, 4-2
mechanically set, 4-3
removal of, 4-5, 4-6
solid-head compression, 4-2
solid-head tension, 4-2
weight-set tension type. 4-4
Retrievable-valve mandrel. 5-2, 5-22
Retrograde-condensate gas. 43-1
Retrograde condensation, 14-l. 23-4, 39-3,
39-8, 39-9, 39-16, 48-7
Retrograde dewpoint pressure, 21-12
Retrograde liquid, 39-7 to 39-10, 39-14,
39-16
Retrograde vaporization, 234
Return-flow equations. jet pump, 6-46
Return-flow fluid gradient, 6-42
Return on investment, 36-1
Return water saltwater, 44-42, 44-43
Revenue-interest fraction (RI). 41-2
Revenue interests, 41-3. 414. 41-9
Reverse ballooning of tubing strings. 4-10
Reverse-circulating gravel pack. 568
6(l PETROLEUM ENGINEERING HANDBOOK
Reverse combustion, 46-2, 46-3, 46-14.
46-3 1
Reverse emulsions. 19-l. 19-2, 19-28
Reverse fault. 29-3
Reverse flow,
check valve, 5-12, 5-23. 537
free-pump cycle, 6-6
installation, 6-6, 6-8
jet-pump casmp type, 6-5
systems. 6-5 to 6-7
tubtng arrangement. 6-7
Reversionary interest, definition. 4 I 1
Reynolds number. 6-36, 6-56. 6-57, 15-l to
15-3, 15-5, 15-24, 17-7, 19-2, 34-2,
34-3. 34-27. 34-38, 34-39
Reynolds-number factor, 13-8, 13-14 to
13-25
Rheological properties, 55-5. 55-6. 55-8
Rheology, 1829, IS-36
Rhombohedral packing of spheres, 26. I.
26-2 . -
Rhumba shaker, 52-8
Rice University, 25-20
Rig-selection considerations offshore,
criteria, IS-4
drilling equipment, IS-10 to IS-16
mooring system (stationkeeping), 18-8 to
18-10
motion characteristics, 18-7
performance evaluation, 18-7, 18-E
types of rigs, 18-5 to 18-7
Rig types for offshore operations, IS-6 to
18-S
Right to transfer,
by landowner, 57-6
by lessee, 57-7
Ring-joint gasket, 3-28 to 3-32
Ring-type plunger, 8-6
Rim-type tester. 5-16, 5-17
_ .
Riser analysis,
ball-joint angle. 18-17
mtroduction, 18-16, 18-17
pipe collapse. 18-17
pipe stress, 18-17
sheave friction, I E-17
tensioner-line angle, 18-17
top angle, 18-17
top tension. 18-17
Riser angle, 18-13
Riser pipe, 3-38. 3-39
Riser-pipe collapse, IE- 17
Riser-pipe stress, 18-17
Riser tensioner, 18-11, 18-13 to 18-15
Riser-tensioner systems, 18-17
Riser-top angle, 18-17
Riser-top tensions, 18-4, 18-16 to 18-18
Risk factor. 41-3
RMS efficiency of motor, IO-25
Robinson field, Illinois, 46-15
Robots, 3-36
Rock bulk compressibility. 26-7
Rock compaction, 26-7
Rock composition, 51-5
Rock compressibility, 26-7, 26-9, 37-2,
37-3. 37-6, 37-10
Rock Creek field, Texas, 41-4
Rock-Eva1 11 (RE), 52-10, 52-l 1
Rock flow model, 4420
Rock/fluid interactions, 47-20, 47-21
Rock-frame compressibility, 51-4
Rock-frame incompressibility, 5 l-49
Rock-grain compressrbility, 5 14
Rock matrix, 51-39, 51-49
Rock-matrix compressibility. 26-7
Rock-matrix density, 50-26
Rock mechanics, 55-1
Rock properties, 39-1, 43-7
Rock quality dcstgnatton (RQD), 51-43.
51-44
Rock tortuostty. 26-28
Rock wettability alteration, 44-39, 4440
Rocking a well, 5-54
Rockwell C scale. 9-t
Rockwell hardness, 2-2. 2-37
Rocky Mountain area, 24-8. 27-14, 27-15,
28-11, 28-18, 41-1, 47-3
Rocky Mountain method, 49-27, 49-3 I.
49-32
Rod-and-plunger system, 6-10, 6-16
Rod and pump data, 9-6, 9-7
Rod grades, Y-5
Rod-pumped-well control, 16-I 1
Rod pumps. 8-l to 8-4, 8-8
Rod stress, 9-2
Rod string design, 9-5
Rollover fault closures, 29-3
Romania. 46-3, 46-4, 46-15, 46-18, 46-28,
46-29
Rose equation. 28-3
Rosin, 44-45
Rotameter. 13-45, 13-48
Rotary converter. IO-36
Rotary cores. 26-20, 26-21
Rotary floatmg drilling vessel, 18-2
Rotary gas meter. 16-6
Rotary gas separator. 7-5, 7-6
Rotary inducer-centrifuge, 7-5
Rotary pumps, 15-15
Rotary-vane positive-displacement meter,
32-l 1
Roughness factors for new pipe, 15-2, 15-3
Round-thread casing and coupling, 2-l. 2-5,
2-7, 2-9, 2-11, 2-13. 2-15. 2-17. 2-19,
2-28, 2-30. 2-57. 2-58. 2-61, 2-64
Round-thread tubing form, 2-64
Rounding rules. 58-5 to 58-7
Royalties. definitton, 41-I
Royalty.
acres, 57-7
clause. 57-5. 57-10
deeds, 51-6, 57-7
gas. 57-10
interest, 57-5 to 57-8
oil, 57-5
overriding, 57-5, 57-7 to 57-10
Royalty interests. definition, 41-l to 41-3
Rubber lining coating, II-6
Rubble pile, IS-39
Rubm, computer subordinate routine,
17-6
Rugosity . 5 l-33
Rule of capture, 57-1, 57-2
Rules for writing metric auantities. 58-l 1
Rules of thumb,-
for critical-flow-pressure ratio. 13-37
for liquid recove-ty, LTS system, 14-5
for regulators. 13-55
for sizing transformers, IO-3 1
for sucker-rod length and cycle strokes.
9-3
of performance htstory required, 37-3
of water-handling equipment, 44-46
of when gas-condensate system exists,
39-2
Run tickets, 17-7
Running, and pulling sucker rods, 9-10
BOP, 1818 to 18-20
20.in. casing. 1 S- 18
30.in. casing, IS-18
Rupture disk, 12-39. 12-40
Ruska universal uermeameter. 26-17
Russell grain-volume method, 26-3, 26-4
RJR, method for water saturation, 49-28
Rylon@. 4-5
Ryton, 7-3
s
S. El Mene field, Veneaula. 24-13
Splat (cumulative logarithmic diagram).
56-6
S-wave critical angle, 5 I-12
S-wave velocity. 51-l 1. 51-37
S-wave velocity ratio vs. porosity, 51-9
S-waves, 51-2, 51-3. 51-5. 51.11, 51.36.
51-44, 51-47
Saccharoidal. 29-8, 29-9
Sacrificial anodes. 1 l-6
SAE 20 lubricating oil, 25-4
Safe nominal interest rate. 41-21. 41-22.
41-24
Safety and pollution preventton equipment
(SPPE) certificate holder, 3-39
Safety controls of engines. IO-17
Safety factor of Goodman diagram, 9-9
Safety factor of motor temperature, IO-26
Safety factors for casing strings,
collapse strength, 2-l to 2-3, 2-32, 2-34.
2-35
internal yteld pressure, 2-l. 2-2, 2-32.
2-34. 2-35
joint strength, 2-l. 2-2, 2-32, 2-34. 2-35
pipe-body yield strength, 2-l. 2-2. 2-34,
2-35
Safety factors, gas lift, 5-3, 5-24, 5-27
Safety factors in continuous-flow gas-lift
installation design. 5-22
Safety factors, manufacturers, 3-l
Safety features for 011 and gas separators.
12-39
Safety head. 12-39, 12-40
Safety relief valves, 12-40
Safety shut-in system. 3- 19
Safety shut-in valves. 16-3, 16-4. 16-I 1
Safety shutdown system. 13-58, 18-43.
1844
Safety systems offshore. 18-47, 18-48
Safety valves, 6-48, 6-49, 18-28. 18-34
Sage and Olds correlation. 2 l-l 1
Salem unit. Illtno~s. 4441
Sales contracts. 40-l
Sales gas, 14-6 to 14-8, 14-12. 14-14
Sales-gas line, 14-5, 14-11. 14-15, 14-18.
14120, 14-21
Sales-gas pressure, 14-3
Sales-gas volumes, 39-10
Sales method of oil and gas, 36-2
Salient gradient floods. 47-15
Salinitv:
definition. 47-2
effect on IFT, 47-20
from reuresentative oilfield brines. 47-3
general,* 47- 14
of brine. 19-26, 47-3 to 47-5. 47-10,
47-11, 47-13, 47-21
of ice, 18-39
of injection water, 44-2. 47-22
of oilfield waters, 24-13. 24-20
Salt-bath heater. 14-14. 14-15
Salt content, 19-26, 24-14
Salt deposition in flow string, 33-20, 33-21
Salt domes, 24-7
Salt intrusions, 29-5
Salt plugs, 29-5 to 29-7
Saltwater disposal projects, 24-3
Saltwater sources, 44-41 to 4443
Salty muds, 49-20. 49-25. 49-27
Salvage value. 41-3. 41-11. 41-13
Sample collection and evaluatton. gas-
condensate reservoirs,
dewpoint and P/V relations, 39-7
recombination of separator samples, 39-6
simulated pressure depletion. 39-7 to
39-10
SUBJECT INDEX 61
Sample containers. 24-4
Sample. Control and Alarm Network
(SCAN), 46-20
Sample description tabulation. 24-5
Sample lag time. 52-8
Sample logs. 41-8
Sample procedure, oilfield waters,
containers. 24-4. 24-5
field-filtered sample, 24-4
for determining unstable properties or
species. 24-4
for sample containing dissolved gas. 24-3
for sampling at wellhead, 24-3, 24-4
for stable-isotope analysis, 24-4
for tabulation of sample description, 24-5
sampling at flowline. 24-3
Sampling crude oil, 17-l to 17-8
Sampling crude-oil emulsions, 19-6
Sampling natural-gas fluids, 17-7
Sampling of petroleum and petroleum
products. 17-5
Sampling of produced waters,
drillstem test, 24-3
procedure for, 24-3 to 24-5
Sampling of water, 44-43
Samson post, 10-3, 10-4
San Ardo field, California, 46-4, 46-15,
46-18
San Joaquin Valley, California, 46-23
San Miguel-4 tar sand, Texas, 46-26
Sand bridging, gas Ii?, 5-38
Sand-by-sand correlation. 36-7
Sand consolidation treatments. 56-3 to 56-5
Sand control.
an acoustic log use, 51-45, 51-46
clay control, 56-5, 56-6
consequences of sand production, 56-3
formation analysis. 56-3
formation properties. 56-2
formation sampling, 56-3
geology of sand formation, 56-2
gravel packing, 56-8. 56-9
gravel selection, 56-6, 56-7
methods of, 56-3
properties of sand formation. 56-2
screen selection. 56-6. 56-7
well preparation, 56-3 to 56-5
why sand is produced, 56-2, 56-3
Sand counts, 49-22, 49-25
Sand filters, 15-20. 15-21, 16-14
Sand formation propertles and geology, 56-2
Sand-grain volume (GV). 26-3 to 26-5, 26-7
Sand-grain volume, laboratory measurement,
26-3 to 26-5
Sand-jetting and drain systems. 19-20
Sand line, 49-10
Sand model,
for radial flow, 26-13
for rectilinear flow, 26-11
for vertical flow, 26-12
Sand pans, 19-29, 19-30
Sand pressure filters, 4447
Sand production, consequences of, 56-3
Sand removal, 19-29
Sandblasting, 46-2 I
Sandface plugging, 39-25
Sandface pressure, 34-28
Sandia Laboratories, 30-7
Sanding. 46-2 I
Sandpacks, 26-l 1, 26-12
Sandstone acidizing, 54-4
Sansinena field, California, 6-24
Santa Barbara Channel, California. 18-1,
18-2
Santa Fe Springs field, California. 29-2
SARABAND log analysis, 49-37
Saskatchewan, Canada, 24-8. 24-12. 51-32
Satelhte navigation (SAT NAV) systems,
18-18
Satters equation. 46-6
Saturated depletion-type oil reservoirs. 40-8
to 40-12
Saturated liquid. definitmn, 22-21
Saturated-oil viscosity. 22-15
Saturated steam, 46-5. 46-6, 46-40
Saturated systems. oil formation volume
factor for. 22. IO. 22. I1
Saturated systems, oil-viscosity correlations.
Beals for dead oil, 22-14
Beggs and Robmson. 22-15. 22-16
Chew and Connally, 22-14, 22-15
Saturated water content of natural gas,
25-I I to 25-15
Saturation change with frontal advance,
38-15
Saturation CUNCS, 23. I, 23-2
Saturation exponent, 26-31
Saturation gradient. 28-3
Saturation measurements, 28-4 to 28-7
Saturation method of determining porosity,
26-6
Saturation pressure, 14-10, 21-11, 21-13 to
21-15, 22-1, 22-5, 22-21
Saturation vapor pressure. 17-7
Saudi Arabia, 12-39
Saunders-type valve bdies, 16-3
Saybolt seconds furol (SSF). 22-13, 22-14
Saybolt seconds universal (SSU), 22-13
Scale or scaling, 5-25. 5-53, 6-48, 6-55,
9-2, 11-13. 19-1, 19-2, 19-26. 19-29,
19-32. 56-l
Scale deposits, 44-43, 56-2
Scale trap. 13-59
Scaled physical models. 45-10
Scaled porous models. 44-17, 44-34
Scales. resistivity, 49-21
Scaling laws. 46-13
Scanning electron micrographs (SEM), 51-8
to 51-l 1
Scanning electron microscope. 46-21
Scannmg-electron-mlcroscope analysis, 56-3
Scattered neutron, 50-9. 50-10
Schilthuis equation, 37-5
Schlumberger. 49-2, 49-36, 49-37, 51-18,
51-21, 51-24, 51-25, 51-41
Schlumberger Borehole Compensated Sonic
log, 51-24
Schlumberger Ltd., 53-19
Schlumberger neutron porosity (SNP), 50-29
Scholem Alechem field, Oklahoma, 6-24
Schoonebeek field, Netherlands, 46-3, 46-14
Scintillation detector, 50- 12, 50-13
Scoring, 6-50
Screen-factor devices, 47-5
Screen selection, 56-7, 56-8
Screen specifications and sizes, 56-9
Screening guides and parameters, 47- 1,
47-22
Screening guides. thermal recovery, 46-13,
46-14
Screening thermal prospects, 46-12 to 46-14
Screenout, 56-8
Screens and filters, jet pumps, 6-48
Scrubbers, 6-33, 12-1, 12-2. 12-10, 12.13,
13-58, 39-26
Scurry field, Texas, 29-4
Sea ice. 18-38, 18-39
Seafloor manifold, 18-33, 18-35
Seal Beach field, California, 6-24
Sealing bores, 6-3. 6-4
Sealing element of packers, 4-5
Search angle, dipmeter, 53-10, 53-11
Seating nipple, 5-3
Seatmg shoe, 6-3
Seawater, 24-17. 24-18, 24-20. 24-2 I
Seawater-injection projects. 4437
Second-stage separator gas, 39-9. 39.10.
39-14
Secondary/backup power. 18-45
Secondary drainage, 28-12
Secondary electrical systems, 10-29. 10-30.
lo-32
Secondary functions of oil and gas
separators.
maintain liquid seal, 12-S
maintain optimum pressure, 12-4
Secondary imbibition. 28-12
Secondary porosity, 26-l. 29-3. 36-6,
51-31. 51-33
Secondary recovery, 16-2. 18-44. 24.2,
24-3, 29-7, 40-4, 41-9. 43-l. 44-45,
45-9
Secondary-recovery methods, 44 I to 44-3
Secondary-seal assembly, 3-6 to 3-8
Secondary separation in separator, 12. I9
Secondary skin-effect correction, 49.16,
49-17
Secondary stratigraphic traps, 29-5
Secondary voltage, lo-29
Section gauge log, 49-25
Securities and Exchange Commission
(SEC), 40-1, 40-2, 41-3
Sediment in crude oil by centrifuge method.
