SPE 83483
Cement Evaluation Under Extreme Conditions
Charles Morris, SPE, Chris Garcia, SPE, Schlumberger, Ray Wydrinski, SPE, Steven J. Tinker, SPE, BP, Mike Mullen,
SPE, Mullen Energy, and Andrew Collins, Schlumberger
Copyright 2003, Society of Petroleum Engineers Inc.
This paper was prepared for presentation at the SPE Western Regional/AAPG Pacific Section
Joint Meeting held in Long Beach, California, U.S.A., 1924 May 2003.
This paper was selected for presentation by an SPE Program Committee following review of
information contained in an abstract submitted by the author(s). Contents of the paper, as
presented, have not been reviewed by the Society of Petroleum Engineers and are subject to
correction by the author(s). The material, as presented, does not necessarily reflect any
position of the Society of Petroleum Engineers, its officers, or members. Papers presented at
SPE meetings are subject to publication review by Editorial Committees of the Society of
Petroleum Engineers. Electronic reproduction, distribution, or storage of any part of this paper
for commercial purposes without the written consent of the Society of Petroleum Engineers is
prohibited. Permission to reproduce in print is restricted to an abstract of not more than 300
words; illustrations may not be copied. The abstract must contain conspicuous
acknowledgment of where and by whom the paper was presented. Write Librarian, SPE, P.O.
Box 833836, Richardson, TX 75083-3836 U.S.A., fax 01-972-952-9435.
Abstract
The completions of ultra-deepwater wells in the Gulf of
Mexico are requiring higher mud weights and heavier casing
strings in order to economically maximize production rates
and to control high-pressure reservoirs. Many operators are
completing multiple wells using synthetic oil-based mud
weights in excess of 15 lbm/gal, casing with a wall thickness
of more than 0.625 in. and special cement materials. Standard
cement bond logging tools, however, may not be well suited to
evaluate the extreme casing conditions or analyze the
casing/cement interface because of the acoustic properties of
these materials.
In order to obtain quality answers to the casing/cement
evaluation questions, a study was performed to evaluate the
results provided by sonic and ultrasonic tools in the different
casing materials. The results were obtained from a
combination of special small-scale experiments and field
applications. This work provides the technical background for
extending the ultrasonic measurements beyond normal
industry conditions. The measurement resolution and
limitations in these extreme conditions are also discussed. It
was found that the latest generation of ultrasonic cement
evaluation tools could provide high-quality measurements of
the casing dimensions and the cement acoustic impedance
properties when utilizing the proposed procedures. Field
examples are presented to illustrate the actual application and
the response of the ultrasonic tools to various extreme cement
evaluation conditions.
Introduction
Cement bond logging tools have been used successfully for
many years to evaluate casing and cement conditions in both
production and injection wells. These tools utilize either sonic
or ultrasonic measurement techniques designed for the
conventional steel casing and cement environment.
The Cement Bond Log (CBL) type tools, which include all
tools that measure amplitude or attenuation, have common
theory of measurement, interpretation principles, strengths,
and weaknesses. The principle of measurement of these tools
is to measure the amplitude of a sonic signal, produced by a
transmitter emitting a 20 kHz acoustic wave, after it has
traveled through a section of the casing. This amplitude is
then converted into attenuation by either using a ratio of
multiple transmitter and receiver amplitudes, or using chart
book conversions. The percent of the circumference of the
casing bonded is then computed by calculating a Bond Index.
At this point the interpreter has to select a value for the
attenuation of a 100% bonded interval. This can be done
based on the CBL data collected in the well or it can come
from the cement properties provided by the cementing
company. The value for the attenuation in a 100% bonded
interval is the key to the interpretation of this type of log and
the cement properties are critical to the interpretation. It is
important to make accurate estimates of the properties if they
are not known from the cementing company. These tools also
provide a qualitative indication of bond to the formation
through the use of a variable density log (VDL) waveform.
The ultrasonic type tools, such as the UltraSonic Imager
(USIT), are designed to measure the acoustic impedance of
the material on the outer surface of the casing.1,2,3,4 This is
accomplished by using a transducer to project a short pulse of
acoustic energy with a bandwidth of 200 kHz to 700 kHz
toward the casing. The transducer then becomes a receiver
and measures the returning echo from the casing. The analysis
of the returning wave can be performed in several different
ways with the outputs being acoustic impedance of the
