See

discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/315364940

Fault and Fracture Detection in Unconventional

Reservoirs: A Utica Shale Study

Conference Paper · January 2016

DOI: 10.15530/urtec-2016-2443623

CITATIONS READS

0 7

3 authors:

Hesham Refayee Hardeep Jaglan

dGB Earth Sciences dGB Earth Sciences
8 PUBLICATIONS 59 CITATIONS 3 PUBLICATIONS 6 CITATIONS

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

Steve Adcock
Resource Evaluations
3 PUBLICATIONS 6 CITATIONS

SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

UrTec 2016 View project

Faults detection in unconventional plays View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Hardeep Jaglan on 16 January 2018.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

URTeC: 2443623

Fault and Fracture Detection in Unconventional Reservoirs: A Utica

Shale study
Hesham Refayee1*, Hardeep Jaglan1, and Steve Adcock1
dGB Earth Sciences, Sugar Land-TX.
Copyright 2016, Unconventional Resources Technology Conference (URTeC) DOI 10.15530-urtec-2016-2443623

This paper was prepared for presentation at the Unconventional Resources Technology Conference held in San Antonio, Texas, USA, 1-3 August 2016.

The URTeC Technical Program Committee accepted this presentation on the basis of information contained in an abstract submitted by the author(s). The contents of this
paper have not been reviewed by URTeC and URTeC does not warrant the accuracy, reliability, or timeliness of any information herein. All information is the responsibility of,
and, is subject to corrections by the author(s). Any person or entity that relies on any information obtained from this paper does so at their own risk. The information herein
does not necessarily reflect any position of URTeC. Any reproduction, distribution, or storage of any part of this paper without the written consent of URTeC is prohibited.

Abstract

Without a good understanding of the faults and fractures present in a net pay zone, the possibility of wasting
valuable resources is high. We characterize here fractures and faults within the Utica Shale by integrating routinely
used methods such as geometric attributes (e.g. Dip, Similarity and Curvature) and comparing them with a new fault
attribute that extracts faults and fractures, and improves their visibility. The new method also helps minimize
random noise in the seismic data. In order to fully optimize faults and structures, we first filtered the seismic data
with a structurally oriented filter to reduce the noise and improve the imaging quality. Using a single attribute to
derive information from faults and fractures is not optimum, therefore we employed a second step, applying several
conventional attributes such as similarity, curvature, and fault enhance filters. These successfully identified the fault
and fracture geometries. A comparatively new fault attribute, known as Fault Likelihood and defined as a power of
semblance, was then used to capture and delineate faults and fractures in the same Utica Shale area. This attribute is
created by scanning a range of fault dips to identify maximum likelihood. The value range of the fault likelihood
attribute is between 0 and 1. In order to obtain even sharper fault plane, a filtering step is also performed. When
compared to traditional attributes, the faults and fractures are better defined by the new method. In addition, the new
fault likelihood attribute is extremely versatile and can be used to characterize fault and fracture proximity and
density.

Introduction

In unconventional reservoirs, seismic characterization of naturally occurring faults and fractures is one of the main
goals. This is critical in understanding the geological history as well as to identify sweet-spots for drilling. Manual
fault picking is a typical exercise for most geoscientists, though it is a time consuming task and needs a well-trained
interpreter. Therefore, a seismic fault enhancement or detection procedure is essential for improving and
accelerating the overall fault and fracture interpretation process. Faults are typically classified as seismically
resolvable features. However, some subtle faults and fractures, which often are of exploration significance, are not
directly visible in seismic sections and time slices. Therefore, a combination of geometrical attributes (i.e. a multi-
attribute set) is needed to achieve a satisfactory result (Brouwer and Huck, 2011). These attributes are good
indicators of seismic discontinuity (Taner, 2001). Since early to mid 1990s, similarity/coherency and dip/azimuth
attributes, have been used to detect faults and fractures. However, most of these typical attributes still lack
capabilities to capture subtle faults and fractures, especially in complex geological scenarios. In this paper, we
provide a comparison between a few conventional geometrical attributes and three new unconventional attributes.
URTeC: 2443623 2

The new attributes are aimed to both enhance the seismic data for structural interpretation and to visualize and
capture very subtle faults and fractures. Thus, these new unconventional attributes are of special significance for
unconventional reservoirs. Utica Shale – a Late Ordovician Calcareous shale – is an ideal play demonstrating the
importance of fault and fractures identification. A complete characterization of faults and fractures is crucial to
optimally produce gas from the Utica Shale reservoir, which is one of the main unconventional shale plays in the
US.