17-5
Sediment in crude oils by extraction
method, 17-5
Sediment in fuel oils by extraction method,
17-5
Sedimentary features. dipmeter patterns in,
53-13
Sedimentary rock porosity, 26-7
Sedimentation flume capacity, 15.18. 15-19
Seeligson field, Texas. 39-3
Segmental orifices. 13-45, 13-48
Segments of circles, table, i-31, l-32
Segments of spheres, table, l-33
Segregation, complete, 37-14, 37-15
Segregation. in gas-injection performance
predictions, 43-16
Seismic analyses, 18-27
Seismic compressional surveys, 5 l-28
Seismic exploration, 5 I-IO
Seismic interpretation, 51-28, 51-29
Seismic mapping, 18-18
Seismic studies, 18-5
Seismic velocities, 58-25
Seismograph Service Corp., 5 I-l
Seismologists, 57-8
Seisviewer@, 5 l-27
Selecting appropriate PIE ratlo. 6-28
Selecting motor size, IO-2 1
Selecting mud-logging service, 52-28 to
52-30
Selecting pumps and drivers, 15-14 to 15-18
Selection,
of backpressure valves, 3-8
of casing hangers, 3-6
of gas-lift installation and equipment, 5-3
of gas-lift port size, 5-28
of independently screwed wellhead
equipment, 3-39
of intermediate casing heads, 3-7
of lowermost casing heads. 3-2 to 3-5
of materials for wellhead service, 3-36.
3-37
of multiple-completion tubing hangers,
3-16, 3-17
of storage-tank location, 1 I-1 1
of subshrface safety valves, 3-27, 3-29,
3-3 1
62 PETROLEUM ENGINEERING HANDBOOK
of surface closing pressure, gas-lift
valves, 5-44
of surface safety valves, 3-27
of tubing hangers, 3-9
of waterflood plants, 44-45
Selection and application of gas scrubbers,
12-35
Selection and applicatton of separators,
horizontal, 12-35
spherical, 12-35
vertical, 12-35
Selection data and methods, electric
submersible pumps (ESP), 7-9 to 7-12
Selective adsorption systems, 14-10 to
14-13, 14-15, 14-17
Self-contained pressure gauges, 30-l to 30-3
Self-contained thermometers, 31-1, 31-2
Self-generating mud acid (SGMA), 54-4
Self-operated controller, 13-50
Semblance, 51-25
Semiconductor sensor element, 52-7
Semidiesels, 10-15, lo-16
Semilog straight-line solution, 354, 35-8,
35-16
Semipermanent packers, 4-1, 4-3, 4-6
Semiquartzitic sandstone, 26-6
Semisteadv state. 37-2 1, 37-22
Semisubmersible rig, 3-38, 18-2 to 18-7,
18-13, 18-21, 18-25, 18-34 to 18-36
Sensible heat, 14-5, 14-10, 14-21
Sensitivity analysis, 39-17
Sensitivity of t&erial-balance results, 37-13
to 37-17
Sensitivity of regulators, 13-54, 13-5.5
Sensitivity of variable, 13-50
Sensitivity studies, 37-16 to 37-18, 48-14
Sensitivity to shock, BHP gauges, 30-5,
30-7
Sensitivity to vibration, BHP gauges, 30-5
to 30-7
Sensor coils, 53-22, 53-23
Sensor sub. 53-2
Sensors, 3-18, 3-19, 3-31, 3-33, 3-34
Separated fluids, estimated quality of,
crude oils, 12-13
gas. 12-15
gas from scrubber, 12-15
measuring, 12-15, 12-16
water, 12-15
Separating foaming crude oil, 12-6, 12-7
Separation of water from oil, 12-3, 124
Separator, design, 12-21 to 12-32, 23-1
Separator high-level float control, 16-9
Separator pressure, 12-16, 12-17. 12-22,
12-23, 12-25 to 12-34, 12-36 to 12-39,
39-9
Separator temperature, 12-17, 12-22, 12-23,
12-25, 12-26, 12-28 to 12-30, 12-36,
12-37, 12-40, 12-41
Separators: see oil and gas separators
Sequence-restart timer, 10-27
Sequential-piloted hydraulic control, subsea,
18-5 I, 18-52
Sequestering agents, 4445, 54-7, 54-9
Service company nomenclature (table), 49-2
Service facilities, 39-24
Service factor, of motor, 10-25, 10-26
Service factor, of steel sucker rods, 94, 9-5
Settled solids removal, 19-29
Settling, in breaking foaming oil, 12-7
in water treating, 44-46
to remove gas from oil in separators,
12-13
Settling space, in emulsion treating, 19-8
Settling tanks, 6-59, 19-18 to 19-21
Settling time, 11-13, 12-3, 19-9, 19-15
Seven-point, hexagonal-gridblock scheme,
48-11
Seven-spot pattern, 43-2, 4413, 4414,
4416, 4417, 44-21, 44-23, 44-34,
46-17, 46-18, 46-26
Severance of minerals, 57-2
Severance tax, 39-27, 41-9, 41-12, 41-15
Shaker screen, 52-8, 52-19
Shale baseline, 49-10
Shale bulk density, 52-19
Shale compaction. 24-20
Shale-data log, 52-20
Shale distillation, yield, 58-29
Shale effect on neutron porosity, 50-31 to
50-33
Shale effects on compressional and shear
velocities, 51-34
Shale factor, 52-21, 52-22
Shale index, 49-38, 49-39
Shale intercalations, 36-6
Shale-outs, 442, 4439
Shale point, 50-24, 50-34
Shale/sand ratio, 36-4
Shale stringers, extent of, 36-6
Shale transit time, 51-39
Shallow dual laterolog (LLS), 49-19
Shallow-hazard surveys, 18-5
Shallow laterolog (LLS), 49-20
Shallow MICROSFL (MSFL), 49-20,
49-22, 49-28
Shaly (dirty) formations, 494
Shaly sand, 26-31, 50-34, 51-34, 51-35
Shannon Pool field. Wyoming, 46-14
Shoestring sands, 29-4, 29-9
Shop-welded tanks, 11-1, 11-5, 11-9
Shoreline sandstone, 36-4
Short or net ton, l-70
Short-cycle units, 14-10, 14-13. 14-17
Short-duration cycling, electric submersible
pump (ESP), 7-15
Short lateral, 49-l 1
Short normal, 49-11, 49-14, 49-26, 49-27,
49-29 to 49-3 1
Short-normal resistivity. 53-2, 53-4
Short-normal resistivitv log. 51-26. 51-46
Short-spaced acoustic logs: 5 1-24
Short-thread casmg, 2-5, 2-7, 2-9, 2-l 1,
2-13, 2-15, 2-17, 2-19. 2-29, 2-57, 2-64
Shoulder-bed corrections, 49-l I, 49-21
Shrinkage,
by liquid recovery, 39-23
definition, 22-21
factors, 22-20, 44-3
of liquid, 32-10, 32-15, 33-14
of oils, 19-7, 37-1, 37-6. 37-22, 37-23.
43-l
test, 39-6
Shrouded configuration application, electric
submersible pump (ESP), 7-1 to 7-3
Shuttle ball, 13-48
Shuttle tankers, 18-36
SL
derived units. 58-2. 58-4. 58-10. 58-11.
angle unit, 58-5
base quantities and units, 58-3, 58-9.
58-10, 58-21, 58-23
bending moment, 58-5, 58-34
Shaoe factor. 6-57. 26-18. 35-4. 35-5. 35-7.
35-12, 35-16, 37-19, 37-20
Shape functions. 32-5
Sharing arrangements, 41-15
Sharp-edged orifice plates, 13-36, 13-37,
58-2 1, 58-23
energy unit, 58-5, 58-11, 58-23, 58-24.
58-32
international system of units, 58-2 to
58-20 i3-45
Sharp-edged valve seat, 5-14, 5-15, 5-20,
5-35, 5-40
Shear bulk modulus, 58-34
Shear-history method, for friction losses in
fluids, 55-5, 55-6
Shear modulus. 51-1, 51-4, 51-37, 51-43,
51-44. 51-49
Shear rams, 18-15
Shear rate, in fluids, 55-5
Shear rate, in oilfield emulsions, 19-6
Shear-rate/viscosity relations, 474
Shear-thinning fluid, 47-4. 47-9
Shear-wave amplitude, 5 1-46
Shear-wave attenuations, 51-2, 51-6
Shear-wave logging, 51-24
Shear-wave transit (travel) times, 5 1-5,
51-15, 51-24, 51-25 to 51-27, 51-30,
51-31, 51-35. 51-43
Shear-wave velocities, 51-2, 514 to 51-9,
51-12 to 51-14, 51-24, 51-25, 51-28,
51-30, 51-34, 51-35, 51-37, 51-38,
51-43
Shear waves, 51-2, 51-3, 51-12 to 51-14,
51-24, 51-25, 51-27, 51-30, 51-35,
5144
Shearing stress, 22-l. 22-13
Sheave friction, 18-17
Shedding, 13-48
Shelf carbonates, 36-6
Shell breccia, 29-8, 29-9
Shell nroun. 46-13
Shell oil Co., 16-12, 46-4, 46.15, 46-16,
46-18, 46-24, 46-25
Shippers ton, l-70
Ships and ship-shaped vessels, 18-5, 18-7,
18-13, 18-21, 18-34, 18-36
Shock load, IO-28
Shock mobility ratio, 47-1
metric system of units, 17-7, 58-l to
58-20
non-S1 metric units. 58-10
prefixes, 58-4. 58-12, 58-13 to 58-20
pressure unit, 58-5, 58-l 1, 58-23 to
58-25, 58-28, 58-29
stress unit, 58-5, 58-11, 58-23, 58-34
supplemental units, 58-2, 58-3
temperature units, 58-5, 58-23, 58-24,
58-28
time units, 58-5, 58-22, 58-23, 58-27
torque units, 58-5. 58-34, 58-38
unit prefixes, 58-3
unit symbols, 58-3, 58-4, 58-15 to 58-20,
58-22
units, 58-9 to 58-11, 58-26 to 58-38
volume units, 58-5, 58-23
Side-pocket mandrel, 3-35. 5-2, 5-53
Side-scan sonar, 18-5
Side-static method of gas metering, 13-37
Side-well producing cuts, 4424, 4425
Sidewall cores, 26-20, 26-21
Sidewall epithermal neutron device, 50-20
Sidewall neutron logs, 51-33
Sidewall neutron porosity, 51-19
Sidewall-pad tool, 49-22
Sidewall vs. conventional core analysis,
comparative data, 27-8
Sidum steam-injection pilot, Arkansas,
46-26
Sieve analysis, 56-3, 56-6, 56-7
Siggins field, Illinois, 47-9
Signal Oil Co., 46-22, 46-23
Significant digits, 58-6, 58-9
Silica, 19-5, 24-4
Silica flour, 46-19
Silica gel beads, 14-21
Silicate-control agents, 54-7
63 SUBJECT INDEX
Silicon-controlled rectifiers @CRs), 18-45
Silicone, as surface tension reducer, 12-13
Silicone-controlled rectifier relays, 7-6
Silver. 50-12
Silverdale field, Alberta, Canada, 46-18,
46-2 1
Simple harmonic motion, 51-2, 51-3
Simple interest, 41-25
Simpsons rule, 34-24, 34-26. 40-4, 40-5
Simulated pressure depletion, 39-7 to 39-10
Simulation and simulator studies, 37-2 I,
37-22. 40-l
Simulation models, consideration in
applications,
fluid- and rock-description data, 48-8,
48-9
history matching, 48-9
model grid selection, 48-7. 48-8
of complex reservoir, 443 1, 4432
type selection. 48-7
Simulation steps, 36-10
Simulation technology, 48-13 to 48-17
Simultaneous formulatmns, 48-14
Sinclair, 47-22
Singapore, 12-39
Smgle-actmg downhole unit. 6-10, 6-20
Singleacting pump, 6-8 to 6-10, 6-18 to
6-20
Single- and two-phase inflow-performance-
relationship (IPR) equation, 34-33, 34-34
Single-carbon-number (SCN) groups, 39-1 I
Single-component phase diagrams, 23-1,
23-2
Single-contact miscibility, 48-5 to 48-7
Single-control line valve, 3-27, 3-29
Single-cylinder engines, IO-15
Single-elenlent fuses, IO-28
Single-element simulation, 48-7
Single-element unbalanced gas-lift valve.
