
1078 
Drilling and Well  Completions 
wells.  The data recorded were compared to equivalent wireline measurements. The 
effect of  the rate of penetration 
(ROP) 
on some devices was  investigated. The water- 
base mud well was drilled to 
3.035 
ft with 
7 
f-in. bit. The oil-base mud well  was 
drilled to 
2,400 
ft with  an 8q-in. bit. 
Each MWD  company ran a full suite of MWD/LWD  logs that were compared 
to “benchmark” wireline logs obtained  by  averaging the wireline logs with  the 
least  standard  deviation  errors.  The data  have  been  analyzed  in  the oil  and 
service  companies 
[128] 
and at Louisiana  State University  (LSU) where  two 
master of science theses were  completed utilizing this data 
[129,130]. 
The general 
conclusions  of  the LSU  studies are as follows: 
Gamma Ray. 
A 
linear relationship is generally established when comparing LWD 
and wireline gamma ray logs. Therefore, the LWD  gamma ray data can be used 
with confidence  as a replacement of wireline gamma ray for formation  evalua- 
tion. Furthermore, LWD  gamma ray logs generally have a better bed resolution 
than  their wireline equivalent. 
Resistivity. 
The 2-MHz  LWD  amplitude  and phase-shift resistivity logs match 
the wireline deep and medium induction very well. Excellent results are obtained 
when the invasion is not severe (less than 
40 
in. in diameter) and in formations 
20 
i2.m  or less. 
The focused  resistivity log offered  by  one of  the  service  companies is  very 
sensitive to borehole diameter and can be used only in a qualitative  manner in 
its present  form. 
Neutron. 
The neutron  porosity  values recorded  with  most  tools match  closely 
the wireline thermal neutron logs in the lower porosity ranges (under 
25 
porosity 
units). In high porosity zones, the LWD  neutron porosities  lie between thermal 
and epithermal wireline values. 
In all zones  the  discrepancies  between  LWD  and wireline porosity  data are 
in  the range  of  one to  five porosity  units.  Thus,  the  LWD  neutron  data  are 
suitable for formation  evaluation. 
Density. 
The best data are obtained with stabilizer-type tools. In good borehole 
sections, a close match between the LWD  data and the wireline data was found. 
Discrepancies of  less than 
0.05 
g/cm3 were generally  noticed. 
Washouts, rugosity, and drillstring wobbling (or vibration) will affect the LWD 
density  readings.  However,  the  LWD  density  data are generally  suitable  for 
formation  evaluation. 
Photoelectric Effect (Pe). 
Only one service company was offering a commercial 
Pe  log.  The readings  of  the LWD  tool  were very  sensitive to washouts. For  a 
qualitative lithology identification of the strata, the LWD  Pe curve is satisfactory. 
In conclusion,  the logs available now  with  LWD  are perfectly  suitable for a 
good basic formation evaluation in all types 
of 
formations. It should be possible 
to complete  a well  successfully with  LWD  data alone in most instances. 
Comparison of  MWD Data with Other  Drilling Data 
Before MWD,  most  drilling data were recorded  at the surface. Mud  logging 
data, the only downhole  data, were  available with  a time delay  corresponding 
to the time required  by  the mud to reach  the surface.