Formation Evaluation

Lecture 5

Sonic (Acoustic) Logs

Acknowledgements: Several of the figures were created by Pete Kane of Reservoir Management Limited (RML), Aberdeen.
Thanks to Peter Griffiths (Director, Geoscience) for permission to use RML’s training and teaching material.
R.Evans, Department of Petroleum Engineering, Curtin University
1
Sonic Logs
Introduction
The Sonic Log

• The sonic log records the speed of sound waves in a well bore. Thus it
is known as an acoustic log.

• The sonic log is displayed as interval transit time, abbreviated to DT,

Dt or Δt (delta t), which is a measure of slowness, as DT is the
reciprocal of the velocity of the sound wave.

• The interval transit time for a given formation depends upon its
lithology and porosity.

• The dependence upon porosity makes the sonic log very useful as a
porosity log.

R.Evans, Department of Petroleum Engineering, Curtin University

2
Sonic Logs
Introduction
The Sonic Log
source
• In its simplest form, a sonic tool consists of a transmitter
that emits a sound pulse and a receiver that picks up and
records the pulse as it passes the receiver.
near
detector
• Earlier tools consisted of one transmitter and two
receivers. The latest tools consist of usually two
transmitters and an array of receivers where the sound
waves are gathered and analysed. far
detector

R.Evans, Department of Petroleum Engineering, Curtin University

3
Sonic Logs
Use of the Sonic Log
Geophysics
interval transit time
- Used to measure interval velocities of formation
- Can be calibrated with seismic sections DT
140 US/F 40
- Cross-multiplied with density log = acoustic impedance

Geology

- Measured subtle changes in lithology/ texture such as grain-size

- Gives estimation of porosity
- But it is not great for exact lithology identification, generally:
- high velocities in carbonates,
- middle with sands and shales
- low with shales
- Highly sensitive to changes in formations, therefore good for correlation
- Prediction of overpressure
R.Evans, Department of Petroleum Engineering, Curtin University
4
 Figure 5.1
Log displays and headers for the sonic log
Sonic Logs
(After Rider, 1996)
Display of the Sonic Log
BHC Tool

Long Spacing Tool

R.Evans, Department of Petroleum Engineering, Curtin University

5
Sonic Logs

Figure 5.2
Typical responses for the
sonic log
(After Rider, 1996)

R.Evans, Department of Petroleum Engineering, Curtin University

6
Sonic Logs
Tool Resolution

depth of investigation...
• depends on frequency, very small
• approx. 1-2 inches (di : 3” + hole size)

vertical resolution...
• depends on detector spacing
• typically 2 ft
• measures - every 3” at 5000 ft/hr

R.Evans, Department of Petroleum Engineering, Curtin University

7
Sonic Logs
Interval Transit Times

Sonic transit times µsec/ft ...

FLUIDS
• fresh water (20oC) = 190
• salt water (20% NaCl) = 185
• oil = 238
• gas = 626
• air = 910

ROCKS
• sandstone = app. 55
• limestone = app. 47.6
• dolomite = 43.5
• shale = 62 – 167

• soft rock >150

• hard rock = 40 Note: casing = 57

R.Evans, Department of Petroleum Engineering, Curtin University

8
 Figure 5.3a
Schematic illustration of the generation and
Sonic Logs detection of different waveforms by the sonic tool
How does the sonic log work?

source

pressure pulse signal

app. 25 kHz
generates 6 waves…
time

near • formation
detector • compression
• shear

time • mud/sonde
• compression
• shear
far
detector • borehole wall
• p-Rayleigh
• Stoneley
t-far time

t-near Note:
Δ-t compression = approx. 1.7 * shear

R.Evans, Department of Petroleum Engineering, Curtin University

9
 Figure 5.3b
The geophysical wave train received by a sonic log
Sonic Logs
Types of Sound Waves

R.Evans, Department of Petroleum Engineering, Curtin University

10
 Figure 5.4b
Illustration of early sonic tool
Sonic Logs
5.2.3 Logging tools Early Sonic Tool

Early Sonic tools

• These were quite simple, with one transmitter (Tx) and one
receiver (Rx). The body of the tool was made from rubber to
stop waves traveling preferentially down the tool to the
receiver (Rx).

• There were two main problems with this tool:

• Measured travel time was too long because the time

taken for the elastic waves to pass through the mud was
included in the measurement (measured time was A+B+C
rather than B).

• Length of the formation through which the elastic wave

traveled (B) was not constant because the velocity and
refraction angle of the wave depended upon the formation
and the effects of formation damage. Formation damage
was a major problem for this tool.

