Comparison of Seismic Inversion Methods On A Single Real Data Se 1998

Downloaded 06/27/14 to 134.153.184.170. Redistribution subject to SEG license or copyright; see Terms of Use at http://library.seg.
org/
Open File Publications, No. 4
Downloaded 06/27/14 to 134.153.184.170. Redistribution subject to SEG license or copyright; see Terms of Use at http://library.seg.org/
Comparison of Seismic
Inversion Methods
on a Single Real Data Set
Robert G. Keys and

Douglas J. Foster, Eds.
Society of Exploration Geophysicists

P. O. Box 702740, Tulsa, OK 74170-2740
ISBN 1-56080-030-5 (Series)

ISBN 1-56080-049-6 (Volume)
Society of Exploration Geophysicists

P. O. Box 702740
Tulsa, OK 74170-2740
© 1998 Society of Exploration Geophysicists

All Rights Reserved. This book or portions hereof may not be reproduced
in any form without permission in writing from the publishers.
Published in 1998 by the Society of Exploration Geophysicists

Second Printing March 1999
Printed in the United States of America.
Contents
Preface v
1. A data set for evaluating and comparing seismic inversion methods 1

R. G. Keys and D. J. Foster
2. A numerical study of linear viscoacoustic inversion 13

J. O. Blanch, W. W. Symes, and R. J. Versteeg
3. AVO inversion of a Mobil data set 45

A. Buland and M. Landrø
4. AVO migration/inversion analysis 57

C. Hanitzsch, D. Marion, A. Tura, W. B. Beydoun, D. Jizba, S. Jin, and B. Fredier
5. Amplitude-preserved processing and analysis of the Mobil AVO data set 75

D. E. Lumley, D. Nichols, C. Ecker, T. Rekdal, and A. Berlioux
6. A comparison of AVO analysis techniques 97

J. E. Malloy, K. L. Woller, and D. D. McAdow
7. Trace inversion of North Sea test line with interpretive directions 115
N. S. Neidell, R. P. Mullin, M. Smith, and E. E. Cook
8. DELPHI stepwise approach to AVO processing 139

D. J. Verschuur, A.-J. van Wijngaarden, and R. Alá’i
9. AVO analysis of Mobil offshore data by linearized inversion in the τ-p domain 165
G. Xia, M. K. Sen, and P. L. Stoffa
10. Rock/fluid properties and their effects on seismic responses 185

C.-S. Yin, M. L. Batzle, and C. C. Mosher
iii
This page has been intentionally left blank

Preface
When it first was proposed to the Society of Ex- cused on seismic data processing problems, while oth-
ploration Geophysicists Research Committee, the ers were primarily interested in addressing
workshop titled “Comparison of Seismic Inversion petrophysical issues. Participants were taking a
Methods on a Single Real Data Set” was intended to multidisciplinary approach to the workshop. When
be a forum for comparing and discussing seismic in- the workshop convened in October 1994, it was clear
version methods. A unique aspect of the workshop that there is no unique or best approach to the seis-
was its focus on a single field data set that included mic inverse problem.
both seismic and petrophysical measurements. The An indication of the diversity in this workshop
petrophysical data included measurements of com- can be found in Tables 1 and 2. Table I shows the top-
pressional wave velocity, shear wave velocity, and ics addressed by each workshop paper. The numbers
density. These measurements were acquired in two at the top of Table 2 refer to workshop presentations
wells that intersected the seismic line. It was our be- listed in Table II. General areas are highlighted with
lief that with well-log measurements of the key elas- bold text in Table 1, and subtopics are listed below
tic properties, the accuracy of seismic inversion meth- the major topics. A check mark is assigned to a topic
ods could be confirmed. We did not impose any re- if that topic was a major issue addressed by the pa-
strictions on the type of methods that workshop par- per. As the tables show, “seismic inversion” covers a
ticipants could apply to the data set. We wanted to lot of territory.
encourage new ideas about the use of seismic inver- The lesson we learned from this workshop is that
sion or AVO methods for detecting hydrocarbons. the exploration problem requires the integration of
The workshop met in Los Angeles on October 28, many different technologies. Techniques are impor-
1994, following the 64th SEG International Exposition tant, but not as important as the proper and appro-
and Annual Meeting. The papers presented at the priate use of those techniques. Exploration success is
workshop covered a broad range of topics related to more likely to follow from the effective integration of
seismic inversion and the prediction of rock and fluid these different technologies to obtain a consistent ex-
properties from seismic data. Nine of the papers pre- planation of the observed geologic, petrophysical, and
sented at the workshop are included in this volume. geophysical data. The workshop participants pro-
This workshop was an experiment. As is often the vided a valuable service by demonstrating the diver-
case with experiments, the outcome was different sity of tools that geoscientists can use to solve explo-
from the expected result. A natural expectation was ration problems.
that, by using a common data set, the workshop The articles in this volume represent a technol-
would expose the best method for detecting hydro- ogy baseline against which other methods can be com-
carbons with seismic data. The flaw in this expecta- pared. Since the workshop data set is in the public
tion is the assumption that seismic exploration, or domain, readers can apply their own methods to the
even the seismic inverse problem, is a single, well- data and compare their results with the results of the
defined problem. Some indication of this fact was workshop participants. At the time of this writing,
evident from questions we received prior to the work- the data set can be obtained from Oil Data Inc., 1888
shop. We observed that some participants were fo- Stebbins Dr., Houston, Texas 77043-2809.
v
Keys and Foster
Table 1. Topics covered by papers in this volume resulting from presentations at the 1994 SEG
Post-Convention Workshop on “Comparison of Seismic Inversion Methods on a Single Real
Data Set.” Presentation numbers refer to papers listed in Table 2.
Topics Presentation No.

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
Geology √
Regional Geology √
Seismic Interpretation √
Inversion √ √ √ √ √ √ √ √
Poststack (Trace Inversion) √
Prestack Inversion(Linear) √ √ √ √ √ √
Prestack Inversion (Nonlinear) √
True Amplitude Processing √ √ √ √ √ √
Multiple Suppression √ √ √ √
Source/Receiver Corrections √ √
Migration √ √ √
Wave Propagation √ √ √ √
Viscoacoustic Media √
Attenuation √ √
Thin Bed Effects/Tuning √
τ−p Domain √ √ √
Forward Modeling √ √
Rock Properties √ √ √ √
Fluid Substitution √
Log Calibration √ √
AVO √ √ √ √ √ √ √
AVO Methods/Processing √ √ √ √ √ √ √
Hydrocarbon Indicators √ √ √ √
VSP √
vi
Preface
Table 2. A list of presentations at the 1994 SEG Post-Convention Workshop on “Comparison

of Seismic Inversion Methods on a Single Real Data Set” for which papers in this volume
were written. Presentation numbers in this list can be used with Table 1 to obtain informa-
tion about the content of each paper. The papers are listed alphabetically by author.
1. Blanch, J. O., Symes, W. W., and Versteeg, R. J., A numerical study of linear
viscoacoustic inversion
2. Buland, A., and M. Landrø, AVO inversion of a Mobil data set
3. Hanitzsch, C., Marion, D., Tura, A., Beydoun, W. B., Jizba, D., Jin, S., and Fredier, B.,
AVO migration/inversion analysis
4. Lumley, D. E., Nichols, D., Ecker, C., Rekdal, T., and Berlioux, A., Amplitude-pre-
served processing and analysis of the Mobil AVO data set
5. Malloy, J. E., Woller, K. L., and McAdow, D. D., A comparison of AVO techniques
6. Neidell, N. S., Mullin, R. P., Smith, M., and Cook, E. E., Trace inversion of North Sea
test line with interpretive directions
7. Verschuur, D. J., van Wijngaarden, A.-J., and Alá’i, R., DELPHI stepwise approach to
AVO processing
8. Xia, G., Sen, M. K., and Stoffa, P. L., AVO analysis of Mobil offshore data by linear-
ized inversion in the τ-p domain
9. Yin, C.-S., Batzle, M. L., and Mosher, C. C., Rock/fluid properties and their effects on
seismic responses
Robert G. Keys
Douglas J. Foster
July 1, 1996
Dallas, Texas
vii

1
A Data Set for Evaluating and

Comparing Seismic Inversion
Methods
Robert G. Keys
Douglas J. Foster
Mobil Exploration and Producing Technical Center
Dallas, Texas
plitude with offset to detect the presence of hydro-

Abstract carbons in the subsurface. The common characteris-
A data set containing marine seismic data and tic of all of these methods is their goal of estimating
well-log measurements of key elastic parameters was some property of the subsurface from seismic data.
compiled from data acquired in an area containing Although seismic inversion methods have great
hydrocarbon reservoirs. This data set was created for potential, it is often difficult to gauge their value when
the purpose of testing seismic inversion methods. The applied to real data because the actual physical prop-
data set includes information that is often unavail- erties of the subsurface are usually unknown. To con-
able with field data and, therefore, may be used to front this issue, geoscientists at Mobil compiled a data
cross check results of seismic processing or inversion set from seismic data and well-log information. The
algorithms. The data set has been released to the pub- well-log data came from two wells that intersect the
lic domain to encourage the investigation of seismic seismic line.
inversion methods. Originally, this data set was created for testing
AVO methods. Consequently, it became known as the
“AVO data set.” Although created for AVO studies,
Introduction the data set contains the kind of information needed
Broadly speaking, seismic inversion methods are to evaluate a broad spectrum of seismic inversion
techniques that extract information about properties methods. The well-log data include measurements of
of the subsurface from seismic data. They often are compressional wave velocity, density, and shear wave
applied to methods that predict acoustic impedance velocity over depth intervals that span both reservoir
from stacked seismic data, but seismic inversion is rocks and overburden. The petrophysical data catego-
also used to describe methods that estimate changes rize the lithology, porosity, and fluid content of the
in elastic properties from prestack seismic data, or logged intervals. The files that comprise the AVO data
AVO methods that use the variation in reflection am- set are listed in Table 1.
1
Keys and Foster
Table 1. Files in the AVO Data Set.
File Name Format Description

FarField.dat ASCII Far Field Source Signature

gun.diagram ASCII Air Gun Array Diagram
obs.dat ASCII Observer’s Notes
seismic.segy SEGY Seismic Data
vspB.hor_comp1 SEGY VSP B, 1st hor. comp.
vspB.hor_comp2 SEGY VSP B, 2nd hor. comp.
vspB.vert_comp SEGY VSP B, vert. comp
vspC.hor_comp1 SEGY VSP C, 1st hor. comp.
vspC.hor_comp2 SEGY VSP C, 2nd hor. comp.
vspC.vert_comp SEGY VSP C, vert. comp
wellA.elan ASCII Petrophysical Data, Well A
wellA.log ASCII Well Log Data for Well A
wellA.Q ASCII Q-values, Well A
wellB.dat ASCII Additional Log data, Well B
wellB.elan ASCII Petrophysical Data, Well B
wellB.log ASCII Well Log Data for Well B
wellB.Q ASCII Q-values, Well B
wellC.Q ASCII Q-values, Well C
The information supplied in this data set can ben-

efit investigations into a wide variety of topics related The Regional Geology
to seismic processing and inversion. Using this data (D. D. McAdow, personal communication)
set, seismic inversion methods that estimate elastic
properties of the subsurface can be checked against The AVO data set comes from the North Viking
well-log measurements. The data set can be used to Graben in the North Sea. The North Viking Graben
study the impact of seismic processing algorithms on formed as a result of late Permian to Triassic rifting
seismic inversion methods. AVO predictions of hy- and trends north-northeast. Extensional episodes and
drocarbons can be substantiated with the accompanying sedimentation continued through the
petrophysical data. To encourage further work on Jurassic into the early Cretaceous. Normal basin sub-
these topics, the AVO data set was released to the sidence and filling became the primary depositional
public domain . mechanism by late Cretaceous.
The AVO data set is the product of the efforts of A significant unconformity occurs at the base of
many individuals. Our intent, and the purpose for this the Cretaceous, which is located at approximately 1.97
document, is to describe the AVO data set and to an- s two-way traveltime in Well A and 2.46 s two-way
swer some of the most frequently asked questions traveltime in Well B (See Figure 1). Jurassic syn-rift
about the data. The first question we address concerns sediments are unconformably overlain by Cretaceous
the geology of the area. The following description of and Tertiary basin fill.
the regional geology for the AVO data set was related The primary reservoir objectives in the North Vi-
to us by David McAdow. king Graben are Jurassic age clastic sediments. Juras-
2
Evaluating and Comparing Seismic Inversion Methods
Fig. 1. AVO seismic line after stack. Arrows show approximate locations of wells A and B.
3
Keys and Foster
sic reservoirs range in depositional environments data and can affect the results of some seismic inver-
from fluvial to deltaic and shallow marine. The Ju- sion algorithms.
rassic is generally characterized as a transgressive The shallow overburden in this area can be ap-
system. Periods of regression have provided coarse proximated by horizontal layers. Deeper layers are
clastic input which form the reservoir intervals. Res- dipping, but the dominant reflectors are adequately
ervoirs are sometimes vertically stacked and are sepa- represented by planar interfaces. The macro scale ge-
rated by deep water shales. Hydrocarbon traps are ology of this area is consistent with common AVO
usually fault bounded structures, but some are asso- assumptions. On a smaller scale, faulting and irregu-
ciated with stratigraphic truncation of the Base Cre- larities in the subsurface create diffractions that in-
taceous Unconformity. terfere with primary reflections and distort their am-
A second reservoir target in the North Viking plitudes. The presence of diffractions can complicate
Graben is the Paleocene deep water clastics. The Pa- the application of some seismic inversion methods to
leocene interval is undisturbed by the rift tectonism these data. Examples of diffraction interference are
and dips gently into the basin. The section occurs at shown in Figure␣ 1, below 2.0 s two-way traveltime.
approximately 1.6 to 1.9 s two-way travel on the AVO
data set. Over much of the basin, including the AVO
data set, the Paleocene section was deposited in a The Well Log Data
slope environment. Sandstone reservoirs are associ- Two wells intersect the AVO seismic line. These
ated with regressive pulses. Hydrocarbon traps are wells are designated Well␣ A and Well␣ B. Well A inter-
usually depositionally mounded structures or are sects the seismic line at shotpoint 440 (CDP no. 808).
stratigraphic pinchouts. Well B is located at shotpoint 822 (CDP no. 1572).
Measurements of compressional wave velocity, den-
sity, and shear wave velocity are provided for both
The AVO Seismic Line wells. Gamma ray and caliper logs are also included
The AVO seismic line consists of 1001 shot records, in the data set. In well A, compressional wave veloc-
oriented in a structural dip direction. Each shot record ity, density, and shear wave velocity are given in the
was recorded on 120 channels for six seconds. The depth interval from 1000 to 3000 m. Compressional
seismic data are sampled every four milliseconds. The wave velocity and shear wave velocity measurements
AVO seismic data are stored in SEG-Y format. in Well A were acquired with the Long Spaced Acous-
Shotpoint numbers begin with 101 and end with tic Log/Shear Wave Acoustic Log (LSAL/SWAL) tool.
1112. There are 11 missing shot points. These are A description of this tool is given by Zemanek et. al.
shotpoints 180, 181, 188, 189, 190, 549, 550, 551, 859, (1984) and Zemanek et. al. (1991). All log measure-
860, and 861. The shotpoint interval is 25 m. ments are referenced to the Rotary Kelly Bushing
The recording configuration is shown in Figure (RKB). In Well␣ A, the RKB elevation is 17.5 m above
2. The near offset receiver is 262 m from the source mean sea level. The water depth at Well␣ A is 355 m.
and the maximum offset is 3237 m. The receiver group Compressional wave velocity, density, and shear
interval is 25 m. The nominal cable depth is 10 m and wave velocity curves for Well A are shown in Figure
the depth of the air gun array is 6 m. Table 2 lists the 5. The units for compressional and shear wave veloc-
instrument settings and describes the source and re- ity are in km/s. The density curve is shown in gm/
ceiver geometry. cm3. The depth scale shows measured depth from RKB
An air-gun array provided the seismic source. A in meters.
diagram of the air-gun array is shown in Figure 3. At Well B, the RKB elevation is 26.5 m above mean
The array consists of 24 live air guns and eight spares. sea level and the water depth is 355.5 m. Compres-
Individual air-gun volumes are shown in parenthesis sional wave velocity, density, and shear wave veloc-
in Figure 3. The total volume of the array is 3650 in3. ity are also given for Well B. Because of acquisition
Figure 4 shows the far field signature for the air-gun problems with the long spaced acoustic log, there are
array. The recorded signature was measured on a hy- gaps in the compressional and shear wave measure-
drophone at a depth of 250 m below the array. ments. To compensate for these missing data, addi-
Multiples are a major source of noise in these data. tional sonic and density log measurements are pro-
The seismic data were acquired in approximately 350 vided in a second file called wellB.dat. (See Table 1.)
m of water. The water bottom contributes to the gen- The sonic log gives the compressional wave interval
eration of multiple reflections. Strong water-bottom times from 1000 to 3000 m measured depth from RKB
multiples and interbed multiples are present in these in Well B. Compressional wave velocities derived from
4
262 m
2975 m
6m
10 m
* 120 119 118 3 2 1
Fig. 2. Streamer configuration. Receiver spacing is 25 m. Data are recorded on 120

channels.
Air Gun Array Diagram

25.2 X 99
3650 cu. in. 24 Guns
(80) * (120) (120) (80)

4.2 m * 33 m * 33 m * 33 m *
4.2 m * (40)
* (80)
* (80)
* (40)
4.2 m * (120)
* (162)
* (162)
* (120)
4.2 m * (40)
* (40)
* (40)
* (40) 25.2 m
4.2 m * (185)
* (258)
* (258)
* (185)
(150) (150) (150) (150)

4.2 m Spare Spare Spare Spare
* (400)
* (300)
* (300)
* (400)
(150) (150) (150) (150)

Spare Spare Spare Spare
*Air gun volume in cubic inches.
Fig. 3. Air-gun array diagram. The circles denote spare guns. All others
are live. Gun depth is 6 m.
5
Keys and Foster
Table 2. Instrument settings and source and receiver geometry
OBSERVER’S REPORT
Instrument Settings
Instrument Type: TI DFS 5.5

Gain Model: IFP
Record Length: 6s
Sample Interval: 4 ms
Preamp Gain Constant: 24 db
Alias Filter: 128 Hz
Lo-cut Filter: 5.3
Slope: 18 db/octave
Notch Filter (in/out): OUT
Number of Data Channels: 120
Number of Aux Channels: 0
Geometry and Source
Shotpoint Interval: 25 m
Shot Interval: 25 m
Traces per Record: 120
Line Origin to Source: 3237 m
Type of Energy Source: BOLT AIR GUNS
Capacity: 3650 in3
Pressure: 1850 psi
Number of Guns: 24
Towing Depth: 6m
Cable Configuration
Total Length: 2975 m

Trace Length: 25 m
Number of Traces: 120
Hydrophones per Trace: 32
Towing Depth: 10 m
Center Near Trace to Source: 262 m
6
Fig. 4. Source pulse recorded on hydrophone at 250 m below air-gun array.
the sonic log are noisier than measurements obtained a diamond symbol, and the “+” symbol denotes oil.
from the long spaced tool. Figure 7 shows three major hydrocarbon zones in Well
Figure 6 shows the compressional velocity, den- A. The top of the upper zone is at 1984 m. The top of
sity, and shear wave velocity measurements for Well this zone corresponds to approximately 2.0 s two-way
B. The compressional wave velocity measurements traveltime on the seismic data. The second zone con-
in the interval from 2600 to 3200 are from the wellB.dat tains an interval of oil sands between 2280 and 2330
file. The remaining compressional and shear wave m in Well A. The top of the third hydrocarbon zone
velocity data are from the LSAL/SWAL measure- occurs at approximately 2620 m. Well B contains an
ments, given in the wellB.log file. As in Figure 5, the interval of oil sands between 2880 and 2950 m. These
velocity units are km/s and the density units are gm/ oil sands are below the Cretaceous unconformity. Gas
cm3. The depth scale shows measured depth from RKB sands are found below 3200 m in Well B.
in meters.
In addition to measurements of elastic properties,
petrophysical data for both Well A and Well B are con- The VSP Data
tained in the files called wellA.elan and wellB.elan, Three-component zero-offset vertical seismic pro-
respectively. These files contain estimates of lithology, files were recorded in wells A and B. The VSP data
and pore fluid content of the two wells. Lithologies for Well B are included in the AVO data set. Because
are subdivided by volume into shale (clay), sandstone of acquisition problems, the VSP data for Well A are
(quartz), limestone (calcite), and coal. Pore fluids are not reliable. Therefore, a VSP from a nearby well, des-
subdivided by volume into water, gas, and oil. The ignated Well C, was substituted for the Well A verti-
effective porosity can be estimated from the sum of cal seismic profile. Well C projects into the AVO seis-
the water, gas, and oil components. The total water mic line at approximately shotpoint 310 (CDP no. 548).
content can be calculated from the petrophysical data The VSP data were used to estimate Q values, and
by adding the water component to the nonremovable these Q␣ data are provided in the files wellA.Q,
bound water and water trapped in isolated parallel wellB.Q, and wellC.Q. The Q data files also contain
pores. The petrophysical data can be used to investi- time picks of the VSP direct arrival, which may be
gate methods that predict lithology and porosity. used in place of check shot data. Although the Q data
These data also can be used as a guide to identify hy- for Well A are questionable, the time pick data in the
drocarbon zones. wellA.Q file can be used for check shot corrections.
In Figure 7, the volumetric components of gas and Time picks from the direct waves in the Well A and
oil are displayed for wells A and B. Gas is denoted by Well B vertical seismic profiles are shown in Figure 8.
7
8
Keys and Foster
Fig. 5. P-wave velocity, S-wave velocity, and density curves for Well A. (a) P-wave velocity and S-wave velocity curves. (b)
Density curve.
Fig. 6. P-wave velocity, S-wave velocity, and density curves for Well B. (a) P-wave velocity and S-wave velocity
curves. (b) Density curve.
9
10
Keys and Foster
Fig. 7. Gas and oil content by fractional volume for wells A and B.
3200
3000 Well A
Well B
2800
2600
2400
2200
2000
Two-Way Traveltime (ms)

1800
1600
1400
1200
1000 1200 1400 1600 1800 2000 2200 2400 2600 2800 3000 3200 3400 3600 3800
Measured Depth (meters)
Fig. 8. Time picks from VSP direct arrivals.
11
Keys and Foster
enced by errors and extraneous noises that are typi-

The AVO Data Set — cally encountered in practice. It is our hope that this
Issues and Objectives data set will provide a useful basis for comparing seis-
mic processing and inversion methods and, ulti-
All seismic and VSP data in the AVO data set are mately, the challenging aspects of this data set will
stored in SEG-Y format. The remaining files, includ- lead to improved methods for detecting hydrocar-
ing the well-log data and petrophysical information, bons.
are in ASCII format. The files that comprise the AVO
data set are listed in Table␣ 1.
The AVO data set was compiled for the purpose Acknowledgments
of testing seismic inversion methods. It includes di- We have attempted to describe a data set that was
rect measurements of important seismic properties at constructed through the efforts of many individuals.
two well locations. It also contains lithology and pore Among other things, Dave McAdow provided the
fluid information. analysis of the VSP data, including the estimated
Some aspects of the AVO data set are well suited Q-values. John Watson performed the petrophysical
to seismic inversion studies. The seismic data are from analysis of the well log data. Bill Soroka, Mike Will-
a marine survey which means that source strength iams, Pete Hansen, Jeff Malloy, and Denis Schmitt also
and receiver coupling are less variable than a typical were involved in compiling this data set and verify-
land survey. The area is not structurally complex, and ing the quality of the data. We are grateful to Mobil,
most major reflectors can be approximated by planar Statoil and Norsk Hydro for granting permission to
interfaces. Hydrocarbons are present in this area, so release these data.
predictions from AVO or inversion methods can be
tested.
Other aspects of this data set are challenging for References
seismic inversion methods. The presence of multiples Zemanek, J., Angona, F. A., Williams, D. M., and
and diffractions can mask or distort amplitude infor- Caldwell, R. L., 1984, Continuous shear wave log-
mation in primary reflections. Furthermore, the pres- ging, Trans. SPWLA 25th Ann. Log. Symp. Paper
ence of hydrocarbons does not insure that their seis- U.
mic response is detectable by a particular seismic in- Zemanek, J., Williams, D. M., and Schmitt, D. P., 1991,
version algorithm. Because these are field data, both Shear-wave logging using multipole sources, The
seismic measurements and well-log data are influ- Log Analyst, 3, 233-240.
12
2
A Numerical Study of Linear

Viscoacoustic Inversion
Joakim O. Blanch
William W. Symes
The Rice Inversion Project
Department of Computational and Applied Mathematics
Rice University, Houston, Texas
Roelof J. Versteeg
Lamont Doherty Earth Observatory
Columbia University, Palisades, N.Y.
Abstract Introduction
Attenuation and dispersion of the seismic pulse Seismic waves disperse and attenuate in the earth,
can strongly affect the outcome of amplitude versus in varying degrees depending on the structure and
offset (AVO) analysis. These anelastic aspects of wave composition of rocks (see for example the collection
propagation also influence the outcome of linear in- Toksöz and Johnston, 1981). It is natural to suspect
version for short scale fluctuations in elastic param- that any deductions made from the details of seismic
eters, the model based analogue of AVO analysis. The waveforms recorded at the surface of the earth would
viscoacoustic model provides a framework for illus- be conditioned by these anelastic aspects of seismic
tration of these effects. An efficient time domain wave propagation. For example amplitude versus
viscoacoustic finite difference scheme for synthesis of offset (AVO) analysis of reflection seismograms at-
primaries only plane-wave (1-D model) and line tempts to map rock mechanics based on the variation
source (2-D model) reflection records is the basis for of reflected wave amplitudes with distance and time.
linear inversion algorithms via iterative minimization Several authors have found, unsurprisingly, that the
of mean square error. This approach to inversion re- results of AVO analysis may depend quite strongly
quires computation of the mean square error gradi- on the degree to which processing methods account
ent. The gradient computation becomes feasible for anelasticity (Martinez, 1993; Samec and Blangy,
through the use of the adjoint state technique, together 1992).
with a checkpointing scheme due to Griewank. In- Linear inversion for short scale elastic parameter
version of synthetic data in the plane-wave domain fluctuations may be regarded as a model based ana-
illustrates the sensitivity to attenuation of even quali- logue of AVO processing. In fact, typical AVO at-
tative aspects of inversion. Viscoacoustic 2-D inver- tributes such as slope and intercept originate in com-
sion of a small part of the Mobil AVO data illustrates binations of elastic parameters in simple models of
applicability to field data in the offset domain. elastic wave reflection (Shuey, 1985). The inversion
13
Blanch, Symes, and Versteeg
approach to data processing seeks to estimate a de- Bourbie et al., 1987). In many applications a single
tailed parametric mechanical subsurface model which standard linear solid suffices (Blanch et al., 1995).
predicts the data well through solutions of some vari- We have designed and tested a finite difference
ant of the linear elastic wave equations. Linear inver- scheme for viscoelastic wave propagation in one, two,
sion for short scale parameter fluctuations regards and three dimensions (Robertsson et al., 1994). This
these quantities as perturbations about long scale algorithm accommodates any number of standard lin-
(slowly varying) background fields, hence as linearly ear solids in parallel and offers very effective absorb-
related to the data. The actual relation between short ing boundary conditions through definition of a low
scale parameter fluctuations and bandlimited data is Q boundary layer. In this paper we make two spe-
approximately linear when multiply reflected energy cializations of this scheme. First, to simplify the mod-
is unimportant or has been removed by preprocess- eling and inversion tasks, we choose viscoacoustics
ing without seriously compromising primary reflec- rather than viscoelasticity as the framework for our
tion amplitudes. This primaries-only condition can experiments. Thus density and P-wave impedance
sometimes he met, at least approximately, and linear fluctuations are the product of the inversion. The price
inversion has actually been used to produce parame- of this decision is that the inversion no longer takes
ter maps of the subsurface, incorporating AVO infor- proper account of actual physical AVO effects: use of
mation (see, e.g., Parsons, 1986; Beydoun et al., 1990; this technique with field data presents a combination
Bourgeois et al., 1989). of elastic parameter fluctuations as a putative den-
Since inversion is based directly on a complete sity fluctuation. However, resolution investigations
mathematical description of wave propagation, it is and initial testing with field data are still possible with
straightforward (in principle) to account for any as- this simplified modeling choice. Second, we have car-
pect of wave physics. In particular, a variety of wave ried out the resolution investigation using layered
propagation theories model attenuation and disper- viscoacoustic models in the τ-p (intercept time – slow-
sion of waves and can be used as the basis for anelas- ness) domain, as the meaning of the results is easy to
tic inversion algorithms. This paper investigates the understand in this case. For instance, synthetic lay-
effect of attenuation and dispersion on linear inver- ered examples based on well logs show that for ex-
sion for elastic parameters, using the viscoelastic ample elastic inversion, neglecting attenuation alto-
model of wave propagation. We have developed nu- gether, may incorrectly infer the class of a reflector, in
merical simulators for several versions of viscoelas- the sense of Rutherford and Williams (1989).
tic wave propagation and also have implemented vari- We formulate inversion as the minimization of
ous auxiliary operators necessary to carry out inver- mean square error between data and predicted data.
sion in this domain. We have used these tools to reach For linear inversion the mean square error is a qua-
two major conclusions: first, that neglect, or grossly dratic function of the elastic parameter fluctuations.
inaccurate estimation, of attenuation effects may lead Efficient algorithms for this minimization require the
to inverted elastic parameter maps which are not only gradient of the mean square error. We use the adjoint
quantitatively but also qualitatively wrong; second, state method to compute this gradient [see Tarantola
that multidimensional viscoelastic inversion of field (1987) for an account of this computation in context].
scale data using the techniques presented here is fea- When applied to dissipative problems like viscoelas-
sible in 2-D, but barely, and that algorithmic advances ticity, the adjoint state method suffers from a well
are needed to make it a practical alternative to con- known technical problem: fields evolving both for-
ventional AVO in 2-D or feasible in 3-D. ward and backward in time must be accessed at the
Viscoelasticity is a phenomenological, rather than same time level, which would appear to imply sav-
fundamental, description of anelasticity in wave ing the entire time history of the forward field, say.
propagation. It provides enough parameters to model We avoid the excessive memory and/or CPU require-
a wide range of anelastic character. For example, sediments implicit in such a strategy via a checkpointing
mentary rocks appear to have a nearly constant qual- scheme due to Griewank (1992). The result is an it-
ity factor (Q, roughly proportional to the number of erative viscoelastic inversion scheme not appreciably
wavelengths of propagation distance necessary to lose more expensive than its optimal elastic analogue.
a fixed fraction of energy) over the seismic frequency Several other authors have studied viscoelastic
range (Bourbie et al., 1987). A simple viscoelastic inversion in the plane-wave domain (Martinez and
model using standard linear solids in parallel can McMechan, 1991; Minkoff, 1995; Buland et at., 1995).
closely approximate this behavior (Blanch et al., 1995; The algorithms developed by these researchers ap-
ply strictly to plane-wave data and a layered Earth
14
Linear Viscoacoustic Inversion
model, although the latter restriction can be relaxed this inversion is feasible, though sufficiently expen-
somewhat through “locally layered” modeling sive to motivate interest in algorithmic improvements.
(Buland et at., 1995). The algorithm of Martinez and We mention some of these possibilities in the conclud-
McMechan (1991) is based on frequency domain layer ing section.
matrices, whereas Minkoff (1995) and Buland et al.

(1995) use high frequency asymptotics. Our time do-
main simulator is in contrast a member of a family Linear Inversion
which includes 2-D arid 3-D simulators (Robertsson Linear inversion requires identification of model
et at., 1994) and does not rely on approximations other and data parameters and implementation of several
than perturbation theory (for linear inversion) and operators. This section reviews the origin of these
finite differences. Martinez and McMechan (1991) requirements in a general way. The following sections
compute the gradient through finite differences, will specify the necessary operators and describe their
whereas we use the adjoint state technique. Minkoff computational implementation in the context of
gives some evidence based on field data inversions viscoacoustic modeling.
that elastic inversion, neglecting attenuation which The basic question of geophysical inversion is: can
actually occurs in the subsurface, is likely to produce one find an earth model m, a member of some pre-
incorrect and even misleading results (Minkoff, 1995). scribed model space M, which predicts a set of geo-
Our analysis based on synthetic examples reaches the physical data dobs in a data space D within a prescribed
same conclusion. Buland et at. apply “locally layered” tolerance? One way to answer this question is to de-
linear viscoelastic inversion to the Mobil AVO data termine a model m ∈ M which best fits the data. A
(Buland et al., 1995). We apply our 2-D viscoacoustic natural fit measure, justified for instance by various
algorithm to the same data set, without the constraint statistical assumptions on the data error (e.g.,
of layered modeling, albeit at much higher computa- Tarantola, 1987), is the mean square. In terms of the
tional cost. prediction operator or forward map F(m), the best fit
Liao et at. (1995) use frequency domain model- model minimizes the Output Least Squares objective
ing to devise an inversion algorithm for 2-D function
Z
J [m; dobs] 12 (F (m) , dobs)2 d~xd
viscoacoustic media following an approach suggested
in part by Tarantola (1988). The 2-D inversion algo- (1)
rithm derived here is in contrast based on time do- r
main modeling. Cost considerations should be The integration is over all variables x d on which the
roughly similar. Ribodetti et at. (1995) have developed data depends, and represents summation if these are
a variant of high frequency asymptotic modeling in discrete.
multidimensional viscoelastic media. Such tools may For many physical theories, including those dis-
render viscoelastic inversion efficient to the point of cussed in this paper, F(m) is a nonlinear function of
practicality, especially if used to provide condition- the parameters m. If the least squares solution m is
ers for iterative algorithms like those developed here believed to be a small perturbation dm of a known
[see Sevink and Herman (1994) for an explanation of reference model m0, i.e., m = m0 + δm, then F(m) may
this idea]. be well approximated by its linearization F(m0) +
Our paper begins with a reprise of the general DF(m0)δm. Here the linearized forward map (or “Born
form and requirements of linear inversion via the approximation”) DF is derived from F by first order
output least squares principle. Then we define the perturbation, and the notation is chosen to empha-
multidimensional viscoacoustic model and its plane- size its linear dependence on δm. Writing δd = dobs –
wave layered medium variant, identify the various F(m0) for the part of the data not already explained by
components of gradient-based linear inversion and the reference model, the optimization problem for δm
show how these are computed. The next section pre- becomes
Z
J [m0; m; dobs] = 21 (DF (m0)m , d)2 d~xd
sents the results of a suite of plane-wave inversion
experiments performed on layered models con- (2)
structed from well logs. We show how the reflector
typology of Rutherford and Williams (1989) may be This objective function is quadratic and
recovered incorrectly unless attenuation is incorpo- semidefinite in δm. Therefore its stationary points are
rated more or less correctly in the inversion. Next we all global minima. Stationary points are found by set-
apply the 2-D viscoacoustic inversion algorithm to a ting the gradient to zero, leading to the well known
small part of the Mobil AVO data set. We show that normal equations (see, e.g., Tarantola, 1987):
15
0 = grad J [m0; m; dobs] = DF (m0)DF (m0)m , DF (m0)d gating waves in real earth media reasonably well. This
model
r is parameterized for example r by the density
(3) ρ(x), the static bulk modulus
r Κ(x), and two relaxation
r
times, one for stress (τσ(x ) ) and one for strain (τε(x ) ).
In equation (3) DF* is the adjoint operator of DF, which Use of the relative difference τ ≡ τε/τσ –1 turns out to
is a type of migration operator when F models seis- be convenient. The standard linear solid relaxation
mic reflections. It is defined by the requirement that function is given by
Z Z G(t; ~x) = K (~x)(1 + (~x)e,t= )H (t) (6)

dtestDF (m0)mtest d~xd = (DF (m0)dtest)mtest d~xm
where H(t) is the Heaviside (unit step) function.
(4) As has been observed by a number of authors
(e.g., Carcione et al., 1988), the convolution in equa-
for any test functions dtest and mtest of data and model tion (5) is inconvenient for computation and can be
type respectively;
r the second integration is over all eliminated for standard linear solid relaxation func-
variables x d on which models depend. tions through
r introduction of a so-called memory vari-
Since the problems we discuss are typically very able r(t, x ) . With this modification the equations of
large in dimension once discretized, iterative meth- motion become
ods for solution of the normal equation are manda- ~ ~v , r + f (t;~xs)
p;t = ,K (1 + )r
tory. We use algorithms of the conjugate gradient fam-
ily which require code to compute the actions of the
operators DF(m) and DF*(m) on appropriate vectors.
r;t = , 1 (r + K r
~ ~v)
(7)
Viscoacoustic Wave ~v;t = , 1 r

~p
Propagation and Inversion Thus the standard linear fluid earth description
amounts to specification of the fields K, ρ, τσ, τ and f.
Definition of the model Ιn this paper, we will regard the relaxation times τσ
Linear viscoacoustics describes the behavior of an and τ and the source functions f as known, even
anelastic fluid, in which the strain response to a though these fields are in practice no better known
change of stress is linear but not entirely instanta- than the others. That is, we will seek to determine only
neous. The stress–strain relation
r is expressed through K and ρ through inversion. So in effect the model vec-
a relaxation function G(t, x ) which specifies the pres- tor for
r therinverse problem treated in this paper is m
sure history due to a unit jump in displacement at t = ≡ K(x ), ρ(x ). Ultimately the remaining parameters
0. The equations
r of motion relate the relaxation
r func- should also be included in the inversion, and as noted
tion G(t, x )r the material density ρ(x ), the pressure in the introduction, other authors have inverted for
(stress) p(t, x)rthe particle velocity, and the body force them. However, the essential points of this paper can
or source f(t,x ) (Christensen, 1982): be made in the more limited context of inversion for
bulk modulus and density, so we avail ourselves of
p;t (t; ~x) = ,G_ (t; ~x) r ~v (t; ~x) + f (t; ~xs ) this simplification.
This completes the basic description of the
(5) viscoacoustic model. We will make use of one further
~v;t(t; ~x) = ,
1 rp(t; ~x) simplification in part of our work, which is available
(~x)
r when the parameters K, ρ, τσ, and τ depend only on
which is an initial value problem, i.e., p = 0, x = 0 , t depth z. Then the Radon transform (slant stack) pro-
<< 0. duces a family of one-dimensional wave equations
In the following we will use the relaxation func- which govern the evolution of the wavefields in the
tion for a standard linear fluid. This is the acoustic intercept time-slowness (τ – ps) (“plane-wave”) do-
version of the standard linear solid (Blanch et al.., 1995; main. A natural statement of these equations uses
Bourbie et al., 1987), a simple viscoelastic model which modified parameters K, τ, and τσ:
approximates attenuation and dispersion of propa-
16
p;t = ,Kmod (1 + mod )v;z , r + f (t; zs) Linearized and adoint operators—
x – t domain
r;t = , 1 (r + Kmod mod v;z ) One linearizes the equation (7) by replacing p, K,
;mod and ρ by p + δp, K + δK, and ρ + δp and dropping

terms with two or more factors of δ(.) in them. It turns
(8)
v;t = , 1 p;z
out to be convenient to nondimensionalize the model
perturbations by defining the bulk modulus and den-
sity reflectiveness: Kr = δK/K and ρr = δρ/ρ respectively.
where
Kmod = K 2
The linearized equations of motion are
1,k
~ ~v , r , [Kr K (1 + )]r
p;t = ,K (1 + )r ~ ~v
!
;mod = 1 , 1 ,k k2
2
(9)
r;t = , 1 (r + K r
(10)
~ ~v + KKr r
~ ~v)

mod = 1 +k2 , 1
1 , 1 , k2 ~ p + r r
~v;t = , 1 r ~
p
and k2 = p2s K/ρ. The solutions of equation (8) are plane r
The background fields p, v , and r solve the system
waves with slowness ps = sinθ/c, where c is the propa- (7).
gation velocity and θ is the angle to the vertical. Note Regard the reflectivity vector δm (Kr, ρr) as the
that the source field f(t,zs) does not depend on slow- input to the linearized forward operator. The field δp
ness ps, i.e., we have modeled an isotropic source. r
is sampled at points xr to yield the output of the lin-
Numerical solution of the family (8) (parameter- earized forward operator or perturbational seismo-
ized by ps) is drastically less computationally inten- r r
gram DF(m)δm – δp(xs; t, xr ). Note that (10) also de-
sive than the solution of even the 2-D version of (5). r
fines an initial value problem (δp, δ x , and δ r ≡ 0 for t
The plane-wave domain is thus an ideal arena for syn- << 0), solved forward in time. Note also that the pa-
thetic studies. rameter perturbations appear linearly on the right-
hand sides, guaranteeing that the output is linear in
Data and the forward modeling the input.
operators To compute the action of the adjoint operator
DF*(m)e on a seismogram such as datum e, the ad-
As noted before we will take as the model vector joint state method prescribes: (1) create an artificial
r r
m = (K(x), ρ(x)) (or m = (K(z), ρ(z)) in the layered case). source field
r
The source depends on a position parameter x s, i.e., f
r r r Z
= f(t)δ(x - x s) (isotropic point radiator located at x s, so
the pressure field does as well). The data vector in
Se (~xs; t;~x) e(~xs; t;~xr)(~x , ~xr ) d~xr ;
the x – t domain is obtained by sampling the pressure (2) solve the adjoint field equations
r r r r
field p(xs; t, (x) at receiver locations x = xr , as is natural
for modeling of marine seismograms. Ignoring im- !
perfections in the receivers, we model the data (pres- ~ 1 ~u + Se
q;t = ,r
sure seismogram) as F(m) = (p(ps; t, zr)). For plane-wave
seismograms and layered models, the slowness ps
s;t = 1 s + q
plays the role of the source location, thus the seismo- (11)
gram is F(m) = (p(ps; t, zr )) in that case, where z = zr is

the receiver depth. In either case, the forward map
F(m) is obtained by solving the viscoacoustic wave
equations (7) [or (8), in the layered case] followed by ~ K (1 + )q + 1 s
~u;t = ,r
sampling the pressure field so produced in source and
receiver locations and time.
17
r
as a final value problem, i.e., q, s, and u ≡ 0 for t >> 0; The output of the linearized forward map is
(3) crosscorrelate the adjoint fields with the back- DF(m)δm ≡ (δ p(ps; t, zr)).
ground fields in time and stack the results over source As in the x – t domain, the adjoint state method
coordinates to obtain the adjoint output produces the action of the adjoint linearized operator
Z Z as the cross-correlation in time of adjoint fields with

Kr;adj = , ~ ~v) (1 + )q + 1 s dt d~xs
K (r the background forward fields. The adjoint fields
solve the final value problem with seismogram-like
:(12) data e = e(ps; t), made into a point source at the re-
Z
r;adj = 1 (r
~ p) ~u dt d~xs

ceiver depth zr:
Se(ps ; t; z) = e(ps; t)(z , zr)
Then DF*(m)e = (Kr ,adj,ρr,adj) is the adjoint output.
As is by now well known (Tarantola, 1984; Lailly,
!
u;t = , 1 q
1983) the adjoint map amounts to a type of prestack
reverse time two-way migration. The adjoint state , Se
mod ;z
equation (11) uses the data e as source for a backwards-
in-time propagation, and the resulting field is corre-
lated with the forward field, which generally gives a
s;t = 1 (s + u) (15)
strong signal when forward and backpropagated ;mod
fields have overlapping wavefronts (imaging condi-
tion).
q;t = , (Kmod (1 + mod )u , Kmod mod s);z
Linearized and adjoint operators— with u = q = s ≡ 0, t << 0. The time crosscorrelation
ττ – p domain and stack over “source coordinate” ps yields
The input of the linearized map is the parameter ZZ
relative perturbation vector δm = (Kr(z), ρr(z)), where
Kr;mod,adj = ,Kmod (1 + mod )v;z u , Kmod modv;z s dt dps
Kr = δK/K, ρr = δρ/ρ as before. It is convenient in stat-
Z
ing the wave equations for perturbational fields to
r;mod,adj = 1 p;z q dt dps
transform reflectivities to modified slowness depen- mod (16)
dent parameters Kr,mod = δKmod/Kmod, ρr,mod = δρmod/ρmod.
Explicitly,
0 1 2 30 1 The adjoint output DF*(m)e = (Kr,adj(z), follows
B
B K r;mod C
C 6 1 + a , a 7 B K r C
A = 64 75 B C from the adjoint of relation (13):
@ @ A (13)
r;mod 0 1 r 0 1 2 30 1
BB Kr;adj CC 66 1 + a 0 77 B K r;mod,adj C
where a = 1,k2 .
k2 @ A=4 5 B@ CA (17)
r;adj ,a 1 r;mod,adj
Linearization of (8) yields
p;t = ,Kmod(1 + mod)v;z , r , Kmod Kr;mod(1 + mod )v;z

Change of reflectivity type
The natural linearized parameters to use from
r;t = , 1 (r + Kmod mod v;z + Kmod Kr;mod modv;z ) ; these equations are bulk modulus and density. Other
;mod
equivalent parameterizations may be accessed
through appropriate linear relations. For example bulk
v;t = , 1 p;z + r;mod
p;z (14) modulus and density reflectivities are related to den-
sity and impedance reflectivities by
0 1 2 30 1
with the initial conditions δ p ≡ 0, δ r ≡ 0, δ v ≡ 0 for BB Kr CC 66 2 ,1 77 BB Ir CC
t << 0. The background forward fields p, v, r solve @ A=4 5@ A (18)
the initial value problem (8). r 0 1 r
18
as is easily seen from K = I2/ρ. Of course one must store the forward fields in the τ – p domain on the
apply the adjoint of any reflectivity transformation other hand is small enough that the checkpointing
as a final step in computing the adjoint operator. scheme was not necessary in that adjoint calculation.
Given implementations of the various operators,
inversion amounts to (approximate) solution of the

Computational considerations normal equations (3). In all experiments reported be-
We have approximated the solution of all of the low, we produced approximate solutions iteratively,
systems of partial differential equations above using using a variant of the conjugate gradient algorithm
finite difference schemes of order two in time and four called conjugate residual iteration (Eisenstat et al.,
in space. For details and references to other work on 1983), which forces the residual in the normal equa-
this topic, see Robertsson et al. (1994). tions (3) to decrease monotonically. The operators
An interesting technical problem arises in the described above are exactly those needed to imple-
computation of the adjoint operator. Equation (12) ment this algorithm.
shows that both forward background fields (com- The τ – p domain computations were performed
puted forward in time) and adjoint fields (computed on a 5 node IBM RS/6000 370 cluster networked with
backward in time) must be combined at the same time Ethernet. The code was parallelized over slowness
level to produce the adjoint output. For acoustic and (“shot”) using the PVM message passing library. A
elastic media which are conservative systems, it is 20-shot forward simulation took 26 wall-clock seconds
possible to compute the forward fields [solution of and a 50 step 20 shot inversion took 55 wall-clock
(7) or (8)], save the final time level, and rerun the com- minutes including I/O. The x – t domain computa-
putation backward in time simultaneously with the tions were performed on a Cray 9016 system. All in-
solution of the adjoint field equations (11) or (15), and ner loops were carefully vectorized. With similar
accumulate the crosscorrelation. This very efficient discretization parameters to those of the τ – p simula-
design is not available for a non-conservative system, tion, each shot gather simulation required approxi-
such as the viscoacoustic wave equation, as it is no mately 5 minutes.
longer possible to compute the forward fields back-
ward in time. In fact tests with typical values of Q
have shown the time reversed evolution of the Resolution of Reflector
viscoacoustic fields to be essentially unstable. To ac-
cess simultaneously both the forward wavefield and Characteristics in the τ – p
the adjoint wavefield, one could store the entire time
history of the forward fields or recompute these fields Domain
from t = 0 for every backward time step in the adjoint This section investigates the ability of inversion
field computation. Neither choice is feasible for mul- to distinguish (acoustic analogues of) Class I, II, and
tidimensional computations. An alternative is to use III AVO reflectors, and the importance of attenuation
available memory to save initial conditions at appro- modeling in this regard. The classes were defined by
priate time steps in the forward computation, from Rutherford and Williams (1989) to specify three dis-
which the recomputation can restart without having tinct reflector characters, which should be easy to dis-
to return all the way to t = 0. Griewank (1992) has tinguish from each other through their AVO behav-
shown how to choose these checkpoints to achieve ior.
logarithmic growth of necessary memory and com- A surprising byproduct of the investigation is a
putation time in the number of time steps. We have possible method for estimating Q from reflection data.
implemented a slightly modified version of
Griewank’s checkpointing scheme for use in 2-D Acoustic analogues of Class I, II,
viscoacoustic inversion. With storage for 20 initial
conditions, less than twice as many floating point and III AVO response
operations are necessary to compute the adjoint with Rutherford and Williams (1989) defined three dis-
2300 time steps as would be needed if the entire for- tinct types or classes of AVO responses from gas sands.
ward time history were stored. The first class (I) has a large positive reflection coeffi-
This refinement of the adjoint state method is cient for normal incidence which decreases with off-
entirely responsible for the feasibility of our set and could change sign for very large offsets. The
viscoacoustic linearized inversion algorithm in 2-D second class (II) has a small reflection coefficient for
(x - t domain). The amount of memory required to normal incidence and either monotonically increas-
19
ing reflection coefficient with offset or first a sign small for the Class II model, which suggests that the
change in reflection coefficient and then increasing density reflectivity has a small impact on the data
reflection coefficient with offset. The third class (III) compared to the impedance reflectivity. The small
has a large negative reflection coefficient for normal impact on the data suggests in turn that density
incidence and the magnitude of the reflection coeffi- reflectivity should be more difficult to estimate than
cient increases with offset. the impedance as well.
We derived three impedance and density We inverted the data using the three different at-
reflectivities, representing acoustic analogues of tenuation models: the correct Q = 100 model and two
classes I, II, and III reflectors, by modifying a well log. incorrect models with Q = ∞ and Q = 50. The inversion
The Rutherford–Williams classification refers to elas- was carried on for a maximum of 50 iterations or until
tic reflection coefficients. Since we will perform the normal residual was reduced to less than 0.10 %,
(visco)acoustic inversion we must determine acous- whichever occurred first. The residual and number of
tic models which mimic the behavior of the three iterations used for each of the impedance and Q mod-
classes. The first model (containing a target Class I els are shown in Tables 1 and 2.
reflector actually present in the section) results from The inverted reflectivities for an interval around
a two-step smoothing procedure. The original sample the 1100 m reflector for the Class I impedance model
rate of the logs (0.15 m) permits spatial frequencies are shown in Figures 9, 10. Results at other depths
far above the passband of the data. Therefore the logs are very similar. The impedance reflectivity is clearly
were first smoothed to roughly wavelength scale. the better determined parameter. It scales rather natu-
Then they were further smoothed to remove almost rally with the amount of attenuation as well: under-
all passband components. These smoothest versions estimated with too little attenuation, overestimated
of the velocity and the density were used as back- with too much attenuation. The density reflectivity
ground velocity and density profiles, Figures 1 and 2. on the other hand does not scale as simply as the im-
The density and impedance reflectivities were derived pedance reflectivity. Nor is it as well resolved. It is
by subtracting the background profiles from the wave- overestimated in the acoustic model (Q = ∞). The ef-
length scale profiles and then dividing the result by fect is so large that the reflector character could per-
the background profiles, Figures 3 and 4. haps be mistaken for Class II (density fluctuation is
We concentrated our attention on the large reflec- of equal or somewhat larger magnitude than the im-
tor in the impedance at 1100 m depth. To build simi- pedance fluctuation). Reflectors are also incorrectly
lar reflectors of the other two classes, we changed the positioned for the incorrect Q models, due to disper-
magnitude and sign of this reflector, Figure 5. For sion, (Robertsson et al., 1994; Blanch et al., 1995). Re-
Class II, we reduced the amplitude of the impedance flectors are positioned too shallow for underestimated
reflector at 1100 m, and for Class III, we changed its attenuation and positioned too deep for overestimated
sign, in both cases leaving the density reflectivity the attenuation. The effect is clearest in the impedance
same. In all three cases, we set the density and veloc- reflectivity estimates.
ity to appropriate values for sea water in the depth Inversion of the data from the Class II model gives
interval 0–298 m. the results shown in Figures 11 and 12. The spatial
Viscoacoustic finite difference modeling produced estimates of the impedance reflectivity seem to be
the intercept time-slowness seismograms for the three rather out of control for all Q models. As we shall see
models shown in Figures 6, 7, and 8. A Ricker wave- below, however, impedance still is as well resolved
let source with a 22 Hz center frequency was inserted as for the Class I reflector, within a spatial passband
at 8 m depth, and the seismogram was also sampled determined by the source frequency content. The den-
at 8 m depth. The grid spacing in all simulations was sity reflectivity estimate has roughly correct magni-
3 m, and the time step was 0.4 ms. The number of tude and scales with attenuation in roughly the same
grid points were 500 and number of time steps were way as the impedance. Note that the impact of the
3750. The water layer (0–298 m) was modeled as reflector at 1100 m depth is very small on the total
purely acoustic (Q = ∞), whereas the sedimentary data, Figure 7, in effect making it a more difficult pa-
column below it was assigned Q = 100, which seems rameter (object) to estimate by prediction error mini-
to be appropriate for sedimentary rocks in many ba- mization. As for the Class I model, incorrect Q mod-
sins. els result in reflector position errors due to disper-
The reflection from the 1100 m reflector appears sion.
at 1300 ms for normal incidence and around 1000 ms The estimates obtained by inverting data from the
for the maximum slowness value. The response is very Class III model are shown in Figures 13 and 14. The
20
results are in general very similar to those for the Class ratio. Moreover, values close to zero in the
I reflector model. The impedance reflectivity scales wavenumber spectra of the density reflectivity are not
with amount of attenuation. The density reflectivity well represented (or rather completely missing) in the
is overestimated for both of the incorrect Q models. spectra obtained with incorrect Q models. The ratios
Reflectors are positioned at wrong locations if incor- for incorrect Q are furthermore less than one in large
rect Q models are used. areas of the passband, which would imply a Class II
The natural way to quantify the density–imped- reflector. The ratios for the Class II reflector are for all
ance relation is through the ratio of these quantities. Q models fairly accurate. Hence, when the two pa-
which is for example insensitive to source scale. Both rameters have a different impact in magnitude on the
modeling and inversion involve a band limited source, data their ratio is more sensitive to an error in Q,
which makes interpretation of the depth domain dif- whereas when the data impact is similar, the ratio is
ficult. Since the reference velocity model is slowly less sensitive.
varying it is possible to relate the wavenumber spec- Since the ratios always are smaller for incorrect
tra of the reflectivities and the frequency spectra of Q, independent of over- or underestimation, a pos-
the source over a small spatial interval. The source sible approach to Q estimation might maximize this
wavelet will thus define a wavenumber passband ratio or its mean square. For Class I or Class III ex-
within which reflectivities ought to be well estimated. amples, this device would pick out the correct Q, or
To investigate the wavenumber spectra of the region so our examples suggest. For the Class II example, on
containing the target reflector, we windowed the origi- the other hand, the ratio is relatively well determined
nal reflectivities and estimates with a cosine-tapered for all Q-values. In both cases the correct value of the
window between 900 and 1200 m depth. The cosine ratio as a function of Q appears to be its maximum.
tapers on each side were 75 m long. Fourier transfor-
mation of the windowed reflectivities yields Viscoacoustic inversion of the
wavenumber spectra for the target interval and re-
veals in more detail the quality of the inversion re- Mobil AVO data set
sults. To demonstrate the applicability and limitations
The wavenumber spectra ratios of inverted and of x – t domain linear viscoacoustic inversion based
target impedance and density reflectivities as func- on finite difference simulation, we performed two in-
tions of spatial frequency for the various Q models versions of a part of the Mobil AVO data set. One of
and reflector classes appear in Figures 15, 16, and 17. the inversions accounted for attenuation of waves
When the Q model is correct, the inverted impedance– whereas the other did not. We used nine shot records
density reflectivity ratio for the Class I and III reflec- located close to Well A as input for the inversion.
tors is large, whereas for the Class II example the ra- Smoothed well logs supplied background (smooth)
tio is less than one. These ratios are also very accurate velocity, density, and Q models which we treated as
fits to those for the target reflectivities, and character- depending only on depth. Average Q was roughly 100.
ize the reflector classes. However the inverted pass- The data were preprocessed prior to inversion.
band impedance–density ratios for the Class I and III The version of the Mobil AVO data set used in these
targets with incorrect reference Q are almost the same experiments had been processed to remove multiple
as for the Class II reflector. Thus, an inversion may reflections using a parabolic Radon transform algo-
predict a Class II reflector when Class I or III reflec- rithm. Since our inversion algorithm is 2-D, we ad-
tors are actually present, if the value of Q used dur- justed the amplitude to 2-D spreading instead of 3-D
ing inversion is substantially in error. In particular, spreading. Most shot gathers contained bad traces that
elastic (or acoustic) inversion of data produced by an we deleted and interpolated to ensure regularly
attenuating subsurface may lead to qualitatively er- spaced data. We resampled to 1.1 ms, filtered with a
roneous conclusions. zero-phase 4-8-25-36 Butterworth filter, cut at 2500 ms,
One can draw other tentative conclusions from and muted to remove direct arrival and shallow
the results of these experiments. For the Class I and postcritical energy. The resulting data, ready for in-
III reflectors, Figures 15 and 17, the ratios in the well- version, are displayed in Figure 18. After cutoff and
resolved passband (0.015 to 0.03 m–1) for the incorrect mute, only 88 traces out of the original 120 contained
reference Q models are all considerably smaller than nonzero signal, so we discarded the rest.
the ratios for the correct Q model, independent of the Each five-step inversion required approximately
sign of the error in Q. Both underestimation and over- 10 CRAY C90 CPU hours. Sixty four MWords of
estimation of attenuation yield an anomalously low memory accommodated 20 time steps or checkpoints,
21
which made three recomputations sufficient to com- wavenumber domain in a passband where the param-
pute the adjoint using Griewank’s scheme (Griewank, eters are well estimated. When the ratio between im-
1992). The total computational effort was increased pedance and density reflectivity varies substantially
by less than 100 percent compared to a “store it all” with Q, it appears to have a maximum for the correct
algorithm. The “store it all” algorithm would, how- Q value. If the ratios are almost the same for different
ever, have required 2272 time steps, i.e., the number Q values, then the ratios are reasonably correct. In
of time steps necessary to simulate the data. summary, either the ratios between two parameters
Five steps of conjugate residual iteration reduced can be used to estimate Q and thus find the correct
the gradient of the mean-square error to roughly 20 ratios, or the ratios are roughly independent of Q and
percent of its starting value. We do not regard this already correct.
level of accuracy as acceptable but point out that it The inversion algorithm for 2-D media was used
amounts to a more careful treatment of amplitudes to process a small subset of the Mobil AVO data. This
than is common in AVO processing. exercise shows that 2-D viscoacoustic linearized in-
The inverted bulk modulus reflectivity for the version, based on full wave finite difference simula-
viscoacoustic case appears as Figure 19. The esti- tion, is feasible in application to field data, though
mated density reflectivity and the estimated param- computationally very expensive. Recent development
eters from the acoustic inversion have a very similar of asymptotic methods in viscoelastic simulation and
appearance. Figures 20 and 21 show cross-sections of inversion (Ribodetti et al., 1995) suggest that finite
the parameter estimates from viscoacoustic and acous- difference simulation could be replaced by much more
tic inversion, bulk modulus and density reflectivity, efficient, though less accurate, simulators in iterative
respectively, to more clearly illustrate the difference and noniterative inversion for multiple elastic param-
between viscoacoustic and acoustic inversion. The eters, while still taking physically consistent account
shallow reflectors are the same for the viscoacoustic of attenuation and pulse dispersion. Alternatively,
and acoustic inversion, but deeper reflectors are un- asymptotic inversion could be combined with finite
derestimated in the purely acoustic inversion. The difference modeling to attain a compromise between
positions of the reflectors are also slightly shifted due the efficiency of the former and the accuracy and flexi-
to difference in dispersion between acoustic and bility of the latter, through preconditioning of itera-
viscoacoustic propagation. tive inversion (Sevink and Herman, 1994). These and
other developments may eventually render multidi-
mensional field data inversion based on attenuative
Conclusions wave physics feasible on a useful scale.
We have described an algorithm for linear
viscoacoustic inversion, driven by finite difference
simulation, in both τ – p and x – t domains. We used Acknowledgments
this algorithm to perform a synthetic study of τ – p We thank Conoco Inc. and TGS Offshore Geo-
domain viscoacoustic inversion for layered reflec- physical Company for the logs used to generate the
tivities. Our experiments revealed that inversion es- τ – p domain example, and Mobil Research and De-
timates of Class I or III reflectors [in the Rutherford– velopment Corporation for permission to publish re-
Williams classification (Rutherford and Williams, sults of our work with the Mobil AVO data set. The
1989)], can masquerade as Class II AVO reflectors if x – t domain computations were performed on a Cray
the Q estimate is grossly incorrect, e.g., if elastic in- Research C9016 system in Eagan, Minnesota, cour-
version is used. That is, neglect of attenuation in mul- tesy of Cray Research Inc. This research was sup-
tiparameter inversion can lead to erroneous qualita- ported in part by the National Science Foundation,
tive conclusions about the relations between param- the Office of Naval Research, the Air Force Office of
eters, hence to incorrect lithological inferences. Scientific Research, IBM, the Schlumberger Founda-
Ratios between inverted parameters (impedance tion, and The Rice Inversion Project. Sponsors of The
and density, for viscoacoustics) are natural lithological Rice Inversion Project for 1995 are Advance Geophysi-
indicators (Smith and Gidlow, 1987). Somewhat sur- cal, Amerada Hess, Amoco Production Co., Conoco
prisingly, the impedance density ratio also yields in- Inc., Cray Research Inc., Discovery Bay Co., Exxon
formation regarding the accuracy of the reference at- Production Research Co., Interactive Network Tech-
tenuation value. The ratio is best formed in the nologies, and Mobil Research and Development Corp.
22
Martinez, R. D., 1993, Wave propagation effects on

References amplitude variation with offset measurements: A
Beydoun, W., Mendes, M., Blanco, J., and Tarantola, modeling study: Geophysics, 58, 534-543.
A., 1990, North sea reservoir description: benefits Minkoff, S. E., 1995, Multiparameter inversion and
of an elastic migration/inversion applied to mul- energy source estimation for a reflection seismic
ticomponent vertical seismic profile data: Geo- experiment: Ph.D. thesis, Rice University, Hous-
physics, 55, 209–2l7. ton, Texas, USA.
Blanch, J. O., Robertsson, J. O. A., and Symes, W. W., Parsons, R., 1986, Estimating reservoir mechanical
1995, Modeling of a constant Q: Methodology and properties using constant offset images of reflec-
algorithm for an efficient and optimally inexpen- tion coefficients and incident angles: 56th Ann.
sive viscoelastic technique: Geophysics, 60,176- Internat. Mtg. of Soc. Expl. Geophys., Expanded
184. Abstracts, 617-620.
Bourbie, T., Coussy, O., and Zinzner, B., 1987, Acous- Ribodetti, A., Vineux, J., and Durand, S., 1995, Asymp-
tics of porous media: Gulf Publishing Company. totic theory for viscoacoustic seismic imaging:
Bourgeois, A., Jiang, B., and Lailly, P., 1989, Linear- 65th Ann. Internat. Mtg. of Soc. Expl. Geophys.,
ized inversion: A significant step beyond pre-stack Expanded Abstracts, 631-634.
migration: Geophysics J. Int., 99, 435-445. Robertsson, J. O. A., Blanch, J. O., and Symes, W. W.,
Buland, A., Landrø, M., Sollie, R., Andersen, M., and 1994, Viscoelastic finite-difference modeling: Geo-
Dahl, T., 1995, Lithology identification by AVO physics, 59, 1444-1456.
inversion: 65th Ann. Internat. Mtg., Soc. Expl. Rutherford, S. R., and Williams, R. H., 1989, Ampli-
Geophys., Expanded Abstracts, 1115-1118. tude-versus-offset variations in gas sands: Geo-
Carcione, J. M., Kosloff, D., and Kosloff, R., 1988, Wave physics, 54, 680-688.
propagation simulation in a linear viscoacoustic Samec, P., and Blangy, J. P., 1992, Viscoelastic attenua-
medium: Geophys. J. Roy. Astr. Soc., 93, 393-407. tion, anisotropy and AVO: Geophysics, 57, 441-
Christensen, R. M., 1982, Theory of viscoelasticity – 450.
An introduction: Academic Press. Sevink, A., and Herman, C., 1994, Fast iterative solu-
Eisenstat, S. C., Elman, H. C., and Schultz, M. H., 1983, tion of sparsely sampled seismic inverse prob-
Variational iterative methods for nonsymmetric lems: lnverse Problems, 10, 937-948.
systems of linear equations: SIAM Journal on Nu- Shuey, R. T., 1985, A simplification of the Zoeppritz
merical Analysis, 20, 345-357. equations: Geophysics, 50, 609-614.
Griewank, A., 1992, Achieving logarithmic growth of Smith, C. C., and Gidlow, P. M., 1987, Weighted stack-
temporal and spatial complexity in reverse auto- ing for rock property estimation and detection of
matic differentiation: Optimization Methods and gas: Geophysical Prospecting, 35, 993-1014.
Software, 1, 35-54. Tarantola, A., 1984, Inversion of seismic reflection data
Lailly, P., 1983, Seismic inverse problem as a sequence in the acoustic approximation: Geophysics,
of before-stack migrations, in Bednar, J., Redner, 49,1259-1266.
R., Robinson, E., and Weglein, A., Eds., Confer- Tarantola, A., 1987, Inverse problem theory: Elsevier.
ence on Inverse Scattering: Theory and Applica- Tarantola, A., 1988, Theoretical background for the
tions: SIAM, Philadelphia, 206-220. inversion of seismic waveforms, including elas-
Liao, Q., and McMechan, G., 1995, Multifrequency ticity and attenuation, in Aki, A., and Wu, R. S.,
viscoacoustic computations: Modeling and inver- Eds., Scattering and attenuation of seismic waves,
sion: 65th Ann. Internat. Mtg. of Soc. Expl. PAGEOPH: Birkhäuser Verlag, Basel.
Geophys., Expanded Abstracts, 635-638. Toksöz, M. N., and Johnston, D. H., Eds., 1981, Seis-
Martinez, R. D., and McMechan, G. A., 1991, τ - p seismic wave attenuation, Soc. Expl. Geophys.
mic data for viscoelastic media—Part 2: Linear-
ized inversion: Geophys. Prosp., 39, 157-181.
23
Table 1. Normal residual for the various inversions reported in the text. The inversion stopped
when the normal residual dropped below 0.10%.
Normal Residual % Class I Class II Class III I
Q=oo 0.11 0.10 0.12
Q = 100 0.10 0.10 0.094
Q = 50 0.28 0.10 0.32
3r----------------,r----------------,----------------~
2.5
u
o
Q)
>
1
0.5
O~----------------~-------------------L------------------~
o 500 1000 1500
Depth (m)
Fig. 1. The reference velocity model.
24
Table 2. Number of iterations for the inversions reported in the test. The inversion stopped if
more than 50 iterations were necessary to reduce the normal residual below 0.10%.
IIIterations I Class II Class III Class IIIII

Q= 00 50 46 50
Q = 100 45 44 42
Q = 50 50 49 50
3,----------------,-----------------,----------------~
2.5
2
-
cry
<
E
-2
E?1.5
->.
' Ci)
c
CI)
o
1 f-----------i
0.5
O~----------------~------------------L----------------~
o 500 1000 1500
Depth (m)
Fig. 2. The reference density model.
25
26
Fig. 3. The impedance reflectivity model derived from the well log.
Fig. 4. The density reflectivity model.

27
Fig. 5. The impedance reflectivity models used to simulate classes I, II, and III AVO responses. The imped-
ances are identical outside the region shown in the graph. Note that the impedance is comparatively very
small for the Class II response.
28
I
Fig. 6. The seismogram for impedance model 1 (Class I reflector). The slowness ranges from 0 ms/m to 0.38 ms/m.
The maximum slowness corresponds to a maximum take-off angle of 34.75 degrees in the water column. The
seismogram has been muted to remove direct wave, total reflections, and reflections which would have occurred
in the water column (298 m deep).
29
30
Fig. 7. The seismogram for impedance model 2 (Class II reflector). The slowness ranges from 0 ms/m to 0.38 ms/m.
...
E
i
Fig. 8. The seismogram for impedance model 3 (Class III reflector). The slowness ranges from 0 ms/m to 0.38 ms/m.
31
I '
0.25 I \
\
\
0.2
" ~ "\
I
0.15
.2:- 0.1
:~ ....
t) /
Q) 0.05
:;:: 1- "/
Q)
'- .. \- ........
Q) 0
0
C ": . -:- - - / .j"
(Ij
-g -0.05 \
I
":- \ /
0..
-E -0.1
-0.15
-0.2
-0.25
1000 1020 1040 1060 1080 1100 1120 1140 1160 1180 1200
Depth (m)
Fig. 9. True and estimated impedance reflectivity for impedance model 1 (class I). Close up of the reflector at
1100 m depth. Solid—True model. Dashed—Estimated with Q = 100 (correct). Dotted—Estimated with Q = ∞
(purely acoustic). Dash-dotted—Estimated with Q = 50.
32
Fig. 10. True and estimated density reflectivity for impedance model 1 (class I). Closeup of the reflector at
33
Fig. 11. True and estimated impedance reflectivity for impedance model 2 (Class II). Close up of the reflec-
tor at 1100 m depth. Solid—True model. Dashed—Estimated with Q = 100 (correct). Dotted—Estimated
with Q = ∞ (purely acoustic). Dash-dotted—Estimated with Q = 50.
34
Fig. 12. True and estimated density reflectivity for impedance model 2 (Class II). Closeup of the reflector at
35
FIG. 13. True and estimated impedance reflectivity for impedance model 3 (Class III). Closeup of the reflec-
tor at 1100 m depth. Solid—True model. Dashed—Estimated with Q = 100 (correct). Dotted—Estimated with
Q = ∞ (purely acoustic). Dash-dotted—Estimated with Q = 50.
36
Fig. 14. True and estimated density reflectivity for impedance model 3 (Class III). Closeup of the reflector at
37
Fig. 15. Ratio of wavenumber spectra between impedance (Ir) and density (ρr) reflectivity for Class I reflector,
Ir / ρr. Solid—True ratio. Dashed—Ratio between estimates obtained with Q = 100 (correct Q). Dotted—Ratio
between estimates obtained with Q = ∞. Dash-dotted—Ratio between estimates obtained with Q = 50.
38
Fig. 16. Ratio of wavenumber spectra between impedance (Ir) and density (ρr) reflectivity for Class II reflec-
tor, Ir / ρr. Solid—True ratio. Dashed—Ratio between estimates obtained with Q = 100 (correct Q). Dotted—
Ratio between estimates obtained with Q = ∞. Dash-dotted—Ratio between estimates obtained with Q = 50.
39
Fig. 17. Ratio of wavenumber spectra between impedance (Ir) and density (ρr) reflectivity for Class III reflec-
tor, Ir / ρr. Solid—True ratio. Dashed—Ratio between estimates obtained with Q = 100 (correct Q). Dotted—
Ratio between estimates obtained with Q = ∞ . Dash-dotted—Ratio between estimates obtained with Q = 50.
40
Fig. 18. The nine shot gathers used as input to the inversion algorithm. Shot gather 1 in the plot corresponds to shot 424 and shot gather 9 to
shot 456 in the original data. Shot gather 5 corresponds to shot 440 in the original data, which coincides with the position of well A. The shots
are spaced 100 m apart.
41
Fig. 19. The estimated bulk modulus from viscoacoustic inversion. The position of well A is indicated by a
vertical line. Reflectivity was not estimated above 100 m depth, roughly corresponding to mute of the data.
Only 300 x 350 grid points of the original 900 x 524 grid points computational grid are shown.
42
Fig. 20. A depth cross-section of the estimated bulk modulus reflectivity at 1050 m offset. Solid—Estimate
from viscoacoustic inversion. Dashed—Estimate from acoustic inversion.
43
4
X 10-
3.-----~----~----~------~----~----~------~----~----~
->.
';;;
'';::
1
, , ~ ,'
,
,~
() \
J ~I
Q) \ \ ' I I
;;::
... \~
I ,I \ I I I I
, fA
Q) \~
I ' I,
, I'
"'
, ' , I I I, , \ I , I I
(J)
, , I , \ ' \ , \, 'I,\
::J 0 II
I I ,
,
,
, " I' \ \ \ I \
, V , \ , ,' \ \I ,
~
::J
'D I , \ 1/ \
, , '
E
0
,
\
I , I I
\'
\
I ,
\
I'
~
::J
al-1
, I/v \
I,
,
\ I,
-2
_3L------L------~----~------L-----~------~----~------~----~
1000 1200 1400 1600 1800 2000 2200 2400 2600 2800
Depth (m)
Fig. 21. A depth cross-section of the estimated density reflectivity at 1050 m offset. Solid—Estimate from
viscoacoustic inversion. Dashed—Estimate from acoustic inversion.
44
3
AVO Inversion of a Mobil Data Set

Arild Buland
Martin Landrø
IKU Petroleum Research
Trondheim, Norway
Abstract
The objective of the present work is to obtain estimates of the P- and S-wave veloci-
ties and densities of the subsurface. The inversion is carried out on 952 τ – p trans-
formed CMP gathers, each containing 61 p values ranging from 0.05 to 0.35 s/km.
The forward modeling is performed by convolving the reflectivity with the wave-
let, and it includes water bottom multiples, transmission effects, absorption and array
filter effects. The basic assumption is that the subsurface is close to horizontally lay-
ered. A damped Gauss-Newton algorithm is used to minimize a least-squares misfit
function.
Comparison with the two well logs shows good agreement for the P-wave velocity
estimates in the areas where the geology is close to horizontally stratified. In deeper
and faulted areas the deviation between estimated and measured P-wave velocities is
larger. The same trend holds for the S-wave velocity estimates, while the densities are
the poorest resolved seismic parameter.
Introduction
The objective of this inversion method is to obtain estimates of P- and S-wave ve-
locities and densities in a multilayered target zone containing reservoir rocks. The
method has been applied to several seismic lines from the North Sea; a similar example
is shown by Buland et al. (1996b). The method has been used in lithology prediction
(Buland et al., 1995), in porosity estimation (Landrø et al., 1995), and in stochastic reser-
voir characterization (Buland et al., 1996a). The data processing and the inversion are
carried out on τ – p transformed CMP gathers. The method is target-oriented and re-
quires the P- and S-wave velocities and densities right above the target zone to be known.
Furthermore, a model for the P-wave velocities in the overburden (the “macro” model)
is required. The macro model should be sufficiently detailed to account for the ob-
served moveout curves. The parameters of the target zone are estimated by the inver-
sion scheme. In this study we used the water layer as macro model, and the water
bottom is the top target interface.
45
Buland and Landrø
The main assumptions are: (1) The model is locally close to horizontally layered
(i.e. the model layers exhibit small dips and small lateral velocity variations on a length
equal to the streamer length), (2) only PP reflections are evident in the data, and (3)
anisotropy effects may be neglected. For small to moderate p values it is reasonable to
assume that the main elastic effects are included when the PP reflection coefficient is
taken into account. For large p values one must expect that P-to-S-to-P converted waves
will contribute to the recorded seismic signal even if the data are acquired offshore over
a horizontally layered medium. Dietrich (1988) was able to identify a P`S`S’P’event from
a real data example recorded in the Norwegian Sea. This event appeared on the τ – p
section for p values around 0.38 s/km.
Tjåland and Ursin (1992) analyzed the information content in the elastic reflection
matrix and concluded that only two to three elastic parameters could be estimated
from the reflectivity. In the present work, we use traveltime information in addition to
the information contained in the seismic amplitude variation as a function of the ray
parameter p. We therefore expect improved reliability since the P-wave velocity esti-
mates can be determined partly from the moveout curves in the τ – p domain and partly
from the reflectivity variation with the ray parameter.
Methodology
The processing scheme consists of five main elements:
1. 3-D Radon transform of the CMP gathers from the time-offset (t – r) domain to
the oblique traveltime-ray parameter τ – p domain
2. Directional source signature estimation
3. Macro model estimation
4. Initial model estimation
5. Stratigraphic AVO inversion in target zone
The first step has been presented previously by Chapel, Kolb, and Canadas (1989),
while the last step was presented by Helgesen and Landrø (1993).
The Radon transform

Each CMP gather is transformed into the τ – p domain using a modified 3-D Radon
transform (Brysk and McCowan, 1986):
Z ∞ Z ∞ Z ∞
Ψ(τ, p) = dω iωe−iωτ rdrJ0 (ωpr) dteiωt U (t, r, z0 ), (1)
−∞ 0 −∞
with inverse:
1 Z∞ −iωt
Z ∞ Z ∞
U (t, r) = 3
dω iωe pdpJ 0 (ωpr) dτ eiωτ Ψ(τ, p), (2)
8π −∞ 0 −∞
where Ψ(τ, p) is the τ – p transformed data, U(t,r,z0) is the observed wave field at re-
ceiver depth z0, ω is angular frequency, t is time, τ is the oblique traveltime, r is the
offset and p is the ray parameter. J0 is the Bessel function of order zero.
This transformation removes the geometrical spreading from the data. The trans-
formed data consist of a number of time traces, where each trace corresponds to data
from a hypothetical plane-wave experiment. The time traces are identified by their p
value (the ray parameter) for the plane-wave experiment.
46
Macro model estimation

To obtain a reasonable P-wave velocity model above the target zone, we can either
use a conventional velocity analysis to estimate interval velocities or we can simply
estimate an average velocity for each τ – p gather from the moveout curves. The last
procedure can be used if the section above the target zone has a rather uniform velocity
field. In this study, the target zone starts at the water bottom and the macro model is
simply described by the water velocity.
Initial model estimation

The estimation of an initial model for the target zone should be done using all
available information about the target zone, including well logs. The first step is an
interpretation to detect the main reflectors on a constant p-section or on a stacked sec-
tion. From this interpretation, the traveltimes to each reflector in the target zone are
digitized. The P- and S-wave velocities and densities for each layer can then be esti-
mated from the available information. In this case values from well logs are used.
Elastic stratigraphic inversion

In this step, we estimate P- and S-wave velocities and densities in a layered target
zone. The model is first divided into a “macro model” overlying the target zone and the
target zone itself. The macro model is used in the computation of the arrival times for
reflections in the target zone. The macro model contains NM layers and incorporates
only the major layer structures above the target. The P-wave velocities in these layers
must be found prior to the inversion.
The target zone is divided into NT layers. Each layer is vertically homogeneous and
is characterized by its P-wave velocity α, S-wave velocity β, and density ρ.
Forward modeling
The modeled seismic signal for trace i in the τ – p domain is a convolution between
reflectivity and wavelet:
NX
T −1
Ψ̂(τ, pi ) = Rk (pi )S(τ − τk (pi ), pi ), (3)

k=0
where Rk is the PP reflection coefficient at interface k, S(τ, pi ) is a directional wavelet,

and τ is the slant observation time.
The slant traveltime τk for interface k is
N
X M q k q
X
τk (pi ) = 1 − (αjM )2 p2i ∆tM
j + 1 − αj2 p2i ∆tTj . (4)
j=1 j=1
Here, p is the ray parameter, ∆tjM is the two-way vertical traveltime in layer j in the
macro model, and ∆tjT is the two-way vertical traveltime in layer j in the target zone.
This means that we choose to parametrize the model in terms of two-way vertical
traveltime instead of layer thickness. The PP reflection coefficient Rk is a function of the
ray parameter pi, the P- and S-wave velocities and the densities at each side of the
interface. Only reflections from the target zone are modeled.
47
Buland and Landrø
Multiple modeling
Waterbottom multiples up to order Nm are also modeled by a convolution:
PNT −1 PNm
(m + 1) Rk (pi )(RF )m (Rwb (pi ))m
Ψ̂mult (τ, pi ) = k=0 m=1 (5)

S(τ − τk (pi ) − mτm (pi ), pi ),
where RF is the reflection coefficient of the free surface (normally -1), and Rwb is the
waterbottom reflection coefficient. The time separations τm between multiples at a par-
ticular trace i is given by
q
τm (pi ) = 1 − (αwater )2 p2i t0m , (6)
where tm0 is the time separation between multiples at zero offset (p = 0). This parameter
can be optimized in the inversion. Note that only multiples from interfaces in the target
zone are modeled.
Transmission effects
The transmission effect can be included by multiplying the reflection coefficient
Rk(pi) with the factor Tk(pi) estimated by
k−1
Y
Tk (pi ) = T M (pi ) t↓j (pi )t↑j (pi ), (7)
j=0
where TM is an estimate of the transmission effect through the macro model, and t↓j and
t↑j are the transmission coefficients for downgoing and upgoing wavefield for interface
j. TM must be estimated prior to the inversion, and can be specified by a zero-offset and
a gradient component: TM(pi) = T0M + TGM p2i .
Absorption
Absorption can be included by multiplying the reflection coefficient Rk(pi) with the
factor
µ ¶
ωtk (pi ) ωtk (pi )
exp − AV
+ i AV log(ω/ωr ) , (8)
2Qk (pi ) πQk (pi )
where tk is the real traveltime to interface k given by
N
X M q k
X q
tk (pi ) = ∆tM M 2 2
j / 1 − (αj ) pi + ∆tTj / 1 − αj2 p2i , (9)
j=1 j=1
and QkAV is an average quality factor:

" µN ¶ #−1
1 X M
∆tM
j
k
X ∆tTj
QAV
k (pi ) = q + q ,
tk (pi ) j=1 QM
j 1 − (αjM )2 p2i j=0 QTj 1 − αj2 p2i (10)
The quality factors for the macro model and for the target zone, QM and QT, must be
given prior to the inversion and are not updated.
48
The second term in the exponential function in Equation (8) represents a velocity
dispersion correction, where ωr is a reference frequency. To reduce computer time, this
term is omitted in the present work.
Array filter effects

In seismic data acquisition, signals from groups of adjacent receivers are normally
added together prior to the recording. The effect of this group summation can be re-
garded as a filtering of the continuous wavefield. The Fourier spectrum of this filter is
given by:
1 sin( N ωp∆x
2
)
H(ωp) = ωp∆x , (11)
N sin( 2 )
where N is the number of receivers in a group, and ∆x is the distance between the
receivers.
This effect can be included in the modeled seismogram by multiplying all reflec-
tion coefficients Rk(pi) by H(ωpi).
Finite aperture effects

When transforming seismic data from the x – t domain into Fourier-Hankel type
domains like the frequency-wavenumber or τ – p domain it is often assumed that the
data have been recorded with an infinite streamer and that the recording time is infi-
nite. In practice, this is not the case since the number of receivers used in seismic data
acquisition is limited. Several scientists have focused on the effects of limited spatial
and temporal aperture on transformed data. Dobbs et al. (1990) derived a limited aper-
ture simulation (LAS) filter for τ – p transformed data, while Amundsen and Ursin
(1991) derived equations that account for limited aperture effects in the frequency-
wavenumber domain.
In our approach, we use an extrapolation technique that is applied to the x – t data
in order to compensate for the lack of small offsets. Following Amundsen and Ursin
(1991) the effect of missing offsets larger than the maximum offset R can be accounted
for in the following way:
Z ∞ pJ1 (Rωp)J0 (Rωp0 ) − p0 J1 (Rωp0 )J0 (Rωp)
Ψ̃(ω, p) = dp0 ωp0 R Ψ(ω, p0 ), (12)
0 p2 − p02
where Ψ̃ (ω,p) is the ω – p transform of the data including the limited spatial aperture
effect, Ψ is the data without aperture effects included, and J0 and J1 are Bessel functions
of order zero and one, respectively.
In the present work, we have not included this effect in the AVO-inversion algo-
rithm, partly due to the increased computer time, and partly because the effect is fairly
small.
Optimization
The inversion for the four unknown parameters of each layer (αk, βk, ρk, ∆k) is car-
ried out by minimizing the following least squares misfit function:
Np Nτ
X X
F = [Ψ̂(τj , pi ) − Ψ(τj , pi )]2 , (13)
i=1 j=1
where Np , Nτ are the number of traces and time samples, respectively.
49
Buland and Landrø
A damped Gauss-Newton algorithm is used for the optimization. The Jacobian

matrix for the problem is Jij = ∂ Ψ̂i /∂θj , where i runs over data space, j runs over model
space and θ is the model parameter vector. The Jacobian matrix is computed numeri-
cally. The gradient of the misfit function F is g = JT∆Ψ, ΨΨwhere ∆ΨΨis the data residual
vector. The Gauss-Newton approximation to the Hessian matrix is given by H = JTJ.

