1887

Abstract

Summary

Elastic full waveform inversion (EFWI) augmented with petrophysical information defines a high standard for velocity model building, as it delivers high-resolution, accurate and lithologically feasible subsurface models. The technique enhances the benefits of using an elastic wave equation over the acoustic implementation while constraining the inverted models to geologically plausible solutions. We derive elastic models of subsurface properties using EFWI and explicitly incorporate petrophysical penalties to guide models toward realistic lithology, i.e., to models consistent with the seismic data as well as with the petrophysical context in the area of study. This methodology mitigates several issues related to EFWI, as it reduces the high non-linearity of the inverse problem, mitigates the artifacts created by interparameter crosstalk, and prevents geologically implausible earth models. We define this penalty using multiple probability density functions (PDFs) derived from petrophysical information, such as well logs, where each PDF represents a different lithology. We demonstrate that the combined FWI objective function establishes a more robust foundation for EFWI by explicitly guiding models toward plausible solutions in the specific geological context of the exploration problem, while at the same time reducing the misfit between the observed and modelled data.

Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/papers/10.3997/2214-4609.202012064
2021-10-18
2024-04-28
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

References

  1. Aragao, O. and Sava, P. [2020a] Elastic full-waveform inversion probabilistic petrophysical model constraints.Geophysics, 85, R101–R111.
    [Google Scholar]
  2. Aragao, O. and Sava, P. [2020b] Elastic full waveform inversion with probabilistic petrophysical clustering.Geophysical Prospecting, 68, 1341–1355.
    [Google Scholar]
  3. Aragao, O. and Sava, P. [2020c] Elastic full-waveform inversion with spatial probabilistic petrophysical constraints.SEG International Exposition and 90th Annual Meeting, Expanded Abstracts, 730–734.
    [Google Scholar]
  4. Bai, T. and Tsvankin, I. [2016] Time-domain finite-difference modeling for attenuative anisotropic media.Geophysics, 81, C69–C77.
    [Google Scholar]
  5. Billette, F. and Brandsberg-Dahl, S. [2005] The 2004 BP velocity benchmark. In: 67th Annual Internat. Mtg., EAGE, Expanded Abstracts, EAGE, B035.
    [Google Scholar]
  6. Cheng, C.H., Toksoz, M.N. and Wills, M.E. [1982] Determination of in situ attenuation from full waveform acoustic logs.J. Geophys. Res., 87, 5477–5484.
    [Google Scholar]
  7. Operto, S., Gholami, Y., Prieux, V., Ribodetti, A., Brossier, R., Metivier, L. and Virieux, J. [2013] A guided tour of multiparameter full-waveform inversion with multicomponent data: from theory to practice.The Leading Edge, 32, 1040–1054.
    [Google Scholar]
  8. Sun, X., Tang, X., Cheng, C.H. and Frazer, L.N. [2000] P- and S-wave attenuation logs from monopole sonic data.Geophysics, 65, 755–765.
    [Google Scholar]
http://instance.metastore.ingenta.com/content/papers/10.3997/2214-4609.202012064
Loading
/content/papers/10.3997/2214-4609.202012064
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