TECHNICAL ARTICLE

Integration of VSP in the process of surface seismic

data inversion
N. de Freslon1*, L. Cuilhe1, S. Yareshchenko2, Y. Solodkyi2, I. Gafych2, C. Rudling3, N. Lucet1,
N. Desgoutte1 and V. Machault1.

Abstract
The measurements of vertical seismic profiles (VSP) used in the petroleum industry are often limited to direct
arrivals to establish time-depth laws. Many other measurements such as PP and PS corridor stacks, offset vertical
seismic profiles (OVSP) and walkaway can help to predict P and S wave impedances estimated by inversion of
surface seismic data.
This article shows the use of all available VSP records to constrain the inversion of surface seismic data and predict
matrix properties of Carboniferous and Devonian intervals in the Machukhske gas field in the Ukrainian Dnieper-
Donetsk basin.
The use of PS corridor stack, in addition to PP corridor stack, allows a better optimization of the S impedance at the
well. Moreover, corridor stacks allow a better estimate of the P and S impedance below the well TD than surface
seismic data alone, and therefore an enhanced characterization of the Devonian sands, which has been drilled
by only a few wells. OVSPs help to build a more reliable a priori model by confirming or discarding the faults
identified on the 3D seismic data.
Results of reservoir characterization show a clear impact of the VSP integration on lithology prediction from surface
seismic data.

Introduction main producing reservoir is a carbonate with more than 300 m

Vertical seismic profiles (VSPs) are commonly used as a
densely sampled check-shot survey for sonic calibration and
velocity information. However, they can play an important role
in assessing information close to the borehole through different
ways (Stewart., 2001): (1) to provide insitu rock properties,
such as seismic velocity, as a function of depth, (2) to assist
in understanding seismic wave propagation (e.g., multiples
etc.), (3) to deliver well understood reflectivity images in
depth, and (4) to help in further surface seismic data processing
and interpretation and profiling of features. Thus, they are
used to provide additional direct quantitative measurements
of the seismic response of the reservoir adjacent to wells.
There are numerous methods for acquiring a vertical seismic
profile, depending on the well configuration, the number
and location of sources and geophones, and how they are
deployed.
This study focuses on the evaluation of Carboniferous and
Devonian reservoirs on the Machukhske gas field in the Ukrain-
ian Dnipro-Donets Basin (DDB), onshore Ukraine. Machukhske
is a gas condensate field with five reservoirs of Lower Car-
boniferous and Devonian age. The main reservoirs are deeply
buried between 5.5 and 6 km and highly overpressured. The
thickness. The field production to date has reached 1.5 Bcm and
originates almost entirely from this reservoir.
The project consists of performing seismic inversion and
reservoir characterization of the carbonate and clastic forma-
tions. The objective is to provide the key elements necessary
to help in predicting inter-well reservoir distribution, thickness
and properties variation using inversion results and identifying
possible drilling locations for development and exploration
wells. Offset VSP (OVSP) and walk-away VSP (WVSP) are
recorded as well as conventional VSP with both PP waves but
also PS converted waves, in addition to surface data (Mullen et
al. 2021). Advanced inversion workflows are carried out using
surface seismic and VSP data. Inversion results are integrated
to enhance the quality of the final elastic parameter cubes
(P-impedance and S-impedance), used for further reservoir
characterization work.
In this paper, we will first describe the studied area, the
methodology and the application to the Machukhske gas field
including VSP and 3D seismic data inversion and integration,
in order to provide optimized P-impedance and S-impedance
cubes. Then, a focus on reservoir prediction of Devonian sand
is presented.

1
Beicip-Franlab  |  2 DTEK group  |  3 RPS group
*
Corresponding author, E-mail: nawal.defreslon@beicip.com
DOI: 10.3997/1365-2397.fb2021041

