3D AVO

WORKFLOW

POSITIVE AVO

BY

DR DEVA GHOSH
A AZ I Z B M U HAM AD
SAL I N A SAF I U L L AH
INTRODUCTION
INTRODUCTION

The oil industry in the last 5 years or so has seen the successful application of AVO
technology in gas discoveries and under favourable geological and rock property environment
oil discoveries as well. This usage is now being extended to geophysical application for field
development and also to time lapse, 4D seismic.

The key to successful application is attributed to significant improvement in seismic data

acquisition with long cables/spread and improvement in data processing with improved noise
cancellation algorithm and amplitude phase processing algorithm. AVO is currently the most
important technology that is being applied by all the operators on their projects. AVO studies
were hampered because of the lack of shear information. This has now changed as most
wellog programs are obtaining dipole sonic (DSI).

For Carigali as an operator in many of our joint ventures, AVO studies would be one of the
technology that we will have to perform in particularly in clastic unconsolidated environment.
AVO responses are very closely linked with rock property behavior and geological setting. A
relationship not very clearly understood. Hence the need of a systematic work process.

WORKFLOW

On the Fig 1, a high level workflow is provided. The modules within this flow is then
expanded in Fig 2 to Fig 5. As can be seen from the accompanying flow that there are two
distinct work processes as in common with all geophysics problems.

3D AVO WORKFLOW DIAGRAM

NAV 3D SEISMIC ROCK PROPERTY / WELL LOG GEOLOGY

Merge Trend Curves Physical

Parameters

Histogram Environment
Brine/Oil/Gas Responses Sedimentology

AVO Analysis AVO Modelling (See figure 4)

Real Data Synthetic

AVO Inversion (See figure 5)

AVO Interpretation

Prediction Fluid / Lithology

To the right is the geophysics forward modelling, i.e. computing the synthetic or expected
response. If this is negative there is little use to go further with AVO studies.

On the left is the real data analysis. The first step is the matching exercise : real vs synthetic.
Currently it is semi-quatitative but AVO inversion is just around the corner.
MODULES TO MAIN FLOW

* AVO True Amplitude Marine & Land Processing : Fig 2a & 2b

* AVO Analysis in Fig 3
* AVO Modelling in Fig 4
* AVO Inversion in Fig 5 ( not operational)

Currently all our 3D surveys are being processed Pre stack Time with Amplitude , Phase
preserved and AVO in mind .

The AVO modelling and analysis is being done with Hampson-Russel software in house on
project to project basis ( For example : Bunga Melati ,Enggor 1 , PM 302 , Mubarak
,Pakistan projects have been completed ) We are also in lookout for a suitable Rock Physics
software for Rock property and Trend Curve generation .

STAFF TRAINING

We are also in process of training our staff with the help of H .R. consultant M Brewer The
staff who have been involved and Project reports available are :
A Aziz, Liau Min Hoe, Russikin and Salina from the processing group & Suhaileen, Redhani,
Hesham, Ahmad Din, Azli Bakar , Simon Tanner from the Interpretational Team

Finally a series of examples are provided. As our experience in applying this increases we will
develop guidelines and cookbook for aiding the steps.

ACKNOWLEDGMENT

We like to thank our management Ms Rashidah Karim and Mr Hasni Hashim for the
encouragement and Ms. Salina Safiullah and Mr. Liau Min Hoe in preparation of this
document. The reader would refer to a more comprehensive AVO document which is under
preparation.

