INTRODUCTION

The first logging device ever designed measured formation resistivity. It was a modification of a
method previously used to detect underground resistivity anomalies associated with either
geologic features or concentrations of metallic ores. Figure 1 illustrates this old surface surveying
method.

Figure 1

A voltage source sent a current through the ground between two widely spaced electrodes. The
voltage drop between two other more closely spaced electrodes was used as a measure of the
ground resistivity. By moving the whole electrode array across the countryside, it was possible to
"map" underground features, as shown in Figure 2.
 Figure 2.

By rotating the whole setup by 90 and lowering it into a borehole, the electric log was born.
There is now a bewildering variety in the design and principles used for resistivity logging. While
we usually only want to know true resistivity (Rt), over a dozen resistivity tools have been
developed in an effort to acquire this measurement. The reason for this abundance of designs is
that resistivity of the borehole, the mud filtrate, and adjacent beds all have an effect on the
resistivity measured by a tool in the borehole. No single design can fully compensate for all these
effects, and a combination of measurements with different tools is required to calculate the illusive
Rt
Since the early days of wireline well logging, a series of improvements have resulted in five main
families of resistivity tools. These include:
 electric logs,
 induction logs,
 laterologs,
 microresistivity devices, and
 dielectric logs
Additionally, Measurement While Drilling (MWD) technology has been quick to develop tools that
perform the same tasks as their wireline counterparts.

EVOLUTION OF RESISTIVITY LOGS

Although the original electric logging principles were sound, their practical implementation left
much to be desired. Efforts to improve the measurement of formation resistivity have been
continually pursued since the inception of the electric log. As a result, several classifications of
resistivity logging have evolved: the electrical survey (ES), Laterologs, Induction Logs, Micro-
Resistivity Logs, and Dielectric Logs (also known as electromagnetic propagation tools).

ELECTRIC SONDE
The first resistivity log, an electrical survey, was run in 1927 by Marcel and Conrad Schlumberger
in the Pechelbronn Field of France. It was downhole adaptation of the Pole-Dipole surface
resistivity method used in mineral exploration. This ES tool contained 3 lead electrodes held
together with ropes. One electrode, which was grounded to the surface, was used to inject current
via the borehole into the formation. The other two electrodes measured the potentials generated
by this injected current.
The measured voltages provided the resistivity determinations for each device, as follows: In
Figure 3,

Figure 3

a current I flows between electrode A and electrode N in a homogeneous, isotropic medium. The
corresponding equipotential surfaces surrounding the current emitting electrode A would be
spherical. The voltage on electrode N situated on one of these spheres is proportional to the
resistivity of the formation, and the measured voltage can be scaled in resistivity units.
The ES was able to detect layer boundaries and high resistivities (typically indicative of oil). Using
the ES, formation resistivity values could only be obtained when used in slim boreholes having
relatively high mud resistivity, shallow invasion, and thick beds. Although the original electric
logging principles were sound, their practical embodiments left much to be desired. Efforts to
improve the measurement of formation resistivity have been busily pursued for several decades.
As a result, three main branches of resistivity logging have evolved: induction logs, focused
electric logs, (in both induction and laterolog varieties) and microwave devices.
 The first overseas ES log was run in Brunei (Borneo) in 1929. ES logs, although rarely used today
in western oil and gas logging operations, are still discussed because a large proportion of well
data from older fields consists solely of ES logs.

INDUCTION LOGS
Before the Second World War, many wells were drilled with muds that consisted of locally
available clay and water mixtures of low salinity. These muds were often incompatible with the
shales encountered downhole, which led to clay swelling, large wash-outs, and even caving of
wells. In the early 1950's, oil-base muds were developed with diesel fuel as the continuous phase,
and therefore significantly reduced clay problems. However these muds did not conduct electric
currents, so ES tools with electrodes could not be applied anymore.
Induction tools were developed for these circumstances. Rather than using current and voltage
electrodes, the induction log introduced a system of focused coils that induce the flow of currents
in the formation away from the disturbing influence of the borehole and the invaded zone.
Experience soon demonstrated that the induction log had many advantages over the conventional
ES log when used in wells drilled with water-based muds. Designed for deep investigation,
induction logs can be focused to minimize the influences of the borehole, the surrounding
formations, and the invaded zone. Spherically focused induction logs provide deep, medium, and
shallow readings.
These tools can also be used in air-drilled holes to derive conductivity values of the formation
using electromagnetic coupling of transmitter and receiving coils in the logging tool via the
conductive rock surrounding non-conductive borehole.

