Changes

Jump to navigation Jump to search
no edit summary
Line 33: Line 33:  
Waves propagation into the formation depends on the amount of frequency used, since the reservoir is further away from the borehole, a high wave frequency, in the MHz, can only give information near the borehole. Therefore, a lower frequency system is used due to its high wavelength, which ultimately results in a higher depth of investigation. The wave propagation concept is applied together with the diffusion equation to design the EM system.
 
Waves propagation into the formation depends on the amount of frequency used, since the reservoir is further away from the borehole, a high wave frequency, in the MHz, can only give information near the borehole. Therefore, a lower frequency system is used due to its high wavelength, which ultimately results in a higher depth of investigation. The wave propagation concept is applied together with the diffusion equation to design the EM system.
 
   
 
   
The EM regions between the source and receiver shaped like a quasi-ellipse. The primary EM fields are considered to be uniformed and are donated as the background conductivity of the medium (σ<sub>b</sub>). The source receiver sensitivity between the wells are measured by perturbing a small volume or a point in the quasi ellipse region. This perturbation results in having a non-uniform secondary EM field. As a result, the disturbed secondary field is calculated by using the Fréchet derivative.<ref name=Spiesandhabashy_1995>B. R. Spies and T. M. Habashy, "Sensitivity analysis of crosswell electromagnetics," Geophysics, vol. 60, no. 3, pp. 629-929.</ref> <ref name=Wiltetal_1995>M. Wilt, D. L. Alumbaugh, H. F. Morrison, A. Becker, K. H. Lee and M. Deszcz-Pan, "Crosswell electromagnetic tomography: System design considerations and field results," Geophysics, vol. 60, no. 3, pp. 629-929.</ref> The result of the Fréchet derivative is displayed in equation (1), which represent the magnetic field sensitivity.
+
The EM regions between the source and receiver shaped like a quasi-ellipse. The primary EM fields are considered to be uniformed and are donated as the background conductivity of the medium (σ<sub>b</sub>). The source receiver sensitivity between the wells are measured by perturbing a small volume or a point in the quasi ellipse region. This perturbation results in having a non-uniform secondary EM field. As a result, the disturbed secondary field is calculated by using the Fréchet derivative.<ref name=Spiesandhabashy_1995>B. R. Spies and T. M. Habashy, "Sensitivity analysis of crosswell electromagnetics," Geophysics, vol. 60, no. 3, pp. 629-929.</ref> <ref>M. Wilt, D. L. Alumbaugh, H. F. Morrison, A. Becker, K. H. Lee and M. Deszcz-Pan, "Crosswell electromagnetic tomography: System design considerations and field results," Geophysics, vol. 60, no. 3, pp. 629-929.</ref> The result of the Fréchet derivative is displayed in equation (1), which represent the magnetic field sensitivity.
 
    
 
    
 
Equation (1) K<sub>Hz</sub> = σ<sub>b</sub> G<sup>hz</sup> E<sub>ϕb</sub>  
 
Equation (1) K<sub>Hz</sub> = σ<sub>b</sub> G<sup>hz</sup> E<sub>ϕb</sub>  
Line 81: Line 81:  
In the early 1970s, the Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory (LLNL) developed the first-ever high-frequency cross-well electromagnetic system using electric dipole sensors. These sensors were intended primarily for hard rock, either igneous or metamorphic rocks, and tunnel detection. Due to the initial EM system high frequency and high conductivity regions in the reservoirs, the signals can only propagate a few inches into the formation (small depth of investigation). Thus, to measure the resistivity of the formation by using this technology, a low-frequency EM system is needed. However, the emitting signals are highly diffusive so, it is difficult to map the data. Based on this situation, the LLNL, together with the University of California-Berkley (UC-Berkley), extended the work on the induction logging tools to create the cross-well EM tomography.<ref name=Wiltetal_1995 />  
 
