Rotary Sidewall Coring—Size Matters

Abhishek Agarwal A formation sample, acquired from downhole, provides a wealth of information
Sugar Land, Texas, USA
about rock properties not readily available elsewhere. Rotary sidewall coring is
Robert Laronga one alternative for acquiring downhole rock samples, but in the past, the small
Clamart, France
sample size often limited laboratory evaluation. A new rotary coring tool, with
Larissa Walker
Shell Appalachia Exploration features that improve sidewall coring operations, addresses core size limitations
Sewickley, Pennsylvania, USA by offering larger diameter samples.
Oilfield Review Winter 2013/2014: 25, no. 4.
Copyright © 2014 Schlumberger.
For help in preparation of this article, thanks to Chad Albury,
Ryan Chapman, Lenishan Fernando and Farouk Hamadeh, Petrophysics is the branch of geology concerned samples, geologists and engineers can perform
Perth, Western Australia, Australia; Joe Loman, Dacey with determining physical properties and behavior more experiments and more easily determine geo-
McManus and Chris Tevis, Houston; William Murphy,
e4sciences, Sandy Hook, Connecticut, USA; Tim Sodergren, of reservoir rocks. Some petrophysicists specialize logic, geomechanical and petrophysical proper-
Salt Lake City, Utah, USA; and Benjamin Wygal, Natchez, solely in interpreting remotely acquired measure- ties. Because of the global proliferation of
Mississippi, USA.
CST, FMI, GPIT, MDT, MSCT, TerraTek, TerraTek HRA, ments in the form of logs; others prefer having a unconventional resource developments, the option
TerraTek TRA and XL-Rock are marks of Schlumberger. piece of the reservoir rock along with logs. Those for taking representative samples without the
HRSCT and RSCT are marks of Halliburton. with a preference for analyzing rock samples pre- expense and loss of efficiency associated with con-
MaxCOR and PowerCOR are marks of Baker Hughes.
fer large ones over small ones. Using larger rock ventional coring has arrived at a crucial time.

30 Oilfield Review
 Coring Bit

Slabbed Cores

Boxed Cores Biscuit Cut

1 ft 1 in.

> Conventional coring. Used with a drilling rig, a bit with an open throat (top left) cuts conventional cores. The cores are retrieved at the surface, boxed
(left) and shipped to a laboratory for analysis. At the laboratory, technicians typically cut the core lengthwise (middle), referred to as slabbing, to access
representative rock for testing. Tests, such as compressive strength measurements along the red lines shown on the slabbed core, may be performed at
this stage. After testing the slabbed core, technicians usually cut plugs for additional evaluation. A biscuit cut, which is a slice of core material (right), is an
option to taking core plugs from slabbed sections; these sections of core material provide alternative testing options at the core laboratory. (Photographs
courtesy of Tim Sodergren.)

In the oil and gas industry, operators use two After an interval has been cored, the drilling to acquire core data should conventional coring
main methods to acquire rock samples from the crew pulls the pipe back to the surface and operations fail. Because of their small size relative
subsurface: cutting whole core with the drilling retrieves the core barrels; the core barrels can to conventional core, there is a chance that SWCs
assembly and taking sidewall samples from the also be extracted from the downhole assembly by taken from a heterogeneous formation may not
borehole. Sidewall cores can be further divided mechanical means, which allows the bottomhole have properties that are representative of the for-
into percussion and rotary cores. Drill cuttings, hardware to remain downhole for continued mation at a reservoir scale. The rock from which
pieces of rock ground up by the drill bit and cir- coring. Technicians take great care to avoid dam- the SWC is taken may also lack crucial features
culated back to the surface, are another source aging the sample inside the carrier after it is that geologists need to analyze the reservoir, espe-
of downhole samples, but they may be unreli- retrieved back to the surface. Conventional coring cially in laminated sand-shale sequences, organic
able for determining downhole rock properties operations often provide the best rock samples shales and fractured reservoirs.
because of the damage they incur during drill- for testing, analyzing and evaluating reservoirs. Two types of sidewall coring are available—
ing and because of depth uncertainty related Compared with normal drilling operations, how- percussion and rotary. Percussion coring tools,
to circulation. ever, the conventional coring process is time first introduced in the 1930s, use hollow bullets
Whole cores, also referred to as conventional consuming and expensive. fired into the formation using an explosive
cores, are continuous sections of reservoir rock Sidewall cores (SWCs) are plugs of rock taken charge. Rotary SWCs are acquired with a tool
cut with a hollow coring bit (above).1 As the bit perpendicular to the wellbore; they are usually that uses a small bit to cut plugs from the side of
penetrates strata, a cylindrical section of the acquired by tools attached to wireline. Sidewall the borehole. Rotary coring tools were devel-
rock passes through the bit and remains inside a cores can be recovered relatively quickly from oped primarily to address shortcomings of per-
core barrel, which is part of the drilling bottom- downhole and may cover multiple zones of interest cussion SWCs.
hole assembly. Whole cores are usually cut in in the same wireline descent; they provide a cost- This article focuses on the development of
multiples of 9-m [30-ft] lengths. In deepwater effective alternative to conventional cores. One sidewall coring and reviews developments in the
appraisal wells, it is not uncommon to cut as convenience of SWCs is that they are taken after rotary sidewall coring technique. Case studies
much as 81 m [270 ft] of core on a single trip in logs have been run, allowing petrophysicists to be
1. For more on whole cores and core analysis techniques:
the well. Longer coring intervals come with the selective—they can pick core depths based on Andersen MA, Duncan B and McLin R: “Core Truth in
added risk of jammed core barrels and damaged interpretations from openhole logs. Sidewall cores Formation Evaluation,” Oilfield Review 25, no. 2
(Summer 2013): 16–25.
core sections. also offer an alternative means for petrophysicists

