| 
					
					
					 CALCULATING
			
					
					Lithology By Statistical Models 
			Determination of
			mineral rock composition is an important intermediate task of
			formation evaluation. In early days of well log analysis, only
			porosity, water saturation and sometimes permeability were
			calculated from the logs. Later on, significance of solid rock
			component distribution was recognized; while introduction of new
			well logging instruments enabled the more accurate assessment of
			lithology. 
			The goal of lithology interpretation is to divide the bulk rock
			volume into effective porosity and solid mineral components. The
			number of rock components involved in the analysis is dependent on
			the quality and quantity of available well logs. As a principle, the
			number of components can't exceed the number of input well logs plus
			one.
 
			In a well of a carbonate reservoir where a rich set of well logs was
			measured, the following components may be determined:
 
			      •        
			Effective porosity•        
			Calcite
 •        
			Dolomite
 •        
			Clay
			minerals (kaolinite, illite, chlorite etc.)
 •        
			Silt
 •        
			Ferroan minerals (oxides, hydroxides etc.).
 
			In an older well of the same field with only a basic suite of well
			logs a three component model is applied:
 
			      •        
			Effective porosity•        
			Carbonate (comprising calcite and dolomite)
 •        
			Shale (comprising clays, silt, ferroan minerals).
 
			
 
			
			
					
			 Rock Models 
			In typical
			circumstances, the number of rock components present in the
			formation exceeds the number which can be reliably determined. (It
			is typically not more than five, while in complex lithology the
			total number of applied mineral constituents may reach 15 or 20.)   
			In the case of a
			full log suite, the following models could be applied: 
			      •        
			Porosity, calcite, dolomite, silt, kaolinite•        
			Porosity, calcite, dolomite, silt, illite
 •        
			Porosity, calcite, dolomite, kaolinite, Fe-minerals
 •        
			Porosity, calcite, dolomite, illite, Fe-minerals.
 
			It means that, for example, in a rock model either kaolinite or
			illite is present, but not both. It is a simplification, which is
			necessary to avoid unreliable solutions.
 
 
			  
			
					
			
			
			 Response Functions of Well Log Measurements 
			A great number of
			well logs are measured in recent wells. For the task of lithology
			determination, only those are involved which are sensitive for the
			mineral composition but are not sensitive for other conditions such
			as fluid saturations. The mathematical relationships connecting the
			rock composition to the well log measurements are called response
			functions. 
			Some typical examples:
 
			Bulk density: 
			            
  
			Potassium content: 
			            
			       
			 Acoustic (Raymer equation):
 
			   
			 
			where 
			       
			 
			Remarks: 
			(1)    
			Some
			well log measurements are related to the mass fractions of the rock
			components rather than to the volume fractions. In their response
			functions, volume fractions are multiplied by the specific density
			of the component. Further examples are: gamma ray, photoelectric
			effect, Thorium content. 
			(2)    
			Response functions may or may not be linear; example of the latter
			is the Raymer equation of acoustic sonic travel time. Similar is the
			case of SP (spontaneous potential). It means that the software
			should be prepared for the handling of systems of nonlinear
			equations.
 
			  
			
					
			
			
			 Zone Parameters 
			It can be observed
			in the examples of response functions that some parameters other
			than the volume fractions of minerals are involved. They are
			generally the specific values of the measured quantity for the rock
			component, e.g. the specific density. These are supposed to be known
			before the evaluation. They are called  "zone parameters"
			because their value is constant over a depth interval which covers
			(roughly) a geological formation. 
			Sources of information for zone parameters are the following:
 
			•        
			In
			publications of well logging companies, handbooks etc. these
			parameters are published as glossary data; e.g. specific density of
			different minerals is well known from the literature. 
			•        
			The
			study of the measured well logs themselves (in the form of hard
			copies, crossplots etc.) can reveal some parameters. E.g. layers
			where shale content is near to 100 % can suggest the zone parameters
			of the "shale" rock component. 
			•        
			Log
			analysis can be calibrated to cores if they exist. In general,
			geological descriptions based on cores and drill cuttings reveal the
			minerals existing in the formation. Comparison of core porosity
			measurements with porosities computed from well logs may indicate
			that zone parameters of the "porosity logs" (density, neutron,
			sonic) are not correct. 
			•        
			In
			field-wide studies where several wells are measured in roughly the
			same period by the same logging company, experience from
			interpretation of one well can be transferred to another well
			regarding selection of rock components, rock models, zone parameters
			etc. 
			•        
			There is a feedback between zone parameters and the analysis. If
			there is a systematic difference between measured values and
			theoretical response values of a well log, it may be reduced by
			modifying zone parameters.
 
			  
					
			 Zones of ANALYSIs 
			Quantitative
			analysis of lithology in a well is carried out in a depth interval
			which is important regarding the hydrocarbon production; that is
			generally the potential reservoir interval and some adjacent
			intervals. It may be homogeneous in respect of lithology, but often
			it covers more than one geological formations which are distinctive
			in age, mineral composition etc. Rock components, rock models and
			zone parameters should be set up differently in these formations. 
			The basic zonation of the interpreted interval is controlled by the
			geological zonation in terms of rock formations.
 
			Necessity of introducing different zones of interpretation may also
			emerge because of technical reasons. In some part of an interpreted
			formation quality and existence of well logging measurements may
			differ. For instance, some of the input well logs may be useless
			because of large rugosity effects. In that interval reduction of
			input information means reduction of the richness of outputs, e.g.
			less detailed rock models can be applied. This is done in the
			software by declaring the rugous interval as a different zone.
 
			In the lithology part of the software, zones of interpretation are
			defined by listing the depth intervals belonging to that zone. For
			each rock component (mineral) and rock model, the list of zones
			where that particular rock component or model is applied should be
			declared. We can apply the same mineral in different zones with
			different zone parameters. In that case in output results the
			mineral can be displayed as the same in different zones, but during
			computation in each zone it is evaluated with its particular
			parameters in that zone.
 
 
			  
			
					
			
			
			 Deterministic analysis 
			In deterministic
			systems of interpretation the number of unknown volumetric fractions
			equals the number of equations (including the log response equations
			and the material balance equation). Validity of the result should be
			checked, e.g. the equations can yield negative volume fractions
			which should be avoided . 
			There are two approaches to this interpretation: sequential and
			simultaneous.
 
 
			
			Deterministic
			interpretation in a sequential way  
			is the traditional
			(conventional) way of lithology determination. The volume fraction
			of one component is determined from one well log. (The response
			function of that well log is simplified so that only the volume
			fraction of that component is involved as the unknown quantity.) The
			second component is determined from another well log measurement; in
			its response function the volume fraction of the first component may
			be already involved. In a similar way at each step a new component
			is determined by using the response function of a well log
			measurement and volume fractions of components computed in previous
			steps. The last component is computed from the material balance
			equation.
			A good example is determining the lithology of a shaly sandstone
			formation from gamma ray and neutron. In the first step, shale
			volume is computed from the formula
 
 
			       
			 
			In the second step (where Vshale is already known) porosity is
			computed from the neutron porosity measurement:
 
			       
			 
			In the last step the material balance equation yields the volume
			fraction of sand: 
			  
			     
			 Solving an actual interpretation task may be more complicated than
			this simple procedure. First, some constraints should applied, e.g.
			neither volume fraction can take negative values. Secondly, a
			branching can occur: different shale parameters can be applied if
			the points representing the depth sites separate into groups on a
			crossplot; in our case, on the crossplot of neutron porosity vs.
			gamma ray. (This corresponds to the application of different rock
			models in the statistical interpretation.)
 
 
			Deterministic
			interpretation by solving a system of equations is an alternate to
			sequential methods.
			              