material on the outside surface of the casing and thickness of
the casing. Current versions of the ultrasonic tools have a
rotating transducer that provides full radial coverage of the
casing circumference. These tools have far better vertical and
radial resolution than the CBL type tools. The returning
waveform is the summation of the echo waveform from the
original burst, and an exponentially decaying waveform from
the resonant energy trapped between the inner and outer
casing walls. The initial acoustic response consists of a large
reflection from the internal surface of the casing. The time of
arrival of the initial reflection depends on the standoff distance
from the transducer to casing and the mud acoustic velocity.
Mark of Schlumberger
2 SPE 83483
Casing radius is determined from the measured time for the
first echo to return. The time separation of the train of
negative impulses is equal to the travel time inside the casing
and is a function of the casing thickness and acoustic velocity
in the casing material. Casing thickness is determined from
the value of the fundamental frequency in the exponentially
decaying part of the waveform. Finally, cement acoustic
impedance is determined from the rate at which this
fundamental frequency decays. The interpretation of the
cement bond for the ultrasonic tools is determined by the
selection of a liquid/cement threshold for acoustic impedance.
Where the acoustic impedance is greater than the
liquid/cement threshold, the casing is interpreted as cemented.
Where the acoustic impedance is less than the liquid/cement
threshold, the casing annulus material is interpreted to be
fluid. An image map of the acoustic impedance measurements
and the interpreted data is created to provide a visualization of
the cement in place.
The key parameter for the interpretation of the ultrasonic
tools is the selection of the liquid/cement threshold, which is
based on the acoustic impedance of the liquids that could be
outside the casing, rather than the cement that might be in
contact with the casing. An important operational requirement
for successful cement evaluation is to ensure that the cement
has reached a representative cured state. If the cement log is
obtained too early in time, an incorrect or ambiguous
evaluation may result. Therefore some prior knowledge of the
cement type or a UCA lab test is necessary. This is especially
important with lighter compressive strength cements that may
have extended curing times. It is always good to be able to
compare the measured response of the acoustic impedance
with the expected acoustic impedance, but these properties are
not needed for the interpretation. There are several
approaches used by the service companies to enhancing the
interpretation of ultrasonic logs where gas-contaminated
cement, gas-filled micro-annulus, or liquid filled micro-
annulus are present.2
Comparing the different type cement logging tools, the
main advantage the CBL type tools have over the ultrasonic
tools is the small affect of the borehole fluids. These tools can
be run in the very heaviest drilling mud. The CBL tools
provide qualitative information about the bond to the
formation through the use of the VDL waveform, where the
ultrasonic logs provide no information about the cement to
formation bond. However, the CBL type tools do not have the
ability to determine if the casing is laying against the
formation. This condition will result in a lower signal
attenuation that would decrease the bond index. The
ultrasonic tools have two main advantages. First, the
ultrasonic logging tools are capable of much better vertical
and radial resolution. This provides the interpreter an
improved picture of what the cement sheath looks like.
Second, the interpretation of the cement is not dependant on
the acoustic properties of the cement. The ultrasonic
interpretation is sensitive to the acoustic properties of the
fluids. The only requirement is that there must be at least a
0.5 MRayl difference between the acoustic impedance of the
fluid and the acoustic impedance of the cement. This is
considered to be the accuracy of the acoustic
impedance measurement.
Discussion of Results
A series of casing and cement evaluation applications are
discussed in the following sections. These applications
represent unusual casing environments that exist in the
industry today and that extend the limits of the ultrasonic tool
capabilities. USIT experiments were performed with different
casing/cement sheath materials to determine the practical
operating limits of the tool. These tests were performed in a
test chamber, at ambient temperature and pressure conditions,
and in full-scale casing sections. The cemented casing pieces
were built with a mud channel in the cement sheath to contrast
a free pipe measurement.
Heavy Wall Casing Issues. The deepwater drilling activities
have lead to the use of medium to large casing sizes that are
thicker than generally used in the past. These casing joints are
greater than 0.6 thick. The theoretical thickness limits of the
USIT are set by the fundamental operating frequency at about