5-12 to 5-15
Single-horsepower rating, lo-25
Single-pattern simulation studies, 48-8
Smgle-payment present-worth factor, 41-25
Single-phase flow, 28-2, 34-2, 34-3, 34-31,
34-33, 34-36. 34-38, 3445
Single-phase fluid, constant compressibility,
35-3
Single-phase motors, IO-2 1
Single-phase transformer, 7-6, 7-7, 10-30,
19-25
Single-phase turbulent flow, 34-37
Single-piece jacket, 18-23
Single-point mooring @PM). 18-2. 18-34
Single-ported valves. 13-55, 13-57
Single satellite wells, 18-31, 18-32
Single-real pumps, 6-39
Single-seated valve. 13-55
Single-shot surveys, 53-3
Single-stage desalting, 19-26
Smgle-tubing-string completions, 3-13
Single-welded butt joints, 12-40
Single-well coning studies. 48-14
Single-well depletion reservoir, 35-1
Single-well power umt, 6-60, 6-61
Single-well systems. 6-60 to 6-63
Single-wing well manifold, 16-l I, 16-12
Singleton field, Nebraska, 4440, 47-22
Sinking fund. 41-16, 41-21. 41-22
Sinking fund, table, l-65
Sinusoidal alternating-current field. 19-13
Siphon breaker, 6-62
Siphon strings, 33-21
Site conditions and considerations offshore,
expected environment, 18-4
introduction, 18-3
logisbcs. 18-4. 18-5
seismic and other location studies. 18-5
water depth, 18-4
Site survey offshore, 18-5
Six-pole induction motor, lo-23
Six-spot pattern, 46-17
Sizes,
of casing hanger, 3-6
of casing head, 3-7
of meter and meter run, 13-36
of separator, estimating, 12-21 to 12-2.5
of tubing hanger, 3-9
of tubing heads, 3-8
Sizing and capacities of separators,
capacities of spherical separators, 12-30,
12-31
capacity curves for vertical and horizontal
separators, 12-27 to 12-29
computer sizing of separators, 12-25 to
12-27
equation for gas capacity, 12-23
equation for sizing, 12-23 to 12-25
gas velocity, maximum, 12-22
horizontal separator sizing, 12-30
vertical separator sizing, 12-29
Sizing, curves, 13-53
equations for plate coalescers, 15-24
instructions, ultrahigh-slip motor, lo-22
of waterflood plants, 44-45
oil and gas separators, 12-25 to 12-27,
12-32
pumping units, IO-7
Skewness, definition, 26-2
Skim piles, 15-23, 15-26, 15-27, 15-30
Skim tanks and vessels, 15-23, 19-28
Skimming, 19-23
Skin-effect correction, IL, 49-17
Skin effects, 30-10, 30.14, 32-5, 354,
35-7, 35-l 1. 35-14, 35.15,.35-19,
40.27, 49-16
Skin factor. 33-11, 37-20
Skirt piles, 18-3, 18.22, 18-23
Sleeve bearings, 13-48
Slide-rail motor mounts. lo-19
Sliding-sleeve valve, 3-35
Slim-hole coupling, 9-5
Slim-hole-coupling derating factor, 9-5, 9-8
Slim-tube displacement tests, 39- 16
Slim-tube displacements, 48-9
Slip joints, 18-13, 18-20
Slip of motor, 10-23, lo-24
Slip-on socket connection, 3-3
Slip-type tubing hanger, 3-39
Slip velocity, 34-27, 34-38
Slip-weld casing hanger, 3-6
Slipform methods, of gravity platform
construction, 18-23
Slippage effect on energy losses, gas-lift
wells, 34-37
Slippage-loss equation, 8-5
Slippage, past pump plunger, 8-4 to 8-6
Slocum field, Texas, 46-15, 46-18, 46-26,
46-27
Slope of backpressure curve, 33-5
Slope of buildup curve, 30-10, 30-12
Sloping-sided structure, 18-42
Sloss field MP pilot, Nebraska, 47-18
Sloss field. Nebraska, 46-14, 46-15, 46-18,
46-2 I, 46-30, 46-33
Slow-speed engines, IO-14 to lo-19
Slowing-down length. 50-l 1, 50-19 to
50-2 I. 50-29 to 50-32
Slowness time coherence, 51-25
Sludge, 19-11, 19-12, 19-32
Sludge tank, 4447
Sludgmg of oil, IO-13
Slug flow, 34-36 to 34-40
Slug-mtst transitton flow, 34-36, 34-37,
34-40
Slug-stze retention ratio, 47-17
Slugging, 12-23, 12-35, 12-38, 39-26
Slugs of well fluids, 12-l. 12-20, 12-32
Smackover field, Arkansas, 46-15, 46-24 to
46-26
Smart end devices. 16-2
Smectite-rich clay, 52-21
Smoke point, 21-7, 21-9
Snap action, control mode, 13-49, 13-51 to
13-53, 13-56
Snells law, 51-3, 51-12
Sniffer, 52-6
Soaking, in steam stimulation, 46-9
Soap-type gels, 55-5
Soave modification of Redlich-Kwong
equation, 20-8, 23-13
Sot. of Automotive Engineers (SAE), lo-12
Sot. of Petroleum Engineers (SPE),
joint committee member on reserve
definitions, 40-2
SPE letter and computer symbols std., 59-2
to 59-70
SPE metric unit standards, 58-21 to 58-39
SPE papers on relative permeability, 28-12
SPE-preferred metric unit. 58-21, 58-24 to
58-38
SPE Reprint Series, 44-36
Sot. of Professional Well Log Analysts
(SPWLA), 52-30
Soda ash, 14-22
Sodium aluminate sand-consolidation
technique, 46-2 1
Sodium chloride (NaCI), as water
contaminant, 24-16
Sodium chloride conversion chart, 49-3
Sodium dodecyl sulfate, 47-7
Sodium hydroxtde, 4440, 4442, 47-18,
54-3
Sodium iodtde (Nal), detector, 50-12 to
50-16, 50-23, 50-35
Soft-packed plungers, 8-6
Soft-start capability. 7-9
Solid-desiccant dehydratton umt, 14-20,
14-22
Solid-head compresston packer, 4-2, 4-8
Solid-head tension packer, 4-2, 4-8
Solid hydrates, 25-1, 25-3, 25-19
Solid-propellant gas generators, 18-16
Solid-state detector, gamma rays, 50-12,
50-14, 50-23, 50-35
Solid-state electrical detector. 52-7
Solid-state electronic components, 16-9
Solid-state electronics, 16-1
Solid-state switchboards, 7-6
Solids in brine, 14-4
Solids wetting, 19-9, 19-10
Soluble-sulfide analyzer, 52-7
Solubility, definition, 45-1
of bentonite in mud-removal acid, 54-4
of CO, in water, 25-15
of methane in water, 25-16
of natural gas in water, 25-17
of propane in water, 25-17
of silica in mud-removal acid, 54-4
of water in refrigerants, 14-10
of water in various hydrocarbons, 25-16
Solubilization parameter or ratio, 47-13,
47.14, 47-20
Solutes concentration in aqueous phase,
25-16
Solution cavtties, 26-6
Solution gas, definition, 12-3
in oil reservoirs, 40-6, 40-13
increases as temperature decreases, 22-10
release of, 22-2 1
Solution-gas drive, definition, 22-20, 40-8
Solution-gas-drive process. 42-5
64 PETROLEUM ENGINEERING HANDBOOK
Solution-gas-drive reservoirs,
basic data required, 37-3 to 37-5
calculation of reservoir pressure, 35-8
comparison of Tarners and Tracys
methods. 37-10
definitions, 37-l
insights from simulator studies, 37-22
introduction, 37-l
material-balance calculations using Muskat
and Taylors method, 37-10 to 37-13
material-balance calculations using Tracys
method. 37-7 to 37-10
material-balance equation, 37-5, 37-6
material-balance equation as a straight
line. 37-6. 37-7
models. types used, 37-2
nomenclature. 37-26, 37-27
nonideal behavior of, 35-3
performances. 37-l) 37-2
production rate and time calculations,
37-17 to 37-21
references, 37-27
sensitivity of material-balance results,
37-13 to 37-17
single empirical IPR equation for, 34-3 I
tank-type material balance. basic
assumptions of, 37-2, 37-3
volatile-oil-reservoir performance
predictions, 37-22 to 37-26
Solution-gas production rate, 37-l I
Solution GOR, definition, 22-l. 22-21,
37-14 to 37-18, 37-21, 37-22, 40-6,
40-8, 40-9, 40-13, 46-34, 46-36
Solution GOR for saturated oils,
Lasater correlation, 22-9
Standing correlation, 22-9
Vasquez and Beggs correlation. 22-9
Solution-mined caverns, 11-13
Solution porosity, 29-8
Solutron techniques for math models. 48-16,
48-17
Solvent breakthrough, 45-7
Solvent extraction, 12-16
Solvent extraction and distillation, 27-8
Solvent-extraction effect. 46-4, 46-5
Solvent override. 48- I2
Solvent slug, 45-2
Sondes, 49-l
Sonic fluid-level tests, 40-27
Sonic level control. 16-5
Sonic log and logging, 44-3, 49-15, 49-16,
49-25 to 49-27. 52-20, 52-27, 58-25
Sonic meters, 13-49. 13-50
Sonolog, 32-6
Sonoloy. 30-7
Sour corrosion, 3-36. 4-4
Sour crude. I I-IO
Sour-crude tanks, I l-6
Sour gas. 5-2, 10-16, 14-7. 14-21, 18-47
Sour-water strrpper correlations, 25-17,
25-18
Sour-water systems, 25-16
Source of hydrocarbon prospects, 57-8
Source rock, definition. 24-19
South America. 18-7
South Belridge tirellood. California. 46-14,
to 46.16. 46-18
South Oklahoma field, 46-15, 46-16
South Pass 27 field. Louisiana, 36-4
South Sunshine field. Wyoming. 24-18
Southeast Texas field, 47-22
S.P. PacksTM. 19-12, 19-19
Space, Sl units for, 58-26, 58-27
Spacer fluids, 56-4
Spacing, defhution, 49-12
Spacing-factor gradient, 5-45
Spacing factor, mtermutent pressure
gradient, 5-42, 5-43
Spacing-load design, 5-48
Spacing pressure differential, 5-29
Spain, 58-20
Sparker, 18-5
Spatial gradient, 48-10
Spatial truncation error, 48-7, 48-9 to 48-12
Special alloy rods, 9-8
Special-service structures, 18-25
Specific conductivity. 39-20
Specific entropy. 58-28
Specific fuel consumption, 58-33
Specific gravities of fluid columns, 6-22,
6-23
Specific gravity (relative density), 204,
20-10
Specific-gravity factor, 13-3, 33-14
Specific gravity, increase with pressure,
saltwater, 24-15
of gas mixtures, 20-4
of natural-gas mixtures, 17-7
of salt soluuons, 24-14
vs. temperature for crude oils, 19-8
Specrfic heat capacity, 58-28
Specific heat ratio. 13-8. 13-13, 14-10,
39-24
Specific heats, of mid-continent liquid oils,
21-6
Specdic-isopermeability map, 39-22
Specnic permeability, 28-l. 28-2, 28-13,
43-3. 43-5
Specific productwity index (PI), 30-l I,
32-4, 58-38
Specific volume, gascondensate system,
21-16, 21-17
of oil. 224. 22-5
of total fluids, 46-7
units and conversions, 58-29
vs. molality. 24-15
Specification of reservoir rock and fluid
description data. 48-8
Specifications of coatings, Il.4
Specifications of diesel fuel, IO-16
Spectral fatigue analysis, 18-27, 18-28
Spectral gamma ray device, 50-15, 50-16,
50-24
Spectral gamma ray log, 50-25
Spectrographic technique, qualitative
emission, 24-5
Spectroscopic gamma ray detection, 50-12
Spectroscopic-quality gamma ray detectors,
SO-IS
Speculative interest rate. 41-17, 41-21,
41-24
Speculative nominal interest rate, 41-22
Speculative nominal rate of return, 41-18,
41-22, 41-24
Speculative rate of return, 41-21
Speed factor, ultrahigh-slip motor, IO-22
Speed reducer, IO-5
Speed/torque curves. IO-24
Speed variation of engines. 10-14, 10-17,
IO-22
Speed variation of motor, IO-24
Spending time of acids, 54-4. 54-5, 54-8,
54-11
Spent acid, 54-3 to 54-7. 54-9, 54-l I
Sperry Sun BHP gauge, 304
Spheres and spheroids. measurement and
calibration. 17-3
Spherical-cell model. 25-8
Spherical separator. 12-I. 12-16 to 12-18,
12-21. 12-30 to 12-32
Spherical-shell equations. 12-38
Spherical three-phase oil/gas/water
separator. 12-5
Spherically focused log (SFL), 49-15,
49.18. 49.20, 49-27
Spiking, 5 l-24
Spindletop dome. Texas, 18. I, 24-7
Splash-proof motor, lo-26
Splash zone, 3-36
Split detector, 53-18, 53-19
Spontaneous ignition 46-2, 46-19. 46-20
Spontaneous potential (SP). 49. I
baseline shift, 49-10
current path, 49-8
curve, 46-26, 49-l I, 49.15, 49.19. 49-25.
49-38, 49-39, 51-16. 51-17, 51-22 to
51-24, 51-32, 51-46
deflections, factors influencing shape and
amplitude, 49-9
effect of interstitial shales, 49-8
effect of invasion. 49-8, 49-10
geometric effect. 49-9
in hard formations, 49-10
in soft formations, 49-10
influence of mud resistivrty and hole
diameter, 49-9
origin, 49-7
phenomena in highly resistive formations,
49-10
pseudostatic, 49-9, 49-10, 49-28 to 49-30
R, determination from, 49-8
static. 49-9 to 49. I I, 49-28 to 49-30
Spool adapter flange, 3-9
Spraberry tield, Texas, 40-2
Spray zone, 3-36
Spread-mooring patterns or system, 18-9
Spreader or spreader plate, 6-58, 19-13.
19-18 to 19-20, 19-23 to 19-25, 19-29
Spreader bar, 7-12
Spring compression regulator, 13-54
Spring-loaded gas-lift valves. 5-17, 5-19 to
5-2 11 5-42
Spring-loaded regulator, 13-54, 13-55,
13-57
Spring-loaded valves. 6-49. 6-50. 13-55 to
13-57
Spring-return fail-safe actuators. 18-15
Spudding the well, 18-18
spurt loss, 55-4
Square roots of certain fractions, table, l-13
Square roots of numbers, table, l-2. l-1 I to
I-13
Squares of numbers, table, I-I to l-6
Squeeze cement job, 56-4
Squeeze cementing, 5 I-40
Squeeze gravel packing, 56-8
Squirrel-cage rotor. 7-3
Stability analyses, 48-l
Stability of BHP gauges, 30-5 to 30-7
Stabilization of separated fluids, 12-2 I,
12-33, 12-35
Stabilization period of wells. 32. I5
Stabilization process and unit, 12-33. 12-35.
12-42, 14-14, 14-15, 39-27
Stabilized PI, 34-30 to 34-35
Stabilizer, 14-5, 14-7, 14-8, 14-l I, 14.14,
14-15, 14-17, 54-9. 55-6
Stable emulsions, 19-2, 19-4 to 19-6
Stable isotopes, sample for analysis, 26-4
Stage-compression ratio. 39-24
Stage-pressure ratio. 12-33
Stage separation. 12-32 to 12-35. 14-14,
14-15
Stage separator, 12-1, 12-17, 12-19
Staggered line drive. 4413 to 44-16, 44-22.
44-34. 4436
Stainless steel. 30-4. 56-7
Stainless-steel filaments. 12-12
Stainless-steel pipe, 15-l I
SUBJECT INDEX
Standard conditions. definition, 22-21.
58.24, 5X-25
Standard deviation, 50-5
Standard distribution of residuals. table,
I-61
Standard lateral, 49. I 1
Standard of weights and measures.
definitmn of. l-68
Standards for mud logging, 52-30
Standing and Katz charts, 20-9
Standing correlations. 22-5. 22-8 to 22-l I,
22.13. 22-14
Standing valve. 5-50 to 5-53. 6-3. 6-31.
6-32. 6-48. 6-49. 6-51. 19-28
Standing valve puller. 8-2. 8-4
Standings equations, 37-21
Star diagram. 24. I9
Starter contactor for motors. 10-2X
Starters for engines. IO-19
Startup of a prqject, 15-3 I
Startup spike. electric submersible pump
(ESP), 7- 14
Startup-spikes chart. ESP. 7- I5
Static-body test pressure, 3-I
Static BHP. calculation of. 34-3 to 34-9
Static drainage-area pressure. 30-9
Static elastic constants, 51-4
Static electricity. I I- 13
Static error, 13-50
Static-fluid level. 5-25. 5-28, 5-37. 5-45.
5-46. 5-48
Static fluids. 34-3
Static-force balance equations. S-17 to 5-19.
5-23
Static geothermal surface temperature, 5-23
Stattc InJectton-gas pressure. 5-37
Static inJection-gas pressure at depth. 5-3 to
5-6
Static-load fluid gradient. 5-23. 5-25. 5-33,
5-48
Static-load fluid gradient traverse. 5-45.
5-46, 5-49
Static-load fluid traverse, 5-25. 5-28. 5-29.
5-33. 5-45
Static prehaure. downstream taps. 13-30 to
13-x
Static pressure from partial buildup, 30-9,
30-10
Static pressure. mean of up-and down
stream taps. 13-33. 13-34
Static pressure. upstream taps, 13-26 to
13-29
Static self potential (SP),
definition. 49-9
determination of. 49-10, 49-28
determination of R,,., 49-10. 49-l I
Static stress. 18-17
Static-type gas separator. 7-4, 7-5
Static voltage level. IO-29
Station-keeping systems. 18-2. 18-S to
18.11. 18-16, 18-21. 18-24, 18-43
Stationary-barrel rod pump, 8-3. 8-4. 8-8,
&IO
Stationary-fluid methods. 28-8
Stationary metering installation, 32-13
Statistical mechanical theory. 25-2
StatistIcal mechanics for adsorption
approach, 25-5
Steady-state analog techmques. 39-2 I
Steady-state conductivity. 4433
Steady-state electrical model, 39-20
Steady-state flow. 32-4, 32-5. 43-3, 43-4
Steady-state in,jectivity, 44-33, 44-34
Steady-state methods of relative-permeability
measurement. 28-3 to 2X-7. 28-14
Steady-state radial flow. 34-31
Steady-state relative-permeability apparatus.
28-4
Steady-xtate relative-permeability methods,
experimental procedure. 28-3, 28-4
saturation measurements. 28-4 to 28-7
Steam-breakthrough times. 48-12
Steam-cheat models. 46-9
Steam displacement. 46-l. 46-23, 46-24
Steam distillation. 46-4. 46-5, 46-15
Steam-distillatmn drive. 46-24
Steam flooding or floods, 19-28. 48-2. 48-5
to 48-8. 48-10. 48-l I. 48-13. 48-17
Steam generation and injection, 46-19
Steam-generation water. 24-5
Steam generators. 46. L9. 46-20
Steam injection. 42-6, 56-2
Steam-injection model. 46-l I. 46-12
Steam-InJection rate. steamfloods. 46-18
Steam/oil ratio (SOR), 46-S. 46-14, 46-15.
46-23. 46-24, 46-27
Steam placement. 46-22
Steam propertles (table), 46-40
Steam quality, 46-5, 46-7. 46-13. 46-18,
46-22
Steam recovery. mechanisms contributing
to, 46-5
Steam splitting. 46-22
Steam stimulation, 46-l. 46-3, 46-4. 46-22
Steam-stimulation operations,
coinjection of gas and steam, 46-22
Huntington Beach. 46-22
ParIs Valley. 46-22. 46-23
Steam/tar ratio. 46-27, 46-28
Steam/water equilibrium. 46-12
Steamdrive, 46. I
Steamtlood, 46-l to 46-4. 46-12 to 46-28
Steamflood front in nine-spot pattern, 48. I2
Steamflood pmjects. 46-23 to 46-28
Steamflooding operations. 25-l
Steaming. 6-48
Steel gravity oil-storage structure. 18-2
Steel gravity structure. 18-2
Steel island. I8- I
Steel jackets, 18-2. 18-26
Steel-laminated elastomers. 18-13
Steel sucker rods.
allowable loading, 9-4
application. 9-2
care and handling. 9-10
coupling connections, 9-2
failures. 9-8. 9-9
manufacture 01; 9-I
predictive calculations, 9-2 to 9-4
rod grades, 9-5, 9-8
rod storage, 9-10
running and pulling, 9-10
service factor, 9-S
unloading and loading, 9-10
Steel template, 18-2
Steelman field, Saskatchewan, Canada,
51-32
Stern travel, 5-15, 5-19. 5-28
Step length, dipmeter. 53-10. 53-l I
Step profile transit time, 51-20
Stepdown transformer. IO-2 I
Stereographic plots, 53-12
Stevens porowneter. 26-4 to 26-6
Stiff diagmm, 24-19
Stiffness analysis. IS-26 to 18-25
Stiles calculation, 44-7. 44-S
Stile5 method. 40-19. 40-20. 44-7
Stimulation coFts. 41-12
Stimulation ratio. 55-4
Stimulation results. fracturing. 55-4. 55-5
Stock-tank gas. 39-9. 39-14
Stock-tank measurement. 32-6. 32-7
Stock-tank oil. definition. 22-21
Stock-tank oil in place per acre-ft. 40-6,
40-8
Stokes law, 6-56. 6-57. 12-22. 15-18.
