JCT COLLEGE OF ENGINEERING AND TECHNOLOGY

PICHANUR, COIMBATORE- 641 105

(Affiliated to Anna University, Chennai)
DEPARTMENT OF PETROLEUM ENGINEERING

LR METHOD OF INTERPRETATION FOR THE PETROPHYSICAL

EVALUATION AND RESERVOIR CHARECTERIZATION USING
PETROPHYSICS SOFTWARES IPv4.2 AND TECHLOG2015
Submitted by
NISHANTH G
ABIJITH K S
Internal Guide, External Guide,
Mr. N. Aravindh Mr. P. Damodar DY. SG. (W)
(Assistant Professor) ONGC, South Zone,Chennai

Project Co-ordinator,
Mr. G. Balachandhran (Professor)
 ABSTRACT
 One of the most important process in oil and gas upstream
process is well logging, which is a group of techniques that
provide information such as the location of the reservoir, its
extension and its amount.
 In this process well log data’s are collected using sonde from
bottom to top and the obtained curves is used to interpret the
reservoir properties by input the data into the respective
software (IPv4.2 and TECHLOG 2015)
 And in this project we introducing “LEFT- RIGHT (LR)
method” for the collected well log data’s and comparing this
result with the existing Quick-look interpretation method.
OBJECTIVES OF OUR PROJECT

 Quality check

Quality Control
Interpret Conditioning
(QC)

 Suggesting a method LEFT-RIGHT

method (LR method) in which, the
direction in which the log curves
deflected (either right or left) is used
to identify the reservoir, its type and
fluid content.
STUDY AREA AND
DATA’S
STUDY AREA AND LOCATION MAP
• The study area chosen is the National Petroleum
Reserve in Alaska (NPRA), northwest of Canada.
•
•From the NPRA we had selected five wells for our
study:
2400 ft
2382 ft
2125 ft
2300 ft
2356 ft
STUDY AREA AND LOCATION MAP
 AVAILABLE LOG DATAS
WELL GR SP Caliper LLd LLs RHOB NPHI DT

NAME

SB 16 ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ●

SB 17 ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ●

SB 18 ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ●

SB 19 ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ●

SB 20 ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ●

SOURCE: Data originally released through: National Oceanic and

Atmospheric Administration National Geophysical Data Centre Boulder, CO
 LOG
INTERPRETATION
 LOG INTERPRETATION
WORKFLOW

Loading the log

data’s into the Analysing of log
software data.
(poor quality data ,by (Curve synthesising
cross-plotting) and conditioning)

Quality checking the

conditioned data
Finally, do the (by cross-plotting)
petrophysical
evaluation.
Step 1: LOADING THE DATA AND
PLOTTING

LOADED WELL DATA

*workspace
Plotting the log curve into the log plot
 Step 2: ANALYSING THE LOG AND
FINDING THE BAD DATA POINTS

 The bad data points are those points that fall outside the main
trend. It can be identified by plotting the cross-plot for the
following two curve sets with caliper as the colour axis in both
case:
 RHOB(density log) versus NPHI(neutron log)
 RHOB versus transit travel time (DT)
 Well 1: South barrow 16

RHOB versus NPHI cross-plot

colored by differential caliper

Cross-plot between RHOB and DT

colored by differential caliper
 Step 3: CURVE SYNTHESISING AND
CONDITIONING

 Done by multiple linear regression which is available in the

software.

 For well 1:

 The bad borehole points are at: 2160-2190 ft

 Good quality data points chosen for curve synthesis: 2190-2220 ft
MLR (multiple linear regression)

Good quality data interval to

build the synthesised curve.
SYNTHESISED CURVE

SYNTHETIC
DENSITY LOG

MEASURED
DENSITY LOG
 Step 4: QUALITY CONTROL
 Is done by comparing the cross-plots of measured data’s
and conditioned log data’s.

Measured log data points

Conditioned log data

Step 5: PETROPHYSICAL
EVALUATION
Analysis the Gamma ray curve

Type of lithology Find sandstone region

Analyse the Resistivity curve

Type of fluid present
Resistivity of formation
(Water or Hydrocarbon)

Analyse the Sonic Curve at the marked sandstone region

Transit time Porosity of formation

Finally, Analyse the Neutron-Density plot

Identification of hydrocarbon fluid Cross over and separation between
(Oil or Gas) curves
 GAS
Zone1

OIL

Zone2
WATEE
R

High Gamma ray implies

porous formation.

