Physics, applications, and limitations of borehole neutron-gamma density measurements

Abstract

Radioactive chemical sources can pose security, health, and environmental risks when used to estimate rock porosity in situ. The oil industry has been developing solutions to eliminate radioactive chemical sources in borehole nuclear logging. Pulsed neutron generators have successfully replaced chemical sources in neutron tools, but cesium-137 is still mainly used for borehole density measurements. Neutron-activated gamma-ray measurements (neutron-gamma) are a possible alternative to radioactive chemical sources in density tools. Despite recent advances, the measurement faces challenges regarding density accuracy across diverse solid and fluid rock compositions and nonnegligible sensitivity to borehole environmental effects. We have examined a theoretical, albeit realistic, logging-while-drilling neutron-gamma density (NGD) tool operating with two inelastic gamma-ray detectors and two fast neutron detectors. With a strong emphasis on measurement physics and source-sensor design, the tool delivers density accuracies comparable to those of gamma-gamma density (GGD) tools with [Formula: see text] error in shale-free formations and [Formula: see text] in shale and shaly formations. Our work also compares NGD with GGD in terms of depth of investigation (DOI), vertical resolution, and sensitivity to borehole environmental effects to determine optimal logging conditions. NGD accuracy is limited in the presence of standoff. With inputs of caliper and mud type, empirical density corrections can be applied up to 0.64 cm (0.25 in) standoff. NGD also has limited applicability in thinly bedded formations with maximum vertical resolution of 76 cm (2.5 ft). However, the measurement outperforms GGD in the presence of invasion because its DOI is twice as large.