The problem is scaled, and the scaled model parameter updates are given by
−1
θ = (H̃ + λ̃I) g̃,
∆˜ (14)
where λ̃Iis the Levenberg-Marquardt damping parameter.
Processing
The streamer had 120 groups separated by 25 m, and the data were recorded with
4 ms sample rate. The distance between the source array and the center of the first
group is 262.5 m.
After CMP sorting the data, we combined consecutive CMP gathers to obtain su-
per CMP gathers containing all available offsets. We also performed a trace interpola-
tion (with ProMAX) to obtain a trace spacing of 12.5 m. This was done to avoid/reduce
aliasing in the τ – p transform. We also extrapolated the data to zero offset prior to this
transformation. Altogether we built 952 super CMP gathers containing 260 traces. We
transformed these data into 952 τ – p gathers, each with 61 p-values ranging from 0.05
s/km up to 0.35 s/km. Well A is located at super gather 337 and Well B at 719.
A directional source signature was modeled and used in the inversion. The source
modeling scheme was calibrated using the measured vertical farfield signature. A com-
parison between the synthetic and real farfield signature is shown in Figure 1. After the
calibration step, we used the source modeling program to obtain p-dependent source
signatures. Finally, we added the receiver ghost to the modeled farfield signatures. As
can be seen from Figure 2 there are some variations in the source wavelet as a function
of the ray parameter, but not strong. The best source signatures are of course obtained
by measuring or monitoring the source array on a shot-to-shot basis. This can be achieved
either by using nearfield hydrophones (Ziolkowski et al., 1982) or by using a
ministreamer below the source array (Landrø and Sollie, 1992, Landrø et al.,1994). The
ministreamer method can also be used to obtain the true zero-offset trace which might
be useful for several purposes in AVO processing. For instance in our algorithm we
always need to extrapolate our data to zero offset, and the presence of a true zero-offset
trace certainly would stabilize this extrapolation step.
The long period water bottom multiples represent a serious problem for the AVO
inversion. Instead of attenuating these multiples prior to the inversion, we have in-
cluded the water bottom multiples in the inversion. The advantage of this approach is
that it offers the theoretical possibility of eliminating the multiples exactly. However,
this approach needs accurate information about the multiple generating system. The
primaries must be modeled with correct moveout curves and amplitudes, and it is cru-
cial to have good initial estimates of the water bottom reflection coefficient and the
time separation between the multiples. The time separation between multiples, tm0 is
optimized in the inversion process.
The AVO inversion method was intended to be target oriented. The zone above the
top target reflector (the macro model) should then only be described by P-wave veloci-
ties. However, to be able to model multiples, we also need S-wave velocities and densi-
ties. We therefore included the overburden in the target zone. The terminology of a
macro and a target zone can be kept by defining the macro model to consist of the
water layer only, while the target zone starts at the sea bottom. Figure 3 shows a com-
parison between a real and modeled constant p-section and the corresponding residual
50
section. We see that the multiples are fairly well attenuated. By using the layer strip-
ping method described above we built an initial model consisting of 19 layers, as shown
in Figure 4. Absorption is included in the forward modeling in the inversion algorithm.
We used average quality factors, provided with the AVO data set, ranging from 90 to
150.
From Well A we obtained the following soft constraint equations:
Vp = 1.27Vs + 1240 (15)
Vp = 6.33ρ – 11300 (16)
Although these constraints are applied weakly, they have the effect of stabilizing
the inversion procedure.
Results
The estimated P- and S-wave velocities and densities are shown unsmoothed in
Figure 5 together with the well log values. Blue colors in the well log values mean lack
of data. The result is fairly stable, but there is a leakage between the layers. There is
also leakage between the P- and S-wave velocity and the density because the solution
of the inversion problem is non-unique. The mean values and standard deviations for
P- and S-wave velocities and densities are listed in Table 1. The standard deviation for
a layer is a measure of lateral variation for a parameter. This variation can be real, or it
can be an indicator of the stability of the inversion process.
Discussions and Conclusions

The results are still preliminary. Further progress requires an improvement of the
initial model and a better preprocessing of the seismic data. We are also working with
true amplitude prestack migration and corrections for dipping interfaces. Experience
so far has shown that use of common offset migration can improve the inversion re-
sults significantly. In the present version of the algorithm, we assume that the inter-
faces are locally horizontal. The algorighm cannot handle faulted structures, which
causes great problems in the deeper parts of the section.
However, above the deeper and faulted zone, we obtain a reasonable fit with the
well log values for the P- and S-wave velocities. The density seems to be far more un-
stable and poorly determined. This means that this example supports earlier works
that suggest the P-wave velocity is the best determined parameter followed by the S-
wave velocity and the density.
The significant drop in P-wave velocity observed in Well B at approximately 2.5 s is
not confirmed by the inversion result. This is probably due to the oversimplification of
the model used in the inversion.
References
Amundsen, L., and Ursin, B., 1991, Frequency-wavenumber inversion of acoustic data:
Geophysics, 56, 1027-1039.
Brysk, H., and McCowan, D. W., 1986, A slant-stack procedure for point-source data:
Geophysics, 51, 1370-1386.
Buland, A., Landrø, M., Sollie, R., Andersen, M., and Dahl, T., 1995, Lithology identifi-
cation by AVO inversion: 65th Ann. Internat. Mtg., Soc. Expl. Geophys., Expanded
Abstracts, 1115-1118.
51
Buland and Landrø
Buland, A., Hansen, O., Abrahamsen, P., and Hektoen, A., 1996, Stochastic reservoir
characterization using AVO inversion: EAGE Winter Symposium, Venice, Italy.
Buland, A., Landrø, M., Andersen, M., and Dahl, T., 1996, AVO inversion of Troll Field
data: Geophysics, 61, 1589-1602.
Chapel, F., Kolb, P., and Canadas, G., 1989, CMP nonlinear inversion in τ – p domain:
59th Ann. Internat. Mtg., Soc. Expl. Geophys., Expanded Abstracts, 935-937.
Dietrich, M., 1988, Modeling of marine seismic profiles in the t–x and τ–p domains:
Geophysics, 53, 453-465.
Dobbs, S. L., Wilson, C. R., and Backus, M. M., 1990, Accounting for limited spatial
aperture in the waveform inversion of p – τ seismograms: Geophysics, 55, 452-457.
Helgesen, J., and Landrø, M., 1993, Estimation of elastic parameters from AVO effects
in the τ – p domain: Geophysical Prospecting, 41, 341-366.
Landrø, M., and Sollie, R., 1992, Source signature determination by inversion: Geo-
physics, 57, 1633-1640.
Landrø, M., Langhammer, J., Sollie, R., Amundsen, L., and Berg, E., 1994, Source signa-
ture determination from ministreamer data: Geophysics, 59, 1261-1269.
Landrø, M., Buland, A., and D’Angelo, R., 1995, Target oriented AVO inversion of Valhall
and Hod fields data: The Leading Edge, 14, 855-861.
Tjåland, E. and Ursin, B., 1992, Information content of the elastic reflection matrix: 62nd
Ann. Internat. Mtg., Soc. Expl. Geophys., Expanded Abstracts, 796-799.
Ziolkowski, A., Parkes, G., Hatton, L., Haugland, T., 1982, The signature of an air gun
array: Computation from near-field measurements including interactions: Geophys-
ics, 47, 1413-1421.
52
__
~ 50 ,----------------------------------------------------,
~--------------------------------------------------~
50 ~---------------------------------------------------,
EI
't...
-
ct!
ctS
..c
---
0.
E
«
-50 4-----------~I-------------~
I -----------~I----------~
o 100 200 300 400
Time (ms)
Fig. 1. Measured (solid line) and modeled (dashed line) vertical farfield signatures.
,--... o
(f)
E
Q)
E 100
I-
200 ~'~~~~~~~~~~~~~~.L..
~,~~~~~~~~~~~~~~.L..
~\~~~~~~~~~~~~~~.L..
0.05 0.10 0.15 0.20 0.25 0.30 0.35
p (s/km)
Fig. 2. Directional source wavelets inclusive receiver ghost. These wavelets were used in the inversion.
53
Buland and Landrø
,--......
,.............
".......... 0.9
(f)
'--"
'-...../
())
(l)
E 1.0
I-
/-
1.
1.11
a)
1.2
101 201 301 401 501 601 701 801 901
,--......
,.............
".......... 0.9
(f)
'--"
'-...../
(l)
())
E 1.0
I-
/-
11.
.1
1.1
b)
1.2
101 201 301 401 501 601 701 801 901
CMP number
,--......
,.............
".......... 0.9
(f)
'--"
'-...../
(l)
())
E 1.0
I-
/-
1..11
c)
1.2
101 201 301 401 501 601 701
70 1 801 901
Fig. 3. (a) Real and (b) synthetic constant p-sections (p equal to 0.1 s/km) to- CMP number
gether with (c) the residual section. Note that the multiples are attenuated.
54
_ 0.4 -4000
-en
Q)
E
0.8
3863
3726
3589
i= 1.2
3453
3316
3179
1.6 3042
2905
2.0 2768
2632
2.4 2495
2358
2.8 2221
2084
1947
101 201 301 401 501 601 701 801 901 1811
1674
Fig. 4. Initial P-wave velocity model consisting of 19 layers. CMP number 1537
1400
a)
--
en
CD 0.8
0.4 4000
3863
3726
3589
E 3453
~ 1.2 3316
3179
1.6 3042
2905
2.0 2768
2632
2.4 2495
2358
2.8 2221
2084
1947
1 101 201 301 401 501 601 701 801 901 1811
1674
1537
CMP number 1400
b)
-- en
CD 0.8
0.4 2000
1895
1789
1684
E 1579
i- 12 1474
1368
1.6 1263
1158
2.0 1053
947
2.4 842
737
2.8 632
526
421
101 201 301 401 501 601 701 801 901 316
211
CMP number 105
0
Fig. 5. Unsmoothed (a) P-wave velocity (b) S-wave velocity and (c) density estimated by the inversion algo-
rithm with the well-log values from wells A and B (the well positions are indicated at the top of the plot).
55
Buland and Landra
c)
2500
-;;P:;;;;;;;;;f;;;:I~A iiiii~~~RE!!im• •
-
Ci)
(1)
E
0.4
0 .8
2421
2342
2263
2184
t- 1.2 2105
2026
1.6 1947
1868
2.0 1789
1711
1632
2.4 1553
1474
.2.8 1395
1316
1237
101 201 301 401 501 601 701 801 901 1158
1079
Fig. 5. Continued. CMP number 1000
Table 1. Average parameter estimates for all layers and corresponding standard devia-
tions.
Layer Estimated average parameters Standard deviation (%)
Vp(m/s) Vs(m/s) p(kg/m 3 ) Vp/Vs Vp Vs p
1 1398 221 1976 6.33 10 7 13

2 1982 303 2308 6.54 10 56 10
3 1782 302 2154 5.90 11 66 16
4 1773 387 1939 4.58 12 45 17
5 1672 477 1749 3.51 10 61 20
6 1986 446 2132 4.46 7 51 15
7 1664 380 1935 4.38 11 49 24
8 1730 690 2222 2.51 7 58 16
9 1784 715 2174 2.50 8 49 15
10 1899 815 2114 2.33 6 39 18
11 2189 933 2221 2.35 6 35 14
12 2190 972 2263 2.25 2 36 13
13 2788 1422 2108 1.96 4 20 14
14 2615 1088 1995 2.40 2 26 17
15 3159 1744 2043 1.81 4 14 15
16 2853 1354 2057 2.11 2 19 17
17 3363 1762 1884 1.91 2 19 17
18 3581 2056 1943 1.74 2 14 17
19 3624 2089 2002 1.73 2 15 19
56
4
AVO Migration/Inversion Analysis
C. Hanitzsch1, D. Marion2, A. Tura1, W. B. Beydoun3,

D. Jizba2, S. Jin3, and B. Fredier2
1
Elf Geoscience Research Centre, London
2
Elf Aquitaine Production, Pau Cedex, France
3
Elf Aquitaine Production
S-wave, and density logs) in addition to surface seis-

Abstract mic data. These data allow the validation of results
Results of an AVO methodology applied to the obtained by the partners in the comparison.
Mobil AVO data set are presented. The AVO method- In this paper, we present the results of an AVO
ology integrates seismic and petrophysical methods methodology that integrates seismic and
and consists of AVO feasibility, amplitude-preserved petrophysical methods in two ways. First, an AVO
preprocessing, prestack amplitude-preserved depth feasibility study is performed on petrophysical data
migration, and stable AVO inversion, log seismic cali- from well logs (when available) to identify potential
bration and interpretation. A preliminary interpreta- zones of interest (gas and oil). This step also helps to
tion of P- and S-impedance depth images derived by prevent problems that may arise because certain rock
our AVO methodology confirmed that the potential properties in potential reservoir zones are not neces-
gas reservoir defined by log data could be identified sarily visible as AVO anomalies. Second, petrophysical
on the seismic data. analyses allow us to validate the gas indicators ob-
tained by seismic AVO processing. The quality of the
seismic results can be checked, which is a useful con-
Introduction trol for field data.
Amplitude versus offset (AVO) studies are a field Much emphasis is put in our AVO methodology
of major interest in geophysics. The joint SEG/EAEG to create a whole amplitude-preserved processing se-
workshop in Montana in 1992 showed that there is quence which is necessary to estimate physical rock
an interest in comparing different approaches and parameters from amplitudes of seismic data. Each step
steps in AVO processing. Therefore, we regard the is aimed at ensuring that relative amplitudes of sig-
opportunity offered by the Mobil AVO data set to com- nals are preserved. The steps in our AVO methodol-
pare different seismic inversion methods on a single ogy are listed in Table␣ 1.
real data set as an important contribution to establish The main difference in our approach compared
amplitude-preserved processing. The advantage of the to conventional schemes is the use of an amplitude-
Mobil AVO data set that persuaded us to participate preserved prestack depth migration. This step re-
was the availability of well data (measured P-wave, places NMO and DMO in conventional processing
57
Hanitzsch et al.
Table 1. AVO methodology applied to the Mobil Other problems determined by quality control are
AVO data set. variations in the shot strength and receiver
receptivities.
1. Quality control of seismic data AVO feasibility study of gas detection

2. AVO feaibility study using well logs and rock physics
3. Amplitude preservation test of To use AVO attributes to identify gas reservoir
multiple attenuation methods zones, it is necessary in a feasibility study to verify
4. Amplitude-preserved preprocess- that:
ing of field data 1) Gas-bearing reservoirs can be identified from
5. Interval velocity analysis elastic parameters at log scale
6. Amplitude-preserved prestack 2) The effect of gas observed on logs persists at
depth migration seismic scales
7. Quality control of structural result 3) Gas zones have a distinctive signature on AVO
attributes
8. Stable AVO inversion
9. Log seismic calibration When these three conditions are met, one may
10. Final interpretation consider that, from a rock physics point of view, the
use of AVO technology to detect gas is feasible. These
aspects of AVO feasibility of gas detection using logs
and rock physics are presented in the following sec-
sequences, which flatten reflections and correct for tion for Well A.
(small) dips. To include better positioning in conven- Figure␣ 2 illustrates the classical response of elas-
tional AVO schemes, a (poststack) migration of the tic wave parameters in a gas-bearing reservoir. More
elastic parameters obtained by AVO inversion is some- specifically, we notice that the presence of gas has the
times performed. In Beydoun et al. (1994), three of largest impact on bulk modulus, P-impedance (Imp
the authors of this paper showed that a prestack depth P) and density. In contrast, shear modulus and
migration followed by AVO inversion gives slightly S-impedance (Imp S) remain unaffected by the pres-
more accurate results than a poststack migration af- ence of gas. From these observations, which are sus-
ter AVO inversion, even in simple models for which tained by theory, we conclude that elastic properties
the conventional processing is valid. are indeed sensitive to fluid type and may be consid-
The next section describes the processing of the ered as good hydrocarbon indicators for this case
Mobil AVO data set. Each subsection discusses one study.
topic of our AVO methodology. In Figure␣ 3, the log data were brought to the scale
of resolution of seismic data and contrasts of elastic
wave parameters were computed. In this figure, we
AVO Migration / Inversion note that the effect of gas that was seen clearly at log
scale on Figure␣ 2 persists at seismic scales and is char-
Methodology acterized by larger relative changes in compressional
parameters than shear parameters.
Quality control of seismic data Finally, Figure␣ 4 illustrates that gas zones have a
The first step of most processing schemes is the fairly distinct signature on AVO attributes. More spe-
quality control of the data. For amplitude preserved cifically, we note that on a cross plot between P and S
processing, quality control requires extra care in the impedance contrasts, gas reservoirs are clearly outli-
evaluation of possible problems with amplitudes and ers with respect to the general trend.
phases. For the Mobil AVO data set, the display of From these observations based on log data we
three raw shots (Figure␣ 1) shows the presence of tend to conclude that AVO attributes can indeed be
strong water bottom and also interbed multiples. used to detect gas reservoir zones for this geologic
environment.
58
SPN 3 SPN 502 SPN 1001

o 111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111 o 111111111'111,11111[111111,111111111111111111[111111111111111
1111111111111'",111111111111[1111111111111111111111111111111 I o 1IIIIlillllliiilliliillililililflililillililillillillillilii i
t
1-
!N 1_111111111111111111111111
!NI_IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII IlIIil~~!11111111111111111111111111
!N!NIIIII~~11111111111111111111111111 !N ~
OJ
Fig. 1. Three raw shots (mute and time gain for visualization applied).
'" ''"" l_tmmmim~ffimmmmlltlmWJ I "I--_I~I [H ~~,
.., ,po. I {l5,[{'B5i.......\It)">H(.{('r/"{uH)H{1II1)HBH\>su,

.., I !trftWm,mm\\)mU!l)IHl!HIIWlIIltIIlB\IPIIllI,t
.. f',' II ~
01> I <n(""')f'''U))\P))\{Up\\{!!!jrr''I\\I~\I!Ul(r''Jlll\~ r
OA 0 .8 1.2 1.6 2 2.4 2.8 3 .2 OA 0 .8 1.2 1.6 2 2.4 2 .8 3 .2 0OA

.4 0 .8 1.2 1.6 2 2.4
2A 2 .8 3 .2
Offse
Offsett (km) Offset
Offs e t (km) Offset
Offs et (km)
59
Hanitzsch et al.
Well logs
inpp inps bulk shear
Gas
zone
Fig. 2. Presence of gas has largest impact on bulk modulus, density, and P impedance. It
does not affect shear modulus and shear impedance. The curves are gamma ray (GR),
caliper (Cali), bulk density (rhob), P-wave velocity (vp), S-wave velocity (vs), P-wave
impedance (impp), S-wave impedance (imps), bulk modulus (bulk), and shear modu-
lus (shear).
60
Elastic contrasts at seismic scales

RipRis DEPTH Rbulk Rshear RoG GR Rrhob
1100
1200
1300
1400
1500
1600
1700
1800
1900
2000
Gas
zone
2100
2200
2300
2400
2500
2600
2700
2800
2900
3000
3 100
Fig. 3. Gas zones are characterized by larger relative changes in compressional param-
eters (RIP, Rbulk) than shear parameters (RIS, Rshear). Relative changes in P-wave
impedance (Rip), S-wave impedance (Ris), bulk modulus (Rbulk), shear modulus
(Rshear), and bulk density (Rrhob) are shown. Also displayed are the nonnal incidence
reflection coefficient (Ro) and the gradient of the reflection coefficient at normal inci-
dence (G). The gamma ray curve (GR) has been filtered to seismic wavelengths.
61
Hanitzsch et al.
P Vs. S impedance contrasts

Well
O , 2r-------------------~------------------~
• Well A
• Gas
• Zone
0,1 '" .
RIP 0,0 1 - - - - - - -.......... .

.-
-0,1 ••
-0,2 '"--_""""'--_---'-_ _"--_...L..-_---"-_----'L...-_"""'--_--I

-O ,2 -0 ,1 0,0 0,1 0,2 '
RIS
Fig. 4. Crossplot of P- and S-impedance contrasts in log data. The pink dots and the red squares
correspond to the top and bottom of gas sands.
Amplitude preservation test of cellation method that used .periodicity of multiples.

Here we will only discuss three methods, namely an
multiple attenuation methods f-k, 't" - P and a model-based method.
Prior to any AVO analysis, multiples generated In terms of multiple attenuation, the eMP stack
in the water layer should be attenuated from the field of each of the multiple suppression methods showed
data. The multiple attenuation method in use has to that, in the poststack domain, multiples were actu-
be able to preserve relative amplitudes. In order to ally suppressed, whereas in the pres tack domain they
clarify this issue, in Tura et al. (1994) some of the au- were only attenuated.
thors of this paper tested a total of six multiple sup- For discussing the preservation of relative ampli-
pression methods routinely used in operations on a tudes of signal, we plot at a target reflector the reflec-
synthetic data set representing the Mobil AVO data tion coefficient as a function of incidence angle esti-
set. mated from prestack depth migration (see Figure 5).
From the six operational methods tested, two The pure data results match the exact result well. The
were model-based methods, three were based on dif- model-based multiple attenuation result has a good
ferences in NMO (an f-k domain decomposition intercept value, but the slope is different than the ex-
method and two 't" - P domain decomposition meth- act result. In the f-k based method, both the intercept
ods), and the last method was an adaptive noise can- and slope do not match the exact result. The 't"- Pbased
62
Fig. 5. Reflection amplitude vs. angle at a target reflector after prestack depth migration of pure data (top
plot) and after model-based (second plot down), f-k based (third plot down), and τ – p (bottom plot) multiple
attenuation. Dashed lines show the exact result and continuous lines show the preprocessed results.
method does the best job in preserving amplitudes.

In this case, both the intercept and slope have been Amplitude-preserved preprocessing
preserved. In addition to multiple attenuation, which was
The results displayed in this section imply that discussed in the previous subsection, we tested sur-
not any off-the-shelf processing method can be used face-consistent amplitude balancing to correct for high
on field data when amplitudes need to be preserved. frequency spatial variations of shot strength and re-
A special amplitude-preserving processing sequence ceiver receptivity. If properly applied, the method
must be determined. In tests conducted here, among (Taner and Koehler, 1981) corrects for shot and receiver
the six multiple-suppression methods, the τ – p based variations in an amplitude-preserved way.
multiple-suppression method was best in the task of The same three shots as in Figure␣ 1 are displayed
attenuating multiples and preserving amplitudes. As after the preprocessing in Figure␣ 6. Much multiple
a result of these tests, we used the τ – p method to energy was removed, but possibly signal might have
remove multiples in the Mobil AVO data. also been affected.
63
64
SPN 3 SPN 502 SPN 1001
o 111111111111111111111111111[111111111111111111111111111111111
11111111111111111111111111[111111111111111111111111111111111 o o
<j
,
<
• t
l
!
.... ~
§ ~
~ N
ro
~Nl_11111I11111111111111111
!rol_11111111111111111111111 !ro
!N - ~
:0:: ~
~ 9
!J
Hanitzsch et al.
III
Fig. 6. Three processed shots (time gain for visualization applied).

Col Col
I'- !I
'" -- m
truR
~ t~
I~
t
~.
~
~i;1
~~[~~
1~ ~~:t) ~~
~:
~lm
~I 11tl III
0.4 0.8
0 .8 1.2 1.6 2 2.4 2.8 3.2
3 .2 00.4
.4 0 .8 12 16 2 2.4 2 .8 3 .2 0.4 0.8 12 16 2 2.4 28 33.2
.2
Offset
Offse t (km) Offset (km) Offset (km)
Interval velocity analysis (1987) and Schleicher et al. (1993). It is a common-off-

set, amplitude-preserved prestack Kirchhoff depth
after migration migration method. Given a smooth background ve-
An interval velocity analysis after migration was locity model, the P-to-P reflectivity as well as the re-
applied to the Mobil AVO data set. The resulting ve- flection angle as function of depth point and offset
locity model is shown in Figure␣ 7. In principle, any are estimated from the data. Elastic ray Green’s func-
velocity estimation method could have been used to tions are used to propagate the seismic energy in the
estimate a smooth velocity model which is suited for background model. For more details, see Beydoun et
migration. The method used here generates 1-D veal. (1994).
locity models for selected CMPs using a genetic algo- The depth migrated CMP gathers (often called
rithm and performs migration. The flatness of the image gathers, iso-x gathers or coherency panels) of
events in the migrated CMP gathers is used as a glo- five CMPs are presented in Figure␣ 8. The high gain
bal objective function to determine the best velocity shows that in addition to strong reflectors, much
model. weaker signals also were flattened. But some of them
are slightly dipping, indicating that the velocity model
Amplitude-preserved prestack is not optimal. In this figure, curved events are also
visible which indicate that some multiples or wave-
depth migration mode conversions partly remain. An overmigrated
The 2.5-D amplitude-preserved prestack depth event at the CMP at location SPN 528 shows that the
migration technique which we applied to the Mobil use of a velocity model obtained by global optimiza-
AVO data set is an outgrowth of the works of Bleistein tion can produce local inaccuracies.
Fig. 7. Interval velocity model.
65
66
CMP at SPN 852 CMP at SPN 744 CMP at SPN 636 CMP at SPN 528 CMP at SPN 420
OJ OJ OJ OJ OJ
o
'"oo '"oo '"oo '"oo o
." ." ." ." ."

o
'" o
'" o
'"
o
'"oo
o o '"oo
OJ OJ OJ OJ
0 0 0
'"OJ0 0 0
'"
0 0 0 '"
0 0
0 0 0 0 0
."
'". ."
'". ."
'". '".
"
;'.
.'"
;'.
"
~ ~
":;:";: "":;:;: ";::;:" ::r ::r
"" ""
E E E E E
OJ OJ OJ OJ OJ
...
0
...
0
...
0
...'"
0
...
0
0 0 0 0 0
Hanitzsch et al.
OJ OJ OJ OJ OJ
CD CD CD CD CD
'"'"oo '"oo '"oo '"oo '"oo
Fig. 8. Five depth-migrated CMP gathers (time gain for visualization applied).
600 1600 2400 3200 600 1600 2400 3200 600 1600 2400 3200 600
800 1600 2400 3200 800
600 1600 2400 3200
Offset (m) Offset (m) Offset (m) Offset (m) Offset (m)
The event at 2.05␣ km depth between SPN 530 and 490

Quality control of structural result is more isolated than the information in P-impedance
In conventional prestack depth migration, the fi- or the structural result.
nal structural result is obtained by stacking the mi-
grated CMP gathers. For the purpose of quality con-

trol, this stack also can be applied to amplitude-pre- Log seismic calibration
served migrated CMP gathers. In this process, ampli- Interpretation of P- and S-impedance sections to
tudes depending on different reflection angles are detect gas reservoir zones relies on an accurate cali-
summed, resulting in some kind of reflection coeffi- bration of log and seismic data.
cient of an averaged reflection angle. Therefore, this Calibration was performed by directly compar-
step is not amplitude preserved, but for the purpose ing upscaled log data with the near well seismic traces.
of quality control it might be useful for a comparison To achieve satisfactory comparison, we found it nec-
with other non-amplitude-preserved techniques. Be- essary to apply depth shifts of a few meters to log
fore the final stack a long window AGC was applied data to align well defined markers on seismic data.
to balance the traces. Results of this depth calibration between log and
The structural result of our prestack depth mi- seismic are shown in Figure␣ 12 for P- and S- imped-
gration is displayed in Figure␣ 9. The two main reflec- ance sections. The gas zone at 2 km depth is shown
tors (from 1.8 km depth at Well B, SPN 822, to 1.5␣ km for reference.
depth at Well A, SPN 440) and the base of the Creta- A more detailed comparison of log and seismic
ceous (from 2.7␣ km depth at Well B to 2.2␣ km depth at data is shown in Figures 13a and 13b. On these fig-
Well A) are almost continuous. Especially in the east- ures, contrasts in P- and S- impedance measured on
ern part, many more reflections are visible. Diffrac- logs are compared with inversion results of the Well
tions which were present in the unmigrated stacked A. Note the overall good agreement between log and
CMP section (Figure 1 of Keys and Foster, chapter 1 seismic data for both P- and S- waves.
of this book) are removed.
Stable AVO inversion for relative Toward AVO interpretation

Once calibration between log and seismic data is
P- and S-impedance performed, the next step is to verify that the
The migrated CMP gathers and the CMP images seismically derived AVO attributes may be used to
of reflection angles obtained by our 2.5-D amplitude detect gas bearing reservoirs.
preserved Kirchhoff depth migration are used in an Figure␣ 14 illustrates the relationship between P-
AVO inversion procedure to obtain attribute images and S-impedance contrasts for seismic traces at well
which can then be linked to lithology and location A. Based on well-log observations (Figure␣ 4)
petrophysics. The attribute parameters chosen in this we have outlined potential gas zones. The pink and
study are relative P- and S-impedances which we pre- red dots, respectively, correspond to contrasts at the
fer to others, e.g., Shuey’s parameters (Shuey, 1985) top and bottom of the reservoir.
intercept and gradient of reflection coefficient. The Note that if we superpose these gas indicators in
AVO inversion uses singular value decomposition Figures␣ 13a and 13b, we find that there is indeed a
(SVD) of the linearized RPP Zoeppritz equation. The gas indicator at 2050 m from seismic data. However,
estimated relative P- and S-impedance images are many more gas indicators are found seismically that
presented in Figures␣ 10 and␣ 11. The third parameter are not observed at the well.
(relative change of density) cannot accurately be de-
termined.
The P-impedance depth image shows similar fea- Conclusions
tures as the structural result in Figure␣ 9, but some dif- Results of an AVO methodology applied to the
ferences are visible, e.g., between the two main re- Mobil AVO data set are presented. It is important to
flectors. Amplitude variations along reflectors are use a whole amplitude-preserved processing se-
present which may be due to attenuation of signal by quence to estimate physical rock parameters from am-
the multiple suppression. plitudes of seismic data. Tests on synthetic data
The S-impedance depth image also shows the two showed that a τ – p based multiple-suppression
main reflectors but additional events are visible (e.g., method was best in the task of attenuating multiples
in between at SPN 780–680 or below at SPN 640–580). and preserving amplitudes. Nevertheless, the mul-
67
Structural image (western part)
68
l\J
CJl
0
(1) l\J
"0
c+-
:Y
:or
~
N
S oj>.
of>.
l\J
Cll
Ol
840 800 760 720 680 640

SPN
Structural image (eastern part)

l\J
Hanitzsch et al.
CJl
0
l\J (1)
"0
c+-
:Y
:or
~
:>;'
~
N
oj>.
of>.
S
'---'
l\J
Cll
Ol
Fig. 9. Structural result of our prestack depth migration (for quality control, not amplitude preserved).
600 560 520 480 440
SPN
P - impedance (western part)

(\)
l\.l
enOl
t:!
t::J
ro (\)
l\.l
"0
r+
"
:T
~
:>:;"
~
(\)
l\.l
S
'-" ~
>I'>
(\)
l\.l
OJ
CD
840 800 760 720 680 640

SPN
P - impedance (eastern part)

(\)
l\.l
Ol
IJl
t:!
t::J
(\)
l\.l ro
"0
r+
"
:T
~
:>:;"
~
(\)
l\.l
>I'
~> ''-"
S- '
Fig. 10. Relative P-impedance in depth obtained by prestack AVO migration/inversion.

