Consider Zone A in the composite log of Fig. 5.75. a. Calculate Rxo of Zone A,...

  

Transcribed Image Text:

Consider Zone A in the composite log of Fig. 5.75. a. Calculate Rxo of Zone A, knowing that Rm Rmf, and Rmc are 1.0, 0.76, and 1.23 -m, respectively, at formation temperature (123F). b. Using the Ro value from Part a, estimate the porosity of Zone A. Assume the zone to be 100% water-saturated. c. For the same Zone A, the MLL reads an average value of 9.5 -m. Calculate Ro d. Why are the Ro values that are calculated in Parts a and c different? Give your best estimate of R e. Why is the Ro value obtained above greater than the read- ing of the 16-in. short normal? SP 201 MV -85MV 4350 0 O RESISTIVITY-OHMS m/m AM = 16" NORMAL LATERAL 6.5 AO = 18-8" 50 50 0 0 MICROLOG MICRO INVERSE MICRO NORMAL 2.4 3.3 20 20 A 10 Fig. 5.75-Logs for Problem 5.13 (courtesy Schlumberger). MICROLATEROLOG Rm10 at 123 F Rmf = 0 76 Rmc 1.23 10 9.5, 20 Consider Zone A in the composite log of Fig. 5.75. a. Calculate Rxo of Zone A, knowing that Rm Rmf, and Rmc are 1.0, 0.76, and 1.23 -m, respectively, at formation temperature (123F). b. Using the Ro value from Part a, estimate the porosity of Zone A. Assume the zone to be 100% water-saturated. c. For the same Zone A, the MLL reads an average value of 9.5 -m. Calculate Ro d. Why are the Ro values that are calculated in Parts a and c different? Give your best estimate of R e. Why is the Ro value obtained above greater than the read- ing of the 16-in. short normal? SP 201 MV -85MV 4350 0 O RESISTIVITY-OHMS m/m AM = 16" NORMAL LATERAL 6.5 AO = 18-8" 50 50 0 0 MICROLOG MICRO INVERSE MICRO NORMAL 2.4 3.3 20 20 A 10 Fig. 5.75-Logs for Problem 5.13 (courtesy Schlumberger). MICROLATEROLOG Rm10 at 123 F Rmf = 0 76 Rmc 1.23 10 9.5, 20