Method

Since most seismic volumes are contaminated by random noise, filtering the input data is a crucial first step before
using conventional attributes. This procedure is aimed to clean up the data from the undesired noise – to enhance the
lateral continuity of seismic events while at the same time sharpening the faults – by applying the integrated
approach shown in Figure 1. For this purpose, a SteeringCube which contains the dip of the seismic reflectors in
inline and crossline directions was computed from the seismic data. Natively a detailed SteeringCube is made,
which is smoothed to create a background SteeringCube containing only large scale dip trends. The primary use of
detailed SteeringCube is to generate high resolution geometrical attributes, which are discussed later. The
background SteeringCube (or dip cube) was used to design a structurally oriented filter called the Dip Steered
Median filter (DSMF). This filter removes the random noise and enhances the lateral continuous seismic events by
filtering the noise along the structural dip using median statistics. However, the DSMF application might result in
over smoothing of discontinuous events, like faults and fractures. In order to preserve or even improve the fault
definition, a second filter called Dip Steered Diffusion Filter (DSDF) was defined. This filter takes advantage of the
fact that seismic data has a rather diffused character close to the faults. The DSDF replaces bad quality seismic
traces at a fault location with good quality traces from the neighborhood, resulting in sharpened faults. Finally, both
the DSMF and DSDF were applied in conjunction on the input seismic data to create a Fault Enhancement Filtered
(FEF) seismic. The FEF process uses a conventional seismic attribute (e.g. similarity) which distinguishes
discontinuities from layer reflections. Based on that discontinuity attribute values, the algorithm decides whether to
apply DSMF or DSDF to enhance sedimentary layers or faults/fractures, respectively. The resulting FEF seismic
volume has both laterally continuous de-noised seismic reflectors as well as sharpened faults. Finally, this FEF
seismic volume was used as input to compute a number of conventional and unconventional attributes discussed
below.

The first attribute that was computed is the similarity (or coherency) attribute. As the input for this attribute is FEF
seismic, it was specifically called as FEF similarity attribute, which is considered to be of better quality than the
standard similarity attribute (Jaglan et al., 2015). Similarity attribute compares adjacent seismic waveforms and
expresses their lateral correlations by measuring the Euclidian distance between the amplitude vectors corresponding
to the waveforms. A similarity value of close to 1 means two trace segments are almost identical, whereas a
similarity of less than 0.6 or 0.5 suggests discontinuities between the two trace segments. The similarity or
coherency type of attributes is typically applied for fast delineation of geological discontinuities such as large scale
faults and stratigraphic features (Gersztenkorn and Marfurt, 1999).
URTeC: 2443623 3

Figure 1. A flowchart depicting integrated structural interpretation workflow using conventional and unconventional attributes (modified after
Jaglan et al., 2015).

In addition, the standard polar dip attribute was applied to visualize the seismic reflector dips. It helps in
identification of faults as they typically have higher dip values. The polar dip attribute simply combines the dip in
inline and crossline directions from the SteeringCube to generate true geological dip. For more detailed analysis of
faults and fractures a curvature attribute was used, which measures the curvedness of a mapped surface. Different
type of curvature attributes are frequently used to delineate faults and fractures (Chopra and Marfurt, 2007).
Curvature can be positive as in anticlines or upthrown side of faults and negative as in synclines downthrown side of
faults; most positive curvature attribute and most negative curvature attribute are therefore typically used to
highlight these features respectively. Our computation of curvature is guided by the detailed SteeringCube
containing high resolution dip information in inline and crossline directions, which results in better definition of the
seismic features. Those features can be faults, fractures, and/or any other sedimentary feature.

