AVO analysis using crossplot and amplitude polynomial methods for characterisation of hydrocarbon reservoirs
Ji-Soo Kim 1 Won-Ki Kim 2 Hee-Sang Ha 3 5 Sung-Soo Kim 41 Department of Earth and Environmental Sciences, Chungbuk National University, 410, Sungbongro 410, Hungduk-Gu, Cheongju-Si, Chungchungbuk-Do, Korea.
2 Department of Energy Systems Engineering, Seoul National University, Shillim-dong san 56-1, Gwanak-gu, Seoul, Korea.
3 GS E&C Research Institute Innovative Construction Research Team, Deokseong-ri, Idong-Myeon, Cheoin-Gu, Youngin-Si, Gyeonggi-Do, 449-831, Korea.
4 Department of Electrical Engineering, Chungbuk National University, 410, Sungbongro 410, Hungduk-Gu, Cheongju-Si, Chungchungbuk-Do, Korea.
5 Corresponding author. Email: hsha@gsconst.co.kr
Exploration Geophysics 42(1) 25-41 https://doi.org/10.1071/EG10048
Submitted: 4 October 2010 Accepted: 14 December 2010 Published: 25 February 2011
Abstract
AVO analysis was conducted on hydrocarbon-bearing structures by applying the crossplot and offset-coordinate amplitude polynomial techniques. To evaluate the applicability of the AVO analysis, it was conducted on synthetic data that were generated with an anticline model, and field data from the hydrocarbon-bearing Colony Sand bed in Canada. Analysis of synthetic data from the anticline model demonstrates that the crossplot method yields zero-offset reflection amplitude and amplitude variation with negative values for the upper interface of the hydrocarbon-bearing layer. The crossplot values are clustered in the third quadrant. The results of AVO analysis based on the coefficients of the amplitude polynomial are similar to those from the crossplots. These well correlated results of AVO analysis on field and synthetic data suggest that both methods successfully investigate the characteristics of the reflections from the upper interface of a hydrocarbon-bearing layer. Analysis based on the incident-angle equation facilitates the application of various interpretation methods. However, it requires the conversion of seismic data to an incident angle gather. By contrast, analysis using coefficients of the amplitude polynomial is cost-effective because it allows examining amplitude variation with offset without involving the conversion process. However, it warrants further investigation into versatile application. The two different techniques can be complement each other effectively as AVO-analysis tools for the detection of hydrocarbon reservoirs.
Key words: amplitude polynomial, AVO, crossplot, hydrocarbon.
References
Castagna, J. P., 1993, AVO analysis-Tutorial and review, InOffset-Dependent Reflectivity-Theory and Practice of AVO Analysis, J. P. Castagna and M. M. Backus eds., Society of Exploration Geophysicists, 3–36.Castagna, J. P., Swan, H. W., and Foster, D. J., 1998, Framework for AVO gradient and intercept interpretation: Geophysics, 63, 948–956
| Framework for AVO gradient and intercept interpretation:Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Denham, I. R., Palmelar, R. A. R., and Rarell, R. C., 1985, The zero-offset stack, 55th Annual International Meeting, Society of Exploration Geophysicists, Expanded Abstracts, pp 624–625.
GEDCO, 2009a, OMNI 3D Seismic Survey Design & Modeling, http://www.gedco.com/Site_Files/OMNI9_NewFeatures_Web.pdf, accessed 18 December, 2010.
GEDCO, 2009b, 2D/3D VISTA Seismic Processing Software, http://www.gedco.com/Site_Files/VISTA_FullPro.pdf, accessed 18 December, 2010.
Gregory, A. L., 1976, Fluid saturation effects on dynamic elastic properties of sedimentary rocks: Geophysics, 41, 895–921
| Fluid saturation effects on dynamic elastic properties of sedimentary rocks:Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Hampson-Russell, 1999, AVO Theory, Hampson-Russell Software.
Hampson-Russell, 2007, AVO Theory, Hampson-Russell Software.
Landmark, 1999, ProMAX AVO AVO Workflow in Interpretive Processing: Landmark Graphics Corporation.
Richards, T. C., 1961, Motion of the ground on arrival of reflected longitudinal and transverse waves at wide-angle reflection distances: Geophysics, 26, 277–297
| Motion of the ground on arrival of reflected longitudinal and transverse waves at wide-angle reflection distances:Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Royle, A., 1999, AVO Gradient and Intercept Crossplot Interpretation: GeoX Systems Ltd, p 6.
Rutherford, S. R., and Williams, R. H., 1989, Amplitude-versus-offset variations in gas sands: Geophysics, 54, 680–688
| Amplitude-versus-offset variations in gas sands:Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Russell, B. H., Hedlin, K., Hilterman, F. J., and Lines, L. R., 2003, Fluid-property discrimination with AVO: A Biot-Gassmann perspective: Geophysics, 68, 29–39
| Fluid-property discrimination with AVO: A Biot-Gassmann perspective:Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Schmitt, D., 1999, Seismic attributes for monitoring of a shallow heated heavy oil reservoir: A case study: Geophysics, 64, 368–377
| Seismic attributes for monitoring of a shallow heated heavy oil reservoir: A case study:Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Shankar, U., Sinha, B., Satyavani, N., Ashalata, B., Reddi, S. A., and Thakur, N. K., 2004, Amplitude Versus Offset Modeling of the Bottom Simulating Reflection Associated with Submarine Gas Hydrates, 5th Conference & Exposition on Petroleum Geophysics, pp 539–540.
Shuey, R. T., 1985, A simplification of the Zoeppritz equations: Geophysics, 50, 609–614
| A simplification of the Zoeppritz equations:Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Ursin, B., 1979, Seismic signal detection and parameter estimation: Geophysical Prospecting, 27, 1–15
| Seismic signal detection and parameter estimation:Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Ursin, B., and Dahl, T., 1992, Least-squares estimation of reflectivity polynomials, 60th Annual International Meeting, Society of Exploration Geophysicists, Expanded Abstracts, pp 1069–1071.
Ursin, B., and Ekren, B. O., 1995, Robust AVO analysis: Geophysics, 60, 317–326
| Robust AVO analysis:Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |