hello guys,
recently i hv been having problems with the owen setting tool 4 magna range
tubing plugs...n ifreqentlywith the baker 20 setting tool 4 cibp...hv lost abt
5 tools in hole...after settin the plug...am stuck = my hing 2 bra the wek
[point n leaving the tool in hole..
i need help i solving this riddle. what cud hv been goin wrong?...
the last incident. the owen setting tool sheared into 2 downhole. when i anted
2 break the weak point!!!
help urgenmtly pls
Red cement and a plaque stating the depth and type of source are required by
regulation in the US. Red cement is a warning should the plaque go missing and
an operator return to the well drilling returns of red cement should alert them
that there is a source there.
Tony
--- In wireline@yahoogroups.com, robin singh <rabin20866@...> wrote:
>
> some iron oxide mixed with cement can give red colour to cement. there are
cement knoen as red oxide cement available in the market but they are mainly
used for anti rust. wonder what the objective of goverment is in putting red
cement.
>
>
> robin singh
>
> --- On Fri, 13/11/09, GaryF <garyfloyd94@...> wrote:
>
>
> From: GaryF <garyfloyd94@...>
> Subject: [wireline] Red Cement
> To: wireline@yahoogroups.com
> Date: Friday, 13 November, 2009, 17:06
>
>
>
>
>
>
> What can be mixed in with cement to make it red in color. An open hole company
lost a source in a well and the government regulators want red cement dumped on
top of the fish. The local cement companies don't have any red coloring. thanks.
>
> Gary
>
From:wireline@yahoogroups.com [mailto:wireline@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of robin singh Sent: Thursday, November 19, 2009
12:11 PM To:wireline@yahoogroups.com Subject: [wireline] querry
does any one of you guys have this
paper "Field results using GR for calculating
permeability" this is by WDM Smith and is a CWLS 1974 presentatin.
thanx in advance
robin singh
______________________________________________________________
For your security, this message has been scanned for all viruses before arrival
in Geoservices network.
This service does not scan any password protected or encrypted attachments.
For your security, this message has been scanned for all viruses when leaving Geoservices network.
This service does not scan any password protected or encrypted attachments.
This e-mail message and its attachments may contain privileged or confidential information
and is intended only for the use of the individual or entity to which it is addressed. If you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any use, dissemination or copying of this e-mail, its attachments or of any information contained therein is strictly prohibited. If you have received this e-mail by mistake, please delete it immediately from your system without keeping any copy thereof. Thank you.
I found the following references to relating permeability to
gamma ray measurements. Perhaps these papers will help you.
Rabe, C.L., 1958, A relation between gamma radiation and
permeability, Denver- Julesburg Basin [Neb.]: American Institute of Mining, Metallurgical,
and Petroleum Engineers Transactions, 1957, v. 210, p. 358-360.
Gaur, R.S., and Singh, Inderjit, 1965,
Relationship between permeability and gamma ray intensity for the
Oligocene sand of an Indian field: Oil and Natural Gas Commission of India
Bulletin, v. 2, no. 1, p. 74-77.
You indicated the original document you are searching for was a
CWLS presentation; Is it included on their CD here?
From: wireline@yahoogroups.com
[mailto:wireline@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of robin singh Sent: Thursday, November 19, 2009 12:11 PM To: wireline@yahoogroups.com Subject: [wireline] querry
does any one of you guys have this paper
"Field results using GR for calculating permeability" this is by
WDM Smith and is a CWLS 1974 presentatin.
Of course gamma ray API is related to permeability.
Natural Gamma radiation is related to sandstone/carbonate formations vs shales (tight formations). Permeable lithologies produce SP. SP overlays GAPI.
SP is probably the most simple measurement, relies on "ion flow" which requires permeability i.e interconnected fluid channels in a reservoir rock. SP is directly related to permeability. The formula relating GAPI to Permeability would have to be based on empirical data. There is an inverse approximate "correlation" between the two.
i.e. k = 1/GAPI * (local complex variables)
Thanks,
Chuck Merritt President - WELLOG www.wellog.com
--- On Fri, 11/20/09, Robert Helms <rhelms@...> wrote:
From: Robert Helms <rhelms@...> Subject: RE: [wireline] querry To: wireline@yahoogroups.com Date: Friday, November 20, 2009, 6:55 AM
Robin Singh,
I found the following references to relating permeability to
gamma ray measurements. Perhaps these papers will help you.
Rabe, C.L., 1958, A relation between gamma radiation and
permeability, Denver- Julesburg Basin [Neb.]: American Institute of Mining, Metallurgical,
and Petroleum Engineers Transactions, 1957, v. 210, p. 358-360.
Gaur, R.S., and Singh, Inderjit, 1965,
Relationship between permeability and gamma ray intensity for the
Oligocene sand of an Indian field: Oil and Natural Gas Commission of India
Bulletin, v. 2, no. 1, p. 74-77.
You indicated the original document you are searching for was a
CWLS presentation; Is it included on their CD here?
From: wireline@yahoogroup s.com
[mailto:wireline@ yahoogroups. com] On Behalf Of robin singh Sent: Thursday, November 19, 2009 12:11 PM To: wireline@yahoogroup s.com Subject: [wireline] querry
does any one of you guys have this paper
"Field results using GR for calculating permeability" this is by
WDM Smith and is a CWLS 1974 presentatin.
As per my theoratical knowledge, permeable formations will contribute more gamma ray counts as compared to tight or less permeable formations of same lithology. Does this property of formation also help to maintain a relationship b/w natural gamma ray counts and permeability?
Thanks & Kind Regards,
Shaukat Ali Petrophysicist Pak Cell : +92 333 5106755
To: wireline@yahoogroups.com From: chuck.merritt@... Date: Fri, 20 Nov 2009 10:38:12 -0800 Subject: RE: [wireline] query
Of course gamma ray API is related to permeability.
Natural Gamma radiation is related to sandstone/carbonate formations vs shales (tight formations). Permeable lithologies produce SP. SP overlays GAPI.
SP is probably the most simple measurement, relies on "ion flow" which requires permeability i.e interconnected fluid channels in a reservoir rock. SP is directly related to permeability. The formula relating GAPI to Permeability would have to be based on empirical data. There is an inverse approximate "correlation" between the two.
i.e. k = 1/GAPI * (local complex variables)
Thanks,
Chuck Merritt President - WELLOG www.wellog.com
--- On Fri, 11/20/09, Robert Helms <rhelms@cbgcorp.com> wrote:
From: Robert Helms <rhelms@cbgcorp.com> Subject: RE: [wireline] querry To: wireline@yahoogroups.com Date: Friday, November 20, 2009, 6:55 AM
Robin Singh,
I found the following references to relating permeability to gamma ray measurements. Perhaps these papers will help you.
Rabe, C.L., 1958, A relation between gamma radiation and permeability, Denver- Julesburg Basin [Neb.]: American Institute of Mining, Metallurgical, and Petroleum Engineers Transactions, 1957, v. 210, p. 358-360.
Gaur, R.S., and Singh, Inderjit, 1965, Relationship between permeability and gamma ray intensity for the Oligocene sand of an Indian field: Oil and Natural Gas Commission of India Bulletin, v. 2, no. 1, p. 74-77.
You indicated the original document you are searching for was a CWLS presentation; Is it included on their CD here?
From: wireline@yahoogroup s.com [mailto:wireline@ yahoogroups. com] On Behalf Of robin singh Sent: Thursday, November 19, 2009 12:11 PM To: wireline@yahoogroup s.com Subject: [wireline] querry
does any one of you guys have this paper "Field results using GR for calculating permeability" this is by WDM Smith and is a CWLS 1974 presentatin.
The Smith publication referred to previously is
on the poorly referenced CD offered by the CWLS (URL provided by others
previously). I have included the cover page of this 10 page paper published
in the CWLS Jour. in Dec. 1974. In order to comply with copyright laws,
you will need to purchase the entire CD to obtain the paper for your use in
research. Perhaps some other source would make more sense if you have
access to this journal in a local university library.
I found answer in your email in the tail. One question please, is there any value range for this local complex variables?
Do we need to calibrate it with existing core or other data?
Thanks & Kind Regards,
Shaukat
To: wireline@yahoogroups.com From: shaligeo@... Date: Sat, 21 Nov 2009 01:10:04 +0500 Subject: RE: [wireline] query
Guys,
As per my theoratical knowledge, permeable formations will contribute more gamma ray counts as compared to tight or less permeable formations of same lithology. Does this property of formation also help to maintain a relationship b/w natural gamma ray counts and permeability?
Thanks & Kind Regards,
Shaukat Ali Petrophysicist Pak Cell : +92 333 5106755
To: wireline@yahoogroups.com From: chuck.merritt@wellog.com Date: Fri, 20 Nov 2009 10:38:12 -0800 Subject: RE: [wireline] query
Of course gamma ray API is related to permeability.
Natural Gamma radiation is related to sandstone/carbonate formations vs shales (tight formations). Permeable lithologies produce SP. SP overlays GAPI.
SP is probably the most simple measurement, relies on "ion flow" which requires permeability i.e interconnected fluid channels in a reservoir rock. SP is directly related to permeability. The formula relating GAPI to Permeability would have to be based on empirical data. There is an inverse approximate "correlation" between the two.
i.e. k = 1/GAPI * (local complex variables)
Thanks,
Chuck Merritt President - WELLOG www.wellog.com
--- On Fri, 11/20/09, Robert Helms <rhelms@cbgcorp.com> wrote:
From: Robert Helms <rhelms@cbgcorp.com> Subject: RE: [wireline] querry To: wireline@yahoogroups.com Date: Friday, November 20, 2009, 6:55 AM
Robin Singh,
I found the following references to relating permeability to gamma ray measurements. Perhaps these papers will help you.
Rabe, C.L., 1958, A relation between gamma radiation and permeability, Denver- Julesburg Basin [Neb.]: American Institute of Mining, Metallurgical, and Petroleum Engineers Transactions, 1957, v. 210, p. 358-360.
