Applied Geophysics

, Volume 14, Issue 3, pp 351–362 | Cite as

Analysis and application of the response characteristics of DLL and LWD resistivity in horizontal well

  • Song Hu
  • Jun Li
  • Hong-Bo Guo
  • Chang-Xue Wang
Borehole geophysics


There exist different response characteristics in the resistivity measurements of dual laterolog (DLL) and logging while drilling (LWD) electromagnetic wave propagation logging in highly deviated and horizontal wells due to the difference in their measuring principles. In this study, we first use the integral equation method simulated the response characteristics of LWD resistivity and use the three dimensional finite element method (3D-FEM) simulated the response characteristics of DLL resistivity in horizontal wells, and then analyzed the response differences between the DLL and LWD resistivity. The comparative analysis indicated that the response differences may be caused by different factors such as differences in the angle of instrument inclination, anisotropy, formation interface, and mud intrusion. In the interface, the curves of the LWD resistivity become sharp with increases in the deviation while those of the DLL resistivity gradually become smooth. Both curves are affected by the anisotropy although the effect on DLL resistivity is lower than the LWD resistivity. These differences aid in providing a reasonable explanation in the horizontal well. However, this can also simultaneously lead to false results. At the end of the study, we explain the effects of the differences in the interpretation of the horizontal well based on the results and actual data analysis.


response characteristic dual laterolog LWD resistivity horizontal well numerical modeling 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.



The authors extend their appreciation to the anonymous reviewers for their critical and constructive comments and suggestions that greatly improved the manuscript.


