Click to view article as PDF file.
GCReservoirs
Without Seismic Reflection
Signal
*
By
Bob Hardage1
Search and Discovery Article #40261 (2007)
Posted October 10, 2007
*Adapted from the Geophysical
Corner column, prepared by the author, in AAPG Explorer, September, 2007, and
entitled “No Reflection
Signal
Can Be Good.” Editor of Geophysical Corner is Bob
A. Hardage. Managing Editor of AAPG Explorer is Vern Stefanic; Larry Nation is
Communications Director.
1Bureau of Economic Geology, The University of Texas at Austin ([email protected])
General Statement
As seismic interpreters, most of us – including the author – have developed the mindset that robust reflection events are what we first try to associate with drilling targets. For thin-bed units, reflection amplitude increases as net pay increases within the target interval. Thin-bed interpreters conclude that “strong reflection events are good.”
In a sand-shale sequence, gas
reservoirs produce P-wave bright spots. In this type of geology, interpreters
focus on the boldest reflection signals to define drilling targets. Depending on
the nature of the seismic impedance contrasts in the type of geology that is
being interpreted, there are exceptions to these two examples that drilling
targets are associated with reasonably prominent reflection events. However, the
association between robust reflection responses and drilling targets is
successfully applied across many prospects and in several depositional
environments. In this article, we look at the opposite principle and describe a
drilling target for which the correct mindset is: “Drill where there is no
reflection
signal
.”
uGeneral StatementuFigure Captions
uGeneral StatementuFigure Captions
uGeneral StatementuFigure Captions |
ExampleThe target in this example is a thin Caddo sandstone positioned at the top of the Bend Conglomerate interval in the Fort Worth Basin. Distribution of the sandstone is shown in map view in Figure 1. This map, based on the interpretation of well logs acquired in the labeled wells, indicates that the sandstone is distributed along a southwest-to-northeast channel-like trend. Local operators consider this particular sandstone to be an attractive drilling target, even though the average thickness is only five meters (16 feet). At this location, the Caddo is interpreted to have been deposited in a deltaic environment that had a low accommodation space. Incised channels similar in size and shape to the trend shown in this map are therefore not unexpected features. Two profiles (AA’ and BB’) are shown that traverse the sandstone trend and connect key calibration wells. Seismic responses along these profiles are exhibited in Figure 2. The interpreted Caddo horizon is shown on the seismic sections; the circled area on each profile identifies the intersection with the sandstone trend. Outside the circled areas, the Caddo reflection is robust because a thin carbonate layer extends across this local area and creates a significant P-wave impedance contrast with the overlying shale. Inside each circled area, the Caddo reflection is absent, or minimal, because there is no significant P-wave impedance contrast between the sandstone that infilled the erosional channel and its sealing shale.
Conclusion
To position a
well that will penetrate this particular sand, an interpreter has to
adopt the attitude that “no reflection The wells shown in these figures were drilled before the 3-D seismic data were acquired. Note the situation for the BYTS14 and BYTS11 wells. BYTS14 touched the edge of the incised channel and produced; BYTS11 was an ever-so-close near miss (Figures 2 and 3). |