Gaur, R.S., and Singh, Inderjit, 1965, Relationship between permeability and gamma ray intensity for the Oligocene sand of an Indian field: Oil and Natural Gas Commission of India Bulletin, v. 2, no. 1, p. 74-77.
You indicated the original document you are searching for was a CWLS presentation; Is it included on their CD here?
From: wireline@yahoogroup s.com [mailto:wireline@ yahoogroups. com] On Behalf Of robin singh Sent: Thursday, November 19, 2009 12:11 PM To: wireline@yahoogroup s.com Subject: [wireline] querry
does any one of you guys have this paper "Field results using GR for calculating permeability" this is by WDM Smith and is a CWLS 1974 presentatin.
***********************
This message has been scanned by the InterScan for CSC SSM and found to be free of known security risks.
***********************
What Chuck says appeals to me. When we look at a GR log, shale base line has the highest API counts (GR Scale may be 0 –
200 API, 0-150 API, 0-100 API depending upon the activity of the formations in a well) whereas, sand base line has the lowest API counts. This implies that the relationship is “inverse”. We all know that Shales, which are not generally permeable, have more
radioactive content than Sands in general. Again this is subject to the mineral content of the Sands. Above mentioned simple explanation is what I can understand, without going into the details of quantitative relationships.
If the question is how to determine quantitative value of Permeability from API GR counts, it is for the experts to come out. I am also
interested to know more on this aspect.
Kavi.
Chief Engineer (Well Logging),
Oil India Limited,
Assam,
India.
E-mail: kvsrao@...
From: wireline@yahoogroups.com
[mailto:wireline@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of
Shaukat Ali Sent: Saturday, November 21, 2009 1:40 AM To: wireline@yahoogroups.com Subject: RE: [wireline] query
Guys,
As per my theoratical knowledge, permeable formations will contribute more gamma ray counts as compared to tight or less permeable formations of same lithology. Does this property of formation also help to maintain a relationship b/w natural gamma ray counts
and permeability?
Thanks & Kind Regards, Shaukat Ali
Petrophysicist Pak Cell : +92 333 5106755
To: wireline@yahoogroups.com
From: chuck.merritt@wellog.com
Date: Fri, 20 Nov 2009 10:38:12 -0800
Subject: RE: [wireline] query
Of course gamma ray API is related to permeability.
Natural Gamma radiation is related to sandstone/carbonate formations vs shales (tight formations). Permeable lithologies produce SP. SP overlays GAPI.
SP is probably the most simple measurement, relies on "ion flow" which requires permeability i.e interconnected fluid channels in a reservoir rock. SP is directly related to permeability. The formula relating GAPI to Permeability would have to be based on empirical
data. There is an inverse approximate "correlation" between the two.
i.e. k = 1/GAPI * (local complex variables)
Thanks,
Chuck Merritt
President - WELLOG
www.wellog.com
--- On Fri, 11/20/09, Robert Helms <rhelms@cbgcorp.com> wrote:
From: Robert Helms <rhelms@cbgcorp.com>
Subject: RE: [wireline] querry
To: wireline@yahoogroups.com
Date: Friday, November 20, 2009, 6:55 AM
Robin Singh,
I found the following references to relating permeability to gamma ray measurements. Perhaps these papers will help you.
Rabe, C.L., 1958, A relation between gamma radiation and permeability,
Denver-JulesburgBasin [Neb.]: American
Institute of
Mining, Metallurgical, and Petroleum Engineers Transactions, 1957, v. 210, p. 358-360.
Gaur, R.S., and Singh, Inderjit, 1965, Relationship between permeability and gamma ray intensity for the Oligocene sand of an Indian field: Oil and Natural Gas Commission of India Bulletin,
v. 2, no. 1, p. 74-77.
You indicated the original document you are searching for was a CWLS presentation; Is it included on their CD here?
From: wireline@yahoogroup s.com [mailto:wireline@ yahoogroups. com]
On Behalf Of robin singh Sent: Thursday, November 19, 2009 12:11 PM To: wireline@yahoogroup s.com Subject: [wireline] querry
does any one of you guys have this paper "Field results using GR for calculating permeability" this is by WDM Smith and is a CWLS 1974 presentatin.
The information contained in this email and any attachments is confidential and may be subject to copyright or other intellectual property protection. If you are not the intended recipient, you are not authorized
to use or disclose this information, and we request that you notify us by reply mail or telephone and delete the original message from your mail system.
********************************DISCLAIMER*******************************************
Information contained and transmitted by this e-mail is confidential and proprietary to Oil India Ltd. and is intended for use only by the addressee. If you are not the intended recipient , you are notified that any dissemination or copying of this e-mail is
strictly prohibited and you are requested to delete this e-mail immediately and notify the originator. Oil India does not enter into any binding agreement with any party by e-mail. Any views expressed by an individual do not necessarily reflect the view of
Oil India. Oil India is not responsible for the consequences of any actions taken on the basis of information provided. While this e-mail has been checked for all known viruses the addressee should also scan for viruses. To know more about Oil India please
visit http://www.oil-india.com
*********************************************************************************************
The information contained in this email and any attachments is confidential and may be subject to copyright or other intellectual property protection. If you are not the intended recipient, you are not authorized to use or disclose this information, and we request that you notify us by reply mail or telephone and delete the original message from your mail system.
The local variables include all of the contributing factors that control permeability. The reason for local variables is because many factors must be summed together on a case by case basis. Permeability is often controlled by fractures. Are the fractures horizontal or vertical? If a quantitative value for permeability is necessary, then a number has to be assigned to the variables that control permeability. Depth, weight of overburden, compression of fractures, each one is an additional variable. Consequently, each must be assigned a value. Fractures are not related to GAPI at all unless a more or less radioactive fluid has migrated in the fracture zones. A major control variable in permeability is limestone filling and sealing of the interconnected porosity. The control factors are additive and multiplicative. The control factors once having had a value attached may have greater influence than the single GAPI factor!
Interesting questions to be answered!
Thanks,
Chuck Merritt
President - WELLOG
--- On Sun, 11/22/09, Shaukat Ali <shaligeo@...> wrote:
From: Shaukat Ali <shaligeo@...> Subject: FW: [wireline] query To: wireline@yahoogroups.com Date: Sunday, November 22, 2009, 3:20 AM
Hi Chuck,
I found answer in your email in the tail. One question please, is there any value range for this local complex variables?
Do we need to calibrate it with existing core or other data?
Thanks & Kind Regards,
Shaukat
To: wireline@yahoogroup s.com From: shaligeo@hotmail. com Date: Sat, 21 Nov 2009 01:10:04 +0500 Subject: RE: [wireline] query
Guys,
As per my theoratical knowledge, permeable formations will contribute more gamma ray counts as compared to tight or less permeable formations of same lithology. Does this property of formation also help to maintain a relationship b/w natural gamma ray counts and permeability?
Thanks & Kind Regards,
Shaukat Ali Petrophysicist Pak Cell : +92 333 5106755
To: wireline@yahoogroup s.com From: chuck.merritt@ wellog.com Date: Fri, 20 Nov 2009 10:38:12 -0800 Subject: RE: [wireline] query
Of course gamma ray API is related to permeability.
Natural Gamma radiation is related to sandstone/carbonate formations vs shales (tight formations). Permeable lithologies produce SP. SP overlays GAPI.
SP is probably the most simple measurement, relies on "ion flow" which requires permeability i.e interconnected fluid channels in a reservoir rock. SP is directly related to permeability. The formula relating GAPI to Permeability would have to be based on empirical data. There is an inverse approximate "correlation" between the two.
i.e. k = 1/GAPI * (local complex variables)
Thanks,
Chuck Merritt President - WELLOG www.wellog.com
--- On Fri, 11/20/09, Robert Helms <rhelms@cbgcorp. com> wrote:
From: Robert Helms <rhelms@cbgcorp. com> Subject: RE: [wireline] querry To: wireline@yahoogroup s.com Date: Friday, November 20, 2009, 6:55 AM
Robin Singh,
I found the following references to relating permeability to gamma ray measurements. Perhaps these papers will help you.
Rabe, C.L., 1958, A relation between gamma radiation and permeability, Denver- Julesburg Basin [Neb.]: American Institute of Mining, Metallurgical, and Petroleum Engineers Transactions, 1957, v. 210, p. 358-360.
Gaur, R.S., and Singh, Inderjit, 1965, Relationship between permeability and gamma ray intensity for the Oligocene sand of an Indian field: Oil and Natural Gas Commission of India Bulletin, v. 2, no. 1, p. 74-77.
You indicated the original document you are searching for was a CWLS presentation; Is it included on their CD here?
From: wireline@yahoogroup s.com [mailto:wireline@ yahoogroups. com] On Behalf Of robin singh Sent: Thursday, November 19, 2009 12:11 PM To: wireline@yahoogroup s.com Subject: [wireline] querry
does any one of you guys have this paper "Field results using GR for calculating permeability" this is by WDM Smith and is a CWLS 1974 presentatin.
Just started following the thread of responses on using GR to determine permeability. I am actually doing some research on permeabilty upscaling so I have gone through all the various sources of estimating permeabilty from well logs.
I believe it was already mentioned for a well behaved conventional clastic sequence low GR normally correlates to higher permeability so there is an inverse relation. But we need to consider what are the geological controls on permeability and these are sorting,grain shape and grain size and diagenetic processes. Keep in mind that permeability is also a tensorial property. These are all related to the geological history and depositional environment.
That being said I would not rank GR highly as a source of permeabilty as there are too many unknowns. What you may want to do is try a multi-variate approach using two or three curves to determine permeabilty but it must be tied to to some kind of facies log or geological description.
The best source of permeability in the industry is currently the magnetic resonance and mobilities from wireline formation testers. With these two pieces of data you can get an estimate of the reservoir's effective permeability which is what is needed to put into the models. Offcourse if you have core data that will be even better but sometimes we don't have that luxury.
If you anyone need references on permeabilty sources, let me know and I can send a couple papers.
