Stanford Rock Physics Laboratory - Gary Mavko

Basic Geophysical Concepts

14
 Stanford Rock Physics Laboratory - Gary Mavko

Body wave velocities have form: velocity= modulus

density
K + (4 / 3) + 2
VP = =
P wave velocity

S wave velocity
VS =
E wave velocity
E
VE =

where
density
K bulk modulus = 1/compressibility
shear modulus
Lam's coefficient
E Young's modulus
Poisson's ratio
M P-wave modulus = K + (4/3)

Moduli from velocities:

2 2 4 2
= V S K = VP VS
3
M = VP2 E = VE2
In terms of Poisson's ratio we can also write:

VP2 2(1 v ) VE2 (1+ v )(1 2v) VP2 2VS2 VE2 2VS2
2 = 2 = v= 2 2 =
VS (1 2v) VP (1 v) 2(VP VS ) 2VS2
Relating various velocities:
VE2 VP2
4 2 3 2 4
VP2 VS VE2 VS
= =
VS2 VE2 VS2 VP2
3 2 1
VS VS2
15
 Stanford Rock Physics Laboratory - Gary Mavko

We usually quantify Rock Physics relations in

terms of moduli and velocities, but in the field
we might look for travel time or Reflectivity

1V1
2V2

The reflection coefficient of a normally-incident P-

wave on a boundary is given by:
2V2 1V1
R = V + V
2 2 1 1
where V is the acoustic impedance. Therefore,
anything that causes a large contrast in impedance
can cause a large reflection. Candidates include:
Changes in lithology
Changes in porosity
Changes in saturation
Diagenesis
16
 Stanford Rock Physics Laboratory - Gary Mavko

AVO
Amplitude Variation with Offset
Deepwater Oil Sand
V P1, VS1, 1 1
Reflected
1 S-wave

Incident Reflected
P-wave P-wave

Transmitted
P-wave

2 2

Transmitted
VP2, V S2, 2
N.4
S-wave
Recorded CMP Gather Synthetic

In an isotropic medium, a wave that is incident on a

boundary will generally create two reflected waves (one
P and one S) and two transmitted waves. The total shear
traction acting on the boundary in medium 1 (due to the
summed effects of the incident an reflected waves) must
be equal to the total shear traction acting on the boundary in
medium 2 (due to the summed effects of the
transmitted waves). Also the displacement of a point in
medium 1 at the boundary must be equal to the displace-
ment of a point in medium 2 at the boundary.

17
 Stanford Rock Physics Laboratory - Gary Mavko

AVO - Aki-Richards approximation:

P-wave reflectivity versus incident angle:

Intercept Gradient
1 VP VS2 VS 2
R( ) R0 + 2 2 +2 sin
2 VP V P VS
1 VP
+
2 VP
[ 2 2
tan sin ]
1 VP
R0 +
2 VP

In principle, AVO gives us information about

Vp, Vs, and density. These are critical for
optimal Rock Physics interpretation. Well
see later the unique role of P- and S-wave
information for separating lithology,
pressure, and saturation.

18
 Stanford Rock Physics Laboratory - Gary Mavko

Seismic Amplitudes
Many factors influence seismic amplitude:
Source coupling
Source radiation pattern
Receiver response, coupling, and pattern
Scattering and Intrinsic Attenuation
Sperical divergence
Focusing
Anisotropy
Statics, moveout, migration, decon, DMO
Angle of Incidence

Reflection coefficient

Source Rcvr

19
 Stanford Rock Physics Laboratory - Gary Mavko

Intervals or Interfaces?
Crossplots or Wiggles?
Rock physics analysis is usually applied to intervals, where
we can find fairly universal relations of acoustic properties to
fluids, lithology, porosity, rock texture, etc.

Interval Vp vs. Phi

Interval Vp vs. Vs
In contrast, seismic wiggles depend on interval boundaries
and contrasts. This introduces countless variations in
geometry, wavelet, etc.

20
 Stanford Rock Physics Laboratory - Gary Mavko

Convolutional Model
Impedance Normal Incidence
Reflectivity
vs. depth Seismic

Convolve
With
wavelet
Rock properties Derivatives of Smoothed image
in each small layer of derivative of
layer properties impedance

Normal incidence reflection seismograms can be

approximated with the convolutional model. Reflectivity
sequence is approximately the derivative of the
impedance:
1 d
R(t) ln( V )
2 dt
Seismic trace is smoothed with the wavelet:
S(t) w(t) R(t)
Be careful of US vs. European polarity conventions!

21
 Stanford Rock Physics Laboratory - Gary Mavko

Inversion

Two quantitative strategies to link interval

rock properties with seismic:
Forward modeling
Inversion

We have had great success in applying

rock physics to interval properties.
For the most part, applying RP directly to
the seismic wiggles, requires a modeling
or inversion step.

We often choose a model-based study,

calibrated to logs (when possible) to
Diagnose formation properties
Explore situations not seen in the wells
Quantify signatures and sensitivities

22
 Stanford Rock Physics Laboratory - Gary Mavko

The Rock Physics Bottleneck

At any point in the Earth, there are only 3
(possibly 4) acoustic properties: Vp, Vs,
density, (and Q).
No matter how many seismic
attributes we observe, inversions can
only give us three acoustic attributes
Others yield spatial or geometric information.
Reservoir
Seismic Acoustic Properties
Attributes
Properties
Traveltime Porosity
Vnmo Vp Saturation
Vp/Vs Vs Pressure
Ip,Is Density Lithology
Ro, G Q Pressure
AI, EI Stress
Q Temp.
anisotropy Etc.
etc
23
 Stanford Rock Physics Laboratory - Gary Mavko

Problem of Resolution
Log-scale rock physics may be different
than seismic scale

24
 Stanford Rock Physics Laboratory - Gary Mavko

Seismic properties (velocity, impedance,

Poisson Ratio, etc)
depend on pore pressure and stress

Units of Stress:

1 bar = 106 dyne/cm2 = 14.50 psi

10 bar = 1 MPa = 106 N/m2
1 Pa = 1 N/m2 = 1.45 10-4 psi = 10-5 bar
1000 kPa = 10 bar = 1 MPa

Stress always has units of force/area

Mudweight to Pressure Gradient

1 psi/ft = 144 lb/ft3
= 19.24 lb/gal
= 22.5 kPa/m
1 lb/gal = 0.052 psi/ft

25