AVO ANALYSIS

BY Riaz Khan
Petroleum Geologist
 INTRODUCTION

¾ The observation of amplitude variation with offset (AVO) or amplitude

variation with angle of incidence (AVA) is termed as AVO analysis.

¾ AVO is a seismic technique that uses pre-stack seismic data, instead

of the more normally used post-stack data, to detect the presence of
hydrocarbons in the reservoir.

¾ Three physical parameters of seismic data are fundamental to

seismic interpretation—density, P-wave velocity and S-wave velocity.
Understanding these is necessary for the application of AVO
technology.
 INTRODUCTION.. Cont.1
AVO and Basic Rock Physics

¾ In reservoir rock, AVO response is dependent on the velocities of P-

and S-waves and on density to define the pore space and fluids
within the rock matrix.

¾ Density effects can be modeled in a fluid-saturated rock using the

relationships of porosity, and water saturation in the matrix and
fluids.

¾ Seismic velocity involves the deformation of the reservoir rock as a

function of time.

¾ The P-wave response changes polarity in going from a wet to a gas

sand, but the S-wave response retains the same polarity. This
difference in function allows the operator to predict where the
presence of gas will occur in the reservoir.
 INTRODUCTION.. Cont.2
AVO and Basic Rock Physics.. cont.

¾ Unfortunately, most seismic data does not give S-wave data but only
P-wave data. The recording of P-wave data at various offsets, which
is always recorded, can be used to record a component of the S-
wave data. The offset recording is the basis of the AVO technique.

¾ The value of using AVO to interpret gas sands was first proposed in
1984 using low impedance value for the sands and higher
impedance values for shales.

¾ In 1989 Rutherford and Williams extended the AVO method to

anomalies other than low impedance sands. Other anomalies that
the method can be applied to are identification of sand to sand
boundaries. The Aki-Richards equations were used to perform
forward modeling and data analysis.
 INTRODUCTION.. Cont.3

Crossplotting AVO attributes

¾ Crossplotting of intercept data against gradient data can be used in

the interpretation of AVO anomalies.

¾ Modeling flow for application of AVO offset data.

z An appropriately trimmed, muted, moved-out, and migrated set of

gathers is analyzed on a sample by sample basis

z A least-square, best fit line is fitted to the amplitudes

z The slope of the line gives G and the intercept of the line, when

projected back to the ordinate, gives P.

z The values of P and G are used to calculate the AVO type
 APPLICATION AND LIMITATIONS

¾ AVO analysis can give the information of lithology change in the

subsurface, which has led to several successful cases of finding oil.

¾ AVO analysis in CMP gathers gives useful knowledge of lithology

changes especially when the subsurface is bound with horizontal
reflectors.

¾ When the subsurface has dipping reflectors, one CMP gather

includes the reflection information corresponding to a segment of
dipping reflector but no longer a reflection point.
APPLICATION AND LIMITATIONS ..cont.1

¾ For AVO analysis in complex media CMP reflection dispersal has to

be removed.

¾ The high amplitude reflections on the P-wave response of the gas

model are called "bright-spots“.

¾ There are other geological situations that create "bright-spots" such

as coal seams or hard streaks.

¾ The P-wave response does not reveal the presence of gas clearly,
and needs to be supplemented with an S-wave recording.
Unfortunately, S-wave recording is not that common.

¾ This leads us to the AVO method, which allows us to derive a

similar result without actually recording an S-wave section.
 COMMON TERMINOLOGIES
Common Mid Point
COMMON TERMINOLOGIES ..Cont.1
COMMON TERMINOLOGIES ..Cont.2

The acoustic impedance (Z) of a material is defined as the product

of density (p) and acoustic velocity (V) of that material.

Z = pV
COMMON TERMINOLOGIES ..Cont.3

Reflection Coefficient (RC): The ratio of the amplitude of the

reflected wave and the amplitude of the incident wave.
The reflection coefficient is given by

where Z 1 is the impedance toward the source, Z 2 is the impedance toward the load, the vertical
bars designate absolute magnitude, and SWR is the standing wave ratio.

standing wave ratio (SWR) is the ratio of the amplitude of a partial standing wave at an antinode
(maximum) to the amplitude at an adjacent node (minimum)

A node is a spatial place along a standing wave where the wave has minimal amplitude

A standing wave, also known as a stationary wave, is a wave that remains in a constant position.
This phenomenon can occur because the medium is moving in the opposite direction to the wave, or
it can arise in a stationary medium as a result of interference between two waves travelling in
opposite directions.
COMMON TERMINOLOGIES ..Cont.4

Wave propagation is expressed mathematically by the set of

following equations;

σ = Ao Cos 2π[(ft-(x/λ)]
v = λf
and f = 1/t

Where σ = stress at any time t and at a distance x within an elastic

wave;
Ao = amplitude of the stress at the source;
λ = wavelength or the distance between successive maximum
compression or refraction at any point, f = frequency of cycles of
compression and refraction;
and v = velocity of propagation
 COMMON TERMINOLOGIES ..Cont.5