			The response functions (plus the material balance equation) can be
			treated as a system of equations with the volume fractions of rock
			components as unknowns. This system of equations can be solved by
			appropriate mathematical methods. Advantages of this approach are: 
			•            
			All
			unknown volume fractions are computed simultaneously, so the
			complete forms of response functions are used (e.g. in the previous
			example effect of porosity on gamma ray measurement is not ignored). 
			•            
			Handling of constraints on the accepted range of volume fractions is
			more consistent. For example substituting zero values for negative
			volume fractions will lead us to more equations as unknowns so it
			leads us to the statistical interpretation. 
			•            
			Cumulative addition of errors associated to the sequential way is
			reduced.
 
			  
			
					
			
			
			 Statistical AnALYSIS 
			In the
			deterministic algorithms, the number of equations (with material
			balance) equals the number of unknown rock components. In
			statistical interpretation the number of equations exceeds the
			number of unknowns. It means that the number of well log
			measurements is at least as large as the number of rock components
			but generally larger. It means that the system is mathematically
			over-determined: no exact solution exists which satisfies all the
			equations. 
			The following method is applied for solving the task of statistical
			interpretation:
 
			•            
			A
			measure of quality called incoherence is defined for the evaluation
			of each approximate solution for the system of equation; 
			•            
			A
			mathematical optimization problem is defined: find the set of volume
			fractions which gives the optimum value of the incoherence; 
			•            
			Constraints on the solution (upper and lower bounds on the volume
			fractions) are treated by including penalty terms in the quality
			indicator if the constraints are violated. 
			•            
			Advanced methods of mathematics are applied for the solution of the
			optimization problem; it yields a set of volume fractions of
			minerals as well as the value of incoherence. 
			The quality indicator is constructed by examining the reliability of
			each well log measurement involved. An error term is associated to
			each well log and the evaluation of each measurement by means of
			response function. The sources of error are the following:
 
 
			•        
			Environmental effects: borehole enlargement and rugosity,
			interaction with drilling mud etc.; 
			•        
			Errors in the principle of measurement (statistical nature of
			radioactive radiation); 
			•        
			Errors in depth matching and effects in difference of depth of
			investigation of the different well logging instruments; 
			•        
			Further on, the selection of rock models and zone parameters is
			burdened with errors. 
			All these diverse sources of error are added together and result in
			a random error for which we can assume a normal distribution with
			zero mean value and a standard deviation of si for the
			i-th measurement and answer.
 
			The quality indicator, incoherence, is defined by the formula:
 
 
  
			where 
			            bi:    
			measured value of the i-th well log; 
			            bth,i:
			value computed from the response function of the i-th well log,
			called answer; 
			            si:    
			standard deviation of error for the i-th measurement. 
			            nf:   
			degree or number of freedom which equals: 
			number of well
			logs + 1 - number of unknowns 
			  
			In a simple rock
			development, it is sufficient to apply a single rock model like the
			three-component sandstone model of porosity, sand (quartz) and
			shale. In real situations further minerals or other lithology
			components accumulate in the rock such as calcite, silt, clays,
			ferroan minerals etc. All of these components ought to be included
			in the interpretation, but their number would exceed the number of
			well log measurements. In that case multiple rock models are
			defined; in each of them the number of equations is greater than the
			number of components. 
			The statistical over-determined nature of the interpretation provides
			the quality indicator, incoherence, which enables us to select
			between the competing rock models. As a general principle, the rock
			model with the smallest incoherence is accepted as valid at each
			depth site. However, the software enables the overruling of this
			automatic model selection. The following reasons may verify the
			change of the least incoherence model:
 
 
			•        
			The
			creation of longer homogeneous intervals requires the comparison of
			model selection for neighbouring depth sites and change of models if
			another model with only slightly larger incoherence fits better into
			the environment, according to the principle of geological
			consistency. 
			•        
			If
			the lithologic rock composition provided by the selected model
			contradicts our knowledge from other sources of information (e.g.
			cores), a more plausible model can be accepted. 
			Generally the interpretation is carried out in cycles: there is an
			initial selection of minerals, rock models and zone parameters. Then
			the interpretation is carried out and the results are examined.
			Occurrence of unexpectedly high incoherences indicates that the
			input of interpretation should be changed:
 
 
			•        
			New
			minerals (rock components) should be included; 
			•        
			Further rock models should be applied; 
			•        
			Zone
			parameters should be modified.
 