Winter 2013/2014 31
 A

Combo Bullets Hard Rock Bullet

B 7/8 in. 11/16 in. 11/16 in.

C Cutting Rings E

0 in. 2

D
Steel cables

> Percussion sidewall coring. Core bullets are fired from a core gun (A) using explosive charges behind each bullet. Various types of bullets are available,
including combo bullets (B), which are for medium hard to soft formations. A groove around the top of the bullet accommodates a cutting ring (C) that is
held in place with a snap ring (not shown). The type of formation dictates which cutting ring is employed. In soft formations, larger cutting rings reduce
bullet penetration. The hardened steel, hard rock bullet does not use a cutting ring. Cables attached to each bullet (D) help extricate the bullet from the
formation after it has been shot. Guns are retrieved to the surface with core bullets attached (E), and technicians remove core samples and place them in
bottles. The bottles are labeled, boxed and sent to a laboratory for analysis. (Photograph of retrieved core gun courtesy of Benjamin Wygal.)

demonstrate the application of the XL-Rock tool, ing in oil and gas wells, a technique practiced The first percussion coring tool was intro-
a recently introduced large-volume rotary side- frequently even today, crucial in the initial phase of duced in the 1930s.4 Today, all major wireline ser-
wall coring service, in an unconventional field development. vice companies offer percussion coring tools, also
resource play in the northeast US and a deepwa- Unfortunately, coring can impact drilling effi- referred to as core guns. Core guns such as the
ter well offshore Australia. ciency because of the time required to cut and Schlumberger CST chronological sample taker
recover whole cores. Depending on the coring appear similar to the original percussion coring
Getting the Core objective and cost limitations, E&P companies tools introduced almost a century ago; however,
The advent of rotary drilling systems in the 1800s may deem conventional coring nonessential. In improvements to core gun hardware have
made possible the practice of whole core drilling. such cases, they may turn to percussion and resulted in the reliable and cost-effective sys-
The origin of core drilling is attributed to French rotary sidewall coring to gain valuable reservoir tems in use today.
civil engineer Rudolph Leschot, who mounted rock information. Of the two methods, percussion Core guns have hollow, barrel-shaped bullets
diamonds on a hollow, circular drill bit to acquire coring has been the most common; however, in mounted on a carrier (above). The bullets are
rock samples.2 The practice of core drilling has some environments, especially hard rock reser- forcefully ejected from the carrier into the bore-
remained a mainstay in mineral exploration. voirs, deepwater exploration and unconventional hole wall by means of an explosive charge. Each
The first coring operation was performed in resource plays, petrophysicists prefer rotary cor- bullet is fired sequentially by application of elec-
Pennsylvania, USA, in the 1860s to locate coal seams ing tools. Petrophysicists use SWCs to validate log trical power from the surface after the tool is posi-
and measure their thickness.3 Wireline geophysical responses and provide empirical petrophysical tioned at the desired zone. Bullets are attached to
logging—introduced by Conrad Schlumberger in and geophysical properties. Core points are the gun body by means of steel cables, which facili-
the 1920s—was originally referred to as “electrical determined based on interpretation of logging tate extraction of cores from the sidewall. After a
coring,” and was first envisioned as a tool for coal data, and gamma ray or spontaneous potential bullet is embedded in the formation, the wireline
exploration. Geologists consider conventional cor- (SP) logs are used for depth correlation between operator uses the weight of the gun and the force
openhole logs and core depths. applied by the logging winch to work the core free.

