AVO Carbonate

AVO for Fluid & Fracture Analysis
In Carbonate Reservoirs
AVO for Fluid & Fracture Analysis in Carbonate Reservoirs

By : Sigit Sukmono
1. AVO for Fluid Analysis in Carbonate Reservoirs

Until recently, seismic analysis of data from carbonate reservoirs
relied mainly on interpreting zero-offset (stacked) volumes.
Common knowledge within the world of AVO suggests that zerooffset information is often insufficient to differentiate shale from
carbonate porosity, or to discriminate gas-saturated from brinesaturated reservoirs.
However, in the last a few years, great efforts have been made to
apply AVO analysis to carbonate reservoir characterization but
several issues must be addressed in investigating the feasibility,
potential, and sensitivity of the response of carbonate rock
properties to porosity and fluid.
By : Sigit Sukmono
First, a lack of carbonate rock property information is

considered an obstacle in applying AVO to carbonate reservoir
characterization. Second, the differences between clastic AVO
and carbonate AVO need to be clarified. Third, procedures and
calibration in seismic data processing and interpretation need to
be developed. The situation has been greatly improved due to
recent significant acquisition of dipole sonic logs. Below is the
illustration given by Li et al (2003) on the application of AVO
for carbonate reservoir in the Western Canadian Sedimentary
Basin (WCSB). Some issues such as physical relationships
between rock properties, fluid sensitivity of the carbonate rock
property, calibration and interpretation are reviewed and
discussed.
By : Sigit Sukmono
1.1. Carbonate rock properties.

Figure 1 shows a set of dipole well logs from the Foothills of the
WCSB in which the mudrock line for clastics is Vs = 0.862 Vp 1172.4. A line with the relationship of Vs = 0.4878 Vp + 230.0 is
fitted to the carbonate lithology cluster. Similar to Castagna's
definition, we call this linear relationship a carbonate line.
It can be seen that the carbonate line deviates from the clastic
mudrock line with a slope significantly less than that of clastic
rocks. In Figure 1, as is always observed, the data points of the
gas sand in these two wells shift away from the clastic rock cluster
and have a low Vp and a low Vp/Vs ratio in comparison with watersaturated sandstone.
By : Sigit Sukmono
Fluid effects in carbonates, especially gas effects, are contentious

but of great interest. The common wisdom is that fluids have little
or no effect on carbonate rock properties because carbonate rocks
have very high moduli. In other words, the high velocity of the
carbonate rock matrix causes seismic waves to travel primarily
trough the matrix where they are little influenced by pore fluids.
However, an analysis of the dolomite data from the Williston Basin
by Rafavich (1984) indicates that gas does influence carbonate rock
properties and its effect is significant (Figure 2).

By : Sigit Sukmono
Figure 1. Velocities and Vp/Vs ratio of dipole well logs from Foothills, the WCSB (Li et al, 2003).

By : Sigit Sukmono
Figure 2. Gas effect of dolomite rock properties for the data set from Williston Basin (Li et al, 2003).

By : Sigit Sukmono
Further evidence of this can be seen in an analysis of a large data

set of lab measurements on carbonate rocks from the WCSB. This
data set includes lime-stones and dolomites. It represents a wide
range of carbonate reservoirs and nonreservoirs. An analysis of this
data set indicates that the result is consistent with the data set of the
Williston Basin (Figure 3).
Notice that the behavior of dolomite rocks due to gas saturation is
similar to that of sandstones. Namely, P-wave velocity and Vp /Vs
ratio decrease, and S-wave velocity increases slightly due to
decreasing density. In addition, the rocks are more sensitive to fluid
with increasing porosity. The results of limestone are not shown. In
general they are similar to dolomites except less sensitive to fluid.
By : Sigit Sukmono
The influence of fluid on carbonate rock properties described above

implies that AVO response to gas and brine saturated rocks should
be different. Figure 4 shows theoretical calculations to examine
these for the most often encountered reservoir types (porous
limestone and porous dolomite encased by tight limestone).
First, for limestone reservoirs encased by tight limestone, AVO
gradient responses are similar for both gas and brine cases.
Consequently, zero-offset amplitude becomes the attribute
differentiating gas from brine. But, as porosity itself could produce
the same response as fluid, zero-offset amplitude is ambiguous in
determining fluid effect in a reservoir

By : Sigit Sukmono
In contrast, the fluid effect on offset amplitude or "gradient in a

dolomite reservoir encased by tight lime-stone is significant.
With increasing porosity from 0 to 20%, all AVO classes (I-IV)
are present. More specifically, a class III AVO mainly
corresponds to porosity of 6-14%, and class III-IV to 14-20%
(Figure 4d). In the WCSB, most carbonate reservoirs are in these
porosity ranges. In addition, these AVO responses are
accompanied by weak-to-strong zero-offset reflectivity.
As a shale/limestone interface could produce a class II or III
AVO response, care must be taken in standard AVO analysis. In
Figure 4, Shuey's two-term AVO and three-term AVO
calculations are shown as blue and red lines, respectively.
By : Sigit Sukmono
10
1.2. Analysis.
Figure 5 shows selected dipole well logs that represent gassaturated dolomite reservoir at about 3700 m and a brinesaturated dolomite reservoir at 3000 m. The gas saturated
reservoir has a thickness of 30 m, an average P-wave velocity
of 5400 m/s, density of 2.5-2.6 g/ cc, and porosity of 8-16%. In
Figure 5, the gas and wet dolomites are red and green squares,
respectively tight limestone data points are black squares and
small blue dots represent entire well logs.
Empirical relationships for sand, shale, and carbonates are
overlain to establish a background where major lithologies are
located. Such plots facilitate understanding relationships among
different lithologies and fluid effect.
By : Sigit Sukmono
11
Figure 3. Gas effect of dolomite rock properties for a data set from the WCSB (Li et al, 2003).

By : Sigit Sukmono
12
Figure 4. Theoretically calculated AVO responses for carbonate reservoirs (Li et al, 2003)..

By : Sigit Sukmono
13
Figure 5. Gas-and brine-saturated dolomite reservoirs in velocity and modulus domains (Li et al, 2003).

By : Sigit Sukmono
14
The empirical relationships of carbonates were developed from lab

measurements and it can be seen that the log data agree with them.
There is no gas sand in these wells (refer to Figure 1). The
observations that can be made from Figure 5 are:
(a) the gas effect is apparent in the Vp/Vs ratio, / ratio, and
domain ( is Lame's constant, is shear modulus, and
is,density);
(b) wet dolomite or wet limestone can be used as the background
reference in order to quantitatively determine the degree of the
gas effect;
(c) the shear modulus of carbonates is higher than that of shale; and
(d) shale and porous carbonate can be distinguished as they occupy
different spaces in cross-plotting domains.
By : Sigit Sukmono
15
To determine a quantitative assessment of the influence of fluid

on carbonate reservoir rocks, brine substitution (using the BiotGassmann equation and calibrated by the empirical relationship
in Figure 2) was performed for the gas-charged dolomite in
Figure 5.
Figure 6 illustrates the sensitivity of rock properties in various
domains. Figure 6 shows, in moving from the gas case to the
brine-substituted case, that the density, velocities, Vp/Vs ratio and
impedances change less than 10% in magnitude. The change in
, however, can be as great as 66%. The contrast (relative
variation) between encasing limestone and the gas-saturated
dolomite is also significantly enhanced.
By : Sigit Sukmono
16
The high sensitivity of the reservoir rock and the enhancement of

contrast between the encasing limestone and the gas-saturated
reservoir in domain are mainly contributed from the decreasing
of Vp/Vs ratio () of the reservoir rock. They are governed by the
relation
/ = (( 2 2 - 4 ) / ( B ( 2 - 2)) R
p
where Rp is P-wave reflectivity and B is the slope of the carbonate

line, Based on this relation, a small decrease in Vp/Vs ratio will
result in a large increase in / The above observations are
consistent with observations in clastic reservoirs. Consequently,
for carbonate reservoir characterization, and ratio may be
used as fluid indicators.
By : Sigit Sukmono
17
Synthetic gathers for the gas-charged, reservoir and the brinesubstituted case were then generated ( Figure 7). A class III
AVO at the base of the gas-charged reservoir changes to weak
class II AVO after brine substitution. This is consistent with the
theoretically calculated AVO response in Figure 4.

By : Sigit Sukmono
18
Figure 6. Sensitivity of rock properties in responding to fluid (Li et al, 2003)..

By : Sigit Sukmono
19
Figure 7. AVO responses of gas-charged and brine-saturated dolomite reservoir (Li et al, 2003).
By : Sigit Sukmono
20
Figure 7 shows a real data example of a CDP gather at a

dolomite gas well. The reservoir, at about 3000 m, has a
thickness of 20 m and porosity of 12-14%. Figure 8a is the
Ostrander gather and Figure 8b is the constructed gather using
P-and S reflectivities (Rp and Rs) extracted using Fattis AVO
equation:
R pp ( ) = R p (1 + tan 2 ) 8 (V s / V p ) 2 R s (sin 2 ).
As with the synthetic gather for the gas case in Figure 7, a class
III AVO is at the base of this reservoir. This again confirms that a
gas-charged dolomite reservoir does produce an AVO anomaly:
the amplitude brightens at far offsets. At this specific well
location, another class III AVO appears underneath the reservoir
and suggests a new potential reservoir.
By : Sigit Sukmono
21
Figure 9 shows a 2D stack section with three CDP gathers from two
tight wells and one gas well. The gas dolomite discovery well
produces 13 million cubic feet per day. The reservoir manifests as
the highlighted bright spots on the stack. Without examining
prestack gathers, the bright spots may be interpreted either as gas
porosity, shale-filled channel, or gas charge reservoir.
The CDP gather at the gas well shows class III AVO anomaly. In
contrast, the seismic responses on the CDP gathers at the two tight
wells are quiet. This example demonstrates that far offsets can
contribute significantly to the amplitude anomaly of bright spots on
a stacked section.
By : Sigit Sukmono
22
In an attempt to better define a carbonate reservoir, we analyzed the

elastic property inversion method developed by Goodway et al
(1994).The procedure is to first extract P- and S-reflectivities (Rp and
Rs) from CDP gathers by using Fatti' AVO equation, invert these
reflectivities into P- and S-impedances by introducing low-frequency
background of P- and S-impedance, and finally calculate the modulus
attributes, ,, and ratio using = Ip2-21s2 and = Is2. This
technique has been widely used in the WCSB clastic reservoirs. Its
effectiveness is based on the fact that and / ratio are sensitive to
fluid as shown in Figure 5.

By : Sigit Sukmono
23
Figure 10 shows and sections for a carbonate gas play.

There are three wells: tight, good gas, and marginal gas. Direct
observation indicate that the good gas well corresponds to the
low anomaly, and the tight and the marginal gas wells
correspond with higher values. However, varies little
within the reservoir zone. Since the shale formation may
manifest itself as an amplitude anomaly on a stack section and
low impedance in P-impedance section, the introduction of
shear-wave information via AVO would help differentiate shale
from carbonate. In Figure 10, there is low and shale zone
under the reservoir zone. It can be seen that ambiguity between
shale and reservoir prevents defining such a zone as a reservoir.
However, crossplotting can solve this problem because the shear
modulus of reservoir carbonate is higher than that of shale.
By : Sigit Sukmono
24
Figure 8. CDP gathers: (a) Ostrander gather and (b) the reconstructed gather using P and S reflectivities (Li et al, 2003).

By : Sigit Sukmono
25
Figure 9. Stacked section and CDP gathers for a dolomite reservoir (Li et al, 2003).

By : Sigit Sukmono
26
Figure 10. (a) section and (b) section with tight, good gas and marginal gas wells.
By : Sigit Sukmono
27
Figure 11 shows the crossplots of The and sections in

Figure 10. There is good separation between shale and carbonates.
For reservoir and nonreservoir carbonate rocks, it can be seen that
a space filled with data points from the gas well (lower half of
Figure 11) has almost no points from tight and marginal gas wells
(upper half of Figure 11).
Furthermore, Figure 11 demonstrates that, in crossplot space, data
points from the gas-charged dolomite reservoir are distinct from
data from the tight limestone and marginal gas well. One can thus
isolate the reservoir from nonreservoir rocks by projecting a
polygon in the crossplot domain back into the 2D section or 3D
volume.
By : Sigit Sukmono
28
Figure 12a has a polygon for the reservoir rocks indicated in Figure 11
and Figure 12b shows the projected results in a section. Up to this
stage the reservoir has been successfully isolated. It can be seen that a
good gas well is located at the center of the most continuous low
zone; the marginal well is near a small gas zone but misses the target;
and the location corresponding to the tight well has no anomaly.
Figure 12b further suggests that potential drilling locations may exist
at CDPs 500 and 810.

By : Sigit Sukmono
29
1.3. Calibrations.
Calibration is a cross-examination between petrophysical rock
properties, seismic rock properties, seismic, and inverted seismic
rock properties. Figure 13, a flow chart for the calibration and
interpretation in carbonate reservoirs using AVO, has two main
branches: one for rock physics analysis and AVO modeling and one
for seismic processing. Seismic interpretation should start from a
stacked seismic in which a seismic amplitude anomaly and/or phase
anomaly may already be seen. An AVO anomaly often can be
determined through analyzing Ostrander or super gathers.

By : Sigit Sukmono
30
AVO modeling can be conducted at this stage to assist

determining whether an AVO anomaly corresponds to a
reservoir, The elastic rock property inversion provides P-and Simpedance, , and / ratio. As P-impedance cannot
solve the ambiguity between shale and carbonate porosity,
shear-wave information becomes crucial in discriminating
reservoir from nonreservoir.
During the elastic rock property inversion, the relationship of P
- and S-reflectivity trend may be used to check if offsetdependent amplitudes have been processed properly. The
relationship between P-and S-impedance may be used to check
if the inversion was performed with the correct low-frequency
background.
By : Sigit Sukmono
31
Figure 11. and crossplots at tight, marginal gas and good gas well locations (Li et al, 2003).