			  
			
					
			 Statistical Method DETAILS 
			Well log measurements 
			Suppose L1,
			L2, ? Lm
			are well log measurements made in a borehole. A depth interval is
			selected where lithology should be evaluated: volumetric fractions
			of rock components (including porosity and solid minerals) should be
			determined. The interval is divided into zones (Z1,
			?Zn) which are constructed of
			one or more sub-intervals. The Li
			log measurements are available at regular frequency - usually at
			each half foot. 
			The set of well log measurements involved in lithology determination
			can be changed in different zones. (E.g. gamma ray is involved in a
			shaly sandstone formation but it is abandoned in a shale-free
			carbonate zone.) It is assumed that all well log measurements are
			available in the zones where they are applied.
 
 
			Rock components and models 
			The bulk rock
			volume is divided into effective porosity and solid rock components.
			The solid components may be minerals (calcite, quartz, kaolinite
			etc.) associations of minerals (ferroan minerals: oxides and
			hydroxides) or lithology types (limestone, sandstone, shale). Each
			rock component is characterized by its specific value of the applied
			rock measurements (zone parameters). 
			For each rock component its scope (i.e. the list of zones where it
			is applied) should be listed. A mineral can be present in one zone
			only or in several zones. In the latter case, its zone parameters
			may or may not be the same in different zones.
 
			The number of mineral components present in a formation generally
			exceeds the number of rock components which can be reliably
			determined by the statistically over-determined interpretation
			technique.
 
 Several subsets of rock components occurring together are defined
			and called rock models. For each model, the zones where it is
			applied should be listed.
 
 
			Response functions and zone
			parameters 
			Response functions
			are mathematical relationships between the logging parameters and
			the rock mineral composition. These are theoretical functions which
			don't account for random errors or factors not involved in the
			model. Actual log measurements and theoretical responses generally
			differ. 
			The zone parameters are specific parameters of response functions
			which are constant for all depth sites in a zone of interpretation.
			Generally one zone parameter reflects the effect of a rock component
			in each response function.
 
 
			System of equations 
			The set of
			response functions creates a system of equations together with the
			material balance equation; the latter describes the fact that the
			sum of all volume fractions in a unit volume equals one: 
			  
			       
			 It is included in the system of equations where it has a special
			status: while response functions are considered as approximations
			burdened with errors, the material balance equation is exact.
 
			A system of equations is set up where the number of unknown rock
			volume fractions is smaller than the number of equations. The
			statistical over-determined nature of the method is characterized by
			the degree of freedom:
 
			       nf
			= nl + 1 - nv
 
			Incoherence 
			Normalized
			incoherence is defined in Section 7. If the deviation of the
			measured logs and the theoretical responses is considered as a
			random error variable, the value of nf *.I2 has a
			chi-square distribution. 
			Normalized incoherence as measurement of quality of interpretation
			is used to the following purposes:
 
			        
			·         
			At
			each depth site with each model, the set of volume fractions which
			minimizes incoherence is accepted as the solution. 
			        
			·         
			At
			each depth site where multiple models are applied, the model with
			the least incoherence is selected (if other considerations don't
			override it). 
			        
			·         
			Statistical characteristics of incoherence in a well or in a zone
			are used as a general indicator of quality of interpretation.
			Improvement by changing selection of minerals, values of zone
			parameters, etc. is justified by the decrease of incoherence.
 
			  
			
					
			
			
			 Mathematical Solution 
			The mathematical
			problem that is to be solved for each model at each depth site is
			the following: 
			        
			·         
			There is a system of equations consisting of nl
			+ 1 equations and nv unknowns
			where nv < nl + 1 . The overdetermined nature of the system (more
			equations than unknowns) means that an exact mathematical solution
			generally is not found. 
			        
