ISSN 0263-5046

October 2008 Volume 26

Reservoir Geoscience and Engineering

Special Topic
Technical Articles Identication of collapse breccia pipes in coal mines based on 3D seismic interval attributes Geomechanical behaviour of the overburden above compacting hydrocarbon reservoirs what would we predict from coalmining experience? HSE Feature HSE must wins in pursuit of Shells Goal Zero News Features Price volatility makes future oil predictions a guessing game A bigger oil shock may await us sooner than we think

first break volume 26, October 2008

special topic

Reservoir Geoscience and Engineering

Near-surface P-velocity modelling by integrated seismic, EM, and gravity data: examples from the Middle East
D. Colombo1*, M. Cogan2, S. Hallinan3, M. Mantovani3, M. Virgilio3 and W. Soyer provide some onshore Middle East illustrations of the benefits of integrating seismic, electromagnetic (EM) and gravity data to improve shallow velocity modelling.
nshore seismic data from the Middle East and around the world are adversely affected by near-surface velocity anomalies. Shallow-section velocity characterization represents a key issue for land data processing in both time and depth domains. In the Middle East, near-surface complexity can be attributed to sand dunes, wadies, sabkha environment, shallow high-velocity layers (carbonate outcrops), karsting, and fractured layers. The correct estimate of the near-surface velocity field is fundamental to obtain reliable seismic images. Conventional workflows for near-surface model building often involve interpreting and inverting refracted arrival information. These methods may fail to appropriately reconstruct the shallow velocity complexities in the presence of large velocity inversions, rapid lateral velocity changes, and noisy refracted arrival data. The combination of additional geophysical measurements (i.e., non-seismic), not influenced by the problems affecting seismic propagation, are needed to address the shallow velocity modelling problem. This paper describes three different approaches recently applied in distinctly different environments around the Middle East to solve near-surface modelling problems. The first example from the United Arab Emirates (UAE) demonstrates the integration of seismic and time-domain electromagnetics (TDEM) for sand dune statics application. The second example from Saudi Arabia also addresses sand dune statics, but this time by simultaneous joint inversion (JI) of seismic and gravity measurements. The final example applies the simultaneous JI technique for the near-surface velocity component of a depth migration model.

Seismic/time-domain EM integration (dune statics)

In early 2008, WesternGeco acquired ~400 line km of 2D Q-Land MAS (mini acquisition system) data over the field referred to as Field A located within the UAE, close to Dubai (van Baaren and van Kleef, 2008).The survey area contains
1 2

dune topography, a spatially variable dune velocity field, and a complex subsurface. The noise observed in the early times of correlated seismic data causes the first breaks (FBs) to be of poor quality, especially for the very shallow section representing the sand dunes. Sand dunes are generally low-velocity and laterally varying as a function of the height and shape of the dune. The first consistent pattern of FB arrivals in Field A represents the refraction from a shallow fast-velocity interface defined as the base of sands or top of the water table. Determining the correct depth of this boundary, together with the definition of the sand-dune velocity variation, is critical to derive a long-wavelength static correction. The use of a shallow EM method such as the timedomain electromagnetic induction method (TDEM) represented an effective solution to map the elevation of the base sand. The base sand in this area corresponds to a large contrast between the dry, resistive sand and the underlying sediments that are at least partially saturated with water or moisture rising through capillary action. The acquisition parameters of the TDEM survey are reported in table one. The acquisition of a parallel uphole programme provided interval velocity information and lithology calibration for a TDEM 1D inversion. The TDEM 1D inversion results provided the geometric constraints for laterally interpolating the interval velocity from uphole measurements in the corridor defined by the topographic surface and the base sands (Virgilio et al., 2008). The resulting shallow velocity model was then used to calculate long-wavelength statics that were used in the surface seismic data processing. This approach was aimed at removing the effects of the laterally varying sand velocities from the data in a geologically consistent manner. Figure 1 shows the results of the TDEM inversion/modelling of the shallow sand dune section.

WesternGeco, Calgary. WesternGeco, Houston. 3 WesternGeco, Milan. *Corresponding author, E-mail: dcolombo@calgary.westerngeo.slb.com.

2008 EAGE www.firstbreak.org

91

special topic

first break volume 26, October 2008

Reservoir Geoscience and Engineering

Figure 1 Display of a TDEM resistivity section acquired in Field A - UAE. The base of dry sand LVL is mapped coherently throughout the section after lithological calibration at the uphole site positions. (Black dots represent the position of TDEM soundings).