By : Sigit Sukmono
32
Figure 12. Projection of gas zone on section

By : Sigit Sukmono
33
Figure 13. Flowchart of AVO processing and interpretation for carbonate reservoirs (Li et al, 2003).
By : Sigit Sukmono
34
2. AVO for Fracture Characterization

2.1. Introduction
Fracture characterization is an important part of reservoir
development, in particular for carbonate reservoirs. Different
techniques have been used to estimate fracture orientation and
density. Traditionally, S-waves generated at the surface and
recorded by three component geophones (either with vertical
seismic profiling or surface geometries) have been used for this
purpose (Alford, 1986).
However, since acquisition and processing of S-waves is costly
and the availability of shear waves sources is limited, different
alternatives have been considered.
By : Sigit Sukmono
35
Recently, P-S converted waves have become more popular

because they are expected to contain the same information as S-S
waves but can be generated with compressional sources, which
makes the acquisition not only inexpensive but also less labor
intensive than S-S waves recording. Garotta and Granger (1988)
and Ata and Michelena (1995) showed examples of the use of PS converted waves to estimate fracture orientation. P-S waves,
however, are more cumbersome to use than nonconverted waves
because of the asymmetry of the ray path, and they are more
expensive to record and process than conventional P-P waves.

By : Sigit Sukmono
36
Since many areas in the world are already covered by 3-D P-wave
data, various authors have focused their attention on the use of
this existing information to estimate fracture properties. A
modeling exercise presented by Mallick and Frazer (1991) shows
that the amplitude-variation-with-offset (AVO) response of Pwaves can be affected by the presence of fractures depending on
the relative orientation between fractures and the recording line.
Lefeuvre (1994), Lynn et al. (1995), perez and Gibson (1996), and
perez et al. (1999) presented examples that confirmed Mallick and
Frazer's (1991) predictions. Rger (1996) developed the theory
behind these observations and showed how to estimate other
fracture properties besides orientation.

By : Sigit Sukmono
37
A more recent line of research initiated by Grechka and Tsvankin

(1996) is devoted to the estimation of fracture properties from the
normal-moveout (NMO) analysis of multiazimuth P-wave data.
Corrigan et al. (1996) successfully applied these ideas to field
data.
All the previously mentioned methods have their own limitations
and do not necessarily yield the same results when applied in the
same area. They are influenced by different sources of noise that
need to be properly considered and reduced to obtain accurate
results.

By : Sigit Sukmono
38
In the following sections, the results of Perez et al (1999) study

are discussed. The study presents different seismic methods used
to estimate fracture orientation when applied to different data
sets recorded in the same field. The methods used are the
rotational analysis of converted waves, azimuthal AVO analysis,
and NMO ellipticity.
The results obtained from different methods generally agree
(except that for 3-D NMO ellipticity), follow one of the fracture
sets detected with Formation microScanners (FMS) logs, and
coincide with the trend of the maximum horizontal stress in the
area.

By : Sigit Sukmono
39
2.2. The Study Area

Maporal field is located in the north-central part of the BarinasApure Basin, Venezuela. Structurally, Maporal field is a dome
slightly extended toward the northeast. Geologically, the
sediments are nearly flat -lying, dipping toward the northeast at
approximately 4o.
The target zone is the O member of the Escandalosa
Formation. This member is a 25-m-thick fractured limestone
located at a depth of approximately 3000 m (2.32 s). Since
fractures seem to control production from the Escandalosa
Formation, reservoir engineers decided to continue the
exploitation of the field using horizontal wells oriented
perpendicularly to the densest fracture systems.
By : Sigit Sukmono
40
Existing well log information in the field provides good

background information about the reservoir and its fracture
properties, and can be used to calibrate the results obtained from
the seismic data.
FMS logs were used to estimate fracture orientation, fracture
density, and orientation of maximum horizontal stress at four
different wells. The rose diagrams in Figure 14 shows the
presence of different fracture systems in the area. The orientation
of the maximum horizontal stress measured is constant across
the field. The open fracture system tends to be parallel or quasi
parallel to the orientation of maximum horizontal stress.

By : Sigit Sukmono
41
2.3. Available Data

The data consisted of a 3-D P-wave survey recorded over an area
(640 km2) much larger than the area of interest to help in the
characterization of other adjacent reservoirs, and three l0-km 2-D
3-C lines centered in the area of interest (Figure 15).
The multicomponent acquisition was performed right after the 3D acquisition finished and, therefore, the results of the analysis of
one data set were not used to help the design of the other. The
three 2-D 3-C multicomponent lines were centered over the area
of interest with an intersection point coinciding with a well
location. For calibration purposes, each line intersected, or was
close to, at least one additional well with log information.
By : Sigit Sukmono
42
Previous P-wave 2-D seismic data were used to identify two

nearly orthogonal faults systems that cross the field (Figure 14).
The azimuths of two the multicomponent lines were almost
parallel to these systems, whereas the other line bisected them,
forming an angle of approximately 45 with each.
The 3-D seismic data were collected using a swath geometry
with a shot line perpendicular to eight receivers lines. A bin
spacing of 80 m, a fold of approximately 40 traces, and a
maximum offset of 3626 m were acquired. A subset of 25 km2
from the original 3-D data set centered at the intersection point
of the 2-D multicomponent lines was used for this study.