Regards
Clive Sirju
--- On Sun, 11/22/09, chuck.merritt@... <chuck.merritt@...> wrote:
From: chuck.merritt@... <chuck.merritt@...> Subject: Re: FW: [wireline] query To: wireline@yahoogroups.com Date: Sunday, November 22, 2009, 3:29 PM
Shaukat,
The local variables include all of the contributing factors that control permeability. The reason for local variables is because many factors must be summed together on a case by case basis. Permeability is often controlled by fractures. Are the fractures horizontal or vertical? If a quantitative value for permeability is necessary, then a number has to be assigned to the variables that control permeability. Depth, weight of overburden, compression of fractures, each one is an additional variable. Consequently, each must be assigned a value. Fractures are not related to GAPI at all unless a more or less radioactive fluid has migrated in the fracture zones. A major control variable in permeability is limestone filling and sealing of the interconnected porosity. The control factors are additive and multiplicative. The control factors once having had a value attached may have greater influence than the single GAPI factor!
Interesting questions to be answered!
Thanks,
Chuck Merritt
President - WELLOG
--- On Sun, 11/22/09, Shaukat Ali <shaligeo@hotmail. com> wrote:
From: Shaukat Ali <shaligeo@hotmail. com> Subject: FW: [wireline] query To: wireline@yahoogroup s.com Date: Sunday, November 22, 2009, 3:20 AM
Hi Chuck,
I found answer in your email in the tail. One question please, is there any value range for this local complex variables?
Do we need to calibrate it with existing core or other data?
Thanks & Kind Regards,
Shaukat
To: wireline@yahoogroup s.com From: shaligeo@hotmail. com Date: Sat, 21 Nov 2009 01:10:04 +0500 Subject: RE: [wireline] query
Guys,
As per my theoratical knowledge, permeable formations will contribute more gamma ray counts as compared to tight or less permeable formations of same lithology. Does this property of formation also help to maintain a relationship b/w natural gamma ray counts and permeability?
Thanks & Kind Regards,
Shaukat Ali Petrophysicist Pak Cell : +92 333 5106755
To: wireline@yahoogroup s.com From: chuck.merritt@ wellog.com Date: Fri, 20 Nov 2009 10:38:12 -0800 Subject: RE: [wireline] query
Of course gamma ray API is related to permeability.
Natural Gamma radiation is related to sandstone/carbonate formations vs shales (tight formations). Permeable lithologies produce SP. SP overlays GAPI.
SP is probably the most simple measurement, relies on "ion flow" which requires permeability i.e interconnected fluid channels in a reservoir rock. SP is directly related to permeability. The formula relating GAPI to Permeability would have to be based on empirical data. There is an inverse approximate "correlation" between the two.
i.e. k = 1/GAPI * (local complex variables)
Thanks,
Chuck Merritt President - WELLOG www.wellog.com
--- On Fri, 11/20/09, Robert Helms <rhelms@cbgcorp. com> wrote:
From: Robert Helms <rhelms@cbgcorp. com> Subject: RE: [wireline] querry To: wireline@yahoogroup s.com Date: Friday, November 20, 2009, 6:55 AM
Robin Singh,
I found the following references to relating permeability to gamma ray measurements. Perhaps these papers will help you.
Rabe, C.L., 1958, A relation between gamma radiation and permeability, Denver- Julesburg Basin [Neb.]: American Institute of Mining, Metallurgical, and Petroleum Engineers Transactions, 1957, v. 210, p. 358-360.
Gaur, R.S., and Singh, Inderjit, 1965, Relationship between permeability and gamma ray intensity for the Oligocene sand of an Indian field: Oil and Natural Gas Commission of India Bulletin, v. 2, no. 1, p. 74-77.
You indicated the original document you are searching for was a CWLS presentation; Is it included on their CD here?
From: wireline@yahoogroup s.com [mailto:wireline@ yahoogroups. com] On Behalf Of robin singh Sent: Thursday, November 19, 2009 12:11 PM To: wireline@yahoogroup s.com Subject: [wireline] querry
does any one of you guys have this paper "Field results using GR for calculating permeability" this is by WDM Smith and is a CWLS 1974 presentatin.
Do permeable formations contribute more gamma ray counts as compared to tight or less permeable formations of same lithology? I mean a tight zone within a same formation will contribute low GR values as compared to other permeable zones of same formation, if suppose the distribution of radioactive minerals is almost uniform thoughout the formation?
Thanks & Kind Regards,
Shaukat Ali
To: wireline@yahoogroups.com From: kvsrao@... Date: Sat, 21 Nov 2009 10:13:49 +0530 Subject: RE: [wireline] query
*********************** This message has been scanned by the InterScan for CSC SSM and found to be free of known security risks. ***********************
What Chuck says appeals to me. When we look at a GR log, shale base line has the highest API counts (GR Scale may be 0 200 API, 0-150 API, 0-100 API depending upon the activity of the formations in a well) whereas, sand base line has the lowest API counts. This implies that the relationship is inverse. We all know that Shales, which are not generally permeable, have more radioactive content than Sands in general. Again this is subject to the mineral content of the Sands. Above mentioned simple explanation is what I can understand, without going into the details of quantitative relationships.
If the question is how to determine quantitative value of Permeability from API GR counts, it is for the experts to come out. I am also interested to know more on this aspect.
Kavi.
Chief Engineer (Well Logging),
Oil India Limited,
Assam, India.
E-mail: kvsrao@oilindia.in
From: wireline@yahoogroups.com [mailto:wireline@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Shaukat Ali Sent: Saturday, November 21, 2009 1:40 AM To: wireline@yahoogroups.com Subject: RE: [wireline] query
Guys,
As per my theoratical knowledge, permeable formations will contribute more gamma ray counts as compared to tight or less permeable formations of same lithology. Does this property of formation also help to maintain a relationship b/w natural gamma ray counts and permeability?
Thanks & Kind Regards, Shaukat Ali Petrophysicist Pak Cell : +92 333 5106755
To: wireline@yahoogroups.com From: chuck.merritt@wellog.com Date: Fri, 20 Nov 2009 10:38:12 -0800 Subject: RE: [wireline] query
Of course gamma ray API is related to permeability.
Natural Gamma radiation is related to sandstone/carbonate formations vs shales (tight formations). Permeable lithologies produce SP. SP overlays GAPI.
SP is probably the most simple measurement, relies on "ion flow" which requires permeability i.e interconnected fluid channels in a reservoir rock. SP is directly related to permeability. The formula relating GAPI to Permeability would have to be based on empirical data. There is an inverse approximate "correlation" between the two.
i.e. k = 1/GAPI * (local complex variables)
Thanks,
Chuck Merritt President - WELLOG www.wellog.com
--- On Fri, 11/20/09, Robert Helms <rhelms@cbgcorp.com> wrote:
From: Robert Helms <rhelms@cbgcorp.com> Subject: RE: [wireline] querry To: wireline@yahoogroups.com Date: Friday, November 20, 2009, 6:55 AM
Robin Singh,
I found the following references to relating permeability to gamma ray measurements. Perhaps these papers will help you.
Rabe, C.L., 1958, A relation between gamma radiation and permeability, Denver- Julesburg Basin [Neb.]: American Institute of Mining, Metallurgical, and Petroleum Engineers Transactions, 1957, v. 210, p. 358-360.
Gaur, R.S., and Singh, Inderjit, 1965, Relationship between permeability and gamma ray intensity for the Oligocene sand of an Indian field: Oil and Natural Gas Commission of India Bulletin, v. 2, no. 1, p. 74-77.
You indicated the original document you are searching for was a CWLS presentation; Is it included on their CD here?
From: wireline@yahoogroup s.com [mailto:wireline@ yahoogroups. com] On Behalf Of robin singh Sent: Thursday, November 19, 2009 12:11 PM To: wireline@yahoogroup s.com Subject: [wireline] querry
does any one of you guys have this paper "Field results using GR for calculating permeability" this is by WDM Smith and is a CWLS 1974 presentatin.
The information contained in this email and any attachments is confidential and may be subject to copyright or other intellectual property protection. If you are not the intended recipient, you are not authorized to use or disclose this information, and we request that you notify us by reply mail or telephone and delete the original message from your mail system.
********************************DISCLAIMER******************************************* Information contained and transmitted by this e-mail is confidential and proprietary to Oil India Ltd. and is intended for use only by the addressee. If you are not the intended recipient , you are notified that any dissemination or copying of this e-mail is strictly prohibited and you are requested to delete this e-mail immediately and notify the originator. Oil India does not enter into any binding agreement with any party by e-mail. Any views expressed by an individual do not necessarily reflect the view of Oil India. Oil India is not responsible for the consequences of any actions taken on the basis of information provided. While this e-mail has been checked for all known viruses the addressee should also scan for viruses. To know more about Oil India please visit http://www.oil-india.com *********************************************************************************************
The information contained in this email and any attachments is confidential and may be subject to copyright or other intellectual property protection. If you are not the intended recipient, you are not authorized to use or disclose this information, and we request that you notify us by reply mail or telephone and delete the original message from your mail system.
look at the situation from a different angle.if there is porosity, it has to be folled up with something. it cannot act like vaccume.the most likely fluid is water or/ and hydrocarbon. now if you are doing some log processing , then try to recall how much GR value you are giving to water and oil/gas.obviously if the pores are filled with water or H/C the GR (TotalGr) value will be low.( unless the water contains some dissolved Uranium.(Remember uranium is highly soluble in water) Now imagine the pores to be filled with some matrix/ shale (i.e some rock). Shales as you know would increase the GR value on the logs. Again if the rock is of micaceous nature one can expect more GR.
of course if you have tight but clean sand sands, then your GR values will be low.
robin singh
--- On Fri, 20/11/09, Shaukat Ali <shaligeo@...> wrote:
From: Shaukat Ali <shaligeo@...> Subject: RE: [wireline] query To: wireline@yahoogroups.com Date: Friday, 20 November, 2009, 20:10
Guys,
As per my theoratical knowledge, permeable formations will contribute more gamma ray counts as compared to tight or less permeable formations of same lithology. Does this property of formation also help to maintain a relationship b/w natural gamma ray counts and permeability?