Finally, a new unconventional attribute known as Fault Likelihood is used to capture faults and fractures as well as
to improve seismic image for structural interpretation. Fault Likelihood, which is defined as the power of semblance,
is computed based on a given range of dips and strike (Hale 2013, and Jaglan et al., 2015). The objective here is to
find an orientation in 3D along which the semblance computed from the seismic is minimum, thereby identifying the
most likely discontinuity possibly caused by a fault presence. Further filtering is performed to highlight only the
local maxima within the fault likelihood volume to achieve a sharper definition of faults. This finally results in what
is termed as Thinned Fault Likelihood (TFL). It has a range of values between 0 and 1, which signify the relative
probability of having a fault anomaly. Jaglan et al., 2015 have shown that the TFL attribute provides the best fault
definition in 3D when compared to other conventional attributes. A supplementary application of the TFL attribute
is to design an edge-preserving smoothing filter, where data can be enhanced and better visualized for structural
interpretation purposes. It generates seismic volumes with razor-sharp edges that are very well suited for quickly
mapping fault planes. The TFL attribute is further used as input for two other unconventional attributes discussed
below. These attributes help in quick and direct characterization of two important aspects of naturally existing
fracture systems, which are relevant to resource extraction.

Fracture proximity attribute is useful in visualizing the connectivity of fracture networks. It basically computes the
lateral distance from a trace position classified as a fracture based on a threshold applied on the input TFL attribute
(Jaglan et al., 2015). It therefore reveals how close a particular sample is from a fracture as well as how close
URTeC: 2443623 4

fractures are to each other, and improves the visibility of the fractures and their network. This information is
particularly useful in geo-steering of wells.
Fracture density highlights the location of concentrated fractures within a user defined radius. Consequently, this
attribute directly identifies regions with higher fracture density as sweet-spots for hydrocarbon extraction.
Furthermore, it is useful in designing a good artificial fracturing plan which takes into account the complexities that
arise from interaction between the induced fractures with the natural ones.

Results

Mapping the fault and fracture zones in the Utica Shale reservoir was carried out first by computing a number of
conventional geometrical attributes such as curvature, FEF similarity, and polar dip. These attributes are presented
along the top Utica Shale reservoir horizon. Results from conventional attribute calculations mainly helped in
detection of only the large faults. Utica Shale reservoir was mapped around 1s TWT. FEF Similarity attribute in
Figure 2 was able to identify the two major faults at the top of the Utica Shale. However, smaller size faults were not
clearly identified by the FEF similarity attribute. Overall the FEF similarity attribute has high values along the top
Utica Shale and therefore the small details are not visible. Polar dip attribute added more value to the interpretation,
where large and small faults are conspicuously seen. The application of the Polar dip attribute in Figure 3 showed
better enhancement of the fault edges and the focus of the faults. However, it did not outline the detailed extent of
fracture networks along the top Utica Shale. Application of the most positive curvature attribute at this level does
reveal a dense network of fractures (Figure 4). Apart from the main NW-SE faults, finer detail is also provided by
the most positive curvature in areas where similarity and polar dip attributes are rather featureless.

After applying the above mentioned conventional geometrical attributes, some new unconventional attributes that
can reveal more geological information were tested. Thinned Fault likelihood (or TFL) was computed along the top
of Utica Shale reservoir aiming to capture more detail and obtain better understanding of the distribution of fracture
networks. This attribute usually provides good fault definition on horizontal slices as well as on vertical sections. A
chair display is always recommended to correlate the detail seen on a horizontal surface with the seismic, and to
validate them geologically. Figure 5, shows FEF seismic profile intersecting with time horizon (top of Utica Shale)
and reveals significantly detailed faults and fractures. Note that the naturally occurring fracture networks are also
nicely captured by the TFL attribute in the Utica Shale (Figure 6). The TFL attribute is also used to design an edge-
preserving smoothing filter, applied on the already fault enhanced FEF seismic data. It generated a seismic volume
with even sharper edges that are optimized for structural interpretation (Figure 7b). Note that in this volume the
overall signal-to-noise ratio has also improved compared to the input FEF seismic data (Figures 7a, and 7b). It did
not only preserve the main NW-SE faults but also sharpened them. Fracture proximity attribute was computed along
the top of Utica Shale reservoir (Figure 8). This attribute measures the distance to the nearest faults or fractures.
Figure 9 depicts the fracture density at the top of Utica reservoir. Red colored areas are the ones with less number of
fractures per square mile; whilst the Blue colored blobs represent the areas of high fracture density, essentially the
potential sweet-spots for drilling.
URTeC: 2443623 5

Figure 2: FEF Similarity attribute computed on the top of Utica Shale reservoir showing the two prominent faults.