0.591. However, it is possible to log the USIT in thick wall
casing for corrosion utilizing the first (or possibly the second)
harmonic frequency. The thickness processing technique is
the same regardless of the frequency used. The tool is
operating outside the standard tool specification and there will
be an additional error of a few percent (outside the 2%
nominal specification) because the non-planar correction is
being applied for half the actual thickness. If the processing
utilizes the first or second harmonic frequency of the signal,
the additional error is generally within an acceptable level for
heavy wall casing corrosion and wear evaluation.
In addition, there is a need to evaluate the cement
condition behind the heavy wall casing. Although the cement
analysis may not be as accurate as for lighter weight steel
casing, it may be possible to determine the presence (or
absence) of a cement sheath.
To investigate these conditions, small casing sections were
built for a USIT test chamber using the actual casing and
cement sheath environment expected down hole. Fig. 1 shows
the test chamber used for these experiments. The cement
sheath was placed on approximately 1/3 of the casing
circumference such that both cement and free pipe conditions
were simulated. The casing size was 9-7/8, 62.8 lbm/ft
(thickness = 0.625).
The tests were run using 11.5 and 13.5 lbm/gal synthetic
oil-base mud (SOBM) and 15.6 lbm/gal CaBr completion fluid
as the borehole fluid. The operating limit of the USIT in
heavy drilling fluid systems depends on the absolute
attenuation of the mud, rather than the mud weight. The
theoretical attenuation limit is quoted as less than 12
dB/cm/MHz. This is usually proportional to the mud weight,
but experience has shown that this relationship is not
consistent. Previous work has suggested that it might be better
represented by the drilling mud viscosity values.3 The upper
operating limit is given in the original tool specifications as
15.9 lbm/gal for water-base mud and 11.6 lbm/gal for oil-base
mud. Both of these limits have been exceeded repeatedly in
actual field applications with very good cement evaluation
results because mud weight is not the definitive parameter of
acoustic attenuation of the fluid. Furthermore, the oil-based
mud systems have evolved over the years from diesel and
mineral oil systems to SOBM systems with very different
SPE 83483
characteristics. Fluid measurements have shown that the
SOBM systems can have lower acoustic impedance values
than many heavy water-base completion fluid systems. Jobs
with oil-base drilling fluid weight in excess of 18.3 lb/gal have
been successfully performed.
Heavy wall casing experiments. The first test was performed
using 9-7/8, 62.8 lb/ft casing in an 11.5 lbm/gal SOBM
system. The measured fluid properties were fluid slowness
of 230 sec/ft and mud acoustic impedance of 1.2 MRayls.
The cement was a 16 lbm/gal neat cement composition. The
results measured in this casing, shown in Fig. 2, were very
good. The cement map clearly differentiates the cement and
mud surrounding the casing. The cement sheath is located
along the outer edge of the acoustic impedance image map.
The barriers on the edge of the cement allowed some cement
to escape into the free pipe section and resulted in the
scattered contaminated solids near the middle of the cement
map and a Bond Index of about 50%. The minimum acoustic
impedance measured at the outer edge of the casing was about
1.0 MRayl and indicates an accurate resolution of the mud
liquids surrounding the casing. The calculated average casing
thickness is plotted in the thickness track on a scale of 0.3-0.8
and gave a thickness error of about 1.3%.
Another test was performed using the 9-7/8, 62.8 lbm/ft
casing in a 13.5 lbm/gal SOBM system. In this test, 16
lbm/gal neat cement was also used. The measured mud
properties were fluid slowness of 247 sec/ft and mud
acoustic impedance of 1.8 MRayls. The results measured in
this casing, shown in Fig. 3, were also very good. Again, the
cement barriers allowed some solids to contaminate the free
pipe channel as seen in the cement map. But the cement map
clearly differentiates the cement (along the outer edge) from
the mud surrounding the casing and can be used to evaluate
zone isolation. The minimum acoustic impedance measured at
the outer edge of the casing was about 1.3 MRayl and
identifies the mud surrounding the casing. The calculated
average thickness, 0.633, is given on a scale of 0.2-1.2.
Additional small-scale experiments were run in which
heavy CaBr completion fluid (15.6 lbm/gal in density) was
used as the borehole fluid with a partial neat cement sheath
covering approximately 1/3 of the outer casing diameter. The
test fixture is shown in Fig. 4. The casing size was 9-7/8,
62.8 lbm/ft (thickness = 0.625) casing. The log results are
illustrated in Fig. 5a and 5b where the measured cement
sheath and free pipe sections are clearly evident. The edges of
the cement sheath are not sharply defined in the image maps
(there is low acoustic impedance solids) because of the cement
slurry leakage past the section barrier as noted in the figures.