32 Oilfield Review
 The engineer selects core bullet geometries Percussion SWCs provide reliable information
and explosive charge strength according to the on grain size distribution, mineralogy, sedimen-
properties of the formation to be cored. Hard for- tary features and hydrocarbon residuals.6 However,
mations, those with porosity less than 15%, gener- material alterations caused by the impact of the
ally require hard rock bullets and larger explosive core bullet may distort porosity measurements.
charges. Cores taken in hard formations tend to Such distortion is well documented, and laborato-
shatter on impact from the bullet, potentially ries that specialize in analyzing SWCs have devel-
resulting in empty core barrels when the gun is oped empirical relationships to correct for some of
retrieved at the surface. Soft formations are eas- these effects; final analyses, however, are often an
ier to sample, although in unconsolidated forma- approximation.7 Permeability is not typically mea-
tions, the barrels may become so deeply embedded sured in percussion core samples but is empiri-
that they cannot be extracted. Samples taken cally derived from porosity and mineralogy. > Rotary coring bit. A diamond-tipped, circular bit
from unconsolidated formations have a tendency Taking percussion SWCs may also create is used for cutting rotary cores from the borehole
wall. When the bit reaches its maximum depth,
to wash out of the bullet because of the turbulent operational issues. Because of the potential for
the assembly is canted upward, which breaks
effects of the mud on the exposed core barrels as leaving cutting rings, broken cables and core bar- the core from the formation. After the core is
they are retrieved through the mud column. For rels in the wellbore during coring, many opera- pulled back into the tool, the operator repositions
sampling in unconsolidated formations, the wire- tors attempt no further logs after cores are taken the tool to cut the next core.
line operator attaches cutting rings to the bullets, without first making a cleanout, or conditioning,
which help decrease bullet penetration; the use of trip. In addition, the bullets may damage the
smaller explosive charges may also help improve borehole wall, which can affect measurements
sample recovery. made by pad contact tools. Debris from percus- almost fifty years accepted these limitations.
Cutting rings decrease penetration for bullets sion cores is not much of a concern when cores The situation changed in the 1980s when the
shot into soft formations and create a hole that has are taken on the last logging trip in the well first rotary coring tools were introduced.
a larger diameter than that of the bullet; the larger because the debris can be ground up and circu-
diameter hole facilitates core extraction. The ring lated out of the well during the cleanout and Rotary Cores to the Rescue
is designed to snap off and remain in the newly before casing operations commence. Rotary sidewall coring tools have miniature, dia-
created hole. If the bullet embeds too deeply in the In many parts of the world, high-angle and mond-tipped drill bits, which are small versions
formation and cannot be worked free, the operator horizontal wells are becoming more common than of those used for conventional coring operations
can break the retaining cables by applying tension conventional vertical wells.8 In these types of (above). Just as various bit designs are available
with the logging winch. Hard formations do not wells, gravity no longer assists the extrication of a for drilling and conventional coring, engineers
normally require cutting rings because depth of core from the sidewall, and conveyance of core can select from a variety of rotary sidewall coring
penetration is rarely a concern, and the rings may guns in these types of wells relies on drillpipe, bits based on expected formation and rock type.
impede penetration and limit sample length. tractor or coiled tubing. The use of explosives in The bit cuts a round plug of formation material
After the cores are shot, the gun is pulled to percussion coring further complicates operations directly from the borehole wall. The tool then
the surface, where field technicians free the with these conveyance techniques. Despite well- snaps off the core and pulls it into a core holding
core barrels from the carrier by removing the established safety procedures, service companies area inside the tool body. Depending on the tool
cables; then they separate and sort the barrels. must consider the fact that percussion SWCs are design, this process is repeated until the core
A technician uses a plunger press to push each explosive devices and must be handled with care. catching apparatus is full.
sample from the barrel into a sample bottle, Because radio silence is required during parts of
2. Bowman I: “Well-Drilling Methods,” Washington, DC:
seals each bottle and marks it with the sample the operation, use of explosives in deepwater US Government Printing Office, Water-Supply Paper 257,
depth. The sealed cores are then transported to exploration makes percussion sidewall coring pro- 1911.
a laboratory for analysis. Prior to shipping the hibitive as well. For these reasons and others, per- 3. Collom RE: “Prospecting and Testing for Oil and Gas,”
Washington, DC: US Government Printing Office,
cores, operators may use UV lights on location to cussion sidewall coring is almost never attempted August 1922.
identify the presence of hydrocarbons in the in high-angle and horizontal wellbores or in deep- 4. Leonardon EG and McCann DC: “Exploring Drill Holes by
Sample-Taking Bullets,” Transactions of the AIME 132,
core samples. water applications. no. 1 (December 1939): 85–99.
Although percussion core guns offer a cost- Frequency of percussion sidewall coring var- 5. Webster GM and Dawsongrove GE: “The Alteration of
effective and rapid means of acquiring samples ies geographically; for many wells in the south- Rock Properties by Percussion Sidewall Coring,” Journal
of Petroleum Technology 11, no. 4 (April 1959): 59–62.
from the formation, the process lends itself to eastern US, geologists take SWCs whenever and 6. Fiedler FJ: “Toward Integrated Formation Evaluation,”
potential problems. The impact of the bullet with wherever logs indicate potential hydrocarbons. Transactions of the SPWLA 29th Annual Logging
Symposium, San Antonio, Texas, USA, June 5–8, 1988,
the formation can, and usually does, damage the In other regions, especially in hard rock reser- paper Q.
core.5 Both hard and soft rocks tend to shatter voirs where sample recovery is usually poor and 7. Fertl WH, Cavanaugh RJ and Hammack GW: “Comparison
upon the bullet’s impact, which alters the rock properties measured on percussion cores are of Conventional Core Data, Well Logging Analyses, and
Sidewall Samples,” Journal of Petroleum Technology 23,
properties of the sample. Cores taken in uncon- unrepresentative of actual rock properties, side- no. 12 (December 1971): 1409–1414.
solidated formations may be compacted by the wall coring is rarely attempted. Operators and 8. Amer A, Chinellato F, Collins S, Denichou J-M, Dubourg I,
Griffiths R, Koepsell R, Lyngra S, Marza P, Murray D and
impact of the bullet, and mudcake from the inner service companies recognized the limitations Roberts I: “Structural Steering—A Path to Productivity,”
borehole wall may be injected into the rock imposed by percussion sidewall coring but for Oilfield Review 25, no. 1 (Spring 2013): 14–31.
matrix of the sample, altering rock properties.

Winter 2013/2014 33
 Tool, Core Diameter, Core Length, Core Capacity
Rotary sidewall coring offers several advan-
Service Company in. in. tages over percussion sidewall coring. The
XL-Rock tool, 1.5 2.5, 3.0, 3.5 50, 44 mechanical distortion of the rock sample caused
Schlumberger by the impact of percussion sidewall cores is
MSCT tool, 0.92 2.0 20, 50, 75 eliminated when drilling rotary SWCs, and rotary
Schlumberger coring preserves the rock pore structure. Unlike
MaxCOR tool, 1.5 2.5 60 for percussion cores, laboratories can perform
Baker Hughes accurate porosity, permeability and capillary
PowerCOR tool, 1.0 1.8 60 pressure measurements on rotary cores.9 Routine
Baker Hughes core analysis (RCAL) measurements are signifi-
RSCT tool, 15/16 1.75 30 cantly better for rotary cores compared with
Halliburton
those performed on percussion cores.10
HRSCT tool, 1.5 2.3 36 A significant limitation of older generation
Halliburton
rotary coring tools is the diameter and length of
> Rotary coring tools offered by major service companies. the core plugs taken from downhole formations.
Insufficient core volume may cause substandard
core analysis results. For conventional cores, rou-
tine core analysis is performed on plugs or slices
selectively taken from a slabbed portion of the
core. Geologists routinely take plugs from a whole
core at 0.6-m [2-ft] intervals, although variations
in lithology as well as formation heterogeneity
may require more frequent sampling. Laboratory-
cut plugs typically measure about 6.4 cm [2.5 in.]
in length by 2.3 to 3.8 cm [0.9. to 1.5 in.] in diam-
eter. Although some rotary coring tools can
1.5 in.
deliver samples comparable in size to plugs cut
from conventional cores in the laboratory, cores
from older generation rotary coring tools are less
than 2.5 cm [1 in.] in diameter (above left).
In addition, early rotary coring tools lacked
3 in.
control over the coring process. One crucial cor-
ing parameter, weight on bit (WOB)—the pres-
sure applied to the coring bit as the core is being
cut—is set at the surface prior to running into
the well. If the WOB is set too low, coring time is
unnecessarily long; if it is set too high, the bit
may stall and stop coring prematurely.
Building on many years of experience with
the MSCT mechanical sidewall coring tool, design
engineers at Schlumberger began developing a
next generation tool. The first limitation they
addressed was core size. The traditional 15/16-in.
diameter core bit was replaced with a 11/2-in.
diameter version, which delivers cores that are
similar to industry-standard plugs taken from
whole cores in the laboratory. Compared with the
smaller diameter cores from the MSCT tool, the
larger cores provide more than three times the
volume for the same core length. The XL-Rock
large-volume rotary sidewall coring service offers
three options for core length: standard 7.6-cm
[3.0-in.], and optional 8.9-cm [3.5-in.] or 6.3-cm
> XL-Rock rotary coring tool. The XL-Rock tool (left) is lowered on wireline and positioned across from
[2.5-in.] lengths (left). The field engineer run-
the zone to be sampled. A hydraulic arm anchors the tool at the desired depth; the bit pivots into a
horizontal position and then begins coring. Up to 50 cores can be taken during each tool descent. The ning the tool can optimize the coring process by
cores shown (inset) are samples taken from test blocks at the surface. adjusting parameters such as WOB in real time.

