Did the workflow above help constraining your interpretation?

What would be
the value of following workflow like this in Hydrocarbon exploration and
production?

Yes, the workflow helped constraining the interpretation, because this workflow
establish fault correlations and fault patterns using displacement patterns on strike
projection, especially when data are limited. If data are 2D seismic lines and
separations between seismic lines are wide, then this workflow will be helpful to
improve interpretation and to decrease uncertainty in fault interpretation and
correlation.
Contour maps for exploration may describe geologic structure as well as thickness of
formations. They can show the angle of a fault and where it cuts off formations and
other faults, as well as where formations stop suddenly.
Defining faults and fault patterns is very important in Hydrocarbon
exploration. Advantages of proper interpretations are reflected in the following:

Validating the fault patterns and interpretations to define prospects of exploration

Minimizing the exploration risk

Improving confidence when we propose a wildcat well

Reservoir connectivity, sealing or leaking faults, field compartmentalized by fault are

crucial factors which are the results of interpretations of faults and fault patterns. If
that interpretation is established than the production of the field can be planned and
executed accurately and the production cost is more effective.
Is your interpretation correct?
Probably yes, because we used workflow steps during our interpretation, and on our
contours maps, contour value decreases from the center to the tipline. Also
displacement varies laterally and vertically. Contour lines on the map have an
elliptical shape.
If not, how would you change it to make it more correct?