R.Evans, Department of Petroleum Engineering, Curtin University

11
 Figure 5.4c
Illustration of the dual receiver tool
Sonic Logs
5.2.3 Logging tools
Dual Receiver Tools
Dual Receiver Sonic Tool
• Tools have one transmitter and two receivers,
The two receivers are a few feet apart and
measure the difference in times of arrival of
elastic waves at each receiver from a given
pulse generated from the transmitter.

• Time to Receiver 1 (Rx1) = A+B+C

• Time to Receiver 2 (Rx2) = A+B+D+E

• Therefore, the sonic interval transit time Dt =

A+B+D+E – (A+B+C) = D+E-C.

• If the tool is axial in the borehole, then C is

equal to E. Therefore, Dt = time D.

• Problems occur if the tool is tilted (or bad hole).

Then C does not equal E, and the two receiver
tool does not work properly. Correct Position Incorrect Position

R.Evans, Department of Petroleum Engineering, Curtin University

12
 Figure 5.4d
Illustration of the borehole compensated tool (BHC)
Sonic Logs
5.2.3 Logging tools Borehole Compensated Sonic (BHC) Tool

Borehole Compensated (BHC) Tool

• This tool has two transmitters and four receivers. This design is
intended to automatically compensate for problems with tool
misalignment and to some degree varying hole size that were
problematic with the dual receiver tools.

• There are two dual receiver sets, with one of the sets inverted.
Transmitters are pulsed alternately, and the Dt values are
calculated from alternate pairs of receivers. The two different
values of Dt are averaged to compensate for tool
misalignment.

• Transmitter-receiver (Tx-Rx) distances are typically 3 ft and 5 ft

apart. The receiver-receiver (Rx-Rx) distance is usually 2 ft.

• Typical tools have 20 pulses per second, and with a typical

logging speed (e.g. 5000 ft/hr) the tool records one reading per
8 cm (3 inches) of borehole.

R.Evans, Department of Petroleum Engineering, Curtin University

13
 Figure 5.4e
Illustration of the long spacing sonic (LSS) tool
Sonic Logs
5.2.3 Logging tools
Long Spacing Sonic (LSS) Tool
Long Spacing Sonic (LSS) Tool
• This tool was developed to overcome the effect of bad hole
because theoretically the long spaced log has a greater 2 ft
chance of detecting the compressional waves from the
undamaged formation.

• Schlumberger’s long spacing sonic (LSS) tool, has two 8 ft

transmitters (upper and lower) which are two feet apart, and
two receivers (upper and lower), which are also two feet
apart.

• The pairs of receivers and transmitters are 8 feet in distance 2 ft

apart. This tool records two readings, a near reading with an
8 to 10 ft. spacing, and a far reading with a 10 to 12 ft.
spacing.

• The depth of investigation was described for this tool earlier.

R.Evans, Department of Petroleum Engineering, Curtin University

14
 Table 5.1
Common tool names for the sonic log
Sonic Logs
5.2.3 Logging tools

Common tool names

• There are numerous tool names for the sonic log. The BHC and LSS tools have already
been mentioned above, but some of the other common log names, which vary between
companies, are listed in Table 5.1 below. The standard common label for the sonic log
heading is DT, but the log name may be plotted instead.

R.Evans, Department of Petroleum Engineering, Curtin University

15
Sonic Logs
Unwanted Logging Effects
Cycle Skipping

• Cycle skipping can happen if the borehole condition is extremely poor and the
hole is severely caved and enlarged.

• Cycle skipping occurs when sound waves from the source reach the first
receiver nearer the transmitter, but are too weak to reach and trigger the far
transmitter.

• The far receiver may be triggered by a different, later arrival in the sonic wave
train, and the travel time measured on this pulse cycle will then be too large.

• When this occurs, the sonic curve shows a very abrupt and large excursion
towards a higher Dt value known as cycle skipping.

R.Evans, Department of Petroleum Engineering, Curtin University

16
 Figure 5.6b
An illustration of cycle skip recorded on the
Sonic Logs Sonic log (After Rider, 1996)
Unwanted Logging Effects
Cycle Skipping

R.Evans, Department of Petroleum Engineering, Curtin University

17
 Figure 5.9
Example of noise spikes on the sonic log. Most
Sonic Logs noise spikes are toward lower transit time.
Unwanted Logging Effects
Noise Spikes

•Occurs if
borehole
condition is
extremely
poor, and the
hole is very
rugose.

•‘Noise
triggering’ if
the tool is
banging
against the
borehole wall.

