Documente Academic
Documente Profesional
Documente Cultură
DECEMBER 2006
Downloaded 21 Nov 2009 to 64.91.188.154. Redistribution subject to SEG license or copyright; see Terms of Use at http://segdl.org/
Downloaded 21 Nov 2009 to 64.91.188.154. Redistribution subject to SEG license or copyright; see Terms of Use at http://segdl.org/
1529
Instead of CEC to define the end-member rock properties, one uses velocities appropriate for smectites and
illites.
4) Pore pressure is then calculated as the difference between
the overburden pressure and the effective stress, using
the Terzaghi principle (Equation 3) with an appropriate
Biot coefficient.
Figure 3. (right) Plot of sonic log and normal compaction curve used to
estimate pore pressure according to Eaton method. The red curve labeled
NCT is the predicted normal compaction trend from the current model
(Dutta method). In the traditional Eaton method, this curve would have
been a straight line. Although such an empirical curve can be constructed
by curve fitting, we note that it would have a wrong intercept and violate
the critical porosity model dictated by the rock physics principle. (left) Plot
of pore-pressure as a function of depth. The predicted pore pressure using
the Eaton (red) and Dutta (blue) methods are displayed.
physics model that relates effective stress to lithology, porosity, seismic velocity, and time-temperature history of sediments. Burial diagenesis of shales (smectite-to-illite
transformation) is accounted for by a kinetic model based
on first-order rate theory and calibration based on X-ray diffraction data from analyses of fine-grained sediments (less
than 5 microns) of many wells. The model does not use a
cation exchange capacity (CEC) parameter in the analysis
as discussed by Lopez in the so-called Simms-Dutta method.
The method has four components:
1) The bulk density is estimated from a rock model that
relates velocity to temperature (and time) and bulk density. Overburden pressure is then calculated by integrating the estimates of bulk density as in Equation 1.
2) The effective pressure is estimated using another rock
model that relates void ratio (and temperature and time)
to effective pressure (compaction model). Void ratio is
calculated from porosity using the velocity-derived bulk
density of the rocks. Void ratio is defined as =/(1).
3) Time-temperature history is computed from seismic data
using a simple burial history model and is related to an
illite-to-smectite transformation using a kinetic theory.
1530
DECEMBER 2006
Downloaded 21 Nov 2009 to 64.91.188.154. Redistribution subject to SEG license or copyright; see Terms of Use at http://segdl.org/
Figure 5. (top) A stacked seismic section with some horizons from a 3D data volume. (bottom) Interval velocity derived from the prestack data of above
using the Dix model. Vertical scale is km.
DECEMBER 2006
Downloaded 21 Nov 2009 to 64.91.188.154. Redistribution subject to SEG license or copyright; see Terms of Use at http://segdl.org/
autopicking.
5) QC and comparison with borehole elastic velocity and iterate
from step 3 if there is significant
inconsistency between estimated borehole and seismic
velocities.
6) In regions with complex raypath
trajectories and wave propagation effects, reflection tomography is a tool that should be used
to estimate a geologically meaningful velocity model.
Finally, one should compare
seismic velocities thus derived with
a velocity template based on a rockphysics-based model and valid for
that geologic basin. Any discrepancies must be noted and rationalized
and corrective steps should be
undertaken, if necessary.
Our experience shows that the
above steps are necessary for obtaining good-quality, stable, and geologically consistent interval velocity
for pore-pressure analysis.
Figure 6. Interpreted horizons (autopick) for the data of Figure 5 for automated velocity analysis using
SCVA procedure as discussed in the text. Each dot in this figure represents an event that is continuous
and interpretable for 20 traces around the dot. A blank portion indicates where no continuous horizon
was found. Interval velocity analysis is performed at each location using prestack data and a generalized liner inversion procedure at each time sample. Vertical scale is seconds.
Figure 7. A comparison of SCVA/AVMB (top) interval velocity with those from Dix analysis (bottom). The top figure shows more details, even in the
low-frequency model, than shown in the bottom figure. Vertical scale is km.
DECEMBER 2006
Downloaded 21 Nov 2009 to 64.91.188.154. Redistribution subject to SEG license or copyright; see Terms of Use at http://segdl.org/
1533
acceptable low-frequency model, such as SCVA, as discussed above, or reflection tomography or prestack waveform seismic inversion (PWSI). Below, we discuss the use
of these techniques for pressure estimation for drilling applications.
PSSI. The use of surface seismic stacked data for ampli-
DECEMBER 2006
Downloaded 21 Nov 2009 to 64.91.188.154. Redistribution subject to SEG license or copyright; see Terms of Use at http://segdl.org/
Figure 10. Composite display of seismically derived pore pressure (left) and the high-resolution interval velocity (right) after combining seismic velocity
and inversion results using PSSI. The two wells and the horizontal slice displaying the pore pressure are also shown.
DECEMBER 2006
Downloaded 21 Nov 2009 to 64.91.188.154. Redistribution subject to SEG license or copyright; see Terms of Use at http://segdl.org/
1535
Figure 11. 1D prestack full waveform inversion (PWSI) as discussed in the text for a location in the deepwater Gulf of Mexico. The first panel shows
the seismic CMP gather; the second panel shows the synthetic gather generated from the PWSI method that best fit the data on the left. The third,
fourth, and fifth panels show VP, VP/VS, and bulk density derived from the inversion, respectively. The blue curves show the result from inversion. The
pink curve denotes the low-frequency velocity. The green curve is the filtered version of the blue curves, and the yellow curves signify the uncertainty in
the estimation of the attributes. The zone labeled SWF denotes where mild shallow waterflow (SWF) was observed in this location.
DECEMBER 2006
Downloaded 21 Nov 2009 to 64.91.188.154. Redistribution subject to SEG license or copyright; see Terms of Use at http://segdl.org/
DECEMBER 2006
Downloaded 21 Nov 2009 to 64.91.188.154. Redistribution subject to SEG license or copyright; see Terms of Use at http://segdl.org/
1537
Figure 14. Seismic attribute analysis and classification used to identify potential sand bodies (second panel from left). A computer program estimates
the geometry of the individual sand bodies and computes the excess pressure due to structural relief (third panel). The pressure cube that is more representative for a background shale lithology (first panel) corrected according to the estimated pressure for each individual sands body (fourth panel).
DECEMBER 2006
Downloaded 21 Nov 2009 to 64.91.188.154. Redistribution subject to SEG license or copyright; see Terms of Use at http://segdl.org/
Figure 16. (left) 3D velocity cube, error field associated with the velocity cube (STD), mean pore pressure in ppg, and standard deviation of pore pressure. (right) Extracted predicated pore pressure and its uncertainty at a well location.
DECEMBER 2006
Downloaded 21 Nov 2009 to 64.91.188.154. Redistribution subject to SEG license or copyright; see Terms of Use at http://segdl.org/
1539