1887
Volume 72, Issue 3
  • E-ISSN: 1365-2478
PDF

Abstract

Abstract

Subsurface energy resources are often found in three‐dimensional and non‐spatially continuous rock formations that exhibit electrical anisotropy. Deep‐sensing tri‐axial borehole electromagnetic measurements are currently being used to detect three‐dimensional fluid‐bearing subsurface formations, but borehole environmental, geometrical and instrument‐design factors, together with measurement noise, constrain their practical range of detection and spatial resolution. By understanding the interplay of the above factors on the detectability and sensitivity of borehole deep electromagnetic measurements, one can potentially quantify the uncertainty of both target spatial location (relative to the well trajectory) and electrical resistivity contrast, thereby improving the certainty of three‐dimensional well navigation in real time. We implement a finite‐volume method to numerically solve Maxwell's equations for three‐dimensional electrically anisotropic heterogeneous rock formations in the calculation of magnetic fields measured with deep‐sensing tri‐axial borehole electromagnetic instruments. The calculated magnetic fields at measurement locations are described as the per cent difference between measurements acquired in rock formations with and without conductive or resistive three‐dimensional targets. We quantify the maximum radial distance of detection from the well trajectory and the spatial sensitivity of a commercially available deep‐sensing electromagnetic instrument with respect to environmental factors and measurement acquisition parameters by assuming that the borehole electromagnetic instrument can reliably detect offset three‐dimensional targets if the corresponding per cent measurement difference exceeds the threshold for measurement noise. Results indicate that commercially available tri‐axial deep‐sensing borehole electromagnetic instruments can achieve maximum detection distances between a quarter of and a full transmitter–receiver spacing. In addition, we show that radial detection distances vary from 0.3 to 2 skin depths depending on the geological environment, that is, target conductivity contrast with respect to the embedding background, electrical anisotropy of the background formation and targets and measurement acquisition parameters, that is, frequency and transmitter–receiver spacings. The above findings are not only important for instrument design and measurement‐acquisition planning but also for the effective implementation of real‐time inversion‐based measurement interpretation procedures.

Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.1111/1365-2478.13451
2024-02-21
2025-02-17
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

/deliver/fulltext/gpr/72/3/gpr13451.html?itemId=/content/journals/10.1111/1365-2478.13451&mimeType=html&fmt=ahah

