The "art" of well log

correlation: practical tips and

other musings
 Published on April 15, 2016
 LikeThe "art" of well log correlation : practical tips and other musing s

509
 Comment

39
 ShareShare The "art" of well lo g correlation: practical tips and o ther musings

13

Boyan Vakarelov
FollowBoyan Vakarelov
Lead of WAVE Knowledgebase Project | Fluvial and Shallow Marine
Sedimentology & Sequence Stratigraphy | Consulting

Resolving subsurface stratigraphy is like solving a three-dimensional

puzzle with many of the pieces hidden from view. In many sedimentary
basins with a long history of petroleum exploration, one of the most
reliable data types for understanding the subsurface is well log
correlation. The purpose of this article is to give a brief overview of
some of the "rules of thumb" we can use when correlating logs in
siliciclastic systems.

Using well logs to interpret stratigraphy is an important skill to master

for every petroleum geologist.
The basics

Well logs (or wireline logs) record measurement results of several types
of rock properties from measuring equipment that is lowered down the
well hole. In the old days, logs used to be presented on long pieces of
paper. Putting together large cross sections wasa tricky affair. Anybody
who has ever done this is still an expert at carpet rolling. These days
things have mostly gone the digital route.

Check out this slideshare presentation for an overview of the most

common measurement types and the equipment used.

While the main practical objective of wireline logging is formation

evaluation (e.g., detecting hydrocarbons, making predictions about rock
properties), several of the measurements available can be used as proxies
for grain size and lithologies common in siliciclastic systems. These will
be the main tools in our tool chest for resolving stratigraphy through
correlation.

Rules-of-thumb for interpreting lithology in siliciclastic systems

Below is a brief list of the types of observations we can make to identify

lithologies using well logs. Note that a lot more can be written on the
subject.

Sandstone-rich intervals
  Low gamma ray values
 Spontaneous potential deflected from the baseline (usually to the
left)

Mudstone-rich intervals

 High gamma ray values

 Spontaneous potential at the baseline
 Density between 2.2 and 2.65 g/cm3

Coal

 Low density (2 g/cm3)

 Typically low gamma ray values
 High resistivity values

Bentonite or bentonitic shale

 Very low resistivity values

Please note that local exceptions to the rules-of-thumb can and do occur.
This may be the subject of a future post. It is always best to calibrate the
log signatures to observations in core if such is available.
Gamma ray and spontaneous potential patterns as grain size proxies

The image below from AAPG Wiki shows the basic log shapes typically
used to tentatively infer grain size (and depositional environments). The
shape in (a) is typical for coarsening-upward successions common in
shallow marine systems. The shape in (b) is a blocky sandbody, which
can represent environments such as amalgamated fluvial intervals or a
sharp-based shallow marine successions The shape in (c) represents a
fining-upward trend, commonly observed in fluvial intervals.
 Grain size and
depositional environment interpretation based on log shapes alone
should be taken with a grain of salt. Always remember that we are not
directly measuring grain size but inferring it from proxies. Presence of
even small amounts of radioactive elements in a sandstone interval (e.g.,
due to volcanic ash) can significantly change gamma ray shapes.

If image logs are available, use them!

Using well log data to interpret stratigraphy

The main focus of this article is using well log data to interpret
stratigraphy: how do we use log signatures in individual wells
(observations) to make decisions about how the identified rock intervals
behave between the wells (interpretations).

Not always an easy task:

The interpretation step in well log correlation is what makes the exercise
far from trivial and difficult to automate.

The experience of the geologist is paramount. Unless dealing with

relatively simple stratigraphy with correlation distances smaller than the
extent of lithological units, the geologist often needs to make decisions
about which units are likely to correlate. Being well versed in high
resolution sequence stratigraphy and having experience in the
depositional environments being correlated are requirements. It should
not be a big surprise that some of the best people doing well log
correlation have extensive outcrop and facies analysis experience. You
really need to get a "feeling" for the rocks and know whether a sand
body is likely to correlate over a given distance to mentally fill in the
gaps between the wells.

The correlation decisions made can often have serious economic impacts
as they can be used for identifying exploration targets, for determining
the distribution of net-to-gross between wells, and for determining the
layering within a reservoir.

