Professional Documents
Culture Documents
8 SeismicVelocity PDF
8 SeismicVelocity PDF
73
Stanford Rock Physics Laboratory - Gary Mavko
74
Stanford Rock Physics Laboratory - Gary Mavko
Velocity (km/s)
(km/s)
VP P
Velocity (km/s)
(km/s)
Dry Dry
4 Number 5
of cracks
Velocity
Velocity
3 Crack shape Dry 4 V
S Dry
Sat. V
Saturated S
Sat.
2 3
1 2
0 100 200 300 0 100 200 300
Effective Pressure (bars) Effective Pressure (bars)
Effective Pressure (bars) Effective Pressure (bars)
Solenhofen limestone
7
Sat.
6 Solenhofen Limestone
V
P
(km/s)
P
Velocity(km/s)
6 5
Velocity (km/s)
Webatuck
Webatuck Dolomite
dolomite
Velocity
Velocity
5 4
Sat.
V Sat. and Dry
S
4 Dry
3
V
S
3 2
0 100 200 300 0 100 200
Effective Pressure (bars) Effective Pressure (bars) F.1
Effective Pressure (bars) Effective Pressure (bars)
76
Stanford Rock Physics Laboratory - Gary Mavko
Pressure-Dependence of Velocities
Vp Vs
= 1.0 − 0.40 *exp(−Peff /11) = 1.0 − 0.38* exp(−Peff /12)
Vp(40) Vs(40)
F29
Remember: Calibrate to Dry Cores!
It is customary to determine the pressure dependence of
velocities from core measurements. A convenient way to
quantify the dependence is to normalize the velocities for
each sample by the high pressure value as shown here.
This causes the curves to cluster at the high pressure point.
Then we fit an average trend through the cloud, as shown.
The velocity change between any two effective pressures
P1 and P2 can be conveniently written as:
V(P2) 1.0 − 0.38exp(−P2 /12)
=
V(P1) 1.0 − 0.38exp(−P1 /12)
Vp and Vs often have a different pressure behavior, so
determine separate functions for them.
Remember to recalibrate this equation to your own cores!
77
Stanford Rock Physics Laboratory - Gary Mavko
Small
impedance
increase from
fluids
Modest
impedance
decrease
from pressure
Increasing Pp Increasing Sw
F32
78
Stanford Rock Physics Laboratory - Gary Mavko
Large
impedance
increase
Small
impedance
decrease
F32
Increasing Sw
Increasing Pp
79
Stanford Rock Physics Laboratory - Gary Mavko
80
Stanford Rock Physics Laboratory - Gary Mavko
F.4
81
Stanford Rock Physics Laboratory - Gary Mavko
82
Stanford Rock Physics Laboratory - Gary Mavko
pressure
5
4.8 water
oil
4.6
dry
4.4
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35
F.6
40
Pore Pressure (MPa)
83
Stanford Rock Physics Laboratory - Gary Mavko
84
Stanford Rock Physics Laboratory - Gary Mavko
85
Stanford Rock Physics Laboratory - Gary Mavko
86
Stanford Rock Physics Laboratory - Gary Mavko
87
Stanford Rock Physics Laboratory - Gary Mavko
2. Soft Porosity:
88
Stanford Rock Physics Laboratory - Gary Mavko
Curves on the left show the typical increase of velocity with effective
pressure. For each sample the velocity change is associated with the
opening and closing of cracks and flaws. These are typical when rapid
changes in effective pressure occur, such as during production.
Curves on the right show the same data projected on the velocity- porosity
plane. Younger, high porosity sediments tend to fall on the lower right.
Diagenesis and cementation tend to move samples to the upper left
(lower porosity, higher velocity). One effect of over- pressure is to inhibit
diagenesis, preserving porosity and slowing progress from lower right to
upper left. This is called “loading” type overpressure. Rapid, late stage
development of overpressure can open cracks and grain boundaries,
resembling the curves on the left. This is sometimes called “transient” or
“unloading” overpressure. In both cases, high pressure leads to lower
velocities, but along different trends.