Instrumentation Type Loop size Transmitted current Effective time decay # soundings

Sirotem Mk3 systems Single loop 50 x 50 m (occasionally: 75x75) 7 to 8 Amp 0.01 to 10 ms 505

Table 1 TDEM acquisition parameters.

Logistically, the TDEM method is effective in reducing the number of uphole measurements needed to identify the base sand. TDEM is also used as an alternative to elevation statics or to more time-consuming refraction statics, although this latter claim may be limited to particular geologic cases. The assumption made is that the main velocity change at the base of dunes corresponds with the main resistivity change. Some independent uphole measurements may still be needed to determine sand velocities, if they cannot be accurately derived from analysis of the seismic data FBs. It should be noted that the direct mapping of resistivity into velocity for the sand dune section is quite difficult as the resistivity in arid (dry) environments is likely to be uncorrelated with seismic velocity variations.

Arabia. The project goal was derivation of a robust nearsurface velocity model for subsequent long-wavelength statics calculation. The prospect area suffers from near-surface geology complexity in the form of vugs and variation in the character of the regional refractor. The regional base of the weathering horizon, the Rus limestone, is often continuous, but in places pinches out at the surface, exposing the variable formation below. In other areas, the geometry of the Rus is influenced by paleostress and is folded into broad anticlines. In these areas, FBs cannot be picked consistently from shot to shot. Some other information is needed to complete the static model. Often, reflection events at deeper intervals have been used to solve the short-wavelength part of the problem based on an interpretation that these deeper events are flat, continuous horizons. When the Rus is absent over large sections of the 2D lines, the long-wavelength static becomes uncertain, where different near-surface models can result in a few degrees of tilt of the stratigraphy. Over the length of a 300 km line, this can be several hundred meters of elevation change on a reflector. Densely sampled surface gravity measurements provide the needed additional constraint in areas where FB picks are inconsistent. For a 30 km test line, the results of simultaneous JI of FB picks and gravity data were used to form a nearsurface model.

Rub Al Khali (Saudi Arabia) seismic/gravity JI (dune statics)

The project was designed as a 2D test of simultaneous JI of refraction FBs and surface gravity measurements from Saudi

Project background
In the southern part of Saudi Arabia (South Rub Al Khali), a joint venture between Shell and Saudi Aramco (SRAK) has acquired nearly 18,300 line km of 2D seismic data.

92

www.firstbreak.org 2008 EAGE

first break volume 26, October 2008

special topic

Reservoir Geoscience and Engineering

Figure 2 Location map for SRAK gravity JI test data. The 2D test line comes from new acquisition in SRAK Blocks 5-9.

New acquisition currently underway will add ~3000 line km to this area. The new data are of generally good quality with source and receiver station spacing of 25 m and with 6 km offsets. The source is vibroseis with an 8 to 80 Hz sweep. To complement the surface seismic data, high-resolution land gravity data were acquired by SRAK on most of the seismic lines. Gravity stations are coincident with every 10th vibroseis source position. In total, 72,963 gravity points were acquired on about 18,300 km of seismic lines. The average accuracy of measured gravity is about 0.028 mGal. The complete Bouguer anomaly was obtained by considering an average density value for sand dunes of 1600 kg/m3. Other processing applied by SRAK to the gravity data included inner-zone terrain corrections up to 54 m from measurement points and outer-zone terrain corrections to 30 km from the measurement points. Terrain correction values may have the highest impact on data accuracy. Inner-zone terrain correction standard deviation is reported as 0.08 mGal on dunes (gravity survey and data processing report, SRAK). Conventional seismic processing has, in general, yielded interpretable sections with minimal statics problems, preservation of high frequencies, and good well ties. Figure 3 shows an example of the imaged data quality. The statics

solution for these data includes a smoothed long-wavelength statics model from the extended generalized reciprocal method (EGRM), two passes of residual statics, and one pass of CMP or trim statics. The long-wavelength refraction statics work well when there is a strong refractor to pick. The technique breaks down when the refractor pinches out at the surface or is structurally complex. By end of 2007, a project was initiated with SRAK to evaluate the simultaneous JI methodology (Colombo and DeStefano, 2007) when applied to statics solutions in dune environments. High-resolution gravity data acquired along the seismic lines were simultaneously jointly inverted with the seismic FB data to resolve the near-surface velocity model. The project involved WesternGeco data processing in Al Khobar, Saudi Arabia, and the structural depth imaging group in Milan, Italy. Imaging through PSDM-JI generally starts from the analysis of FBs (i.e., in the pre-migrated domain), which are simultaneously jointly inverted with non-seismic data represented by MT or gravity (Figure 10). In the case of the SRAK test, the PSDM-JI has been limited to the simultaneous JI of FB and gravity data. This approach has the advantage over conventional refraction statics methods of providing