FIRST BREAK I VOLUME 39 I JUNE 2021 35

 TECHNICAL ARTICLE 
Figure 1 Stratigraphic column and location of Dnieper-Donets basin with Machukhske field (modified from Ulmishek, 2001).
Study area: geological aspects of the
Machukhske gas field
The Machukhske field operated by DTEK Oil and Gas is a gas
field located onshore Ukraine in the Dnipro-Donets Basin (DDB).
Several plays can be identified in the Dnipro-Donets Basin
petroleum system. This is a prolific basin which still contains
undiscovered resources, in particular gas. In this project, the
main target reservoirs are carbonate (C1t) and underlying clastic
(D3fm) reservoirs of Carboniferous and Devonian ages. The trap
at this level is an anticline probably lying above a salt pillow. The
structure developed during a period of salt movement at a time of
the Tournaisian/Visean boundary. The C1t interval is composed
of a massive carbonate layer, with higher effective porosity in
the middle of the formation and at the top. The D3fm interval
consists of mixed shale and sand layers, with alternating shale
and carbonate at the top. A stratigraphic chart is displayed in
Figure 1, as well as a regional map.
Methodology
Workflow
The proposed workflow aims at integrating surface and VSP
data. The VSP data shows features at a finer scale and can help
to improve understanding of seismic signal signature. Preliminary
first pass 3D elastic PP inversion of surface seismic data was car-
ried out without using VSP data. Some uncertainties lie on seismic
interpretation, particularly for the dipping of the top C1t reservoir
in the northern flank of the structure. Also, the Devonian interval
is poorly constrained as few wells are crossing this interval. These
limitations led us to use VSP data that can provide additional infor-
mation and help to improve understanding of surface data. VSP
data are then integrated in a second-pass 3D elastic PP inversion.
Once seismic and well data are QC’d and conditioned, the
main steps of the inversion procedure are performed for each
dataset independently. It consists of well-to-seismic calibration,
a priori model building, and the inversion itself. Then, the
inversion is rerun during the integration phase.
36 FIRST BREAK I VOLUME 39 I JUNE 2021
Well-to-seismic calibration
Elastic well-to-seismic calibration aims at extracting from the
considered seismic cube the wavelet that ensures the best possible
match between the synthetic traces calculated at wells and neigh-
bouring seismic traces and determining the optimal well calibration
(i.e. well position) to be used for initial model building.
The workflow consists of three major tasks (1) Multi-trace
Coherence Analysis (MCA) (Dash and Obaidullah, 1970). MCA
corresponds to the extraction of zero-phase wavelet and associated
amplitude spectrum in the interval of interest. This processing step
is based on the correlation theory; (2) Wavelet estimation (Lucet et
al., 2000). This includes the estimation of wavelet phase and energy
in the interval of interest. Such a process is applied on sub-volumes
surrounding the wells and includes the following steps: time shift,
phase rotation and normalization coefficient estimation; (3) Mul-
ti-seismic well locations. This process defines for each well over
all the angle stack cubes one single 3D optimal position, laterally
(common IL/XL) and vertically (common time-shift).
A priori Model building
The a priori modelling procedure generates the multi-parameter
model that is used as an input to the inversion (Nivlet, P., 2004).
A geometrical framework, integrating structural and stratigraphic
constraints, is computed from the interpretation horizons, seismic
cube and a priori geological knowledge about the depositional
environment. In practice, interpreted time horizons delineate geo-
logical units. For each of these units, a stratigraphic grid is used to
define the correlation scheme to be used for populating the model
between wells. A seismic cube is used to build dip cubes in each
direction which will be used to guide the inversion process. Once
the structural and stratigraphic grid is defined and the well infor-
mation is correctly calibrated, an a priori model of P-impedance,
S-impedance and density is built, by interpolating the elastic
parameters values from logs between the calibrated well locations
and along the correlation lines within the geometrical framework.
Then, a low pass filter is applied to an priori model.
 TECHNICAL ARTICLE

This a priori impedance model is updated through the
inversion process, so that the final optimized model is able to
reproduce the seismic signal. This modelling phase is crucial
in the overall workflow as it defines the low frequencies, lower
than seismic ones, that will not be updated through the inversion
process. Also, it provides a way of constraining the inversion by
incorporating stratigraphic information.
A geological term: it expresses the distance between the
optimal (m) and the a priori model (mprior). It is weighted by (a)
a parameter to express the confidence in the a priori model, and
(b) correlation lengths to characterize the spatial distribution of
the elastic impedance.