June 2002
1st Version
 FIGURE 1

HIGH LEVEL AVO

WORKFLOW
 3D AVO WORKFLOW DIAGRAM

NAV 3D SEISMIC ROCK PROPERTY / WELL LOG GEOLOGY

Merge Trend Curves Physical

Parameters

3D AVO Processing Histogram Environment

True Amplitude / Phase Brine/Oil/Gas Responses Sedimentology

AVO Analysis AVO Modelling (See figure 4)

Real Data Synthetic

AVO Inversion (See figure 5)

AVO Interpretation

Prediction Fluid / Lithology

FIGURE 1
 FIGURE 2a/2b

AVO PROCESSING WORKFLOW

 AVO PROCESSING FLOW - 3D MARINE
CATALOG, FAR 3D SEISMIC NAVIGATION
FIELD ON ACQ. BIN DATA
MODELLED 2ms
WAVELET

EDIT/QC MERGE ARCHIVE

NO 1
ADJACENT TRACE SUMMATION

MARINE NOISE
ATTENUATION

SURFACE CONSISTENT AMPLITUDE

DERIVATION(OPTIONAL)

SPHERICAL S
DIVERGENCE I
G
DEGHOST RECEIVER DESIGNATURE N
DERIVE OPERATOR TO ZEROPHASRE A
L
Q COMPENSATION
Q=100, 15dB CUT P
R
PRED. DECON
TAU-P O
FILTER 100-150ms C.
GAP 20-30 ms

RADON DEMULTIPLE
INFIL CDP (IF REQUIRED)

FLEXIBINNING
100% NEAR TO ARCHIVE
300% FAR (TAPER) NO 2

INTERPOLATION (IF REQUIRED)

ACQ BIN TO PROC BIN (HALF)
2MS TO 3MS OR4MS ANTIALIAS

3D DMO WITH EQUALISATION I

M
VELOCITY 3D PRE-STK TIME MIG
A
ANALYSIS TWO PASSESS
G
POST STK PROC I
- 3D FXYDECON ARCHIVE N
- BANDPASS NO 3 G
- EQUALISATION

NEAR (5-15O FAR (25O-45O

FULL (5O-35O)
Preserve True Amplitude & Phase by
correcting for wave propagation & other ACOUSTIC IMPEDANCE
acquisition related effects. Figure 2a
 AVO PROCESSING
FLOW
3D LAND
SURVEY DATA 3D SEISMIC

EDIT MERGE EDIT/QC ARCHIVE

SURFACE CONSISTENT
AMPLITUDE COMPENSATION

TAU-P
NOISE ATTENUATION

SPHERICAL DIVERGENCE/
Q COMPENSATION
S
WAVE THEORY
INTERPOLATION
I
G
GROUND ROLL ELIMINATION N
A
SURFACE CONSISTENT L
DECONVOLUTION

UPHOLE VEL/STATIC

3D REFRACTION
STATIC

AUTO STATIC
(2 PASS)
processed VEL ANALYSIS
ARCHIVED
gathers gathers
3D DMO & ARCHIVED
WEIGHTING
I
PSTM M
G
FXY DECON I
N
ARCHIVED
G
AVO ANALYSIS
Figure 2b
 FIGURE 3

AVO ANALYSIS
 3D AVO ANALYSIS

3D Migrated Gathers
PSTM
Velocity
3D Migrated Angle
Gathers

Time Alignment
Remove Time Jitter : Trimstatics

Frequency Balance
Qualitative AVO Gathers
Quantitative AVO
Rank Prospect Fluid & Lithology
Prediction
Hilbert Transform
Compute Envelope Analysis

Pseudo Gradient Compute / Crossplot

Far - Near Intercept / Gradient

Rising / Falling AVO Products

Fluid Factor Shear Impedance Lithology

FIGURE 3
 FIGURE 4

AVO MODELLING
 3D AVO MODELLING

ROCK PROPERTIES WELL LOG

Digitize / Block

Gardner / Gardner/ Castagna Gassman

Gregory Background Fluid Replacement

Earth Model
Vp, Vs,
, h

Elastic Modelling Aki & Richard Zoeppritz

Synthetic Gathers

AVO Analysis

FIGURE 4
 FIGURE 5

AVO INTERPRETATION
&
INVERSION
3D AVO INVERSION

3D Seismic

3D Processing

PSTM Gathers

AVO Analysis
I.G.F.F

Weighted Stack
Statistical

Inversion
Bayseian

Fluid Factor

FIGURE 5
EXAMPLES
AVO COMPONENTS & ROCK PROPERTIES

R + B SIN2 θ + C (tan2 θ − sin2 = R (α)