Thanks & Kind Regards,
Shaukat Ali Petrophysicist Pak Cell : +92 333 5106755
To: wireline@yahoogroup s.com From: chuck.merritt@ wellog.com Date: Fri, 20 Nov 2009 10:38:12 -0800 Subject: RE: [wireline] query
Of course gamma ray API is related to permeability.
Natural Gamma radiation is related to sandstone/carbonate formations vs shales (tight formations). Permeable lithologies produce SP. SP overlays GAPI.
SP is probably the most simple measurement, relies on "ion flow" which requires permeability i.e interconnected fluid channels in a reservoir rock. SP is directly related to permeability. The formula relating GAPI to Permeability would have to be based on empirical data. There is an inverse approximate "correlation" between the two.
i.e. k = 1/GAPI * (local complex variables)
Thanks,
Chuck Merritt President - WELLOG www.wellog.com
--- On Fri, 11/20/09, Robert Helms <rhelms@cbgcorp. com> wrote:
From: Robert Helms <rhelms@cbgcorp. com> Subject: RE: [wireline] querry To: wireline@yahoogroup s.com Date: Friday, November 20, 2009, 6:55 AM
Robin Singh,
I found the following references to relating permeability to gamma ray measurements. Perhaps these papers will help you.
Rabe, C.L., 1958, A relation between gamma radiation and permeability, Denver- Julesburg Basin [Neb.]: American Institute of Mining, Metallurgical, and Petroleum Engineers Transactions, 1957, v. 210, p. 358-360.
Gaur, R.S., and Singh, Inderjit, 1965, Relationship between permeability and gamma ray intensity for the Oligocene sand of an Indian field: Oil and Natural Gas Commission of India Bulletin, v. 2, no. 1, p. 74-77.
You indicated the original document you are searching for was a CWLS presentation; Is it included on their CD here?
From: wireline@yahoogroup s.com [mailto:wireline@ yahoogroups. com] On Behalf Of robin singh Sent: Thursday, November 19, 2009 12:11 PM To: wireline@yahoogroup s.com Subject: [wireline] querry
does any one of you guys have this paper "Field results using GR for calculating permeability" this is by WDM Smith and is a CWLS 1974 presentatin.
You are correct. We must remember that gamma logs only responds
to the presence of natural gamma radiation, primarily due to gamma-emitting
isotopes of potassium, uranium and thorium and their daughter isotopes. Unless
you have excellent empirical knowledge, using natural gamma to estimate
permeability is dubious. Another common logging tool measurement that does a
better job of estimation in-situ permeability is FWS tube-wave attenuation log.
Regards,
James J. LoCoco, C.P.G., SAGEEP 2010 Technical Chair
Contact me about presenting a professional paper or poster at
the SAGEEP Conference April 11-15, 2010 at Keystone, CO USA.
From:
wireline@yahoogroups.com [mailto:wireline@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of clive
sirju Sent: Sunday, November 22, 2009 9:15 AM To: wireline@yahoogroups.com Subject: Re: FW: [wireline] query
Just started following the thread of responses on using GR
to determine permeability. I am actually doing some research on permeabilty
upscaling so I have gone through all the various sources of estimating
permeabilty from well logs.
I believe it was already mentioned for a well behaved
conventional clastic sequence low GR normally correlates to higher
permeability so there is an inverse relation. But we need to
consider what are the geological controls on permeability and these are
sorting,grain shape and grain size and diagenetic processes. Keep in
mind that permeability is also a tensorial property. These are all
related to the geological history and depositional environment.
That being said I would not rank GR highly as a source of
permeabilty as there are too many unknowns. What you may want to do is try a
multi-variate approach using two or three curves to determine permeabilty but
it must be tied to to some kind of facies log or geological description.
The best source of permeability in the industry is
currently the magnetic resonance and mobilities from wireline formation
testers. With these two pieces of data you can get an estimate of the
reservoir's effective permeability which is what is needed to put into the
models. Offcourse if you have core data that will be even better but
sometimes we don't have that luxury.
If you anyone need references on permeabilty sources, let
me know and I can send a couple papers.
Regards
Clive Sirju
--- On Sun, 11/22/09, chuck.merritt@... <chuck.merritt@...>
wrote:
From: chuck.merritt@... <chuck.merritt@...>
Subject: Re: FW: [wireline] query
To: wireline@yahoogroups.com
Date: Sunday, November 22, 2009, 3:29 PM
Shaukat,
The local variables include all of the contributing
factors that control permeability. The reason for local variables is
because many factors must be summed together on a case by case basis.
Permeability is often controlled by fractures. Are the fractures horizontal
or vertical? If a quantitative value for permeability is necessary, then a
number has to be assigned to the variables that control permeability.
Depth, weight of overburden, compression of fractures, each one is
an additional variable. Consequently, each must be assigned a value.
Fractures are not related to GAPI at all unless a more or less radioactive
fluid has migrated in the fracture zones. A major control variable in
permeability is limestone filling and sealing of the interconnected
porosity. The control factors are additive and multiplicative. The control
factors once having had a value attached may have greater influence
than the single GAPI factor!
Interesting questions to be answered!
Thanks,
Chuck Merritt
President - WELLOG
--- On Sun, 11/22/09, Shaukat Ali <shaligeo@hotmail. com>
wrote:
From: Shaukat Ali <shaligeo@hotmail. com>
Subject: FW: [wireline] query
To: wireline@yahoogroup s.com
Date: Sunday, November 22, 2009, 3:20 AM
Hi Chuck,
I found answer in your email in the tail. One question please, is there any
value range for this local complex variables?
Do we need to calibrate it
with existing core or other data?
Thanks & Kind Regards, Shaukat
To: wireline@yahoogroup s.com
From: shaligeo@hotmail. com
Date: Sat, 21 Nov 2009 01:10:04 +0500
Subject: RE: [wireline] query
Guys,
As per my theoratical knowledge, permeable formations will contribute more
gamma ray counts as compared to tight or less permeable formations of same
lithology. Does this property of formation also help to maintain a
relationship b/w natural gamma ray counts and permeability?
Thanks & Kind Regards, Shaukat Ali
Petrophysicist Pak Cell : +92 333 5106755
To: wireline@yahoogroup s.com
From: chuck.merritt@ wellog.com
Date: Fri, 20 Nov 2009 10:38:12 -0800
Subject: RE: [wireline] query
Of course gamma ray API is related to permeability.
Natural Gamma radiation is related to sandstone/carbonate formations vs
shales (tight formations). Permeable lithologies produce SP. SP overlays
GAPI.
SP is probably the most simple measurement, relies on "ion
flow" which requires permeability i.e interconnected fluid channels
in a reservoir rock. SP is directly related to permeability. The formula
relating GAPI to Permeability would have to be based on empirical data.
There is an inverse approximate "correlation" between the two.
i.e. k = 1/GAPI * (local complex variables)
Thanks,
Chuck Merritt
President - WELLOG
www.wellog.com
--- On Fri, 11/20/09, Robert Helms <rhelms@cbgcorp. com>
wrote:
From: Robert Helms <rhelms@cbgcorp. com>
Subject: RE: [wireline] querry
To: wireline@yahoogroup s.com
Date: Friday, November 20, 2009, 6:55 AM
Robin Singh,
I found the following references to relating
permeability to gamma ray measurements. Perhaps these papers will
help you.
Rabe, C.L., 1958, A relation between gamma
radiation and permeability, Denver- Julesburg Basin [Neb.]: American
Institute of Mining, Metallurgical, and Petroleum Engineers Transactions,
1957, v. 210, p. 358-360.
Gaur, R.S., and Singh, Inderjit, 1965,
Relationship between permeability and gamma ray intensity for the
Oligocene sand of an Indian field: Oil and Natural Gas Commission of
India Bulletin, v. 2, no. 1, p. 74-77.
You
indicated the original document you are searching for was a CWLS
presentation; Is it included on their CD here?
From: wireline@yahoogroup s.com [mailto:wireline@
yahoogroups. com] On Behalf Of robin singh Sent: Thursday, November 19, 2009 12:11 PM To: wireline@yahoogroup s.com Subject: [wireline] querry
does any one of you guys have this
paper "Field results using GR for calculating
permeability" this is by WDM Smith and is a CWLS 1974
presentatin.
Appreciate if you could send me papers on permeability?
Thanks & Kind Regards,
Shaukat Ali /
To: wireline@yahoogroups.com From: jim.lococo@... Date: Mon, 23 Nov 2009 09:29:50 -0700 Subject: RE: FW: [wireline] query
Clive..
You are correct. We must remember that gamma logs only responds to the presence of natural gamma radiation, primarily due to gamma-emitting isotopes of potassium, uranium and thorium and their daughter isotopes. Unless you have excellent empirical knowledge, using natural gamma to estimate permeability is dubious. Another common logging tool measurement that does a better job of estimation in-situ permeability is FWS tube-wave attenuation log.
Regards,
James J. LoCoco, C.P.G., SAGEEP 2010 Technical Chair
Contact me about presenting a professional paper or poster at the SAGEEP Conference April 11-15, 2010 at Keystone, CO USA.
From: wireline@yahoogroups.com [mailto:wireline@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of clive sirju Sent: Sunday, November 22, 2009 9:15 AM To: wireline@yahoogroups.com Subject: Re: FW: [wireline] query
Just started following the thread of responses on using GR to determine permeability. I am actually doing some research on permeabilty upscaling so I have gone through all the various sources of estimating permeabilty from well logs.
I believe it was already mentioned for a well behaved conventional clastic sequence low GR normally correlates to higher permeability so there is an inverse relation. But we need to consider what are the geological controls on permeability and these are sorting,grain shape and grain size and diagenetic processes. Keep in mind that permeability is also a tensorial property. These are all related to the geological history and depositional environment.
That being said I would not rank GR highly as a source of permeabilty as there are too many unknowns. What you may want to do is try a multi-variate approach using two or three curves to determine permeabilty but it must be tied to to some kind of facies log or geological description.
