Cement
Evaluation
Logging
Diagnostics
• A successful squeeze cannot be performed without first diagnosing the
problem
• Diagnostic methods include:
– Acoustic cement evaluation logs
– Temperature logs
– Pressure integrity tests
– Production data
– Production logs
– Pulsed neutron logs
– Casing caliper (mechanical or ultrasonic)
– Downhole camera
– Injection tests
Lesson Objectives
• Tools used for evaluation
• Describe purposes of cement evaluation
• Interpret logs to determine cement quality
Cement Job Evaluation
Cement Evaluation – Goal
• Determine if the material behind the pipe is a solid
or liquid
• Is there isolation in the annulus
• Where is the cement (TOC)
• There is no such a thing as “bad cement” or “good
cement”
Evaluation Techniques
1. Radioactive Tracer Survey
2. Hydraulic Testing
3. Temperature Survey
4. Acoustic Logging
Radioactive Tracers
• Radioactive tracer work is very rare in cementing evaluation and
requires specialty equipment and personnel
• Generally used only in very special applications
– Well control – flow determination
– Lost circulation – identify loss zones
• More common in fracturing applications to determine if prop stayed in
zone
Pressure Evaluation
• The most common method of cement evaluation is
to perform some type of pressure evaluation to
determine if isolation has been achieved
• Perforation Pressure test
• Casing test
• Liner top test
Temperature Logs
• Temperature surveys (logs) are very effective but
must be run within a specific time window to be
valid
• Very cost effective
• Limited application
– Generally used for determining top of cement or lost
circulation zone
– Can be used to determine underground flow
Temperature Survey
• The heat of hydration causes a
temperature rise
• Need to compare the results with caliper
or breakout areas
• Look for a change in slope to a different
temperature gradient or a spike in the
temperature
• Gives approximate location of cement –
it is not a precise measurement due to
temperature diffusion up the well
Is this temperature change due to the
top of cement, or a change in the
hole size?
Temperature Logs
• Temperature logs may show too much detail when
viewed on a small scale
• Taking the full wellbore data from the ASCII file
and plotting it out for the full wellbore can give
information that is easier to interpret
Full Well Temperature Survey (from Piceance Creek)
120
115
110
105
100
95
Probable Top of Cement
90
85
80
2.75 65.3 128 190 253 315 378 440 503 565 628 690 753 815 878 940 1003 1065 1128 1190 1253 1315 1378 1440 1503 1565
Temperature Logs
• The lighter the slurry – the less exotherm will be
present when the cement sets
• The higher the wellbore temperature, the more
difficult it will be to see a change in temperature
from the cement
• The smaller the annulus, the less the mass of
cement, the more difficult it will be to see a change
in temperature from the cement
Acoustic Logging
Acoustic Logging
• Noise Logging
– Detects noise from moving fluids
– Not continuous
– Used to detect flow behind pipe
• Sonic Logs
– Conventional bond logs
• Ultrasonic Logs
– USIT, CAST V, ISO Scanner
Conventional Cement Bond Log
• “A Sonic Method for Analyzing the Quality of
Cementation of Borehole Casings” SPE-1512,
Oct. 1960
• “The amplitude of a sound signal after it has
traveled in a firmly cemented pipe is only a
fraction of that recorded by the same device in
free pipe.”
Amplitude vs. Attenuation
• Amplitude (mV) – the magnitude of acoustic
energy at the receiver
• Attenuation (dB/ft) – energy loss from a wave
propagation during transmission across a
space
Sonic Log – Principle of Operation
• Measures the amplitude of a 20 kHz acoustic wave
after it has traveled through a section of casing
• The amplitude is converted to attenuation by
using either values from chart or book conversions
or using the ratio of multiple transmitter and
receiver amplitudes
• The percent of the circumference of the casing
bonded is then computed by calculating a “Bond
Index”
Conventional CBL
Casing
Cement
Formation
20 kHz
Amplitude
Transmitter
3 ft.
receiver
VDL
5 ft.
receiver
CBL (Sonic) Signal Transmission
Mud
Casing
Cement
Formation
Composite
CBL (Sonic) Signal Transmission
Raw Amplitude Waveforms
Signal Processing into a VDL
Raw Waveform
Half Wave Rectified and Shaded
Stacked Shading
Conventional CBL
• Assumes the cement is homogeneous – same density, same
strength throughout the well
• Signal is transmitted and picked up on receivers spaced at
3 and 5 feet from the transmitter
• 3 foot receiver used for pipe / cement “bonding”
• 5 foot receiver used to get a qualitative indication of
formation bonding
• Processed signal is an average over the 3 or 5 foot interval
• Cement properties are key to the interpretation of CBL
Logs
CBL – Bond Index
• What is needed?
– Expected cement impedance - amplitude for 100% bond: E100%
– Free pipe amplitude: EFree
– Measured amplitude: EMeas
• Bond index:
BI = log10(Emeas/Efree)
log10 (E100%/Efree)
• Conventional thought (wrong, but conventional)
– 80% < BI < 100%: “Good” cement
– 80% > BI: “Bad” cement
CBL Interpretation Chart
Original nomograph
developed in 1963
Nomograph is tool specific
Normal assumption is the
cement has a strength of
3,000 psi
Typical CBL Presentation
Free Pipe
Transit Time
Gamma Ray
Amplitude Curve
Casing Collars
Microannulus – zero pressure
Microannulus – 1,500 psi
Cycle Skip
Transit Time Stretch / Cycle Skip
E1
Detection Level
Transit Time Time
Stretch
Eccentering – Effects on CBL
Relative
Response
0.8
Eccentering
0.6
+
+
0.4
0.2
1/2 1/4 0 -1/4 -1/2
Courtesy of Atlas Wireline Services Division
Western Atlas International, Inc.
