AFI (AVO Fluid Inversion)

Similar documents
QUANTITATIVE INTERPRETATION

Integrating reservoir flow simulation with time-lapse seismic inversion in a heavy oil case study

An overview of AVO and inversion

Quantitative Interpretation

Integrating rock physics modeling, prestack inversion and Bayesian classification. Brian Russell

Pre-Stack Seismic Inversion and Amplitude Versus Angle Modeling Reduces the Risk in Hydrocarbon Prospect Evaluation

Reservoir Characterization using AVO and Seismic Inversion Techniques

Rock physics and AVO analysis for lithofacies and pore fluid prediction in a North Sea oil field

Rock Physics and Quantitative Wavelet Estimation. for Seismic Interpretation: Tertiary North Sea. R.W.Simm 1, S.Xu 2 and R.E.

Rock physics and AVO applications in gas hydrate exploration

The role of seismic modeling in Reservoir characterization: A case study from Crestal part of South Mumbai High field

Lithology prediction and fluid discrimination in Block A6 offshore Myanmar

Statistical Rock Physics

Stochastic vs Deterministic Pre-stack Inversion Methods. Brian Russell

Fluid-property discrimination with AVO: A Biot-Gassmann perspective

THE USE OF SEISMIC ATTRIBUTES AND SPECTRAL DECOMPOSITION TO SUPPORT THE DRILLING PLAN OF THE URACOA-BOMBAL FIELDS

The GIG consortium Geophysical Inversion to Geology Per Røe, Ragnar Hauge, Petter Abrahamsen FORCE, Stavanger

Comparative Study of AVO attributes for Reservoir Facies Discrimination and Porosity Prediction

The Marrying of Petrophysics with Geophysics Results in a Powerful Tool for Independents Roger A. Young, eseis, Inc.

AVO responses for varying Gas saturation sands A Possible Pathway in Reducing Exploration Risk

Seismic reservoir characterization in offshore Nile Delta.

Reservoir properties inversion from AVO attributes

HampsonRussell. A comprehensive suite of reservoir characterization tools. cgg.com/geosoftware

AVO Crossplotting II: Examining Vp/Vs Behavior

Downloaded 10/02/18 to Redistribution subject to SEG license or copyright; see Terms of Use at

Edinburgh Anisotropy Project, British Geological Survey, Murchison House, West Mains

Time-lapse seismic monitoring and inversion in a heavy oilfield. By: Naimeh Riazi PhD Student, Geophysics

Sensitivity Analysis of Pre stack Seismic Inversion on Facies Classification using Statistical Rock Physics

An empirical study of hydrocarbon indicators

Reducing Uncertainty through Multi-Measurement Integration: from Regional to Reservoir scale

Quantitative interpretation using inverse rock-physics modeling on AVO data

A New AVO Attribute for Hydrocarbon Prediction and Application to the Marmousi II Dataset*

RC 1.3. SEG/Houston 2005 Annual Meeting 1307

Shaly Sand Rock Physics Analysis and Seismic Inversion Implication

Heriot-Watt University

AVO analysis of 3-D seismic data at G-field, Norway

Linearized AVO and Poroelasticity for HRS9. Brian Russell, Dan Hampson and David Gray 2011

We apply a rock physics analysis to well log data from the North-East Gulf of Mexico

SEG Houston 2009 International Exposition and Annual Meeting. that the project results can correctly interpreted.

Net-to-gross from Seismic P and S Impedances: Estimation and Uncertainty Analysis using Bayesian Statistics

Integrating rock physics and full elastic modeling for reservoir characterization Mosab Nasser and John B. Sinton*, Maersk Oil Houston Inc.

Estimation of density from seismic data without long offsets a novel approach.

Summary. Seismic Field Example

Derived Rock Attributes Analysis for Enhanced Reservoir Fluid and Lithology Discrimination

Application of advance tools for reservoir characterization- EEI & Poisson s impedance: A Case Study

Use of Seismic and EM Data for Exploration, Appraisal and Reservoir Characterization

Downloaded 11/20/12 to Redistribution subject to SEG license or copyright; see Terms of Use at

Interpretation of baseline surface seismic data at the Violet Grove CO 2 injection site, Alberta

The elastic properties such as velocity, density, impedance,

Downloaded 09/16/16 to Redistribution subject to SEG license or copyright; see Terms of Use at