Elastic inversion
The main purposes of the inversion are to maximize the signal
content and resolution, to reduce the random noise and to gener-
ate optimized impedances (IP and IS) and synthetic volumes. The
model-based elastic inversion combines geological knowledge,
seismic data and well log information to build optimized imped-
ance distributions consistent with all input data (Tonellot et al.,
2001). The inversion aims at minimizing an objective function,
J(m), which is the sum of two terms and is expressed such as:

A seismic term: it expresses the mismatch between the syn-

thetic seismic data, resulting from the convolution between the
reflectivity (Rp) and extracted wavelet (W), and the observed
seismic data (Sobs). It is weighted by seismic standard deviation
parameters. As a result, the inversion process rejects partially the
noise component, random noise and AVO noise of the seismic
signal from the optimal parameter model; Figure 2 Structural map of top C1t with VSP surveys and well MACH-55.

Figure 3 Surface seismic data in time domain (a) Near (b) Mid (c) Far angle-stack sections (d) Full-stack cube sections with interpreted surfaces and well MACH-55.

FIRST BREAK I VOLUME 39 I JUNE 2021 37

 TECHNICAL ARTICLE 
Figure 5 Walk-away vertical seismic profile with C1t surface and well MACH-55.
Available data
Surface and VSP seismic data are available. Figure 2 shows a
structural map of top C1t, the carbonate structure is evidenced
in the central part. In addition, the location of MACH-55 well,
which doesn’t reach the Devonian sand and from which VSP data
are acquired and offset and walk-away VSP lines within the 3D
survey, is displayed.
Surface seismic data consist of one full-stack and three
angle-stack cubes (Figure 3). Data were recorded in 2015 and
cover about 120 km2. Angles are ranging from [4°-14°] for
the near angle-stack, [10°-24°] for the mid angle-stack and
[20°-34°] for the far angle-stack. Each angle-stack has 409
inlines and 464 crosslines, with 25-25m seismic bin and a 4 ms
sampling. These data have a frequency bandwidth, at -6 dB,
lying between 12.7Hz and 35.3Hz for the near angle-stack, and
38 FIRST BREAK I VOLUME 39 I JUNE 2021
Figure 4 Offset vertical seismic profiles with C1t
surface and well MACH-55– (a) PP OVSP1 (b) PP
OVSP2.
between 10.8Hz and 34.4Hz for the far angle-stack. Average
signal-to-noise ratio is around 17% for the near angle-stack and
16% for the far-stack. Generally, there are higher noise levels
on the near angles and loss of high frequencies with increasing
angle. QCs, such as RMS amplitude and noise maps as well as
residual move-out corrections, were performed.
Three types of vertical seismic profile are available: offset
VSPs, walk-away VSP, and PP and PS corridor-stacks. They
were recorded in February 2020 at MACH-55, a well located
in the northern part of the study area (Mullen 2021). The main
purpose is to take advantage of VSP data availability to tackle
seismic interpretation uncertainties around the well and improve
the 3D inversion.
The processed PP OVSP consists of two full-stack lines (Fig-
ure 4): one NE-SW oriented (OVSP1) and the other one NW-SE
oriented (OVSP2). Each line contains less than 200 traces spaced
at 10 m. The frequency bandwidth at -6dB is ranging between
14Hz and 35Hz and the signal-to-noise ratio is around 12% for
both datasets.
The processed PP walk-away VSP consists of one NE-SW
oriented line (Figure 5). It contains 300 traces spaced at 10 m. The
frequency bandwidth at -6dB ranges between 11Hz and 38Hz and
the signal-to-noise ratio is around 16%.
Three wellhead corridor angle-stacks were available for both
PP and PS reflections (Figure 6). For display purposes, the traces
have been repeated twice. Similarly to surface data, PP and PS
angle-stacks range from [4°-14°] for the near angle-stack, [10°-
24°] for the mid angle-stack and [20°-34°] for the far angle-stack.
The frequency bandwidths range from 4Hz to 80Hz for PS data,
and from 10Hz to 51Hz for PP data. As expected, PS data have
a larger frequency content than PP data. As there is only one
Figure 6 PP and PS corridor vertical seismic profile –
Near, Mid and Far angle-stack traces.
 TECHNICAL ARTICLE

Figure 7 First track corresponds to facies, second track to P-impedance and third track to S-impedance logs, in the depth domain, at log scale.