Eccentering (inches)
CBL
Strengths
• Works in most well fluids, tolerates corrosion
• Responds to solidity (shear coupling)
• Qualitative cement-formation bond from VDL
• Inexpensive
• With sufficient data base, can be quite accurate
CBL
Weaknesses
• High CBL amplitude can be ambiguous
– liquid microannulus (shear coupling lost)
– Channel
– Contaminated cement
• Low amplitude doesn’t ensure 100% bond
• Vertical Resolution ~ 3 ft.
• Knowledge of cement properties is key
Other Sonic Tools
• Segmented Bond Tool (SBT)
• Radial Analysis Cement Bond Log (RAL)
Segmented Bond Tool
• Pad Mounted Radial Tool – 6 pads, 60 degree
investigation angle
• Attenuation measurements are made in two directions
using steered transmitters and receivers on adjacent
pads
• Effective acoustic energy is increased by a factor of 4
• Derives a compensated value that does not depend on
receiver sensitivities or transmitter power
• Vertical Resolution ~ 6 inches
Segmented Bond Tool
Transmitter - Receiver
T1 Sequence
T T5
3
R2 R4 R6
5 6 1 2 3 4
R1 R3 R5
T2 T4 T6
T1 → R2 →R3 T4 → R3 → R2
A12 A13 A43 A42
H24-H3 Liner Severely Channeled Cement
H24-H3 Liner High-Side Cement Channel
Radial Analysis Cement Bond Log (RAL)
• Not a pad tool
• Single Transmitter
• Ten Crystal Receivers
– One at 3 and 5 ft. Eight at 3.25” from transmitter
– Can plot each of the 8 receivers on a separate track
• Downhole calibration reference signal
– No assumption of 100% bond
• Output includes detailed cement map
Ultrasonic Tools
Ultrasonic Tools
USI Logging Procedure
1. Measure fluid properties using
reference plate while running into
well:
- velocity FVEL
- acoustic impedance ZMUD
2. Enter ZMUD and FVEL
parameters. Flip transducer to face
casing and log up.
Ultrasonic Logging Principals
• Logs scan around the wellbore and take 36, 72 or
100 readings
• Readings are processed into a cement map that is
color coded with the colors indicating the relative
range of the readings
• Many logs use a cut off point for cement at 2.6
Acoustic Impedance
Acoustic Impedance of Various Materials
Acoustic Impedance
Material 106 kg.m2 sec
Fresh Water 1.5
Free Gas 0.1
Steel (casing) 46.0
12 lb/gal Drilling Mud 2.16
15 lb/gal Drilling Mud 2.70
17 lb/gal Drilling Mud 3.06
9 lb/gal Foamed Class C (250 psi) 2.19
9 lb/gal Foamed Class C (1000 psi) 2.69
13 lb/gal Cement (500 psi) 3.37
13 lb/gal Cement (2000 psi) 4.42
16.5 lb/gal Cement (500 psi) 4.38
16.5 lb/gal Cement (2000 psi) 5.62
Fluid Behind Pipe
Cement Behind Pipe
USIT Log Header – Cement Presentation
USIT - Cement Presentation
Isolation Scanner
• New tool from Schlumberger
• Similar ultrasonic measurement to USIT, but
signal is not sent at 90° to the casing
• Resulting measurement is a flexural wave
• Designed to determine solid, liquid or gas
• Effective in very low cement densities
ISO Scanner – Evaluation of Annular Material
Decay Rate 1
Decay Rate 2
ISO Scanner Header
ISO Scanner Log Example
Well Data QC Data Casing Data Cement Data
USIT vs. ISO Scanner
Response to materials with low acoustic impedance
Resolution of the measurement
Relative Response
USIT (Resolution = 0.5 MRayl)
ISO Scanner (Resolution = 0.2 MRayl)
2.0 Acoustic Impedance 3.2
Ultrasonic Tools
• Tolerate liquid (wet) microannulus (vibrations normal to surface)
• Full coverage, 30 mm resolution image
– Detailed picture of material distribution: solid, liquid, gas
– Detects narrow channels
• Less uncertainty than sonic logs (CBL/CBT) ?
• Casing inspection in same pass
Summary
Sonic Tools Ultrasonic Tools
u Limited mud weights
• Work in any mud u No formation evaluation
• Qualitative formation evaluation u Insensitive to microannulus
• Sensitive to microannulus u Independent of cement properties
u Can include casing inspection
• Sensitive to the material in contact
with the pipe u No averaging of the wellbore
u Preferred for low density, low
• Very limited in lightweight strength cement systems
cements
• Average over 3’ of wellbore (can
vary with some tools)
Ultrasonic and Sonic logs are sensitive to the cement/casing
bond but in different ways - complementary evaluation tools
Summary
Sonic Tools Ultrasonic Tools
Think:
Think:
When does the signal come back?
How Loud is the signal?
Summary
• In the absence of cement job data, the slurries
pumped, and formations involved, cement
evaluation is very difficult and subject to extreme
interpretation errors.
• For optimum evaluation, cement job data must be
included in the evaluation because cement does
not disappear.