SEISMIC INVERSION OVERVIEW

Bayesian Lithology-Fluid Prediction and Simulation based. on a Markov Chain Prior Model

Downloaded 09/09/15 to Redistribution subject to SEG license or copyright; see Terms of Use at

Integration of Rock Physics Models in a Geostatistical Seismic Inversion for Reservoir Rock Properties

Recent advances in application of AVO to carbonate reservoirs: case histories

An empirical method for estimation of anisotropic parameters in clastic rocks

The SPE Foundation through member donations and a contribution from Offshore Europe

Reservoir Characterization of Plover Lake Heavy-Oil Field

Fifteenth International Congress of the Brazilian Geophysical Society. Copyright 2017, SBGf - Sociedade Brasileira de Geofísica

Framework for AVO gradient and intercept interpretation

A E. SEG/San Antonio 2007 Annual Meeting. exp. a V. a V. Summary

We LHR3 06 Detecting Production Effects and By-passed Pay from 3D Seismic Data Using a Facies Based Bayesian Seismic Inversion

URTeC: Summary

Elements of 3D Seismology Second Edition

Integration of rock attributes to discriminate Miocene reservoirs for heterogeneity and fluid variability

23855 Rock Physics Constraints on Seismic Inversion

Quantifying Bypassed Pay Through 4-D Post-Stack Inversion*

SEG/San Antonio 2007 Annual Meeting. Summary

Simultaneous Inversion of Pre-Stack Seismic Data

Downloaded 11/02/16 to Redistribution subject to SEG license or copyright; see Terms of Use at Summary.

We G Quantification of Residual Oil Saturation Using 4D Seismic Data

Earth models for early exploration stages

New Frontier Advanced Multiclient Data Offshore Uruguay. Advanced data interpretation to empower your decision making in the upcoming bid round

Impact of Phase Variations on Quantitative AVO Analysis

Bandlimited impedance inversion: using well logs to fill low frequency information in a non-homogenous model

AVO Attributes of a Deep Coal Seam

SRC software. Rock physics modelling tools for analyzing and predicting geophysical reservoir properties

Shear Wave Velocity Estimation Utilizing Wireline Logs for a Carbonate Reservoir, South-West Iran

Case study: AVO analysis in a high-impedance Atoka Sandstone (Pennsylvanian), North Arkoma Basin, McIntosh County, Oklahoma

Seismic reservoir and source-rock analysis using inverse rock-physics modeling: A Norwegian Sea demonstration

2011 SEG SEG San Antonio 2011 Annual Meeting 771. Summary. Method

Porosity prediction using attributes from 3C 3D seismic data

RESERVOIR SEISMIC CHARACTERISATION OF THIN SANDS IN WEST SYBERIA

UNIVERSITY OF CALGARY. Reservoir property prediction from well-logs, VSP and. Natalia Soubotcheva A THESIS

Downloaded 09/16/16 to Redistribution subject to SEG license or copyright; see Terms of Use at

Dynamic GeoScience Martyn Millwood Hargrave Chief Executive OPTIMISE SUCCESS THROUGH SCIENCE

SPE These in turn can be used to estimate mechanical properties.

Useful approximations for converted-wave AVO

Probabilistic seismic inversion using pseudo-wells

A look into Gassmann s Equation

3D petrophysical modeling - 1-3D Petrophysical Modeling Usning Complex Seismic Attributes and Limited Well Log Data

Time lapse view of the Blackfoot AVO anomaly

Toward an Integrated and Realistic Interpretation of Continuous 4D Seismic Data for a CO 2 EOR and Sequestration Project

Simultaneous Inversion of Clastic Zubair Reservoir: Case Study from Sabiriyah Field, North Kuwait

Practical aspects of AVO modeling

Rock Physics Modeling in Montney Tight Gas Play

OTC OTC PP. Abstract

Post-stack inversion of the Hussar low frequency seismic data

Quantitative Seismic Interpretation An Earth Modeling Perspective

Facies Classification Based on Seismic waveform -A case study from Mumbai High North

Transcription:

AFI (AVO Fluid Inversion) Uncertainty in AVO: How can we measure it? Dan Hampson, Brian Russell Hampson-Russell Software, Calgary Last Updated: April 2005 Authors: Dan Hampson, Brian Russell 1