Fig. 5b shows a test run using water as the completion fluid.
The acoustic impedance of the annular fluid in the free pipe
sections was determined to be that of water (1.5 MRayls). The
measured acoustic impedance results for minimum, average,
and maximum values were 1.5, 3.5, and 6.5 MRayls,
respectively. The calculated average thickness, 0.63, is given
on a scale of 0.3-0.8.
Deepwater Wellbore Completions. The Deepwater
environment of the Gulf of Mexico presents many challenging
conditions for well completion. The water depths, drilling and
3
formation pressure, temperature expansion effects, formation
stability issues, salt zone migration, hydrates, and completion
packer mechanical damage can lead to increased stress on the
casing and directly contribute to the casing failure. The most
cost effective solution to the problem of casing collapse under
these conditions was to use heavier casing to allow for higher
burst ratings.
Most operators are now using heavy wall casing for most
if not all the new well completions. Other actions include:
vacuum insulated production tubing with temperature monitor
systems installed to continuously monitor the annulus; prevent
trapped annulus fluids - rupture discs installed to prevent
casing collapse because of heated annular fluids; cement jobs
with a "foam" spacer to allow fluid expansion and no trapped
annulus fluid; and multi-stage lightweight cement systems.
Proper cement evaluation is of paramount importance in
the subsea offshore environment because of the cost to
intervene in these completions. Production liner zonal
isolation is important for two reasons: to isolate low pressure
or water sands and to ensure fracture stimulation operations
are confined to the intended zone.
Heavy wall casing Example 1. One of the first attempts to
obtain casing and cement evaluation data in a deepwater well
with heavy wall casing is illustrated next. The casing was 9-
7/8, 62.8 lbm/ft completed in a 12.25 borehole. The fluid in
the borehole during the logging operation was an 11.7 lbm/gal
CaCl. The cement system was a two-stage foam cement (13.8
and 15.0 lbm/gal) followed by a non-foam stage cement
(16.34 lbm/gal). There were no cement returns during the job
and a small pressure increase at the end of the pumping
operation. The intent was to leave a short annular space
devoid of cement at the top of the casing section.
The measured acoustic impedance of the cement solids is
in the range of 3-5 MRayl and the USIT could easily
distinguish solid, liquid, and gas behind casing. The logs were
run with the wellbore under zero applied wellhead pressure.
Due to the lower compressive strength, these cements have
much lower acoustic impedance properties and can be
extremely difficult to evaluate using conventional sonic bond
logging techniques. To date, the USIT has been used with
very favorable results in instances where a quantitative
evaluation of these cements is required.4 Fig. 6 shows the
cement results for the interval covering the top of the lead
cement stage. The log interpretation showed generally good
zone isolation with the top of the lead cement shown on Fig.
6; top of the foamed tail cement stage about 300 lower (not
shown); and the top of the tail cement stage about 800 lower
(not shown). The free pipe is clearly seen in the USIT cement
map along with the presence of free gas patches segregated
from the foam cement slurry in the annulus. There was no
problem determining the casing radius and thickness of 9.875
and 0.625, respectively. The CBT variable density log
(VDL) image indicates little attenuation in this lightweight
cement. A micro-annulus is unlikely since the mud weight
during the drilling and casing operations and the subsequent
logging program should have resulted in a differential pressure
on the casing of only about 186 psi. Experience has indicted
that a differential casing pressure of up to 500 psi will not
create a micro-annulus in the heavy casing.
4 SPE 83483
Heavy wall casing example 2. Again, the USIT was run in a
well with 9-7/8, 62.8 lbm/ft casing with 11.6 lbm/gal CaCl
brine in the borehole. The cement was a multi-stage foam
cement completion similar to example 1 above (13.0, 15.0,
and 16.34 lbm/gal). The logs were run with the wellbore
under zero applied wellhead pressure. Fig. 7 shows the log
results for several intervals. Good zone isolation was
achieved with this cement system. The top of the lead cement
was found as seen in the figure; the top of the foamed tail
cement stage; and the top of the tail cement stage. There was
little free gas associated with the foam cement in this job.
However, there was abundant free gas at the top of the casing
interval. The cement results given in Fig. 7 show typical low
acoustic impedance values for the foam cement used for this
well. There was no problem determining the casing radius and
thickness of 9.875 and 0.625, respectively. The CBT
variable density log (VDL) image indicates little attenuation in
this lightweight cement and is unlikely to be affected by
a micro-annulus.
Heavy wall casing example 3. This well was evaluated with