15-21. 15.26. 19.14, 19-15
Stoneley waves. 51-12 to 51-14, 51-2.5.
51-27. 51-47
Stopcock controller, 16-4
Slobcocked wells. 32-15
Storage capacity offshore, 18-7
Storage faciliti&. 6-60
Storage of sucker rods. 9-10, 9-13, 9-14
Storage pressure of products, I I-12
Storage size, evaporation losses. I I 12
Storage-tank types,
bolted-steel, I l-l, I l-3
cone-bottom, I l-2
field-welded. I l-2
fixed-roof. I l-2
flat-sided (non-API), I l-2
floatmg. I l-2
pipe. I l-2. I l-4
welded-steel. I l-l
Storm chokes. 13-57
Straight-hne extrapolation, 40-3 I, 40-32
Straight-line relationship, 39-25
Straightening vanes, 12-22. 12-25. 13-36
Strain-gauge transducers, 30-5. 30-7
Strain-sensitive resistor, 30-7
Strand Ime, 29-4. 29-5. 29-9
Stratification. 36-5, 42-3. 45-7 to 45-10,
45.12. 45-13
Stratification ratio, 39-19
Stratified reservoirs. 44-7. 44-29
Stratigraphy. 44-2
Stratigraphy from dipmeter patterns, 53. IO.
53-12, 53-14
Stratigraphic traps, 29-3 to 29-S. 29-8. 44-2
Streamlines. 44-15. 44-16
Streamtube models, 45-10
Street Ranch field, Texas, 46-26 to 46-2X
Stress analyses. 18.25. 18-27
Stress-concentration effect, 9-8
Stress-concentration factor. 9-5
Stress conversions. 58-7
Stress, in acoustic-wave propagation in
rocks, 51-6. 51-7
Stress, in suspended casing strings, 2-36
Stress-range diagram. 9-I I. 9- I3
Stress ranges recommended for riser pipe,
18-17
Stress relaxation, 2% I3
Stress, Sl unit for, 58-5. 58-l I. 58-23,
58-34
Stress/strain diagram. 5 l-2
Stretch factor, IO-6
Stretch, in casing, 2-35 to 2-37
in tubing. 2-46
Strike of a formation, 53-7
Strike-slip faults. 29-3, 29-9
Stripper hanger, 3-39
Stripper rubber, 3-9
Stripper wells. 8-6
Strongly impliclt procedure (SIP), 48-16
Strontium, 24-9. 24-18. 4444. 44-45
Structural bearings. 10-4. 10-5, IO-12
Structural casing, 18-18. IX-19
Structural closure, 29-l. 29-5, 29-6
Structural con1ours, 39-22
Structural-design process. offshore,
environmental criteria
fatigue analysis. 18-2; l*-25
field-development plan. 18-25. 18-26
in-situ analysw. IX-26
transportation and launch. 18-26. 18-27
Structural drawings. 15-31
Structural engineer. 18-Z
Structural-frame analysis. I X-22
66 PETROLEUM ENGINEERING HANDBOOK
Structural maps, 41-8
Structural nose, 29-3, 29-4
Structural pinchouts. 44-39
Structural traps. 29-l to 29-3
Structure *a,, 44-38
Structure map, West Heidelberg field,
46-28. 46-30
Structure. principal factor in gravitational
segregation, 442
Structure selection offshore.
concrete gravity, IS-25
guyed towers, 18-25
template/jackets. IS-25
tension-leg platform, 18-25
Structures, offshore.
background and philosophy, 18-22
classification of, 18-22 to 18-24
dcaign process of, 18-25 to IS-27
guyed towers, 18-24
selection of, 18-25
special services. 18.25
r&ion-leg platform. 18-24. I X-25
Strudel scour, 18-43
Studded adapter flange, 3-9
Studded flanged outlets. 3-3
Studded flanges, 3-8
Stymie condition, 5-54
Sub-bottom profiler. 18-5
Subleases, 41-15. 57-7
Subhmation curves. 23-l. 23-2
Submarine cables, 18-44. 18-45
Submarines. 3.38
Submerged Lands Act of 1953. 57-l I
Submerged zone, 3-36
Submersible electric motor, 7-l. 7-3. 7-4
Submersible electrically driven pumps,
I l-14
Submersible pumps, 7-l to 7-17. 44-42
Submersible rig. 18-2. 18-S. 18-6
Subordinate phase. 446
Subscript symbols in alphabetical order,
59-63 to 59-70
Subsea applications,
fixed platform drilling. 3-38
floating drilling vessels, 3-39
SPPEiOCS equipment, 3-39
Subsea completion system. IS-3
Subsea drilling system. IS-IO
Subsea hydraulic power unit, 18-52
Subsea (seafloor) pipelines, 18-29, 18-30,
18-35, 18-36
Subsea satellite wells, 18-33
Subsea tree, 18-31, 18-32
Subsea valve actuator. 18-50, 18-5 1
Subsea well completions,
control lines, 18-33. 18-34
flowlines, 18-33. 18-34
introduction, I E-30. 18-3 1
manifolds. 18-32
multiple templates. 18-32
single satellite wells. 18-31
well servicing. 18-34
well workovers, 18-34
wset vs. dry, 18-31
Subaea wellhead installation. 6-6. 6-7
Subsea wells. 18-3. 18-14, 18-31. 18-34 to
18-38. I X-48
Subsurface completions. 3-26
Subsurface-controlled subsurface safety
valves (SSCSVs). 3-29
Subsurface tlowing pressure. calculation,
33-18
SUbSUr~dCC mapping, 40. I
Subsurface~pressure surveys. 42-4
Subsurface pressures. calculation, 33-13
Subsurface pump. 9. I, 9-I 3
Subwrfxe-pump bores. X-l
Subsurface-pump woke length, Y-12
Subsurface safetv valves (SSSVs). 3-26.
3-27, 3-31, j-33, 3-34. 6-48
Subsurface saltwater, 44-42
Subsurface shut-m pressure, calculation,
33-19
Subsurface sucker-rod pumps, 8-l to S-10
Subsurface waters, 24-3. 24-19
Successive overrelation (SOR), 48-16
Sucker-rod fxlure, lo-29
Sucker-rod life, IO-17
Sucker Rod Pumping Research Inc., 8.10
Sucker-rod pumps, 6-8, 8-1, 8-10
Sucker-rod string. 8-8, 8-10, 10-1, 10-5,
IO-6
Sucker rods.
allowable stress and range of stress, 9-8
chemical and mechanical properties, 9-4
chemistries of. 9-5
couplings and subcouplings, 9-3, 9-4
fiberglass, 9-10 to 9-14
general dimension. 9-2. 9-3
introduction, 9-I
joint circumferential displacement values,
9-10
mcchamcal properties, 9-5
pin failures, 9-9
rcfcrences. 9-14
rod and pump data, 9-6, 9-7
steel. 9-l to 9-10
storage, 9. IO
tolerances, 9-3
Suction gradlent, 6-29
Suction pipmg. 15-17
Sukkar and Cornells method, 34.9 to 34-24
Sukkar-Cornell integral f[lr BHP calculation,
34-10 to 34-22
Sulfate-reducmg bacteria (SRB), 44-41,
44-43, 4444
Sulfide stress crackmg, 3-35, 3-36
Sulfonates, 19-10, 47-16
Sulfur, 3-3. 10-16. 19-28, 24-16, 46-22
Sulfur dioxide. 14-17. 14-22
Sulfur il. I l-6
Sulfur/oxide ran, 52-7
Sulfuric acid, 1 l-6
Summation-of-tluids method, orositv. 27-1
Sun Oil Co.. 46-15, 46-18. 46-29 to*46-32
Supercompressibility factor, 13-8, 22-20,
~33.13
Supercritical CO*, 45-5
Supercritical-tluid drive, 45-5, 45-6
Superficial velocitv of gas. 34-46
Superheated stea, 46-j
Superposition, 35.8, 35.9, 40-12
Suber&ry control and data acquisition
(SCADA), 16-l. 16-2, 16-6 to 16-10,
16-12
Suplacu de Barcau field, Romania, 46-4,
46-1.5. 46-18. 46-28, 46-29
Surface-active agents,
addme to oil. 56-2
in coitrolling stability of emulsions, 19-l
in drilling fluids, 445
Surface-active agents in waterflooding.
interfacial-tenTinn reduction, 44-40
mohilitv Improvement. 44-39. 4440
rock-&ttab~lity alteration. 44-40
Surface-active chemicals, 24-2
Surface area of crude. evaporation from,
1 I-12
Surface area of fracture. 55-2, 55-X
Surface area, specific, 28-8
Surface casing. 3-3
Surface closmg pressure, gas-lift valves,
5-44 to 5-47
Surface control valve. 18-50
Surface-controlled subsurface safety valves
(SCSSVs). 3-29. 18-47. 18-48
Surface-driven pumps. 4442
Surface environment, 36-2
Surface equipment, hydraulic pumping,
control manifolds, 6.54
fluid controls, 6-51
lubricators, 6-54
power-fluid systems, 6-54 to 6-57
power-oil tank and accessories, 6-57 to
6-59
pumps, 6-49 to 6-54
single-well systems, 6-60 to 6-63
Surface extractmn efticiency, 52-18
Surface facilities, design and operating
program for, 39-23
for closed power-fluid system, 6-59
for open power-fluid system, 6-58
for saltwater disposal and waterflooding,
15-l to 15-33
formulating policy for. 40-l
Surface-flowline hackpressure, 5-54
Surface-gas gravity td well-fluid gravity
ratio, 21-17
Surface geothermal temperature, 5-48
Surface injection-gas pressure, 5-44
Surface kick-off injection-gas pressure,
5-46, 5-48
Surface-line heat losses, 46-4
Surface opening pressures, gas-lift valve,
5-39
Surface preparation for coatings. I l-5
Surface production equipment, 12-2
Surface production facilities, 36-2
Surface bumping unit, 9-1, 9-3, 9-13
Surface pumps. 6-49 to 6-51
Surface-recording BHP gauges, 30.4. 30.5
Surface safety valves (SSVs), 3-19 to 3.21,
3-27, 3-31, 3-33. 3-34. 3-39. 18-47.
18-48
Surface seismic shear surveys, 5 I-28
Surface separation equipment, 40-24
Surface steam generators, 46-4, 46-19
Surface tension, 19-14, 22-16, 22-17,
22-19, 22-21, 24-16. 47-8, 54-6 to 54-8,
58-35. 58-38
Surface transfer pumps, 19-28
Surface unloading flowing wellhead
temperature, 5-46. 5-48
Surfactant absorption on metal oxide
surface. 47-15
Surfactant as foaming agent, 55-6
Surfactant breakthrough times, 47-17
Surfactantlbrineioil phase behavior. 47-1 I to
47-13
Surfactant chemistry, 47-7
Surfactantidivalent comolexes. 47-15
Surfactant flooding, 48-j
Surfactantipolymer processes, 23.7
Surfactant ietdntion; 47-10, 47-15 to 47-17
Surfactant slug, 48-5
Surfactant systems. 23-8
Surfactants, adsorption of. 47-8
chemistry of. 47-7
classiticatlon of, 47-7
definition of, 54.6
in interfacial-tension reduction, 44-40
in mud removal. 56-l
in water blocks and emulsion removal.
56-2
micellaripolymer. 47-7
molecular structures. 47-7
reducing acid reaction rate. 54-8
solutions, 47-11
surface tension of. 47-8
to avoid emulsification. 54-9, 54-10
Surge tank, 24-3, 44-47
Surging, applicability of horizontal
separator, 12-35
in gas-lift installations. 5-I. S-22, 5.24,
5-38
in rod pumps, X-4
SUBJECT INDEX 67
Surging flow. 13-52, 13-53
Suspended solids, 15-18, 19-15, 24-5.
44-36. 44-45
Swab cups or noses, 6-47
Swabbing. 52-17, 52-18
Sweden. 12-39
Sweep after breakthrough. 44-29
Sweep efficiency. 39-18, 46- 14
Sweep efficiency at breakthrough, 4419,
44-20
Sweepout-pattern efficiency, 4423 to 44-25,
44-28
Sweet corrosion, 3-35, 4-4, 4-5, 9-8
Sweet gas, 11-10, 14-21, 14-22
Sweet natural-gas systems method, for
estimatmg initial hydrate formation, 25-5
Sweetening by ethanolamines, 14-2 1, 14-22
Swelling clays, 26-18
Swelling tests. 48-9
Switchboard. electric submersible pump
(ESP), 7-5 to 7-7, 7-12
Switchboard-motor controller. 7-8
Switches for control of oilfield motors,
LO-27
Switching valves, 13-56
Switzerland. 12-39
Symbol subscript definitions in alphabetical
order. 59-52 to 59-62
Symbol subscripts in alphabetical order,
59-63 to 59-70
Symbols in alphabetical order, SPE
standard, 59-2 to 59-17
Symmetrical folds, 29-2
Syngenetic interstitial water. definition.
24-18
Syntactic foam, 1X-15
Synthetic polymers in acidizing, 54-8
System. definition. 22-2 1
Systeme International dUnit&. 58-2
T
Tadpole plot, 53-10. 53-12
Tadpole symbol or structure, 47-7
Tailgate booster, 7-2
Tailing. 9-10
Taint, computer subordinate routme,
17-6
Tandem labyrinth path model, 7-l 1
Tandem pumps, 6-7, 6-8
Tangential method of calculating dtrecttonal
surveys, 53-5. 53-6
Tangible cost. 41-I 1. 41-13
Tangible property, 57-l I
Tank battery,
connections, II-9
consolidation. 16-1, 16-2
for hydrogen-sulfide crude storage. I I-10
installation and hookup, 11-Y
maintenance and operation, 11-10, 11-l 1
Tank bottoms, 19-32
Tank calibration. 17-3
Tank cars. measurement and calibration,
17-3
Tank corroston protection,
cathodic protection, 11-6
coatings specifications, I l-4 to 11-6
Tank dimensions, 114, 11-5
Tank gauging, 17-3, 174
Tank grades, 11-I 1
Tank pressures. evaporation loss from,
11-12
Tank-type depletion performance, 37-10
Tank-type material balance, 37-2, 37-4,
37-19, 37-21
Tank-type models. 37-2, 37-4, 37-5, 37-l I,
37-14. 37-17
Tanker loading operations, 18-36
Tanker mooring devices. IS-2
Tanker mooring systems. 18-43
Tankers. 18-43
Tankers vs. semtsubmersibles. 18-35, 18-36
Tanks, aboveground. nonrefrigerated,
emergency ventmg capacity, 11-7, I l-8
means of venting, 1 l-8. I l-9
normal ventmg capacity, 1 l-7
venting requirements, determination of,
I l-6
Tanks, measurement and calibration, 17-3
Tapered valve seat. 5- 15
Tar production history, 46-28
Tar sands, 46-3, 46-31
Tar Springs sand reservoir, Illinois, 40-32,
40-33
Tamer method. 37-10. 40-9, 40-10
Tax consequences related to conveyances,
41-15. 41-16
Taxation, 57. I1
Taylor method, 37-10 to 37-13
Taylor series expansions, 48. IO
Tectonic stresses, 55-l
Teflon@ seal rings, 2-1, 2-38. 4-5
Telemetry. 3-18, 3-27, 18-45. 51-27
Telemetry system, 53-1, 53-2
Tell-tale screen, 56-8
Temperature,
actual, 31-2 to 314
average annual, U.S., 31-3
gradient, effect of cement behind casing,
31-6
ideal curves of flutd migrating through
casing hole, 31-5
in wells, 31-l to 31-7
logs. 31-l
mean surface, 31-3
radial differential log, 3 1-7
static bottomhole. 31-6
surveys. 31-l to 31-7, 42-4
Temperature-base factor, 13-3, 13-12
Temperature controls, 12-40
Temperature conversion chart, 58-39
Temperature conversion tolerance
requirements, 58-7
Temperature correction factor (coefficient).
5-6. 5-7, 30-2, 30-3
Temperature data log, 52-23
Temperature dependence of compressional-
and shear-wave velocities. 51-8
Temperature dtstribution.
in annular completion, 46-6
in Marx-Langenheim model, 46-7
Temperature effect of tubmg string, 4-Y.
