Exercise 2.5.

Map TDC using Average Velocity

Figure 2.23 gives the TWT map of a target horizon in ms which suggest an
anticlinal closure. There are 5 well controls and the average velocity of the
rocks above the target horizon posted in each well.
1. Velocity map construction:
a. Connect every well-point using ruler and make linear interpolation to
estimate the velocity values between two wells. For example,
between wells C and E there should be velocity contour of 8500,
8600 and 8700 ft/s.
b. Construct velocity map with 100 ms contour interval.
2. Depth map construction:
a. In every intersection points between the TWT and velocity contour,
calculate the depths in feet where depth = TWT/2000 x Velocity.
b. Construct depth map with 100 feet contour interval.
c. Compare the TWT and depth-map and evaluate presences of the
anticlinal closure on both maps.

Aug 2020 Pitfall : Velocity Effect (by: Sigit Sukmono) 1

 Figure 2.23. The TWT
map of a target
horizon in ms which
suggest an anticlinal
closure. There are 5
well controls and the
average velocity of
the rocks above the
target horizon posted
in each well

Aug 2020 Pitfall : Velocity Effect (by: Sigit Sukmono) 2

 Exercise 2.6. Section TDC using Interval Velocity Layer-Cake Method
Figure 2.24 gives the TWT section and its interpretation which suggest
an anticlinal form of the La Trobe target. Using Excel, convert the TWT
section into depth-section using the following steps:
a. Create the table as shown in Table 2.3. Using the provided time-
thickness and interval velocity of each layer, calculate the
thickness of each layer in feet where thickness = time-
thickness/2000 x interval velocity.
b. Successively from the most-top layer to top La Trobe calculate
the cumulative thickness to get the depth of the La Trobe target
c. Construct the depth section as given in Figure 2.25 and
compare it with the TWT section in Figure 2.24 to evaluate the
presences of the anticlinal form of the La Trobe.

Aug 2020 Pitfall : Velocity Effect (by: Sigit Sukmono) 3

 Figure 2.24. (a)
Seismic record in
TWT, (b)
Interpretation of
the geological
layers of the seismic
record with
annotation of the
interval velocity (Vi)
of each layer. The
target is the La
Trobe which has
anticlinal
expression.

Aug 2020 Pitfall : Velocity Effect (by: Sigit Sukmono) 4

 Table 2.3 Calculation table for Exercise 3.6
Formation Vi (ft/s) SP-1 SP-2 SP-3 SP-4 SP-5 SP-6 SP-7 SP-8 SP-9 SP-10
Water 4920 95 80 80 80 90 80 80 95 100 90 thickness in ms
thickness in ft
cummulative thickness
Pleistocent-Recent 7000 225 220 240 240 250 250 240 250 275 280 thickness in ms
thickness in ft
cummulative thickness
Pliocene 8000 190 180 170 180 245 250 240 230 275 220 thickness in ms
thickness in ft
cummulative thickness
U. Miocene 8500 310 310 340 320 280 290 270 250 220 260 thickness in ms
thickness in ft
cummulative thickness
Miocene Channel 18000 0 70 160 225 295 200 225 100 45 0 thickness in ms
thickness in ft
cummulative thickness
L. Miocene 8600 190 90 0 0 0 0 0 65 95 190 thickness in ms
thickness in ft
cummulative thickness
Oligocene 12000 285 265 250 190 100 150 130 250 300 300 thickness in ms
thickness in ft
cummulative thickness
Eocene 13000 360 400 400 395 378 330 365 380 390 410 thickness in ms
thickness in ft
cummulative thickness
Paleocene 14000 170 190 175 175 170 160 150 130 140 140 thickness in ms
thickness in ft
cummulative thickness
Latrobe Group 14500 Depth of Top Latrobe

Aug 2020 Pitfall : Velocity Effect (by: Sigit Sukmono) 5

 Figure 2.25. Solution of Exercise 2-6 showing the seismic section in
depth. Compare the La Trobe position in time and depth sections

Aug 2020 Pitfall : Velocity Effect (by: Sigit Sukmono) 6