trace per incident angle, the noise content cannot be measured

and is set to zero.
The well-log database consists of eight wells spread over the
seismic survey. All wells are crossing the C1t carbonate interval
whereas only three wells are reaching D3fm sand interval.
P-sonic (DTC), S-sonic (DTS) and density (RHOB) are required
for elastic inversion workflow. In addition, four main horizons
which delineate the main geological units are used for the elastic
inversion workflow.
Some wells used in the study, including MACH-55, are
displayed in Figure 7. Logs are in the depth domain, at log scale
(before upscaling). The first track corresponds to lithology, the
second and third tracks correspond respectively to P-impedance
and S-impedance logs. It clearly shows the change of elastic
response between the carbonate interval and overlying shale
interval, whereas the transition with underlying clastic reservoir
is more complex.

Results and discussion

AVO analysis
In terms of seismic response, a positive reflection coefficient
leads to a negative amplitude peak (SEG polarity). As shown
in Figure 8, Top C1t is a clear transition between shale and
carbonate lithologies associated with an increase of impedance
and presents a strong trough as shown in Figure 8. Top D3fm
does not correspond to a clear reflection as there is a transition
from mixed carbonate and shale layers to thin sand reservoir
layers interbedded with shales, which are beyond seismic vertical
resolution.
Seismic amplitudes from surface and corridor-stack data are
checked at the MACH-55 well location (Figure 8). Consistency
between all data sets is highlighted at the top of the C1t interval,
characterized by a large trough, then seismic correspondence
decreases deeper. Particularly, at the D3fm level, amplitudes
are weaker and prevent reliable AVO analysis. This is due to
differences in frequency content, particularly for corridor-stacks.
Seismic trace comparison also points out that both PP and PS far
corridor-stack traces have a poorer quality. No VTI anisotropy is
Figure 8 Comparison between traces extracted from surface seismic data (first track),
PP corridor-stack traces (second track), PS corridor-stack traces (third track). Near traces
correspond to green colour, mid traces to blue colour and far traces to red colour.
evidenced by the VSP corridor angle-stacks as near to far traces
are properly superimposed.
In order to go further and understand the well seismic signa-
ture, AVO analysis is performed from seismic surface data and
VSP data (Coulombe et al., 1996). The first AVO is modelled
using well data from MACH-55. The analysis is carried out at
the top of the limestone layer (Figure 9 – a). Resulting mod-
elling shows that the AVO class anomaly is type I: amplitude
starts positive and reduces with increasing offset (Figure 9 – b).

FIRST BREAK I VOLUME 39 I JUNE 2021 39

 TECHNICAL ARTICLE 
The same analysis is performed at the top of the sand layer using
well MACH-51 crossing the Devonian reservoir, and a similar
AVO class anomaly is shown. However, this well exhibits a
thick sand layer which brings a clear AVO response, contrary
to other wells where the mixed sand-shale layers lead to a more
confused response.
Trace comparison and analysis show that the theoretical
variations of amplitude with offset does not always match
with real data: regarding surface data, for the top C1t, the
highest amplitude is measured at the mid stack, whereas it
should be for the near stack. It is probably the consequence of
the contamination of data with random noise, and the effect
Figure 10 AVO PP-up image gathers, near, mid, far and full, from left to right.
40 FIRST BREAK I VOLUME 39 I JUNE 2021
Figure 9 AVO modelling at top of C1t carbonate
interval (a) First track corresponds to well-logs sonic
velocity, second track to well-log shear velocity and
third, track to well-log density. Modelling performed
at the interval depth corresponding to the red line
(b) Angle of incidence versus reflected amplitude
cross-plot. Different modelling methods were used.
(linearization Aki and Richards in purple, linearization
Shuey in red, and Shuey approximation small angles
in blue).
of additional events, other than pure AVO modifying the
amplitudes.
The application of joint elastic inversion aims at solving the
uncertainty on the AVO interpretation. The joint elastic inversion
provides quantitative properties (impedance) which can be
directly linked to matrix properties, which are consistent in terms
of AVO effect and provide an interpretation of the angle-stacks
through a link derived from Aki-Richards equations, together
with rejecting inconsistent data in the residuals.
The AVO response is also checked using VSP corridor-stacks.
It shows that AVO modelling results are consistent with real VSP
data at the C1t level, whereas this modelling is not in agreement
Figure 11 Optimized P-impedance sections resulting
from WVSP and surface seismic data (left) and
P-impedance traces comparison (right): well-log
P-impedance in black, optimized P-impedance
from WVSP inversion in blue and from surface data
inversion in red.
 TECHNICAL ARTICLE

