first break volume 23, June 2005
Multi-disciplinary Geoscience
New concepts for borehole and VSP data
integration in seismic data processing
Rick Walia and Ken Brandt, CGG Canada Services; Rob Duthie, VSFusion/Baker Atlas;
Roger Whittaker and Emmanuel Malterre, First Calgary Petroleums; and Peter Bell, RPS
Hydrosearch, provide an example from Algeria to illustrate the benefits of integrating bore-
hole and VSP data in the processing of challenging seismic data.
T he Berkine basin, Algeria presents unique challenges
for seismic data acquisition, processing, and interpre-
tation. This is primarily due to surface and shallow
subsurface conditions, namely, the presence of up to 2
km wide and up to 250 m high star-shaped dunes, unconsol-
idated sands in the shallow subsurface, and several high-den-
sity/velocity layers within 500 m below the surface causing
severe statics and multiple problems. The seismic data pro-
cessing was therefore faced with several challenges, in terms
of statics, noise (random, linear, multiples and acquisition
footprint), and also velocity analysis. These all had a detri-
mental effect on the integrity of the structural and strati-
graphic interpretation of the 2D and 3D seismic data. New
ways of integrating borehole data to obtain a better under-
standing of these problems and possible solutions were con-
sidered, and are presented in this article.
Data processing
The Berkine basin in eastern Algeria is regarded as one of the
more significant hydrocarbon plays in North Africa. The dis-
cussion in this paper focuses primarily on the important
Ledjmet blocks 405 and 406 of the Berkine basin, which
have the potential of more than 5 trillion ft3 of gas and 5 bil-
lion barrels of oil equivalent (boe) of recoverable oil reserves
Figure 1 Berkine Basin oil and gas trend - more than 5 billion
barrels of oil discovered to date.
© 2005 EAGE
special topic
(Figure 1). Several early to upper Jurassic salts, anhydrite, car-
bonates, and evaporates together with unconsolidated sands
in the shallow to very shallow subsurface are the source of
most of the processing woes in terms of statics, multiples and
poor signal-to-noise ratio.
For a detailed mapping of the Ledjmet-405/406 blocks,
two 3D seismic surveys were acquired using Vibroseis 100-
fold parallel-geometry. This acquisition geometry allowed a
much better sampled offset distribution (50-5000 m) in the
CDP domain. This also resulted in effective noise attenua-
tion, improved velocity analysis, an enhanced signal-to-noise
ratio, and a stable full Kirchhoff Prestack Time Migration
(KPSTM). A typical raw CDP gather before and after noise
attenuation and surface-consistent amplitude correction is
shown in Figure 2.
Role of borehole data in statics solution
It is obvious from Figure 2 that, due to inaccuracies in first
break picking, a conventional statics solution based solely on
refraction is bound to fail. This was the first challenge to the
Figure 2 (a) A typical CDP gather from the Ledjmet 3D vol-
ume. Poor signal-to-noise ratio due to random noise, ground
roll, surface-generated noise, interbed multiples, and refrac-
tions produced by several high-velocity sand, limestone, and
anhydrite layers posed the main challenges in the surface-con-
sistent amplitude-preserving processing flow. (b) CDP gather
after application of random noise and linear noise attenuation
in shot and offset domain and multichannel median filters in
selected frequency bands.
83
 special topic
Multi-disciplinary Geoscience
Figure 3 Combination of model-based layer stripping and
reflection statics led to a stable statics solution. Yellow dots in
(A) represent upholes and red dots represent exploration wells.
borehole data integration process. Several weeks were spent
on experimenting to find the best possible way to handle
statics due to surface dune topography, unconsolidated/wet
shallow sand layers, and deeper high-velocity laterally-vary-
ing thin layers. As a result, a four-step statics workflow was
designed as shown in Figure 3. Based on the recommenda-
tion of this workflow, hundreds of shallow uphole (~100 m)
and a few deeper uphole (~300 m) surveys were collected
field-wide. A precise near-surface 3D model was then pre-
pared using uphole and well data to compute statics caused
Figure 4A Stack with model and refraction statics applied.
Figure 4B Stack with model and refraction and reflection stat-
ics applied.
Figure 4C Stack with model and refraction and reflection stat-
ics and residual statics applied.
84
first break volume 23, June 2005
by shallow sand layers. The application of this long-wave-
length statics permitted accurate picking of the first breaks
corresponding to the deeper ~2000 m/s and ~3000 m/s lay-
ers at a modelled depth of ~100 m and ~320 m below ground
level respectively. Refraction statics were then computed
based on this model as step two of the statics workflow and
applied. This step was able to handle medium to long wave-
length statics. As step three, a reflection-based specialized
algorithm, which uses a known shallow reflection as a refer-
ence to compute residual medium wavelength statics, was
applied successfully followed by three passes of residual stat-
ics (Figure 4). After every pass, velocity picks were refined
and the frequency bandwidth was broadened to achieve a
high-resolution seismic volume. The final stacks are com-
pared in Figure 5.
High resolution VSP
Although an acceptable statics solution was achieved from
the workflow discussed above, the identification of laterally
varying high-velocity layers within the top 500 m of the shal-
low subsurface and their eventual mapping were critical to
further refine the statics for a confident structural interpreta-
tion. This work is ongoing. However, a successful experi-
ment to acquire high-resolution VSP (HRVSP) was tested,
and is now routinely deployed in every exploration well to
collect high-frequency VSP data. The purpose is to obtain the
precise depth and velocity of the low- and high-velocity lay-
ers in order to construct an accurate near-surface model and