LATEROLOGS
Laterolog tools were developed for high salinity drilling muds, applied to drill through salt layers, in
which ES tools are virtually short-circuited. The laterologs use arrays of electrodes to focus the
current emitted by the center electrode into the formation, and thereby significantly reduce the
effect of the mud. Both the induction and laterolog tools are superior to the older ES tools to obtain
a reliable value of the true resistivity of the uninvaded formation. These tools are much superior to
the conventional electrical logs (ES) because they eliminate many of the detrimental borehole
effects. They are also provide better resolution of thin beds. Focusing electrode systems are
available with deep and medium depths of investigation, and are often run in tandem with a micro-
resistivity log to provide a very shallow reading.

MICRO RESISTIVITY TOOLS

Micro resistivity tools were introduced to provide an accurate assessment of the resistivity of the
mudcake (Rmc) and the invaded zone Rxo. These tools have very close electrode spacing, with
electrodes mounted on a pad that is pushed against the borehole wall to minimize the effect of the
borehole fluid.

HIGH-RESOLUTION INDUCTION TOOLS

From the 1960s to the mid-1980s, the Dual Induction logging tool provided the primary logging
service for openhole formation evaluation in fresh-water and oil-base muds. However, certain
design limitations caused problems with the induction response, resulting in formation resistivity
measurements that were distorted by adjacent beds, the invaded zone, and even by the borehole.
The most serious of these were
 Resistivity readings that caused estimates of formation water resistivity (Rw) to be much
lower than those indicated by spontaneous potential or by measurements of
recovered water samples.
 Separation between the deep, medium, and shallow focused responses in tight, high-
resistivity formations where other measurements indicated little or no invasion.
  Poor vertical resolution of 8 feet for the deep induction measurements and 6 feet for the
medium curve.
Distortions stemming from resolution and shoulder effect had been predicted through
electromagnetic theory; however, automatic correction algorithms were unsuccessful, owing to the
non-linearity of the R-signal measurement, which was the only measurement made by the dual
induction tools. These limitations in tool response were recognized by logging companies and their
clients, but the tool represented the best technology of the time.
During the mid-1980s, advances in electronics technology and signal processing led to improved
output from standard dual induction hardware. Improvements arose from the use of both the
conventional (indirect) EMF’s induced in the receiver coil and the directly coupled, out of phase, "X
signals." These newer induction tools are referred to as high-resolution induction (HRI) or phasor
induction tools. Central to the development of the Phasor tool was a nonlinear deconvolution
technique that corrects the induction log in real time for shoulder effect and improves the thin-bed
resolution down to 2 ft in many cases. This algorithm uses the induction quadrature signal, or X-
signal, which measures the non-linearity directly.
The result of the additional data is a measurement of formation resistivity which is less affected by
adjacent beds and allows far better precision in correcting for invasion effects. Modern software
routines allow real-time deconvolution in the logging unit and hence output of Rt, along with Rxo
and diameter of invasion (di) directly onto the log.
Figure 4: Induction Log Comparison shows the same formation logged with (a) a conventional
dual induction and (b) an HRI log. Note the improvement in bed resolution between (a) and (b).

Figure 4
ARRAY INDUCTION TOOL
Though the high resolution induction tool was an improvement over the dual induction tool, there
was still a need for a tool capable of providing better estimates of Rt in the presence of deep
invasion or complex transition zones.
One approach would be to recombine multiple arrays to produce a set of measurements at several
depths of investigation and then invert the measurements radially to obtain an estimate of Rt. The
concept of multiple measurements was put forth as early as 1957 by Pupon, but at the time,
technical limitations on the amount of data that could be transmitted to the surface via logging
cable hindered early development of such an array tool.
Modern array induction tools are constructed of eight independent arrays with main coil spacings
ranging from 6 inches to 6 feet. Each array consists of a single transmitter coil and two receivers.
All measurements are simultaneously acquired every 3 inches of depth.
Log processing makes full environmental corrections and the logs are virtually free of cave effect
and can be used to provide an accurate Rt estimate and a quantitative description of the transition
zone in both oil-and water-base mud systems.

The processing algorithm for array induction tools works as well when Rxo < Rt and when
Rxo > Rt -within limits. The chief limitation of array induction tools in salty muds is their ability to
make accurate borehole corrections. In cases where the mud is salty and the borehole is rugose,
the traditional laterolog tool would be the resistivity tool of choice. For most applications where
Rt/Rm> 500, the laterolog provides a closer estimate of Rt; however, the array induction tools
contribute important invasion information even in these cases. For salty mud, a combination of
array induction and laterolog tools would produce a better total answer than either tool alone.