(\)
l\.l
OJ
CD
600 560 520 480 440

SPN
69
Hanitzsch et al.
~
;t
:>;"'
t:l
Depth (km)
r+
S
"0
(1)
l\J
CIl
l\J
l\J
2.4
*'"
CJ)
1.2 1.6 2 2.8
640
440
680
0
co
CD
480
0
co
'<I'
...,
,.-...
...,
,.-...
S - impedance (western part)
S - impedance (eastern part)

...cO ...cO
0, 0,
720
0
r:: C\l r::
... C'-
...
..., Q)
..., Q)
til til
520
0
Q) cO C\l
~ Q) l{)
SPN
Z
SPN
Z
Q)
0.. Q) 0..
[JJ [JJ
() ()
r:: r::
cO cO
760
0
-0 CD -0
Q) C'- Q)
0, 0,
....8 ....8
560
0
CD
l{)
(f) (f)
800
0
0
co 600
0
0
CD
840
12
l\J
l\J
l\J
l\J
*'"
CIl
CJ)
1.6 2 2.4 2.8

~
:>;"'
;t
Depth (km)
t:l
r+
S
"0
(1)
Fig. 11. Relative S-impedance in depth obtained by prestack AVO migration/inversion.
70
- - -
Relative P impedance
....,
- -
..... ...
-
.u.s _5
1.0 m ill_U• •
IIiow- (SPN)
PM 11' "0 .,
2.1....
2.1....01
,so _ __
,.-
.-
-2, ....
·2.1 ' "
Relative S impedance
... 423. 5 43'
200
' .50
2.0
.....
Fig. 12. Comparison between well and seismic relative P- and S-impedance.
71
Hanitzsch et al.
Log vs. seismic 0

I
0
I
RIP
0 0
0
"" N N
""
<0
0
0
I\J
0
0
0
N
0
Gas
Zone I
0
0
~
~N
;:rN
0
SO
N
Col
0
0
""
0
0
I\J
01
0
0 t
Gas
indicators
RIS
I I
0 0 r)
0 0
ro
"" N
""
;;;
0
0
I\J
0
::>
0
Gas
zone
I
-
I\J
0
0
0
~
~N
;:r N
0
SO
N
(.oJ
0
0
""
0
0
N
U\
Fig. 13. Relative P- and S-im- 0
0
pedance: overplot of log and
neighboring seismic traces.
72
P vs. S impedance contrasts

Seismic
0. 2
0.1
RIP 0
- 0.1
0.2
- 0.2 - 0.1 o 0.1 0.2
RIS
Fig. 14. Crossplot of P- vs. S-impedance contrasts in seismic data.
tiple attenuation was the most problematic step of the

processing, partly because amplitudes of the signal References
were also affected. Beydoun, w., Jin, 5., and Hanitzsch, C, 1994, AVO
In this study, we were able to show from log mea- migration and inversion: Are they commutable?:
surements that gas reservoirs have a seismic signa- 64th Ann. Intemat. Mtg., Soc. Expl. Geoph., Ex-
ture that can be detected from AVO attributes. Depth panded Abstracts, 952-955.
images of relative P- and 5- impedances were obtained Bleistein, N., 1987, On the imaging of reflectors in the
by pres tack AVO migration/ inversion. A preliminary earth: Geophysics, 52,931-942. .
interpretation of these images confirmed that the po- Schleicher, J., Tygel, M., and Hubral, P., 1993, 3-D true-
tential gas reservoir defined by log data could be iden- amplitude finite-offset migration: Geophysics, 58,
tified on the seismic data. However, a more refined 1112-1126.
analysis of the data is necessary to characterize and Shuey, R. T., 1985, A simplification of the Zoeppritz
understand the nature of all AVO anomalies observed equations: Geophysics, 50, 609-614.
in the seismic data. Taner, M. T., and Koehler, E, 1981, Surface consistent
corrections: Geophysics, 46,17-22.
Tura, M. A. C, Hanitzsch, C, Beydoun, W. B., Jin, 5.,
Acknowledgments and Fredier, B., 1994, Amplitude preserved process-
We are grateful to Elf Aquitaine for permission to ing: Tests of some multiple attenuation methods:
publish this report. Proceedings of the SEG post-convention workshop
"Prestack Amplitude Preservation," 64th Ann.
Intemat. Mtg., Soc. Expl. Geoph.
73

5
Amplitude-Preserved Processing
and Analysis of the Mobil AVO
Data Set
David E. Lumley1, Dave Nichols2, Christine Ecker,
Thorbjørn Rekdal3, and Arnaud Berlioux
Stanford Exploration Project, Stanford University
Stanford, California
We present our results on amplitude-preserved SEG conducted a research workshop on a compre-
data processing and analysis of the Mobil AVO data hensive seismic and well-log data set as an open bench-
set. First, we apply a source and receiver consistent mark of AVO techniques. As participants in the work-
amplitude balancing to the seismic data, which re- shops, we initially found that the data were so heavily
duces source and receiver amplitude variance from contaminated with multiple reflections (water-column
about 8% and 15%, respectively, to within a few per- peglegs) that it would be nearly impossible to perform
cent scatter. Next, we apply a time-domain conjugate- a reasonable AVO analysis without first removing
gradient multiple-suppression technique to remove multiples, but in a manner that simultaneously pre-
multiple reflection energy and simultaneously preserves the primary AVO response. This led directly to
serve and enhance primary reflection AVO ampli- a new method for amplitude-preserved multiple sup-
tudes. We perform unmigrated AVO analyses and find pression developed by Lumley, Nichols, and Rekdal
that the multiple-suppressed data correlate better with (1994). We believe this method to be a new practical
the well-log data than the unprocessed data. A tool useful for suppressing multiple reflections with-
prestack migration/inversion of the multiple-sup- out compromising subsequent AVO analysis.
pressed data show a clear improvement over We were also surprised to find that raw source
unmigrated AVO analysis and reveal an undrilled and receiver consistent amplitude variations were as
graben block in the center of the line that exhibits a high as 10% and 20%, respectively. These source-re-
positive hydrocarbon indicator anomaly. ceiver amplitude variations cause undesirable scat-
ter in AVO amplitude analysis and can smear any at-
1
Currently at Chevron Petroleum Technology Com- tempt at amplitude-preserved multiple suppression.
pany, La Habra, California This led Lumley and Berlioux to develop a quick and
2
Currently at Geco-Prakla, Gatwick, U.K. robust method for estimating and applying the nec-
3
Currently at PGS Seres, Oslo, Norway essary source-receiver amplitude corrections.
75
Lumley et al.
We compare the effects of amplitude balancing, amplitude-preserved processing step or AVO analy-
multiple suppression, conventional unmigrated AVO sis. Shot-and-receiver consistent amplitude balancing
analysis, and a prestack migration/inversion method. is required to suppress this undesirable amplitude
We show a distinct improvement in the quality of AVO contamination.
information after multiple suppression and in com-

paring prestack migration/inversion results to con-
ventional unmigrated AVO analysis. Amplitude model
We present our results of source- and receiver-
consistent trace amplitude balancing. Our method
Amplitude Balancing first removes the low-wavenumber geologic trend
from source- and receiver-consistent amplitude terms
Amplitude variations by 2-D median filtering and triangular smoothing of
Figure 1 shows a display of trace rms-amplitude the trace rms-amplitude plane. Then the shot and re-
plotted as a function of shot position and offset. The ceiver correction coefficients are calculated by stack-
trace amplitude is calculated in a triangular-tapered ing logarithmic trace amplitudes along the shot and
window on each trace from 5-6 seconds record time, receiver axes separately
after geometric spreading and NMO corrections. This The method is based on a simple theoretical
late time window helps to suppress the effects of model of trace rms amplitudes:
source-receiver directivity and coherent reflection sig-
nal biasing the trace amplitude estimate. The dark At(xs, xr) = Ar(xr) • As(xs) • Ae(xs, xr) • Ae(xs, xr). (1)
vertical stripes in Figure 1 correspond to missing shots
in the data set. Each horizontal band corresponds to a This model is similar to that of Taner and Koehler
single hydrophone group (receiver) in the marine (1981), where At is the trace rms amplitude response
cable, and the grayscale value shows the variable at a particular shot and receiver location xs and xr,
amplitude sensitivity of receivers along the cable. For given as the product of a source-consistent term As, a
example, the two adjacent dark gray horizontal stripes receiver-consistent term Ar, and non-source-receiver-
at about 1 km offset represent two hydrophone groups consistent terms due to variable-reflection earth ge-
which are relatively weak compared to other receiver ology Ae and noise An. A 2-D map of At can be made
groups. The overall amplitude variations are on the by finding the rms amplitude of samples at each (xs,
order of 10-20% of the average amplitude in the plane, xr) trace location within a specified time gate, as pre-
and may cause undesirable systematic scatter in any viously described in Figure 1.
Fig. 1: Trace rms-amplitude map.

Horizontal stripes indicate varia-
tions in hydrophone recording sen-
sitivity; vertical stripes indicate
variations in source strength. The
black vertical stripes are dead shot
gathers.
76
Amplitude-Preserved Processing and Analysis
geologic trend removal has highlighted the horizon-

Regional geology trend tal bands related to receiver–amplitude variation.
It is convenient to express equation (1) as a sum
in the logarithmic domain,
Shot and receiver coefficients
at = as + ar + ae + an, (2) If the noise an is uncorrelated in both the shot and

receiver axis directions, then estimates of the source
where and receiver amplitude balancing coefficients as and
ar can be obtained by directional stacking in the ât
a* = log(A*). (3) plane. Normalized stacking along the shot axis gives
an estimate of ar ,
If an estimate can be made of the amplitude compo-
nent due to variable reflection geology strength, Ae(xs,
(5)
xr), then this regional geologic trend can be subtracted
from equation (2), resulting in,
if as and an are uncorrelated and zero-mean in the shot
ât = at – ae = as + ar + an , (4) direction. Similarly, stacking along the receiver axis
gives an estimate of as ,
where we further assume Ât has been scaled to a mean
value of unity.
We estimate the geology contribution Ae(xs, xr) by
first median-filtering the trace amplitude map At(xs, (6)
xr) to remove noise spikes, and then smoothing the
result with a 2-D triangular operator to get the low
spatial-frequency trend. Our estimate of Ae obtained if ar and an are uncorrelated and zero-mean in the re-
this way is shown in Figure 2. The estimate of the trace ceiver direction.
amplitude without the bias of the geologic trend—At The estimated shot and receiver coefficients are
—is shown in Figure 3. This is equivalent to dividing plotted in Figures 4 and 5, respectively. These are ob-
the image of Figure 1 by the image in Figure 2, or sub- tained by stacking Figure 3 along the receiver and shot
tracting in the logarithmic domain. Note that the 2-D axes, respectively. Note that the shot coefficients vary
Fig. 2: Low spatial-frequency re-

gional geology amplitude trend.
77
Lumley et al.
in amplitude less than 10% due to varying source

strength, whereas the receiver coefficients vary up to
almost 20% due to variable group cable sensitivity. Multiple Suppression
Multiple contamination
Amplitude balanced results Water-bottom pegleg multiples contaminate pri-
The final amplitude balancing coefficients cs(xs) mary reflections and distort the AVO character in the
and cr(xr) can be obtained by exponentiating and in- Mobil data. The adverse effects of multiples can be
verting as and ar: seen in the raw CMP gather and its semblance scan in
Figure 8. From drilling results, two reservoir target
c* = exp(–a*) (7) reflections are expected to be visible at about 2.1 and
2.6 s in the data, but they are almost completely
A plot of the combined source–receiver coeffi- masked by water-bottom multiple reflections. The
cients cs cr is shown in Figure 6. Note that both verti- companion velocity scan shows strong semblance
cal (source) and horizontal (receiver) stripes are clearly energy associated with multiples at a wide range of
visible. Each seismic trace P(xs, xr) can now be bal- traveltimes and stacking velocities, which contami-
anced in a source–receiver-consistent manner such nates primary stacking velocity analysis. Before ac-
that curate velocity, AVO, and migration/inversion analy-
sis can be performed, multiple reflection events need
P̂ (xs, xr) ≈ cs(xs) cr(xr) P(xs, xr) (8) to be suppressed from the data while simultaneously
preserving primary reflection AVO amplitudes.
where P̂ (xs, xr) is the balanced trace data. Figure 7
shows the source- and receiver-consistent balanced
trace amplitude map. Note that the original source Multiple-suppression method
and receiver variations have been largely suppressed Lumley, Nichols, and Rekdal (1994) present their
as directly comparable to Figure 3. There are clear method of amplitude-preserved multiple suppres-
diagonal stripes left in the amplitude map which are sion. An iterative time-domain conjugate gradient
CMP-consistent and, therefore, should not be re- scheme is used to invert for a velocity scan which
moved since they are geology-related. “fits” its associated CMP gather to within a few per-
Fig. 3. Unbiased trace amplitude

obtained by removing the low-fre-
quency regional geology trend.
78
Fig. 4. Shot coefficients.
Fig. 5. Receiver coefficients.

79
Lumley et al.
Shot/Receiver Coefficients
o
()l
0
::!l:
rJJ ()l
(1)
r-
---- rv
:>;"
a
rv
()l
GJ
4 8 12 16 20 24 28
shot location (km)
Fig. 6. Source and receiver amplitude balancing coefficients.
Balanced Trace Amplitude
?
()l
0
::ll-
~ CJ,
r-
:>;"
a rv
rv
()l
GJ
4 8 12 16 20 24 28
shot location (km)
Fig. 7. Balanced trace amplitude map with geologic trend removed.
80
Fig. 8. Mobil CMP gather and its semblance velocity scan. Reservoir target reflec-
tions occur at 2.1 and 2.6 s.
cent misfit error, when a hyperbolic forward model- H resides in the spacetime domain, it has the advan-
ing operator is applied to that velocity scan. This en- tage of being able to accurately avoid frequency-do-
sures that most amplitude and AVO information is main artifacts arising from data mute zones. Further-
accurately preserved by the velocity transform pair. more, the hyperbolic operator allows non-stationary
Next, a primary velocity trend is automatically picked use of offset, time, and cosine operator weighting, as
in the scan by a Monte Carlo method, and a semblance well as rho-filter spectral shaping.
mask is designed on this basis to isolate multiple en- The time-variant nature of the hyperbolic opera-
ergy in velocity space. The amplitude-preserved mul- tor allows for optimal separation of primary and
tiple-suppressed CMP gather is then obtained by multiple velocity energy compared to slant-stack
modeling the isolated multiple reflections and sub- (Beylkin, 1991), parabolic (Hampson, 1986), or time-
tracting them from the original CMP gather. shifted hyperbolic methods (Foster and Mosher, 1992).
Optimal velocity separation is critical for all multiple
suppression techniques based on moveout velocity
Multiple-suppression theory difference, in both a kinematic and dynamic sense.
The method is based upon a space–time operator The method is potentially orders of magnitude faster
which models both multiple and primary reflections and more stable in practical applications than wave-
as time-variant Dix hyperbolas. The hyperbolic equation derived scattering (Carvalho et al., 1991) or
summation/scatter operator H maps points in the surface-consistent methods (Verschuur et al., 1992).
velocity model space m(τ, v) to a CMP gather in the The least-squares estimate of m from Equation (9)
seismic data space d(t, h): requires minimizing the L2 norm of the residual error,
d = Hm (9)
(10)
where h is source-receiver offset, t is two-way with respect to m. The method of conjugate gradients
traveltime, v is Dix rms velocity, and τ is two-way (Gill et al., 1981) provides an iterative L2 approxima-
vertical traveltime (pseudodepth). Since the operator tion m̂ for the exact solution m. The CG method iter-
81
Lumley et al.
ates until a velocity scan m̂ is found which does fit cedures once the run parameters are optimized (e.g.,
the data after forward modeling, to within some speci- no interactive design of velocity space masks), and
fied error tolerance. At this point of “practical con- takes about 1 CPU minute per CMP gather on an HP
vergence,” the L2 velocity scan can be forward-mod- 750 workstation.
eled with the scattering operator H and will accurately

match the input data. Hence, an amplitude-preserv-
ing velocity transform pair has been found. Synthetic data
Since the time-variant hyperbolic operator is op- Figure 9 shows full waveform elastic synthetic
timal for separating multiple and primary energy in seismograms generated at the Well A location using
velocity space, multiple reflection energy may be iso- blocked well-log values and a 1-D Haskell-Thomp-
lated and accurately modeled from the velocity scan son matrix propagator modeling algorithm (Aki and
m̂ without seriously distorting primary energy. Mul- Richards, 1980). The left panel show data modeled
tiple reflections modeled this way can then be sub- without free-surface multiples, but including interbed
tracted from the input CMP gather, resulting in an multiples and both primary and shear-converted P-
amplitude-preserved multiple-suppression tech- wave reflections. The right panel is the same, except
nique. it includes the free-surface multiple reflections.
Figure 10 shows a comparison of the multiple
suppression on the full waveform synthetic data. The
Multiple-suppression results left panel shows the original input data including free-
To examine the effectiveness of the multiple-sup- surface multiples, the center panel is our amplitude-
pression technique, we first tested the method on full- preserved multiple-suppression, and the right panel
wave synthetic data. Once we were satisfied we had is the subtracted estimate of the multiple reflections.
passed this test, we performed multiple suppression Note that, kinematically, the multiple-suppression has
to the entire Mobil line. The method is fully automatic done a good job at removing multiple reflection
in the sense that it requires no manual interactive pro- events. However, the method seems also to be very
Fig. 9. Haskell synthetic CMP gathers. “Primaries” gather (left) is modeled with-
out free-surface multiples but includes interbeds and shear conversions. The
gather on the right includes the extra free-surface multiples. Note the reservoir
reflections at 2.2 and 2.6 s, which have opposite AVO trends.
82
Removed multiples
Offset (km)
Multiple-suppressed Haskell data

Offset (km)
Haskell primaries + multiples

Offset (km)
Fig. 10. Multiple suppression of the Haskell synthetic data. The left panel shows the synthetic
CMP gather including free-surface multiples, the center panel shows the multiple-suppressed
data, and the right panel shows the removed multiples. Note the target AVO trends at 2.2 and 2.6
seconds have been correctly preserved.
83
Lumley et al.
good dynamically in the sense that there is no obvi- For comparative purposes, Figures 13 and 14
ous amplitude distortion of uncovered primary events show stacked sections of the Mobil data made before
from near to far offset. Furthermore, although most and after multiple suppression, respectively. As is of-
primary events are fairly constant in amplitude, the ten the case, stacking is such a low-fidelity process
two reservoir reflections at 2.2 and 2.6 s have retained that it tends to attenuate multiples sufficiently well
the correct (and opposite trend) AVO behavior. in stacked sections. However, the multiple suppres-
Figure 11 shows a tough test of the method that sion has definitely cleaned up deeper parts of the sec-
is not available in field data situations. The left panel tion, especially in the region of horst-graben faulting
is the full waveform data modeled without free-sur- at 2.5–3.5 s and midpoints 20–26 km. Note that the
face multiples, the center panel is the multiple-sup- stacked section comparison is mainly kinematic and
pressed data of Figure 10, and the right panel is the gives little indication of dynamic AVO amplitude pres-
unweighted subtraction of the two to make the re- ervation in the multiple suppression, as will be dem-
sidual data, all plotted at the same scale. Any ampli- onstrated in the subsequent AVO analysis and migra-
tude error in the multiple-suppressed data in the off- tion/inversion sections.
set or time direction will cause reflection events to In summary, our multiple-suppressed gathers
appear in the residual data. However, the residual clearly show uncovered primary reflection events
data are comprised mostly of incoherent noise. There with reasonable AVO behavior and the estimated mul-
are faint traces of residual multiple reflection events tiple reflections show radial birefringence patterns
at the very near offsets, and some residual shear-con- characteristic of water-column pegleg multiples. The
verted energy that occurs at moveout velocities lower stacked sections show that the multiple suppression
than what was modeled in the L2 velocity scans. This has cleaned up deeper parts of the structure associ-
is our best evidence that the method appears to per- ated with horst-graben faulting. This combined evi-
form very well at removing multiple reflections while dence suggests that our multiple-suppression method
simultaneously preserving AVO amplitudes. may work well on both synthetic and field data.
Field data Unmigrated AVO Analysis

Figure 12 shows an application of our method to We present our results of conventional
a single CMP gather from the Mobil data set. The left unmigrated AVO analysis applied to the Mobil data.
panel shows the input data in which multiple reflec- AVO gathers were examined before and after mul-
tions mask the primary target events at 2.1 and 2.6 s. tiple suppression. Hydrocarbon indicator (HCI) sec-
The center panel shows our multiple-suppressed es- tions were computed using near and far offset AVO
timate, and the right panel shows the subtracted mul- amplitudes to try and highlight the top reservoir re-
tiples. flection in both cases. The multiple-suppressed AVO
Note that the three prominent events at 1.8, 2.1, analysis gives a cleaner HCI section and indicates a
and 2.6 s have been cleaned up in the multiple-sup- possible undrilled reservoir in the center graben block.
pressed version. Note also that the top reservoir re-
flection at 2.1 s has the expected amplitude-increas-
ing-with-offset AVO behavior, and the lower target Unmigrated AVO gathers
at 2.6 s has the expected opposite amplitude-decreas- Figure 15 shows amplitude-corrected unmigrated
ing-with-offset AVO trend, as modeled in the full AVO gathers near the Well A location, and Figure 16
waveform synthetics from the well logs. shows the same near the Well B location, before and
Another point of interest is that the raw input after multiple suppression. Two iterations of stack-
gather has a radial birefringence pattern that is typi- ing velocity analysis were performed, one before and
cal of water-column multiples: amplitudes are one after multiple suppression. All multiple-sup-
brighter at the near and far offsets, yet weak in the pressed gathers are NMO-corrected with the better
middle offsets. The x – t radial periodicity of this ef- velocities obtained in the second iteration, whereas
fect is controlled by the water depth and the source original gathers with multiples are NMO-corrected
bandwidth. Note that the estimated multiple reflec- with the inferior first velocity analysis estimates. All
tions in the right panel exhibit this radial birefringence gathers were amplitude corrected for the effects of
pattern but that the multiple-suppressed primaries in geometric spreading and source-receiver directivity.
the center panel do not, which is as it should be.
84
Haskell primaries residual data

Offset (km)
Multiple-suppressed Haskell data

Offset (km)
Haskell primaries
Offset (km)
Fig. 11. Multiple suppression of Haskell synthetic data. The left panel is the original CMP gather
modeled without free-surface multiples, the center panel is the multiple-suppressed data, and the
right panel shows the residual (difference) between the two, all at the same scale. Since the mul-
tiple-suppressed data accurately match the ideal multiple-free synthetics, the residual data con-
tain mostly incoherent noise.
85
Lumley et al.
Removed multiples
Offset (km)
Multiple-suppressed CMP gather

Offset (km)
Raw CMP gather

Offset (km)
Fig. 12. Multiple suppression of the Mobil CMP gather. The left panel shows a raw input CMP
gather, the center panel shows the multiple-suppressed data, and the right panel shows the re-
moved multiples. Note the AVO trend on the target reflections at 2.1 and 2.6 s seems reasonable.
Note also that the radial birefringence pattern characteristic of water-column pegleg multiples is
visible only in the estimates multiples and not the primaries.
86
co
co
0
M
N
M .,-...,
S
~ ~
M
'--"
~
~
co .,.-t
M 0
~
'0
co .,.-t
M
S
0
N
N
N
~
N
co
N
o 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5

time (s)
Fig. 13. Stacked section before multiple suppression. Deep reflections below the unconformity
are masked.
87
Lumley et al.
co
~ co
u
ro
+J 0
M
lf2
'd (\)
Q) M "..-.,.
[j]
[j]
S
~ ~
Q) M
'-"
~ +J
P, ~
Q., CO •..-1
M 0
~ ~
lf2 'D
•..-1
CO
I
Q)
M
S
......,
p, 0
(\)
'M
+J
r-I
(\)
~ (\)
~
~
(\)
CO
(\)
0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5

time (s)
Fig. 14. Stacked section after multiple suppression. Note deep reflections associated with horst-
graben structure underneath the unconformity have been uncovered.
88
Fig. 15. Unmigrated AVO gathers near Well A, before (left) and after multiple suppression (right).
Note that multiples have been overcompensated by the source–receiver directivity correction
but that the gather exhibits a clean and reasonable AVO trend after suppression.
Fig. 16. Unmigrated AVO gathers near Well B, before (left) and after multiple suppression (right).
Note that multiples have been overcompensated by the source–receiver directivity correction
but that the gather exhibits a clean and reasonable AVO trend after multiple suppression.
89
Lumley et al.
The left panels of Figures 15 and 16 show the has been cleaned up considerably compared to Fig-
unmigrated AVO gathers before multiple suppression. ure 17. The shallow event at 1.6–2.0 s is still noisy, but
The right panels show the same after multiple sup- the HCI anomaly at the 2.1–s reservoir reflection is
pression. Note that the source-receiver directivity cor- clearly stronger in S/N ratio. Note the strong anomaly
rection has unreasonably enhanced far offset multiple- also highlighted for the first time at 2.5 s and 15–18
reflection amplitudes. That is because the multiples km midpoint distance. This anomaly occurs in a cen-
are propagating more nearly vertical than the prima- tral graben block along the line, as will be shown in
ries at the far offsets, and so are overcompensated for the next section, and its strength increases in the updip
wide-angle source-receiver directivity. The two fig- direction and is truncated by the updip horst-graben
ures show that the multiple-suppressed gathers have fault. This HCI section definitely would be of more
cleaner primary reflection events, reasonable AVO value to an interpreter in correlating existing well in-
amplitudes, and better moveout velocity correction; formation to an AVO HCI section and in suggesting
all of which should enhance AVO analysis. potential new drilling locations.
Unmigrated HCI sections Prestack Migration/

HCI sections were computed using all full-fold
CMP gathers along the line. Estimates of conventional Inversion
intercept and slope (A, B) and relative-impedance-
contrast parameter sections were obtained from the Migration/inversion method
unmigrated AVO gathers. These showed reasonable-
looking AVO structure but did not show interesting We applied a Kirchhoff prestack migration/inver-
composite multiparameter indicators at the known sion method to the multiple-suppressed Mobil data.
shallow reservoir location. This method is based on previous amplitude-pre-
A good HCI section was obtained as follows. The served prestack depth migration and impedance in-
amplitude-corrected gathers were partially stacked version work, Lumley (1989, 1993a, 1993b), and is re-
into two reflection-angle ranges: 0–15 degrees, and lated to works by Bleistein (1987), Beydoun and
all angles beyond. Call these two parameter sections Mendes (1989), and more recently Schleicher et al.
“near” N and “far” F. A reasonable HCI section was (1993).
then obtained using the composite indicator The method can operate in either the prestack
time or depth migration domains and compensates
HCI = N(N – F). (11) internally for geometric spreading and source-receiver
directivity in a wave-equation-consistent manner. Es-
This N, F technique does not contain as much AVO timates of both reflection angle and reflection ampli-
information as A, B or impedance-contrast sections tude are provided and are combined as a function of
but has a higher S/N ratio. Our indicator is appropri- offset and (pseudo)depth to give the total angle-de-
ate for the shallow reservoir in which amplitude in- pendent reflectivity estimate. Elastic and AVO param-
creases with offset. We did not attempt to refine a sepa- eter estimates can be obtained as a second step given
rate indicator which would highlight the more subtle the migration/inversion angle-dependent reflectivity
amplitude-decreasing-with-offset AVO anomaly at estimates as input.
the deeper reservoir target. For the Mobil data application, we performed
Figure 17 shows the HCI section computed as amplitude-preserved prestack time migrations of con-
described above for the non-multiple-suppressed stant-offset sections. Time migration was favored over
data. White indicates an HCI anomaly of classic am- depth migration because of its speed and robustness
plitude increasing with offset, which is appropriate in this laterally smooth velocity field. Sixty input off-
for the shallow reservoir. Note that the HCI section is set sections were prestack-migrated into ten output
extremely noisy. The shallow reservoir event shows offset sections, in a pseudodepth window of 1–3 s
up as anomalous along most of the line, but unfortu- vertical traveltime. The migration takes about the
nately most shallower events give false anomalies too. same CPU run time as a standard Kirchhoff prestack
This HCI section would be nearly useless to an inter- time migration but uses three times the memory to
preter trying to high-grade a drilling location. store the multiple images necessary to calculate the
Figure 18 shows the HCI section computed using amplitude-preserved reflectivity and reflection-angle
the multiple-suppressed data. Note that the section estimates.
90
Fig. 17. HCI section from unmigrated AVO analysis before multiple suppression. White rep-
resents a classic AVO anomaly of amplitude increasing with offset. Note that the section is so
noisy that it is practically useless.
91
Lumley et al.
~
co
.,..,0
-+-l CO
()
Q)
[fJ 0
,...,
H
U
N
~ ,..., r"\
"d
S
~ ~
Q) ,..., '-../
rtJ +l
rtJ ~
Q) CO .r-!
,..., 0
~
p, ~
1)
~ CO .r-!
,...,
~ S
[fJ
I 0
Q)
N
,....,
P, N
.,.., N
-+-l
~
~ ~
::8 N
CO
N
1.6 2 2.4 2.8

time (s)
Fig. 18. HCI section from unmigrated AVO analysis after multiple suppression. White represents a
classic AVO anomaly of amplitude increasing with offset. This section is much cleaner and shows
a strong AVO anomaly associated with the known reservoir at 2.1 s. Note the new anomaly in the
graben at 2.5 s and 15–18 km.
92
in the previous section. Figure 20 shows the migra-

Migration/inversion results tion/inversion HCI result. Note that the HCI section
Figure 19 shows an example of a prestack migra- is much cleaner than the unmigrated analysis of Fig-
tion/inversion reflectivity (left) and reflection angle ure 18. The shallow event at 1.6–2.0 s is now nearly
iso-x gather (right) located at 15.765 km midpoint dis- completely devoid of a false hydrocarbon anomaly,
tance, in the vicinity of the central graben. The top yet the top reservoir event at 2.1 s still correctly shows
reservoir reflection at 2.05 s clearly exhibits a classic a strong anomaly along the line.
AVO response of amplitude increasing with offset, as The deep AVO anomaly at 2.5 s in the center of
predicted by the full waveform synthetic and the the line is also much stronger than the unmigrated
available well-log data. The reflection at the major AVO analysis shows, and the truncation at the updip
unconformity at 2.25 s also has increasing amplitude horst-graben fault is now clearly in focus. Figure 21
with offset, which may indicate hydrocarbon content, shows a stack of all the amplitude-preserved prestack-
or perhaps a large shear impedance contrast due to migrated reflectivity gathers. Note the near-vertical
overpressure across the unconformable boundary. faulting at the right side of the section under the
Finally, the large reflection at 2.45 s has a large in- unconformity. The down-thrown graben block in the
crease in amplitude with offset corresponding to the center at 2.5 s from 15–20 km is now clearly visible,
updip segment along the down-thrown graben, very and the amplitude of the dominant negative reflec-
near to the updip horst-graben fault truncation as tion seems to increase in brightness in the updip di-
shown in Figures 20 and 21. This classic AVO response rection. Both the amplitude-preserved migrated sec-
suggests that perhaps gas-charged hydrocarbons have tion and the migration/inversion HCI section are con-
accumulated updip in this graben structure. We have sistent with gas accumulating updip, trapped against
labeled this potential well location as “Well D.” the updip horst-graben fault.
Using the migrated AVO and angle gathers from In this example, the combination of amplitude-
the prestack migration/inversion, an HCI section was preserved multiple suppression and prestack migra-
computed in an analogous manner to the description tion/inversion seem to provide much better informa-
Fig. 19. Migration/inversion reflectivity (left) and reflection angle (right) gathers
near the central graben. The angle contours start at 5 degrees at the near offset and
increase in 5-degree increments. There is about 35 degrees of reflection illumina-
tion angle at 2.0 s pseudodepth.
93
Lumley et al.
~
0
.r-!
~
U
Q)
UJ
H
U
,-..,
l
S
~ ~
'-"
0
'A .j-l
lfl ~
H
Q)
:>
~
H
~
~
0
.r-!
~
lU
H
Q{)
.r-!
1.6 2 2.4 2.8

time (s)
Fig. 20. Migration/inversion AVO analysis after multiple suppression. Note that the section is
much cleaner than either unmigrated AVO analysis sections, and that the top reservoir at 2.1 s is
still strongly anomalous as expected from well-log data. The new HCI anomaly at 2.5 s in the
central graben is clearly truncated updip by the horst-graben fault.
94
co
~
0
.
...., CO
+l
(1J
~ 0
M
QJJ
.
....,
~ N
M 1"""'\
"d S
Q)
~ ~
rrJ M
'-/
rrJ +l
Q)
~
~ CO .r-i
0, M 0
~
P, 'D
;:J CO .r-i
UJ
M
S
I
Q) 0
r-I
N
~
.
....,
+l
N
r-I N
~
~ ~
N
CO
N
1.6 1.8 2 2.2 2.4 2.6

time (s)
Fig. 21. True-amplitude prestack migration. Note the near-vertical faulting to the right of the
section under the unconformity. Also note that the negative reflection at 2.5 s in the central
graben becomes increasingly bright updip and is truncated against the horst-graben fault. This
is consistent with gas-charged hydrocarbons accumulating updip, and represents a potentially
new drill-site location.
95
Lumley et al.
tion needed to high-grade drilling locations than ei-

ther unmigrated AVO analysis or nonamplitude-pre- References
served multiple attenuation. Aki, K., and Richards, P. G., 1980, Quantitative seis-
mology: Theory and methods: W. H. Freeman and
Co., New York.