The best source of permeability in the industry is currently the magnetic resonance and mobilities from wireline formation testers. With these two pieces of data you can get an estimate of the reservoir's effective permeability which is what is needed to put into the models. Offcourse if you have core data that will be even better but sometimes we don't have that luxury.
If you anyone need references on permeabilty sources, let me know and I can send a couple papers.
Regards
Clive Sirju
--- On Sun, 11/22/09, chuck.merritt@wellog.com <chuck.merritt@wellog.com> wrote:
From: chuck.merritt@wellog.com <chuck.merritt@wellog.com> Subject: Re: FW: [wireline] query To: wireline@yahoogroups.com Date: Sunday, November 22, 2009, 3:29 PM
Shaukat,
The local variables include all of the contributing factors that control permeability. The reason for local variables is because many factors must be summed together on a case by case basis. Permeability is often controlled by fractures. Are the fractures horizontal or vertical? If a quantitative value for permeability is necessary, then a number has to be assigned to the variables that control permeability. Depth, weight of overburden, compression of fractures, each one is an additional variable. Consequently, each must be assigned a value. Fractures are not related to GAPI at all unless a more or less radioactive fluid has migrated in the fracture zones. A major control variable in permeability is limestone filling and sealing of the interconnected porosity. The control factors are additive and multiplicative. The control factors once having had a value attached may have greater influence than the single GAPI factor!
Interesting questions to be answered!
Thanks,
Chuck Merritt
President - WELLOG
--- On Sun, 11/22/09, Shaukat Ali <shaligeo@hotmail. com> wrote:
From: Shaukat Ali <shaligeo@hotmail. com> Subject: FW: [wireline] query To: wireline@yahoogroup s.com Date: Sunday, November 22, 2009, 3:20 AM
Hi Chuck,
I found answer in your email in the tail. One question please, is there any value range for this local complex variables?
Do we need to calibrate it with existing core or other data?
Thanks & Kind Regards, Shaukat
To: wireline@yahoogroup s.com From: shaligeo@hotmail. com Date: Sat, 21 Nov 2009 01:10:04 +0500 Subject: RE: [wireline] query
Guys,
As per my theoratical knowledge, permeable formations will contribute more gamma ray counts as compared to tight or less permeable formations of same lithology. Does this property of formation also help to maintain a relationship b/w natural gamma ray counts and permeability?
Thanks & Kind Regards, Shaukat Ali Petrophysicist Pak Cell : +92 333 5106755
To: wireline@yahoogroup s.com From: chuck.merritt@ wellog.com Date: Fri, 20 Nov 2009 10:38:12 -0800 Subject: RE: [wireline] query
Of course gamma ray API is related to permeability.
Natural Gamma radiation is related to sandstone/carbonate formations vs shales (tight formations). Permeable lithologies produce SP. SP overlays GAPI.
SP is probably the most simple measurement, relies on "ion flow" which requires permeability i.e interconnected fluid channels in a reservoir rock. SP is directly related to permeability. The formula relating GAPI to Permeability would have to be based on empirical data. There is an inverse approximate "correlation" between the two.
i.e. k = 1/GAPI * (local complex variables)
Thanks,
Chuck Merritt President - WELLOG www.wellog.com
--- On Fri, 11/20/09, Robert Helms <rhelms@cbgcorp. com> wrote:
From: Robert Helms <rhelms@cbgcorp. com> Subject: RE: [wireline] querry To: wireline@yahoogroup s.com Date: Friday, November 20, 2009, 6:55 AM
Robin Singh,
I found the following references to relating permeability to gamma ray measurements. Perhaps these papers will help you.
Rabe, C.L., 1958, A relation between gamma radiation and permeability, Denver- Julesburg Basin [Neb.]: American Institute of Mining, Metallurgical, and Petroleum Engineers Transactions, 1957, v. 210, p. 358-360.
Gaur, R.S., and Singh, Inderjit, 1965, Relationship between permeability and gamma ray intensity for the Oligocene sand of an Indian field: Oil and Natural Gas Commission of India Bulletin, v. 2, no. 1, p. 74-77.
You indicated the original document you are searching for was a CWLS presentation; Is it included on their CD here?
From: wireline@yahoogroup s.com [mailto:wireline@ yahoogroups. com] On Behalf Of robin singh Sent: Thursday, November 19, 2009 12:11 PM To: wireline@yahoogroup s.com Subject: [wireline] querry
does any one of you guys have this paper "Field results using GR for calculating permeability" this is by WDM Smith and is a CWLS 1974 presentatin.
Zoubi,
I guess I know the reason you got no attention from the other guys here.
Try to rewrite your email in plain English, trust me, you would get more
attention from guys like Syd, Chuck and the others.
Just my 2 cents.
Rgds,
Wijoyo
On Thu, 2009-11-19 at 15:20 +0000, zouby wrote:
>
> hello guys,
> recently i hv been having problems with the owen setting tool 4 magna
> range tubing plugs...n ifreqentlywith the baker 20 setting tool 4
> cibp...hv lost abt 5 tools in hole...after settin the plug...am stuck
> = my hing 2 bra the wek [point n leaving the tool in hole..
> i need help i solving this riddle. what cud hv been goin wrong?...
> the last incident. the owen setting tool sheared into 2 downhole. when
> i anted 2 break the weak point!!!
>
> help urgenmtly pls
>
>
>
>
>
dear sir,Shauka Ali just to tell you that,I'm student looking for a job,please sir, if any let me know.
but there is one company of my friend Adam Mahamat here in Chad Doba oilfield Esso Exploration and production.I would introduction the wireline to him if he can.
thanks and kind regards,
From: Shaukat Ali <shaligeo@...> To: wireline@yahoogroups.com Sent: Mon, November 23, 2009 9:18:55 PM Subject: RE: [wireline] query
Clive,
Appreciate if you could send me papers on permeability?
Thanks & Kind Regards,
Shaukat Ali /
To: wireline@yahoogroup s.com From: jim.lococo@mountsop ris.com Date: Mon, 23 Nov 2009 09:29:50 -0700 Subject: RE: FW: [wireline] query
Clive…..
You are correct. We must remember that gamma logs only responds to the presence of natural gamma radiation, primarily due to gamma-emitting isotopes of potassium, uranium and thorium and their daughter isotopes. Unless you have excellent empirical knowledge, using natural gamma to estimate permeability is dubious. Another common logging tool measurement that does a better job of estimation in-situ permeability is FWS tube-wave attenuation log.
Regards,
James J. LoCoco, C.P.G., SAGEEP 2010 Technical Chair
Contact me about presenting a professional paper or poster at the SAGEEP Conference April 11-15, 2010 at Keystone, CO USA.
From: wireline@yahoogroup s.com [mailto:wireline@ yahoogroups. com] On Behalf Of clive sirju Sent: Sunday, November 22, 2009 9:15 AM To: wireline@yahoogroup s.com Subject: Re: FW: [wireline] query
Just started following the thread of responses on using GR to determine permeability. I am actually doing some research on permeabilty upscaling so I have gone through all the various sources of estimating permeabilty from well logs.
I believe it was already mentioned for a well behaved conventional clastic sequence low GR normally correlates to higher permeability so there is an inverse relation. But we need to consider what are the geological controls on permeability and these are sorting,grain shape and grain size and diagenetic processes. Keep in mind that permeability is also a tensorial property.. These are all related to the geological history and depositional environment.
That being said I would not rank GR highly as a source of permeabilty as there are too many unknowns. What you may want to do is try a multi-variate approach using two or three curves to determine permeabilty but it must be tied to to some kind of facies log or geological description.
The best source of permeability in the industry is currently the magnetic resonance and mobilities from wireline formation testers. With these two pieces of data you can get an estimate of the reservoir's effective permeability which is what is needed to put into the models. Offcourse if you have core data that will be even better but sometimes we don't have that luxury.
If you anyone need references on permeabilty sources, let me know and I can send a couple papers.
Regards
Clive Sirju
--- On Sun, 11/22/09, chuck.merritt@ wellog.com<chuck.merritt@ wellog.com> wrote:
From: chuck.merritt@ wellog.com <chuck.merritt@ wellog.com> Subject: Re: FW: [wireline] query To: wireline@yahoogroup s.com Date: Sunday, November 22, 2009, 3:29 PM
Shaukat,
The local variables include all of the contributing factors that control permeability. The reason for local variables is because many factors must be summed together on a case by case basis. Permeability is often controlled by fractures. Are the fractures horizontal or vertical? If a quantitative value for permeability is necessary, then a number has to be assigned to the variables that control permeability. Depth, weight of overburden, compression of fractures, each one is an additional variable. Consequently, each must be assigned a value. Fractures are not related to GAPI at all unless a more or less radioactive fluid has migrated in the fracture zones. A major control variable in permeability is limestone filling and sealing of the interconnected porosity. The control factors are additive and multiplicative. The control factors once having had a value attached may have greater influence than the single GAPI
factor!
Interesting questions to be answered!
Thanks,
Chuck Merritt
President - WELLOG
--- On Sun, 11/22/09, Shaukat Ali <shaligeo@hotmail. com> wrote:
From: Shaukat Ali <shaligeo@hotmail. com> Subject: FW: [wireline] query To: wireline@yahoogroup s.com Date: Sunday, November 22, 2009, 3:20 AM
Hi Chuck,
I found answer in your email in the tail. One question please, is there any value range for this local complex variables?
Do we need to calibrate it with existing core or other data?
Thanks & Kind Regards, Shaukat
To: wireline@yahoogroup s.com From: shaligeo@hotmail. com Date: Sat, 21 Nov 2009 01:10:04 +0500 Subject: RE: [wireline] query
Guys,
As per my theoratical knowledge, permeable formations will contribute more gamma ray counts as compared to tight or less permeable formations of same lithology. Does this property of formation also help to maintain a relationship b/w natural gamma ray counts and permeability?
