1887

Abstract

Summary

Geologic model building of the subsurface is a complicated and lengthy process. Seismic data are usually inverted at the beginning of this process and discarded after inversion and interpretation. Modifications from the seismic inversion results are almost never validated due to the one-way information flow towards reservoir properties. In this paper, we propose to include the production data and the inverted reservoir properties back in the seismic inversion during the next iteration of geologic model updates. The elastic properties and the fluid-flow properties are connected and cross-updated based on the underlying rock physics models. The statistical approach we propose in this paper not only provides a single Earth model that best satisfies both types of data, but also has the potential to properly quantify the uncertainty associated with this model. We show preliminary results from the proposed framework on a synthetic gas-pocket identification example.

Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/papers/10.3997/2214-4609.201412673
2015-06-01
2024-04-19
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

References

  1. Billette, F., and S.Brandsberg-Dahl
    [2005] The 2004 BP velocity benchmark: Presented at the 67th Annual International Conference and Exhibition, EAGE.
    [Google Scholar]
  2. Gray, S.
    [2014] Seismic imaging and inversion: What are we doing, how are we doing, and where are we going?SEG Expanded Abstracts, 4416–4420.
    [Google Scholar]
  3. Land, C. S.
    [1968] Calculation of imbibition relative permeability for two-and three-phase flow from rock properties. Society of Petroleum Engineers Journal, 8(02), 149–156.
    [Google Scholar]
  4. Li, Y.
    [2014] Wave-equation migration velocity analysis for VTI models using geological and rock physics constraints. Ph.D. Thesis, Stanford Univeristy.
    [Google Scholar]
  5. Moreno, L., Tsang, Y. W., Tsang, C. F., Hale, F. V., and Neretnieks, I.
    [1988] Flow and tracer transport in a single fracture: A stochastic model and its relation to some field observations. Water Resources Research, 24(12), 2033–2048.
    [Google Scholar]
  6. MullerT M, GurevichB and LebedevM
    [2010] Seismic wave attenuation and dispersion resulting from wave-induced flow in porous rocks—a review. Geophysics, 75, A147–64.
    [Google Scholar]
  7. Shen, Y., Biondi, B., Clapp, R., and Nichols, D.
    [2014] Wave-equation migration Q analysis (WEMQA). SEG Expanded Abstracts, 3757–3762.
    [Google Scholar]
  8. Wang, Y., Chen, S., Wang, L., and Li, X.
    [2013] Modeling and analysis of seismic wave dispersion based on the rock physics model. J. Geophys. Eng., 10, 054001.
    [Google Scholar]
  9. WhiteJ E
    [1975] Computed seismic speeds and attenuation in rocks with partial gas saturation. Geophysics, 40, 224–32.
    [Google Scholar]
http://instance.metastore.ingenta.com/content/papers/10.3997/2214-4609.201412673
Loading
/content/papers/10.3997/2214-4609.201412673
Loading

Data & Media loading...

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