calibrate seismic-derived statics.
After several experiments and trial runs, HRVSP was
acquired in 2 m intervals from 100 m to a total depth of 500
m below the surface, with a single vibrator placed at a 15 m
offset from the wellhead sweeping from 6 to 120 Hz. A
HRVSP dataset (up to ~110 Hz) was collected along with a
full suite of shallow wireline logs. The match between the
shallow synthetic, HRVSP, and the seismic data is excellent
and the low- and high-velocity layers correlate very well
(Figure 6). The results of this experiment were very encourag-
ing to plan for HRVSPs and shallow logs at several locations
and will be fully integrated in the seismic data processing.
Borehole data in seismic velocity picking
It is unfortunate but true that the most critical step in seismic
data processing, velocity picking, is carried out without any
consideration to the true geological velocity, which is readily
available from borehole data, such as sonic log, check shots,
and VSP. Arguments that the seismic velocities are picked to
flatten the reflection are justified if the reflections are clearly
visible and a quick qualitative check can guarantee a perfect
flattening. The CDP shown in Figure 2 clearly shows that
such a practice of velocity picking may not be valid, where
even a 1% velocity change can provide very different stacks
(Figure 7). It is therefore imperative to use borehole data to
© 2005 EAGE
first break volume 23, June 2005
Figure 5 Comparison of final stack with first-breaks-based statics to a four-step statics workflow, which is a combination of
refraction statics derived from the uphole data-based model, refraction statics using a layer-stripping approach, followed by
reflection and auto statics.
obtain interval velocities, which can be readily converted
into stacking velocities, thereby providing an invaluable ref-
erence in velocity picking (Figure 8). This information should
preferably come from VSPs, as they better correspond to seis-
mic velocities due to the similar bandwidth of acquisition
when compared with sonic log-derived velocities. As clearly
shown in Figure 8, slight modifications in velocity picking
matched to the borehole-derived velocities may not only pro-
Figure 6 Composite showing sonic velocities, HRVSP corridor
stack and seismic stack correlation. The presence of several
thin high-velocity layers is confirmed. A good correlation
between the HRVSP corridor stack and seismic data may help
refine the statics model.
© 2005 EAGE
special topic
Multi-disciplinary Geoscience
vide better quality of stacks, but also may make seismically-
derived interval velocities more geologically meaningful.
VSP data in multiple identification
As discussed, the presence of several shallow salt, anhydrite,
and dolomite layers results in a series of primary and interbed
multiples. Some of these multiples can be eliminated by cas-
cading routine and specialized demultiple algorithms.
However, others are difficult to remove without negatively
Figure 7 Stack sections showing 1% change vs stack quality,
the data is very sensitive to the velocity picking.
85
 special topic
Multi-disciplinary Geoscience
Figure 8 VSP can be an excellent source for providing refer-
ence stacking velocity trends in seismic velocity picking. This
can be seen in panel 2 where the seismic velocity picking is
matched with VSP-derived stacking velocity trend and in
panel 4 where the interval velocity from the stacking veloci-
ty becomes more meaningful.
affecting the primary events, due to insufficient moveout in
both near and far offsets. This means that interpretation has
to be carried out with remnants of multiples in the final data.
In such circumstances, the best approach would be to some-
how identify the multiples and exclude them from the inter-
pretations. VSP, by virtue of its acquisition geometry, can be
a very useful tool to help identify the primaries and respec-
tive multiples.
The diagram in Figure 9 illustrates multiple generation in
VSP. The multiple event (M1) terminates directly below
where the strong impedance contrast of primary reflection
(PR1) meets the first breaks at receiver depth level 4, as it
cannot exist at receiver depths deeper than the event gener-
ating PR1. Both the time difference between primary and
multiple arrivals, as well as the receiver depth level where a
Figure 10 VSP upwaves before and after deconvolution. Before
deconvolution is applied it is possible to identify the multiple
events, which are delayed in time but truncating at the same
depth as the interface at which the multiple is reflected.
86
first break volume 23, June 2005
Figure 9 A diagram illustrating how the multiple event (M1)
terminates well below the first-breaks at receiver level 4. The
time-difference between primary and multiple arrivals and
the receiver level where a multiple terminates provides infor-
mation about the interval responsible for generating that
multiple and also the interface that finally reflects that mul-
tiple.
multiple terminates, provide information about the event
responsible for generating the multiple. This information is
critical for the success of pre- and poststack modelling-based
multiple removal schemes. It is important to note that this
interpretation can only be performed when both pre and post
VSP downwave deconvolution upwave datasets are studied
(Figures 10 & 11). Figure 12 illustrates the final results of
borehole data integration efforts in seismic data processing,
which led to confident structural and stratigraphic interpre-
tation and several successful wells.
Conclusions
The integration efforts undertaken have resulted in a high
quality 3D seismic data set. Innovative use of upholes, log,
Figure 11 An integrated composite can be useful in under-
standing the correlation of primary events and also the pos-
sible identification of multiple events (as shown in the yellow
box). The VSP corridor stack before deconvolution provides
a good correlation of multiple events in the yellow box.
© 2005 EAGE
first break volume 23, June 2005 special topic
Multi-disciplinary Geoscience