4-10
Temperature. effect on acid reaction rate.
54-4
effect on BHP gauges, 30-2, 30-3. 30-5
effect on corrosion inhibition, 54-6
effect on confined bellows-charged dome
pressure, 5-6 to 5-8
effect on elastic-wave velocities, 51-7
Temperature gradient. 33-18, 58-28
Temperature log, 46-26, 49-25
Temperature measurement, 16-7
Temperature. method of measuring of
petroleum and petroleum products, 17-5
Temperature of crude, evaporation loss,
11-12
Temperature, of liquid hydrocarbons. 17-5
Temperature profiles. 4-6. 4-7
Temperature ranges, of gas-condensate
reservoirs, 39-2
Temperature rating of insulations, IO-26
Temperature txe of motor. IO-25
Temperature sensors, IO-29
Temperature. SI unit for, 58-5, 58-23,
58-24. 58-28
Temperature transition zone, 52-22
Temperature vs. pressure drop. 14-2
Template/jacket, 18-22. 18-23. IS-25
Ten Section field, California. 34-35
Tendon system, 18-25
Tenneco Oil Co., 46-14, 46-18
Tensile load, 18-22
Tensile strength, 3-3. 9-4. 9-5. 9-8, Y-12,
1 l-9, 18-49. 30-4. 55-l
Tensile strength, API casing and liner
casing, 2-2
API tubing, 2-37
line pipe. 2-46
of construction materials. 12-41
Tensiometer, 24-16
Tension-leg platform (TLP). 18-2. 18-3,
18-24, 18-25. 18-44
Tension packer. 4-2. 4-3
Tension tests of round-thread casing jomts.
2-60
Tension-type tubing hanger. 3-16
Tensional forces, 29-2, 29-3
Tensioner-line angle, 18-17
Tensioning unit, 18-13
Tensleep sand reservoir. Wyoming, 40-19
Terminology in conversion and rounding
practices, 58-8, 58-9
Ternary-phase diagrams, 23-4 to 23-6, 23-8,
23-13, 47-l 1
Tertiary oil recovery. 24-2, 24-3
Tertiary polymer floods. 47-6. 47-10
Tertiary recovery, wet combustion, 46-30.
46-33
Test pressures.
extra-strong threaded line pipe, 2-50
extreme-line casing, 2-62
internal-joint tubing, 2-62
plain-end line pipe, 2-50 to 2-53, 2-62
threaded line pipe, 2-47, 2-62. 2-63
wellhead equipment. 3-1, 3-2
Test procedures, gas-condensate reservoir.
39-5
Test-rack closing pressure, 5-6. 5-17, 5-18.
5-20
Test-rack opening pressure, 5-6 to 5-8. 5-16
to 5-18, 5-21, 5-22, 5-29. 5-31 to 5-37,
5-46, 5-47. 5-49 to 5-51
Test separator. 12-17, 32-6
Tester setting temperature, S-46. 5-49
Testing crude oil, 17-I to 17-8
Testing natural gas fluids. 17-7
Tetrabromoethane. 52-20
Tetraethylene glycols (TRG), Id- 18
Texaco, 464. 46-15, 46-18
Texas, 16-12. 16.13. 18-2. 19.15. 21-2,
214, 21-S. 24-3, 24-7, 24-S. 24-10,
24.20, 24-21. 26-7. 29-3. 29-4, 29-7,
29-8, 32-l. 32-2. 33-l. 33-21, 36-l.
36-2, 36-6. 39-3, 39-20 to 39-22. 39-25.
40-19, 40-23, 40-33. 40-34. 41-4,
44-14, 44-36, 4437, 44-40, 44-42.
44-46, 46-3, 46-4, 46-15. 46-18, 46-26
to 46-32. 47-3. 47-7. 47-22. 49-l 1,
49-3 I, 58-20
Texas allowable rule. 32-l
Texas gulf coast, 27-6 to 27-8
Texas Railroad Commission. 32-l. 32-2,
32-15, 33-15
Texture of foams. 47-8
Texture of rock, 51-8 to 51-l 1
Thallium, 50. I3
Thaw settlements, 18-41
Theoretical considerations of multiphase
flow, 34-36, 34-37
Theoretical considerations of thermal
recovery,
surface-hne heat losses. 46-4
wellbore heat losses, 46-5
Theorettcal models, 51-S
Theoretical productivtty index. 32-4
6X PETROLEUM LNGINEERING HANDBOOK
Theories of emulsions.
color. 11-5
definition of an emulsion, 19-l. 19-2
effect on viscosity of fluids. 19-6
emulsifying agents, 19-3 to 19-5
how emulsions form, 19-2. 19-3
prevention of, 19-5
stability of, 19-5, 19-6
Theory of elastic-wave propagation in rocks.
51.49, 51-50
Theory of elasticity.
bulk modulus, 51-l. 51-2
elastic parameters, relationships among.
51-2
Poissons ratio. 51-2
shear modulus. 51-I
Youngs modulus, 5 Ill
Thermal-absorption cross section, 50-10,
50-22
Thermal ammeter, IO-33
Thermal analysis, 18-41
Thermal breathing, 11-6
Thermal conductance, conversion of units,
table. 1-79
Thermal conductivity, conversion of units,
table. 1~79
detector (TCD). 52-4 to 52-6. 52-l 1
of a gas. 3 l-2
of a material over a depth increment,
52-22
of adjacent formation, 31-7
of cement, 46-b
of common sediments, 3 l-4
of geological strata. 3 l-2
of insulating materials. 46-4
of- Kern River oil sands. 46-39
of mineral oils in motors, 7-3
of refrigerants. 14-l 1
overburden, 46-7
units and conversion factors, 58-34
variation with brine saturation, 46-37
Thermal contractum of liquid, 22-2 I
Thermal cracking, 46-12, 46-15. 46-16
Thermal detectors, 50-20, 50-21
Thermal-diffusion coefficient. 50-l 1
Thermal diffusivity, 46-5, 46-7. 46-10
Thermal efficiency, 46-8, 46-Y, 46. I4
Thermal energy neutron. 50.11, 50.17.
50-36
Thermal-expansion coefficients, 17-5, 17-6
Thermal-exoansion factor. 13-8
Thermal expansion of hydrocarbon liquids,
22-3, 22-5
Thermal flooding, 40-4
Thermal inbreathing, I l-6. 11-7
Thermal lag, 31-I. 31-2
Thermal model, 484 to 48-7, 48-14
Thermal neutron absorption, 50-4, 50-2 1
Thermal neutron detectors, 50-15
Thermal neutron porosity device, 50-12.
50.20. 50.30, 50-32
Thermal overload relay, IO-29
Thermal packers, 46-19
Thermal porosity device, 50-2 I, 50-28,
50-32
Thermal properties,
chemical kinetics, 46-37
oil viscosities, 46-3 I, 46-34. 46-35
pore-volume compressibility, 46-37
relative-permeability curve, 46-34, 46-37
steam properties, 4640
thermal conductivity, 46-37
vaporization equilibrium. 46-37
Thermal recovery,
analytical models for steam injection, 46-7
to 46-l I
case histories, 46-22 to 46-3 I
current status, 46-3, 46-4
field facilities, 46-19, 46-20
field prolects, 46-13 to 46. I7
general references, 46-45. 46-46
geographical dtstribution of projects. 46-3
historical development. 46-3
in-situ combustion, three forms of, 46-l
to 46-3
mtroductton to. 46-I
laboratory experimentation, 46-12, 46-13
monitoring and coring programs, 46-20,
46-2 I
nomenclature, 46-40, 46-41
numerical simulation, 46-I I, 46- 12
oil recovery, 46-14. 46-15
operational problems and remedies, 46-2 I,
46-22
proJect design, 46-17 to 46-19
references, 46-43 to 46-45
reservoirs amenable to. 46-3, 46-4
steam injection processes, two forms of,
46-l
theoretical considerations, 46-4 to 46-7
thermal properties, 46-3 I to 46-40
well completion, 46-19
Thermal resistance. 58-34
Thermal strength stabilizing agent, 46-19
Thermal stress. 46-19
Thermal trip capabibty of circuit breakers,
IO-28
Thermal venting capacity of tanks, 11-7
Thermalization. SO-22
Thermaiytic Hydrocarbon Analyzer (THA).
52-10, 52-l 1
Thermistor. 16-7, 3 l-2
Thermocouple-amplifier transducers. 46-21
Thermocouples. 16-7, 31-2, 51-5
Thermodynamic equilibrium, 23-12
Thermodynamic temperature, 58-10, 58-23
Thermogenic hydrates, 25-18
Thermometers.
differential, 31-2. 31-5
electrical surface-recording, 31-2. 3 l-5
in gas, 31-2
self-contamed, 3 l-l, 31-Z
time response. 3 l-2
Thermometry. l-68, l-69, 31-2 to 31-7
Thermoplastic line pipe. 15-10
Thermoset restns, 9-12
Thermosetting resin line pipe, 15-10
Thermosiphon. 19-2 I
Thickening agents, 55-5
Thief hatch, 11-9, II-l], 11-13
Thief sampler, 17-1, 17-2
Thin-bed corrections, induction log, 49-17
Thin-film epoxy system, 15-10
Thu-film strain-gauge transducer, 30-7
Thmnest reservoir, fireflood. 46-29
Thtosulfates, 14-22
Third for a quarter transaction, 41-15
l3-spot pattern. 46-17, 47-18, 46-26
Thodos gas-viscosity method, 20-9, 20-15
Thorium. 50-2 to 50-4. 50-15, 50-16, 50.24
to 50-27, 50-34. 50-35
Thread galling, 9-9
Thread limitations, wellhead equipment,
3-1, 3-2
Thread pressure rating for casing, line pipe,
and tubing, 3-3, 3-4
Threaded adapter flange, 3-9, 3-l 1
Threaded flanges, 3-8. 3-17
Threaded line pipe. 246 to 2-49
Threading andmachining dimensions, 2-63,
2-64, 2-67. 2-68
Threading data, API, 2-64 to 2-72
3-D Log . 51-18
3D seismic techniques, 36-I) 36.8, 36.9
3D simulator, 36-10
3D velocity log, 51-44
3D vertical mtgration, 36-9
Three-phase autotransformer, 7-6
Three-phase critical point. 25-15
Three-phase tlow. 28-9
Three-phase induction motors. 10.20, 10.31,
IO-35
Three-phase numerical simulators, 46-7
Three-phase relative mobility, 28-9
Three-phase relative permeability, 28-12
Three-phase saturation condittons. 28-B.
28-9
Three-phase saturation trajectory, 28-7
Three-phase separator, 12-4. 12-5. 12.14.
12-15, 12-19. 12-21, 15.21. 16-7. 16-8
Three-phase standard transformer, 7-6
Three-phase transformer. IO-30
Three-phase voltage, IO-23
Three-phase well tester. horizontal skid-
mounted, 12-4, 12-21
with batch-type meters, 32-9
with oil-volume meter and PD meter,
32-8
with PD meters, 32-7
Three-point rule, 41llO
Three-stage separation, 12-33, 12-34
Three-tube pump, 8-8, 8-9
Three-way bypass valve. 14-S. 14-6
Three-way engine valves. 6-9
Threshold energy, 50-7, 50-9
Threshold pressure, 28-6
Throat annulus. jet pump, 6-38. 6-40, 641.
6-46
Throat-diffuser loss coefficient, 6-37
Throat of jet pump, b-32, 6-34 to 6-37.
6-39 to 6-42. 6-46. 6-47
Throttling discharge of liquid. 12-42
Through-flowline (TFL) completions, 5-2
Through-flowline (TFL) installations. b-2.
6-6, 6-7. 6-34
Through-flowline (TFL) well servicmg,
18-34
Thrust fault, 29-3
Tia Juana Este field. Venezuela. 46-4.
46-15, 46-18
Tickell diagram, 24-19
Tie lines, 23-5, 23-9, 23-10. 45-5
Tier and rate structure, windfall profit tax,
41-15
Time-average equation. 5 I-30, 5 I-33 to
51-35. 51-50
Time-clock tab, IO-28
Time-cycle control. 5-41 to 5.44, 5-54
Time-cycle controller, 5-38, 5-40, 5-4X,
5-53, 5-55, 14.11. 14-20, 16.3, 164.
16-11
Time-cycle-operated controller, adjustment
of. 5-55
Time designation, Sl metric system, 5822
Time lag of a process, 13-52. 13-53
Time-lapse techmque, 50-36
Time of injection operations, 42-2
Time-rate performance, 45. I2
Time, SI units for. 5X-5. 58.22. 58-23.
58-27
Time truncation error, 48-10
Time value of money, 41-3
Title examination, 57-9
Titled polar scan displays. 51-28
Tixier relation, 26-29
Tolerance, definition. 58-9
Tolerances,
of buttress-thread casing coupling, 2-29
of external-upset tubing coupling, 243
of integral-joint tubing upset, 2.45
of line-pipe lengths. 2-47
of nonupset tubing coupling, 2-42
of ring-joint gaskets, 3-28, 3-30, 3-32
of round-thread casing coupling, 2-28
of sucker and pony rods. 9-3, 9-l 1
Toluene, 17-2, 17-5, 24-18, 26-22
Ton as a umt, l-70
SUBJECT INDEX 69
Tool characteristxs. acoustic logging. 5 1-l 5
Tool-face angle, 53-1
Tool for long-spacing acoustic logging.
51-21 to 51-23
Tool span. conventional acoustic logging.
51-16
Tools available for directional surveys,
53-3, 53-4
Tooth efficiency, 52-25
Top-seating holddown. 8-3
Topworka (motor), 13-49
TorIspherical head equations. 12-38
Tornado chart>. 49-28
Torpeda sandstone. 28-10, 46-5
Torque. engine, IO-17
Torque factors, 10-6, IO-7
Torque mode of motors, IO-20 to 10-22,
10-25, 10-31, :O-32
Torque of motor, LO-25
Torque reductions, IO-24
Torque, SI umt for, 58-5, 58-34, 58-38
Torsion. 29-2, 29-9
Torsion modulus, 51-l
Torsional waves. 5 1-2
Tortuosity, 26-28, 26-29, 26-31. 2X-6
Total dissolved solids (TDS), 15-29, 24-5.
24-l to 24-13. 24-20, 44-44, 47-2. 47-3
Total dvnamic head (TDH), 7-10
Total (&o-phase) FVF. 6-47. 6-48, 22-l,
22.13. 22.14. 22-20
Total-gas analysis. 52-3
Total
Total-gas analyzer. 52-9
porosity. 26-2.
Total-gas detector, 52-5
26-3.
Total liauid saturation. 40. IO
26-7
Total solids. M-45
Transmission method, 51-11, 51-12. 51-27
Transmission 011, IO-12
Transmission system, 12-10. 12-l I
Transmitter of sonic meter, 13-49
Transport coefficient, 28-l. 28-3
Transport energy, 34-46
Transport equations, 28-13. 28-14
Transport properties. umts and conversions,
Trespass, 57-2
58-34, 5x-35
Transportation and launch offshore, 18-26
Transportation fatigue. 18-27
Transportation systems offshore.
marine terminals, 18-43
Triangular diagram,
pipeline, 18-42. IS-43
tankers, IX-43
23-4.
Transverse captllary imbibition, 28-12
23-5,
Transverse dispersion, 28-12, 45-6
23-8.
Trap, 12-1
Trap classification. 29-l to 29-6
Trapezoidal integration, 34-24
Trapezoidal rule, 33-17, 40-15
Travel time, 51-15
Travel-time measurement. borehole-
compensated (BHC) log, 51-16
Travelmg-barrel rod pump, X-4, 8-10
Traveling valve. 19-28
Travcrae wa*es, 5 l-2
Treating crude-oil emulsiona. 19-6 to 19-15
Treating emulsions produced from EOR
project\. 19-28
Treatment planning. hydraulic fracturing,
55-9
Treatment plant. 39-24
Tree savers, 55-9
collapse resistance, 2-39, 2-41. 2-43
design factors, 2-38
design safety factors, 2-38, 2-39, 2-45.
2-46
dimensions, 2-42, 2-43. 2-45. 2-58, 2-65.