R.Evans, Department of Petroleum Engineering, Curtin University

18
 Figure 5.10
Example of a typical sonic log with cycle skipping
Sonic Logs and noise spikes
Unwanted Logging Effects
Cycle skipping and noisy data
• The pips on the left of the log represent
one millisecond (OWTT) intervals, termed
the integrated transit time, which is counted
from bottom to top for the distance
travelled by the soundwave.

• Cycle skipping and noises are clearly

observed. Note the bad hole from the
caliper log!

• With modern computers, problems related

to noise and cycle skipping have been
considerably reduced.

• Slowness Time Coherence or First Motion

Detection are done to give delta t
practically free from cycle skip and noise.

R.Evans, Department of Petroleum Engineering, Curtin University

19
 Figure 5.12a
Long-spaced acoustic devices are not immune to
Sonic Logs alteration effects, such as wash-out in an open
hole.

Long Spaced Tools

• This tool is more likely to yield
measurement free from the effects of
formation alteration, relaxation damage
(from the drilling process), and
enlarged borehole.

• These more accurate measurements

are always desirable when the sonic
data are to be used for seismic
purposes. Figure 5.12a compares the
transit time recorded with an LSS tool
to that from a standard spacing tool in
a formation with alteration.

R.Evans, Department of Petroleum Engineering, Curtin University

20
 Figure 5.12b
Paired aberrations recorded between the short and
Sonic Logs long spaced sonic log (After Rider, 1996)

LSS Aberrations
• Long spaced tools are not as
robust as the conventional sonic,
and they often suffer from cycle
skipping and paired errors.

• Paired errors occur when the

dynamic compensation system,
which uses each transmitter-
receiver twice (at 2 levels) does
not record a proper signal on one
of the eight readings (which
comprise a full sequence).

• This leads to a depth discrepancy

between the long and short
spaced sonic log.
Pairs are separated mostly by 10 ft, the compensation
shift distance.

R.Evans, Department of Petroleum Engineering, Curtin University

21
Sonic Logs
5.4 Sonic Log Interpretation

Introduction

• There are many applications for the sonic log, depending on the
interpreter’s perspective and objectives.

• The geophysicist may wish to integrate seismic and well logs.

• The geologist may wish to correlate the stratigraphy of a particular

formation and understand the distribution of diagenetic cements.

• The petrophysicist or log interpreter may want to calculate porosity.

• Several uses of the sonic log will be covered in this course.

R.Evans, Department of Petroleum Engineering, Curtin University

22
Sonic Logs
Sonic Log Interpretation
In the following section we will cover…..
Uses of the Sonic Log

• Calculation of Acoustic Velocity

• Lithology identification
• Correlation
• Compaction and erosion
• Identification of overpressure
• Porosity determination
• Log-Seismic Integration

Potential problems with Sonic Log Interpretation

• Highly susceptible to hole condition
•A poor porosity log?
•Compacted vs uncompacted sands
•Effect of shale
•Effect of Gas

R.Evans, Department of Petroleum Engineering, Curtin University

23
Sonic Logs
Sonic Log Interpretation
Calculation of Acoustic Velocity

• Calculation of velocity from interval transit time

-Sonic logs are given in microseconds per foot (10-6 seconds)
-and this is called the Interval transit time (usual range 40-140 μsec/ft).
-Velocity is the reciprocal of sonic transit time.

To calculate velocity from the sonic log

If Δt = 40μsec from sonic log 140

DT
US/F 40
1

Velocity = 40 x 10-6

= 25,000 ft/sec
= 7620 m/sec
R.Evans, Department of Petroleum Engineering, Curtin University
24
 Figure 5.16
Average velocity ranges of common lithologies
Sonic Logs
(Modified from Rider, 1996)
Sonic Log Interpretation
Lithology Identification Interval Transit Time us/ft Δt
200 150 100 80 70 60 50 40
• Cannot be used to identify
Velocity kilofeet/sec
rock types based upon 5 10 15 20 25 30
velocity or interval transit
times, because for most Sandstones
CLASTICS
lithologies there is a wide
Shales
range of values.
Coals CARBONATES
• Sedimentary rocks undergo Dolomites
compaction and diagenesis, Oil
(Chalks) Limestones
changing the porosity and Water
chemistry of the rock. Anhydrite
Salt

• High velocities are usually Igneous IGNEOUS &

METAMORPHIC
associated with carbonates, Metamorphic
middle velocities with sands
and low velocities with Oceanic Basalts

shales. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Velocity km/sec

R.Evans, Department of Petroleum Engineering, Curtin University

25
 Figure 5.17a Lithology: response of the sonic log to
the presence of coals (After Rider, 1996)
Sonic Logs
Sonic Log Interpretation
Lithology Identification
• More diagnostic are the extremely low velocities associated with coals and the narrow range
of velocities of evaporites.