Log data plotted for interpretation of well South Barrow 18

(GR, CALIPER, LLd, LLs, DT, NPHI and RHOB).
 Result of Interpretation

Step 1-3:

Interval (ft) Rt (Ωm) Ro (Ωm) Sw (%) Effective porosity

(%)
2050-2075 57.7 9.7 41 24

Reservoir parameters estimated for representative well C

Step 4:

• The positive separation between the neutron and the density

curve is high from 2050-2058 ft, representing the presence of gas
• The separation is minimum at 2058-2065 ft, representing the
presence of oil
 LR METHOD
OF
INTERPRETATION
 Principle

 Petrophysicists look at the well log patterns, recognize the

trends, and then turn those patterns into reservoir knowledge.

 “By looking at how the log curve deflects relative to each other, you can
tell the difference between oil, gas and water and find the type of
formation present in the zone of interest”.
 Requirements
 To make it work, you need to have five logs
 Caliper Log (Reference log),
 Gamma Ray Log,
 Resistivity Logs,
 Density Logs,
 Neutron logs
 Caliper Log as the base reference log for the identification of
lithology initially.
 LR Method
 Caliper reads shaley formation (caving)

 Right-Right-Right-Right (Tight non-reservoir)

 Right-Right-Right-Left (Shale)

 Caliper reads porous formation (mud cake formation)

 Left-Right-Right-Right (Low porosity or tight reservoir)

 Left-Left-Left-Left (Water bearing reservoir)
 Left-Right-Left-Left (Oil bearing reservoir)
 Left-Right-Left-Right (Gas reservoir)
 WELL SB 18

Left-Right-Right-Right
Low porosity (tight) reservoir

Left-Right-Left-Left
Zone1
Oil bearing reservoir

Zone2

Left-Right-Left-Left
Oil bearing reservoir
 Result comparison

WELL SB 18

Conventional method LR method

At Zone 1: from interval 2050-2058 ft

Gas reservoir Low porosity (tight) reservoir

At Zone 1: from interval 2058-2065 ft

Oil bearing Reservoir Oil bearing Reservoir

At Zone 2: from interval 2058-2065 ft

Water bearing reservoir. Water bearing reservoir.

 Discussion & Conclusion
 With all these process, we finally suggested a
new and simple method of interpretation,
named Left Right Method, and compared the
result of the normal method of interpretation
with this suggested method and showed that
both the result are coinciding.

 Thus the suggested method gives high speed

interpretation with more accuracy.
 References
1) A.P.V.V.S.S. Dileep, P. Ramana Murthy, K. Chinnababu; (2010): Characterizing the reservoirs by open hole-
wire line logging.
2) Bateman RM (1985) Open-hole log analysis and formation evaluation Schlumberger Inc. In: Log
interpretation principles. Schlumberger education services, Houston, USA
3) Dresser A (1981) Well logging and interpretation techniques. Dresser Industries Inc., Addison
4) Darwin V. Ellis and Julian M. Singer ;( 2007): Well Logging for Earth Scientists.
5) Mithilesh Kumar, R. Dasgupta (2017) Petrophysical evaluation of well log data and rock physics modelling for
characterization of Eocene reservoir in Chandmari oil field of Assam-Arakan basin, India, Springer Publication
6) Poupon A, Leveaux J (1971) Evaluation of water saturations in shaley formations.
7) HALIBURTON; (2001): Basic Petroleum Geology and Log Analysis.
8) James J. Smolen; (1996): Cased hole and production log interpretation principles and applications.
9) Lee M. Etnyre; (1989): Finding Oil and Gas from Well Logs.
10) Stefan M. Luthi; (2000):Well Log Interpretation Model for the Determination of Lithology and Fluid Contents.
11) Website : www.Superpetrophysics.com
12) Website (Data source): www.certmapper.cr.usgs.gov/data