34 Oilfield Review
Because of the larger size of the XL-Rock drill
bit, this control contributes to successful cor-
ing. Stalling can be reduced, and coring time
can be minimized.
Design engineers next looked at upgrading
the mechanical components and ruggedizing the
electronics of the XL-Rock tool. The redesigned
tool offers improved reliability and features
greater operator control than did earlier genera-
tion tools. Lessons learned developing LWD tools,
high-pressure, high-temperature wireline tools
and the MDT modular dynamics tester, as well as
years working with the MSCT tool, helped engi-
neers design a tool that is more robust than previ-
ous generation tools.
The standard tool is rated to 177°C [350°F]
and 173 MPa [25,000 psi]. An optional version is
rated to 200°C [400°F] and 207 MPa [30,000 psi.]
At 11.3 m [37 ft] in length, the XL-Rock tool is the
shortest sidewall coring tool in the industry. The
shorter length greatly reduces the operational
risk of sticking the tool while coring. The surface-
controlled bit release, which can be actuated in
the event the bit becomes stuck, also reduces
operational risk.
At each core point, a hydraulic arm anchors
the tool in place, and the core bit assembly pivots > Rotary core recovery. After the cores are cut, they are pulled into the XL-Rock tool body and stored in
from its recessed transport position in the tool to a a handling tube. At the surface, the tool operator removes the tube from the tool, separates the cores
position perpendicular to the tool body. The and seals them inside individual sample bottles (top left). The bottles are labeled and packed for
hydraulically powered rotary bit provides high shipping (top right) to the laboratory for analysis. (Photographs courtesy of Chris Tevis.)
torque at low rotary speed and is effective in a
wide range of rock types. After the full length of
the core has been drilled, a core catcher ring holds
the core within the bit assembly; the assembly is
then canted upward to break the end of the core.
For additional depth correlation, a core marker is
inserted between samples inside the tool after
each core is retracted. Up to 50 samples can be
collected per descent (above right).
The larger cores from the XL-Rock tool also
enable core laboratories to perform more-
advanced geomechanical studies. In the past,
because of core-size limitations, these studies
were usually reserved for plugs taken from con-
ventional cores.11 After the XL-Rock cores have
been retrieved, they can be subsampled into
miniplugs at angles parallel, perpendicular and
at 45° to observed bedding planes to characterize
anisotropic mechanical properties (right). The
9. Fiedler, reference 6.
10. For more on conventional coring and RCAL: Andersen
et al, reference 1.
11. For more on geomechanical measurements on cores: > Subsampled XL-Rock cores. Because the 11/2-in. diameter cores from the
Cook J, Frederiksen RA, Hasbo K, Green S, Judzis A,
Martin JW, Suarez-Rivera R, Herwanger J, Hooyman P, XL-Rock tool (left) are larger than conventional sidewall cores, they can be
Lee D, Noeth S, Sayers C, Koutsabeloulis N, Marsden R, subsampled into miniplugs (right) at angles parallel, perpendicular and at 45°
Stage MG and Tan CP: “Rocks Matter: Ground Truth in to observed bedding planes. Technicians then use these smaller samples to
Geomechanics,” Oilfield Review 19, no. 3 (Autumn 2007): make measurements that characterize anisotropic mechanical properties.
36–55. The ruler is scaled in inches and decimal inches.