• Coals are usually easily identified because they form distinct low velocity peaks. Coals are
often caved or washed out, which can be diagnosed from the caliper log..

R.Evans, Department of Petroleum Engineering, Curtin University

26
Sonic Logs
Sonic Log Interpretation
Lithology Identification

• Because the sonic log is not diagnostic of lithology, care should be taken when
using the sonic log to discriminate between sands and shales.

• Sands can often be affected by carbonate cementation in the form of nodules

or continuous bands, which if thick enough can be identified from the sonic or
density logs.

• These will represent areas of low porosity and permeability and if continuous
enough they may affect production.

• They are often recognized as spikes (high velocity, high density), which have
the opposite deflection to coals.

• It is advisable to use the sonic log with a combination of other logs if

lithological identification is important.

R.Evans, Department of Petroleum Engineering, Curtin University

27
 Figure 5.17b
Lithology: Sonic response in sand and shale
Sonic Logs sequences (After Rider, 1996)

Sand Velocity < Shale Velocity

Sand Velocity > Shale Velocity

R.Evans, Department of Petroleum Engineering, Curtin University

28
 Figure 5.17c
Texture: Sonic log responds to the changes in
Sonic Logs texture in a sedimentary rock succession (After
Rider, 1996)

Coarsening-upward, shallow marine succession Turbidite system with textural changes

R.Evans, Department of Petroleum Engineering, Curtin University

29
 Figure 5.18
Correlation of the geological succession by
Sonic Logs means of the sonic log (After Rider, 1996)
Sonic Log Interpretation
Correlation
• The sonic log is useful for the
correlation of geological units,

• In some cases correlation can

be carried out using the sonic
log, which can have a very
distinctive character. 75 m

• This example demonstrates

how the shape of the sonic log
can be used to correlate over
large distances (40km) despite 40 m
the lateral change in formation
thickness.

• The sonic log is sensitive to 40 km

lithological changes caused by
texture and composition.
R.Evans, Department of Petroleum Engineering, Curtin University
30
 Figure 5.19
Compaction in a shale sequence observed to
Sonic Logs affect interval transit time on a sonic log (After
Rider, 1996).
Compaction

• Sediments gradually compact because of the

increasing weight of overlying sediments.

• During compaction, grains are squeezed closer

together, the pore spaces between grains start to
close and fluids within the pore spaces are
expelled.

• Compaction can often be observed on the sonic log.

As a sediment becomes more compacted the
velocity increases, and this is often observed with
increasing burial depth.

• The compaction of sands and shales is different.

Shales compact by almost 50% and sands by 20 to
30%.
Interval transit time decreases
Velocity increases from approx 160 μsec/ft to 140 μsec/ft
R.Evans, Department of Petroleum Engineering, Curtin University
31
 Figure 5.20
Reduction of porosity in sandstones
Sonic Logs and shales due to compaction during
burial

From Rowan et al. 2003 (USGS Open-File Report 03-329)

R.Evans, Department of Petroleum Engineering, Curtin University
32
 Figure 5.21
Estimation of uplift from the sonic log (After Rider,
Sonic Logs 1996)

Erosion
•Estimates of erosion for a particular study area can be back-calculated by examining the
compaction curves and identifying any changes in the compaction trend.

•However, the most accurate method is the calculation of shale porosity with depth.

Well A shows a normal compaction

Well B is over compacted relative to well A at the same depth,
because of uplift and subsequent erosion (curve B)
Amount of uplift is the vertical distance between curve A and B.
Compaction is in chalk.

R.Evans, Department of Petroleum Engineering, Curtin University

33
 Figure 5.22
Overpressure indicated by plotting interval transit
Sonic Logs time against depth (After Rider 1996).

Overpressured zones

• Sonic logs can be used to identify regions

of overpressure by examination of
acoustic velocity.

• A fall in sonic velocity in a particular

formation can indicate an increase in pore
pressure, and if significant,
overpressuring.

• The deviation of the sonic velocity from

the normal compaction trend can be used
to identify overpressured zones.