2-66
elongation, 2-37
equation for calculating performance
properties, 2-46, 2-54 to 2-56
external upset, 2-38 to 2-45
gross linear footage from net footage,
2-45
hydrostatic test pressure, 2-62
integral joint, 2-38 to 2-45
internal yield, 2-39. 2-41, 2-43, 2-46
joint strength. 2-61
joint yield strength, 2-39, 2-41, 2-43,
2-46
Tubing/casing annulus, 6-2, 6-4. 6-5. 18-33,
34-27
multiplication factors. 2-45
nonupset coupling, 2-38 to 2-44
performance properties, 2-38 to 2-43
range lengths, 2-37. 2-38
round-thread and form, 2-58, 2-64
round-thread height dnnensions, 2-66
safety factors, 2-38. 2-39, 2-54 to 2-56
selection of weight and grade, 2-39
special joints, 2-38
stretch when freely suspended. 2-46
string of single weight and grade, 2-38
tensile requirements. 2-37. 2-38
thread dimensions, 2-65. 2-66
tolerance, 2-42. 2-43, 2-45
weight, 2-42, 243. 2-45
vIeId strength. 2-37
Total water. definition of. 27-8 23-13. 45-2 to 45-7
Totally enclosed fan cooled (TEFC) motor, Triaxial PV-comprewbility technique, 26-8,
IO-26 26-9
Totally enclosed nonventilated (TENV)
motor, IO-26
Triethylene glycol (TEG). 14-7. 14-18 to
14-20, 25-19
Tow and launch analysis procedure. 18-27
Toxic concentration of refrigerants. 14-10
Toxic decomposition products of
refrieeranta. 14-I 1
Triethylenr-glycoliwater mixtures, 39-5
Triggering, 51-16, 51-17
Trigonometric functions, table, l-50 to 1-54
Trimdad. 36-9, 46-3
Trinle ooint. 23-l. 23-2
Triplex pumps. 6-1. 6-30. 6-33, 6-45, 6-46,
Tubing cleanliness. 56-3
Tubing constants. 4-10
Tubing hanger bowl, 3-8, 3-13
Tubing hangers, 3-8. 3-l I. 3-14, 3-16,
3-26. 3-37. 3-39
Tubing-head adapter flange, 3-9, 3-11
Tubing-head bowl. 3-8, 3-9. 3-39
Tubing heads, 3-8, 3-11, 3-14, 3-37, 3-39
Tubing installation, 33-2 I
Tubing/packer system,
advantages, 4-6
combination, 4-l I
illustration, 4-9
in completion or workover, 4-10
operational well modes. 4-6 to 4-8
where packers are used, 4-6
Tubing performance curve, 34-50
Tubing plug, 3-35
Tubing-profile calipers, 53-17 to 53-19
Tubing pump. 8-I. 8-4
Tubing response characteristics,
ballooning and reverse ballooning. 4-10
buckling effects, 4-10. 4-l I
introduction. 4-8. 4-9
piston effect, 4-9
temperature effect, 4-9
Tubing-retrievable subsurface safety valve!,
Toxicity: 52-20
Trace-element absorption factor. 50-34
Tracer studies. IS-2j
Tracers. 26-21, 46-21, 52-26
Tracys method, 37-7 to 37-10, 37-21
T&Alaska Pitxline Ssstem. 18-3
Transducer assehbly ofsonic meter, 13-49
Transducer criteria, 30-5
Transducers, 30-6. 30-7. 46-21
Transfer pressure line. 5-48
Transformer voltage drop, lo-33
Transformers. 7-6. 7-l 1, IO-29 to IO-3 I,
10-35. 19-3 I
Tranwnt backpressure, 44-35
Tramlent period, 30-l I to 30. I3
Tramlent-pressure test, 36-7
Tranwnt &tine. 35. I 1
Tranrlent well&t analysis.
buildup tr\ting, 35-15, 35-16
detern&ationof I)~, 35. I6
drawdown test, 35-14, 35-15
Transit time. 51-15
Transit-time integration curves. 51-22
Transit-time log, 51-47, 51-48
Transit-time measurement. 51-14
Transit-time/pressure correlation, 5 l-40
Transition collapse-pre\rure equation, 2-54,
2-55
Transitmn llow (slug-mist), 34-36. 34-37.
34-40
Transition zones, 27-8
Transmonal sediments, 36-3
Transmissibility. 39-19. 48-3, 48-14 to
48-16
6-49 to 6-51. 6-60, 6-61, 15.14, 16-11,
55-9
Tripolite, 51.5, 51-6
Tritium, 46-2 I
Tritium ion, 50-6
Trix-Liz field, Texas. 46-18
Troubleshooting electrtcal submersible pump
(ESP). 7-1, 7-14 to 7-17
Troubleshootmg gutde. 6-28. 6-31 to 6-33,
6-47. 6-51
Troy granite, 51-8 to 51-10
Trube correlation, 20-I I. 20-16
Trube method, 22-l I. 22-12
Trucking charges, al-12
True boiling pomt, 21-7 to 2 l-9
True equdibrium state, 25-3
True mass, dctinition of. I-70
True porosity. SO-20, 50-28 to 50-30
True stratigraphic thickness (TST), 53-10,
53-12, 53-15, 53-16
True vapor pressure, I l-12, 14-13
True vertical depth (TVD). 5-4, 5-6. 18-41,
49-37. 53-3. 53.15, 53-16
True vertical thickness (TVT). 53-10,
53-12. 53-15. 53-16
Truncation, 29-4. 29-S. 29-9
Trustee. definition. 57-3
Tube amplitude mtlo. 51-47. 51-43
Tube-type HZ detector. 52-b. 52-7
Tube wave. Sl-12. 51-47. 51-48
Tubmg.
collapse pressure. 2-46
(SSSVs), 3-27. 3-33
Tubing size vs. constant B. 6-20
Tubing sizes, F, values for, 34-25
Tubing support. electrical submersible pump
(ESP), 7-6
Tubing thread<. wellhead equipment, 3-2
Tubing-to-packer connections, 4-1
Tubular goods sizes. 3-S
Tungsten carbide. 6-34
Tunisia, 24-18
Turbidity, 44-44
Turbine expansion systems. 14-8
Turbine meters, 13-45. 13-49, 16-6, 16-7.
16.12. 17-4, 17-7. 32-6. 32-12
Turbine-powered propulcion systems. 18-43
Turbine prime mover, 18-45
PETROLEUM ENGINEERING HANDBOOK 70
Turbo-expander process, 14-X
Turbocharged engine. IS-16
Turbopumps, 6-67
Turbulence, 14-2. 14-3
Turbulence and short-circuiting factor,
15-19
Turbulence, energy loss due to, 13-2, 13-3
permanent pressure loss from, 13-2
Turbulent flow regime, 28-13
Turnkey format, 15-32
Two-cycle engines, IO-14 to 10-16, IO-19
Two-dimensional (2D) relief maps, 5 l-28
2- and 3D seismic surveys, comparison,
36-9
2D simulator. 36-10
Two-phase compressibility factor. 39-7.
39-8, 39-10, 39-14
Two-phase flow, 34-33, 34-34, 34-37
Two-phase (total) formation volume factor
(FVF), 647, 648. 22-1, 22-13, 22-14,
22-20
Two-phase separators, 12-9, 12-10, 12-17 to
12-19. 12-21. 12-25
Two-phase vertical-flow model, 7-12
Two-phase waterflooding. 47-l
Two-phase well tester.
with positive displacement (PD) meter,
32-8
with volume meters. 32-9
Two-receiver system, acoustic logging.
51-15. 51-16
Two-stage desalting, 19-26, 19-27
Two-stage separation, 12-33, 12-34, 22-7
Type curve, 35-6
Type II(-) phase, 23-8
Types of injection. 424
Typewritmg recommendations, Sl metric
syatcm, 5X-13
U
Ultimate chemical analysis, 21-I. 21-2
Ultimate depletion, 42-2
Ultimate gas recovery, 40-24, 40-34
Ultimate &I recovery, 44-37, 47-20
Ultimate recovery, 30-I I, 36-3, 37-3,
37-21, 37-25, 39-10, 39-13, 39-17,
39-20. 39-23. 39-24. 40-l. 40-2. 40-4.
40-S. 40-11. 40-13, 40-15, 40-16,
40-24, 40-26. 40-32. 40.33. 40-37.
40-39. 41-10. 41-I I. 42-2. 42-6. 44-2 to
444, 447, 4431
Ultimate recovery efficiency. 43-3
Ultimate water requirements. 4441
Ultrahigh-slip motors, IO-19 to 10-24.
10-31. IO-32
Ultrasonic level device. 16-5
Ultrasonic tests. 19-30
Ultrasonic thickness indicators. 12-40
Ultraviolet absorption unit, 12-16
Ultraviolet detectors, 3-34
Ultraviolet light, 52-10, 52-l 1
Ultraviolet photographs, 46-21
Ultraviolet radiation, I l-9
Ultraviolet (UV) sensors, 18-47
Umbilicals in subaea control systems, 18-49
Umbrella effect, 43-7
Unbalanced backpressure regulator, 5-13
Unbalanced gas-lift valves. 5-39
Unbalanced pressure regulator, 5-12
Unbalanced. single-element gas-lift valves,
5-12, 5-14. 5-17. 5-19 to 5-22, 5-41 to
5 -44
Unconformity, 29-5, 29-8. 29-9, 49-25.
53-12
Uncrosslmked gels, 55-5
Underbalance method, 56-5
Underbalanced condition, 52-17 to 52-19
Undercurrent loadmg. 7-15
Underllow slurry, 15-19
Underground storage, 11-13, 1 I-14
Undersaturated carbonate reservoir, 44-36
Undersaturated oil, 37-10
Undersaturated oil reservoirs, 40-7, 40-12
Undersaturated reservoir, 37-5, 37-6, 37-9
Undersaturated system, definition, 22-21
Undersaturated systems, oil FVF for,
Trube method, 22-l I, 22-12
Vasquez and Beggs method, 22-12, 22-13
Undersaturated systems, oil-viscosity
correlations, 22-16
Undervoltage relay, IO-28
Underwriters Laboratories Inc., IO-27
Undiscounted future net cash flow. 41-5
Unfavorable mobduy ratio, 28-7
Uniboom. 18-5
Union of Soviet Socialist Republics (USSR),
12.39. 21-2
Umon Oil Co.. 46-15. 47-22
Unit displacement, 43-10, 43-l I
Unit displacement efficiency, 42-3, 43-3,
43-5: 43-6, 43-8, 43-9 -
Unit-of-production basis, 41-16, 41-17,
41-23
Unit of weights and measures, definition of,
l-68
Unit operations, 57-7, 57-8
Unit pressure of fluid columns, 6-22, 6-23
Unit-recovery equation,
depletion recovery factors, 40-10 to 40-12
depletion-type reservoir, 40-8
dry-gas reservoir, 40-25
Muskats method. 40-9
Tamers method. 40-9, 40-10
water-drive reservoir, 40-16
Unit-recovery factor, 40.16, 40.18, 40-19,
40-24
Unit recovery for gas reservoir without
water drive. 40-24
18-23. 18-25, 18-46, 24-l. 24-2, 24-6,
24-21. 36-2, 39-16, 40-16, 41-12, 44-1,
44-4. 51-l. 52-22, 52-26, 52-30
U.S. areas. core-analysis data from, 27-9
U.S. Beaufort Sea. 18-3
U.S. Bureau of Mines (USBM), l-80, 33-1,
Unit response function. 35-8, 35-9
United Geophysical. 51-I
United States (U.S.), l-68 to l-71, 9-8,
12-38, 12-39, 17-4, 18-3, 18-18, 18.20,
Unitization of tank batteries, 32-7
Unitized BOP stack, 18-12
Unitized pressure-energized secondary seal,
3-6
Unitorque geometry, IO-4
Units and names to be avoided, 58-5
Units and systems of weights and measures,
British and U.S. systems, l-69, I-70
relative density and density, l-80
standards of, l-70, I-71
subdivision of umts. I-70
tables of, l-71 to l-80
the metric system, 1-68. l-69
unit and standard definitions, l-68
Universal rails, motor mounts, IO-19
U. of Houston, 50-15
Unloading and loading sucker rods, 9-10
Unloading daily production rate, 5-23
Unloading flowing-pressure traverse, 5-28,
5-32
Unloading flowing-temperature-at-depth
traverse. 5-32
Unloading gas-lift valve, 5-55
Unloadinp gas-lift valve depths, 5-51
Unloading gas-lift valve temperature, 5-46.
5-48
Unloading intermittent-spacing-factor
traverse. 5-45. 5-46
Unloading procedure, gas lift, 5-53 to 5-55
Unloading temperature traverse. 5-46
Unrecoverable oil, 44-11
Unsegregated reservoir, 37-5
Unstable properties, sample for determining,
24-4
Unsteady-state methods of relative-
pernledbihty measurement, 28-3, 28-10,
28-12, 28-14
Upflow filters, 15-20
Upkicking, 6.31
Upset configuration, 9-2
Upstream taps, 13-26 to 13-29, 13-33,
13-34, 13-37
Urethane jacket, 18-49
Utah, 24-8, 24-20, 24-21. 46-16. 46.30.
46-31. 46-33, 46-34
V
Uranium, 24-16, 50-2 to 50-4, 50-15.
50-16, 50-23 to 50-27, 50.34. 50-35
33-3
USBM BHP gauge, 30-I
U.S. Bureau of Standards, 21-8
U.S. bushel. l-69, I-70
U.S. Coast Guard jurisdiction, 18-44
U.S. customary umts. 5X-9
U.S. Dept. of Interior, 57-I 1
U.S. DOE, 21-9, 45-l
U.S. gallon, 1.69. l-70
Urnted States Geological Survey (USGS),
3-39. 41-9
U.S. Government. 53-5
U.S. gulf coast area. 24-7, 24-8, 24-17
U.S. Metric Board, l-69
U.S. Mineral Management Service, 18-5
U.S. Natural Gas Policy Act of 1978, 57-10
U.S. Navy. 18-4
U.S. oil production by EOR, 46-3
U.S. OCS Orders. 18-46. 18-47
U.S. Prototype Kilogram No. 20. l-69,
I-70
U.S. sieve number, 56-6, 56-7
U.S. survey foot, l-69
U.S. system of weights and measures. l-69,
I-70
U.S. Tax Reduction Act of 1975, 57-i I
U.S. Weather Bureau, 31-2
Unitization agreements, 41-9, 57-8
Unitization. definition of, 57-7
V-belt drive, 10-5. lo-12
Vacuum-breaker holes, II - I3
Vacuum deaeration. 15-29
Vacuum distillation, 27-8
Vacuum-line system, 1 I-13
Vacuum models, 46-l 3
VaCUUm relief of storage tanks, 1 l-7
Vacuum units and conversions, 58-29
Validity of simulation results.
model assumptions, 48-9, 48-10
spatial truncation errors, 48-10, 48-12
uncertain reservoir-description data.
48-12. 48-13
Valuation,
analytical methods for computation of
appraisal value. 41-3 to 41-R
cash-flow projection preparation, 41-3
check list of data required for evaluation,
41-8, 41-9
fair-market-value determination, 41.2.
41-3
Valuation concepts,
accounting method, 41.16. 41.17. 41-22,
41.23
average annual ROR method. 41-23,
41-24
DCF method, 41-17 to 41-20
Hoskolds method. 41-16. 41-20 to 41-22
iUBJECT INDEX 71
MorkillF method, 41-16. 41-22
Valuation methods. equations, 41-17. 41-18
Valuatmn of oil and gas reserves.
concepts of. 41-16 to 41-24
development and operating costs. 41-1 I.
41-12
federal taxes. 41-12 to 41-16
forecast of future production rate. 41-Y to
41-11
general references, 41-37
interest tables and deferment factors,
41-25 to 41-36
nomenclature. 41-36
references, 41-37
types of oil and gas property ownership,
41-I. 41-2
valuation, 41-2 to 41-9
Valve depths, continuous-flow gas-lift
installation, 5-32 to 5-35
Valve depths. gas lift, 5-28
Valve mechanics, gas lift,
bellows-assembly load rate. 5-16, 5-17
bellows protection, 5-16
constant closing pressure. S-13
crosswer seat. 5-16
inJection-gas volumetric throughput
profiles, 5-20, 5-21
introduction. S-12
opening and closing pressures, 5-19
pilot and differential opening njection-
pressure-operated valves, S-13. 5-14
port configurations, 5-15
production-pressure factor and valve
spread. 5-19. 5-20
purpoacs of valves, 5-12
specifications and stem travel. 5-14, 5-15
static-force balance equations, 5-17 to
5-19
unbalanced single-element valves. 5-12.
5-13
Valve port area, 5-36
Valve port size, gas lift, 5-44
Valve-spacing transfer production pressures.
5-48
Valve specifications and stem travel, 5-14.
