Modified Boundary Conditions for Elastic Inversion of Active Land Seismic Data in VTI Media

Author(s):  
W. He ◽  
R. Plessix ◽  
S. Singh
2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
S. Amoyedo ◽  
E. Tawile ◽  
S. Pou-Palome ◽  
P. Kakaire ◽  
O. Olagundoye ◽  
...  

2022 ◽  
Vol 41 (1) ◽  
pp. 40-46
Author(s):  
Öz Yilmaz ◽  
Kai Gao ◽  
Milos Delic ◽  
Jianghai Xia ◽  
Lianjie Huang ◽  
...  

We evaluate the performance of traveltime tomography and full-wave inversion (FWI) for near-surface modeling using the data from a shallow seismic field experiment. Eight boreholes up to 20-m depth have been drilled along the seismic line traverse to verify the accuracy of the P-wave velocity-depth model estimated by seismic inversion. The velocity-depth model of the soil column estimated by traveltime tomography is in good agreement with the borehole data. We used the traveltime tomography model as an initial model and performed FWI. Full-wave acoustic and elastic inversions, however, have failed to converge to a velocity-depth model that desirably should be a high-resolution version of the model estimated by traveltime tomography. Moreover, there are significant discrepancies between the estimated models and the borehole data. It is understandable why full-wave acoustic inversion would fail — land seismic data inherently are elastic wavefields. The question is: Why does full-wave elastic inversion also fail? The strategy to prevent full-wave elastic inversion of vertical-component geophone data trapped in a local minimum that results in a physically implausible near-surface model may be cascaded inversion. Specifically, we perform traveltime tomography to estimate a P-wave velocity-depth model for the near-surface and Rayleigh-wave inversion to estimate an S-wave velocity-depth model for the near-surface, then use the resulting pairs of models as the initial models for the subsequent full-wave elastic inversion. Nonetheless, as demonstrated by the field data example here, the elastic-wave inversion yields a near-surface solution that still is not in agreement with the borehole data. Here, we investigate the limitations of FWI applied to land seismic data for near-surface modeling.


Geophysics ◽  
2002 ◽  
Vol 67 (6) ◽  
pp. 1920-1928 ◽  
Author(s):  
Vladimir Grechka ◽  
Ilya Tsvankin

Processing of seismic data is often performed under the assumption that the velocity distribution in the subsurface can be approximated by a macromodel composed of isotropic homogeneous layers or blocks. Despite being physically unrealistic, such models are believed to be sufficient for describing the kinematics of reflection arrivals. In this paper, we examine the distortions in normal‐moveout (NMO) velocities caused by the intralayer vertical heterogeneity unaccounted for in velocity analysis. To match P‐wave moveout measurements from a horizontal or a dipping reflector overlaid by a vertically heterogeneous isotropic medium, the effective homogeneous overburden has to be anisotropic. This apparent anisotropy is caused not only by velocity monotonically increasing with depth, but also by random velocity variations similar to those routinely observed in well logs. Assuming that the effective homogeneous medium is transversely isotropic with a vertical symmetry axis (VTI), we express the VTI parameters through the actual depth‐dependent isotropic velocity function. If the reflector is horizontal, combining the NMO and vertical velocities always results in nonnegative values of Thomsen's coefficient δ. For a dipping reflector, the inversion of the P‐wave NMO ellipse yields a nonnegative Alkhalifah‐Tsvankin coefficient η that increases with dip. The values of η obtained by two other methods (2‐D dip‐moveout inversion and nonhyperbolic moveout analysis) are also nonnegative but generally differ from that needed to fit the NMO ellipse. For truly anisotropic (VTI) media, the influence of vertical heterogeneity above the reflector can lead to a bias toward positive δ and η estimates in velocity analysis.


2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Pavlo Kuzmenko ◽  
Rustem Valiakhmetov ◽  
Francesco Gerecitano ◽  
Viktor Maliar ◽  
Grigori Kashuba ◽  
...  