improvement. The HRVSP experiment designed and applied

to a real case was the important part of the study, as it has
the potential to further refine the statics and velocity model in
the top 500 m of subsurface to achieve a precise statics com-
putation and a confident seismic interpretation. In most seis-
mic interpretation, zero-offset VSP data is only used in its
fully-processed corridor-stack form. This information is suffi-
cient for correlation purposes but, in our opinion, represents
only partial use of the information available in the VSP wave-
field. Analysis of VSP data at different stages of its processing
can greatly aid seismic interpretation, especially of difficult
seismic data, such as that from the Ledjmet blocks in Algeria.

Figure 12 2001 Vs. 2004 processing: The integration efforts Acknowledgements

undertaken resulted in a high-quality 3D seismic data.
Innovative use of upholes, log and VSP data to improve the
statics, velocities and primary-multiple identification were the
key steps contributing to this improvement.
and VSP data to improve the statics, velocities, and primary-
multiple identification were the key steps that resulted in this
Special thanks to Cherif Hellal, chief geologist, Eastern
Region, Sonatrach for his sustained contribution to the
advancement of this project. Thanks to Todd Mojesky,
Lavdosh Bubeqi, and Maria Bastidas for the technical sup-
port and processing of the seismic data. The authors also
thank First Calgary Petroleums and CGG Canada Services
for their approval to publish this work.

EAGE / SEG Research Workshop on

‘Multicomponent Seismic -
Past, Present and Future’
5 – 8 September 2005, Pau, France

This joint EAGE / SEG workshop will focus on all aspects related to current uses
and future trends in Multicomponent Seismic Technology:

• Survey design, spatial sampling, resolution and illumination

• Marine, land and borehole multicomponent acquisition systems
• 2D, 3D and 4D multi-component processing methods
• Lithology prediction, porosity estimation, fracture characterization, P-P versus P-S AVO
• Well calibration for P-P and P-S waves
• Multidisciplinary case studies that include and prove the value of converted waves
• Reservoir monitoring with S-S and P-S waves

WWW.EAGE.ORG

© 2005 EAGE 87