5-15
Valve spread. 5-19
Valve surface closing pressure, 5-47
Valve switches, 16-3
Valve-travel increment. 13-54
Valve types. 16-3. 16-4
Valves at wellhead. 3-11 to 3-13
Valves, gas-lift.
crossover seats, 5-15
for intermittent lift, S-42. 5-43
injection-pressure operated, 5-12 to 5-14
mechanics, 5-12 to 5-21
mtrogen-charged. 5-16. 5-17
pilot-operated. 5-13
port configuration. 5-15
production-pressure-operated, 5-13
purpose of, 5- 12
unbalanced. single-element, 5-12, 5-13
wireline-retrievable, 5-2
van der Waals equation. 20-7 to 20-9,
23-12
van der Waals forces, 47-8
Van Everdingen, Timmerman, and
McMahon method. 38-9 to 38-l I
Vanadium, 50-23, 50-35
Vane-type compressor, I l- 13
Vane-type mist extractor, 12-S. 12-9. 12-11
Vapor control in storage tanks, I I-12 to
II-14
Vapor equivalent of stock-tank liquid, 39-10
Vapor/liquid equtlibrutm (VLE) constant,
14-16
Vapor/liquid equilibrtum ratio, 39-l I.
39-12. 39-15
Vaporillquid:hydrute formation condmons.
25-13
Vapor losses. II-II. 11-12
Vapor pressure, 6-36, II-I I, I l-12. 19-8.
20-3. 20-11 to 20-13, 20-16, 20-17
Vapor-pressure curves,
for binary mixtures. 23-4
for light hydrocarbons, 23-4
Vapor pressure, empty hydrate, 25-l I
of water. 25-15
temperature curves. 14-13
temperature plot, 20-12
Vapor recovery, equipment. 19-32
line valve. 11-I I
system. 11-12. II-13
unit. 15-27
Vapor/solid equilibrium constants, 25-7,
25-8
Vapor-solids equilibrium ratio method, 25-5
Vaporization/condensation phenomenon,
46-11 to 46-13
Vaporization (vapor-pressure) curve. 23-l.
23-2
Vaporization equilibrium. of an oil fraction,
46-37
of hydrocarbons. 46-12
Vaporization losses, storage tanks, II-12
Vaporizing ga$ drive, 45-l. 45-2, 45-4,
45-5, 45-13
Vaporizing gas drive simulator, 45-14
Vara as length unit. 58-7, 58-21
Variable-bore rams, 1% I I
Variable deck load, 18-7
Variable deck-load capacity, 18-7
Variable Density LogTM (VDL), 51-18,
51-35, 51-41, 51-42, 51-45. 51-46
Variable-density presentation, 5 I-24, 51-25
Variable flowing pressure-gradient method,
5-22
Variable-gradlent design, 5-22
Variable-gradient valve spacing, 5-32 to
5-37
Variable-inductance transducer. 30-6
Variable-reluctance transducer, 30-5
Variable-speed drive, 7-7 to 7-9. 7-12. 7-16
Variables that affect sucker-rod string and
pumping-umt loadIn& IO-5
Variance, 38-9
Vasquez and Beggs correlations, 22-7 to
22-13
Velocity, equivalents (table), l-76
in gas lines, 15-7
in liquid lines, 15-2. 15-5
of propagation. 51-2
porosity correlations, 5 l-34
porosity laboratory data. 5 l-6
ratio. compressional to shear wave, 51-35
to 51-38
Velocity meters.
derivation of an orifice equation, 13-2.
13-3
energy balance. 13-l. 13-2
forms of meter, 13-2
Vena contracta. 13-3
Venango fields. Pennsylvania. 44-4
Venezuela. 6-24. IO-IS, 12-39. 18-l. 19-2.
21-4, 24-6. 24-9, 24-13, 27-9, 27.20,
46-3. 46-4. 46.15. 46.16, 46.18, 58-20
Vent discharge for tanks, I I-Y
Venting atmospheric and low-pressure
storage tanks. 1 l-6 to I I-9
Venting capacity of tank<, I I-7
Venting requirements for storage tanks,
II-6
Ventura Avenue field. California, 40-12
Ventura field. Californta, 6-24
Venture capital. 57-8
Venturi plug valves, 3-12
Venturi tube, 13-2
Venturi-tube flowmeter. 32-13
Verscntates . 44-45
Vertical communication. 4X-10. 48.12
Vertical conformance, 44-5
Vertical coverage. 44-39
Vertical cylindrical vessel. 15-24
Vertical electric grids. 19-26
Vertical emulsion treater?. 19.7, 19.21 to
19-23
Vertical flow downward, 34.28
Vertical-flow system, 26-12. 26-13
Vertical fractures, 44-25. 44-28, 51-28.
51-46 tn 51-48. 55-2, 55-9
Vertical free-water knockout. 19-17
Vertical hydraulic fracture. 35-4
Vertical multiphase flowing-gradient
correlation, 6-27, 6-28. 6-30. 6-43, 6-45
Vertical multistage pumps, 1 I-14
Vertical permeability, 37-5, 48-8
Vertical recycling separator. 12-14
Vertical reservoir continuity, 36-4
Vertical saturation distribution. 37-4
Vertical scrubber, 12-38
Vertical sections, directlonal-data
presentation, 53-7
Vertical segregation, 37-l
Vertical separator, 12-l. 12-7 to 12-9.
12-14, 12-16 to 12-25. 12-27 to 12.30,
12-35, 12-40, 18-28
Vertical-separator sizing, 12-29, 12.30
Vertical settling tank. 19-2 1
Vertical-sided structures. 18-42
Vertical splits of pipe, 53-18, 53-20
Vertical stratification, 39-18
Vertical stresses, 55-l
Vertical sweep, 46-14, 46-21. 46.30. 46-3 I
Vertical sweep efficiency, 39-17. 39-18.
47-11 47-2
Vertical three-phase oil/gas/water separator.
12-4
Vertical three-phase separator. 19-17
Vertical vessels, 13-53
Vertically fractured reservoirs. 35-4
Vertically fractured reservoirs, shape
factors. 35-5
Vessel-motion terminology. 18-7
Vessel response to motion. 18-X
Vibrating crystal (quartz) transducer. 30-6.
30-7
Vibratmg wire transducer, 30-5 to 30.7
Vibration,
dampening, 16-5
fatigue, IS-34
lackmg in jet pumps, 6-34
of casing in high-current drilling, 18-21
problems in instrumentation for gas
measurement, 13-I
stresses, 3-1
surface pumps with oil power tluid, 6-55
switch for pumping unit. IO-29
vortex shedding, 18-2 I, 18-22
Vinyl ester, 9-12
Viscosities of gas-condensate (CC) systems,
39-4
Viscosity breaker, 56-8
Viscosity-controlled fluids, 55-4
Viscosity corrections. 6-20
Viscosity correlations. gas. 20-9
Viscosity factor, 20-15. 20-16
Viscosity gradients, 6-69
Viscosity in SI metric system. 58-24, 58-35
Viscosity index. 21-7
Viscosity number, 10-12. IO-13
Viscosity, of brine. 24-16
of dead and live oils, 46-3 I, 46-35. 46-36
of fluids. effect of emulsion on. 19-6
of formation water. 24-16, 24-17
of gas, 20-9, 20-15
of gas-free crude. 6-68. 46-35
72 PETROLEUM ENGINEERING HANDBOOK
of hydrocarbon gas. 15-6
of oil vs. specific gravity. 6-67
of oils. 6-24
of pure compounds, 20-8
of refrigerants. 14-l 1
of sodium chlortde (N&I) solutions.
24-17
of water, 6-24. 6-67
profile. 55-5
ratio vs. pseudoreduced temperature, 20-9
tWtOS. 43-5, 43-6, 45-7. 45-I I
recommendations for gear and chain
reducers, lo-12
relations. polymers. 47-4
temperature relationships. 19-7. 19-S.
46-31, 46-34, 46-35
Vtscous emulsions. 55-8
VISCOUS fingering or fingers, 28-13, 45-7,
45-8, 47-2, 48-13
Viscous forces. 35 Il. 44-3 I, 47-9
Viscous hydrocarbons, metering, 17-4
Visual cell. 39-7
Viton? 4-5
Vocabulary of petroleum measurement
standard. 17-3
Vogel method. for thermal efficiency, 46-9
Vogels Inflow-performance relationship
(IPR). 34-3 1 to 34-35. 37-2 I
Void volume. detinttton of, 27-l
Volanr. 49-37. 49-38
Volatile-oil reservoir,
comparison of predicted vs. actual
reservoir performance. 37-25. 37-26
material balance. 37-25. 37-26
multicomponent-flash method. 37-23 to
37-26
Muskat-method applicability. 40-9
performance predictions, 37-2, 37-25,
37-26
volumetric methods. 40-13
Volatile solvents, 39-26
Voltage drop for overhead and buried cable,
IO-33
Voltage drop in electrrcal systems, IO-32
Voltage frequency. 10-21. IO-23
Voltage gradient, 19-25
Volume correction factors, 17-5, 17-6
Volume correction to 15T. 17-6
Volume correction to 60F. 17-5. 17-6
Volume equivalents. table, l-73
Volume-limit switches, 16-13
Volume loss vs. temperature for crude oil,
19-9
Volume meters, 32-8, 32-9. 32-l I
Volume of spheres by hundredths, table,
l-34, I-35
Volume, SI unit for. 58-5, 58-23
Volume tank for engine installations, IO-19
Volumeters, 26-3
Volumetric analysis. 40-I
Volumetric-average boiling point, 2 l-l I,
21-12
Volumetric-average density, 34-27
Volumetric balance, 40-10, 4438
Volumetric behavior.
of a binary mixture, 23-3
of a pure component, 23-2
Volumetric calculations, 37-3
Volumetric efficiency, 6-10, 6-24, 6-25,
6-38, 6-67. 84, 10-9, 43-3, 45-8, 45-9
Volumetric flow rates, 28-3, 34-27
Volumetric gas throughput, 5-3, 5-8 to
5-10, 5-15. 5-16
Volumetric heat capacity, 46-7, 46-10
Volumetric heat-transfer coefficient. 58-35
Volumetric liquid-settling capacity. 12-29
Volumetric material balance. 40-13
Volumetric matertal-balance equation, 48-2
Volumetric metering vessels. 12-6
Volumetrtc meters. 13 I
Volumetric methods.
free gas in gas reservoir of gas cap, 40-5
nonassociated-gas reservoirs, 40-2 1 to
40-X
oil-in-place, 40-S. 4-6
oil m rcscrvotr. 40-S. 40-6
oil reservoirs with gas-cap drive, 40.13,
40-14
oil reservotrs with water drive, 40-15 to
40-20
saturated depletron-type oil reservoirs,
40-S to 40. I2
solution gas in oil reservoir, 40-6, 40-13
undersaturated oil reservoirs, 40-12
volatile-otl reservoirs. 40-13
Volumetric pump efficiency, 40-27
Volumetric rdtto. 55-6
Volumetric recovery esttmates for
nonassociated-gas reservotrs,
compresstbility factor, 40-2 1. 40-22
gas FVF, 40-22, 40-23
gas in place, 40-23, 40-24
permeability distribution effect, 40-24 to
40-26
recovery with water drive, 40-26
untt recovery without water drive, 40-24
Volumetric reserves, 36-7
Volumetric reservon. 36-3, 37-6, 37-10
Volumetric solubility of methane in water.
25-16. 25-17
Volumetric sweep, 46-14, 46-19, 46-30,
46-3 I
Volumetric-sweep efficiency. 39-17. 39-18.
47-1, 47-2, 47-17
Volumetric technique for reserve estimation.
40-I
Volumetric unit recovery, 40-13
Voluntary unit operations. 57-8
Vortex breaker. I l-2, 19-18
Vortex chamber, 12-20, 12-21
Vortex core, 6-62. 6-63
Vortex tinder. 6-62, 6-63. 12-20
Vortex-finder tube. 12-20, 12-2 I
Vortex flow pattern, 13-49
Vortex meter. 16-6. 16-7
Vortex retainer. 12-13
Vortex shedding, 1X-2 1, IS-22
Vortex-shedding meter, 13-48
Vortices. jet pumps, 6-36
Vugs, 26. I. 26-h
Vugular pore openings, 26-2
W
W. Guara field. Venezuela, 24-13
Wabasca tar sand, 46-34
WAG (water-alternating-gas), 45-8, 48-6
Walking beam, IO-2 to IO-4
Wall-resistivity devices, 49-7
Walnut shells, 55-8
Warranty clause, 57-6
Wash-down gravel pack, 56-9
Wash pipe, 56-S
Wash tank, 19-20
Washburn-Bunting porosimeter, 26-4 to
26-6
Washouts, 51-33
Wasson field, Texas, 16-12, 23-10
Waste disposal, 41-9, 41-12
Watch-dog timer, 16-S
Water/air ratio (WAR). 46-2, 46-16, 46-17,
46-19. 46-28. 46-30
Water-alternating-gas (WAG), 45-S. 48-6
Water analyses, 24-18. 24-19
Water-based fluids, 18-49
Water-based fracturing fluids,
foams, 55-6. 55-7
gels, 55-5. 55-6
Water-based muds. 26-2 I, 40.19, 44.5.
53-9
Water block, 56-2
Water breakthrough, 39-16. 44-4. 44-7,
44-9. 44-11, 4412. 44-14, 44-15, 44-34
Water channeling, 31-S
Water compresstbility. 24-12, 24-l 3. 37-3.
37-6. 37-10, 40-7. 40-34
Water coning. 32-3. 48-6. 48-9
Water content,
dewpoint chart, 25-l I, 25 I2
equations, 25-13
equilibrnnn. 25-12
for natural gas in equilibrium with brines.
25-14
tn light-hydrocarbon systems. 25- I6
in vapor phase, effects of molecular
wetght, 25-16
metastable, 25-12. 25-13
of CO,, 25-14, 25-1.5
of CO,-rich tluid phases. 25-15
of effluent oil, 12-13
of gas in equilibrium with hydrates.
25-10, 25-l I
of gases tn vapor/hydrate region, 25-12
of hydrocarbon-rich liquid. 25-10, 25-l 1
of natural gases. 14-4, 25-l I to 25-15
of nitrogen in equilibrium with hydrates.
25-14
of propane liqwd and vapor phase, 25-18
of separated crude 011, 12. I3
of untreated oil, 19-l
of vapor in equilibrium with hydrates,
25-12, 25-13
of vapor m vapor/hydrate region, 25-13 to
25-15
of volume occupted by various gases.
25-14
saturated. of natural gas in equilibrium
with aqueous phase. 25-l I to 25-15
suppression, 25 I3
Water cut, S-12. 6-24. 6-25. 6-27, 6-29.
6-30. 6-36. 6-42. 6-44. 6.47, 6.56,
40-19. 44-7, 44-9. 44-25. 4428, 44-32,
44-39
Water-cut oil, I l-2
Water-cut recovery calculation, 45-10
Water-cut recovery curve. 44-8
Water depth, offshore operattons. 18-4
Water dewpoint of natural gas. 14-4
Water dewpoint temperature, 14-17
Water-discharge control valves, 12-39.
19-29
Water displacement, 28-10
Water disposal, IS-30
Water drive, 36-2. 36-3, 39-15. 39-16,
39-24. 40-6. 40-7. 40-12. 40-14. 40-18.
40-24. 40-34, 44 IO. 44-25
Water-drive behavior. 38-8
Water-drive constant, 40-6
Water-drive equations, 38-12, 38-13, 38-16
Water-drive oil reservoirs.
general references, 38-20
introduction, 38-l
mathematical analysis, 38-l to 38-16
nomenclature, 38-17. 38-18
recovery efficiency of. 40. I6
references, 38-20
shape factor. 35-5
Water-drive sand fields, 40-17
Water-drive unit recovery, 40-16 to 40-18
Water-dump valve, 19.20, 19-30
Water-external microemulsion, 47-l 1
Water films. I l-8
Water formation volume factor, definition.
22-20
Water fractional flow. 44-12, 44-13
Water/gas contact (WGC), 38-l
Water/gas relative permeability, 28-10
SUBJECT INDEX 73
Water gradient. 6-29, 6-44
Water-hammer problems. 15-2
Water/hydrocarbon systems, behavior of,
25-1 to 25-28
Water in crude oil by centrifuge method,
17-5
Water in crude oil by dtstillation method.
17-5
Water in effluent oil. 12-15, 12-16
Water-in-oil detectors, 19-3 I
Water-in-oil emulsions, 6-27, 19-l. 19-2.