Winter 2013/2014 35
TerraTek Geomechanical Laboratory Center of terization, which is available exclusively for modulus, static and dynamic Poisson’s ratio, com-
Excellence in Salt Lake City, Utah, USA, offers a XL-Rock cores. This service provides mechanical pressional and shear velocities and horizontal
fast track geomechanics full anisotropic charac- properties, including static and dynamic Young’s stress profiles. Completion quality assessment of
shale samples is included in the analysis.
Laboratory RCAL analysis is most often per-
formed on traditional cores. The laboratory test-
Borehole End Side View Rock End ing of cores retrieved by the XL-Rock tool may
offer additional benefits over those for whole
cores because the samples can be transported
and tested at the laboratory within hours or days
of having been cut. Analyses of conventional
cores are often conducted many weeks after
acquisition, and some rock properties may be
affected by the delay. The TerraTek TRA tight
rock analysis technique, which is used for shale
characterization, can be performed more quickly
and efficiently with the larger volume cores.
Smaller core volume often requires that multiple
samples be acquired at the same depth and com-
bined for analysis.
The larger size of the XL-Rock cores also
enables laboratory technicians to perform spe-
cial core analysis (SCAL) measurements (left).12
The small total pore volume of a 1-in. by 1-in.
plug after trimming, typical of older generation
rotary coring tools, results in a high uncertainty
on saturation measurements. The significantly
larger volume of an XL-Rock core reduces the
uncertainty by a factor of four. For this reason,
1.5-in. plugs are the industry standard for most
SCAL, and the majority of SCAL laboratory
equipment is designed to accept this size plug
but may not be able to accommodate 1-in. and
smaller plugs.
Typical measurements and techniques per-
formed on XL-Rock cores include the following:
• absolute and relative permeability
• mineralogy (X-ray diffraction, scanning elec-
tron microscope image and isotopic analysis)
• petrographic description
• source rock and oil characterization
• log calibration [grain density, porosity at reser-
voir confining pressure, resistivity, m and n
exponents, dielectric permittivity, nuclear mag-
netic resonanace analysis, T2 cutoffs, total
organic carbon (TOC) and acoustic properties]
• reservoir storage and flow capacity
• capillary pressure characteristics
• formation damage and sensitivity tests.
Operators rely on many of these measurements to
1.5 in. 3 in. make decisions regarding reservoir development.
The TerraTek HRA heterogeneous rock anal-
> Sample cores. An XL-Rock tool took these core samples from a variety of rock types in the same
ysis service, another core analysis option, is a
well. Formations included soft sandstone (top) and dense limestone (bottom). The cores ranged in
length from about 1.6 to 3 in. [4 to 7.6 cm] and are of excellent quality for laboratory analysis. rock typing workflow that can identify optimal
(Photographs courtesy of William Murphy.) sampling depths using openhole log data.13

36 Oilfield Review
Empirical data derived from various tests, and
from the TerraTek TRA service, may then be
used to optimize the modeled output from the
TerraTek HRA service, especially for unconven-
tional resource plays.
Marcellus Shale

Unconventional Resource Application

Operators have taken various approaches to ana-
lyzing samples from shale resource plays.
Acquiring conventional cores using a drilling rig is Pennsylvania
expensive and time consuming, but during the ini-
tial evaluation phase, conventional coring may be UNITED STATES
necessary. Geologists and engineers view rotary
cores taken on wireline as a cost-effective alterna-
tive, but the small sample size may inhibit exten-
sive petrophysical analysis and full anisotropic
mechanical properties studies. Also, limited sam-
pling in heterogeneous formations may produce
samples that are not representative of the majority
of the rock. These were a few of the situations
0 km 300
faced by Shell Appalachia Exploration in north-
0 mi 300
central Pennsylvania, USA, while developing a
Marcellus Shale play (right).
To evaluate shale cores, Shell geologists fol-
low the Gas Technology Institute protocols for
crushed shale analysis.14 Typical core evaluation > Marcellus Shale exploration. Several operators are currently exploring the Marcellus Shale (blue) in the
includes source rock evaluation, porosity, per- eastern US. Production from this prolific formation has exceeded experts’ estimates, and as of October
2013, the US Energy Information Administration estimated production at 12 Bcf/d [340 million m3/d].
meability and saturation, in addition to X-ray
diffraction. To perform all of these measure-
ments requires a minimum sample mass of 200 g
[0.25 lbm] (right). Previous attempts to per-
form these techniques on rotary cores had
required consolidating multiple cores from Core Length, in. 0.92-in. Diameter 1.5-in. Diameter
Core Mass, g Core Mass, g
around the same point or nearby points to have
a sufficient sample volume. Reservoir heteroge- 1.0 26 69
neity observed in the Marcellus Shale had 1.2 31 82
resulted in some of these combined samples
1.4 36 96
introducing uncertainties in measured proper-
ties, even if the cores were separated by as little 1.6 41 110
as 0.15 m [0.5 ft]. Because of the need for a 1.8 46 123
sample size of large volume, Shell turned to the
2.0 52 137
XL-Rock rotary coring tool to acquire sufficient
core material to permit single-sample recovery 2.2 151
and analysis. 2.4 165