Figure 12 Comparison between surface seismic data

and PP OVSP1. Interpreted horizon corresponds to the
initial top of carbonate reservoir, C1t.

with the amplitude as a function of the incidence angle observed 2004). All sub-stacks are inverted simultaneously using a global
on surface seismic data. As a consequence, VSP inversion results cost function considering the two wavefields in the same PP time
should be more consistent with well data. Also, the VSP corri- domain. It produces a unique optimal earth model parameterized
dor-stack samples the D3fm interval at higher frequencies, thus it by three elastic parameters (IP, IS, Density).
can help to position and give more precision on the D3fm interval. Well-to-Seismic calibration is carried out: wavelet phase
Walk-away VSP data could have been used additionally for and energy are estimated in the interval of interest and tie is
AVO analysis, but the available data appears not to be suitable performed using dedicated PP and PS elastic impedance traces
for the analysis. Indeed, various angles of incidence do not (Ramos et Castagna, 2001). The calibration is satisfying. Howev-
illuminate the same Common Image Point for a reliable analysis er, the PS far corridor-stack trace is short as highlighted through
of any variation of amplitude with the angle. This is highlighted trace extraction, thus calibration cannot be properly carried out.
in Figure 10, PP-up image gathers clearly show a very limited Using the previous calibrated well data, the a priori model is
overlap. Nevertheless, acoustic inversion is performed, and the built. Since the MACH-55 well does not reach the D3fm interval,
resulting section is compared to surface seismic inversion results the results from first-pass 3D surface seismic inversion were
(Figure 11). It shows a good consistency in terms of acoustic extracted at well, merged with well-log and filtered in order to
impedance variations, benefiting from higher resolution WVSP improve the constraint for the Devonian interval. The initial P-im-
data. Trace extraction is performed and shows the consistency pedance a priori model and the one using information from 3D
between the different datasets. inversion show that incorporating those results allows us to add
To summarize, seismic amplitude issues appear within sur- low frequency information below the TD of the well (Figure 13).
face data that cannot be handled at this stage. This is confirmed Both sequential (PP, PS) and joint inversions (PP-PS) of the
by VSP data that are consistent with the well data. This should be VSP corridor stacks are carried out. Model-based joint inversion
tackled thanks to the inversion process. is performed using PP and PS near and mid corridor-stacks.
Similar weights are selected on all cubes. High weighting of the
A priori model
Structural framework
The VSP record can be used for interpretation and profiling of
features in addition to surface data (Emsley et al., 2002). As
stated, uncertainties lie in the seismic interpretation in the north-
ern part of the study, which has a direct impact on the structural
framework and subsequently the final a-priori model. Using VSP
measurement can bring an additional value to help understanding
of the structural features, in particular OVSP data.
To illustrate, the OVSP1 line and a surface seismic line
parallel to it are compared (Figure 12). The initial top C1t inter-
pretation is displayed. It shows that, at the north of MACH-55,
a quite steep slope was picked on the 3D section, whereas this
feature is not visible on the OVSP section. The dipping observed
on the 3D section might be non-geological and is most probably
related to seismic processing velocity anomalies visible in this
area. Similarly, the OVSP2 line brings additional information and
enhances the structural understanding of the area.
The geometrical framework has been updated with the
insights provided by the VSP data.

Stratigraphic framework
Multi-component inversion is carried out in order to take advan- Figure 13 A priori model without (left) and with (right) low frequency information
tage of the availability of both PP and PS data (Agullo, Y et al., from 3D surface data inversion below the TD of the well.