  1. Allen, D. F., Anderson, B. I., Barber, T. D., et al., 1993, Supporting Interpretation of Complex, Axisymmetric Invasion by Modeling Wireline Induction and 2-MHz LWD Resistivity Tools: SPWLA 34th Annual Logging Symposium, Calgary, Alberta, Canada, 13-16 June, Paper N.Google Scholar
  2. Anderson, B., Bonnet, S., Rosthai, R., et al., 1992, Response of 2MHz LWD resistivity and wireline induction tools in dipping beds and laminated formations: Log Analyst, 33(5), 461–475.Google Scholar
  3. Chew, W. C., and Wang, Y. M., 1990, Reconstruction of two-dimensional permittivity distribution using the distorted born iterative method: IEEE Transactions on Medical Imaging, 9(2), 218–225.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Chu, Z. H., Gao J., Huang L. J., et al., 2007, Geophysical logging method and principle (first volume): Petroleum Industry Press, China, 114–122.Google Scholar
  5. Darwin, V. E., and Julian M. S., 2008, Well Logging for Earth Scientists (Second Edition): Springer, Netherlands, 213–244.Google Scholar
  6. Faivre O., Barber T., Jammes L., et al., 2002, Using Array Induction and Array Laterolog Data to Characterize Resistivity and Anisotropy in Vertical Wells: SPWLA 43th Annual Logging Symposium, Oiso, Japan, 2-5 June, Paper M.Google Scholar
  7. Fan, Y. R., Wang, L., Li, H., et al., 2014, Numerical simulation and corresponding characteristic analysis of dual laterolog for cave reservoirs: Journal of China University of Petroleum (Edition of Natural Science), 38(6), 40–46.Google Scholar
  8. Gianzero, S., Chemali, R., and Su, S. M., 1989, Induction Resistivity and MWD tools in horizontal wells: 30th Annual Logging Symposium, SPWLA, Denver, Colorado, America, 11-14 June, Paper N.Google Scholar
  9. Gregory, A. N., Walter, L. A., and Gerald, W. H., 1989, Effect of conductive host rock on borehole transient electromagnetic responses: Geophysics, 54(5), 598–608.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Hagiwara, T., 1996, EM log response to anisotropic resistivity in thinly laminated formations with Emphasis on 2-MHz resistivity devices: SPE Annual Technical Conference and Exhibition, 25-28 September, New Orleans, USA, SPE 28426.Google Scholar
  11. Hue, Y., Teixeira, F. L., Martin, L. S., et al., 2005, Three-Dimensional simulation of eccentric LWD tool response in boreholes through dipping formation: Geoscience and Remote Sensing, 43(2), 257–268.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Jin, J. M., 1993, The finite element method in electromagnetics: Wiley-IEEE Press, New York, 8–15.Google Scholar
  13. Koelman, J. M. V. A., Van, d. H. M., Lomas, A. T., et al., 1996, Interpretation of Resistivity Logs in Horizontal wells an Application to Complex Reservoirs from Oman: 16-19 June, 37th Annual Logging Symposium, SPWLA, New Orleans, Louisiana, America, Paper G.Google Scholar
  14. Li, H., Shen, Y. Z., and Zhu, X. F., 2016, Numerical simulation of resistivity LWD tool based on higher-order vector finite element: Journal of Petroleum Exploration & Production Technology, 6(3), 533–543.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Michalski, K. A., and Zheng, D., 1990, Electromagnetic Scattering and Radiation by Surfaces of Arbitrary Shape in Layered Media, Part I: Theory: IEEE Transactions on Antennas and Propagation, 38(3), 335–344.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Nam, M. J., Pardo, D., and Torres-Verdín, C., 2010, Assessment of delaware and gronirgen effects on duallaterolog measurements with a self-adaptive hp finiteelement method: Geophysics, 75(6), F143–F149.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Peng, Z., and Lee, J. F., 2012, Comparisons of heterogeneous multiscale finite element method and localized homogenization process for modeling aperiodic metamaterials, IEEE Antennas and Propagation Society, AP-S International Symposium (Digest). doi:10.1109/ APS.2012.6348588.Google Scholar
  18. Rodr'guez-Rozas, A., and Pardo, D., 2016, A Priori Fourier Analysis for 2.5D Finite Elements Simulations of Logging-While-Drilling (LWD) Resistivity Measurements: Procedia Computer Science, 80, 782–791.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Serry, A. M., Budebes, S. A., and Aboujmeih, H., 2014, What is Rt? logging-while-drilling and wireline resistivity measurements Spotlighted: an offshore case study in Abu Dhabi: 55th Annual Logging Symposium, SPWLA, Abu Dhabi, UAE, 18-22 May, Paper HH.Google Scholar
  20. Tai, C. T., 1971, Dyadic green's functions in electromagnetic theory: Intext Educational Publishers, Scranton, 110–125.Google Scholar
  21. Tan, M. J., Gao J, Zou Y. L., et al., 2012, Environment correction method of dual laterolog in directional well: Chinese J. Geophys. (in Chinese), 55(4), 1422–1432.Google Scholar
  22. Trowbridge, C. W., 1972, Progress in magnet design by computer: Proceedings of the Fourth International Conference on Magnet Technology, Brookhaven, USA, 617–626.Google Scholar
  23. Wang, T., and Fang, S., 2001, 3-D electromagnetic anisotropy modeling using finite differences: Geophysics, 66(5), 1386–398.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Wang, H. M., 1999, Finite element analysis of resistivity logging: PhD Thesis, University of Houston.Google Scholar
  25. Wang, H. M., Liang, C., and Zhang, G. J., 2000, Dual laterolog response in 3-D environments: Petrophysics, 41(3), 234–241.Google Scholar
  26. Wei, B. J., and Liu, Q. H., 2007, Fast algorithm for simulating 3-D electromagnetic inverse scattering in horizontally stratified medium via DTA: Chinese J. Geophys. (in Chinese), 50(5), 1595–1605.Google Scholar
  27. Wei, B. J., Wang, S. S., Ou, Y. F., et al., 2011, Simulating the response of induction logging while drilling tools by vector eigenfunction expansion formulae for dyadic Green’s functions: Chinese J. Geophys. (in Chinese), 54(5), 1391–1401.Google Scholar
  28. Xu, W., Ke, S. Z., Li, A. Z., et al., 2014, Response simulation and theoretical calibration of a dual-induction resistivity LWD tool: Applied Geophysics, 11(1), 31–40.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Yong, S. H., and Zhang, C. M., 2007, Logging data processing and comprehensive interpretation: China University of Petroleum Press, China, 152–284.Google Scholar
  30. Yang, W., and Torres-Verdín, C., 2005, Numerical simulation of dual-laterolog measurements in the presence of dipping, anisotropic, and invaded rock formations: Seg Expanded Abstracts, (1), 344.Google Scholar
  31. Zhang, G. J., 1986, Electrical logging (second volume): Petroleum Industry Press, China, 1–40.Google Scholar
  32. Zhou, J., 2016, LWD/MWD resistivity tool parameters: A Survey sponsored by Resistivity Special Interest Group: Scholar
  33. Zhou, Q., 2008, Log interpretation in high-deviation wells through user-friendly tool-response processing: 49th Annual Logging Symposium, SPWLA, Edinburgh, Scotland, UK, 25-28 May, Paper AAAA.Google Scholar
  34. Zhou, Q., Bean, C., Bell, C., et al., 2007, Practical approach towards modeling and inversion applications in high deviation well interpretation: SPWLA Middle East Regional Symposium, Abu Dhabi, UAE, 15-19 April, Paper Q.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Editorial Office of Applied Geophysics and Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Petroleum Exploration & Production Research InstituteSINOPECBeijingChina
  2. 2.Research Institute of Petroleum Exploration & Development, Tarim Oil Field Branch CompanyCNPCXinjiangChina
  3. 3.Research Institute of Petroleum Exploration & DevelopmentCNPCBejingChina

Personalised recommendations