2008 EAGE www.firstbreak.org

93

special topic

first break volume 26, October 2008

Reservoir Geoscience and Engineering

robust velocity reconstructions of the shallow layers, including velocity inversions or low-velocity zones, which generally represent hidden layers for refraction seismology. the value observed in the real data application (Figure 6). Another observation can be made regarding the fit of the gravity anomaly. In a gravity inversion approach, it is easy to perfectly fit the gravity anomaly through inversion, because a large number of density distributions can fit a measured gravity response (high non-uniqueness of the inversion results). However, in a simultaneous JI approach, the seismic and the gravity inversions must come to a compromise, i.e., the derived velocity/density model subject to the JI constraints must be the best common model fitting the dual geophysical measurements. In this way, the non-uniqueness of the inversion procedure is reduced.

Synthetic test
A preliminary synthetic model test is shown in Figure 4 where a conceptual complex shallow-velocity model is used. The synthetic test results suggest that the JI of seismic FBs and gravity data are able to better reconstruct the overall shallow velocity structure than the inversion of FB data alone (with no noise added to the data). Remarkably, the density section deriving from FB-gravity JI is quite accurate for the shallow density variations within the dunes. This is because the gravity measurements are highly sensitive to shallow density variations close to the measurement points. This makes high-resolution gravity measurements an excellent tool to map the shallow density variations. The joint FB-gravity inversion is able to derive the shape and velocity/density of the low-velocity channel in the middle of the section, an impossible task for FB inversion alone for which the fastest travel paths are travelling as head waves at the interface sands carbonates regardless of the offset used. In fact, stiff rock formations such as carbonates or basalts possess negligible vertical velocity gradients, thus impeding the refracted waves from penetrating through the body and providing information about the thickness. Figure 5 displays the fit of the synthetic model response with the response generated by the density model from JI. The gravity field response, displayed as change in gravity, is in the range of maximum 2 mGal, which is close to

Real data application

A very simple processing sequence is applied to the seismic dataset before statics application: SEG-Y input Geometry assignment True amplitude recovery F-K filter Spiking deconvolution, one window, operator length 80 ms, 1% white noise NMO velocity analysis Seismic FBs are picked automatically and gravity data processing relies on the processing performed by SRAK (after careful QC of the acquisition/processing report). Table 2 shows the JI parameters and results. It is observed that the seismic and gravity meshes have different dimensions.

Figure 3 Final imaged stack section from SRAK Line 404.

94

www.firstbreak.org 2008 EAGE

first break volume 26, October 2008

special topic

Reservoir Geoscience and Engineering

The gravity cells increase in size with depth to adapt to the expected decay in resolution of the gravity method (i.e., decay proportional to the squared distance from the measurement point). Links between seismic velocity and density parameters are set up during JI by using an empirical parameter relationship (Gardner, in this case) and structural constraints between the velocity and density inversion updates (based on cross-gradient relationship). The relative weights were set at 50% for both the empirical and structural relations. The geophysical domains (i.e., seismic and gravity) were weighted equally in the first JI iteration while gravity was weighted 10 times more than seismic FBs in the second JI iteration. JI results for both velocity and density fields are shown in Figure 6 with the corresponding initial and final fit of the measured gravity anomaly. Calculation of long-wavelength statics is performed based on the velocity results from JI. Figure 7 displays the comparison between JI statics and conventional elevation statics calculated with a constant velocity replacement of 2500 m/s.

Figure 4 Synthetic inversion results of a conceptual complex shallow velocity model comparing FB diving wave (or turning ray) tomography with JI of FB and gravity data.

2008 EAGE www.firstbreak.org

95

special topic

first break volume 26, October 2008

Reservoir Geoscience and Engineering

Velocity inversion mesh size Gravity inversion mesh size Velocity starting model Gravity starting model Number of JI iterations JI domain weights (seismic vs gravity) JI constraint weights 50 x 50 m 250 m (x), 150-450 m (z) Refraction delay-time technique Gardner conversion of starting velocity model 2 First iteration = 1:1 (seismic gravity) Second iteration = 0.1:1 (seismic gravity) Gardner equation = 50% Cross gradients = 50% 168 ms 26 ms (85% misfit impr.) 5.35 mGal 0.03 mGal (99% misfit impr.)

Initial final r.m.s. Seismic Initial final r.m.s. Gravity

Table 2 FB Gravity JI parameters and performance.

Figure 5 Fit of the calculated gravity model response (red) with the synthetic gravity anomaly (blue), starting model (top), and final inverted model (bottom).

96

www.firstbreak.org 2008 EAGE

first break volume 26, October 2008

special topic

Reservoir Geoscience and Engineering

Figure 6 JI starting conditions (left column) and JI results after the second iteration (blue=measured gravity anomaly; red=calculated gravity response). The highvelocity/density slab represents the shallow Rus limestone present in a regional extent in the area.

Figure 8 shows the comparison of final JI statics with benchmark refraction statics calculated using a proprietary seismic processing system (both after residual statics). The differences between final results are subtle, yet as Phase 1 of the near-surface modelling work, it was considered a success. The result proves that the gravity constraint does not alter the long-wavelength trend, which is well defined by the refractor and provides a result comparable to applicable refraction static technology. A proposed Phase 2 of the test would involve repeating the process for a section of a line without the clearly defined refractor and with more complex near-surface conditions.

Northern Oman seismic/gravity JI (depth imaging)

The third and final example is from Northern Oman, a complex thrust-belt area with significant velocity variations in both lateral and vertical directions (Figure 9). The geology of Northern Oman, from east to west, is characterized by

obducted ophiolites followed by a complex accretionary prism (Hawasina) that rides over Fiqua shale above the deep carbonate platform (Natih limestone). The accretionary wedge also known as Hawasina consists of tight (fast) carbonates and cherts, heavily tectonized as a result of the subduction process. Targets for exploration are the large deep structures generated in the Mesozoic carbonate sequence (Natih, Mauddud) and deeper Paleozoic. To the west, the geologic structure is further complicated by the presence of Tertiary carbonates (Asmari, Dammam, Rus, Umm Er Radhuma) often structured and sometimes outcropping as in the impressive Jebel Hafit structure on the border between Oman and UAE. These shallow carbonates, together with the velocity inversion caused by the Fiqua shales, represent a severe obstacle to the penetration of the seismic energy. The complexity described above, together with the poor signalto-noise ratio of the seismic data, make velocity analysis and imaging extremely difficult in this area.

2008 EAGE www.firstbreak.org

97

special topic

first break volume 26, October 2008

Reservoir Geoscience and Engineering

Figure 7 Comparison of elevation statics (left) with constant replacement velocity of 2500 m/s and FB gravity JI statics (right).

Figure 8 Comparison of statics results after calculation and application of residual statics: benchmark refraction (left) and JI (right).

98

www.firstbreak.org 2008 EAGE

first break volume 26, October 2008

special topic

Reservoir Geoscience and Engineering

Figure 9 Study area in northern Oman with main geologic units.

Due to the complexity of the geologic setting, the seismic exploration strategy in this area consisted of the acquisition of extremely long offsets accompanied by gravity measurements densely spaced along the lines. Processing in depth by means of simultaneous JI with gravity was performed on a total of approximately 600 line km in northern Oman. The line presented here Receiver interval Source interval Max offset (off-end) Max offset (split-spread) Channels Line length Gravity station interval
Table 3 Acquisition parameters, northern Oman.

used the acquisition parameters detailed in Table 3 with maximum offsets exceeding 25 km when in off-end configuration. The depth imaging, velocity model building approach followed the general workflow detailed in Figure 10 where JI of seismic and gravity data occurred at two separate stages targeting both shallow and deep sections. The 12.5 m 50 m 25,200 m 12,600 m 2,015 ~34 km 490 m

2008 EAGE www.firstbreak.org

99

special topic

first break volume 26, October 2008

Reservoir Geoscience and Engineering

Figure 10 Depth-domain JI workflow (PSDM-JI).

shallow velocity model was obtained by the simultaneous JI of FBs and gravity residuals to reconstruct the complex velocity variations occurring in a range of about 2 km from the surface. The velocity model building was further refined and continued to greater depths by including the residual moveout of the post-migrated domain gathers, which were also jointly inverted with the gravity data residuals. The simultaneous JI of seismic and gravity residuals provided significant improvements to the velocity modelling of the shallow section when compared with the results of diving-wave tomography without gravity. Figure 11 shows a detailed view of the shallow carbonate velocity structure as derived by JI of FB with gravity residuals. Figure 12 displays the corresponding density models of the initial and final JI outputs, with the corresponding fit of the model gravity field response relative to the measured Bouguer anomaly (gravity reduction using a density of

Figure 11 Velocity fields provided by diving-wave tomography (top) and simultaneous JI of FBs and gravity data (bottom). The use of gravity in JI with seismic FB allows a better definition of the carbonate slab velocity structure.