The amplitude of a wave at a distance x

from the source can be expressed by;

Α = Ao e^-αx
where α = is the absorption coefficient

¾ The source of the wave determines

• 1) the type of wave,
• 2) the frequency (f or n) of the wave
(which is also related to the period T),
and
• 3) the energy (E) of the wave
¾ The medium determines the velocity
of the wave
¾ The source and the medium together
determine the amplitude (A) and the
wavelength (l).
EαA
 COMMON TERMINOLOGIES ..Cont.6

P- and S-Waves
There are several important differences between P- and S-waves:

z First, the velocity of the S-wave is slower than the velocity of the P-wave
for a given geological formation.

z Second, S-waves are less sensitive to the presence of gas in a reservoir

than P-waves, since the high compressibility of gas has more effect on the
P-wave velocity.

z A third important physical parameter is the density that is strongly

affected by the presence of gas.

z The P and S synthetics for the wet model are almost identical, but for the
gas model the S-wave synthetic is the reverse of the P-wave synthetic and
has lower amplitudes.
 AVO CLASSIFICATION

¾ Generally the tops of sands are characterized by negative reflection

coefficients (-RC) or by positive reflection coefficients (+RC), which
become negative with increasing offset and hence are classified as
conforming types.
Near offset Far Offset
RC = +ve or –ve -ve

¾ Sands with positive reflection coefficients on both near and far

offsets or those, which have negative reflection coefficients
becoming more positive with increasing offset, are described as non-
conforming types .
Near offset Far Offset
RC = +ve or –ve +ve
AVO CROSSPLOTTING APPROACH
G = a linear approximation to the
slope of the amplitude variation with
offset

P = the value of linear

approximation at the intercept,
where the offset is zero.

Shale over a non-shale (sand)

interface can result in any
combination of P and G

Figure represents classification of

AVO types as a function of P and G.
P and G are both dimensionless
and are scaled to have the same
range of values.

The division boundaries radiate

from the origin with a fixed angular
relationship. This basis for divisions
has the benefit of being very
straightforward to calculate. Castagna and Swan’s modified by Young and
LoPiccolo
AVO CLASSIFICATION ..Cont.1

Young and LoPiccolo, 2004

 AVO CLASSIFICATION ..Cont.2

Generalized relationship between the amplitude of the reflection at normal

incidence and the amplitude of the reflection with increasing offset for the
different AVO types
AVO TYPES AND SEISMIC ROCK PROPERTIES

¾ AVO types are the results of the contrast of the rock properties of the
overlying shale to the non-shale

¾ Different geologic environments tend to favor different types of contrasts, for

example;

z In shallow young rocks the sands tend to be lower in impedance than the shales
and the resulting AVO type values tend towards the higher numbers (3’s, 4’s and
5’s).
z With depth the sands generally become faster than the shales and the AVO types
will decrease to 1’s and 2’s.
z Similarly, the expected AVO types in geopressure areas are 1’s and 2’s.
z AVO types 3 and 4 may be found in deeper overpressured sections.
 AVO TYPES AND SEISMIC ROCK PROPERTIES .. Cont.1

¾ AVO typing is also controlled by lithology;

z Sands that display a low ratio of compressional velocity to shear

velocity will tend to be conforming AVO types. This type of sand is
generally non-cemented or lightly cemented, but still granular in
nature.

z If the sands are well-cemented or if a carbonate is encountered the

AVO type will generally be negative (non-conforming).

z Coals always show a much slower compressional velocity than either

sands or shales as a result coals tend to be types 4 and 5.
 AVO TYPES AND SEISMIC ROCK PROPERTIES .. Cont.2

¾ AVO type in the presence of hydrocarbons

z The presence of compressible fluids, especially gas, has the effect of

lowering the impedance; the effect can be emphasized with offset.
Usually P and G both shift in a negative direction with the addition of
compressible fluids.

z Gas and light oil tend to cause the AVO type to be positive; a shift to
the AVO type from negative to positive, if the sand is very well-
cemented the effect may be slight.

z A wet type 2 AVO sand may show a transition updip into a type 3 AVO
with the addition of gas.
AVO TYPES AND SEISMIC ROCK PROPERTIES

Bold red arrows show the direction of the effect of various lithologic and
geologic variations on AVO types
 REFERENCES

¾ Young, Roager A. and LoPiccolo, Robert D.”Conforming and non-conforming sands-An organizaing
Framework for Seismic Rock Properties”, Gulf coast Association of Geological Societies Transaction,
Volume 54, 2004

¾ Shuang Sun, Bancroft, John C. “Amplitude Scaling for AVO analysis of CSP gathers”, CREWES
Research Report-Volume 12, 2000.

¾ Brian Russell, “Geophysical Corner”, Hampson-Russell Software Services Ltd., Calgary, Canada,
1999.

¾ Eastern Gulf Region PTTC workshop, October 9, 2003 in Jackson, Mississippi