1887
Volume 67, Issue 7
  • E-ISSN: 1365-2478

Abstract

ABSTRACT

By analogy with P‐ and S‐wave impedances, the product of Young's modulus and density can be termed as Young's impedance, which indicates the rock lithology and brittleness of unconventional hydrocarbon reservoirs. Poisson's ratio is also an effective indicator of rock brittleness and fluid property of unconventional reservoirs, and fracture weaknesses indicate the fracture properties (fracturing intensity and fracture fillings) in fracture‐induced unconventional reservoirs. We aim to simultaneously estimate the Young's impedance, Poisson's ratio and fracture weaknesses from wide‐azimuth surface seismic data in a fracture‐induced shale gas reservoir, and use the horizontal transversely isotropic model to characterize the fractures. First, the linearized PP‐wave reflection coefficient in terms of Young's impedance, Poisson's ratio, density and fracture weaknesses is derived for the case of a weak‐contrast interface separating two weakly horizontal transversely isotropic media. In addition, an orthorhombic anisotropic case is also discussed in this paper. Then a Bayesian amplitude variation with incident angle and azimuth scheme with a model constraint is used to stably estimate Young's impedance, Poisson's ratio and fracture weaknesses with only PP‐wave azimuthal seismic data. The proposed approach is finally demonstrated on both synthetic and real data sets with reasonable results.

Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.1111/1365-2478.12783
2019-04-18
2024-04-20
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

