Click
to view article in PDF format.
GCStratal Slicing Makes Seismic Imaging of Depositional Systems Easier
By
Hongliu Zeng1
Search and Discovery Article #40196 (2006)
Posted June 4, 2006
*Adapted from the Geophysical Corner column, prepared by the author and entitled “Seismic Imaging? Try Stratal Slicing,” in AAPG Explorer, June, 2006. Editor of Geophysical Corner is Bob A. Hardage. Managing Editor of AAPG Explorer is Vern Stefanic; Larry Nation is Communications Director.
1Research scientist, Bureau of Economic Geology, University of Texas, Austin, Texas ([email protected])
Many people today view land surfaces from commercial
airplanes or on satellite images and are amazed by the geomorphic forms of river
channels, deltas, barrier islands, dune fields, and other features. These views
show us modern stratal-
time
surfaces of exposed landforms.
Three-D seismic technology has now made it possible to image similar, but much older, geomorphic features and stratal surfaces preserved in the rock record. Historically, interpreters have analyzed vertical sections of 3-D seismic volumes line by line and found field-scale (50 meters or thicker) geologic and depositional features. Sometimes, reservoir-scale (three-10 meters thick) features can be detected in these vertical sections, but many of these small-scale targets cannot be resolved and interpreted because of data bandwidth limitations.
For example, in the vertical view in Figure 1a the seismic facies around the dash line are interpreted to be fluvial deposits, based on the presence of discontinuous, patchy events and frequent lateral changes in amplitudes. Wells drilled through the interval support this interpretation.
However, correlating individual channel-fill sand bodies and marginal facies (levee, crevasse splay, etc.) on adjacent vertical views is difficult because these facies elements are thin (three-10 meters) and the seismic resolution barely resolves the tops and bases of the thickest units. In this particular section view, it is not possible to decide what depositional elements are represented by the circled features.
|
uGeneral statementuFigure captions
u
|
One strategy to map depositional systems with high resolution is to change the emphasis of seismic interpretation from vertical sections to horizontal sections. For a perfectly migrated 3-D seismic data set, horizontal resolution is the same as vertical resolution. Outcrop and subsurface studies show depositional bodies have horizontal dimensions greater than their vertical dimensions. As a result, small depositional bodies often can be resolved in plan view even if they can only be detected in vertical view. As a demonstration of this principle, a stratal slice made by the method described in this article and then passed through the dash line in Figure 1a shows high-quality images of fluvial channels, crevasse splays, floodplain, and a mud plug (Figure 1b). Although most of these depositional elements are less than 10 meters thick -- and thus below vertical seismic resolution -- they are well resolved in the horizontal dimension. To implement
horizontal-view seismic interpretation, we must pick geologic- For either
horizontal view to be an accurate representation of a stratal surface,
one must assume the formation being sliced is flat-lying when Many depositional
sequences, however, are characterized by thickness changes (Figure
2c), which cause horizon-slice and One such method is
“stratal slicing” (Figure 2c), or
proportional slicing, which divides the variable-thickness vertical
interval between two seismic reference events (Figure
2) into a fixed number of uniformly spaced subintervals. If the
number of subintervals is 10 and the In principle, no major angular unconformities (truncations) or other discordant reflections should occur between the reference events.
Stratal Four stratal
In map view, the
four stratal Stratal slice S3 shows a narrow (35 to 70 meters, or 1 to 2 traces wide), well-developed meandering feature interpreted to be a small coastal plain channel (Figure 4, arrows). Wireline logs indicate this channel-fill sandstone is about four meters thick. Image S3 is only six ms (seven meters) above slice S2 and is contaminated by some interference from the S2 fluvial system. Even so, identification of the meandering channel across stratal surface S3 is unambiguous. The image resolution achieved in this case is much smaller than vertical resolution and probably represents the limit of resolution expected from stratal-slice analysis for this data set.
The software used to make stratal |