Thanks & Kind Regards, Shaukat Ali Petrophysicist Pak Cell : +92 333 5106755
To: wireline@yahoogroup s.com From: chuck.merritt@ wellog.com Date: Fri, 20 Nov 2009 10:38:12 -0800 Subject: RE: [wireline] query
Of course gamma ray API is related to permeability.
Natural Gamma radiation is related to sandstone/carbonate formations vs shales (tight formations). Permeable lithologies produce SP. SP overlays GAPI.
SP is probably the most simple measurement, relies on "ion flow" which requires permeability i.e interconnected fluid channels in a reservoir rock. SP is directly related to permeability. The formula relating GAPI to Permeability would have to be based on empirical data. There is an inverse approximate "correlation" between the two.
--- On Fri, 11/20/09, Robert Helms <rhelms@cbgcorp. com> wrote:
From: Robert Helms <rhelms@cbgcorp. com> Subject: RE: [wireline] querry To: wireline@yahoogroup s.com Date: Friday, November 20, 2009, 6:55 AM
Robin Singh,
I found the following references to relating permeability to gamma ray measurements. Perhaps these papers will help you.
Rabe, C.L., 1958, A relation between gamma radiation and permeability, Denver- Julesburg Basin [Neb.]: American Institute of Mining, Metallurgical, and Petroleum Engineers Transactions, 1957, v. 210, p. 358-360.
Gaur, R.S., and Singh, Inderjit, 1965, Relationship between permeability and gamma ray intensity for the Oligocene sand of an Indian field: Oil and Natural Gas Commission of India Bulletin, v. 2, no. 1, p. 74-77.
You indicated the original document you are searching for was a CWLS presentation; Is it included on their CD here?
From: wireline@yahoogroup s.com [mailto:wireline@ yahoogroups. com] On Behalf Of robin singh Sent: Thursday, November 19, 2009 12:11 PM To: wireline@yahoogroup s.com Subject: [wireline] querry
does any one of you guys have this paper "Field results using GR for calculating permeability" this is by WDM Smith and is a CWLS 1974 presentatin.
I'd certainly agree with that! How do you go about banning text-speak Syd??
It won't help the fundamental problem of getting stuck with a setting tool, but a lot of our clients run one of Guardian's Addressable Release Tools (ART) above a setting to so that they can release from a stuck tool without danger of over-stressing/breaking the cable.
Regards,
Iain Maxted Managing Director
Guardian Global Technologies Ltd Merlin House, Brunel Court Village Farm Industrial Estate, Pyle, Bridgend, Wales, CF33 6BL, UK
Tel: +44 (0) 1656 742100 Fax: +44 (0) 1656 742251
PLEASE DO NOT PRINT THIS E-MAIL UNLESS YOU REALLY NEED TO!
See our new website at www.ggtg.net
-----Original Message----- From: wireline@yahoogroups.com [mailto:wireline@yahoogroups.com]On Behalf Of Wijoyo Utomo Sent: 24 November 2009 06:26 To: wireline@yahoogroups.com Subject: Re: [wireline] owen setting tool for magna range plugs
Zoubi,
I guess I know the reason you got no attention from the other guys here. Try to rewrite your email in plain English, trust me, you would get more attention from guys like Syd, Chuck and the others.
Just my 2 cents.
Rgds, Wijoyo
On Thu, 2009-11-19 at 15:20 +0000, zouby wrote: > > hello guys, > recently i hv been having problems with the owen setting tool 4 magna > range tubing plugs...n ifreqentlywith the baker 20 setting tool 4 > cibp...hv lost abt 5 tools in hole...after settin the plug...am stuck > = my hing 2 bra the wek [point n leaving the tool in hole.. > i need help i solving this riddle. what cud hv been goin wrong?... > the last incident. the owen setting tool sheared into 2 downhole. when > i anted 2 break the weak point!!! > > help urgenmtly pls > > > > >
Subject: RE: [wireline] Owen setting tool for magna range plugs
I'd certainly agree with that! How do you go about banning text-speak Syd??
It won't help the fundamental problem of getting stuck with a setting tool, but a lot of our clients run one of Guardian's Addressable Release Tools (ART) above a setting to so that they can release from a stuck tool without danger of over-stressing/breaking the cable.
Regards,
Iain Maxted Managing Director
Guardian Global Technologies Ltd Merlin House, Brunel Court Village Farm Industrial Estate, Pyle, Bridgend, Wales, CF33 6BL, UK
Tel: +44 (0) 1656 742100 Fax: +44 (0) 1656 742251
PLEASE DO NOT PRINT THIS E-MAIL UNLESS YOU REALLY NEED TO!
See our new website at www.ggtg.net
-----Original Message----- From: wireline@yahoogroups.com [mailto:wireline@yahoogroups.com]On Behalf Of Wijoyo Utomo Sent: 24 November 2009 06:26 To: wireline@yahoogroups.com Subject: Re: [wireline] owen setting tool for magna range plugs
Zoubi,
I guess I know the reason you got no attention from the other guys here. Try to rewrite your email in plain English, trust me, you would get more attention from guys like Syd, Chuck and the others.
Just my 2 cents.
Rgds, Wijoyo
On Thu, 2009-11-19 at 15:20 +0000, zouby wrote: > > hello guys, > recently i hv been having problems with the owen setting tool 4 magna > range tubing plugs...n ifreqentlywith the baker 20 setting tool 4 > cibp...hv lost abt 5 tools in hole...after settin the plug...am stuck > = my hing 2 bra the wek [point n leaving the tool in hole.. > i need help i solving this riddle. what cud hv been goin wrong?... > the last incident. the owen setting tool sheared into 2 downhole. when > i anted 2 break the weak point!!! > > help urgenmtly pls > > > > >
--- On Mon, 11/23/09, Shaukat Ali <shaligeo@...> wrote:
From: Shaukat Ali <shaligeo@...> Subject: RE: [wireline] query To: wireline@yahoogroups.com Date: Monday, November 23, 2009, 8:18 PM
Clive,
Appreciate if you could send me papers on permeability?
Thanks & Kind Regards,
Shaukat Ali /
To: wireline@yahoogroup s.com From: jim.lococo@mountsop ris.com Date: Mon, 23 Nov 2009 09:29:50 -0700 Subject: RE: FW: [wireline] query
Clive…..
You are correct. We must remember that gamma logs only responds to the presence of natural gamma radiation, primarily due to gamma-emitting isotopes of potassium, uranium and thorium and their daughter isotopes. Unless you have excellent empirical knowledge, using natural gamma to estimate permeability is dubious. Another common logging tool measurement that does a better job of estimation in-situ permeability is FWS tube-wave attenuation log.
Regards,
James J. LoCoco, C.P.G., SAGEEP 2010 Technical Chair
Contact me about presenting a professional paper or poster at the SAGEEP Conference April 11-15, 2010 at Keystone, CO USA.
From: wireline@yahoogroup s.com [mailto:wireline@ yahoogroups. com] On Behalf Of clive sirju Sent: Sunday, November 22, 2009 9:15 AM To: wireline@yahoogroup s.com Subject: Re: FW: [wireline] query
Just started following the thread of responses on using GR to determine permeability. I am actually doing some research on permeabilty upscaling so I have gone through all the various sources of estimating permeabilty from well logs.
I believe it was already mentioned for a well behaved conventional clastic sequence low GR normally correlates to higher permeability so there is an inverse relation. But we need to consider what are the geological controls on permeability and these are sorting,grain shape and grain size and diagenetic processes. Keep in mind that permeability is also a tensorial property. These are all related to the geological history and depositional environment.
That being said I would not rank GR highly as a source of permeabilty as there are too many unknowns. What you may want to do is try a multi-variate approach using two or three curves to determine permeabilty but it must be tied to to some kind of facies log or geological description.
The best source of permeability in the industry is currently the magnetic resonance and mobilities from wireline formation testers. With these two pieces of data you can get an estimate of the reservoir's effective permeability which is what is needed to put into the models. Offcourse if you have core data that will be even better but sometimes we don't have that luxury.
If you anyone need references on permeabilty sources, let me know and I can send a couple papers.
Regards
Clive Sirju
--- On Sun, 11/22/09, chuck.merritt@ wellog.com <chuck.merritt@ wellog.com> wrote:
From: chuck.merritt@ wellog.com <chuck.merritt@ wellog.com> Subject: Re: FW: [wireline] query To: wireline@yahoogroup s.com Date: Sunday, November 22, 2009, 3:29 PM
Shaukat,
The local variables include all of the contributing factors that control permeability. The reason for local variables is because many factors must be summed together on a case by case basis. Permeability is often controlled by fractures. Are the fractures horizontal or vertical? If a quantitative value for permeability is necessary, then a number has to be assigned to the variables that control permeability. Depth, weight of overburden, compression of fractures, each one is an additional variable. Consequently, each must be assigned a value. Fractures are not related to GAPI at all unless a more or less radioactive fluid has migrated in the fracture zones. A major control variable in permeability is limestone filling and sealing of the interconnected porosity. The control factors are additive and multiplicative. The control factors once having had a value attached may have greater influence than the single GAPI
factor!
Interesting questions to be answered!
Thanks,
Chuck Merritt
President - WELLOG
--- On Sun, 11/22/09, Shaukat Ali <shaligeo@hotmail. com> wrote:
From: Shaukat Ali <shaligeo@hotmail. com> Subject: FW: [wireline] query To: wireline@yahoogroup s.com Date: Sunday, November 22, 2009, 3:20 AM
Hi Chuck,
I found answer in your email in the tail. One question please, is there any value range for this local complex variables?
Do we need to calibrate it with existing core or other data?
Thanks & Kind Regards, Shaukat
To: wireline@yahoogroup s.com From: shaligeo@hotmail. com Date: Sat, 21 Nov 2009 01:10:04 +0500 Subject: RE: [wireline] query
Guys,
As per my theoratical knowledge, permeable formations will contribute more gamma ray counts as compared to tight or less permeable formations of same lithology. Does this property of formation also help to maintain a relationship b/w natural gamma ray counts and permeability?