FIRST BREAK I VOLUME 39 I JUNE 2021 41

 TECHNICAL ARTICLE 
geological term allows optimized impedance results to differ
significantly from the a priori model. P-impedance, S-impedance
and density traces from well-logs, the a priori model, initial (first
pass) surface data inversion and VSP data joint inversion are
displayed in Figure 14.
Impedance results show a good consistency between resulting
elastic impedance traces from PP-PS, corridor-stack inversion
and well-log data. The main trends are correctly retrieved as well
as the amplitude, particularly at C1t level. There is a decrease
of impedance below the massive carbonate thanks to the low
frequency component brought by 3D inversion results when
building the a priori model. It also shows a poor optimization
of density, which is more likely to be owing to the lack of large
angles for PS data.
When compared to first pass surface data 3D inversion,
impedance results are also in line. In detail, it shows that the
frequency content is higher in VSP inversion results and resulting
impedance amplitudes are closer to the ones of well-logs. It
demonstrates that inverted S-impedance resulting from joint
inversion is more reliable. There are several reasons for this,
especially the more accurate AVO response of VSP data, the
higher frequency content and the lower level of AVO noise.
To summarize, thanks to the use of VSP and both PP and PS
data, the optimized elastic parameter traces are improved. The
prediction of S impedance at the well is improved by using the
corridor stack data compared to PP surface data alone. However,
there is no significant optimization of density. This work shows
the feasibility of multi-component inversion of VSP PP and PS
dataset.
Data integration
The next step is to rerun the surface seismic elastic inversion
with the updates derived from the VSP results. Resulting elastic
parameter cubes will be used for further reservoir characterization
work, allowing a quantitative analysis of reflection amplitudes.
Figure 14 Multi-component inversion results - first track corresponds to
P-impedance traces, second track to S-impedance traces and third track to density
traces.
42 FIRST BREAK I VOLUME 39 I JUNE 2021
The a priori model, composed of a structural and stratigraph-
ic framework, is enriched by the analysis of OVSP records which
allow us to build a more reliable structural framework close to
the well location. In addition, the stratigraphic framework is
improved below the TD of the wells thanks to the integration
of corridor-stack inversion results. Here, the resultant inverted
traces are merged with the well-log driven a priori model below
D3fm. Once the structural and stratigraphic grids are defined and
the well information is correctly calibrated, the a priori model is
produced.
The second pass inversion used similar parameters to the
tuned first pass inversion. Various QCs are performed such as
extraction at well location, maps generation, a check of the con-
vergence function and analysis of the lateral variations of elastic
impedance cubes though maps and sections.
Optimized P-impedance sections from first pass (Figure 15 – a)
and second pass (Figure 15 – b) inversion are displayed. The
structural update can be clearly seen, in particular on the flank. High
impedance values are mainly linked to carbonate facies within the
C1t interval. The deeper clastic interval exhibits lower values, which
is in line with the rock physics model. Vertical and lateral changes of
impedance values after update of the inversion are observed.
Using inversion results, and well-log information, discri-
minant analyses targeting the carbonate and clastic interval
independently are performed. It provides the probability of
Figure 15 Optimized P-impedance sections resulting from (a) first pass inversion (b)
second pass inversion integration VSP inversion.
 TECHNICAL ARTICLE

Figure 16 Sand proportion maps, focused on the

area of interest, resulting from discriminant analysis,
performed using results from first pass and second
pass 3D elastic inversion.

