Fault interpretation of listric faults in the Gulf of Mexico to train CNN fault prediction – A case study of human interpretation vs automatic fault interpretation

Author(s):  
Alexandro Vera-Arroyo ◽  
Zach Williams ◽  
Heather Bedle
2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
German Garcia ◽  
◽  
Hadrien Dumont ◽  
Simon Edmundson ◽  
Chris Babin ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  

2021 ◽  
pp. 1-67
Author(s):  
Stewart Smith ◽  
Olesya Zimina ◽  
Surender Manral ◽  
Michael Nickel

Seismic fault detection using machine learning techniques, in particular the convolution neural network (CNN), is becoming a widely accepted practice in the field of seismic interpretation. Machine learning algorithms are trained to mimic the capabilities of an experienced interpreter by recognizing patterns within seismic data and classifying them. Regardless of the method of seismic fault detection, interpretation or extraction of 3D fault representations from edge evidence or fault probability volumes is routine. Extracted fault representations are important to the understanding of the subsurface geology and are a critical input to upstream workflows including structural framework definition, static reservoir and petroleum system modeling, and well planning and de-risking activities. Efforts to automate the detection and extraction of geological features from seismic data have evolved in line with advances in computer algorithms, hardware, and machine learning techniques. We have developed an assisted fault interpretation workflow for seismic fault detection and extraction, demonstrated through a case study from the Groningen gas field of the Upper Permian, Dutch Rotliegend; a heavily faulted, subsalt gas field located onshore, NE Netherlands. Supervised using interpreter-led labeling, we apply a 2D multi-CNN to detect faults within a 3D pre-stack depth migrated seismic dataset. After prediction, we apply a geometric evaluation of predicted faults, using a principal component analysis (PCA) to produce geometric attribute representations (strike azimuth and planarity) of the fault prediction. Strike azimuth and planarity attributes are used to validate and automatically extract consistent 3D fault geometries, providing geological context to the interpreter and input to dependent workflows more efficiently.


2010 ◽  
Author(s):  
John Hall Cohen ◽  
Jermund Kleppe ◽  
Tore Grønås ◽  
Thomas Baxter Martin ◽  
Torstein Tveit ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Emma A. H. Michie ◽  
Mark J. Mulrooney ◽  
Alvar Braathen

Abstract. Significant uncertainties occur through varying methodologies when interpreting faults using seismic data. These uncertainties are carried through to the interpretation of how faults may act as baffles/barriers or increase fluid flow. How fault segments are picked when interpreting structures, i.e. what seismic line spacing is specified, as well as what surface generation algorithm is used, will dictate how detailed the surface is, and hence will impact any further interpretation such as fault seal or fault growth models. We can observe that an optimum spacing for fault interpretation for this case study is set at approximately 100 m. It appears that any additional detail through interpretation with a line spacing of ≤ 50 m adds complexity associated with sensitivities by the individual interpreter. Further, the location of all fault segmentation identified on Throw-Distance plots using the finest line spacing are also observed when 100 m line spacing is used. Hence, interpreting at a finer scale may not necessarily improve the subsurface model and any related analysis, but in fact lead to the production of very rough surfaces, which impacts any further fault analysis. Interpreting on spacing greater than 100 m often leads to overly smoothed fault surfaces that miss details that could be crucial, both for fault seal as well as for fault growth models. Uncertainty in seismic interpretation methodology will follow through to fault seal analysis, specifically for analysis of whether in situ stresses combined with increased pressure through CO2 injection will act to reactivate the faults, leading to up-fault fluid flow/seep. We have shown that changing picking strategies alter the interpreted stability of the fault, where picking with an increased line spacing has shown to increase the overall fault stability. Picking strategy has shown to have minor, although potentially crucial, impact on the predicted Shale Gouge Ratio.


2004 ◽  
Author(s):  
N.P. Tootill ◽  
M.P. Vandenbossche ◽  
M.L. Morrison

2003 ◽  
Author(s):  
N. Tootill ◽  
M. Morrison ◽  
M. Bik ◽  
A. Hill ◽  
R. George

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document