15.6 lbm/gal ZnBr in the borehole with 9-7/8, 62.8 lbm/ft
heavy wall casing. The well was cemented using a 15.5
lbm/gal foamed spacer followed by 15.9 lbm/gal lead and tail
cement. This particular borehole environment was tested in
the experiments described above using 14.6 lbm/gal ZnBr.
The test determined the fluid parameters of fluid slowness and
acoustic impedance of 186 sec/ft and 2.95 MRayls,
respectively, where the values for the actual borehole fluid
were 183 sec/ft and 3.17 MRayls.
Fig. 8 illustrates the fundamental measurement of the
ultrasonic tool in the heavy casing. The top of the figure
shows the high quality signal measured from four different
circumferential locations (out of 72 total). The transducer
emits high frequency ultrasonic pulses that travel through the
liquid and into the casing wall, resonating the casing in the
thickness mode. The returning waveform is the summation of
the echo waveform from the original burst, and an
exponentially decaying waveform from the resonant energy
trapped between the inner and outer casing walls. The initial
acoustic response consists of a large reflection from the
internal surface of the casing. The time of arrival of the initial
reflection depends on the standoff distance from the
transducer to casing and the mud acoustic velocity. The time
separation of the train of negative impulses is equal to the
travel time inside the casing and is a function of the casing
thickness and acoustic velocity in the casing material.
Casing radius is determined from the measured time for
the first echo to return. The frequency spectrum of this signal,
the normalization spectrum, is inserted in the model to
automatically compensate for spectral variations caused by
mud attenuation or by transducer variations with temperature
and pressure.
Casing thickness is determined from the value of the
fundamental frequency in the exponentially decaying part of
the waveform. The fundamental resonance is found and
characterized by frequency analysis of the process-windowed
signal, using the group delay (the derivative of the phase with
respect to the angular frequency). The amplitude spectrum
has a broad peak representing the transducer frequency
response, with small minima at the resonances. By contrast,
the group delay is almost flat except at the resonances, which
produce clear minima. The lower part of Fig. 8 shows the
group delay frequency map for one segment of the
circumference (9 points) with the dashed lines showing the
theoretical location of the fundamental (and first harmonic)
frequency response for the casing thickness. The resonance is
found by searching for the group delay minimum in a pre-
selected range around the expected frequency. Clearly, the
measured frequency group delay minimum is found near the
expected heavy casing frequency response.
Fig. 9 shows two zones in the wellbore (an upper interval
and a lower interval) with the two cement stages to illustrate
the difference in the cement acoustic impedance. The lead
cement shows a lower average acoustic impedance of 3-4
MRayls versus 6-8 MRayls for the tail cement. Good cement
conditions were achieved during the operations with zone
isolation along the entire interval. There was no problem
determining the casing radius and thickness of 9.875 and
0.625, respectively. The CBT variable density log (VDL)
image indicates good sonic signal attenuation with this cement
and, generally, a high bond index.
Heavy wall casing example 4. This well completion
represents one of the most difficult borehole conditions
evaluated to-date. The 9-7/8, 67.5 lbm/ft casing has a
thickness of 0.675. The fluid in the wellbore was a 13.85
lbm/gal SOBM system where the fluid slowness and acoustic
impedance of the borehole fluid were estimated as 213 sec/ft
and 2.35 MRayls, respectively. The cement used was 14.5
lbm/gal neat cement. The top of cement was interpreted to be
at about x7,350 with generally good zone isolation below that
depth. Fig. 10 shows the USIT and CBT log results across
this transition interval. The logs were run with the wellbore
under zero applied wellhead pressure. The CBT shows poor
cement attenuation until about 500 lower. The USIT was
able to accurately measure the casing radius and thickness in
this heavy wall casing.
Conclusions
1. The USIT can be used successfully to determine the
casing and cement parameters under downhole conditions
more extreme than the original tool
specifications suggested.
2. Quantitative evaluation of the casing and cement sheath
conditions can be made in most heavy wall casing
materials using standard USIT procedures.
Acknowledgements
The interpretation of cement data has evolved over a number
of years through pushing the limits of the operational envelope
and by serendipity. Our thanks to the many people who
helped with these tests at the Belle Chasse Wireline & Testing
District and the BP Deepwater business units for giving us the
opportunity to run these tools.
References
1. Hayman, A.J., Hutin, R., and Wright, P.V.: High-
Resolution Cementation and Corrosion Imaging
By Ultrasound, SPWLA 32nd Annual Logging
SPE 83483 5