Thanks & Kind Regards, Shaukat Ali Petrophysicist Pak Cell : +92 333 5106755
To: wireline@yahoogroup s.com From: chuck.merritt@ wellog.com Date: Fri, 20 Nov 2009 10:38:12 -0800 Subject: RE: [wireline] query
Of course gamma ray API is related to permeability.
Natural Gamma radiation is related to sandstone/carbonate formations vs shales (tight formations). Permeable lithologies produce SP. SP overlays GAPI.
SP is probably the most simple measurement, relies on "ion flow" which requires permeability i.e interconnected fluid channels in a reservoir rock. SP is directly related to permeability. The formula relating GAPI to Permeability would have to be based on empirical data. There is an inverse approximate "correlation" between the two.
i.e. k = 1/GAPI * (local complex variables)
Thanks,
Chuck Merritt President - WELLOG www.wellog.com
--- On Fri, 11/20/09, Robert Helms <rhelms@cbgcorp. com> wrote:
From: Robert Helms <rhelms@cbgcorp. com> Subject: RE: [wireline] querry To: wireline@yahoogroup s.com Date: Friday, November 20, 2009, 6:55 AM
Robin Singh,
I found the following references to relating permeability to gamma ray measurements. Perhaps these papers will help you.
Rabe, C.L., 1958, A relation between gamma radiation and permeability, Denver- Julesburg Basin [Neb.]: American Institute of Mining, Metallurgical, and Petroleum Engineers Transactions, 1957, v. 210, p. 358-360.
Gaur, R.S., and Singh, Inderjit, 1965, Relationship between permeability and gamma ray intensity for the Oligocene sand of an Indian field: Oil and Natural Gas Commission of India Bulletin, v. 2, no. 1, p. 74-77.
You indicated the original document you are searching for was a CWLS presentation; Is it included on their CD here?
From: wireline@yahoogroup s.com [mailto:wireline@ yahoogroups. com] On Behalf Of robin singh Sent: Thursday, November 19, 2009 12:11 PM To: wireline@yahoogroup s.com Subject: [wireline] querry
does any one of you guys have this paper "Field results using GR for calculating permeability" this is by WDM Smith and is a CWLS 1974 presentatin.
***********************
This message has been scanned by the InterScan for CSC SSM and found to be free of known security risks.
***********************
Clive,
I appreciate you for uploading the write up on Permeability in a pdf file. Unfortunately, while trying to save
it, I am getting a message that it is corrupt. Would you please upload it again. Thanks.
Regards,
Kavi.
From: wireline@yahoogroups.com
[mailto:wireline@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of
clive sirju Sent: Wednesday, November 25, 2009 8:58 PM To: wireline@yahoogroups.com Subject: RE: [wireline] query
You may find this useful.
Regards
Clive
--- On Mon, 11/23/09, Shaukat Ali <shaligeo@hotmail.com> wrote:
From: Shaukat Ali <shaligeo@hotmail.com>
Subject: RE: [wireline] query
To: wireline@yahoogroups.com
Date: Monday, November 23, 2009, 8:18 PM
Clive,
Appreciate if you could send me papers on permeability?
Thanks & Kind Regards, Shaukat Ali
/
To: wireline@yahoogroup s.com
From: jim.lococo@mountsop ris.com
Date: Mon, 23 Nov 2009 09:29:50 -0700
Subject: RE: FW: [wireline] query
Clive…..
You are correct. We must remember that gamma logs only responds to the presence of natural gamma radiation, primarily due to gamma-emitting
isotopes of potassium, uranium and thorium and their daughter isotopes. Unless you have excellent empirical knowledge, using natural gamma to estimate permeability is dubious. Another common logging tool measurement that does a better job of estimation in-situ
permeability is FWS tube-wave attenuation log.
Regards,
James J. LoCoco, C.P.G., SAGEEP 2010 Technical Chair
Contact me about presenting a professional paper or poster at the SAGEEP Conference April
11-15, 2010 at Keystone, CO USA.
From: wireline@yahoogroup s.com [mailto:wireline@ yahoogroups. com]
On Behalf Of clive sirju Sent: Sunday, November 22, 2009 9:15 AM To: wireline@yahoogroup s.com Subject: Re: FW: [wireline] query
Just started following the thread of responses on using GR to determine permeability. I am actually doing some research on permeabilty upscaling so I have gone through
all the various sources of estimating permeabilty from well logs.
I believe it was already mentioned for a well behaved conventional clastic sequence low GR normally correlates to higher permeability so there is an inverse relation.
But we need to consider what are the geological controls on permeability and these are sorting,grain shape and grain size and diagenetic processes. Keep in mind that permeability is also a tensorial property. These are all related to the geological history
and depositional environment.
That being said I would not rank GR highly as a source of permeabilty as there are too many unknowns. What you may want to do is try a multi-variate approach using
two or three curves to determine permeabilty but it must be tied to to some kind of facies log or geological description.
The best source of permeability in the industry is currently the magnetic resonance and mobilities from wireline formation testers. With these two pieces of data you
can get an estimate of the reservoir's effective permeability which is what is needed to put into the models.. Offcourse if you have core data that will be even better but sometimes we don't have that luxury.
If you anyone need references on permeabilty sources, let me know and I can send a couple papers.
Regards
Clive Sirju
--- On Sun, 11/22/09, chuck.merritt@ wellog.com
<chuck.merritt@ wellog.com> wrote:
From: chuck.merritt@ wellog.com <chuck.merritt@ wellog.com>
Subject: Re: FW: [wireline] query
To: wireline@yahoogroup s.com
Date: Sunday, November 22, 2009, 3:29 PM
Shaukat,
The local variables include all of the contributing factors that control permeability. The reason for local variables is because many factors must be summed together
on a case by case basis. Permeability is often controlled by fractures. Are the fractures horizontal or vertical? If a quantitative value for permeability is necessary, then a number has to be assigned to the variables that control permeability. Depth, weight
of overburden, compression of fractures, each one is an additional variable. Consequently, each must be assigned a value. Fractures are not related to GAPI at all unless a more or less radioactive fluid has migrated in the fracture zones. A major control variable
in permeability is limestone filling and sealing of the interconnected porosity. The control factors are additive and multiplicative. The control factors once having had a value attached may have greater influence than the single GAPI factor!
Interesting questions to be answered!
Thanks,
Chuck Merritt
President -
WELLOG
--- On Sun, 11/22/09, Shaukat Ali <shaligeo@hotmail. com> wrote:
From: Shaukat Ali <shaligeo@hotmail. com>
Subject: FW: [wireline] query
To: wireline@yahoogroup s.com
Date: Sunday, November 22, 2009, 3:20 AM
Hi Chuck,
I found answer in your email in the tail. One question please, is there any value range for this local complex variables?
Do we need to calibrate it with existing core or other data?
Thanks & Kind Regards, Shaukat
To: wireline@yahoogroup s.com
From: shaligeo@hotmail. com
Date: Sat, 21 Nov 2009 01:10:04 +0500
Subject: RE: [wireline] query
Guys,
As per my theoratical knowledge, permeable formations will contribute more gamma ray counts as compared to tight or less permeable formations of same lithology. Does this property of formation also help to maintain a relationship b/w natural gamma ray counts
and permeability?
Thanks & Kind Regards, Shaukat Ali
Petrophysicist Pak Cell : +92 333 5106755
To: wireline@yahoogroup s.com
From: chuck.merritt@ wellog.com
Date: Fri, 20 Nov 2009 10:38:12 -0800
Subject: RE: [wireline] query
Of course gamma ray API is related to permeability.
Natural Gamma radiation is related to sandstone/carbonate formations vs shales (tight formations). Permeable lithologies produce SP. SP overlays GAPI.
SP is probably the most simple measurement, relies on "ion flow" which requires permeability i.e interconnected fluid channels in a reservoir rock. SP is directly related to permeability. The formula relating GAPI to Permeability would have to be based on empirical
data. There is an inverse approximate "correlation" between the two.
i.e. k = 1/GAPI * (local complex variables)
Thanks,
Chuck Merritt
President - WELLOG
www.wellog.com
--- On Fri, 11/20/09, Robert Helms <rhelms@cbgcorp. com> wrote:
From: Robert Helms <rhelms@cbgcorp. com>
Subject: RE: [wireline] querry
To: wireline@yahoogroup s.com
Date: Friday, November 20, 2009, 6:55 AM
Robin Singh,
I found the following references to relating permeability to gamma ray measurements. Perhaps these papers will help you.
Rabe, C.L., 1958, A relation between gamma radiation and permeability,
Denver-JulesburgBasin [Neb.]: American
Institute of
Mining, Metallurgical, and Petroleum Engineers Transactions, 1957, v.. 210, p. 358-360.
Gaur, R.S., and Singh, Inderjit, 1965, Relationship between permeability and gamma ray intensity for the Oligocene sand of an Indian field: Oil and Natural Gas Commission of India Bulletin,
v. 2, no.. 1, p. 74-77.
You indicated the original document you are searching for was a CWLS presentation; Is it included on their CD here?
From: wireline@yahoogroup s.com [mailto:wireline@ yahoogroups. com]
On Behalf Of robin singh Sent: Thursday, November 19, 2009 12:11 PM To: wireline@yahoogroup s..com Subject: [wireline] querry
does any one of you guys have this paper "Field results using GR for calculating permeability" this is by WDM Smith and is a CWLS 1974 presentatin.
The information contained in this email and any attachments is confidential and may be subject to copyright or other intellectual property protection. If you are not the intended recipient, you are not authorized
to use or disclose this information, and we request that you notify us by reply mail or telephone and delete the original message from your mail system.