Conclusion Beydoun, W. B., and Mendes, M., 1989, Elastic ray-
Our group at the Stanford Exploration Project has Born l-2 migration/inversion: Geophys. J., 97,151-
focused on amplitude-preserved processing and 160.
analysis of the Mobil AVO data. We have shown that Beylkin, G., 1991, Discrete radon transform in
source-receiver consistent amplitude variations are as Gardner, G. H. F., and Lu, L., Eds., Slant-stack pro-
large as 10% and 20%, respectively, and demonstrated cessing:: Soc. Expl. Geophys., 344-353.
a quick and robust method for performing the re- Bleistein, N., 1987, On the imaging of reflectors in the
quired amplitude balancing corrections. Multiple re- earth: Geophysics, 52, 931–942.
flections seriously contaminate primary AVO re- Carvalho, P. M., Weglein, A. B., and Stolt, P. H., 1991,
sponse in the Mobil data in CMP gather and HCI sec- Examples of a nonlinear inversion method based
tion comparisons. We present a new method for sup- on the T matrix of scattering theory: Application
pressing undesirable multiple reflections while pre- to multiple suppression: 61st Ann. Internat. Mtg.,
serving AVO information along primary reflection Soc. Expl. Geophys., Expanded Abstracts, 1319–
events. The method is derived from least-squares con- 1322.
jugate-gradient inverse theory applied to time-vari- Foster, D. J., and Mosher, C. C., 1992, Suppression of
ant Dix hyperbolic operators, and is demonstrated to multiple reflections using the Radon transform:
be effective on full waveform synthetics and the Mobil Geophysics, 57, 386–395.
field data. Finally, we have shown that prestack mi- Gill, P. E., Murray, W., and Wright, M. H., 1981, Prac-
gration/inversion analysis is superior to unmigrated tical optimization: Academic Press.
AVO analysis of the Mobil data. Our results correlate Hampson, D., 1986, Inverse velocity stacking for mul-
well with a known reservoir reflection from well-log tiple elimination: 56th Ann. Internat. Mtg., Soc.
data, and we find what appears to be an as-yet-un- Expl. Geophys., Expanded Abstracts, Session:
drilled hydrocarbon reservoir in a large central gra- S6.7.
ben block underlaying the major structural Lumley, D., Nichols, D., and Rekdal T., 1994, Ampli-
unconformity. tude-preserved multiple suppression: Stanford
Exploration Project Report, 82, 25–46.
Lumley, D. E., 1989, Kirchhoff prestack depth migra-
Acknowledgments tion: Imaging conditions and amplitude recovery:
We thank Stew Levin for his efforts in helping to 59th Ann. Internat. Mtg., Soc. Expl. Geophys., Ex-
organize our research seminar during his visit at SEP, panded Abstracts, 1336.
for helping to unload, sort, and preprocess the data, Lumley, D. E., 1993a, Angle-dependent reflectivity
and for his many valuable suggestions during our estimation: 63rd Ann. Internat. Meeting, Soc. Expl.
brainstorming sessions. We also acknowledge valued Geophys., Expanded Abstracts, 746–747.
seminar contributions from Bob Clapp and Yetmen ——— 1993b, Kirchhoff prestack impedance inver-
Wang that helped illuminate problems related to the sion: A gas reservoir pilot study: Stanford Explo-
Mobil data but do not appear explicitly in this paper. ration Project Report, 77, 211-230.
We commend Mobil Oil for releasing this AVO data Schleicher, J., Tygel, M., and Hubral, P., 1993, 3-D true-
set and thank Bob Keys for traveling out to visit us amplitude finite-offset migration: Geophysics, 58,
and discuss the relevant issues. Thorbjørn Rekdal’s 1112–1126.
postdoctorate at SEP was partially funded by Norsk Taner, M. T., and Koehler, F., 1981, Surface consistent
Hydro and the Norwegian Research Council. This corrections: Geophysics, 46, 17–22.
research was made possible by the generous funding Verschuur, D. J., Berkhout, A. J., and Wapenaar, C. P.
of the Sponsors of the Stanford Exploration Project A., 1992, Adaptive surface-related multiple elimi-
under the excellent direction of Prof. Jon Claerbout. nation: Geophysics, 57, 1166–1177.
96
6
A Comparison of AVO Analysis

Techniques
J. E. Malloy, K. L. Woller, and D. D. McAdow

Mobil Oil Company
Three different methodologies for estimating AVO analysis attempts to estimate elastic prop-
compressional (P) and shear (S) wave reflectivities erties of the subsurface from variations in amplitude
were examined using the Mobil North Sea data set. in surface seismic data. Because independent infor-
All three approaches involved estimating intercept mation about the properties of the subsurface is often
and slope values from the seismic data and then con- unavailable, AVO analysis tends to be qualitative in
verting these intercept and slope estimates into P- and nature. It is used to highlight changes in elastic prop-
S-wave reflectivity. The first approach used the tradi- erties from the background trend rather than to de-
tional method of estimating intercept and slope from termine the elastic properties themselves. The Mobil
unmigrated NMO corrected CMP gathers. The sec- North Sea data set provided a unique opportunity to
ond also estimated intercept and slope from NMO quantify AVO analysis. The data set included seismic
corrected CMP gathers, but the estimation was per- data, well-log data from two wells on the seismic line,
formed after common-offset time migration. The third and petrophysical data from the logged intervals. The
technique inverts for intercept and slope as part of well-log data provide an independent means to cali-
the imaging process using a linearized form of the brate the estimates of subsurface properties obtained
wave equation. from the seismic data.
Comparisons with well-log data show that esti- The objective of this work is to compare different
mates of P- and S-wave reflectivity obtained from a methodologies of estimating elastic parameters from
least-squares fit of amplitude versus offset in CMP surface seismic data. The parameters that are esti-
gathers failed to match trends seen in the log data. mated are P-wave and S-wave reflectivity. The param-
Reflectivities obtained from the prestack inversion did eter estimation involves first determining intercept
match the log data trends. None of the techniques, and slope values from the seismic data and then con-
however, match the well-log data in detail. verting these values to reflectivity. Three different
approaches to estimating these reflectivities are ex-
amined. The first approach is to do a least-squares fit
of amplitude versus offset using unmigrated CMP
97
Malloy, Woller, and McAdow
gathers. The second approach does a least-squares fit plications to the analysis. Diffractions caused by the
of amplitude versus offset using common offset mi- faulting should be taken care of via migration.
grated CMP gathers. The third approach inverts for The seismic line intersected two wells. The wells
intercept and slope using a linearized form of the are designated Well A and Well B. For this study only
wave equation. data from Well A was used because it was the most
According to Aki and Richards (1980), for angles complete data set. In Well A, compressional wave ve-
of incidence less than approximately 30%, the P-wave locity, density, and shear-wave velocity were acquired
reflection coefficient (RP) can be expressed as in the interval from 1000 to 3000 m. These curves are
shown in Figure 1. The depths are measured depths
RP(θ) = A + Bsin2(θ) from Kelly bushing at 17.5 m above sea level. The
water depth at this location is 355 m.
where A is the intercept or normal incidence P-wave
reflectivity, B is the slope or change in P-wave reflec-
tion coefficient with offset, and θ is the angle of inci- Methodology
dence. Spratt et al. (1993) showed that for VP/VS ratios In all three methodologies discussed in this study,
of around 2, the slope can be related to shear wave intercept and slope estimates are obtained from the
reflectivity by seismic data using the Aki and Richards model. These
slope and intercept estimates are then related to RP
B ≈ RP - 2RS and RS.
The first methodology looked at in this study es-
where RS is the S-wave reflection coefficient. timates intercept and slope from NMO corrected CMP
Two main assumptions of all three approaches gathers. The intercept and slope are estimated from a
presented in this study are that locally the earth can least-squares fit of amplitude versus offset along iso-
be considered horizontal [i.e., an input V(z) model is time lines across the gathers. Using the Spratt et al.
adequate for intercept and slope estimation] and that (1993) approximation, this yields unmigrated esti-
we are dealing with only P-wave reflections in the mates of RP and RS. These RP and RS sections are then
data. poststack time migrated in order to facilitate compari-
To compare the seismic data and the well-log data, son with the well data.
crossplots of RP versus RS were used over various geo- The second method also estimates intercept and
logic intervals. Using the concept of the fluid line slope from CMP gathers, but the data are CMP gath-
given by Foster et al. (1993), the best fit line through ered after common offset time migration. As with the
these RP, RS pairs should represent the background first method, intercept and slope are estimated along
relationship between P- and S-wave reflectivity in iso-time lines.
these intervals. Deviations from this trend should, in The migration algorithms used in the first two
theory, represent changes in elastic parameters. methods are commercially available “off-the-shelf”
phase shift and Kirchhoff modules, respectively, and
are not designed to explicitly preserve amplitude in-
Data formation, although the amplitude-preserving char-
The seismic data comprise 1001 shot records ac- acteristics of the algorithms are deemed acceptable
quired in the structural dip direction. The shot and in a relative sense.
group intervals were both 25 m. Each shot record con- The third method inverts the seismic data for in-
sisted of 120 data channels each with a 6-s length. The tercept and slope. The prestack seismic inversion al-
near offset was 262 m, yielding a maximum offset at gorithm is designed to construct the best estimate for
the far receiver of 3237 meters. The nominal cable the relative changes in the acoustic impedance of the
depth was 10 m, and the gun array was positioned at subsurface from seismic data recorded at the surface.
6 m depth. The method is based on a linear approximation for
Although the overall seismic data quality is good, the reflected or scattered seismic wavefield:
water bottom and interbed multiples are a major
source of noise in these data. An effective demultiple D(xr,xs,ω)
process is needed before AVO analysis.
At a large scale, structurally the subsurface in this = ∫∫F(ω)A(xr,xs,x’,z’)R(x’,z’,θ)cos2(θ)exp{-iω[τr+τs]}dx’dz’
area is consistent with the AVO V(z) model. At a finer (1)
scale, faulting and stratigraphic changes can add com-
98
A Comparison of AVO Analysis Techniques
where R(x,z,θ) = R0(x,z) + S(x,z) tan2(θ). This linear ap-

proximation assumes that the medium contains no ∫ D(xr,xs,ω) - ∫ ∫F(ω)AR cos2(ω)exp{-iω[τr+ τs]}dx’dz’∫ 2
out-of-plane velocity variations, although it accounts (2)
for three-dimensional wave propagation effects.
In Equation (1), In Equation (2), D(xr,xs,ω) represents the recorded

data after elimination of the direct and critically re-
D(xr,xs,ω) is the scattered wavefield due to a source fracted waves. The error criterion is the L2 norm in-
at xs, recorded at a receiver xr, duced by an inner product over the set of all sources,
receivers, and frequencies. The minimum of Equation
R(x’,z’,) is the linear approximation for the reflec- (2) is the solution of the normal equations,
tion coefficient at the image point (x,z) as a
function of incidence angle, formed by the 〈K(x’,z’)cos2(θ(x,z),D(xr,xs,ω)〉
raypaths from the source to the image point to
the receiver, = ∫ ∫ 〈K(x,z)cos2(θ(x,z),K(x’,z’)cos2(θ(x’,z’))〉 R0(x’,z’) dx’ dz’
R0(x,z) is the normal incidence reflection coeffi- + ∫ ∫ 〈K(x,z)cos2(θ(x,z),K(x’,z’)sin2(θ(x’,z’))〉 S(x’,z’) dx’ dz’,
cient at the image point (x,z),
S(x,z) is the gradient or slope of the reflection co- 〈K(x’,z’)sin2(θ(x,z),D(xr,xs,ω)〉

efficient at normal incidence,
= ∫ ∫ 〈K(x,z)sin2(θ(x,z),K(x’,z’)cos2(θ(x’,z’))〉 R0(x’,z’) dx’ dz’
ts(x,z) is the traveltime for a wave to propagate
from a source at xs to an image point at (x,z), + ∫ ∫ 〈K(x,z)sin2(θ(x,z),K(x’,z’)sin2(θ(x’,z’))〉 S(x’,z’) dx’ dz’,
tr(x,z) is the traveltime for a wave to propagate where K(x,z) = F(ω)A(xr,xs,x,z) exp{-iω[τr + τs]}. (The
from an image point at (x,z) to a receiver at xr , dependence of K on the measurement variables xr, xs,
and ω is omitted to clarify the notation.)
F(ω) = 4(2π)1/2 |ω|3/2exp{-i(π,/4)sign(ω)}, and ω An approximate solution for the normal equations
is angular frequency, (ω = 2πf), where f is fre- can be obtained by neglecting the interaction between
quency in cycles per second). adjacent image points so that the normal equations
reduce to the 2 x 2 matrix problem
The amplitude term is given by
〈K(x’,z’)cos2(θ(x,z),D(xr,xs,ω)〉
A(xr,xs,x,z) = Ar(x,z)As(x,z)/{ρV (1/σr + 1/σs) }
2 1/2
= 〈K(x,z)cos2(θ(x,z),K(x’,z’)cos2(θ(x’,z’))〉 R0(x’,z’)
where ρ(z) and V(z) are the background density and
background velocity of the medium, Ar(x,z) is the + 〈K(x,z)cos2(θ(x,z),K(x’,z’)sin2(θ(x’,z’))〉 S(x’,z’)
amplitude spreading factor for a wave propagating (3a)
along a raypath from the image point (x,z) to the re-
ceiver xr, and σr is the “ray parameter.” The equations 〈K(x’,z’)sin2(θ(x,z),D(xr,xs,ω)〉
for spreading factors and ray parameters are given
by Bleistein (1985). = 〈K(x,z)sin2(θ(x,z),K(x’,z’)cos2(θ(x’,z’))〉 R0(x’,z’)
The spreading factors and ray parameters are
functions of the background velocity profile, V(z). + 〈K(x,z)sin2(θ(x,z),K(x’,z’)sin2(θ(x’,z’))〉 S(x’,z’)
Considerable computational savings are achieved (3b)
from the assumption of a one-dimensional back-
ground velocity profile. This assumption also elimi- for each image point (x,z).
nates the need to provide a background density pro- This system of equations can be solved for R0(x,z)
file because the density term cancels in Bleistein’s for- and S(x,z) for each image point (x,z). The inner prod-
mula for the spreading factor. ucts on the left-hand side of Equations (3a) and (3b)
The seismic inversion algorithm seeks to deter- map the surface seismic data D(xr,xs,ω) into a subsur-
mine R0(x,z) and S(x,z) so that the following error cri- face image point (x,z). Depth migration operators also
terion is minimized. map surface seismic data into image points. Beylkin
99
(1985) showed that the transformations given by the errors in estimating the shear-wave reflectivity come
inner products on the left-hand side of Equations (3a) from the methodology used in both approaches and
and (3b) are equivalent to depth migration operators not the particular migration algorithm.
since they produce depth images that properly locate
the position of discontinuities or reflectors in the sub-

surface. Note that the only differences between the Method 3
left-hand side of Equation (3a) and the left-hand side In this approach we invert for intercept and slope
of Equation (3b) are the trigonometric weights. In as part of the imaging process. Figures 6 and 7 show
Equation (3a), the trigonometric weight enhances near the RP and RS estimates. These sections show a much
offset data, whereas the weighting function in Equa- better agreement between the compressional and
tion (3b) emphasizes far offset data corresponding to shear-wave reflectivities. This seems much more rea-
large angles of incidence. Thus the left-hand term of sonable considering how well compressional and
Equation (3a) represents a near-offset depth migra- shear velocities track one another in the well. This
tion of the surface data; the left-hand term of Equa- suggests that divorcing intercept and slope estima-
tion (3b) is the corresponding far-offset depth-migration from the imaging process, as the first two meth-
tion image. ods do, leads to errors in the estimation. This is espe-
Implementation of the algorithm is accomplished cially true of slope or shear-wave estimation. In gen-
by computing the near offset and far offset depth mi- eral, P-wave reflectivity determination seems to be
grations, as specified by the left-hand side of Equa- more robust.
tion (3). Then, the 2 x 2 system of Equations (3a and
3b) is solved at each image point (x,z) to determine
R0(x,z) and S(x,z). R0(x,z) is the depth image of the rela- Well/Seismic Comparison
tive changes in acoustic impedance, or the “true am- To compare seismic estimates of RP and RS with
plitude” depth migration of the seismic data. This im- the data from Well A, the well logs were stretched to
age is the final product of the inversion program. time using the velocity function employed in the AVO
analysis. These times logs (P-wave, S-wave, and den-
sity) were then used to calculate RP and RS. Crossplots
RP and RS Estimates of RP and Rs calculated from both the seismic data and
the well data were then used to compare the respec-
Method 1 tive estimates.
As stated earlier, RP and RS estimates were made
on unmigrated CMP gathers and then poststack mi-
grated prior to comparison to the well-log data. Fig- Method 1
ures 2 and 3 show a portion of the migrated RP and RS Figure 8 is a crossplot showing the seismic esti-
sections, respectively, from the vicinity of Well A. The mates of RP and RS and the best fit line through these
similar nature of the P-wave and S-wave logs in Fig- data versus a best fit line through the well data over
ure 1 suggests that RP and RS should also be quite simi- this same time interval. This time interval corresponds
lar in appearance. This is not the case using this meth- to sediments of the same age and in the same geo-
odology. The events on the shear-wave section are logic group. This approach did not preserve the back-
much more noisy and discontinuous, and it is hard to ground trend and can be seen from the disagreement
believe that this represents true changes in the elastic in the best fit lines.
properties of the subsurface.
Method 2
Method 2 Figure 9 is a crossplot showing the seismic esti-
With this method RP and RS estimates were from mates of RP and RS and the best fit line through these
prestack time migrated CMP gathered data. Figures data versus a best fit line through the well data over
4 and 5 show the RP and RS sections, respectively, and the same interval shown in Figure 8. Again this ap-
are the same portions of data shown in Figures 2 and proach did not preserve the background trend and
3. Again the RP section is much less noisy and more can be seen from the disagreement in the best fit lines.
continuous than the RS estimate. The similar appear- However, estimating RP and RS from prestack time
ance of the RS sections in Figures 3 and 5 suggests that migrated CMP gathers did result in a background
trend which is in closer agreement with the well data.
100
closely matched the well data. None of the approaches

Method 3 was able to generate reflectivities that agreed with the
The final crossplot in Figure 10 shows the com- well-log data in detail. Further work remains to be
parison of the prestack inversion and the well data. done to better understand the discrepancy between
Here the trend as estimated from the seismic data well and seismic data.
matches quite closely with the trend seen in the log
data. The inversion has preserved the background
trend and gives us hope that deviations from this Acknowledgments
trend can be related to actual elastic parameters. R. G. Keys is responsible for the prestack inver-
Figure 11 shows a comparison of RP from the in- sion code, and D. J. Foster provided much useful dis-
version versus RP from the well over the time interval cussion and insight into AVO analysis.
of interest. Figure 12 is a comparison of the seismic RS
and the well RS. Although the trends have been pre-
served by the inversion, these inversion and well data References
do not agree in detail. One explanation for the dis- Aki, K., and Richards, P. G., 1980, Quantitative seis-
agreement is the discrepancy in the wavelet between mology—theory and methods: W. H. Freeman
the seismic data and the log generated synthetic. Also, and Co.
only a background V(z) model is used in the inver- Beylkin, G., 1985, Imaging of discontinuities in the
sion. No density information is used. These two things inverse scattering problem by inversion of a
suggest further areas of research. causal generalized Radon transform: J. Math.
Phys., 26, 99-106.
Bleistein, N., 1986, Two and one half dimensional in
Conclusions plane wave propagation: Geophys. Prosp., 34,
We have presented three different methodologies 686-703.
for estimating P-wave and S-wave reflectivities from Foster, D. J., Smith, S. W., Dey-Sarkar, S., and Swan,
surface seismic data. These methodologies were ap- H. W., 1993, A closer look at hydrocarbon indi-
plied to the Mobil AVO data set. The two approaches cators: 63rd Ann. Internat. Mtg., Soc. Expl.
which involved estimating intercept and slope val- Geophys., Expanded Abstracts, 731-733.
ues from NMO-corrected CMP gathers did not repro- Spratt, R. S., Goins, N. R., and Fitch, T. J., 1993, Pseudo-
duce the trends in RP and RS as seen in the well-log shear—the analysis of AVO, in Castagna, J. P., and
data. On the other hand, the prestack inversion did Backus, M. M., Offset dependent reflectivity—
estimate reflectivity values which defined a trend that theory and practice of AVO analysis: Soc. Expl.
Geophys., 37-56.
101
102
5
'2 P-wavc velocity
......
< 4
(1)
0-
,<~. 3
[
en
2
'--"
I
.,....."r"'f\,.""-"iI;..,.l~lJ\••/,!;\v....~)MLU,~~.).\J,~. .,L~(~\.r.J,......,!~,jr'.JA,W.~~A"
S-wavc velocity
o
1200 14CX> 1600 1800 20m 2200 2400 2600 2800 :WOO
Measured Depth (metcrs)
2.g
2.6
~ 2.4
0
g 2.2
en
Q'
6Q
2
g~- 1.8
1.6
1.4
1200 1400 1600 1800 2000 2200 2400 2600 2XOO 3000
Measurcd Depth (ll1e(er~)
Fig. 1. P-wave, S-wave velocity, and density for Well A. (a) P-wave and S-wave velocities.
Fig. 2. Rp section estimated from unmigrated CMP gathers. Rp estimate was then poststack
time migrated.
103
104
time migrated.
Fig. 3. Rs section estimated from unmigrated CMP gathers. Rs estimate was then poststack
Fig. 4. Rp section estimated from common offset time-migrated CMP gathers.
105
106
Fig. 5. Rs section estimated from common offset time-migrated CMP gathers.

Fig. 6. Rp section estimated via prestack inversion.

107
108
Fig. 7. Rs section estimated via prestack inversion.
Viking Group at Well A - Postslack Migration

2.5
Poslslack Migration 0
Well lit
2 Mil{S'ation 111
o
o
1.5 o o
o o
o
o :0 «>
000 (fo
"."" ...........................
0 0 """'"
f:> "",
o o.
0.5 ~O ~ 00""'"
o o 0. , """" o
. ~ ",
~ <0 0 """ <9
'. """",,""0 o
VJ
~ o o 0° " " o
(>.{l••••••• ,.,. : ~
., •••••• ~ Q 0 : 0 ' 0 o
.•.•..... :0
-0.5
." " ........... "......... ~0 .
_".,'" 00 0 $
_ .... •••••••• ••••• 0 V'
A
1 I-:-; o
0
0
0 0
-1.5 0/
0
00
0
-2 00
o
-2.5 ,L-______J -_ _ _ _ _ __ L_ _ _ _ _ _ ~L_ ______ ~ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ L_ _ _ _ _ _ ~L_ ______ ~ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ L_ _ _ _ _ _ ~ ______ ~
-I -0.8 -0.6 -0.4 -0.2 o 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8

Rp
109
Fig. 8. Crossplot showing Rp/Rs trends for the poststack migration and well data over the Viking interval.
Viking Group at Well A - Prestack Migration
110
2.5
Prestack Migration <)
Well fit
2 :0 Migration fit
o
0
0 0
1.5 <)
<)
0 0
00 o o
<> <>0 ~
o 0 .... ,.. ".,
O o 0 .......... .
o 00 ......... .
~oo
<> <l(>
<> <> <> ........................ 0
0.5
Vl
.
()
A·········
v:~ .....
.cr::
.0<>.0. 0: . .••....... ~ ••.
o •• ; • ...1(:> 0
o
o ..... ,.. ,'()'
, ... "., ..
............... 0:0
000 0 o
-0.5 ""', ..... " o
" ... , ... "'. & o o o
00 o ~
,., •• ,,1"
o
-1 ~ ...... """" o 0
o o o
00
o o
o o o
o
-1.5 o
o o
-2
-1 -0.8 -0.6 -0.4 -0.2 o 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8
Rp
Fig. 9. Crossplot showing Rp/Rs trends for the prestack migration and well data over the Viking interval.
Viking Group at Well A - Inversion
Inversion <)
Well fit ··· ... 1.....
Inversion fit ..7" ••••
.'
.'
.'
..'
.....,.,.,.....
o o
~ .'
$ ..........
o o .. '
0.5 () ., .. "
0 : 000 , ,,,
.. .'
o ",-",,,
.'
o o
<$V
o
<) 00
<)
<:> o
VJ o
~ o o
o <)
<)
~
<>
<)
<>
-0.5
<)
8
<)
o <)
o
-I
-I -0 .8 -0.6 -0.4 -0.2 o 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8

Rp
111
Fig. 10. Crossplot showing Rp/Rs trends for the prestack inversion and well data over the Viking interval.
WelVlnversion Rp Comparison
112
Pre-slack Inversion
Well Dala
;/\ : "'.
. .
v
.... .;
2000 2050 2100 2150 2200 2250 2300 2350

Time (msec)
Fig. 11. Comparison of Rp derived from the well-log data and Rp estimated from the seismic data via prestack inversion.
Well/Inversion Rs Comparison
Pre-stack Inversion
Well Data
,
;:,
".;
;.. '
2000 2050 2100 2150 2200 2250 2300 2350

Time (msec)
113
Fig. 12. Comparison of Rs derived from the well-log data and Rs estimated from the seismic data via prestack inversion.