References

  1. Alumbaugh, D.L. & Lu, X. (2001) Three‐dimensional sensitivity analysis of induction logging in anisotropic media. Petrophysics, 42(06).
  2. Anderson, B., Barber, T. & Gianzero, S. (2001) The effect of crossbedding anisotropy on induction tool response. Petrophysics, 42(02), 137–149.
    [Google Scholar]
  3. Antonsen, F., Danielsen, B.E., Jensen, K.R., Prymak‐Moyle, M., Lotsberg, J.K., Teixeira De Oliveira, M.E. et al. (2022) What next after a decade with significant advances in the application of ultradeep azimuthal resistivity measurements?Petrophysics, 63(06), 762–780.
    [Google Scholar]
  4. Bradaric, A.D., Andersen, T., Lecomte, I., Løseth, H. & Eide, C.H. (2022) Recognition and characterization of small‐scale sand injectites in seismic data: implications for reservoir development. Journal of the Geological Society, 179(2), jgs2021‐041.
    [Google Scholar]
  5. Carcione, J.M. (2011) Electromagnetic diffusion in anisotropic media. Radio Science, 46(01), 1–11.
    [Google Scholar]
  6. Clegg, N., Parker, T., Djefel, B., Monteilhet, L. & Marchant, D. (2019) The final piece of the puzzle: 3‐D inversion of ultra‐deep azimuthal resistivity LWD data. SPWLA‐2019‐HHH. In: SPWLA 60th annual logging symposium, The Woodlands, TX, June 2019. OnePetro.
  7. Davydycheva, S., Druskin, V. & Habashy, T. (2003) An efficient finite‐difference scheme for electromagnetic logging in 3D anisotropic inhomogeneous media. Geophysics, 68(5), 1525–1536.
    [Google Scholar]
  8. Davydycheva, S., Druskin, V., Knizhnerman, L. & Rabinovich, M. (2020) Quality control of ultra‐deep resistivity imaging using fast 3D electromagnetic modeling. In: SEG technical program expanded abstracts 2020. Houston, TX: Society of Exploration Geophysicists, pp. 380–384.
  9. Ellis, D.V. & Singer, J.M. (2007) Well logging for earth scientists. Vol. 692, Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Springer.
    [Google Scholar]
  10. Ezioba, U. & Denichou, J.M. (2014) Mapping‐while‐drilling system improves well placement and field development. Journal of Petroleum Technology, 66(08), 32–35.
    [Google Scholar]
  11. Hou, J., Mallan, R.K. & Torres‐Verdín, C. (2006) Finite‐difference simulation of borehole EM measurements in 3D anisotropic media using coupled scalar‐vector potentials. Geophysics, 71(5), G225–G233.
    [Google Scholar]
  12. Huang, H. (2005) Depth of investigation for small broadband electromagnetic sensors. Geophysics, 70(6), G135–G142.
    [Google Scholar]
  13. Jahani, S. & Jacob, Z. (2015) Photonic skin‐depth engineering. Journal of the Optical Society of America B, 32(7), 1346–1353.
    [Google Scholar]
  14. LaBrecque, D.J. (1999) Finite‐difference modeling of 3D EM fields with scalar and vector potentials. In: Three‐dimensional electromagnetics. Houston, TX: Society of Exploration Geophysicists, pp. 146–160.
    [Google Scholar]
  15. Pardo, D. & Torres‐Verdín, C. (2015) Fast 1D inversion of logging‐while‐drilling resistivity measurements for improved estimation of formation resistivity in high‐angle and horizontal wells. Geophysics, 80(2), E111–E124.
    [Google Scholar]
  16. Puzyrev, V., Torres‐Verdín, C. & Calo, V. (2018) Interpretation of deep directional resistivity measurements acquired in high‐angle and horizontal wells using 3‐D inversion. Geophysical Journal International, 213(2), 1135–1145.
    [Google Scholar]
  17. Rabinovich, M., Le, F., Lofts, J.J. & Martakov, S. (2012) The vagaries and myths of look‐around deep‐resistivity measurements while drilling. Petrophysics, 53(02), 86–101.
    [Google Scholar]
  18. Seydoux, J., Legendre, E., Mirto, E., Dupuis, C., Denichou, J.M., Bennett, N., et al. (2014) Full 3D deep directional resistivity measurements optimize well placement and provide reservoir‐scale imaging while drilling. SPWLA‐2014‐LLLL. In: SPWLA 55th annual logging symposium, Abu Dhabi, UAE, May 2014. OnePetro.
  19. Shahriari, M., Rojas, S., Pardo, D., Rodríguez‐Rozas, A., Bakr, S.A., Calo, V.M., et al. (2018) A numerical 1.5 D method for the rapid simulation of geophysical resistivity measurements. Geosciences, 8(6), 225.
    [Google Scholar]
  20. Sinha, S., Walmsley, A., Clegg, N., Vicuña, B., McGill, A., dos Reis, T.P. et al. (2022) Past, present and future applications of ultra‐deep directional resistivity measurements: a case history from the Norwegian continental shelf. : SPWLA‐2022‐0045. In: SPWLA 63rd annual logging symposium. OnePetro.
  21. Spies, B.R. (1989) Depth of investigation in electromagnetic sounding methods. Geophysics, 54(7), 872–888.
    [Google Scholar]
  22. Thiel, M. & Omeragic, D. (2020) Full 3D reservoir mapping using deep directional resistivity measurements. SPE‐201281‐MS. In: SPE annual technical conference and exhibition. OnePetro.
  23. Yee, K. (1966) Numerical solution of initial boundary value problems involving Maxwell's equations in isotropic media. IEEE Transactions on Antennas and Propagation, 14(3), 302–307.
    [Google Scholar]
/content/journals/10.1111/1365-2478.13451
Loading
/content/journals/10.1111/1365-2478.13451
Loading

Data & Media loading...

Most Cited This Month Most Cited RSS feed

This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address
Approval was a Success
Invalid data
An Error Occurred
Approval was partially successful, following selected items could not be processed due to error