References

  1. AlemieW. and SacchiM.D.2011. High‐resolution three‐term AVO inversion by means of a Trivariate Cauchy probability distribution. Geophysics76, R43–R55.
    [Google Scholar]
  2. BachrachR., SenguptaM., SalamaA. and MillerP.2009. Reconstruction of the layer anisotropic elastic parameters and high‐resolution fracture characterization from P‐wave data: a case study using seismic inversion and Bayesian rock physics parameter estimation. Geophysical Prospecting57, 253–262.
    [Google Scholar]
  3. BakulinA., GrechkaV. and TsvankinI.2000a. Estimation of fracture parameters from reflection seismic data‐Part I: HTI model due to a single fracture set. Geophysics65, 1788–1802.
    [Google Scholar]
  4. BakulinA., GrechkaV. and TsvankinI.2000b. Estimation of fracture parameters from reflection seismic data‐Part II: fractured models with orthorhombic symmetry. Geophysics65, 1803–1817.
    [Google Scholar]
  5. ChenH., BrownR.L. and CastagnaJ.P.2005. AVO for one and two fracture set models. Geophysics70, C1–C5.
    [Google Scholar]
  6. ChopraS., SharmaR.K., KeayJ., and MarfurtK.J.2012. Shale gas reservoir characterization workflows. 82th Annual International Meeting, SEG, Expanded Abstracts, 1–5.
  7. DaubechiesI., DeVoreR. and FornasierM.2010. Iteratively reweighted least squares minimization for sparse recovery. Communications on Pure and Applied Mathematics63, 1–38.
    [Google Scholar]
  8. DowntonJ.E.2005. Seismic parameter estimation from AVO inversion. PhD thesis, University of Calgary, Calgary, Canada.
  9. DowntonJ.E. and RoureB.2015. Interpreting azimuthal Fourier coefficients for anisotropic and fracture parameters. Interpretation3, ST9–ST27.
    [Google Scholar]
  10. GassmannF.1951. Über die Elastizität poröser Medien. Vierteljahrsschrift der Naturforschenden Gesellschaft in Zürich, 96, 1–23.
  11. GoodwayB., VarsekJ. and AbacoC.2007. Anisotropic 3D Amplitude variation with azimuth (AVAZ) methods to detect fracture prone zones in tight gas resource plays. CSPG/CSEG Convention, 590–596.
    [Google Scholar]
  12. GrayD. and HeadK.2000. Fracture detection in Manderson field: a 3‐D AVAZ case history. The Leading Edge19, 1214–1221.
    [Google Scholar]
  13. HarrisN.B., MiskiminsJ.L. and MnichC.A.2011. Mechanical anisotropy in the Woodford Shale, Permian Basin: origin, magnitude, and scale. The Leading Edge30, 284–291.
    [Google Scholar]
  14. KabirN., CriderR., RamkhelawanR. and BaynesC.2006. Can hydrocarbon saturation be estimated using density contrast parameter. CSEG Recorder, 31, C31–C37.
    [Google Scholar]
  15. LiuE. and MartinezA.2013. Seismic Fracture Characterization. EAGE Publication, The Netherlands.
    [Google Scholar]
  16. MallickS., CraftK.L., MeisterL.J. and ChambersR.E.1998. Determination of the principal directions of azimuthal anisotropy from P‐wave seismic data. Geophysics63, 692–706.
    [Google Scholar]
  17. PanX. and ZhangG.2018. Model parameterization and PP‐wave Amplitude Versus Angle and Azimuth (AVAZ) direct inversion for fracture quasi‐weaknesses in weakly anisotropic elastic media. Surveys in Geophysics39, 937–964.
    [Google Scholar]
  18. PanX. and ZhangG.2019. Fracture detection and fluid identification based on anisotropic Gassmann equation and linear‐slip model. Geophysics84, R99–R112.
    [Google Scholar]
  19. PanX., ZhangG., ChenH. and YinX.2017a. McMC‐based AVAZ direct inversion for fracture weaknesses. Journal of Applied Geophysics138, 50–61.
    [Google Scholar]
  20. PanX., ZhangG., ChenH. and Yin, X.2017b. McMC‐based nonlinear EIVAZ inversion driven by rock physics. Journal of Geophysics and Engineering14, 368–379.
    [Google Scholar]
  21. PanX., ZhangG. and YinX.2017c. Azimuthally anisotropic elastic impedance inversion for fluid indicator driven by rock physics. Geophysics82, C211–C227.
    [Google Scholar]
  22. PanX., ZhangG. and YinX.2018a. Elastic impedance parameterization and inversion for fluid modulus and dry fracture quasi‐weaknesses in a gas‐filled reservoir. Journal of Natural Gas Science and Engineering49, 194–212.
    [Google Scholar]
  23. PanX., ZhangG. and YinX.2018b. Azimuthal seismic amplitude variation with offset and azimuth inversion in weakly anisotropic media with orthorhombic symmetry. Surveys in Geophysics39, 99–123.
    [Google Scholar]
  24. PanX., ZhangG. and YinX.2018c. Azimuthally pre‐stack seismic inversion for orthorhombic anisotropy driven by rock physics. Science China‐Earth Sciences61, 425–440.
    [Google Scholar]
  25. PanX., ZhangG. and YinX.2018d. Elastic impedance variation with angle and azimuth inversion for brittleness and fracture parameters in anisotropic elastic media. Surveys in Geophysics39, 965–992.
    [Google Scholar]
  26. PanX., ZhangG. and YinX.2019. Amplitude variation with offset and azimuth inversion for fluid indicator and fracture weaknesses in an oil‐bearing fractured reservoir. Geophysics84, 1–50.
    [Google Scholar]
  27. PistreV., PlonaT., SinhaB., KinoshitaT., TashiroH., IkegamiT.et al. 2005. A new modular sonic tool provides complete acoustic formation evaluation. 75th SEG meeting, Houston, TX, USA, Expanded Abstracts, 368–371.
  28. RickmanR., MullenM., PetreE., GrieserB. and KundertD.2008. A practical use of shale petrophysics for stimulation design optimization: all shale plays are not clones of the Barnett Shale. Annual Technical Conference and Exhibition, Society of Petroleum Engineers, SPE 11528.
  29. RussellB., HedlinK., HiltermanF. and LinesL.2003. Fluid‐property discrimination with AVO: a Biot‐Gassmann perspective. Geophysics68, 29–39.
    [Google Scholar]
  30. RussellB.H., GrayD. and HampsonD.P.2011. Linearized AVO and poroelasticity. Geophysics76, C19–C29.
    [Google Scholar]
  31. RügerA.1997. P‐wave reflection coefficients for transversely isotropic models with vertical and horizontal axis of symmetry. Geophysics62, 713–722.
    [Google Scholar]
  32. RügerA.1998. Variation of P‐wave reflectivity with offset and azimuth in anisotropic media. Geophysics63, 935–947.
    [Google Scholar]
  33. SacchiM.D. and UlrychT.J.1995. High‐resolution velocity gathers and offset space reconstruction. Geophysics60, 1169–1177.
    [Google Scholar]
  34. SchoenbergM. and SayersC.M.1995. Seismic anisotropy of fractured rock. Geophysics60, 204–211.
    [Google Scholar]
  35. SenaA., CastilloG., ChesserK., VoiseyS., EstradaJ., CarcuzJ., et al. 2011. Seismic reservoir characterization in resource shale plays: “sweet spot” discrimination and optimization of horizontal well placement. SEG Annual International Meeting, Expanded Abstracts, 1744–1748.
  36. SharmaR.K. and ChopraS.2013. Unconventional reservoir characterization using conventional tools. 83th Annual International Meeting, SEG, Expanded Abstracts, 2264–2268.
  37. SharmaR.K. and ChopraS.2015. Determination of lithology and brittleness of rocks with a new attribute. The Leading Edge34, 554–564.
    [Google Scholar]
  38. ShawR.K. and SenM.K.2006. Use of AVOA data to estimate fluid indicator in a vertically fractured medium. Geophysics71, C15–C24.
    [Google Scholar]
  39. SilS.2013. Fracture parameter estimation from well‐log data. Geophysics78, D129–D134.
    [Google Scholar]
  40. ThomsenL.1986. Weak elastic anisotropy. Geophysics51, 1954–1966.
    [Google Scholar]
  41. ZhangK., ZhangB., KwiatkowskiJ.T. and MarfurtK.J.2010. Seismic azimuthal impedance anisotropy in the Barnett Shale. 80th Annual International Meeting, SEG, Expanded Abstracts, 273–277.
  42. ZongZ. and YinX.2017. Model parameterization and P‐wave AVA direct inversion for young's impedance. Pure and Applied Geophysics174, 1965–1981.
    [Google Scholar]
http://instance.metastore.ingenta.com/content/journals/10.1111/1365-2478.12783
Loading
/content/journals/10.1111/1365-2478.12783
Loading

Data & Media loading...

Most Cited This Month Most Cited RSS feed

This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address
Approval was a Success
Invalid data
An Error Occurred
Approval was partially successful, following selected items could not be processed due to error