12. For more on SCAL: Andersen et al, reference 1. 2.6 178

13. For more on the TerraTek HRA technique: Suarez-
Rivera R, Deenadayalu C, Chertov M, Hartanto RN, 2.8 192
Gathogo P and Kunjir R: “Improving Horizontal
Completions on Heterogeneous Tight Shales,” 3.0 206
paper CSUG/SPE 146998, presented at the Canadian
Unconventional Resources Conference, Calgary, > Sample size masses. Conventional cores are typically taken in the exploration phase of field
November 15–17, 2011.
development; however, conventional coring can be expensive. Because core data are important for
14. For more on the Gas Technology Institute (formerly Gas
Research Institute) methodology for crushed shale
calibrating openhole logging measurements and determining rock properties, many operators rely on
sample evaluation: Guidry FK, Luffel DL and Curtis JB: SWCs. Shell Appalachia Exploration geologists determined that a minimum of 200 g was required to
“Development of Laboratory and Petrophysical ensure sufficient quantity of rock for proper analyses. Assuming a 2-in. [5-cm] core length cut with a
Techniques for Evaluating Shale Reservoirs,” Chicago: 0.92-in. [2.34-cm] diameter bit, typical of older generation rotary coring tools, the operator would have
Gas Research Institute Report GRI-95/0496, April 1996. needed four cores per depth to obtain 200 g (left, pink). A single 1.5-in. by 3-in. [3.8-cm by 7.6-cm] core,
which can be cut with the XL-Rock tool, would provide at least 200 g of sample (green). The photograph
(right) illustrates the size difference between a single XL-Rock core and four cores cut with an older
generation 0.92-in. bit.

Winter 2013/2014 37
 directional tools such as the GPIT general pur-
pose inclinometry tool, which measures tool ori-
entation at the core point.
In addition to petrophysical evaluation, Shell
Appalachia is currently conducting geomechani-
cal studies of the cores to determine rock elastic
properties. Shell engineers have included multi-
ple in situ stress, or minifrac, well tests in well
evaluation programs using the MDT tool.16 Data
from these tests and mechanical properties from
core evaluations are used in fracture stimulation
designs and drilling optimization.17

FMI Image

Core point

1.5 in.

> Marcellus Shale cores. These four cores, acquired in the Marcellus Shale using the XL-Rock tool,
are examples of the high-quality rock samples taken during rotary coring operations. (Photographs
courtesy of Larissa Walker.)

In one recent exploration well, the Shell section from which the rotary cores have been
geologist chose 100 core points, which required acquired can be verified after core acquisition.
two coring trips. From the 100 sample points, 96 After the cores have been cut and retrieved
high-quality samples from the shale reservoir from the well, the operator may elect to run an
section were brought to the surface (above). FMI fullbore formation microimager to deter-
The average time for drilling each core was mine the exact depth of core acquisition.15 The
5.3 min. diameter of a retrieved XL-Rock core is 3.8 cm,
Another potential challenge with sidewall sam- but the bit has a larger diameter and leaves a
pling is determining whether the sample is repre- 6.35-cm [2.5-in.] hole in the borehole wall. These
sentative of the surrounding resource rock. For holes can be clearly seen in an FMI image log
whole cores, geologists in the laboratory have the (right). Geologists are able to correlate the core
> Core depth confirmation. This FMI image log run
luxury of visually identifying the best rock for tak- depths with openhole log data. As a standard
after the rotary coring operation clearly indicates
ing plugs. The points for taking rotary cores cannot practice, many operators who employ the
where cores were taken. Geologists can use
be visually selected in advance unless an image XL-Rock service use the FMI tool after rotary cor- this information to confirm that samples are
log is run prior to cutting cores; however, the rock ing runs. The XL-Rock tool is combinable with representative of the formation being examined.

