Several logging methods are presently available to the oil industry for the evaluation of formation porosity: the Sonic and Neutron logs are already widely used, the Gamma-Ganmia log is being progressively introduced. The readings of these instruments are primarily a function of the rack-porosity, hence the general term of "porosity tools". Apart from porosity, however, other variables such as type of fluid in the pores, nature of matrix and degree of shaliness have an important influence._x000D_
The response of each device is a different function of such parameters: therefore, a cci bination of porosity tools can lead to information on these variables in addition to the evaluation of effective porosity._x000D_
For example, the presence of gas; rather than water or oil, in a formation which is not deeply invaded, will tend to give Neutron derived porosity values which are too 'low; on the other hand, the Sonic derived porosity: value will be too high in such- a case. For the same porosity, the Sonic gives a longer transit time in sandstone than limestone, whereas in the low porosity range, the Neutron will read more counts per second in a sandstone than in a limestone of the same porosity. The presence of shale also affects the readings of the various porosity tools in different ways so that the combination of two or more methods may lead, in some cases; to an evaluation of both the-effective porosity and the shale, content._x000D_
In conclusion, it may be said that the various porosity tools pre-sently available, are, to a large extent, complementary, and that in many problems the use of two porosity tools, instead of one, is very likely to bring valuable additional information.