Abstract The seismic data have historically been utilized to perform structural interpretation of the geological subsurface. Modern approaches of Quantitative Interpretation are intended to extract geologically valuable information from the seismic data. This work demonstrates how rock physics enables optimal prediction of reservoir properties from seismic derived attributes. Using a seismic-driven approach with incorporated prior geological knowledge into a probabilistic subsurface model allowed capturing uncertainty and quantifying the risk for targeting new wells in the unexplored areas. Elastic properties estimated from the acquired seismic data are influenced by the depositional environment, fluid content, and local geological trends. By applying the rock physics model, we were able to predict the elastic properties of a potential lithology away from the well control points in the subsurface whether or not it has been penetrated. Seismic amplitude variation with incident angle (AVO) and azimuth (AVAZ) jointly with rock-derived petrophysical interpretations were used for stochastical modeling to capture the reservoir distribution over the deep Visean formation. The seismic inversion was calibrated by available well log data and by traditional structural interpretation. Seismic elastic inversion results in a deep Lower Carboniferous target in the central part of the DDB are described. The fluid has minimal effect on the density and Vp. Well logs with cross-dipole acoustics are used together with wide-azimuth seismic data, processed with amplitude control. It is determined that seismic anisotropy increases in carbonate deposits. The result covers a set of lithoclasses and related probabilities: clay minerals, tight sandstones, porous sandstones, and carbonates. We analyzed the influence of maximum angles determination for elastic inversion that varied from 32.5 to 38.5 degrees. The greatest influence of the far angles selection is on the density. AI does not change significantly. Probably the 38,5 degrees provides a superior response above the carbonates. It does not seem to damage the overall AVA behavior, which result in a good density outcome, as higher angles of incidence are included. It gives a better tie to the wells for the high density layers over the interval of interest. Sand probability cube must always considered in the interpretation of the lithological classification that in many cases may be misleading (i.e. when sand and shale probabilities are very close to each other, because of small changes in elastic parameters). The authors provide an integrated holistic approach for quantitative interpretation, subsurface modeling, uncertainty evaluation, and characterization of reservoir distribution using pre-existing well logs and recently acquired seismic data. This paper underpins the previous efforts and encourages the work yet to be fulfilled on this subject. We will describe how quantitative interpretation was used for describing the reservoir, highlight values and uncertainties, and point a way forward for further improvement of the process for effective subsurface modeling.


1989 ◽  
Vol 77 (6) ◽  
pp. 877-890 ◽  
Author(s):  
F. Assous ◽  
B. Chalindar ◽  
F. Collino

2006 ◽  
Vol 9 (05) ◽  
pp. 502-512 ◽  
Author(s):  
Arne Skorstad ◽  
Odd Kolbjornsen ◽  
Asmund Drottning ◽  
Havar Gjoystdal ◽  
Olaf K. Huseby

Summary Elastic seismic inversion is a tool frequently used in analysis of seismic data. Elastic inversion relies on a simplified seismic model and generally produces 3D cubes for compressional-wave velocity, shear-wave velocity, and density. By applying rock-physics theory, such volumes may be interpreted in terms of lithology and fluid properties. Understanding the robustness of forward and inverse techniques is important when deciding the amount of information carried by seismic data. This paper suggests a simple method to update a reservoir characterization by comparing 4D-seismic data with flow simulations on an existing characterization conditioned on the base-survey data. The ability to use results from a 4D-seismic survey in reservoir characterization depends on several aspects. To investigate this, a loop that performs independent forward seismic modeling and elastic inversion at two time stages has been established. In the workflow, a synthetic reservoir is generated from which data are extracted. The task is to reconstruct the reservoir on the basis of these data. By working on a realistic synthetic reservoir, full knowledge of the reservoir characteristics is achieved. This makes the evaluation of the questions regarding the fundamental dependency between the seismic and petrophysical domains stronger. The synthetic reservoir is an ideal case, where properties are known to an accuracy never achieved in an applied situation. It can therefore be used to investigate the theoretical limitations of the information content in the seismic data. The deviations in water and oil production between the reference and predicted reservoir were significantly decreased by use of 4D-seismic data in addition to the 3D inverted elastic parameters. Introduction It is well known that the information in seismic data is limited by the bandwidth of the seismic signal. 4D seismics give information on the changes between base and monitor surveys and are consequently an important source of information regarding the principal flow in a reservoir. Because of its limited resolution, the presence of a thin thief zone can be observed only as a consequence of flow, and the exact location will not be found directly. This paper addresses the question of how much information there is in the seismic data, and how this information can be used to update the model for petrophysical reservoir parameters. Several methods for incorporating 4D-seismic data in the reservoir-characterization workflow for improving history matching have been proposed earlier. The 4D-seismic data and the corresponding production data are not on the same scale, but they need to be combined. Huang et al. (1997) proposed a simulated annealing method for conditioning these data, while Lumley and Behrens (1997) describe a workflow loop in which the 4D-seismic data are compared with those computed from the reservoir model. Gosselin et al. (2003) give a short overview of the use of 4D-seismic data in reservoir characterization and propose using gradient-based methods for history matching the reservoir model on seismic and production data. Vasco et al. (2004) show that 4D data contain information of large-scale reservoir-permeability variations, and they illustrate this in a Gulf of Mexico example.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document