assignment into facies cubes, from which a most likely lithology

cube is computed, based on cut-off on probability.
Further insight on Devonian sand is provided. Sand proportion
maps are computed above a defined cut-off on probability of sand
assignment, within a time interval below D3fm surface (Figure 16).
It illustrates that the main spatial organization is preserved using
first and second pass inversion results. The main geobodies are
well retrieved, with local variations between both results.
The predicted total facies thickness is computed above a
defined cut-off on probability of assignment into sand facies and
compared to the total thickness computed at well for the clastic
interval (Figure 17). The total thickness at well is computed
using facies before upscaling. The cross-plot shows that the glob-
al correspondence between predicted thickness and thickness at
well is fair when using first pass-inversion results (blue points), it
is improved for well MACH-5 and MACH-51 after incorporating
additional information from VSP data, whereas it stays good for
MACH-53 (orange points). Figure 17 Predicted thickness versus thickness within D3fm interval at
To summarize, it shows that incorporating VSP analysis well crossplot – blue points correspond to the predicted thickness computed using
has had a positive impact on the optimized impedance cubes first pass inversion results, and the orange point, using second-pass inversion results.
and subsequent reservoir characterization analysis. Combining
various results, and particularly at different scale allows different These results can provide an overview on the prospectivity of the
insights and leads to improved outcomes. area and help to define possible drilling locations for future wells
targeting the main reservoirs.
Conclusions
The proposed workflow aims at integrating surface and VSP Acknowledgements
data to improve the quality of the final results. First pass 3D We would like to thank DTEK Oil and Gas for the dataset and
elastic PP inversion of surface seismic data is carried out. Some this project, as well as RPS for the support. We would also like
limitations are pointed out that can be tackled using VSP data, in to thank Peter Rowbotham for reviewing the paper and his useful
parallel the exploitation of VSP data using offset VSP and VSP comments that helped to improve it.
corridor-stack is performed. This allows us to provide additional
structural constraints and elastic impedance traces that are References
reliable thanks to the use of PP and PS data. Then, results are Agullo, Y., Macé, D., Labat, K., Tonellot, T., Bourgeois, A. and Lavielle, M.
integrated to enrich the structural and stratigraphic frameworks [2004]. Joint PP and PS stratigraphic inversion for prestack time migrated
of the 3D a priori model and run a second pass 3D elastic PP multicomponent data: 74th Annual International Meeting, SEG, Expanded
inversion. Final inversion results are thoroughly controlled and Abstracts, 889-892.
validated by a series of QCs. Mullen, R., Barry, B., Rudling, C., Bailey, J., Solodkyi, Y., Yareshchenko, S.,
The results of this reservoir characterization work show a Gafych, I. and Wills, W. [2021]. Collaborative VSP acquisition to optimize
clear impact of the VSP results integration on lithology predic- imaging for field development. First Break, this issue.
tion for the clastic interval through sand proportion maps and Clochard V., Delépine N., Devault B., Wangkawong K. and DeVault, B.C.
predicted thickness computation. Additional properties, such as [2017]. Warping of 9C seismic data and its application to 9C stratigraphic
porosity, can therefore be characterized on the predicted facies. pre-stack inversion. A real case study from the BIG SKY CO2 Project

FIRST BREAK I VOLUME 39 I JUNE 2021 43

 TECHNICAL ARTICLE 
(Montana, US), 79th EAGE Conference and Exhibition 2017, Paris.
Expanded abstracts.
Coulombe, C.A., Stewart, R.R. and Jones, M.J. [1996]. AVO processing and
interpretation of VSP data. Canadian Journal of exploration geophysics,
32(1), 41-62.
Dash, B.L. and Obaidullah, K.A. [1970.] Determination of signal and noise
statistics using correlation theory. Geophysics, 35, 24-32.
Emsley, S. J., Beccacini, A., Cosma, C., Enescu, N. and Shiner, P. [2002].
Fractured reservoirs: using VSPs to bridge the scale gap between image
logs and seismic, EAGE 64th Conference & Exhibition, Florence, Italy.
Lucet, N., Déquirez, P.-Y. and Cailly, F. [2000]. Well-to-seismic calibration:
A multiwell analysis to extract one single wavelet. SEG – 70th Annual
International Meeting, Calgary, Expanded abstracts, 1615-1618.
FTS22 V2H.indd 1
44 FIRST BREAK I VOLUME 39 I JUNE 2021
Nivlet, P. [2004]. Low-frequency constraint in a priori model building for
stratigraphic inversion. SEG- 74th Annual International Meeting, Denver,
expanded abstracts, 1802-1805.
Ramos A.C and Castagna, J.P. [2001]. Useful approximations for convert-
ed-wave AVO. Geophysics, 66(6).
Tonellot, T., Macé, D. and Richard, V. [2001]. Joint stratigraphic inversion
of angle-limited stacks. SEG – 71st Annual International Meeting, San
Antonio, Expanded abstracts, 227-230.
Ulmishek, G. [2001]. Petroleum Geology and Resources of the Dniep-
er-Donets Basin, Ukraine and Russia, US Geological Survey Bulletin
2201-E.
Stewart R.R. [2001]. VSP: An In-Depth Seismic Understanding, CSEG
recorder.
07/05/2021 12:47