New York Paper - Rock Classification from the Oil-driller’s Standpoint

The American Institute of Mining, Metallurgical, and Petroleum Engineers
Arthur Knapp
Organization:
The American Institute of Mining, Metallurgical, and Petroleum Engineers
Pages:
6
File Size:
260 KB
Publication Date:
Jan 1, 1921

Abstract

The ordinary well log is subjected to a great deal of criticism, much of which is well founded. Sometimes, though, the difficulty in interpreting the log is due to the fact that the geologist or engineer using the logs does not know the limitations of the drilling method used. The rotary drill, especially, has inherent limitations that make it difficult to secure definite information at all times. The identification of well-defined key beds is about all that can be expected from the rotary log. The formation in a drilled hole, as reported by the driller, has a direct relation to the speed with which the drill makes the hole or to the reaction of the various strata on the bit, called the "feel of the bit." When this is not thoroughly understood by the geologist or engineer endeavoring to interpret the log, the result is an erroneous correlation with other wells or a discarding of the log as worthless. General Terms Hard and Soft.—Hard and soft are relative terms. In the case of well logs, they are very misleading as they are used in connection with both resistance to abrasion and resistance to percussion. In technical rock classification, hardness is relative resistance to abrasion. The term brittleness is used in connection with resistance to blows. These terms are misleading to the geologist or engineer who is not familiar with both the cable-tool, or standard tool, method of drilling and the rotary method. In the case of the standard tools, the driller's report of the hardness of the formation is in terms of its resistance to blows. For instance, a cable-tool driller might be able to make from 30 to 50 ft. a tour in a brittle limestone, which he would call soft and at the same time he might call a relatively soft (from a purely mineralogical standpoint) gypsum hard, because it is somewhat elastic and is not readily broken by blows. The rotary driller would reverse the terms. The limestone is hard in that it resists the abrasive action of the bit, while the gypsum might be soft in that it is readily cut by the rotary bit. It is rare that wells drilled by the standard tools are correlated with those drilled by the rotary, but the technologist who has worked with well logs from one system might be misled when working with the other.
Citation

APA: Arthur Knapp  (1921)  New York Paper - Rock Classification from the Oil-driller’s Standpoint

MLA: Arthur Knapp New York Paper - Rock Classification from the Oil-driller’s Standpoint. The American Institute of Mining, Metallurgical, and Petroleum Engineers, 1921.

Export
Purchase this Article for $25.00

Create a Guest account to purchase this file
- or -
Log in to your existing Guest account