Overview AVO Analysis is now routinely used for exploration and development. But: all AVO attributes contain a great deal of uncertainty there is a wide range of lithologies which could account for any AVO response. In this talk we present a procedure for analyzing and quantifying AVO uncertainty. As a result, we will calculate probability maps for hydrocarbon detection. Last Updated: April 2005 Authors: Dan Hampson, Brian Russell 2

AVO Uncertainty Analysis: The Basic Process CALIBRATED:! GRADIENT! INTERCEPT! BURIAL DEPTH G I STOCHASTIC AVO MODEL FLUID PROBABILITY MAPS AVO ATTRIBUTE MAPS ISOCHRON MAPS! P BRI! P OIL! P GAS Last Updated: April 2005 Authors: Dan Hampson, Brian Russell 3

Conventional AVO Modeling: Creating 2 pre-stack synthetics IN IN SITU SITU = = OIL OIL I O G O FRM FRM = = BRINE BRINE I B G B Last Updated: April 2005 Authors: Dan Hampson, Brian Russell 4

Monte Carlo Simulation: Creating many synthetics I-G G DENSITY FUNCTIONS BRINE OIL GAS 75 50 25 0 Last Updated: April 2005 Authors: Dan Hampson, Brian Russell 5

The Basic Model Shale We assume a 3-layer model with shale enclosing a sand (with various fluids). Sand Shale Last Updated: April 2005 Authors: Dan Hampson, Brian Russell 6

The Basic Model The Shales are characterized by: V p1, V s1, r 1 P-wave velocity S-wave velocity Density V p2, V s2, r 2 Last Updated: April 2005 Authors: Dan Hampson, Brian Russell 7

The Basic Model V p1, V s1, r 1 Each parameter has a probability distribution: V p2, V s2, r 2 Last Updated: April 2005 Authors: Dan Hampson, Brian Russell 8

The Basic Model The Sand is characterized by: Shale Sand Shale Brine Modulus Brine Density Gas Modulus Gas Density Oil Modulus Oil Density Matrix Modulus Matrix density Porosity Shale Volume Water Saturation Thickness Each of these has a probability distribution. Last Updated: April 2005 Authors: Dan Hampson, Brian Russell 9

Trend Analysis Some of the statistical distributions are determined from well log trend analyses: 5000 4500 4000 3500 3000 2500 2000 1500 1000 500 0 0.4 0.9 1.4 1.9 2.4 2.9 3.4 DBSB (Km) Last Updated: April 2005 Authors: Dan Hampson, Brian Russell 10

Determining Distributions at Selected Locations Assume a Normal distribution. Get the Mean and Standard Deviation from the trend curves for each depth: 5000 4500 4000 3500 3000 2500 2000 1500 1000 500 0 0.4 0.9 1.4 1.9 2.4 2.9 3.4 DBSB (Km) Last Updated: April 2005 Authors: Dan Hampson, Brian Russell 11

5000 Shale Velocity Trend Analysis: Other Distributions 4500 4000 3.0 Sand Density 3500 2.8 3000 2.6 3.0 Shale Density 2500 2.4 2.8 40% 2.6 2000 2.2 Sand Porosity 2.4 35% 1500 2.0 2.2 30% 1000 1.8 2.0 500 1.6 25% 1.8 0 1.4 20% 1.6 0.4 1.2 0.9 1.4 1.9 2.4 2.9 3.4 15% 1.4 DBSB (Km) 1.0 1.2 10% 0.4 0.9 1.4 1.9 2.4 2.9 3.4 1.0 5% DBSB (Km) 0.4 0.9 1.4 1.9 2.4 2.9 3.4 0% DBSB (Km) 0.4 0.9 1.4 1.9 2.4 2.9 3.4 DBSB (Km) Last Updated: April 2005 Authors: Dan Hampson, Brian Russell 12

Practically, this is how we set up the distributions: Shale: V p V s Density Trend Analysis Castagna s Relationship with % error Trend Analysis Sand: Brine Modulus Brine Density Gas Modulus Gas Density Oil Modulus Oil Density Matrix Modulus Matrix density Dry Rock Modulus Porosity Shale Volume Water Saturation Thickness Constants for the area Calculated from sand trend analysis Trend Analysis Uniform Distribution from petrophysics Uniform Distribution from petrophysics Uniform Distribution Last Updated: April 2005 Authors: Dan Hampson, Brian Russell 13