********************************DISCLAIMER*******************************************
Information contained and transmitted by this e-mail is confidential and proprietary to Oil India Ltd. and is intended for use only by the addressee. If you are not the intended recipient , you are notified that any dissemination or copying of this e-mail is
strictly prohibited and you are requested to delete this e-mail immediately and notify the originator. Oil India does not enter into any binding agreement with any party by e-mail. Any views expressed by an individual do not necessarily reflect the view of
Oil India. Oil India is not responsible for the consequences of any actions taken on the basis of information provided. While this e-mail has been checked for all known viruses the addressee should also scan for viruses. To know more about Oil India please
visit http://www.oil-india.com
*********************************************************************************************
The information contained in this email and any attachments is confidential and may be subject to copyright or other intellectual property protection. If you are not the intended recipient, you are not authorized to use or disclose this information, and we request that you notify us by reply mail or telephone and delete the original message from your mail system.
--- On Thu, 11/26/09, K V S Rao <kvsrao@...> wrote:
From: K V S Rao <kvsrao@...> Subject: RE: [wireline] query To: "wireline@yahoogroups.com" <wireline@yahoogroups.com> Date: Thursday, November 26, 2009, 2:30 AM
************ ********* ** This message has been scanned by the InterScan for CSC SSM and found to be free of known security risks. ************ ********* **
Clive,
I appreciate you for uploading the write up on Permeability in a pdf file. Unfortunately, while trying to save it, I am getting a message that it is corrupt. Would you please upload it again. Thanks.
Regards,
Kavi.
From: wireline@yahoogroup s.com [mailto:wireline@ yahoogroups. com] On Behalf Of clive sirju Sent: Wednesday, November 25, 2009 8:58 PM To: wireline@yahoogroup s.com Subject: RE: [wireline] query
You may find this useful.
Regards
Clive
--- On Mon, 11/23/09, Shaukat Ali <shaligeo@hotmail. com> wrote:
From: Shaukat Ali <shaligeo@hotmail. com> Subject: RE: [wireline] query To: wireline@yahoogroup s.com Date: Monday, November 23, 2009, 8:18 PM
Clive,
Appreciate if you could send me papers on permeability?
Thanks & Kind Regards, Shaukat Ali /
To: wireline@yahoogroup s.com From: jim.lococo@mountsop ris.com Date: Mon, 23 Nov 2009 09:29:50 -0700 Subject: RE: FW: [wireline] query
Clive…..
You are correct. We must remember that gamma logs only responds to the presence of natural gamma radiation, primarily due to gamma-emitting isotopes of potassium, uranium and thorium and their daughter isotopes. Unless you have excellent empirical knowledge, using natural gamma to estimate permeability is dubious. Another common logging tool measurement that does a better job of estimation in-situ permeability is FWS tube-wave attenuation log.
Regards,
James J. LoCoco, C.P.G., SAGEEP 2010 Technical Chair
Contact me about presenting a professional paper or poster at the SAGEEP Conference April 11-15, 2010 at Keystone, CO USA.
From: wireline@yahoogroup s.com [mailto:wireline@ yahoogroups. com] On Behalf Of clive sirju Sent: Sunday, November 22, 2009 9:15 AM To: wireline@yahoogroup s.com Subject: Re: FW: [wireline] query
Just started following the thread of responses on using GR to determine permeability. I am actually doing some research on permeabilty upscaling so I have gone through all the various sources of estimating permeabilty from well logs.
I believe it was already mentioned for a well behaved conventional clastic sequence low GR normally correlates to higher permeability so there is an inverse relation. But we need to consider what are the geological controls on permeability and these are sorting,grain shape and grain size and diagenetic processes. Keep in mind that permeability is also a tensorial property. These are all related to the geological history and depositional environment.
That being said I would not rank GR highly as a source of permeabilty as there are too many unknowns. What you may want to do is try a multi-variate approach using two or three curves to determine permeabilty but it must be tied to to some kind of facies log or geological description.
The best source of permeability in the industry is currently the magnetic resonance and mobilities from wireline formation testers. With these two pieces of data you can get an estimate of the reservoir's effective permeability which is what is needed to put into the models.. Offcourse if you have core data that will be even better but sometimes we don't have that luxury.
If you anyone need references on permeabilty sources, let me know and I can send a couple papers.
Regards
Clive Sirju
--- On Sun, 11/22/09, chuck.merritt@ wellog.com <chuck.merritt@ wellog.com> wrote:
From: chuck.merritt@ wellog.com <chuck.merritt@ wellog.com> Subject: Re: FW: [wireline] query To: wireline@yahoogroup s.com Date: Sunday, November 22, 2009, 3:29 PM
Shaukat,
The local variables include all of the contributing factors that control permeability. The reason for local variables is because many factors must be summed together on a case by case basis. Permeability is often controlled by fractures. Are the fractures horizontal or vertical? If a quantitative value for permeability is necessary, then a number has to be assigned to the variables that control permeability. Depth, weight of overburden, compression of fractures, each one is an additional variable. Consequently, each must be assigned a value. Fractures are not related to GAPI at all unless a more or less radioactive fluid has migrated in the fracture zones. A major control variable in permeability is limestone filling and sealing of the interconnected porosity. The control factors are additive and multiplicative. The control factors once having had
a value attached may have greater influence than the single GAPI factor!
Interesting questions to be answered!
Thanks,
Chuck Merritt
President - WELLOG
--- On Sun, 11/22/09, Shaukat Ali <shaligeo@hotmail. com> wrote:
From: Shaukat Ali <shaligeo@hotmail. com> Subject: FW: [wireline] query To: wireline@yahoogroup s.com Date: Sunday, November 22, 2009, 3:20 AM
Hi Chuck,
I found answer in your email in the tail. One question please, is there any value range for this local complex variables?
Do we need to calibrate it with existing core or other data?
Thanks & Kind Regards, Shaukat
To: wireline@yahoogroup s.com From: shaligeo@hotmail. com Date: Sat, 21 Nov 2009 01:10:04 +0500 Subject: RE: [wireline] query
Guys,
As per my theoratical knowledge, permeable formations will contribute more gamma ray counts as compared to tight or less permeable formations of same lithology. Does this property of formation also help to maintain a relationship b/w natural gamma ray counts and permeability?
Thanks & Kind Regards, Shaukat Ali Petrophysicist Pak Cell : +92 333 5106755
To: wireline@yahoogroup s.com From: chuck.merritt@ wellog.com Date: Fri, 20 Nov 2009 10:38:12 -0800 Subject: RE: [wireline] query
Of course gamma ray API is related to permeability.
Natural Gamma radiation is related to sandstone/carbonate formations vs shales (tight formations). Permeable lithologies produce SP. SP overlays GAPI.
SP is probably the most simple measurement, relies on "ion flow" which requires permeability i.e interconnected fluid channels in a reservoir rock. SP is directly related to permeability. The formula relating GAPI to Permeability would have to be based on empirical data. There is an inverse approximate "correlation" between the two.
i.e. k = 1/GAPI * (local complex variables)
Thanks,
Chuck Merritt President - WELLOG www.wellog.com
--- On Fri, 11/20/09, Robert Helms <rhelms@cbgcorp. com> wrote:
From: Robert Helms <rhelms@cbgcorp. com> Subject: RE: [wireline] querry To: wireline@yahoogroup s.com Date: Friday, November 20, 2009, 6:55 AM
Robin Singh,
I found the following references to relating permeability to gamma ray measurements. Perhaps these papers will help you.
Rabe, C.L., 1958, A relation between gamma radiation and permeability, Denver- Julesburg Basin [ Neb. ]: American Institute of Mining , Metallurgical, and Petroleum Engineers Transactions, 1957, v.. 210, p. 358-360.
Gaur, R.S., and Singh, Inderjit, 1965, Relationship between permeability and gamma ray intensity for the Oligocene sand of an Indian field: Oil and Natural Gas Commission of India Bulletin, v. 2, no.. 1, p. 74-77.
You indicated the original document you are searching for was a CWLS presentation; Is it included on their CD here?
From: wireline@yahoogroup s.com [mailto:wireline@ yahoogroups. com] On Behalf Of robin singh Sent: Thursday, November 19, 2009 12:11 PM To: wireline@yahoogroup s..com Subject: [wireline] querry
does any one of you guys have this paper "Field results using GR for calculating permeability" this is by WDM Smith and is a CWLS 1974 presentatin.
The information contained in this email and any attachments is confidential and may be subject to copyright or other intellectual property protection. If you are not the intended recipient, you are not authorized to use or disclose this information, and we request that you notify us by reply mail or telephone and delete the original message from your mail system.
************ ********* ********* **DISCLAIMER* ********* ********* ********* ********* ****** Information contained and transmitted by this e-mail is confidential and proprietary to Oil India Ltd. and is intended for use only by the addressee. If you are not the intended recipient , you are notified that any dissemination or copying of this e-mail is strictly prohibited and you are requested to delete this e-mail immediately and notify the originator. Oil India does not enter into any binding agreement with any party by e-mail. Any views expressed by an individual do not necessarily reflect the view of Oil India. Oil India is not responsible for the consequences of any actions taken on the basis of information provided. While this e-mail has been checked for all known viruses the addressee should also scan for viruses. To know more about Oil India please visit http://www.oil- india.com ************ *********
********* ********* ********* ********* ********* ********* ********* *********
The information contained in this email and any attachments is confidential and may be subject to copyright or other intellectual property protection. If you are not the intended recipient, you are not authorized to use or disclose this information, and we request that you notify us by reply mail or telephone and delete the original message from your mail system.
Hi sir, what exactly are you selling & what vintage?
Please respond to dheddleston@..., thanks
--- In wireline@yahoogroups.com, Steve Wierenga <pureperf1@...> wrote:
>
>
> We have 2 complete Sondex Ultrawire 1-11/16" PLT strings for sale.
> Interested parties, please contact:
> swierenga@...
> Steve Wierenga
> Pure Energy Services Ltd.
> Calgary, Alberta, Canada
>
>
>
>
>
>
> __________________________________________________________________
> Connect with friends from any web browser - no download required. Try the new
Yahoo! Canada Messenger for the Web BETA at
http://ca.messenger.yahoo.com/webmessengerpromo.php
>
Can anybody provide me the material or it's source site for "comparison of different methods of Sw calculations, their limitations and advantages / disadvantages" Like comparison b/w Indonesian and Dual water and conditions in which used.