By : Sigit Sukmono
43
Superbins of 240 x 240 m2 were formed to insure adequate

coverage in offset and azimuth for AVO and NMO analysis.
Figure 16 shows atypical CDP supergather from the 3-D data.
Only f-k filtering in the shot domain has been applied to these
data to eliminate surface waves. Notice how the presence of
static noise, or possible azimuthal anisotropy.
Reflections from the top of the target (Escandalosa Formation)
are located at 2.32 s. Figure 17 shows a 2-D 3C, raw commonshot gather recorded over Line 2. Notice the presence of energy
in both horizontal components, which is an indication of
azimuthal anisotropy.
By : Sigit Sukmono
44
Michelena et al. (1994) performed modeling to demonstrate that

azimuthal anisotropy, not heterogeneity, is responsible for the
energy observed in the transverse component in this area. As
shown by Ata and Michelena (1995), fracture orientation changes
across the field, which explains why not all 3-C records show
energy in the transverse component. Converted waves from the
top of Escandalosa Formation are indicated by the arrow at 3.8 s.
Figure 18 shows the structural map of the top of the Escandalosa
Formation interpreted from the 3-D P-wave seismic data. This
map confirms the gentle nature of the structural variations in the
field already known from previous 2-D P-wave data. As we
mentioned before, this structure dips 4 toward the northeast.
By : Sigit Sukmono
45
2.4. Data Analysis

Fracture orientation was estimated by applying different
methods to the different data sets available, started by
analyzing the P-S converted waves in the multicomponent
data. Then, we analyze the AVO and NMO responses of Pwaves recorded in the vertical component of the 2-D 3-C data
around the intersection point of the three lines.
Finally, the azimuthal variations of AVO and NMO responses
of the P-waves for each bin in the 3-D data was investigated.
The following sections describes the obtained results.

By : Sigit Sukmono
46
2.4.1. 2-D data

Rotation analysis of P-S converted waves.Figure 19
shows portions of migrated horizontal components around
three different points in the field. Notice that points located
on lines 1 and 3 clearly show that the horizontal component
parallel to line 3 arrives earlier than the other component,
which is what we expected from the direction of the
maximum horizontal stress in the field.
Remember that the orientation of the faster shear arrival
generally coincides with the direction of maximum horizontal
stress.

By : Sigit Sukmono
47
Figure 14. Maximum horizontal stress (inward facing arrows) from break-out orientation logs at wells, 16, 17, 20, and 23.
The rose diagrams indicate fracture orientation and density from FMS logs in the same wells (Perez et al, 1999) .

By : Sigit Sukmono
48
Figure 15. Study area over 2-D and 3-D surveys (Perez et al, 1999)

By : Sigit Sukmono
49
Figure 16. Typical supergather from 3-D data. The bin size is 240 x 240 m2 (Perez et al, 1999)

By : Sigit Sukmono
50
Figure 17. 3-C raw

common-shot
gather
recorded over line 2 of
the 2-D multicomponent
lines. Converted waves
from
the
top
of
Escandalosa Formation
are indicated by the
arrow at 3.8 s in the
horizontal components
(Perez et al, 1999).

By : Sigit Sukmono
51
Figure 18. Structural map of the top of Escandalosa Formation interpreted from the 3-D seismic data. Colors indicate
two-way traveltime in second (Perez et al, 1999)

By : Sigit Sukmono
52
Figure 19. Horizontal components from three different locations in the field (Perez et al, 1999)

By : Sigit Sukmono
53
Figure 20. Fracture orientation from rotational analysis of converted waves (Perez et al, 1999).

By : Sigit Sukmono
54
After interpreting the migrated sections of radial and transverse

components, rms amplitudes in a window around the target was
compute. Then, rotational analysis based on the amplitude ratio
between the two horizontal components (Ata and Michelena,
1995) to estimate fracture orientation for each common conversion
point (CCP) of the three lines was performed. From the angles
estimated at each CCP, we obtain new angles for points outside the
multicomponent lines using 2-D spline interpolation. The
orientation of the fastest shear arrival happens to be approximately
constant for all depths across the field.
Figure 20 shows a smoothed map with the results of the
rotational analysis plus interpolation.

