4.6 Article

Rock Physics Based Interpretation of Seismically Derived Elastic Volumes

Journal

FRONTIERS IN EARTH SCIENCE
Volume 8, Issue -, Pages -

Publisher

FRONTIERS MEDIA SA
DOI: 10.3389/feart.2020.620276

Keywords

interpretation; rock physics; impedance; porosity; seismic

Funding

  1. Saudi Aramco
  2. College of Petroleum Engineering and Geosciences of King Fahd University of Petroleum and Minerals

Ask authors/readers for more resources

A rock physics-based seismic interpretation workflow has been developed to extract volumetric rock properties from seismic data, successfully linking elastic properties with volumetric properties through rock physics models in different case studies. Additionally, a geology-driven relationship was derived to accurately relate pore fluid to porosity in rocks.
A rock physics based seismic interpretation workflow has been developed to extract volumetric rock properties from seismically derived P- and S-wave impedances, I ( p ) and I ( s ). This workflow was first tested on a classic rock physics velocity-porosity model. Next, it was applied to two case studies: a carbonate and a clastic oil field. In each case study, we established rock physics models that accurately relate elastic properties to the rock's volumetric properties, mainly the total porosity, clay content, and pore fluid. To resolve all three volumetric properties from only two inputs, I ( p ) and I ( s ), a site-specific geology driven relation between the pore fluid and porosity was derived as a hydrocarbon identifier. In order to apply this method at the seismic spatial scale, we created a coarse-scale elastic and volumetric variables by using mathematical upscaling at the wells. By using I ( p ) and I ( s ) thus upscaled, we arrived at the accurate interpretation of the upscaled porosity, mineralogy, and water saturation both at the wells and in a simulated vertical impedance section generated by interpolation between the wells.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available