首页> 外文会议>Society of Petroleum Engineers International Petroleum Technology Conference >Comparison of Fluid Prediction Success between AVO and Bright Spot Techniques in the Marco Polo Field, the Gulf of Mexico
【24h】

Comparison of Fluid Prediction Success between AVO and Bright Spot Techniques in the Marco Polo Field, the Gulf of Mexico

机译:Marco Polo Fields ZHO与亮点技术与墨西哥湾的流体预测成功的比较

获取原文

摘要

Bright spot amplitude anomalies in seismic data are common indicators of natural gas; however, an interpretation based purely on these amplitude anomalies often yields a false indication of gas-saturated sands. A data set from the Marco Polo field, the Gulf of Mexico, demonstrates this problem. A discovery well was drilled into a sequence of bright spot anomalies that were indeed gas-saturated sands. This suggested that other bright spots in the seismic section also corresponded to gas sands and that non-bright spots were to brine-saturated sands. Nine development wells were later drilled into those bright spots, but not all of them were gas sands and not all of non-bright spots were brine-saturated sands. This study utilized Gassmann fluid substitution and three seismic amplitude versus offset (AVO) techniques (intercept and gradient, elastic impedance, and Lambda-Mu-Rho) as a comparison to purely using bright spots technique for fluid-type prediction at the location around the discovery well. This study used borehole information only from the discovery well in the purpose of AVO calibration. Forward models for the three AVO techniques were created from the well-log information in order to predict differences in the modeled attributes between gas- and brine-saturated scenarios. Pre-stack seismic data were inverted for intercept and gradient attributes, elastic impedance (EI) volumes, and Lambda-Mu-Rho (LMR) volumes. These volumes were compared to the forward models to predict gas- and brine-saturated locations. The prediction results were evaluated with information from the nine development wells. The intercept and gradient, elastic impedance, and LMR techniques yielded correct predictions of 52%, 61%, and 70%, respectively, of the observed sands. The traditional bright spot method yielded only 45% of correct fluid prediction. In conclusion, the pre-stack AVO techniques provided a better fluid prediction than relying solely on the post-stack bright spots alone. Furthermore, the prediction results improved as the computational intensity of the inversion increased from the intercept and gradient, to the elastic impedance, and to the LMR technique.
机译:地震数据中的亮点幅度异常是天然气的常见指标;然而,纯粹对这些幅度异常的解释通常会产生气体饱和砂的错误指示。来自Marco Polo Field,墨西哥湾的数据集展示了这个问题。钻孔钻孔成一系列亮点异常,确实是气体饱和的砂。这表明地震截面中的其他亮点还对应于气体砂,并且非亮点是盐水饱和砂。九个发展井后来钻进那些亮点,但并非所有的都是气体砂,并非所有的非亮点都是饱和饱和的砂岩。本研究利用了Gassmann流体取代和三个地震振幅与偏移(AVO)技术(拦截和梯度,弹性阻抗和Lambda-MU-RHO),作为纯粹使用明亮的斑点技术在周围的位置进行流体类型预测的比较发现很好。这项研究仅在AVO校准的目的中使用了钻孔信息。三种AVO技术的前向模型是从良好的日志信息创建的,以便预测气体和盐水和饱和情景之间建模属性的差异。堆叠前的地震数据被反转截取和梯度属性,弹性阻抗(EI)体积和Lambda-Mu-Rho(LMR)体积。将这些体积与前向模型进行比较以预测气体和盐水和饱和的位置。通过来自九个发育井的信息评估预测结果。截距和梯度,弹性阻抗和LMR技术分别为观察到的砂体分别为52%,61%和70%的正确预测。传统的亮点方法仅产生了45%的正确流体预测。总之,堆叠前的AVO技术提供了比单独依赖于堆叠后亮点的更好的流体预测。此外,预测结果随着反演的计算强度从截距和梯度增加到弹性阻抗以及LMR技术而改善。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号