7
Trace Inversion of North Sea Test

Line with Interpretive Directions
N. S. Neidell, R. P. Mullin, M. Smith and E. E. Cook

N. S. Neidell and Associates
Houston, Texas
line study can best be assessed. Also, the validity of

Abstract indicated anomalies can be put into a more practical
A seismic profile of recent-vintage, good-quality context.
data along with certain other subsurface information The limited local data diminish to a substantial
was provided for trace inversion processing. Time degree the certainty of results obtained. Nevertheless,
constraints for the study only allowed that the well suggestions for additional studies are offered to cor-
logs could be used for straightforward correlative roborate those positive leads which were obtained.
purposes. Also future directions are noted for the North Sea with
Evaluation of the inversion encompasses both the the understanding that the present study has contrib-
effectiveness of the data display as well as assessment uted to this overall view.
of the information content which is enhanced and
preserved. With limited ground-truth, only the cred-
ibility and consistency of interpretive conclusions can Geologic Background
help establish validity. This is the procedure adapted The North Sea basin (Figure 1) contains virtually
here. every age and type of rock and every conceivable type
Any interpretation must be presented as fully as of structure and hydrocarbon trap that has yet been
possible against a more general background, and de- encountered. There have been at least eight tectonic
tails of data treatment and the interpretive procedure movements in North Sea history (Ziegler, P. A., 1973;
also must be well described in order that the results Ziegler,␣ W.␣ H., 1973), all of which have influenced oil
can be fully appreciated. Such an approach was taken entrapment as it is known today. Also, there are sev-
here. Our approach considers the North Sea Basin in eral major unconformities which become evident in
general before focusing on the study area. Velocity, different parts of the basin. Additionally, tectonic
the data treatment, and the seismic expression of movements have given rise to many faulted compres-
lithologies, all relevant to this work, are addressed. sional structures, and in some areas where Permian
In this way, the interpretive results from this single Salt has experienced substantial depth of burial,
domes have formed.
115
r~
.___ __ r__[.~
"1' ___. 1" L_
l"___
__ '"r_
______ ,- ._ ::_~._i~_._:·_ __ _ 1__ -
,____.________:_-~_ ._[__~_ :_~ ___r).__ _
116
'/ )
Stratigraphic Cotumn
Colul1ln - North Viking Graben (\ ".
rLlO~EljE
rouat:EllE
,,/(' /
I '.W)CEfiE
'-IlOCEriE "::,~~;:~.~Im' ~ I
.- =~~~::..::--=
1r) Ur,()CEtlE
U)nOAtAlw -::-=::-=-=:::-~-:- =-=-==0=---==
:: =::-=-::=-=-:n=::..::::..::~-==
~jr) \~
. ~l7
Gn011p
F.OCfIlF -u ===-=-==-=~=-==--=--==:
~==-:=--=== ::":--;:';=.11 =-=.:-::
I' ALEOCEIIE n~~~~"r!IO~~J~~~g~'
urren
I Gnoup
"'""'
3 ~1[i[~d
X
~
~J=~
cnOMER ==n
51
~I I cnOP.'~R
Lf")WEn
lr)WEn KliOtl
KIIOIl
GnOUp
Gnoup
~
UPI'ER VIKIIiG
VU<lIIG
l~pPE~.1 OflOUP
onoul'
U
u
,- --
;;;
in
'A
~I WOOLf. onEl1f
a: "n""
Gnoup
;; - !.or,"
OUI/lilt
~I1-"'OOlEl
---- GROUP
Neidell et al.
LOWER
LOWEn
UPPEn
I _ 5!o8
,.
u ------
in m::ORE. ,
~I MIDDLE
M!DOLe
GROUP
~
It.1!1t~~
- -----------
------- ------- '-
:::==-.--:.
HISI n., ===-_--=-
-------------
lOWEn
lOWEJ1 sou
i::I~lliS::f~-~~~~ -11" IIlfn",
(,(0 - 54-
5""
g UPPER
uprER
~
w '0&"
~
~ LO Y/ER
LOV/EFt
C't (}
CAnSOIl.
CAns o ".
-------
--- ------ -- --'-- - ---------_. - --- ---- - - -- - -- -1.\"1-
·o ,. ~
.. , ." ,,' on •
. (} .. ~ .... " 0' 011 .n" n •• ,~ lin .... " A. .. "'ot,,,'~.1 !,"~ •• I.·,
lo,t:
t>1 t: JJ C.",.b-II
C,"'ob_n .n~ f. 0,''' . . . . ..
·11~
,~ ·n " ' ~ g.
. ~rn ~f'~
a,
~I 'hI "~, ... , ' . .. Oil .nd 0 •• flOI,,..' -
~<II,""
.<lIO. ~ ~, .. u IJ" ... ~.'.
'-1 ._ !D ~ ••. I I .1
'j)"
-!d"
Fig. 1. Structural elements and hydrocarbon discoveries in North Sea Basin with stratigraphic column—
North Viking Graben.
Trace Inversion of North Sea Test Line
Many of these salt structures are in the nature of On the British side of the North Sea, similar
salt pillows. However, in deeper parts of the Zechstein aeolian Rotliegendes sands are seen in Yorkshire al-
basin, large domes with almost vertical sides can be though they are much shallower than at Groningen.
found. Although on occasion fault movements have Some shallow gas production had actually been es-
broken off pieces of salt which can be found isolated tablished from the Zechstein at Eskdale (C on Figure
from a parent dome, rocks in the North Sea basins are 1). Thus it seemed that there might be a possibility
in general consolidated, and extensive horizontal salt that the Rotliegendes dune deposits extend right
flows such as are found in the Gulf of Mexico have across the Southern North Sea from the Netherlands
never been seen. Shale flows, which result from deeply to England.
buried unconsolidated shale sediments, are also ab- In 1964, Britain became the twenty-second coun-
sent in the North Sea. All of the deeply buried shales try to ratify the 1958 Geneva Convention relating to
are in older more consolidated rocks. The young un- the continental shelves, which required twenty-two
consolidated Tertiary rocks are not deep enough for ratifications in order for it to become International
conditions to generate shale flowage. Law. It immediately opened up the Southern North
It follows clearly that lessons learned elsewhere, Sea to competitive bidding. Virtually all the area south
as in the Gulf of Mexico, can not be fully encompass- of Latitude 550 N was offered along with a scattering
ing in their relation to the North Sea. On the other of blocks between Latitudes 550 N and 580 N (Figure
hand, experience with the North Sea, while broader 1). Allocation of blocks was made on a basis of British
in geologic diversity, will not include certain of the financial interest, financial capability, and technical
unusual stratigraphic occurrences that are commonly capability.
seen in the Gulf of Mexico. Only at the greatest depths Awards were made in August and September
explored to date and in the Eastern Gulf of Mexico do 1964, and by December 1965, major discoveries had
the lithologies in the two areas become more similar been made. The British awards were quickly followed
and some additional structural styles can be noted in by awards in the Dutch and the Norwegian portions
common. Carbonate rocks are now present in both of the North Sea. The German North Sea was awarded
systems and the sands are fully consolidated in both in its entirety to a consortium of ten companies which
cases. called itself simply the German North Sea consortium
The organization of this discussion is historical and included, as one might expect, most of the major
in part and practical in outlook. Technology is treated international oil companies.
as an integral element in terms of the objectives A number of quite significant gas fields were
sought. Those possibilities that remain to be found quickly found in an area on trend with Groningen run-
are highlighted, and a number of key references are ning across the North Sea to England’s East Anglia.
cited for further study. Also as a result of this exploration some gas accumu-
lations were found in the Triassic Bunter sands. These
Hydrocarbon occurrence and their sands occur in structures above the Salt. It should be
mentioned, however, that exploration of the South-
discovery ern gas area was and is by no means simple. Many
The first exploration in the North Sea was trig- Bunter Sands, for example, have excellent structural
gered by the discovery of the giant Groningen gas field position but, unfortunately, are water wet because gas
in Holland (A on Figure 1.). This was a deposit of gas was prevented from migrating upward from the Car-
in the thick aeolian sands of the Rotliegendes (Lower boniferous sourcing coal measures by the Zechstein
Permian) formation. The trap was formed by a faulted Salt formation which can make an excellent seal. Like-
structure overlain by the thick impermeable salt for- wise the Rotliegendes may at times be in excellent
mation of the Upper Permian (See Cook, 1965, Fig. structural position but prove unproductive. To the
10). The hydrocarbon source was considered to be the South, the Zechstein salt formations thin and become
coal measures in the Carboniferous (Eames,␣ 1973). For absent. Thus there is no seal. To the North the
more than fifty years, exploration had been carried Rotliegendes shales out, and in some areas in between
on in the Zechstein basin of Northwest Germany (B as one might expect in a desert environment, the
on Figure 1). A number of smaller discoveries of oil aeolian deposits are thin or are heavily cemented and
and gas were made mainly in sediments above tight.
Zechstein salt, but nothing of the magnitude of More than twenty dry holes were drilled in the
Groningen had been encountered previously. Northern North Sea before oil was discovered around
117
Neidell et al.
1969. At Ekofisk (D on Figure 1) (Feazel et al., 1990; they have begun here in older Permian rocks, first
Van␣ den␣ Bark and Thomas, 1980) in Norwegian wa- making the giant gas discoveries in the Southern
ters, a giant field was found in porous Damian oolitic North Sea. This was followed by Triassic gas discov-
carbonates in a structure formed over a large, deep- eries in the same area, many of which initially were
seated Permian salt dome. overlooked by the drilling for the deeper
The oolites apparently were deposited over a Rotliegendes. For example in Dutch block P-6 (K on
growing salt dome which provided a slightly shal- Figure 1) a well had been drilled to test the
lower environment conducive to such deposition. Rotliegendes which at that location turned out to be
Overlying shale deposits provided the cap rock while too tight to produce. The well, however, had drilled
Jurassic Kimmeridgian shale below was the source through the Bunter Sands in a good structural posi-
rock for its oil. At the same time (about 1969-70) oil tion. While gas shows had been seen, they were not
was discovered in Paleocene sands at the Montrose tested. In 1973, E. E. Cook (one author) negotiated a
field (E on Figure 1). Several discoveries were made farm-in on behalf of a group of companies and even-
around this time in the Norwegian North Sea (Cod tually a producing well in the Bunter was completed.
(F), Balder (G), and Valhall (H)—see Figure 1). Then This ultimately proved up almost a trillion cubic feet
about a year later in British waters, the Forties field (I of gas. (Similar examples shown in Figures 3 and 4.)
on Figure 1, Hill and Wood, 1980; Wills, 1991) was The major Rotliegendes exploration gas play of
found in Paleocene sands deposited immediately over the late 1960s was followed in the 1970s by the major
a volcanic uplift. Jurassic shales below and on the Jurassic oil play in the Northern North Sea. Some
flanks are again thought to be the source rocks for Cretaceous production was found in the course of
these fields. Further North, also in British waters, the drilling to the Jurassic play. The Ekofisk field should
Brent field (J on Figure 1) (Livera and Gdula, 1990; be mentioned again here. The Kilda field in block 16/
Struijk and Green, 1991; and Brown, 1991) discovered 26 (M on Figure 1) is a very large gas condensate strati-
oil in Jurassic sands in a faulted structure at a loca- graphic accumulation trapped in basal Cretaceous
tion immediately below the Cretaceous–Jurassic sands which immediately overlie Jurassic source
unconformity. Nowhere in the North Sea do we see rocks. In defining the Kilda field, the overlying Alba
large growth faults with major roll-over which pro- field (M on Figure 1) was subsequently found in
vide much of the production in the Gulf of Mexico Eocene sands. In 1976, the first well ever drilled on
(the so-called flexure trend). Block 16/26 in fact encountered 50 ft of Paleocene oil
The Southern North Sea is largely a gas province sands which were never tested at the time because
with hydrocarbon source taken to be carboniferous the Jurassic was considered to be the objective. The
coal measures. While there are some oil discoveries, Alba field has now proven to have reserves of at least
they are in the minority and involve at least some 600 million barrels. Such shortsightedness was all too
special circumstance. Moving up to the Northern often a common occurrence in the history of North
North Sea we find largely an oil province with source Sea exploration and development.
now viewed as the Kimmeridgian Shales of Jurassic Later drilling has made several Devonian discov-
age. Gas discoveries here are the more rare occurrence. eries. The Argyll (N on Figure 1), (Robson, 1991) and
The thick prospective formations of the North Sea the Buchan (O on Figure 1) (Edwards,1951) fields both
were an attractive playground for testing and evalu- produce from the Devonian Old Red Sandstone. In
ating newly emerging technology. An early model both cases the Jurassic is the source and is juxtaposed
study of the Brent Field by Meckel and Nath (1977) by faulting against the reservoir rock. Today there is
captured the essence of this reservoir and also clari- some exploration aimed at Carboniferous reservoirs.
fied why the Statfjord Sand reservoir below with its This is confined to the Southern North Sea gas area.
more subtle seismic signature was not recognized In areas where the Rotliegendes is thin or absent, gas
until some years later. The model cross-section and accumulations may occur in sands within the Carbon-
one of their simulated seismic sections is shown in iferous Westphalian formation itself. Frigg Field (P on
Figure 2 along with some actual data. Figure 1) (Heritier, 1980) demonstrates another strati-
It is interesting that North Sea exploration has graphic style of middle Paleocene Age lobate subma-
reversed the usual sequence of progress. Instead of rine tan deposits. A large flat spot at base of pay can
commencing with the shallower, younger formations, be seen on seismic data over the field (Figure 5).
118
Fig. 2. Seismic Model and Seismic Data—Brent Field.
119
Neidell et al.
deltaic and shallow marine environments. While the

The Study Area Jurassic is characterized as a transgressive system,
Returning to Figure 1, the approximate location periods of regression provide the coarse clastics for
of the study area is part of the North Viking Graben the prospective reservoir intervals. Deep water shales
in the North Sea Basin. This graben formed as a re- separate these reservoirs, which can be stacked in
sult of late Permian to Triassic rifting and in general some number above one another. Fault-bounded
trends north to northeast. Syn-rift style sedimentation structures are the more usual hydrocarbon traps for
continued through the Jurassic and possibly into the such reservoirs. Stratigraphic truncations, however,
early Cretaceous. By late Cretaceous age, deposition also occur just below the base of the Cretaceous
occurred during normal basin subsidence and con- Unconformity and these can trap hydrocarbons as
tinued through the Tertiary. Figure 1 also shows a well.
general Stratigraphic Column denoting age, group as Paleocene deep water clastic reservoirs are sec-
well as basic lithology. ondary targets. Turbidites or slump sediments for
Discussions which follow consider the role of these objectives were deposited in a slope environ-
velocity, treatment of the seismic data, interpretive ment. Depositionally mounded features or strati-
procedures, and sand/shale reflectivity regimes and graphic pinchouts now provide the trapping mecha-
culminate in addressing interpretive results from the nism for hydrocarbons.
profile for study. At this point, however, we want to A Base Cretaceous Unconformity horizon was
preview some of the findings and relate them in gen- interpreted in reference to the formation tops as iden-
eral terms to a broader picture, drawing on the previ- tified in the two wells provided. (Refer again to Fig-
ous geologic text. ures 6–9). Well A, at SP 440, shows this unconformity
The Tertiary section can be noted from the seis- at 1.97 s (two-way traveltime). Well B, at SP 822, has
mic displays (Figures 6 and 7) to be within Zone I the unconformity at 2.46 s. A well-developed fault, at
sand/shale reflectivity environment. These environ- SP 460, offsets this horizon between the subsurface
ments will be examined more completely later on, but control points. Late Cretaceous and early Tertiary sedi-
we shall note now that sands in Zone I here have ments form a wedge, as will be pointed out on the
slower velocities than the surrounding shales (bright seismic imaging, which may be part of offlapping se-
spots are possible for gas accumulations in this re- quences following the rifting phase. In places these
gime). Early Cretaceous and Jurassic sections are in sediments appear to on-lap the early Cretaceous sedi-
the Zone II or transitional sand/shale reflectivity en- ments. Further details will be addressed when inter-
vironment. Here on average, the sands and shales pretive results from the test line are presented later.
have the same velocity, and average reflection coeffi- Both Wells A and B contain potential hydrocar-
cients of either polarity tend to be small. Any indi- bon producing zones—both oil and gas. Synthetic seis-
vidual sand may of course have higher or lower ve- mograms computed from the wells have been used
locity than the enclosing shales. Dim-outs, bright to place these zones at the well locations by indicated
spots, and polarity reversals are all possible within seismic ties. Hence the local information available for
Zone II and can occur in close proximity. The deeper the study was quite limited and more general knowl-
Jurassic on the right side of the profile and the Trias- edge of the basin and stratigraphy became important
sic and older sediments across the section (Figures 6, in developing interpretive judgments. Nevertheless,
7, 8, and 9) are all within the Zone III sand/shale the area will be seen to have much additional poten-
reflectivity environment. Wet sands now have higher tial which as yet remains untested. Suggestions for
velocities than the surrounding shales. Dim-outs and validating such potential will be provided as well.
polarity reversals can indicate hydrocarbon presence However, we should return at this point to a system-
for this case, but the polarity reversals become rare as atic exposition of more basic concepts and methods
the consolidation state increases with depth or time. leading to examinations of the specific results.
Additional discussions concerning the sand/
shale reflectivity regimes coupled with the more de-
tailed presentation of interpretive results should Role of Velocity
clarify the previous statements substantially. Never- The systematic increase of velocity in the Gulf of
theless, based on what we know and these general Mexico has become a recognized worldwide standard
observations, we can understand that the major ob- for continuous Tertiary deposition. For many years
jectives zones for this study likely will be Jurassic age the seismic industry used velocity functions for depth
syn-rift sediments. These were deposited in fluvial to conversion in which velocities increased linearly with
120
depth, from some initial velocity V0 or Vz = V0 + KZ. Unlike the Gulf of Mexico, which became structur-
Initial velocities (V0) might vary from place to place, ally deformed mainly because of movements caused
and the rate of increase K might also vary, but in gen- by the deposition of huge volumes of sands and
eral, initial velocities fall into the range 1750–2100 m/s shales, the North Sea underwent several periods of
(approximately 5500–6500 ft/s) and the constant K falls tectonic movement involving uplift and erosion and
in the range 0.55–0.65. deep-water carbonate deposition, prior to rifting and
Faust (1951) studied sand and shale velocities in the formation of the Viking–Central Graben from the
general and concluded that not only is there an in- close of the Triassic throughout the Jurassic. During
crease in velocity with depth but also increases in the Cretaceous, general subsidence of the whole area
velocities with age. He derived his curves for sands resulted in the deposit of thick Chalk formations.
and shales and, in a period before the advent of ve- During the Tertiary, general uplift with continuing
locity logs, he used 1000-ft intervals to measure his subsidence in the Viking Graben area brought about
velocities. He pointed out that these intervals were the development of the Tertiary basin, which has con-
too large to observe any differences between sands tinued to this day.
and shales but recognized that earlier work by Haskel The problems with making depth conversions in
(1941) indicated variations both in the rate of velocity the North Sea to take into account all of these tectonic
increase for sandstones and shales in Tertiary sections changes have been described by Cook (1965) and
and somewhat higher velocities for sandstone in this Rockwell (1967). Depth conversion requires a num-
case. Haskel also indicated that sandstone velocities ber of different velocity curves, each applied at ap-
showed conspicuously greater rates of increase of propriate depths after adjusting for the original depth
velocity with depths than those of shales, a fact that of burial. Computer programs have been devised to
became enormously important with the recognition handle this procedure.
of the Crossover phenomenon by Neidell and Berry These problems also have a profound effect on
(1989). stacking velocities for effective seismic imaging. De-
The North Sea, because it contains rocks of many tailed velocity calculation and interpretation is re-
ages and most compositions, also exhibits a wide mag- quired even for the stacking of conventional sections.
nitude of velocity variation. For example, in places, Stratigraphic (inversion) sections with displays hav-
there are up to 10 000 ft (3000 m) of Gulf Coast type ing enhanced visual dynamic range (such as color)
Tertiary velocities. This is the case in portions of the require this same degree of velocity control routinely,
Northern North Sea. Below the Tertiary, the Upper but the interpretation of North Sea velocities requires
Cretaceous is mainly Chalk, having velocities rang- much more intensive study and the interpreted ve-
ing from about 9000 ft/s (3000 m/s) to 15 000 ft/s (5000 locity curve must be tied to the known geologic
m/s) depending on porosity and depth of burial (past boundaries to be effective. A comparable current in-
or present). Underlying the Cretaceous are lower-ve- terpretive challenge in the Gulf of Mexico is to define
locity sands and shales of the Jurassic followed by the stacking velocities below tabular salt bodies having
higher-velocity sands and shales of the Triassic. Be- irregular boundaries. This is a problem and a play
low the Triassic are the high-velocity dolomites and receiving much attention just now.
salt of the Permian formation followed by the lower- We comment here, having introduced the idea of
velocity aeolian deposits (often highly cemented) of the color inversion sections and their enhanced vis-
the Rotliegendes (Lower Permian). Under the ibility, that the future role for such technology along
Rotliegendes, the Carboniferous section is again in with other seismic methods such as 3-D surveys and
many places a sand and shale section. Older rocks exist AVO studies will become of immense importance as
but have only been penetrated in a few places. All of we address the more subtle aspects of the geology. In
these different-aged formations represent different ve- particular we can look at a line over block 48/12 in
locity–depth curves for each identifiable strati- the Southern North Sea and contrast the appearance
graphic unit presenting in concert a most complex of the Bunter Sands as they are seen via the conven-
pattern of variation. tional display and the color display. This comparison
All velocity function curves, even those for the of Figures 3 and 4 which was carried out in 1980 was
carbonates, show an increase of velocity with depth first published by Neidell and Beard (1985). Nearby
and the absolute values of velocity in any particular drilling to Rotliegendes depth found gas shows in the
stratigraphic unit depend very much on the original Bunter Sands, but the individual member sands were
depth of burial. Variation of velocity with age in the each greater than 300 ft (100 m) in thickness. No test-
North Sea, while present, is of secondary importance. ing was done in conjunction with this drilling owing
121
Neidell et al.
oCt
W
(f)0J
IW
~z
NORTH SEA
0:::-
0-1
Z
LINE 12
ot--
70
o
-0
60
<n
o
50
o
to
-
o
T"""
z
w
.-.-<t:
PLATTEN ;
...J
n.
to
T"""
Fig. 3. Conventional display of stratigraphic processing for data from North Sea Block.
122
NORTH SEA
LINE 12
50 60
+ +
0 .5
1.0
1.5
2.0
Fig. 4. Color display of inversion for Line 12 data-Compare to Figure 3.
123
124
Neidell et al.
0
t!)
t::)
C!)
t!)
0::
u..
0:
LL.
c..
l~
0..
-
0
0
u
-
-
«
t!)
C!)
l~
a..
c..
-
C/)
~
c:x:
CI)
I
-oJ
u..
I-
LL.
Fig. 5. Early seismic section across Frigg Field. Line 73-F-9. SSL Survey 1973 (after Brewster, 1991).
co
=
m
=
Fig. 6. Black and white migrated section—Mobil North Viking Gragen line.
125
N eidell et al.
rJll
l!1U
..
o .
"
0225
OOLl
0861;
0981:
OI7t.:p.
()~~ I P
OOhr-
e(
{ Il, f
=(I)
{)R' )I ;>.
~ () I. t ,I
QJ
~
Dc'l I
(lOU . -....
'0"'
0
<:.I
01111 -
...c:
~
QJ
....,..J
I=:
I=:
QJ
,.Q
ns
0'"'
bO
....I=:
~
~
-'"'
...c:
0
III -....
Z
,.Q
0
Q) 029T ~
:: OOSI I
I=:
::>:J!'> W
>-
W
~
-
....
0
<:.I
QJ
<I)
I=:
a: ....0
0
-I l!l
QJ
0 i>
0
....I=:
-
U
'0"'
0
~
....bb
~
126
~
~
n
t1>
~
~
t1>
'"I
r:n
...
o
=
o
~
Z
o
:+
::s-
en
t1>
~
~
r:n
....
~
...
t1>
=
Fig. 8. (a) Black and white migrated section-Mobil North Viking Graben Line-enlarged view.
~
N
'I
~
N
<Xl
(t)
z.....
Q.
(t)
......
......
(t)
....
~
!'"""
Fig. 8. (continued). (b) Color inversion section-Mobil North Viking Graben Line-enlarged view.
::;3
~
r")
ttl
~
-
ttl
>-t
[IJ
....
o
=
o
1-1'\
Z
o>-t
....::r
CJ}
ttl
~
;3
[IJ
....
....r"""4
ttl
=
Fig. 9. (a) Black and white migrated section-Mobil North Viking Grabven Line-enlarged view.
i-l
N
IJ:)
i-I
VJ
o
Z
ttl
.....
Q..
ttl
ttl
-
.....
~
:--
Fig. 9. (continued) (b) Color inversion section- Mobil North Viking Graben Line-enlarged view.
to the then prevalent perceptions of where hydrocar- range (see Figure 3 and 4, for example). Indeed, prop-
bons might occur. erly conditioned data displayed in a suitable color
Figure 4, the color display, shows the transgres- scheme provide a 20-fold increase in detail over black-
sive sequence of Bunter deposition clarifying the na- and-white displays. Moreover, when the data are
ture of both the time lines and the lithology change. rescaled (semi-quantitatively) as velocity, porosity and
No confusion exists about seismic reflections and their hydrocarbon presence may be detected and confirmed
clear relation to the velocity/density contrasts inher- under a wide range of circumstances. Velocity scal-
ent with velocity change when clear seismic imaging ing of the seismic data also allows more definitive
is available. Two faults caused by salt dissolution in correlations and predictions to be made when used
the overlying evaporite section provide easily recog- with well logs.
nized reference features to guide comparison with the To take full advantage of the extended visual
conventional display of Figure 3 which is shown, but range of color displays, our processing sequence seeks
not quite at the same plotting scale. It is interesting to produce optimally imaged data in which details
that the basic stratigraphy would not be correctly in- indicative of stratigraphic changes are preserved.
terpreted starting with the conventional seismic dis- Many of the techniques used have become industry
play even though the data processing in fact preserved standard, among them the presentation of relative
the necessary information. amplitudes, collapse of the wavelet to a consistent
Two pronounced velocity drops are seen at the zero–phase character, and a full prestack migration.
center of two of the barrier bars, probably indicating Central and unique to our method, however, is our
porosity and gas presence. Also, a promising struc- intensive analysis of the velocity field using high-reso-
ture showing a velocity drop at the crest is noted in lution velocity spectra which are of proprietary de-
the Platten Dolomite. This indicates porosity but may sign. These analyses perform well at reflection times
not necessarily be gas filled since underlying salt for- where other analyses lose their resolution (below
mations may have prevented gas from migrating into about 2.0 s for land data and 3.0 s for marine).
it and the magnitude of the velocity drop is not quite Typically these spectra are run at a density of 16
high enough to indicate gas with certainty. per mile (about 12 per km) for land data or 12 per
Similar problems with viewing stratigraphy in mile (approx. 10 per km) for marine surveys on fully
seismic terms are quite common, as we can see even prestack migrated CDP gathers. When interpreted
where units are quite thick. Another noteworthy case with due consideration for the geologic setting, these
occurs in the West Sak Sands of the Kuparik field in produce a velocity field that not only yields an opti-
Alaska where an en-echelon sand development was mum stacked section but can be used to derive a ve-
mistaken for blanket deposition on the conventional locity model for the final poststack migration and the
displays. Only the inconsistent behavior of the wells background velocity trend for the acoustic impedance
led to stratigraphic processing and appropriate im- section.
aging which ultimately solved the problem. The color seismic inversion displays are derived
exclusively from seismic inputs. Correlative studies
with logs are performed later and only where appro-
Treatment of Seismic Data priate.
Our approach to hydrocarbon exploration and Migration actually has two functions to perform
reservoir definition rests principally on accepted ideas —focusing to achieve image “sharpness” and event
of basic geology in conjunction with refined seismic positioning. The detailed and dense velocity work
methods. There are two themes which are applied in optimizes the imaging, while the pre- and poststack
parallel to the seismic data. Significantly improved migrations produce the best possible positioning.
and definitive seismic imaging constitutes one of these Since seismic data are band limited, trace inver-
directions. Use of a unified framework, an organized sion provides only partial information about changes
sequence of high-technology procedures to identify in acoustic impedance. Interval velocities calculated
and qualify key anomalies and subsurface character- from the high-resolution velocity field between care-
istics, is the second theme. fully chosen horizons generally show good correspon-
It was recognized more than 10 years ago that as dence to the gross features of a sonic log where it
much as 80% of the stratigraphic information con- should. This allows us to use the stacking velocity field
tained in seismic data presented in conventional black to develop the low-frequency components of veloc-
and white displays was lost due to inappropriate pro- ity not present in the individual traces. Taken alone,
cessing and limitations in display visual dynamic the low-frequency trend gives us valid information
131
Neidell et al.
on a large scale of relative changes along the profile. have provided some extraordinary results and in-
It may also be approximately “matched” to well in- sights.
formation for better correspondence in terms of mag- For example, in the first category of sand–sand-
nitude. stone reservoirs—see Neidell and Berry (1989)—we
The seismic data are inverted, combined with the have studied and documented the relationships of
trend, and scaled to velocity. They are plotted in highly acoustic parameters for sands and shales and found
contrasting colors at 400 ft/s (about 125 m/s) veloc- it necessary to consider depth and geologic age as in-
ity steps and at scales of 10 in/s to 20 in/s (25 cm/s to dependent variables. The “crossover” region of more
50 cm/s) depending on the objective of the project. or less equal sand–shale velocity and its special prop-
We then have a section which displays for the inter- erties and problems has been considered in detail—
preter the full potential of the seismic data and al- this is the Zone II, which separates the “bright-spot”
lows definitive correlations with the well logs to be world from the more consolidated Zone III litholo-
made. gies below. Seismic correlations to well-served infor-
mation are considered, and carbonates and the other
potential reservoirs are placed into this same scheme
Interpretive Procedure for systematic analysis.
Interpretive overlays noting anomalies and key We have seen that the reduction in seismic inver-
features are prepared as a final product from the in- sion measured velocities for hydrocarbons in the
version color displays. Log correlations and all prior bright-spot world of Zone I is quite pronounced (1000-
knowledge are incorporated into the overlay and com- 4000 ft/s or 330-1350 m/s). In this young, unconsoli-
panion final reporting. Anomalies are examined dated environment, where sand acoustic impedance
within the framework of geometric considerations is less than that of shale, the contrasts in reflection
described quite completely by several authors in coefficient which result from gas presence can be two-
Payton (1977). Of course the velocity dimension in- fold, threefold, even fivefold. Hence we can see the
herent in the data is used fully as well. Intensive study signatures directly on conventional seismic displays
of all the moveout velocities unambiguously identify of reflectivity where relative amplitudes have been
lithologies such as salt, shales, carbonates, and sand- preserved.
shale sequences. Also, such studies identify lateral It is revealing that in Zone III below the cross-
gradients critical for establishing true structural ge- over Zone II, the sands and sandstones have com-
ometries and making effective time-to-depth conver- pacted and consolidated to acoustic impedance val-
sion, as we have noted previously. ues greater than those of the shales. Hydrocarbons
The added visibility of the stratigraphic changes, again drop velocities as seen by the seismic method
which result from the improved data processing and almost as much as in Zone I (600-3000 ft/s or 200-
enhanced visual dynamic range display, in conjunc- 1000 m/s), but now the changes in reflection coeffi-
tion with the use of both geometry and velocity in- cient size owing to the generally higher acoustic im-
formation, assures that no anomalies of significance pedance values only approach 10–15%. This level of
will be overlooked. change usually cannot be seen on conventional seis-
Single-line interpretations as performed here nec- mic displays. Fortunately, when detailed data process-
essarily have limitations, but the examinations of ad- ing preserves the information, such velocity changes
ditional lines in the seismic grid or an appropriate are clearly observed on the extended visual dynamic
database of well logs along with access to local knowl- range color displays (with amplitudes scaled in ve-
edge assures us that anomalies can be considered in a locity). These displays have the capability to present
regional setting and not viewed out of context. Such such changes most clearly and also put their geom-
knowledge was beyond the scope of the immediate etry and continuity in a structural context. Hence,
project considered and so it is particularly difficult to hydrocarbons in deeper, older formations can be de-
validate in any way our current findings. tected more readily than previously believed.
As a component of our unification theme, we sug- It is principally in Zone II for sand reservoirs that
gest that the existing hydrocarbon reservoirs we rec- this technology is generally somewhat less effective.
ognize be subdivided into two categories: sands/ Here, we cannot routinely use synthetic seismograms
sandstones in one grouping and carbonates and all for correlative purposes with any reliability. While it
others (i.e., fractured lavas, shales, coal-seam meth- is true that our success in finding and defining reser-
ane, etc.) as a second grouping. Our basic studies of voirs in Zone II is diminished, this procedure never-
reservoirs on a global scale following this philosophy theless remains the single most effective technique we
132
have to date for working in this regime. Substantial