38 Oilfield Review
Deepwater Coring
Deepwater exploration and development projects
introduce considerations for coring operations
that may not be applicable to other drilling envi-
ronments. The high hourly costs for rigs capable
of drilling in deep water necessitate efficient and
reliable operations. Conventional coring may not
be economically viable in these situations.
Percussion cores can be acquired quickly and
provide selectivity, but the quality of cores offers
operators little more than basic rock property
analysis. If coring objectives can be met, selec-
1 in.
tively sampling with large-diameter rotary coring
tools offers operators an alternative to conven-
tional coring.
> Core recovery in a challenging deepwater environment. During coring operations in a deepwater
The ability to acquire plugs as large as those
well offshore Australia, rotary cores were taken with the XL-Rock tool from rocks with UCS values
taken from whole core affords the opportunity to ranging from 500 to 5,000 psi and from several formation types. The operation resulted in 100% recovery
collect high-quality rock samples and perform a of the cores attempted; these examples are representative of the quality of the samples taken.
greater variety of petrophysical and rock analy-
ses. By using rotary coring tools to acquire sam-
ples, petrophysicists can have confidence that earlier coring program, which were achieved with Routine Coring Operations
mechanical damage to the sample that might the large cores, involved several types of studies, Rotary coring tools were introduced to overcome
affect measured properties is minimized. including sedimentology, biostratigraphy, geome- some of the limitations of percussion cores, but
The reliable acquisition of representative rock chanical properties analysis and validation of geologists wanted still more core volume. Early
samples ultimately determines the practicality of interpretations of petrophysical logs. reports indicate that large-diameter rotary cores
replacing conventional coring with rotary cores. For the deepwater well offshore Australia, the provide a viable alternative for geologists who
Reliability includes both properly functioning coring objectives were similar to those of the Gulf have had to accept smaller cores provided by con-
equipment and the ability to cut, recover and of Mexico wells, and traditional rotary cores were ventional sidewall coring tools or for operators
bring cores to the surface. In some rock types, deemed too small to provide representative sam- that found conventional coring operations too
recovering samples can be difficult regardless of ples for analysis. Because of the successful acqui- inefficient and expensive.
the method used. Many deepwater reservoirs are sition of large cores in the Gulf of Mexico, BHP The option of taking representative rock sam-
in sandstone formations of varying strength. geologists and engineers elected to use the ples without the expense and loss of efficiency of
Acquiring rotary cores in rocks with unconfined XL-Rock tool and acquire 1.5-in. [3.8-cm] by 3.0-in. conventional coring operations has arrived at a
compressive strength (UCS) less than 1,000 psi [7.6-cm] cores. crucial time in the industry. Geologists and engi-
[6.9 MPa] is especially challenging.18 This was one Geologists interpreted the petrophysical log neers have the option to use large cores to evalu-
of the concerns BHP Billiton Petroleum faced data and selected core points based on the coring ate unconventional resource plays and also
when developing a coring strategy for evaluating a objectives, which included routine core analysis, determine mechanical properties in consolidated
deepwater well offshore Australia. geomechanical studies, geochemistry testing and formations. With more core material for analysis,
BHP had successfully tested the XL-Rock cor- biostratigraphic studies. They then used acoustic operators’ chances for successful development of
ing tool in a deepwater Gulf of Mexico well and data from the well to estimate UCS. These data these plays are greatly improved. —TS
achieved good recovery. The objectives of this were incorporated in the decision process for
determining rotary core depths. The sampling
15. Adams J, Bourke L and Buck S: “Integrating Formation
MicroScanner Images and Cores,” Oilfield Review 2, program covered several formation types, and
no. 1 (January 1990): 52−65. samples were taken in rocks with a UCS range of
16. For more on in situ stress testing and minifracs:
Desroches J and Kurkjian AL: “Applications of Wireline
500 to 5,000 psi [3.4 to 34.4 MPa].
Stress Measurements,” SPE Reservoir Evaluation & Even in the challenging low-UCS intervals,
Engineering 2, no. 5 (October 1999): 451–461.
the coring operation achieved 100% recovery
Carnegie A, Thomas M, Efnik MS, Hamawi M, Akbar M
and Burton M: “An Advanced Method of Determining (above). The ability to acquire large-diameter
Insitu Reservoir Stresses: Wireline Conveyed cores led to a revision of the coring program; BHP
Micro-Fracturing,” SPE paper 78486, presented at the
Abu Dhabi International Petroleum Exhibition and eliminated some originally planned conventional
Conference, Abu Dhabi, UAE, October 13–16, 2002. coring. Large-diameter core recovery and opera-
17. Laronga R, Tevis C, Kaiser B, Lake P and Fargo D:
“Field Test Results of a New-Generation Large-Bore
tional efficiencies compared to those in conven-
Rotary Coring Tool,” Transactions of the SPWLA 52nd tional coring resulted in significant cost savings
Annual Logging Symposium, Colorado Springs, Colorado,
USA, May 14–18, 2011, paper TTT.
without sacrificing coring objectives.
18. For more on geomechanics and UCS: Cook et al,
reference 11.

Winter 2013/2014 39