Calculating a Single Model Response From a particular model instance, calculate two synthetic traces at different angles. Note that a wavelet is assumed known. 0 o 45 o Top Shale Sand Base Shale Last Updated: April 2005 Authors: Dan Hampson, Brian Russell 14

On the synthetic traces, pick the event corresponding to the top of the sand layer: Calculating a Single Model Response Note that these amplitudes include interference from the second interface. 0 o 45 o Top Shale Sand P 1 P 2 Base Shale Last Updated: April 2005 Authors: Dan Hampson, Brian Russell 15

Calculating a Single Model Response Using these picks, calculate the Intercept and Gradient for this model: I = P 1 G = (P 2 -P 1 )/sin 2 (45) 0 o 45 o Top Shale P 1 P 2 Sand Base Shale Last Updated: April 2005 Authors: Dan Hampson, Brian Russell 16

GAS Using Biot-Gassmann Substitution Starting from the Brine Sand case, the corresponding Oil and Gas Sand models are generated using Biot-Gassmann substitution. This creates 3 points on the I-G cross plot: BRINE OIL K GAS ρ GAS K OIL ρ OIL G I G I G I Last Updated: April 2005 Authors: Dan Hampson, Brian Russell 17

Monte-Carlo Analysis By repeating this process many times, we get a probability distribution for each of the 3 sand fluids: G I Brine Oil Gas Last Updated: April 2005 Authors: Dan Hampson, Brian Russell 18

The Results are Depth Dependent Because the trends are depth-dependent, so are the predicted distributions: @ 1000m @ 1200m @ 1400m @ 1600m @ 1800m @ 2000m Last Updated: April 2005 Authors: Dan Hampson, Brian Russell 19

The Depth-dependence can often be understood using Rutherford-Williams classification 2 4 6 5 1 3 Impedance 1 2 3 Class 2 4 5 Class 1 6 Sand Shale Class 3 Burial Depth Last Updated: April 2005 Authors: Dan Hampson, Brian Russell 20

Bayes Theorem Bayes Theorem is used to calculate the probability that any new (I,G) point belongs to each of the classes (brine, oil, gas): P ~ ( F I, G ) = p k ( ~ ) I, G F p ( I, G F )* P ( F ) where: P(Fk) represent a priori probabilities and Fk is either brine, oil, gas; p(i,g Fk) are suitable distribution densities (eg. Gaussian) estimated from the stochastic simulation output. * k ~ P ( F ) k Last Updated: April 2005 Authors: Dan Hampson, Brian Russell 21

How Bayes Theorem works in a simple case: Assume we have these distributions: Gas Oil Brine OCCURRENCE VARIABLE Last Updated: April 2005 Authors: Dan Hampson, Brian Russell 22

How Bayes Theorem works in a simple case: This is the calculated probability for (gas, oil, brine). 100% OCCURRENCE 50% VARIABLE Last Updated: April 2005 Authors: Dan Hampson, Brian Russell 23

When the distributions overlap, the probabilities decrease: Even if we are right on the Gas peak, we can only be 60% sure we have gas. 100% OCCURRENCE 50% VARIABLE Last Updated: April 2005 Authors: Dan Hampson, Brian Russell 24

Showing the Effect of Bayes Theorem This is an example simulation result, assuming that the wet shale V S and V P are related by Castagna s equation. Last Updated: April 2005 Authors: Dan Hampson, Brian Russell 25

Showing the Effect of Bayes Theorem This is an example simulation result, assuming that the wet shale V S and V P are related by Castagna s equation. This is the result of assuming 10% noise in the V S calculation Last Updated: April 2005 Authors: Dan Hampson, Brian Russell 26

Showing the Effect of Bayes Theorem Note the effect on the calculated gas probability 1.0 0.5 Gas Probability 0.0 By this process, we can investigate the sensitivity of the probability distributions to individual parameters. Last Updated: April 2005 Authors: Dan Hampson, Brian Russell 27

Example Probability Calculations Gas Oil Brine Last Updated: April 2005 Authors: Dan Hampson, Brian Russell 28

Real Data Calibration # In order to apply Bayes Theorem to (I,G) points from a real seismic data set, we need to calibrate the real data points. # This means that we need to determine a scaling from the real data amplitudes to the model amplitudes. # We define two scalers, S global and S gradient, this way: I scaled G scaled = S global *I real = S global * S gradient * G real One way to determine these scalers is by manually fitting multiple known regions to the model data. Last Updated: April 2005 Authors: Dan Hampson, Brian Russell 29