R.Evans, Department of Petroleum Engineering, Curtin University

34
Sonic Logs
Sonic log and porosity calculation
• Porosity can be calculated from the sonic log, but this
calculation is usually inferior to neutron or density log
calculations

•There is a simple relationship between porosity and

velocity
Wyllie’s time average equation
Where
Øt = porosity
( Δt - Δtma ) Δt = interval transit time
Øt = (tool measured)
(Δtf - Δtma ) Δtma = transit time of matrix material
Δtf = transit time of interstitial fluid

R.Evans, Department of Petroleum Engineering, Curtin University

35
Sonic Logs
Sonic log and porosity calculation
• The sonic porosity calculation is usually inferior to neutron or density log
calculations as velocities are affected by other variables besides porosity
and matrix, e.g. compaction, overpressures, gas.
• note the assumption...
Δtf • lithology!
Δtsh
rock μsec/ft
sst 52 - 59
lst 47.6
Δtma

dol 43.5
clays 62 - 167
Δtma
the “Clay” bit!
Δtf Vcl ( Δtsh - Δtma )
(Δtf - Δtma )

R.Evans, Department of Petroleum Engineering, Curtin University

36
Sonic Logs

Sonic and Seismic

LOG DATA SEISMIC DATA
• Sonic logs are frequently
integrated with seismic data.

• Synthetic seismograms are

generated from the sonic log
and are upscaled to seismic
scale.

• Note: The resolution of the

sonic log is about 2 foot (60
cm), whereas the resolution of
seismic data ranges from 15 to
50 metres.

Sonic Density Interval Seismic traces

Velocity

R.Evans, Department of Petroleum Engineering, Curtin University

37
Sonic Logs

CLASSROOM EXERCISE

1. Calculate the porosity of the

sandstone formation from
the sonic log

-salt water 185 μsec/ft

-sandstone 56 μsec/ft

R.Evans, Department of Petroleum Engineering, Curtin University

38
Sonic Logs
Sonic log and porosity calculation VSH

DEPTH
0 V/V 1

FEET
CALI
DT PORTSONIC
6 IN
BADHOLE
16

140 US/F 40 0.5 V/V 0 1

PORTSONIC
V/V 0
NET
-water based mud
0 1

-sandstone formation

100 Øt = ( Δt - Δtma )
90 (Δtf - Δtma )
200

300 Δtf = 185 μsec/ft

(salt water)
400
Δtma = 56 μsec/ft
(sst)

Delta t = about
500
90 μsec/ft
Ø = (90-56)/(185-56)
600 Ø = 26.4%

700 Remember
Øt = porosity
Δt = interval transit time
800 (tool measured)
Δtma = transit time of matrix material
900
Δtf = transit time of interstitial fluid

R.Evans, Department of Petroleum Engineering, Curtin University

39
 -Sonic logs are given in microseconds per foot (10-6 seconds)
-and this is called the Interval transit time (usual range 40-140 μsec/ft).
Sonic Logs -Velocity is the reciprocal of sonic transit time.

Sonic Log Interpretation

To calculate velocity from the sonic log

10 6 1
Δt = Or, Velocity (ft/sec) =
V Δt x 10 - 6

1
Velocity (ft/sec) = = 25, 000 ft/sec, or 7620 m/s
40 x 10 -6

R.Evans, Department of Petroleum Engineering, Curtin University

40
Sonic Logs- (Additions)
http://www.edge.ou.edu/well-log-interpretation/unit-4.htm

Vuggy Porosity, Total Porosity & the Sonic Log

• The Wyllie et al. formula for calculating sonic porosity can be used to determine
porosity in consolidated sandstones and carbonates with intergranular porosity
(grainstones) or intercrystalline porosity (sucrosic dolomites).

• However, when sonic porosities of carbonates with vuggy or fracture porosity

are calculated by the Wyllie formula, porosity values are too low.

• This is because the sonic log records only matrix porosity rather than vuggy or
fracture secondary porosity.

• The percentage of vuggy or fracture secondary porosity can be calculated by

subtracting sonic porosity from total porosity.

• Total porosity values are obtained from one of the nuclear logs (i.e. density or
neutron).

R.Evans, Department of Petroleum Engineering, Curtin University

41
Sonic Logs- (Additions)
http://www.edge.ou.edu/well-log-interpretation/unit-4.htm

Hydrocarbon Effect

• The interval transit time (Δt) of a formation is increased because of the

presence of hydrocarbons (i.e. hydrocarbon effect).

• If the effect of hydrocarbons is not corrected, the sonic derived porosity is too
high.

• Hilchie suggests the following empirical corrections for hydrocarbon effect:

• φ = φsonic x 0.7 (gas)

• φ = φsonic x 0.9 (oil)

(Remember, fresh mud = 189 μsec/ft ; salt-water mud = 185 μsec/ft)

R.Evans, Department of Petroleum Engineering, Curtin University

42