Figure 3: A Polar dip attribute extracted along the top of Utica Shale reservoir. Note the enhancement of the fault edges.
URTeC: 2443623 6

Figure 4: Most Positive Curvature attribute extracted at the top of Utica Shale reservoir. Finer detail is brought out by the curvature attribute.

Figure 5: Chair diagram showing FEF seismic profile intersecting with Thinned Fault Likelihood (TFL) attribute displayed on the top of Utica
Shale.
URTeC: 2443623 7

Figure 6: Thinned Fault Likelihood (TFL) is extracted at the top of Utica Shale reservoir. This attribute sharpens and outlines the main two faults.
In addition, TFL reveals an extensive network of fractures over the Utica Shale reservoir.

Figure 7: FEF Seismic section (a) before and (b) after being optimized by Thinned Fault Likelihood (TFL). Fault in the upper section (a) is
poorly imaged. Note the sharp edge of the fault on the left side of the image b.
URTeC: 2443623 8

Figure 8. Fracture Proximity attribute is computed on the top of Utica Shale reservoir. The colorbar values depict distance in feet from the nearest
fracture anomaly.

Figure 9. Fracture Density attribute is computed on the top Utica Shale reservoir. Note the dense fracture zones, which could be a sweet spot for
drilling.
 URTeC: 2443623 9

Conclusions

This study shows the application of conventional and unconventional seismic attributes to refine the location of the
major faults in Utica Shale, as well as to examine the fracture networks in the area. In this paper, we are presenting
results of a method for improving the structural interpretability of the seismic data using geometrical attributes and
the new unconventional attributes. Structural dip information extracted from seismic cube was used to generate a
Fault Enhancement Filtered (FEF) seismic volume, which has both de-noised seismic reflectors as well as sharpened
faults. This seismic volume is optimum for the application of conventional and unconventional seismic attributes to
characterize faults and fractures in Utica Shale. Conventional geometrical attributes such as FEF similarity and polar
dip were only able to outline major faults. In addition, the curvature attribute was also partially successful in
bringing out the fine detail about the fracture networks. However, it was the application of the new unconventional
Thinned Fault Likelihood (TFL) attribute that provided the best definition of fault geometries in 3D, and also nicely
delineated the fracture networks. On top of that, the TFL attribute proved to be an excellent tool to sharpen
discontinuous geological features such as faults and further optimized the FEF seismic volume for structural
interpretation. The TFL attribute was further utilized to understand fracture proximity/connectivity and density, by
the two new attributes of the same name. The TFL attribute volume was used as input by the fracture density
attribute to identify the areas with dense networks of naturally occurring fractures. These areas are potential sweet-
spots for drilling.

Acknowledgements The authors are grateful and thankful to TGS for providing the data and giving the permission
to present this work.

References

Brouwer, F. and Huck, A., 2011, An Integrated Workflow to Optimize Discontinuity Attributes for the Imaging of
Faults. 31st Annual GCSSEPM Foundation Bob F. Perkins Research Conference, 496–533.

Chopra, S. and Marfurt, K.J., 2007, Seismic Attributes for Prospect Identification and Reservoir Characterization.
Geophysical Developments Series, SEG, 518.

Gersztenkorn, A., and K.J. Marfurt, 1999, Eigenstructure-based coherence computations as an aid to 3-D structural
and stratigraphic mapping: Geophysics, v. 64, p. 1468-1479.

Hale, D., 2013, Fault surfaces and fault throws from 3D seismic images, Geophysics, 78 (2), 33-43, DOI:
10.1190/GEO2012-0331.1.

Jaglan, H., Qayyum, F., and H, Helene, 2015, Unconventional seismic attributes for fracture characterization: First
Break, 33, 101-109.

Taner, M.T., Seismic Attributes, CSEG Recorder, September 2001, P 48-56.

View publication stats