First set of practical tips: things to remember

 Even though they provide continuous data, wireline logs sample a

very small rock volume away from the well. We can think of them
as individual trees in a forest.
 You should always be aware of well spacing and whether what you
are trying to correlate likely extends across such distances.
 You should be aware of the depositional environment and the basin
setting. A shallow marine sandstone can correlate across a distance
of 10km but a channel belt may not.

Second set of practical tips: things to do

These are a few practical tips that have always worked for me when
correlating well logs and I have tried to teach to students:

 You should always start with a cross section that covers the entire
area. This will give you a good feeling for how correlatable the
interval is and what areas may present difficulties. A cross section
view also helps with answering questions about likely depositional
environments.
 Use a datum; maximum flooding surfaces are always a good
choice.
 Always do the easy bits first. The more correlation lines you put
in, the easier it will be to understand the more complicated areas
later. This is also a great way to differentiate between
straightforward correlation and more speculative correlation. You
will usually need to do both.
 You should be correlating the mudstones before the sandstones.
The reason for this is quite simple. Mudstone intervals are far more
likely to correlate from well to well and to have recognizable log
signatures (patterns).
 When working in large areas use the loop tie method to check
correlations between individual cross sections. You should always
end up at the same location.
 You should be model driven. Unless you are fortunate enough to
be working in an area with extremely high well density and you
have the time to correlate all wells, correlation will involve a fair
bit of interpretation. What will make a correlation "reasonable"
will depend on what we know about the depositional environment,
the basin setting, and the accommodation setting. Such
assumptions should always drive the correlation.
 Put your sequence stratigrapher hat on. Effective correlation
requires thinking about time lines, changes in accommodation,
regressions and transgressions, and the likely response of rock
intervals to such variables.
 Practice. Getting your eyes trained to recognize log patters takes
time.
The case studies below show how the above approach has been used in
practice, and how variables such as the accommodation setting
should drive correlation.

Correlation example from a low accommodation setting: Second

Frontier Sandstone

The first example is taken from Vakarelov and Bhattacharya

(2009). The correlation is of a wave-dominated, shallow-marine interval
of Upper Cretaceous age (Second Frontier Sandstone, Frontier
Formation; Powder River Basin, Wyoming). Deposition occurred in a
distal foreland setting. The area has relatively high well density (red
dots). The Salt Creek field (-SC-) alone has had over 2000 wells drilled
in it over its long production history.
About 500 wells were cross-correlated which allowed for the resolving
of the internal architecture of the main sandstone-dominate package in
the interval. The cross section shown below is a subset of this
correlation.
Cores are available and the entire interval crops out to the west, which
allows for the constraining of the depositional environment. Both core
and outcrop observations suggest that the wave-dominated interval was
deposited under low accommodation conditions. All coastal plain
intervals have been removed by wave ravinement. It is this ravinement
surface that has been used as a datum in the cross section. Check out the
different geometries of the correlation below and above the sandstone
interval. How can we interpret this?

Detailed correlation allows for the mapping of a number of depositional

units (different colors in the cross section) that have offlapping
geometries relative to one another. Note that we can observe the nature
of the fine-grained intervals that separate the sand-dominated packages
in core (see above). Also note that there is no rise in the position of each
consecutive shoreline unit relative to the position of the underlying
downlap surface (the shoreline trajectory is flat to subtly dropping).
There is an interesting tectonically-driven truncation story here as well,
but this subject will be left of a different time.

Correlation example from a high accommodation setting: Dunvagan

Formation

The well log cross section below is modified from Plint (2000). The
interval is from the Upper Cretaceous Dunvagan Formation in the
Alberta Foreland Basin. This may be one of the most ambitious
correlation efforts to date.

The study uses a number of well log cross sections that have been loop
tied.
Deposition occurred in a more proximal foreland setting with higher
rates of subsidence relative to the previous example. As a result, we see
clear vertical separation of shallow marine parasequences, as well as the
deposition of a thick coastal plain interval. Note the well-expressed
clinoforms in the bottom portion of the succession.
IMPLICATIONS:

Working in the two areas above requires different correlation

approaches.

How important do you think is it to be aware of the accommodation

setting at the time of deposition when correlating wells?

Both areas have abundant well control. What if there were a lot less
wells?
Both study areas are from a retroact foreland basin setting and were
deposited during a Greenhouse time of Earth history. What if you
are working in a different tectonic setting or an Icehouse time?
the other art, is to put a section seismic back correlation,, if they match is a very
good correlation and interpretation too!