1078
Drilling and Well Completions
wells. The data recorded were compared to equivalent wireline measurements. The
effect of the rate of penetration
(ROP)
on some devices was investigated. The water-
base mud well was drilled to
3.035
ft with
7
f-in. bit. The oil-base mud well was
drilled to
2,400
ft with an 8q-in. bit.
Each MWD company ran a full suite of MWD/LWD logs that were compared
to “benchmark” wireline logs obtained by averaging the wireline logs with the
least standard deviation errors. The data have been analyzed in the oil and
service companies
[128]
and at Louisiana State University (LSU) where two
master of science theses were completed utilizing this data
[129,130].
The general
conclusions of the LSU studies are as follows:
Gamma Ray.
A
linear relationship is generally established when comparing LWD
and wireline gamma ray logs. Therefore, the LWD gamma ray data can be used
with confidence as a replacement of wireline gamma ray for formation evalua-
tion. Furthermore, LWD gamma ray logs generally have a better bed resolution
than their wireline equivalent.
Resistivity.
The 2-MHz LWD amplitude and phase-shift resistivity logs match
the wireline deep and medium induction very well. Excellent results are obtained
when the invasion is not severe (less than
40
in. in diameter) and in formations
20
i2.m or less.
The focused resistivity log offered by one of the service companies is very
sensitive to borehole diameter and can be used only in a qualitative manner in
its present form.
Neutron.
The neutron porosity values recorded with most tools match closely
the wireline thermal neutron logs in the lower porosity ranges (under
25
porosity
units). In high porosity zones, the LWD neutron porosities lie between thermal
and epithermal wireline values.
In all zones the discrepancies between LWD and wireline porosity data are
in the range of one to five porosity units. Thus, the LWD neutron data are
suitable for formation evaluation.
Density.
The best data are obtained with stabilizer-type tools. In good borehole
sections, a close match between the LWD data and the wireline data was found.
Discrepancies of less than
0.05
g/cm3 were generally noticed.
Washouts, rugosity, and drillstring wobbling (or vibration) will affect the LWD
density readings. However, the LWD density data are generally suitable for
formation evaluation.
Photoelectric Effect (Pe).
Only one service company was offering a commercial
Pe log. The readings of the LWD tool were very sensitive to washouts. For a
qualitative lithology identification of the strata, the LWD Pe curve is satisfactory.
In conclusion, the logs available now with LWD are perfectly suitable for a
good basic formation evaluation in all types
of
formations. It should be possible
to complete a well successfully with LWD data alone in most instances.
Comparison of MWD Data with Other Drilling Data
Before MWD, most drilling data were recorded at the surface. Mud logging
data, the only downhole data, were available with a time delay corresponding
to the time required by the mud to reach the surface.