By : Sigit Sukmono
55
Each arrow indicates the local fracture orientation (fracture

strike) estimated from converted waves. The colors show the
same structural map presented in Figure 18. Since the azimuths
between the lines have been interpolated, orientations presented
in this map are more reliable along and in the neighborhood of
the three lines. As we can see, fracture orientation follows the
trend of the maximum horizontal stress in the area. Notice that
the estimated fracture orientation follows the direction of one of
the fracture systems present in the area.
Azimuthal AVO from 2-D data.For the 2-D P-wave data,
we perform conventional AVO analysis over CDP gathers
located along each line close to the intersection point.
By : Sigit Sukmono
56
We obtain the sections of AVO gradient and AVO intercept for

each line. Figure 21 shows the AVO gradient sections around
the intersection point along almost perpendicular lines 1 and 3.
Notice the different AVO gradients for the reflection from the
bottom of the reservoir along these two lines. No significant
differences are observed in AVO response from the top of the
reservoir. Figure 22 is a graph of AVO gradient versus AVO
intercept. Gradients for lines 1 and 2 (nearly perpendicular to
fracture orientation) are positive and higher than gradients along
line 3 (which is nearly parallel to the fracture orientation
estimated from converted waves). As expected, the AVO
intercept is almost the same for all lines.

By : Sigit Sukmono
57
The exact direction of the maximum AVO gradient was

estimated from the three CDP gathers located at the intersection
point of the multicomponent lines. We use a formula derived by
Rger (1996) for the reflection coefficients in transversely
isotropic media with a horizontal symmetry axis. The estimated
azimuth of the maximum AVO gradient is 56. Since it is
expected to be perpendicular to fracture orientation, we obtain
the fracture azimuth is 146 (Figure 23) .

By : Sigit Sukmono
58
Fracture orientation estimated using this technique also follows

the regional maximum horizontal stress and is close to the
orientation obtained from the analysis of the converted waves
(Figure 20).
NMO ellipticity from 2-D data.From the same three
gathers used to obtain the orientation of the maximum AVO
gradient, we estimate the parameters that describe the best
fitting horizontal ellipse of the NMO velocities for all azimuths
(Grechka and Tsvankin, 1996). The NMO ellipse obtained
from this analysis is shown in Figure 21. The azimuth of the
major axis is 125. The major axis corresponds to the
maximum NMO velocity that is expected to coincide with
fracture orientation.
By : Sigit Sukmono
59
The differences between maximum and minimum velocities are

around 5%, but the axes of the ellipse have been exaggerated to
give a better idea of its orientation. In this case, the orientation of
the major axis of the NMO ellipse also follows the regional trend
of the maximum horizontal stress in the area.
2.4.2. 3-D Seismic Data
Azimuthal AVO from 3-D data.3-D P-wave data was
gathered using a bin size of 240 x 240 m2 to achieve the coverage
needed in both offset and azimuth to perform azimuthal AVO
analysis. The orientation of the maximum AVO gradient was
estimated for each superbin based on the amplitudes located
within a time window that follows the top of Escandalosa.
By : Sigit Sukmono
60
Figure 25 shows smoothed results of the azimuthal AVO

analysis for each superbin. The arrows in Figure 25 are oriented
according to these new, smoothed angles. As we can see, the
estimated orientations follow closely the local structural
changes, but the general trend is still close to the regional
maximum horizontal stress. Areas with abrupt changes in
structure seem to have a more erratic AVO response when
compared to other areas in the field.
Notice the similarity between the results obtained with
converted waves (Figure 20) and 3-D azimuthal AVO analysis
(Figure 23). There are differences, however, between the two
results, especially in the northwest part of the area.
By : Sigit Sukmono
61
No interpolation was used to generate Figure 12 because AVO

analysis was performed at equally spaced grid points. On the
contrary, to generate Figure 7, we interpolated the azimuths
measured along the lines for all grid points where no
information was available.
In principle, this can create unrealistic orientations in areas
surrounded by angles that represent the same direction but
different orientations (0 and 180, for instance ), which is the
case in the northwest part of the area. No attempt was made to
change these angles in the data before interpolation.

By : Sigit Sukmono
62
Figure 21. AVO

gradient
sections
around
the
interception point for
lines 1 and 3. Notice
how
the
AVO
responses
changes
around the bottom of
the reservoir located
at 2.370 s (Perez et
al, 1999).
By : Sigit Sukmono
63
Figure 22. AVO intercept versus AVO gradient for lines 1,2 and 3 at the intersection point of the 2-D multicomponent lines
(Perez et al, 1999)

By : Sigit Sukmono
64
Figure 23. Orientation perpendicular to the maximum AVO gradient at the intersection point of the 2-D multicomponent lines.
This result is compared to the orientation of line 3, which is nearly parallel to the orientation of maximum horizontal stress in
the area (Perez et al, 1999)

By : Sigit Sukmono
65
Figure 24. Orientation of

the NMO ellipse from 2-D
P-wave data at the
intersection point of the 2D multicomponent lines
(Perez et al, 1999).

By : Sigit Sukmono
66
Figure 25. Fracture orientation from 3-D azimuthal AVO analysis. The arrows indicate the local orientation of the
perpendicular to the maximum AVO gradient (Perez et al, 1999).

By : Sigit Sukmono
67
Figure 26. Fracture orientation from 3-D NMO ellipticity. The arrows indicate the local orientation of the maximum
axis for the NMO ellipse (Perez et al, 1999).