Fitting 6 Known Zones to the Model 4 5 6 4 5 6 1 3 1 3 2 2 1 2 3 4 5 6 Last Updated: April 2005 Authors: Dan Hampson, Brian Russell 30

Real Data Example West Africa This example shows a real project from West Africa, performed by one of the authors (Cardamone). There are 7 productive oil wells which produce from a shallow formation. The seismic data consists of 2 common angle stacks. The object is to perform Monte Carlo analysis using trends from the productive wells, calibrate to the known data points, and evaluate potential drilling locations on a second deeper formation. Last Updated: April 2005 Authors: Dan Hampson, Brian Russell 31

One Line from the 3D Volume Near Angle Stack 0-20 degrees Far Angle Stack 20-40 degrees Last Updated: April 2005 Authors: Dan Hampson, Brian Russell 32

One Line from the 3D Volume Near Angle Stack 0-20 degrees Shallow producing zone Deeper target zone Far Angle Stack 20-40 degrees Last Updated: April 2005 Authors: Dan Hampson, Brian Russell 33

AVO Anomaly Near Angle Stack 0-20 degrees Far Angle Stack 20-40 degrees Last Updated: April 2005 Authors: Dan Hampson, Brian Russell 34

Amplitude Slices Extracted from Shallow Producing Zone Near Angle Stack 0-20 degrees +189-3500 Far Angle Stack 20-40 degrees Last Updated: April 2005 Authors: Dan Hampson, Brian Russell 35

Trend Analysis Sand and Shale Trends 3.00 5000 VELOCITY 4500 4000 3500 3000 2500 2000 Sand velocity DENSITY 2.75 2.50 2.25 2.00 Sand density 1500 1.75 1000 500 700 900 1100 1300 1500 1700 1900 1.50 500 700 900 1100 1300 1500 1700 1900 4000 VELOCITY 3500 3000 2500 2000 Shale velocity DENSITY 3.00 2.75 2.50 2.25 2.00 Shale density 1500 1.75 1000 500 700 900 1100 1300 1500 1700 1900 2100 2300 2500 BURIAL DEPTH (m) 1.50 500 700 900 1100 1300 1500 1700 1900 BURIAL DEPTH (m) Last Updated: April 2005 Authors: Dan Hampson, Brian Russell 36

Monte Carlo Simulations at 6 Burial Depths -1400-1600 -1800-2000 -2200-2400 Last Updated: April 2005 Authors: Dan Hampson, Brian Russell 37

Near Angle Amplitude Map Showing Defined Zones Wet Zone 1 Well 6 Well 7 Well 3 Well 5 Well 1 Well 2 Well 4 Wet Zone 2 Last Updated: April 2005 Authors: Dan Hampson, Brian Russell 38

Calibration Results at Defined Locations Wet Zone 1 Well 2 Wet Zone 2 Well 5 Last Updated: April 2005 Authors: Dan Hampson, Brian Russell 39

Calibration Results at Defined Locations Well 3 Well 6 Well 4 Well 1 Last Updated: April 2005 Authors: Dan Hampson, Brian Russell 40

Near Angle Amplitudes Using Bayes Theorem at Producing Zone: OIL 1.0 Probability of Oil.80.60.30 Last Updated: April 2005 Authors: Dan Hampson, Brian Russell 41

Near Angle Amplitudes Using Bayes Theorem at Producing Zone: GAS 1.0 Probability of Gas.80.60.30 Last Updated: April 2005 Authors: Dan Hampson, Brian Russell 42

Using Bayes Theorem at Target Horizon Near angle amplitudes of second event 1.0 Probability of oil on second event.80.60.30 Last Updated: April 2005 Authors: Dan Hampson, Brian Russell 43

Verifying Selected Locations at Target Horizon Last Updated: April 2005 Authors: Dan Hampson, Brian Russell 44

Summary By representing lithologic parameters as probability distributions we can calculate the range of expected AVO responses. This allows us to investigate the uncertainty in AVO predictions. Using Bayes theorem we can produce probability maps for different potential pore fluids. But: The results depend critically on calibration between the real and model data. And: The calculated probabilities depend on the reliability of all the underlying probability distributions. Last Updated: April 2005 Authors: Dan Hampson, Brian Russell 45