0 θ)

(After Hilterman)
 AVO PROCESSING
NMO CORRECTION
CONVENTIONAL High Order DATA ACQUISITION
VELOCITY SENSITIVITY

OFFSET
MULTIPLE SUPPRESSION (RADON) Short Cable (2.5 km)
None With

Long Cable (8.0 km)

 AVO CLASSES

+
IV
BACKGROUND TREND
GRADIENT HARD I

III II +
I
- R (α)
- INTERCEPT + II

MAXIMUM IMPACT ON EXPLORATION

- III
CLASS II

* II & IV FALLING AVO CONFUSED SOFT

IV
WITH LITHOLOGIES CHANGE
10 20 30 40 50
Angle of Incidence
* III ALREADY A BRIGHT SPOT
 AVO ANALYSIS
MALAY BASIN (MALONG)
AVO ENVELOPE WELL

Poisson GATHERS REAL

MODEL
Ratio

OFFSET
GEOSCIENCE CONFERENCE
2001 KUALA LUMPUR AVO ANALYSIS
WEST AFRICA - OIL SAND
3d Migrated Gathers Model Gathers AVO Class

A
II

III
B

C II
D II

E II
50 TO 300 50 TO 300
DEEPWATER TURBIDITE
 AVO ANALYSIS

- α
- Intercept
Sin2 α

x x
R (α) x R (α) x x x Gradient
x
+ x + x x
x x

AVO
FLOW
NMO CORRECTED Gather
Offset 0

Background
Fluid
Shale
Factor
GRADIENT 0
Time
GAS
INTERCEPT
 AVO CROSSPLOT

0 + Intercept
-
+ HARD CASTAGNA'S
BACKGROUND
+
HARD

SHALE

BRINE SAND
SOFT
0 Gradient
OIL SAND

GAS SAND
GRADIENT SOFT

FLUID
FACTOR
-
-
- INTERCEPT + WELL

Background
Vp = 1360 + 1160Vs
Fluid Factor = ∆Vp - 1160 ∆Vs
Vp Vs
 ROCK PROPERTIES

RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN Vp, Vs, ρ,

& POROSITY IN CLASTICS / CARBONATES

CROSSPLOTS OF Vp, Vs AND ρ

TREND CURVE GENERATION FOR

MALAY BASIN

SENSITIVITY ANALYSIS
GAS SAND : ROCK PROPERTY & REFLECTION
3600

GASSMANN-BIOT UPPER BOUND

3400

INTRODUCE GAS
Vp 3200

K
3000
µ
Vp GASSMANN-BIOT LOWER BOUND
2800
Vs
ρ
Velocity (m/s) 2600

2400

GASSMANN-BIOT
2200
DROP IN Vp RESULTS IN
INCREASE OF NEGATIVE Vs 2000

REFLECTION COEFFECIENT 1800

0 20 40 60 80 100
WATER SATURATION Sw (%)
 VP / VS LITHOLOGY

50
1/VP, µSEC/FT

60

Vp/V
s=
1.9
70
limestone 1.8
dolomite
1.7
80 very limy sand

clean sands 1.6

90 100 110 120 130 140 150

1/VS, µSEC/FT
APPROXIMATION TO ZOEPPRITZ EQUATION
MODELLING
 MALAY BASIN - GAS SAND
NORMAL INCIDENCE (5 - 150) WIDE ANGLE (30 - 400)

AVO GATHERS

Rising
AVO

NEAR OFFSET
FAR
AVO : FALSE HC INDICATOR
TUNING EFFECT

OFFSET

Tuning Curve

Overshoot Value

A B
Overshoot Correction
Factor = B/A
Tuning Thickness
AVO ENVELOPE
DW TURBIDITE