194. 19-7, 19-10, 19-11. 19-13, 19-28,
4440
Water in propane-rich fluid phases. 25-4
Water influx, 37-1, 37-3, 37-5 to 37-7,
38.2, 38-3. 40-6, 40-7, 40.15, 40.24,
40-26
Water influx rates. 38-2. 38-4 to 38-6,
38-8. 38-10. 38-14. 40-18
Water-injection case htstortes. 44-36. 44-37
Water injection, gas-condensate reservoirs,
39-15, 39-16, 39-18, 39-23. 39-24
Water-injection gradient, 3 l-5
Water-injection oil-recovery performance,
areal sweep and pattern efficiency. 44-12
to 4425
displacement calculation procedures, 44-7
to 4412
reservoir fractures, effect of, 44-25, 4426
waterflood performance-method selection,
44.31_ 44-32
waterflood performance-prediction
methods, 44-26 to 44-3 1
Water-injection pressure maintenance,
case histories, 4436. 4437
factors in, 44-2 to 44-5
mtroduction, 44 I
nomenclature, 44-41. 44-48
oil-recovery performance predictions, 44-7
to 4432
pilot floods, 4437 to 44-39
references. 4449 to 4452
residual oil determination, 44-5 to 44-7
selection and sizing of waterflood plants,
44-45 to 44-47
surface-active agents in, 44-39 to 4443
water treatmg, 4443 to 4445
well behavior, 4432 to 4436
Water-injection rate, 44-32, 4441
Waterinjection requuements, 18-44
Water-injection operations, 42-5, 42-6, 43-l
Water-injection systems, 6-l
Water-injection well behavior. 44-32 to
44-36
Water jets or jetting, 19-29, 19-30
Water knockout, 12-1, 12-2
Water legs, 19-20
Water manometer. 13-37
Water of crystallization, 26-21
Water/oil contact (WOC), 38-1, 38-5, 38-9.
404, 40-5. 40-15, 40-34
Water/oil mobility ratio. 447. 44-8, 47-6
Water/oil ratio (WOR). 19-27. 24-20. 28-5,
34-41, 40-18 to 40-20. 44-7, 44-9.
441 I, 44-3 I, 44-32. 4439, 46-33
Water/oil viscosity ratio, 40-18, 44-10
Water permeability, 47-8
Water power fluid, 6-27, 6-29, 6-44, 6-55,
6-56, 6-60, 6-62, 6-63
Water-pressure function, 37-8. 37-10
Water-producing intervals, location of, 31-4,
31-6
Water relative permeability, 28-6, 28 IO.
28.13, 40-18, 40-26, 44-12, 44-40.
46-37, 4638
Water resistivity, 26-3 1
Water retention time, 12-15
Water salinity, 24-3. 24-17, 24-18. 26-18.
26-19, 44-40, 50-3. 50-36
Wateri\and discharge, IY-30
Water-saturation data, 399
Water saturation, determining. 26-22
Water-saturation distributions, 44-l 1
Water saturatton from caplliary-pressure
data, 26-25
Water-saturation profile. 44. I I
Water sheds. 35-16
Water slugs. 14-21
Water source. 44-41 to 4443
Water specific gravity, 6-67
Water-supply wells. 16-14
Water surge tanks. 44-47
Water table, 44-41
Water-temperature bypass control, 13-59
Water treating.
dissolved gas, 44-43
microbiological growth, 44-44
minerals, 44-44
sampling. 44-43
Water treatment for steam generation, 46-20
Water-treatment plant. 16-14
Water types,
condensate water. 24-18
connate water. 24. I8
dtagenetic water. 24-18
formation water, 24-18
Interstitial water, 24-18
Juvende water, 24-18
meteoric water, 25-18
seawater. 24-18
Water underrun. 48-12
Water-vapor content, 14-3
Water-vapor removal, 14-17 to 14-21
Water viscosity, 44-6, 44-32, 44-33
Water/volatile-gas systems, 25-24 to 25-27
Water wash or washing, 19-7, 19-13,
19-15. 19-18 to 19-22, 19-27
Water-weight factors. 2-I. 2-33, 2-38
Water-wet, 19-9. 44-6
Water-wetting agent, 56-5
Watered-out, 39-15
Waterflood applications. 3-37
Waterflood displacement performance,
44-13
Waterflood oil-recovery predictions, 446
Waterflood performance-prediction methods,
4426 to 44.31
Waterflood plant facilities. 44-47
Waterflood plants, selection and sizing,
4445 to 4441
Waterflood prediction methods, table, 44-29
selection of, 44-31
Waterflood processes,
case histories, 4436. 44-37
factors in, 442 to 44-5
introduction. 44-l
nomenclature, 44-47. 4448
oil-recovery performance predictions, 447
to 4432
pilot floods, 4437 to 44-39
references, 44-49 to 44-52
restdual oil determinatton, 44-5 to 447
selection and sizing of waterflood plants,
44-45 to 44-47
surfaceactive agents in, 4439 to 44-43
water treating, 4443 to 4445
well behavior, 4432 to 44-36
Waterflood recovery process, 28-8
Waterflood requnements.
daily water-injection rates, 44-4 I
fresh waters, 44-41. 44-42
makeup water. 44-4 1
salt waters, 44-42. 44-43
ultimate water. 44-4 1
water sources, 4441
Waterflood susceptibility data, 45-8
Waterflood sweep eflicienctes, 4439
Waterflooding. an imbtbmon process. 28-14
complete. 40-16
factor in, 44-2 to 44-5
history and development, 44-I
inJection wells. 34-28
of dissolved-gas reservoirs, 25-19
reservoir simulatton of, 48-4. 48-7,
48-10, 48-13
tests, 44-8
volume of produced water, 24-2
Waterfloods. in chemical tloodmg. 47-9.
47. IO. 47-2 I
Waterfrac services. 55-5
Waters produced from.
Appalachian area, 24-6. 24-7
California fields, 24-8
Canadian fields, 24. I2
gulf coast fields, 24-8
Illinois fields, 24-9
mid-comment fields. 24-9. 24-10
Rocky Mountain fields, 24-l I
Venezuela fields, 24-13
Wave baffle, 19-17. 19-18
Wave equation. 9-3
Wave forces. IX-24
Wave propagation, 51-2. 51-3. 51-12, 51-46
Wave scatter diagrams. 18-26, 18-27
Waves in Arctic. IS-39
Waxes, 39. I
Waxing, 6-56
Waxy-based hydrocarbon liquids or heavy
ends. 14-6. 14-7
Waxy distillates. 14-5
Weather-related downtime, 18-8
Weight, definition of, l-70
Weight-loaded regulator, 13-54, 13-55
Weight-loss corrosion, 3-36
Wetght of a body, 58-3
Weight on btt (WOB), 18-13, 18.14, 53-1,
53-2. 53-4
Weighted-average deferment factor, 41-21 1
41-23, 41-24
Wetghted loaded valves, 13-55
Wetghts and measures. definition of, 1-68
of buttress-thread casing coupling, 2-29
of concentrations of HCI, 54-2
of external-upset tubing coupling. 2-43
of extra-strong threaded line pipe, 2-50
of integral-joint tubing upset. 2-45
of nonupset tubing coupling, 2-42
of plain-end line pipe, 2-50 to 2-53
of round-thread casing coupling, 2-28
of threaded line pipe. 2-47
Weir or weir box, 19.19, 19.20, 19.23
Weir-tank-type LACT system, I6- I3
Welch field, Texas, 44-30
Weld-neck lme-pipe flange. 3-17, 3-19.
3-23, 3-24
Welded-steel tanks, 1 I-I, 1 l-2, 1 l-9, I l-l I
Welded-type seal. 3-9
Welding slag, 5-53
Welex, 49-2. 49-36, 49-37. 51-18
Welge calculations, 44-I I , 44.12
Well completions, consideration in pilot
waterflooding, 44-39
offshore, 18-28
steam and firefloods. 46-19. 46-20
Well conditioning. gas-condensate reservoir,
39-5
Well costs and spacing, 39-l
Well delwerability. 5-12. 39-l
Well-effluent composition. 2 I 16
Well fluids and their characteristics,
condensate. 12-3
crude oil, 12-3
impurities and extraneous materials 12-3
natural gas. 12-3
physical and chemical. 12-21
water, 12-3
74 PETROLEUM ENGINEERING HANDBOOK
Well injectivity. 39-5, 39-6, 39-23 to 39-26, Wellhead choke, 34-45 Wireline-retrievable subsurface safety valves
46-17 Wellhead control valve, 6-51, 6-59 (SSSVs), 3-27, 3-33, 6-48, 6-49
Well kick, 18-11 Wellhead corroston aspects, 3-35 Wireline tensile strengths. 30-4
Well killing, 39-25 Wellhead corrosion protection methods, Wireline unit, 18-28
Well-log analysis, 37-3 3-36 Wireline well servicing, 18-34
Well logging, letter and computer symbols, Wellhead equipment and Bow-control Wiring methods offshore, IS-46
59-2 to 59-51 devices, Woodsen Shallow field, Texas, 44-4
Well logs, API flanged or clamped types, 3-1 to 3-18 Woodson field, Texas, 46-3
caliner. 53-l corrosion. 3-35. 3-36 Work eauivalents. table. 1-77
casing collar-locator, 53-26 general references, 3-40 Work, init in SI metricsystem, 58-23,
casing inspection, 53-1 independent screwed wellhead, 3-39 58-24, 58-32
dinrn~ter. 53- 1 introduction. 3-l Working barrel. lo- 1
diiectional surveys, 53-1 other control devices, 3-34, 3-35 Working fluid level, 5-5 I
in interpretation of paleoenvironments, references, 3-40 Working interest, 41-1 to 41-4, 41-9, 41-13.
36-3 safety shut-in systems, 3-18 to 3-34 41-15, 41-35, 57-5, 57-7, 57-9, 57-10
measurement while drilling (MWD), 53-1 special application, 3-36 to 3-39 Working-interest fraction (WI), 4 1-2
to 53-3 Wellhead sampling, 24-3, 24-4 Working pressure, wellhead equipment, 3-I
references, 53-26 Wellhead support, electrical submersible to 3-5, 3-7, 3-8, 3-12 to 3-25, 3-27.
Well-pattern geometry, 39-1 pump (ESP), 7-6 3-38
Well-performance equations, Wells inflow performance, 7-8 to 7-10, Workover fluld, 5-2
diffusivitv. 35-I. 35-2 7-12 Workover-fluid invasion. 54. I 1
gas well,%9 to 35-14
multiphase flow, 35-2
nomenclature, 35-20
oil well, 35-2 to 35-9
references, 35-21
transient well-test analysis, 35-14 to 35-20
Well preparation for sand control.
cement bond, 56-4
cleanliness. 56-3. 56-4
uerforation cleanine. 56-5
perforations. 56-4,56-5
Well-pressure performance, closed
reservoir. 35-2
Well productivity, 39-5, 39-6, 39-13, 39-23
to 39-26. 46.17. 46-21. 56-3. 564
Well re-entry workbver, 18-33
Well servicing, 18-28, 18-29, 18-34
Well spacing,-39-13, 41-11
Well stimulation, 7-16, 56-1
Well-test control logic, 16-12
Well tester, 32-7 to 32-10
Well testing, 39-24, 39-25
Well-testing procedures, 32-15
Well tests and sampling gas-condensate
(CC) reservoirs,
field sampling and test procedures, 39-5,
39-6
well conditioning, 39-5
Well-workover equipment, 18-28
Well workovers, 18-28, 18-29, 18-34, 4439
Wellbore cleanup by acidizing, 54-8
Wellbore deviation. 56-3
Wellbore fluid expansion, 35-6
Wellbore heat losses,
calculations including pressure changes,
46-6, 46-7
hot water, 46-6
model treating, 46-7
overall heat-transfer coefficient. 46-6
recent developments, 46-l
saturated steam, 46-5, 46-6
superheated steam, 46-5
Wellbore hydraulics,
flow through chokes, 3445 to 34-49
injection wells, 34-28 to 34-30
liquid loading in wells, 34-46, 34-50
metric conversion for key equations,
34-51 to 34-55
multinhase flow. 34-35 to 34-45
nome;lclature. 34-50, 34-51
oil wells, inflow performance, 34-30 to
34-35
producing gas wells, 34-3 to 34-28
references, 34-55, 34-56
theoretical basis, 34-1 to 34-3
Wellbore problems, 34-3
Wellbore-storage effect, 30-14, 35-4, 35-6,
35-7. 35-12. 35-15
Wellbore variables, influence on focused
electrode logs, 49-21, 49-22
Wellhead assembly, 3-2, 3-3
Wells required, gas-condensate (CC)
reservoirs, 39-26
Wellsite data-acquisition system, 5 1-25
Wellsite log analysis, in real time, 49-36
in replay time, 49-37, 49-38
West Edmond field, 40-2
West Heidelberg field, Mississippi, 46-28,
46-30
West Newport field, California, 46-16,
46-18
West Panhandle field, Texas, 34-46
West Texas area, 27-16, 27-17
West Virginia, 21-2, 24-6, 24-7
Wet combustion, 46-2, 46-3. 46-14, 46-17
to 46-19. 46-22, 46-30, 4633
reverse, 46-3 1
Wet gas, 5-2, 10-16, 39-1, 39-10, 39-11.
39-13, 39-18 to 39-20, 39-23, 39-24
Wet vs. dry subsea completions, 18-31
Wettability, 28-10 to 28-13, 44-5, 446,
4.427, 4439
Wettability reversal, 47-19
Wetting aeents. 42-2
Wetting it&iscible fluids, 28-3, 28-5, 28-6
Wetting phase, 47-9
Wetting -phase relative pernreability, 28-12
Wetting-phase saturation, 26-27, 28-6
Weyburn field, Saskatchewan, Canada,
51-32
Weymouth equation, 15-7 to 15-9
Wheatstone bridge circuit, 52-3
Whittier field, California, 44-40, 47-21,
47-22
Whole-core analysis, 27-1, 27-8
Whole-core measurement of permeability,
26-17, 26-18
Whole cores, 26-2, 26-7
Wichert and Azizs chart, 20-15
Wilmington field, California, 6-24, 44-39
Windfall Profits Tax (WPT), 41-1, 41-4,
41-12, 41-15
Winding-insulation materials, lo-26
Winkleman Dome field, Wyoming, 46-15,
46-18
Winsor microemulsion systems, 47-12
Wire-mesh filters, 39-26
Wire rope guidelines, 18-14
Wire-wrapped screens, 56-7. 56-8
Wireline cores, 26-2
Wireline equipment, 49-1
Wireline formation tester. 49-l
Wireline logging, 50-I
Wireline logging operations (schematic),
49-2
Wireline lubricator, 18-34
Wireline operations, 6-2, 6-48
Wireline-retrievable gas-lift equipment, 5-2,
5-16, 5-26, 5-50, 5-53
Wireline-retrievable standing valve, 6-3,
6-48
Workover operations, 8-8, 30-8, 39-24 to
39-26, 56-4
Workover rigs, 56-3
Wormhole effect in acidiztng, 54-8, 54-10
Woven wire mesh. 19-14
Wrap-around tubing hanger, 3-8
Wye-delta transformer, IO-30
Wye-wye transformer, IO-30
Wyllie time-average equation, 5 1-29
Wvllies eauation. 26-20
Wyoming. 21-4, 23-7, 24-8, 24-11, 24-18,
24-20, 39-16, 40.19, 40-23, 44-42.
46-3, 46-14, 46-15, 46-18
X-plot wellsite analysis, 49-37
X-ray absorbers, 28-4
X-ray crystallography, 25-5
X-ray diffraction, 25-6, 5 1-5
X-ray-diffraction analysts, 54-9, 56-3
X-ray shadowgraph, 44-17, 4419 to 44-2 I,
4425, 4434
X-Y recording mode, 51-18
Xanthan gum, 47-3
Y
Y method, adjustment procedure for
material-balance equation, 40-6
Yardsticks, 32-l. 32-3, 42-6
Yates field, Texas, 40-2
Year-end compound-interest factors, 41-20
to 41-22
Yield wint. 58-34
Yield-point collapse pressure, 2-54
Yield point of construction materials, 1241
Yield strength, collapse-pressure equation,
2-54
of API body and bonnet members, 3-3
of API casing and liner casing, 2-2
of API tubing, 2-37, 2-61
of elastic material, 58-2
of line nine. 2-46. 2-56. 2-63
of pipebbdy, 2-2, 2-4, 2-6, 2-8, 2-10,
2-12, 2-14, 2-16, 2-18, 2-32
of pipe material, 18-17
of sucker rods, 9-5
Yorba Linda field. California. 46-3. 46-18
Youngs modulus of elasticity, 2-35, 5 I- I,
51-43, 51.44, 58-34
Z
Zeolite ion exchange, 46-20
Zeros, importance of, 58-6
Zinc acetate, 44-42

S-ar putea să vă placă și