Symposium, June 16-19, 1991 paper KK.
2. Butsch, R.J.: Overcoming Interpretation Problems
of Gas-Contaminated Cement Using Ultrasonic
Cement Logs, SPE paper 30509, SPE Annual
Technical Conference and Exhibition, Dallas, TX,
October 22-25, 1995.
3. Morris, C.W., Zanutto, S.L., and Dacres, Jr., W.G.:
Lightweight Cement Evaluation Using Ultrasonic
Measurements, SPE paper 62517, SPE/AAPG
Western Regional Meeting, Long Beach, CA, June
19-23 2000.
4. Butsch, R.J., Morris, C.W., Wydrinski, R., and
Kasecky, M.J.: The Evolution of Specialized
Cements, SPE paper 76713, SPE Western
Regional/AAPG Pacific Section Joint Meeting held
in Anchorage, Alaska, U.S.A., May 2022, 2002.

Transducer sub

Cement sheath

Casing

SOBM

Fig. 1 Test chamber used for 9-7/8 casing with 11.5 and 13.5 lbm/gal SOBM borehole fluid. The
cement sheath covers about 1/3 of the casing perimeter.
6 SPE 83483

Cement sheath
Contaminated Solids Cement Map

Bond Index

Acoustic
Impedance Image

Thickness
Image

Thickness
(0.3-0.8)

Radius Image

Radius

Amplitude
Image

Fig. 2 Log results for 9-7/8 casing in test chamber with 11.5 lbm/gal SOBM borehole fluid. The
partial cement sheath and free pipe sections around the casing circumference are seen in the cement
map.
SPE 83483 7

Acoustic Impedance
Amplitude Image

Thickness Image
Radius Image

Cement Map
Bond Index
Thickness
(0.2-1.2)
Radius

image
Cement sheath

Contaminated Solids

Fig. 3 Log results for 9-7/8 casing in test chamber with 13.5 lbm/gal SOBM borehole fluid and a neat
cement sheath segment. The partial cement sheath is seen in the cement map.
8 SPE 83483

Cement sheath

Casing

Barriers for cement sheath

Rubber openhole cut standoffs

Fig. 4 Test chamber for 9-7/8 casing with 15.6 lbm/gal CaBr borehole fluid. The cement sheath covers
about 1/3 of the casing outer diameter.
SPE 83483 9

Cement sheath

Standoff

Fig. 5a 15.6 lbm/gal CaBr borhole fluid.

Cement sheath

Standoff

Amp Radius Radius Thickness AI BI Cement

Image Image (0.3-0.8) Map Map
Fig. 5b 8.3 lbm/gal water borehole fluid.

Fig. 5 Log results from experiments using 15.6 lbm/gal CaBr and water borehole fluids. The cement sheath
and free pipe sections around the casing outer diameter are seen in the acoustic impedance and cement maps.
10 SPE 83483

Amp Radius Radius Thick AI BI Cement CBT VDL

Image Image (0.2-0.7) Map Map Attenuation Curves

Estimated top of cement

Fig. 6 Example 1: Cement evaluation logs for 9-7/8 casing with 11.7 lbm/gal CaCl borehole fluid. Cement
is a multi-stage foam and lightweight cement system.
SPE 83483 11

Amp Radius Radius Thick AI BI Cement CBT VDL

Image Image (0.2-0.7) Map Map Attenuation Curves

Estimated top of lead cement

Top of foamed tail cement

Top of tail cement

Fig. 7 Example 2: Cement evaluation logs for 9-7/8 casing with 11.6 lbm/gal CaCl borehole fluid. The
cement was a multi-stage foam cement system and the figure shows intervals from three separate cement
zones.
12 SPE 83483

Fundamental frequency

First harmonic frequency

Fig. 8 Ultrasonic waveform measurement and frequency analysis images in 9-7/8 casing with 15.6 lbm/gal
ZnBr borehole fluid. The four selected waveforms illustrate the fundamental tool measurement and the nine
Group Delay plots show the heavy casing frequency response.
SPE 83483 13

AI AI BI Cement CBT VDL

Map Curves Map Attenuation Curves

Lead cement stage

Tail cement stage

Fig. 9 Example 3: Cement evaluation logs for 9-7/8 casing with 15.6 lbm/gal ZnBr borehole fluid and a
two-stage neat cement completion. The figure shows intervals from the two cement zones.
14 SPE 83483

AI AI BI Cement CBT VDL

Map Curves Map Attenuation Curves

TOC x7,350

Fig. 10 Example 4: Cement evaluation logs for 9-7/8 casing with 13.85 lbm/gal SOBM borehole fluid and a
neat cement completion.