			·         
			An
			object function (the normalized incoherence) is set up which
			describes the quality of each approximate solution of the system of
			equations. The goal is to find the set of volume fractions which
			minimizes the incoherence. 
			        
			·         
			The
			restrictions on the valid range of volume fractions are taken into
			account. Penalty terms are added to the object function which assure
			that the final solution is inside the accepted range. 
			An iterative method is applied starting from an arbitrary initial
			approximation. A variant of the Newton method is applied which
			rapidly converges to the minimum place of the object function. (It
			is a local approximation of the function by a quadratic function at
			each step.)
 
 
 
					
			
			 Presentation of Results 
			Strip logs of
			lithological composition are the usual way of graphical presentation
			of the interpretation. The volumetric fractions of the different
			rock components are displayed versus depth. At each depth site, the
			area covered by the specific colour code of the rock component is
			proportional to the volumetric fraction. 
			Statistical tables about abundances of rock components (total and
			separated by models) are printed together with the tables
			representing the rock models and zone parameters.
 
			Although the strip logs of lithology are the most useful for the end
			user (geologist, reservoir engineer etc.), other forms of
			presentation are also important for the log analyst. The crossplots
			of response vs. measurement for the input well logs are crucial for
			the evaluation of the quality of interpretation. Clouds of points
			moved far away from the identity line may reflect two conditions:
 
			•        
			The
			zone parameters of one (or more) minerals regarding that input log
			are not correct and should be modified; 
			•        
			Another rock component exists in the formation and it should be
			included in the rock models. 
			Crossplots of two rock components are suitable for investigating the
			reservoir quality of the formation. Especially, crossplot of volume
			fraction of shale vs. porosity is important in shaly sandstones.
			Irregularity of the crossplot (e.g. points with high porosity and
			high shale content) may refer to improper shale zone parameters.
 
			Cumulative histogram of squared incoherence is used for the
			calibration of the standard errors of input logs so as to
			approximate the theoretical chi-square probability distribution.
 
 
 
			
					
			
			
			 Optimization of Zone Parameters 
			Rock components
			involved in lithology interpretation are different in their degree
			of certainty. Some of them are stable minerals (such as quartz,
			calcite etc.) with well known attributes regarded as worldwide
			constants. Other components are more complex mixtures of minerals
			such as shale or ferroan minerals. Their zone parameters are known only with a higher degree of
			uncertainty.
 
			Another source of zone parameter uncertainty is the presence of
			systematic errors in well log measurements. Some of these errors can
			be eliminated by correction of the measured logs. However, often the
			deviation of zone parameters from their expected values is also
			necessary. In these cases
			adjustment of zone parameters is necessary. Beside manual
			improvement, necessity of automatic optimization emerges. The
			criterion of optimization is the magnitude of incoherence. Iterative
			methods can be applied by modifying the selected set of zone
			parameters until the minimum value of the weighted sum of squared
			incoherence is reached.
 
			We have to emphasize that automatic zone parameter optimization
			should be applied with great care. Only one (or at most two) zone
			parameter of a rock component can be altered by this method;
			similarly, only a limited number of zone parameters belonging to the
			same log response function should be changed. Otherwise, artificial
			mathematical objects will be generated instead of real rock
			components.
 
 
			  
			
					
			
			
			 Role of Standard Errors 
			Another set of
			parameters which have great influence on lithology interpretation
			are the si
			standard errors associated with well logs included as input
			parameters. Both the magnitude of si-s
			relative to each other and their absolute value are important. 
			Increasing the value of a si
			term decreases the influence of the respective well log on the
			results of lithology interpretation. The crossplot of response vs.
			measurement of that log will show a wider cloud of points with
			statistical characteristics of regressional relationship degraded
			(the correlation coefficient decreases, closeness of regression
			coefficients to 1 and 0 decreases, error of estimation increases).
 