3D INDUCTION TOOL
It has been estimated that 30% of the world’s oil reserves will be found within thinly laminated
formations. However, thin-bedded laminated formations pose a special problem for log analysts.
The thin shale layers in these formations do not alter the porosity and permeability characteristics
of the inter-bedded sands, but the highly conductive nature of the shales greatly suppresses
standard induction log response. The term "low-contrast pay" is often applied to such intervals of
inter-bedded sands and shales, which typically exhibit a combined resistivity of only a few tenths
of an Ohm-m over adjacent shales.
Experience has shown that these formations are often capable of producing at very high rates.
Identifying and quantifying hydrocarbon reserves in low resistivity formations can have major
economic impact on such a prospect.
Low resistivity pay can be attributed to two different modes. It can be found in thinly bedded
laminated sand-shale formations. Or it can be found in sand layers of varying grain size
distributions that create an electrical anisotropy caused by variations in water saturation and fluid
morphology. These potentially productive intervals are almost indistinguishable from adjacent
shales, given the poor vertical resolution of conventional resistivity tools. Such measurements will
only be satisfactory when evaluating formations that are at least as thick as the tool’s vertical
resolution.
Conventional induction logging tools are limited to measurements in one dimension because their
sensors are aligned along the tool or Z-axis. These tools measure horizontal resistivity, which is
measured parallel to the bed. Horizontal resistivity is dominated by the low resistivity of the shale
laminae, rather than by the higher resistivity of the hydrocarbon-bearing sand laminae.
Conventional tools will not adequately resolve the electrical anisotropy of low resistivity formations.
Baker Atlas offers a 3D induction tool designed to identify and quantify hydrocarbons in laminated,
low-resistivity pay formations. The Baker Atlas 3D Explorer service characterizes formation
 resistivity in three dimensions. Like conventional tools, this logging tool employs sets of "Z"
direction coils that are aligned coaxially with the instrument; but unlike conventional tools, it also
carries orthogonally mounted "X" and "Y" coil arrays. This configuration, together with specially
developed software, provides the information necessary to determine vertical resistivity (Rv) and
horizontal resistivity (Rh) from the 3D induction data. Vertical resistivity is sensitive to the
hydrocarbon-bearing laminated sand within sand-shale sequences.

When Rv is greater than Rh the formation is said to exhibit electrical anisotropy. The ratio of Rv/Rh
determines the value of the electrical anisotropy ratio. The vertical resistivity and the anisotropy
ratio are sensitive to changes in both laminar shale content and to laminar sand resistivity.
On the log presentation, the separation between horizontal and vertical resistivity curves is used to
identify zones of transverse anisotropy. Transverse anisotropy associated with the laminated
formation structure is used to flag the presence of hydrocarbons within the sand laminae.

DIELECTRIC TOOLS
Microwave devices (also called electromagnetic propagation logging) were built to measure the
dielectric constant and conductivity of the formation. Strictly speaking, they do not measure
formation resistivity; however, they are often classified as resistivity devices since their end use is
the same as for resistivity devices, i.e., determination of formation fluid saturation.

RESISTIVITY LOGS FOR BOREHOLE IMAGING

Reservoirs characterized by thin beds or fractures are prime candidates for the detailed evaluation
provided by borehole imaging tools. These tools offer vertical resolution finer than 1 foot, and
produce images of the formation that are colored according to formation conductivity. These
images can show changes in fluid properties, permeability, porosity, rock composition, and grain
texture.
Resistivity imaging tools are offered by the major logging companies, who provide the following
products:
 Baker Atlas: Simultaneous Acoustic / Resistivity (STAR) Tool
 Halliburton: Electrical MicroImaging (EMI) Tool
 Schlumberger: Formation MicroImager (FMI) Tool, and
Azimuthal Resistivity Imager (ARI)
These tools are further discussed in the presentation on Resistivity Imaging, found under the
subtopic entitled Borehole Imaging Technology.

CASED HOLE RESISTIVITY LOGS

Cased hole resistivity logs offer deep-reading resistivity measurements to aid in locating bypassed
pay behind pipe, for reservoir monitoring, or contingency logging. These tools will be further
discussed in the Petroleum Engineering presentation on Cased Hole Resistivity Logs, found under
the subtopic entitled Formation Evaluation in Cased Holes.