Landro (2001) proposed using AVO attributes to quantify changes in reservoir saturation and pressure from 4D seismic data. This method relates changes in intercept (R0) and gradient (G) to saturation and pressure variations. The current study extends Landro's method with a third equation linking P-wave time-shift to changes in these properties. Solving the combined system of three equations yields improved estimates of saturation and pressure changes compared to Landro's original method. The new methodology was tested on a synthetic reservoir model where it more accurately determined pressure variation averages from time-lapse seismic AVO and time-shift analysis.
Landro (2001) proposed using AVO attributes to quantify changes in reservoir saturation and pressure from 4D seismic data. This method relates changes in intercept (R0) and gradient (G) to saturation and pressure variations. The current study extends Landro's method with a third equation linking P-wave time-shift to changes in these properties. Solving the combined system of three equations yields improved estimates of saturation and pressure changes compared to Landro's original method. The new methodology was tested on a synthetic reservoir model where it more accurately determined pressure variation averages from time-lapse seismic AVO and time-shift analysis.
Landro (2001) proposed using AVO attributes to quantify changes in reservoir saturation and pressure from 4D seismic data. This method relates changes in intercept (R0) and gradient (G) to saturation and pressure variations. The current study extends Landro's method with a third equation linking P-wave time-shift to changes in these properties. Solving the combined system of three equations yields improved estimates of saturation and pressure changes compared to Landro's original method. The new methodology was tested on a synthetic reservoir model where it more accurately determined pressure variation averages from time-lapse seismic AVO and time-shift analysis.
Landro (2001) proposed an elegant procedure to express changes in seismic amplitude
attributes as a function of variation in reservoir saturation and pressure. The expressions are based on the Smith and Gidlow (1987) PP reflection coefficient equation, which reads: with k
, l
, m
, k
, l
, etc., being the regression coefficients of empirical curves, the angle
of incidence, S the change in fluid saturation and P the change in net pressure. Splitting this expression into the seismic attributes intercept (R 0 ) and gradient (G) leads to a system that can be explicitly solved for changes in saturation and pressure. Extension of Landros method using the time-shift as a constraint The system of equations proposed in Landro (2001) was extended with an additional equation expressing the PP-wave time-shift as a function of changes in pressure (P) and in saturation (S), defined as: where D is the reservoir thickness. Explicit expressions for P and S were found by Enhanced Oil Recovery processes have considerable impact on a reservoirsphysical characteristics. 4D seismic inversion presents an efcient tool for quantifying changes in a reservoirs dynamic properties. Landro (2001) proposed a simple method for detecting changes in rock properties from AVO data. However this inversion algorithm is prone to great uncertainty. We present here an inversion scheme based on a modied form of Landros equations and extended with a third equation that relates the P-wave time-shift to uid properties changes. The combined information from amplitudes and travel times can quantify the changes in the rock properties with fairly high accuracy. The methodology was tested on a synthetic eld case. Estimation of pressure and saturation changes from 4D seismic AVO and time-shift analysis Figure 1. a. Cost function for the solution proposed by Landro; b. Cost function for the solution obtained from a system of three linear equations; c. Cost function for the solution obtained from a system of three quadratic equations. a. b. c. 39 solving the system composed by the approximations of change in vertical reflectivity (R 0 ), change in gradient reflectivity (G) and PP- wave time-shift (Tpp). The non-linear system was solved with a Gauss-Newton algorithm. The results were compared to the changes in pressure and saturation obtained by solving the system using linearised equations and with Landros method, which does not incorporate the time-shift. Since approximations were used, estimation of the unknowns can never be exact (except for the zero perturbation case). The error, expressed as a cost function, can be quantified as the square root of the squared differences in saturation and pressure change, normalised over the dynamic range of each variable: Costfunc= In Figures 1a through 1c the cost function has been calculated over the entire region of interest; in general, the quadratic approximations present the minimum cost function (i.e., the most accurate solution). Results Time-lapse seismic data were analysed as a way of comparing the estimations of changes in reservoir fluid properties. The basis was a synthetic 15 25 11 gridblock, sandy, heterogeneous reservoir. (Each cell is cubic with sides of 10 m.) A water injector well was placed in the centre of the reservoir, and four producers in the corners. Initial water and oil saturation were 10% and 90%, respectively, and pore pressure was 40 MPa; fluid properties are initially homogeneous. 4D seismic data was modelled before and after two years of production. The reservoir saturation (a) and pressure (b) after two years of production are plotted in Figures 2a and 2b. Figures 3a and 3b show the changes in AVO coefficients after two years of production. The predominant changes in pressure explain why G changes more than R 0 . We also determined the time-shift, shown in Figure4. 40 Figure 2. a. Reservoir saturation after two years of production; b. Reservoir pore pressure after two years of production. Figure 3a. Change in R0 after two years of production; b. Change in G after two years of production. a. b. a. b. Mario Trani T +31 15 278 61 34 F +31 15 278 11 89 E m.trani@tudelft.nl Rob Arts T +31 30 256 46 38 F +31 30 256 46 05 E rob.arts@tno.nl Olwijn Leeuwenburgh T +31 30 256 45 17 F +31 30 256 46 05 E olwijn.leeuwenburgh@tno.nl Jan Brouwer T +31 30 256 49 57 F +31 30 256 46 05 E jan.brouwer@tno.nl Information 41 The quadratic approximations, making use of the supplementary information from PP-wave travel time and of a second order approximation in both variables, better estimate the vertically averaged pressure variation. Conclusions A 4D seismic inversion scheme based on a modified form of Landros equations and extended with a third equation is proposed; the latter equation expresses the time-shift induced by P-wave velocity changes as a function of pore pressure and saturation changes. The method was tested on a synthetic reservoir. The results showed an improvement of the P and S estimation with respect to Landros method. The next step is to use the inversion results together with the production data in a data assimilation scheme (Leeuwenburgh et al., submitted to 70th EAGE Conference & Exhibition). Figure 4. Time-shift at the reservoir bottom: red corresponds to the maximum time-shift of 1 ms. Figure 5. a. Differences between the true average P and the P estimated by Landros algorithm for all the CDPs; b. Differences between the true average P and the P estimated by the linear equation system for all the CDPs; c. Differences between the true average P and the P estimated by the quadratic equation system for all the CDPs. a. b. c.