			Decreasing the value of a si
			term increases the influence of the respective well log. The
			crossplot of response vs. measurement of that log will show a
			narrower cloud of points. The correlation coefficient increases,
			closeness of regression coefficients to 1 and 0 increases, error of
			estimation decreases.
 
			In both cases, influence of other well logs on the interpretation
			changes the opposite way, e.g. increasing standard error of one log
			(i.e. decreasing influence of that log) will increase the influence
			of the other logs. One factor should be considered when evaluating
			the regressional relationship of response vs. measurement: the
			inherent variability of the measured well log values (reflecting the
			variability of the rock in respect of that well log) also affects
			the closeness of fit.
 
			No fixed rules exist for the setting of relative magnitudes of
			standard errors Si,
			however, the following guidelines can be applied:
 
			        
			·         
			Ratios of standard errors are based on the ratios of measurement
			errors (repeat sections can be used for the evaluation of this). 
			        
			·         
			The
			influence of the well logs should reflect their quality and their
			ability to reveal lithology in the formation. (E.g. gamma ray may
			have greater influence in shaly sandstones than in carbonates.) 
			        
			·         
			Both
			extremities (input logs with negligible influence or with
			overwhelming influence) should be avoided. 
			The absolute values of standard errors si
			are calibrated by comparing the practical distribution
			of squared incoherences to the theoretical chi-square distribution.
			In FlexInLog, the upper quartile of the distribution is used as it is
			more robust parameter than the average. The si-s
			are multiplied with a common factor so that the upper quartile
			equals 0.5.In this way
			interpretations in different wells become comparable. E.g. depth
			sites where I2 > 2 considered as cases of high
			incoherence with unreliable lithology interpretation; calibration of
			standard errors assures that this criterion is consistent for
			different evaluations.
 
			
 
			
			
					
			 Reducing Unknowns 
			Constraints on the
			valid range of rock components are applied in lithology
			determination. The trivial conditions of 0 £ Vi
			£ 1 should be met, besides, upper limits on some accessory minerals
			Vi £ (Vi)max
			<< 1 may be applied. The most frequent case of violation is that the
			volume fraction of a component tends to be negative; the
			mathematical algorithm sets this volume fraction equal to zero. 
			Theoretically this means that the number of unknowns is reduced and
			the degree of freedom nf is
			increased by one. The increase of nf
			is applied in FlexInLog in the formula of the incoherence; this fact
			should be kept in mind when comparing incoherences of evaluations by
			models with different numbers of (existing) rock components.
 
			A special case of this phenomenon occurs when deterministic
			evaluation is applied. Using a system of equation with nf
			= 0, an exact mathematical solution is computed. Generally, none of
			the constraints is violated and every equation is satisfied without
			error (responses equal measurements for each input well log).
 
			If some constraints of avoiding negative rock components are
			violated, these components are substituted with zeroes. This reduces
			the number of unknown components and the system of equations is
			transformed into an over-determined one (nf > 0). The same
			mathematical algorithm can be used as for the statistical
			interpretation (standard errors should be defined). Responses are no
			longer equal to well log measurements, so incoherence can be
			computed and used for the assessment of the quality of
			interpretation.
 
			The handling of violations of constraints this way provides some
			benefits of statistical interpretation for the deterministic
			interpretation. The mathematically optimal (least incoherence)
			solution is found if one or more of the volume fractions of rock
			components becomes zero.
 
 
			  
			
					
			 Determination of Matrix Density 
			Matrix density is
			obtained from the formula: 
			  
			     
			 where  rb:
			the measured (and corrected) log density
 
			
			F
			: effective porosity provided by the quantitative lithological          
			interpretation
 
			  
			It is important
			to compare matrix density obtained from well log analysis with those
			measured on cores, since it can reveal some errors of lithological
			interpretation; for instance non-existing mineral or lithological
			components were taken into account in the applied rock models, what
			may cause serious difference between the two compared grain
			densities.
			
 |