89
Stanford Rock Physics Laboratory - Gary Mavko
F31
90
Stanford Rock Physics Laboratory - Gary Mavko
4.5 p =0 VP
Velocity (km/s)
p
4
St. Peter sandstone
3.5
p =80 MPa
3 c
VS
p =0
2.5 p
0 20 40 60 80
Effective Pressure (MPa)
3.6
p =80 MPa
3.4 c
VS
Velocity (km/s)
3.2 p =0
p
2.6
0 20 40 60 80
Effective Pressure (MPa)
F.9
Experiments that illustrate the effective pressure law. In the first part of
the experiment, effective pressure is increased by increasing confining
pressure from 0 to 80 MPa, while keeping pore pressure zero (solid dots).
Then, effective pressure is decreased by keeping confining pressure fixed
at 80 MPa, but pumping up the pore pressure from 0 to nearly 80 MPa
(open circles). (Jones,1983.)
The curves trace approximately (but not exactly) the same trend. There is
some hysteresis, probably associated with frictional adjustment of crack
faces and grain boundaries. For most purposes, the hysteresis is small
compared to more serious difficulties measuring velocities, so we assume
that the effective pressure law can be applied. This is a tremendous
convenience, since most laboratory measurements are made with pore
pressure equal 0.
91
Stanford Rock Physics Laboratory - Gary Mavko
Dry
2.5
Dry
Velocity
2 p =0
p VS
p p=1MPa
1.5 p =41 MPa
Sat. p
0.5 F.11
92
Stanford Rock Physics Laboratory - Gary Mavko
Pore
pressure
Confining
pressure transducer
Rock
sample
transducer
Jacket
Concept of
Induced Pore Pressure
∆σ = 1bar
transducer
93
Stanford Rock Physics Laboratory - Gary Mavko
100
0
80
5
Velocity
2.5 10
20
40
60
VS
2
5
1.5
0 10 20 30 40 50
Effective Pressure (MPa)
F.12
94
Stanford Rock Physics Laboratory - Gary Mavko
F.16
95
Stanford Rock Physics Laboratory - Gary Mavko
F30
96
Stanford Rock Physics Laboratory - Gary Mavko
1 Bedford limestone
0.9 Vp
V/Vo
0.8 Vs
0.7
-4 -2 0 2 4 6 8 10
Temperature
1.1
1 Barre granite
0.9
µ/µο
0.8
0.7
0.5
-4 -2 0 2 4 6 8 10
Log viscosity (poise) F.17
Temperature
In this experiment the pore fluid is glycerol, whose viscosity
is extremely sensitive to temperature. The data show a
classical viscoelastic behavior with lower velocity at low
viscosity and higher velocity at higher viscosity. Viscosity is
one of several pore fluid properties that are sensitive to
temperature.
97
Stanford Rock Physics Laboratory - Gary Mavko
F.18
98
Stanford Rock Physics Laboratory - Gary Mavko
F.19
99
Stanford Rock Physics Laboratory - Gary Mavko
F30
100
Stanford Rock Physics Laboratory - Gary Mavko
API = 141.5
ρ −131.5
O
3
1 l/l = 5.615 ft /bbl F30
101
Stanford Rock Physics Laboratory - Gary Mavko
F30
102
Stanford Rock Physics Laboratory - Gary Mavko
F30
103
Stanford Rock Physics Laboratory - Gary Mavko
Soft
Deepwater
Sands
104
Stanford Rock Physics Laboratory - Gary Mavko
Fluid Properties
105
Stanford Rock Physics Laboratory - Gary Mavko
Axial Stress
P and S waves
F.20
106
Stanford Rock Physics Laboratory - Gary Mavko
T
S
e
tur
SII Source
ac
Fr
T
S S II
Source
S IIA
P
Source
1.2
1.1
1
V/Vo
0.9
0.8 P
S⊥
0.7 SII
SIIA
0.6
0 20 40 60 80 100
Percent Failure Strength F.21
107
Stanford Rock Physics Laboratory - Gary Mavko
50
40
30
20
10
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1
fabric anisotropy
Virtually any rock that has a visual layering or fabric at a scale finer
than the seismic wavelength will be elastically and seismically
anisotropic. Sources can include elongated and aligned grains and
pores, cracks, and fine scale layering. Velocities are usually faster
for propagation along the layering.
108
Stanford Rock Physics Laboratory - Gary Mavko
109
Stanford Rock Physics Laboratory - Gary Mavko
110
Stanford Rock Physics Laboratory - Gary Mavko
F.23
111
Stanford Rock Physics Laboratory - Gary Mavko
F.24
112