1887
Volume 39, Issue 2
  • ISSN: 0812-3985
  • E-ISSN: 1834-7533

Abstract

The Enfield rock physics model was constructed to enable 4D feasibility studies and interpretation of the 2007 Enfield 4D seismic monitor survey. The rock physics model links reservoir static and dynamic parameters to impedances, using log data from five wells in the field, laboratory core measurements taken from cores on Enfield and neighbouring fields, and theoretical rock models from the literature. The reservoir is modelled by a sand-shale mix: sand properties are described using a modified critical porosity model whereas shale properties are generated from log data averaging. The dynamic properties in the model include saturation and pressure. Saturation is modelled using Gassmann’s formula assuming homogeneous mixing. The reservoir sand velocity-pressure relationship is described by an empirical model fitted to dry core plug measurements. An assessment of the effect of uncertainty is included for both the saturation and pressure elements of the model. The resultant rock physics model was used before the acquisition of the seismic monitor survey to assess the likelihood of detecting a 4D seismic signal only 7 months after production start-up. Our modelling results indicate that the strong pressure build-up around the water injectors would result in a detectable 4D seismic signal and this prediction is confirmed by the successful 4D seismic monitor data acquired in 2007. The rock physics model has been validated against the 4D monitor data and is being used to quantify the 4D interpretation, linking the observed 4D response back to predicted pressure and saturations changes in the field.

Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.1071/EG08015
2008-06-01
2026-01-15
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

References

  1. Furre A. K. , Andersen M. , Moen A. S. , and Tønnessen R. K. 2007, Sonic Log Derived Pressure Depletion Predictions and Application to Time-Lapse Seismic Interpretation: 69th EAGE Conference & Exhibition, Extended Abstracts, Paper P077.
  2. Kragh E. Christie P. 2002 Seismic repeatability, normalized rms, and predictability: Leading Edge 21 640 647 doi:10.1190/1.1497316
    [Google Scholar]
  3. MacBeth C. 2004 A classification for the pressure-sensitivity properties of a sandstone rock frame: Geophysics 69 497 510 doi:10.1190/1.1707070
    [Google Scholar]
  4. Mavko G. , Mukerji T. , and Dvorkin J. 1998, The Rock Physics Handbook: Cambridge Univ. Press.
  5. Nes O.-M. , Holt R. M. , and Fjaer E. 2000, The reliability of core data as input to seismic reservoir monitoring studies: Proc. SPE Europ. Petr. Conf., Paris, SPE paper No. 65180.
  6. Nur A. , Mavko G. , Dvorkin J. and Gal D. 1995, Critical porosity: The key to relating physical properties to porosity in rocks: 65th Ann. Internat. Mtg. Soc. Explor. Geophys., Expanded Abstracts, 878.
  7. Ridsdill-Smith T. , Flynn D. , and Darling S. 2007, Benefits of two-boat 4D acquisition: 77th Ann. Internat. Mtg. Soc. Explor. Geophys., Expanded Abstracts.
  8. Siggins A.F , and Dewhurst D.N. 2003, Saturation, pore pressure and effective stress from sandstone acoustic properties: Geophysical Research Letters, 30, paper no. 1089.
  9. Smith M. , Gerhardt A. , Bourdon L. , and Mee B. 2007, Using 4D seismic data to understand production-related changes in Enfield, NWS Australia: 19th Geophysical Conference and Exhibition, Australian Society of Exploration Geophysicists, Extended Abstracts.
/content/journals/10.1071/EG08015
Loading
/content/journals/10.1071/EG08015
Loading

Data & Media loading...

  • Article Type: Research Article
Keyword(s): rock physics, time-lapse seismic.

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