By : Sigit Sukmono
68
Figure 27. Lateral velocity variations of the isotropic NMO velocity at the bottom of the reservoir (Perez et al, 1999)

By : Sigit Sukmono
69
NMO ellipticity from 3-D data.3-D NMO analysis was

performed for the same superbins used in the 3-D azimuthal
AVO analysis. Figure 26 shows the result of this process: the
orientation of the semimajor axes of NMO ellipses at the target
for each CDP. The general trend in the orientation of these axes
is not as expected from all our previous results, which followed
the orientation of the maximum horizontal stress more closely. In
Figure 26, the differences between the semimajor and semiminor
axes of the NMO ellipse are of the order of 3%.
We can speculate about various reasons to explain the
orientation of NMO ellipses for each CDP. First, the NMO
ellipses include a cumulative influence if the overburden from
the surface to the target.
By : Sigit Sukmono
70
We did not do layer stripping to obtain interval velocities

because the target is too thin (25 m) compared to its depth and,
therefore, the error amplification due to stripping is expected
to be severe. Second, since the ellipticities (i.e., the
elongations of NMO ellipses) are small (about 3%). The
ellipse orientation becomes a poorly determined quantity, so
that the estimated ellipse azimuths may be inaccurate. The
third issue is that we believe that the proper way to remove the
effects of near-surface azimuthal anisotrophy is by doing
independent static corrections for each azimuth, which we did
only for the 2-D data. The effect of static variations, nearsurface anisotropy,
By : Sigit Sukmono
71
and azimuthal anisotropy in the subsurface that affect the

NMO velocities cannot be separated whit static correction
methods that analyze simultaneously all azimuths in a
superbin. We found that after applying such corrections for
any depth, lateral coherency of events was improved
considerably, but differences between major and minor axes of
NMO ellipses were reduced to less than 0.01 %.
For this reason, we did not remove static corrections in the
data used to generate Figure 27. Finally, the influence of
lateral heterogeneity may make azimuthal variation of the
NMO velocity elliptical even in the absence of anisotropy.

By : Sigit Sukmono
72
Figure 27 shows lateral variations of the isotropic NMO

velocity ( e.g., a circular approximation of NMO ellipse)
estimated from conventional velocity analysis around the
target. Even though the changes in these velocities are not
that large, they may distort our inferences about P-wave
azimuthal anisotropy which are made under the assumption
that the medium is laterally homogeneous.

By : Sigit Sukmono
73
BIBLIOGRAPHY
Alford, R. M., 1986, Shear data in the presence of azimuthal anisotropy: 56th Ann. Internat. Mtg., Sac. Expl.
Geophys., Expanded Abstract, 476-479.
Ata, E., and Michelena, R. J., 1995, Mapping distribution of fractures in a reservoir with P-S converted
waves: The Leading Edge, 12,664-676.
Corrigan, D., Withers, R., Damall, J., and Skopinski, T., 1996, Analysis of amplitude versus offset to detect
gas-oil contacts in the Arabian Gulf: 66th Ann. Internat. Mtg., Soc. Expl. Geophys., Expanded Abstract,
1834-1837.
Garotta, R, and Granger, P. Y., 1988, Acquisition and processing of 3C x 3-D data using converted waves:
58th Ann. internat. Mtg., Soc. Expi. Geophys., Expanded Abstract, 657-658.
Grechka, V., and Tsvankin, J., 1996, 3D description of normal moveout in anisotropic media: 66th Ann.
Internat. Mtg., Soc. Expl. Geophys., Expanded Abstracts, 1487-1490.
Johnson, W. E., 1995, Direct detection of gas in pre-Tertiary sediments?: The Leading Edge, 14, 119-122.
Lefeuvre, F., 1994, Fracture related anisotropy detection and analysis: and if the P-waves were enough?":
64th Ann. Internat. Mtg., Soc. Expl. Geophys., Expanded Abstracts, 942-944.
Li, Y. et al, 2003, Recent application of AVO to carbonate reservoirs in the Western Canadian Sedimentary
Basin, The Leading Edge, July 2003, vol.22, no.7, SEG.
By : Sigit Sukmono
74
Lynn, H., Simon, K. M., Layman, M., Schneider, R, Bates, C. R., and Jones, M., 1995, Use of anisotropy in Pwave and S-wave data for fracture characterization in a naturally fractured gas reservoir: The wading Edge,
14, 887-893.
Mallick, S., and Frazer, L N., 1991, Reflection/transmission coefficients and azimuthal anisotropy in marine
seismic studies: Geophys. J. Internat., 105,241-252.
Maria A. Prez*, Vladmir Grechka, and Reinaldo J. Michelena*, 1999, Fracture detection in a carbonate
reservoir using a variety of seismic methods, Geophysics, v.64, no.4, 1266-1276
Michelena, R. J., Ata, E., and Sierra, J., 1994, Exploiting P-S converted waves: Part I, Modeling the effects of
anisotropy and heterogeneities: 64 Ann. Internat. Mtg., Soc. Expl. Geophys., Expanded Abstract, 236--239.
Perez, M., and Gibson, R., 1996, Detection of fracture orientationing azimuthal variation of P-wave AVO
responses: Barinas Field (Venezuela): 66th Ann. Internat Mtg., Soc. Expl. Geophys., Expanded Abstracts,
1353-1356.
Perez, M., Gibson, R., and Toksoz, N., 1999, Detection of Fracture orientation from azimuthal variation of Pwave AVO responses: Geophysics, 64, 1253-1267, this issue.
Ruger, A., 1996, Reflection coefficients and azimuthal AVO analysis in anisotropic media: Ph.D. thesis,
Colorado School of Mines.

