Porosity

Porosity value of formation can be appraised through 3 main method:

Neutron porosity log

Density log
Sonic log

Of these 3 main methods, only neutron porosity log gives a direct measurement
of porosity. However, neutron logs are only available for Wincher Range well 2
and 4. This is not sufficient to evaluate formation porosity.
Indirect measurement of porosity can be achieved from both density and sonic
log. A conversion of the logs into porosity is calculated with the equation below.
This calculation requires knowledge of the fluid and formation matrix, as shown
below the fluid density and matrix density are part of the equation.

log m
f m

f =1.10 g /cm

m=2.65 g /cm3
DENSITY POROSITY DIAGRAM
As shown from the above diagram, the porosity estimation appears very erratic.
The factor which most likely causes this is due to logging signal being disrupted
from borehole breakout. Severe borehole breakout will return a lower density
reading as drilling fluid inside of breakout affected density reading. The severity
of borehole breakout has already been established in previous section, therefore
density log is not a reliable basis for porosity estimation.
Sonic logs are the best basis for porosity estimation in this case study. The
porosity calculation is based on the equation below, with interval time for fluid
set for average formation water value and interval time for formation matrix is
set to average sand value.

T log T m
T f T m

T f =185 s /ft
T m=55 s /ft

Open Hole and Cased Hole Gamma Ray

The study involves examination of the borehole GR reading at time of open hole
(wireline logging) against reading obtained when borehole is cased (production
logging). Inherently, cased hole will exhibit lower GR reading due to the casing
blocking the GR received from inside the borehole. These two GR reading need to
be adjusted so they match on a GR-Depth plot.
However, at certain intervals of depth, it is observed that the reading will deviate
from each other. There are two cases occurring:
Open Hole GR > Cased Hole GR :

Indicates presence of scaling inside of borehole. The scaling is radioactive in

nature, in which reflected in higher GR reading.
Open Hole GR < Cased Hole GR :
Indicates high radioactive element inside formation. The decay from these
elements may in the future cause pore hole plugging. The decay occurs in
order of Uranium Thorium Radon. The presence of Radon is of major
concern due to its short decay time (5 days). If Radon is present in production
fluid, it will eventually cause scaling inside of borehole.
Uranium content in formation can also be identified from plotting GR against CGR
log. Data is only available for Wincher Range 4 well as shown in figure below.
From this figure, it can be concluded that the formation around the well is prone
to formation damage for future production. Therefore, future development needs
to take precaution on scaling possibility. A method that could resolve this issue
will be scale inhibitor, which works by dampening the development of scales.
Resistivity Log
The resistivity log perform under the concept of . The data available for
Wincher Range well 4 and 5 are not being used due to uncommon resistivity
logging performed. These data do not necessarily log the shallow and deep
region, but was used to investigate other elements. Only logging data from
Wincher Range 1 and 2 are used for water contact analysis, and these two well
logs complement each other.
A separation between deep and shallow resistivity logs indicate a hydrocarbon
region, whereas hydrocarbon return higher resistivity reading due to its low
conductive nature. As hydrocarbon region dissipates, both resistivity logs will
merge to the same value. The point where this occur is the water contact, as can
be seen in the figure below both Wincher Range well 1 and 2 show a clear
indication of water contact level.

Future Development Planning

Based on the study into the nature of the reservoir in Wincher Range, the team
has devised a new development plan for re-entry into the field and continue its
production. The suggest method is summarised as below:
1. Re-entry into Wincher Range well 4.

2. The section of well below the water contact level will be plugged and
abandoned.
3. A horizontal well will be drilled and deviated from the existing well 4,
targeted at TVD of 12700ft.
4. The horizontal section of the well will be fractured.
Drilling Method
Study into the history of Wincher Range development has shown that the proven
method to be applied should be underbalanced with oil-based mud drilling. Oilbased mud is preferred because of high presence of smectite in the formation,
which will allow for clay swelling if water-based mud is being used. An
underbalanced drilling is performed due to low consolidation nature of sand
layer, whereas an overbalanced drilling is prone to cause formation damage
around the borehole.
Stimulation Method
Wincher Range field has been recognised as a tight gas reservoir with low
permeability and low gas production rate. Stimulation processes have been
performed in the past and study shows that hydraulic fracturing method has
been tested on the field. Cautionary measure must be applied when choosing the
fracturing fluid as field history indicates that well 1 was fractured with water and
resulted in clay swelling around fractured region. It has caused severe formation
damage and gas production rate to decline, ultimately the well was abandoned.
The propose method for fracture will be with CO2 fluid. This method has been
tried and tested on Wincher Range well 3 and has not indicate formation damage
after fracturing work was completed.
Completion Method
The production section will be completed with slotted liner surrounded by gravel
pack. An open hole completion is suggested to minimise gas flow restriction into
the well. However, due to the nature of low consolidated sand in the formation,
sand production is an issue. Gravel packing will filter sand out from entering the
well and control this issue.
Cost Analysis