In the early 1970s, the Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory (LLNL) developed the first-ever high-frequency cross-well electromagnetic system using electric dipole sensors. These sensors were intended primarily for hard rock, either igneous or metamorphic rocks, and tunnel detection. Due to the initial EM system high frequency and high conductivity regions in the reservoirs, the signals can only propagate a few inches into the formation (small depth of investigation). Thus, to measure the resistivity of the formation by using this technology, a low-frequency EM system is needed. However, the emitting signals are highly diffusive so, it is difficult to map the data. Based on this situation, the LLNL, together with the University of California-Berkley (UC-Berkley), extended the work on the induction logging tools to create the cross-well EM tomography.<ref name=Wiltetal_1995 />  
   −
The LLNL and UC-Berkley team tested this technology by using very simplistic tools (see [[:file:AlsaudKatterbauerFigure3.jpg|Figure 3]]). The system worked by sending a high alternating current from the source on the surface down the logging cable to the transmitter. The transmitter is made of a magnetic core wrapped with a wire, and it is tuned with a capacitor. To achieve the optimum single operating frequency suitable for the borehole condition, the coil is tuned by either replacing the capacitor or/and increasing/decreasing the number of turns around the magnetic core. The research team tested different frequencies to reach the optimum resolution and range. The antenna detects the emitted signal from the transmitter in the receiver located in the other borehole. The signal is then sent uphole through the logging cable to the lock-in detector to decode the signal. The received signal is coupled with the source signal with an isolated wireline for configuration. The transmitter and receiver are two isolated structures, where each one has its generator. The only way to connect these coils is by a surface isolated cable. This kind of separation is vital for generating high-quality data and minimizing the earth loops' noise. In the borehole, the logged information is between an interval of depths, so to log the data, multiple receivers stay at a separated interval while the transmitter travels upward at a constant velocity. Following this technique, a complete cross-well tomography is generated.<ref name=WiltAlumbaughetal_1995>M. Wilt, D. L. Alumbaugh, H. F. Morrison, A. Becker, K. H. Lee and M. Deszcz-Pan, "Crosswell electromagnetic tomography: System design considerations and field results," Geophysics, vol. 60, no. 3, pp. 629-929.</ref> <ref name=Wiltetal_1995 />  
+
The LLNL and UC-Berkley team tested this technology by using very simplistic tools (see [[:file:AlsaudKatterbauerFigure3.jpg|Figure 3]]). The system worked by sending a high alternating current from the source on the surface down the logging cable to the transmitter. The transmitter is made of a magnetic core wrapped with a wire, and it is tuned with a capacitor. To achieve the optimum single operating frequency suitable for the borehole condition, the coil is tuned by either replacing the capacitor or/and increasing/decreasing the number of turns around the magnetic core. The research team tested different frequencies to reach the optimum resolution and range. The antenna detects the emitted signal from the transmitter in the receiver located in the other borehole. The signal is then sent uphole through the logging cable to the lock-in detector to decode the signal. The received signal is coupled with the source signal with an isolated wireline for configuration. The transmitter and receiver are two isolated structures, where each one has its generator. The only way to connect these coils is by a surface isolated cable. This kind of separation is vital for generating high-quality data and minimizing the earth loops' noise. In the borehole, the logged information is between an interval of depths, so to log the data, multiple receivers stay at a separated interval while the transmitter travels upward at a constant velocity. Following this technique, a complete cross-well tomography is generated.<ref name=WiltAlumbaughetal_1995>M. Wilt, D. L. Alumbaugh, H. F. Morrison, A. Becker, K. H. Lee and M. Deszcz-Pan, "Crosswell electromagnetic tomography: System design considerations and field results," Geophysics, vol. 60, no. 3, pp. 629-929.</ref><ref name=Wiltetal_1995 />  
    
The team did two field trials in Richmond, California, where the distance between the two wells is 50 m, the other in Devine, Texas, where the wells are 100 m apart. The Richmond test targeted a shallower depth compared to the Devine trial, and the EM system was used to monitor the injected saltwater.<ref name=WiltAlumbaughetal_1995 /> <ref name=Wiltetal_1995 />  
 
The team did two field trials in Richmond, California, where the distance between the two wells is 50 m, the other in Devine, Texas, where the wells are 100 m apart. The Richmond test targeted a shallower depth compared to the Devine trial, and the EM system was used to monitor the injected saltwater.<ref name=WiltAlumbaughetal_1995 /> <ref name=Wiltetal_1995 />  

Navigation menu