2,500 kg/m3). The enhancement obtained in the seismic image in depth domain is displayed in Figure 13 where the JI velocity model provides a much better definition of the base of the carbonate slab as well as of the thrust faults intersecting it. A correct reconstruction of the shallow velocity field provides large benefits to the very deep section. Imaging results in depth domain (Colombo et al., 2007) using the JI workflow with gravity considerably improved the imaging results when compared to the corresponding time migration (poststack) results (Figure 14).

Figure 12 Density models from JI and misfit between calculated gravity response and measured Bouguer anomaly (boxed area refer to detail shown in Figure 11).

100

www.firstbreak.org 2008 EAGE

first break volume 26, October 2008

special topic

Reservoir Geoscience and Engineering

Figure 13 The examples above display the different depth imaging results obtained by modeling the near-surface velocity field by using diving-wave tomography alone (top) and by using diving waves (i.e FBs) in simultaneous JI with gravity data (bottom). As a result, the base of the carbonate slab and the sediments underneath are better resolved.

Conclusions
The application of workflows that integrate seismic, gravity, and electromagnetic methods in different projects in the Middle East demonstrates the potential benefits for time and depth land seismic data processing. A complex shallow section represents one of the main obstacles to onshore seismic imaging in the Middle East. Conventional seismic workflows based on FB analysis and inversion are often insufficient to model complex velocity fields such as those involving lateral velocity changes and vertical velocity inversions. Fastest arrival time diving waves, in fact, tend to oversample the high-velocity features and under-sample the low velocity ones. The absence of vertical gradients within stiff rocks such as carbonate banks and/or shallow basalt layers means that most of the first arrivals are travelling as head waves along the high-velocity interface without providing information on thickness and velocity inversions. In such cases, the use of additional geophysical data incorporated in seismic data processing could possibly

solve some of the long-standing problems encountered in overthrust geology, sand dunes, and several other complex shallow-velocity cases (e.g., shallow volcanics, permafrost, shallow gas pockets, and carbonates). The JI methodology, in particular, provides an analytical solution to the integration of seismic with gravity and EM data. JI has the capability to reduce the human interpretative intervention in favor of robust and stable data-driven integration workflows. JI applications could potentially be adapted to fast-track seismic production environments involving large volumes of seismic data for calculation of robust statics solutions (e.g., a fast-track FB-gravity JI followed by statics calculation) or to more detailed and target-oriented depth imaging approaches.

Acknowledgements
We wish to thank the owners of the data who kindly provided permission for this publication. These are: the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia Ministry of Petroleum and Mineral Resources; SRAK,

2008 EAGE www.firstbreak.org

101

special topic

first break volume 26, October 2008

Reservoir Geoscience and Engineering

Pieter Van Mastrigt and Abdulmohsin Al-Dulaijan; Ministry of Oil and Gas, Oman; and RAK Petroleum, John Hurst. We also thank WesternGeco for allowing the publication of these results and colleagues in Milan, Al Khobar and Abu Dhabi offices, namely, Massimo Clementi and Maurizio Sfolciaghi. Tarek Nafie, and Ahmed Mouaki Benani Chebihat.

References
Colombo D. and De Stefano, M. [2007] Geophysical modeling via Simultaneous JI of Seismic, Gravity and Electromagnetic data: application to Pre-Stack Depth Imaging. The Leading Edge, 26(3), 326-331. Colombo D., Mantovani, M., De Stefano, M., Garrad, D. and Al Lawati, H. [2007] Simultaneous JI of Seismic and Gravity data for long offset Pre-Stack Depth Migration in Northern Oman. CSEG Annual Meeting. van Baaren P. and van Kleef, F. [2008] Single-sensor vibroseis acquisition in complex thrust belt areas. A case study from Dubai. 78th SEG International Exposition and Annual Meeting. Virgilio, M., Hallinan, S., Colombo, D., Soyer, W. , De Stefano, M. and Mantovani, M. [2008] Simultaneous JI of electromagnetic, gravimetric and seismic data for 3D depth imaging and time statics
Figure 14 Comparison between conventional time processing results (poststack migration top) and prestack depth migration (bottom) obtained using the PSDM JI workflow with gravity data.

computation with TDEM. 69th EAGE Conference and Exhibition, Workshop 2.

Bringing Knowledge and Technology to the Field

Call for Papers

deadline 1 December 2008
www.eage.org 1st International Petroleum Conference & Exhibition 4-6 May 2009 Shiraz, Iran

102

www.firstbreak.org 2008 EAGE