By : Sigit Sukmono
75

AVO Carbonate

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

AVO Carbonate

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

AVO for Fluid & Fracture Analysis

AVO for Fluid & Fracture Analysis in Carbonate Reservoirs

1. AVO for Fluid Analysis in Carbonate Reservoirs

First, a lack of carbonate rock property information is

1.1. Carbonate rock properties.

Fluid effects in carbonates, especially gas effects, are contentious

AVO for Fluid & Fracture Analysis in Carbonate Reservoirs

AVO for Fluid & Fracture Analysis in Carbonate Reservoirs

AVO for Fluid & Fracture Analysis in Carbonate Reservoirs

Further evidence of this can be seen in an analysis of a large data

The influence of fluid on carbonate rock properties described above

AVO for Fluid & Fracture Analysis in Carbonate Reservoirs

In contrast, the fluid effect on offset amplitude or "gradient in a

AVO for Fluid & Fracture Analysis in Carbonate Reservoirs

AVO for Fluid & Fracture Analysis in Carbonate Reservoirs

AVO for Fluid & Fracture Analysis in Carbonate Reservoirs

The empirical relationships of carbonates were developed from lab

To determine a quantitative assessment of the influence of fluid

The high sensitivity of the reservoir rock and the enhancement of

where Rp is P-wave reflectivity and B is the slope of the carbonate

AVO for Fluid & Fracture Analysis in Carbonate Reservoirs

Figure 6. Sensitivity of rock properties in responding to fluid (Li et al, 2003)..

AVO for Fluid & Fracture Analysis in Carbonate Reservoirs

Figure 7 shows a real data example of a CDP gather at a

In an attempt to better define a carbonate reservoir, we analyzed the

AVO for Fluid & Fracture Analysis in Carbonate Reservoirs

Figure 10 shows and sections for a carbonate gas play.

AVO for Fluid & Fracture Analysis in Carbonate Reservoirs

AVO for Fluid & Fracture Analysis in Carbonate Reservoirs

Figure 11 shows the crossplots of The and sections in

AVO for Fluid & Fracture Analysis in Carbonate Reservoirs

AVO for Fluid & Fracture Analysis in Carbonate Reservoirs

AVO modeling can be conducted at this stage to assist

AVO for Fluid & Fracture Analysis in Carbonate Reservoirs

Figure 12. Projection of gas zone on section

AVO for Fluid & Fracture Analysis in Carbonate Reservoirs

2. AVO for Fracture Characterization

Recently, P-S converted waves have become more popular

AVO for Fluid & Fracture Analysis in Carbonate Reservoirs

AVO for Fluid & Fracture Analysis in Carbonate Reservoirs

A more recent line of research initiated by Grechka and Tsvankin

AVO for Fluid & Fracture Analysis in Carbonate Reservoirs

In the following sections, the results of Perez et al (1999) study

AVO for Fluid & Fracture Analysis in Carbonate Reservoirs

2.2. The Study Area

Existing well log information in the field provides good

AVO for Fluid & Fracture Analysis in Carbonate Reservoirs

2.3. Available Data

Previous P-wave 2-D seismic data were used to identify two

AVO for Fluid & Fracture Analysis in Carbonate Reservoirs

Superbins of 240 x 240 m2 were formed to insure adequate

Michelena et al. (1994) performed modeling to demonstrate that

2.4. Data Analysis

AVO for Fluid & Fracture Analysis in Carbonate Reservoirs

2.4.1. 2-D data

AVO for Fluid & Fracture Analysis in Carbonate Reservoirs

AVO for Fluid & Fracture Analysis in Carbonate Reservoirs

AVO for Fluid & Fracture Analysis in Carbonate Reservoirs

AVO for Fluid & Fracture Analysis in Carbonate Reservoirs

Figure 17. 3-C raw

AVO for Fluid & Fracture Analysis in Carbonate Reservoirs

AVO for Fluid & Fracture Analysis in Carbonate Reservoirs

AVO for Fluid & Fracture Analysis in Carbonate Reservoirs

AVO for Fluid & Fracture Analysis in Carbonate Reservoirs