thicknesses of Zone II (1000–10 000 ft or 300–3000+ Sands and Shales and the
m) are frequently encountered and the economic po-
tential matches what we find for Zone I or III. Reflectivity Crossover
Carbonate reservoirs in terms of measured seis- Concerning velocity, the study by Neidell and
mic parameters for porosity and hydrocarbons behave Berry (1989) is unique in the literature as it documents
substantially like the Zone III consolidated sands. the sand/shale reflectivity phenomenon in one par-
Clearly the geometries and geologic origins are quite ticular area of the Gulf of Mexico as it is seen via well-
different for these lithologies as compared to sands log measurements. The major problem is identifying
and sandstones. with certainty sands and shales in the Zone II
Once the interpretation has been formulated with reflectivity regime even before we can consider hy-
all appropriate information and assistance, we address drocarbon presence. In fact, a first problem is the iden-
the verification phase of anomalies as a separate mat- tification of Zone II itself because zones may change
ter. Indicated velocity drops in structurally favorable abruptly across faults and some zones may not exist
settings and within potential reservoir units can re- at all or zones may change from one to another at the
late to reservoir presence but may also be caused by same depth over relatively short distances. The rea-
bed thinning with subsequent tuning and detuning sons for these variations are not yet clearly understood
of amplitudes, or by lithologic change. Instantaneous but may be related to change in the type of sand or
frequency analysis is a most effective means for rec- shale being deposited and to degrees of cementation
ognizing tuning effects. Model studies can separate in different locations. Rapid changes in sea level also
tuning effects from effects caused by parameter seem to be involved somehow.
changes relating to lithology or hydrocarbon presence. In the North Sea most of the older sand–shale se-
In Zone I, hydrocarbon presence causes increased quences are of Zone III type. We have, however, seen
amplitude with offset as distinguished from lithology several bright spots in the southern North Sea in the
change. For Zone III, amplitudes with offset decrease Triassic (Bunter Sand) section. We are not absolutely
with hydrocarbon presence as opposed to lithology certain, however, that this cannot still be a Zone III
change, which causes no such comparable effect. phenomenon in which a relatively lower velocity Tri-
Catalogs can be developed that relate porosity and assic section (3000–3700 m/s or 9000–11 000 ft/s) has
pore fluid to the magnitude of the velocity anoma- entrapped gas lowering the velocity by 650–750 m/s
lies, which are observed if there are adequate data. (approximately 2000 ft/s) to develop the reflections
Such techniques enable calibration studies to be used having greatest prominence with reversed polarity.
for predictive purpose, and often with remarkable ac- In the Tertiary, however, we have observed to date
curacy. in the limited areas in which we have worked only
The ability to clearly image our objectives, qualify Zone I and Zone II responses. The Frigg field (P on
them and establish their quantitative significance from Figure 1) (Brewster, 1991; Heritier, Conort, and Mure,
seismic data sets these procedures apart from the stan- 1990; Heritier, Lossel, and Wathne, 1980) is an example
dard “piece-meal” and less enlightened practices. of Zone I gas accumulation in the Paleocene of the
Various levels of information synergy act on the given Tertiary basin. This field is essentially a gas accumu-
opportunities to contribute to our knowledge in this lation in an offshore sand bar formed by ocean cur-
way. rents some twenty miles from the basin edge. The gas-
We see in this procedure a unity of approach filled sand top is well defined, and a flat gas–liquid
which draws together the roles of most of the newer contact easily can be seen and mapped. Figure 5 from
techniques into an organized framework for valida- Brewster (1991) shows an exemplary seismic view of
tion and confidence building. The same methods most the feature having the clearly discordant gas–oil con-
fully define reservoirs within seismic data. Taken in tact or Flat Spot. On a relative amplitude section this
concert with our calibration studies and fundamen- would be a Bright-Spot which would be quite famil-
tal work on the relation of seismic data to well logs, iar to any Gulf Coast explorationists.
an approach is continuing to evolve in the industry. In recent years there have also been a number of
This approach is one of the most effective means for oil discoveries in the Tertiary basin. These fields are
using available seismic data. in sands found in what are essentially submarine fan
deposits left by ancient rivers running into the old
Tertiary basin. Regional dip and updip sealing by
shales have provided the trapping. The first two such
133
Neidell et al.
discoveries, made about 1984 and 1986 [the Alba field studies and detailed mapping prior to any drilling,
in Block 16/26 (M on Figure 1) and the Gryphon field but what is clear from these results is the power of
discovery in Block 9/18B (L on Figure 1)], were found the inversion technology as applied in revealing the
in the Eocene by serendipity while drilling through full potential of the area even having such limited
the accumulation on the way to a deeper objective. data.

It turns out that these accumulations are in Zone Major reservoirs as expected should be the Juras-
II and are hardly visible on conventional seismic dis- sic syn-rift clastic deposits as can be seen on the pro-
plays. Color inversion sections of data processed with file (Figures 6, 7, 8, and 9). Traps here consist mostly
detailed velocity analyses and 3-D seismic surveys of faulted blocks and truncations under the Creta-
have enabled the geometric form of these submarine ceous Unconformity. A black-and-white convention-
fans to be recognized and mapped. The inversion sec- ally migrated seismic display is seen in Figure 6, while
tions show a velocity drop of only about 450 ft/s the color inversion section, based on detailed veloc-
(150␣ m/s) since we are dealing with oil accumulations ity work, is shown in Figure 7.
without gas. We are also aware that in Zone II, veloc- A color key is included on the color inversion sec-
ity reductions for gas presence in the sand members tion (impedance section), scaled in steps of 120 m/s
showing anomalous behavior may be significantly on this presentation, and this applies to the enlarged
smaller than they might be for counterpart situations portions of the profile (Figure 7). The Cretaceous
in Zones I or III. Unconformity is interpreted as the boundary between
So, in the North Sea Tertiary basin, a pattern is a predominately light colored section above with
emerging of prospective submarine fans that may oc- darker colors, principally blue below. This pro-
cur at all ages from the Jurassic through the Triassic. nounced change also mirrors the change in lithology
Their location depends entirely on the river patterns as well as the compaction effects one might expect
and alongshore currents at the time of deposition. The for the deeper section in general. The dark green
easily identifiable ones associated with gas (such as wedge representing the upper Cretaceous is part of
Frigg) or structure (the Forties and Brae fields) were the offlapping sequence which truncates against the
discovered early. The two fortuitous fields mentioned unconformity boundary as seen primarily on the left
in the previous paragraph are nevertheless giant fields side of the section. This section marks the change in
as well. deposition from syn-rift environment to prograding
There are probably on the order of twenty or so marine environment.
other such fields, some of which may be giants yet to Wells A and B, as marked on the displays, both
be found, but they will not be found using conven- have oil and gas shows and are indicated in Figures 8
tional seismic imaging. Their structural detail will best and 9 for the data provided. These are correlated at
be mapped by 3-D seismic surveys. This will continue each well location to the color inversion section us-
to be the major exploration effort in the North Sea ing standard synthetic seismograms for establishing
during the next decade, but the processing technol- appropriate time–depth matching. A common color
ogy to be applied will improve, as will the display key applies to these enlarged panels of the inversion
technology, so that both structural as well as strati- profile. A green dot is used to signify an oil show, with
graphic content of the survey data will become avail- a gas symbol denoting a gas show. Dashed lines de-
able to the interpreter. note possible water levels (flat geometries or discor-
dant events at major changes of velocities in structur-
ally reasonable settings). An excellent example of a
Interpretive Results from likely water contact is seen at Anomaly 4 on Figure
8b.
Test Line There are quite significant velocity changes asso-
We have set the stage and may now examine more ciated with many of the hydrocarbon-bearing zones
fully the results of our one-line study. It is clear where within Well A (Figures 8a and 8b). The deeper shows
the profile sits in general terms (Figure 1), and we have (below 2.3 s) occur within seemingly thin sandstones
a context for its consideration. Several panels of data and do not offer an obvious seismic signature. Such
from the profile shall be examined as well in order character appears similar to the hydrocarbon-bearing
that the detail down at the prospect level be studied. zones at the Well B location (Figures 9a and 9b). Sand-
In fact, there were several particularly attractive stones seen at both well locations are discontinuous,
anomalies, noted on the profile, that remain untested. probably owing to deposition in a fluvial environ-
It would be prudent to subject these first to tie-line ment. Such units by their nature cannot be followed
134
readily from downdip wet seismic signatures to evi- and D, which are at rather low angle. As stated above,
dent updip hydrocarbon-bearing signatures. Only one the only clear anomaly found near Well B is number
such “good” anomaly, Anomaly 12 downthrown to 12. Anomaly 19 may be a carbonate bank (note high
Fault G, could be found near Well B. Hence it is the velocities compared to surrounding sediments) over
geologic complexity which in this instance makes the a break in slope of the underlying Jurassic syn-rift
recognition of hydrocarbon effects from the seismic sediments. This in itself offers some interesting pos-
data as well as the well correlations quite a bit more sibilities.
difficult. Several shallow anomalies also were noted, as
Many of the best anomalies observed along the previously mentioned. All of the shallow anomalies
profile from the more prospective syn-rift sediments can be seen on Figure 7, and their approximate posi-
and from shallower objectives are ordered and de- tions are noted on Figure 6. Numbers 15 and 16, near
scribed in Table 1. Multiple potential pays can be seen 1.8 s and near the left third of the section, are associ-
upthrown to Faults B and D as these anomalies have ated with a possible Tertiary turbidite deposit as de-
higher potential of indicating hydrocarbon presence duced from the mounded geometry and velocity con-
owing to their continuity and character. Most of the trol. Such sediments have velocities lower than sur-
hydrocarbon-bearing zones seen in Well A are in traps rounding sediments giving them some possibility as
upthrown to Fault D. Anomalies associated with Fault potential pay intervals. Anomaly 17 consists of two
B have not be tested by either well. Other anomalies groups of tilted, slump-like faulted blocks. These are
near Well A are not stacked as they are along Faults B near 1.55 s and also on the left third of the section.
Table 1. Anomalies from prospective syn-rift sediments and shallower objectives.
Anomaly SP Range time m/s Comments Tested/

Drop Untested
1 316-340 1.44 600 Downthrown Fault A U
2 360-375 1/85 500 Unconformity/Upthrown, flat geometry U
3 380-400 1.98 400 Upthrown, major Fault B, flat geometry U
6 454-464 1.8 500 Downthrown, major Fault E U
7 428-449 1.99 800 Upthrown, major Fault D, flat geometry T
poss. gas/oil contact
418-452 2.02 300 Upthrown, major Fault D, flat geometry T
poss. oil/water contact, polarity reversal
9 434-440 2.14 350 Upthrown, Fault C Poss U
10 434-454 2.21 600 Upthrown, Faults C & D, connected T
11 466-484 2.31 600 Downthrown, Fault E U
12 830-850 2.8 600 Downthrown, Fault G, near Well B U
13 438-455 1.79 300 Poss. Upthrown relief fault U
15 670-760 1.78 * Low velocity, mounded geometry U
16 760-796 1.82 * Low velocity, mounded geometry U
17 914-980 1.56 * Low velocity U
825-870 1.53 * Low velocity U
18 898-934 0.70 600 Low velocity, part of prograding wedge U
1004-1020 0.70 600 Low velocity, part of prograding wedge U
1034-1052 0.71 600 Low velocity, part of prograding wedge U
19 220-270 1.8 — Poss. carbonate buildup-check
along strike U
* not readily determined
135
Neidell et al.
The likely sediments have lower velocities than the The companion studies we saw at the workshop
surrounding sediments, making this a Zone I and which are represented by the writings here were
reflectivity type situation. Anomaly 18 is very shal- particularly interesting and diverse in their results. It
low and fault related, as can be seen at 0.7 s on the far was our opinion that the inversion study as repre-
left side of the section. Sediments in this case are at sented by this work which presented velocity changes
the toe of a prograding wedge. in both structural and stratigraphic context offered
Commerciality, or for that matter the viability of the most refined interpretive approach and permit-
any of these anomalies, can only be determined by ted the recognition of prospect leads having great like-
mapping the extent of each of the anomalies as well lihood of surviving further study and maturing into
as verifying other considerations. However, Anoma- bona fide potential drill sites.
lies 2, 3, 4, and 5 have good potential for denoting
hydrocarbon-bearing zones as they stand, as they are
near tested hydrocarbon zones with similar charac- Future Directions
ter. In the North Sea, we believe that future and
deeper exploration in the southern Zechstein Basin
will be aimed at the Carboniferous, which is a pre-
Conclusions salt formation and will likely show enhanced reser-
We were pleased to participate in the North Sea voir character owing to the salt presence1 (see Ziegler,
Test Line Trace Inversion Workshop and owe a debt P. A., 1973; Ziegler,␣ W.␣ H., 1973). For the Northern
of gratitude to Mobil Oil for its perception in orga- North Sea, deeper exploration will be aimed at test-
nizing the project and releasing the data set. While ing Triassic sands and older formations below the
the well control of the area is limited, we have never- well-known Jurassic pays. These wells may encoun-
theless been able to interpret the Test Line and iden- ter very high pressure at depth which again may sig-
tify key markers, depositional features, and trends nal particularly favorable reservoirs (Ziegler,␣ W.␣ H.,
with a fair degree of confidence using also readily 1973). Additionally, the shallower Tertiary sands,
available data about the North Sea. which have already been mentioned, will be a major
It is also clear that the sand–shale reflectivity exploration play. For all such plays, the deep-water
zones for the area have been recognized as well and completion technology pioneered in Offshore Brazil
lend much to our understanding of the subtlety of and the Gulf of Mexico will be a decided asset.
recognizing certain of the pay zones. Zone II complexi- Ever greater importance as we noted will be given
ties coupled with the limited resolution available for to 3-D seismic surveys in the North Sea. Despite a
seismically “thin” beds and the depositional complex- substantial 3-D survey made four to five years ago,
ity probably explains the greatest proportion of the the Alba field has been redefined by what may be one
mysterious or puzzling seismic expressions of strati- of the biggest 3-D surveys ever undertaken. Even in
graphic nature we encounter. the old Groningen field, a recent 3-D survey has re-
While time did not permit us to fully use and in- vealed, after thirty years, several peripheral traps
tegrate all the available data (e.g., the VSP), we nev- which are now being drilled successfully, enhancing
ertheless obtained results indicating good additional overall production and further extending the life of
potential in the area. Several prospect leads having the field.
classic geometry and velocity signatures were noted Stratigraphy and stratigraphic processing also has
and presented in Table 1 with some limited discus- been previously cited for the role that it will play for
sion. We judge the best potential seen to be Anoma- the future of the North Sea. Model studies will be
lies 2, 3, 4, and 5, which are upthrown to Fault B and applied and are important for structural consider-
could all be tested by drilling a single well. We have ations, principally relating to depth conversion. AVO
explained that prudence requires additional efforts technology also will make a contribution once it is
be undertaken to validate such leads before any drill- appreciated that the sands which occur may not al-
ing should be contemplated. Simple matters such as ways be in shale environments. In fact, the
mapping them in an orthogonal direction must be Rotliegendes, which has evaporites and carbonates
undertaken even in rudimentary terms before any above, behaves quite like the Wilcox or Bromide sand
economic values can be assigned. of Oklahoma in this regard. We must say here, how-
1
Salt by its nature moves horizontally, thus redirecting some of the compaction force resulting in effectively “younger”
reservoirs below it. This is in addition to its effects on the thermal regime and ability to form an effective seal.
136
ever, that success in applying this technology will fol-

low once we stop treating the geology in overly sim- References
plistic terms. Bowen, J. M., 1991, 25 years of North Sea exploration,
Unlike the United States in its waters of the Gulf in Abbotts, I. L., Ed., United Kingdom oil and gas
of Mexico, there is no single entity or agency that fields—25 years commemorative volume: Geo-
keeps track of total production or trends for the North logical Society Memoir 14, 1-8.
Sea. In fact, the various governments involved allow Brown, S., 1991, Stratigraphy of the oil and gas reser-
the operators even greater latitude in reporting of re- voirs: U.K. continental shelf, in Abbotts, I. L., Ed.,
sults and sharing data than the United States allows United Kingdom oil and gas fields—25 years com-
off its shores. As a result, there are no equally authori- memorative volume: Geological Society Memoir
tative sources which can be readily accessed to an- 14.
swer questions about relative production and esti- Brewster, J., 1991, The Frigg Field, Block 10/1 U.K.
mates of total likely production. We mention, how- North Sea and 25/1 Norwegian North Sea, in
ever, that Bowen (1991) presents some cumulative re- Abbotts, I. L., Ed., United Kingdom oil and gas
serve figures which we reproduce in part here for ref- fields—25 years commemorative volume: Geo-
erence as Figure 10. These provide at least a starting logical Society Memoir␣ 14, 117-126.
point for a more encompassing estimate of total re- Cook, E. E., 1965, Geophysical operations in the North
serves, which clearly must be quite impressive. Many Sea: Geophysics, 30, 495-510.
giant fields have been found indeed in the North Sea, Eames, T. D., 1973, Coal rank and gas source relation-
but we cannot offer more than generalities in address- ships Rotliegendes Reservoirs, in Woodland, A.
ing this subject because of lack of more definitive data. W., Ed., Petroleum and the continental shelf of
north-west Europe, Vol. I, 191-203.
Fig. 10. UKCS wildcat drilling (cumulative reserves) 1965-1989.
137
Neidell et al.
Edwards, C. W., 1991, The Buchan Field, Blocks 20/ Struijk, A. P., and Green, R. T., 1991, The Brent Field,
5a, 21/1a U.K. North Sea, in Abbotts, I. L., Ed., Block 211/29 U.K. North Sea, in Abbotts, I. L., Ed.,
United Kingdom oil and gas fields—25 years com- United Kingdom oil and gas fields—25 years com-
memorative volume: Geological Society Memoir memorative volume: Geological Society Memoir
14, 253-260. 14, 63-72.

Faust, L. F., 1951, Seismic velocity as a function of Van den Bark, E. and Thomas, O. D., 1980, Ekofisk:
depth and geologic time: Geophysics, 16, 192-206. First of the giant oil fields in Western Europe, in
Feazel, C. T., Knight, I. A., and Pekot, L. J., 1990, Halbouty, M. T., Ed., Giant oil and gas fields of
Ekofisk Field-Norway, Central Graben North Sea, the decade: 1968-1978: AAPG Memoir 30, 195-224.
in Beaumont, E. A., and Fowler, N. H., Eds., Struc- Wills, J. M., 1991, The Forties Field, Blocks 21/10, 22/
tural traps IV, tectonic and nontectonic fold traps: 6a, U.K. North Sea, in Abbotts, I. L., Ed., United
AAPG, 1-25. Kingdom oil and gas fields—25 years commemo-
Haskel, N. A., 1941, The relation between depth, li- rative volume: Geological Society Memoir 14,
thology and seismic wave velocity in Tertiary 301-308.
sandstones and shales: Geophysics, 6, 318-326. Ziegler, P. A., 1973, North Sea basin history in the Tec-
Heritier, F. E., Conort, A., and Mure, E., 1990, Frigg tonic framework of North-Western Europe, in
Field—U.K. and Norway Viking Graben, North Woodland, A. W., Ed., Petroleum and the conti-
Sea, in Beaumont, E. A., and Fowler, N. H., Eds., nental shelf of north-west Europe, Vol. I, 131-149.
Stratigraphic traps I: AAPG, 69-90. Ziegler, W. H., 1973, Outline of the Geological His-
Heritier, F. E., Lossel, P., and Wathne, E., 1980, Frigg tory of the North Sea, in Woodland, A. W., Ed.,
Field—Large submarine fan trap Lower Eocene Petroleum and the continental shelf of north-west
rocks of the Viking Graben, North Sea, in Europe, Vol. I, 165-190.
Halbouty, M. T., Ed., Giant oil and gas fields of
the decade: 1968-1978: AAPG Memoir 30, 59-79.
Hill, P. J., and Wood, G. V., 1980, Geology of the for- References for General
ties field, U.K. Continental Shelf, North Sea, in
Halbouty, M. T., Ed., Giant oil and gas fields of Reading
the Decade: 1968-1978: AAPG Memoir 30, 81-93. Brennard, T. P., 1991, The Auk Oil-Field, in Woodland,
Livera, S. E., and Gdula, J. E., 1990, Brent Oil Field, in A. W., Ed., Petroleum and the continental shelf of
Beaumont, E. A., and Fowler, N. H., Eds., Struc- north-west Europe Vol. I, 275-281.
tural traps II—Traps associated with Tectonic Campbel, C. J., and Ormaasen, E., 1987, Discovery of
faulting: AAPG, 21-63. oil and gas in Norway: An historical synopsis, in
Meckel, L. D., Jr., and Nath, A. K., 1977, Geologic con- Geology of the Norwegian oil and gas fields.
siderations for stratigraphic modeling and inter- Kirk, R. H., 1980, Stratfjord Field—A North Sea giant,
pretation, in Payton, C. E., Ed., Seismic stratigra- in Halbouty, M. T., Ed., Giant oil and gas fields of
phy—Applications to hydrocarbon exploration: the decade: 1968-1978, AAPG Memoir 30, 95-116.
AAPG Memoir 26: 417-438. Neidell, N. S., Mullin, R. P., and Smith, M., 1995, Seis-
Neidell, N. S., and Beard, J. H., 1985, Seismic visibil- mic detection of juvenile reservoir character un-
ity of stratigraphic objectives: Presented at the der leaky fluid cushions: 27th Annual Offshore
60th Annual Tech. Conf., SPE. Technology Conference, Reprint 7641, 55-62.
Neidell, N. S. and Berry, N., 1989, Documenting the Taylor, G., 1994, Gulf Coast Analog, Subsalt concepts
sand/shale crossover, Geophysics, 54: 1430-1434. due North Sea try: AAPG Explorer.
Payton, C. E., Ed., 1977, Seismic stratigraphy—Ap- van Veen, F. R., 1991, Geology of the Leman Gas Field,
plication to hydrocarbon exploration: AAPG in Woodland, A. W., Ed., Petroleum and the con-
Memoir 26. tinental shelf of north-west Europe, Vol. I, 223-
Robson, D., 1991, The Argyll, Duncan and Inner 231.
Fields, Blocks 30/24, 30/25a U.K. North Sea, in
Abbotts, I. L., Ed., United Kingdom oil and gas
fields—25 years commemorative volume: Geo-
logical Society Memoir 14, pp. 219-226.
Rockwell, D. W., 1967, The digital computer’s role in
the enhancement and interpretation of North Sea
seismic data: Geophysics, 32, 259-281.
138
8
DELPHI Stepwise Approach to

AVO Processing
Dirk Jacob Verschuur, Aart-Jan van Wijngaarden,

and Riaz Alá’i
Delft University of Technology, Delft, The Netherlands
Abstract pseudo VSP facilitates an accurate comparison be-

The data set provided for amplitude versus off- tween real VSP data and surface data. Integration of
set (AVO) inversion has been subjected to the three real and pseudo VSP data may provide a new way to
steps which are involved in the DELPHI consortium predict lateral reservoir variations.
program: preprocessing, structural imaging, and litho-
logic characterization.
In the preprocessing step, a major problem is the Introduction
presence of strong surface-related multiples. With an The DELPHI consortium at the Delft University
integrated surface-related and Radon multiple elimi- of Technology is carrying out a research program on
nation procedure, it was possible to remove the mul- the stepwise inversion of seismic data. The three prin-
tiples in a satisfactory way without distorting the pri- cipal steps are:
mary AVO characteristics.
Once the multiples were removed, structural im- 1) Preprocessing
aging could be done in a fairly straightforward way, 2) Structural imaging
in which prestack migration techniques were used to 3) Lithologic characterization
get a good macro velocity depth model for the
poststack depth migration. As such, the Mobil AVO data set is a good candi-
In the lithologic inversion stage, anomalies in the date to test the application of the DELPHI processing
compressional to shear wave velocity cp / cs ratio, approach.
which are related to hydrocarbons, were detected by For this data set, preprocessing is an important
inversion of prestack data. The inversion result shows step, as the data suffer from distortions due to sur-
that the shallower reservoirs have larger anomalies face multiple energy. The DELPHI surface-related
than the deeper (Jurassic) reservoirs. This is in agree- multiple elimination method (including the latest de-
ment with the provided well data. velopments on integration with the parabolic Radon
Finally, using wave equation-based depth ex- method) will be applied to supply the best possible
trapolation, a shot record at the well was transformed primaries-only data set for the imaging and charac-
into a pseudo vertical seismic profile (VSP). The terization steps. The amplitudes of the primary events
139
Verschuur, van Wijngaarden, and Alá’i
should be preserved after this preprocessing stage. ior. These fluctuations are not as strong as the
Because of moderate dips, the structural imaging receiver amplitude fluctuations and, therefore,
step is accurately performed with conventional stack- they were left in the data.
ing and poststack depth migration. However, the ini- 6) Interpolation of missing shots and near offsets,
tial depth model derived from stacking velocities has Application of the surface-related multiple-
been updated using the prestack areal shot record elimination method requires full coverage of the
migration method described by Berkhout and shots and receivers up to zero offset. Among
Rietveld (1994) and Rietveld and Berkhout (1994) to the selected shots from the line, six shot records
obtain a consistent depth model. are missing (shots 549-551 and 859-861). They
In the lithologic characterization step, a gradient were interpolated in the common offset plane.
section was derived to get an overview of the general As the nearest offset was 263 m, approximately
AVO behavior of the data. After that, the preprocessed ten near-offset traces are missing in each shot.
data were used as input for our linear constrained They were created using a parabolic Radon
inversion process to estimate the seismic contrast pa- transform to extrapolate the data to zero offset
rameters. Well information was used to constrain the in the CMP domain (see Kabir and Verschuur,
inversion. The contrast parameter section was then 1993).
transformed to lithology/hydrocarbon information.
The final section of this paper describes how the seis- In Figure 1, five shots (503, 603, 703, 803 and 903)
mic shot records around one of the wells were trans- are displayed without any processing (except for di-
formed to pseudo VSP data for comparison with the rect-wave mute). For display purposes, NMO correc-
real VSP data. tion is applied to the shots. This gives some idea about
the structure of the primary reflections. The down-
ward curving events can be considered to be mul-
Preprocessing tiples.
To process the Mobil line, shots 354 to 1053 were In Figure 2, the same five shots (503, 603, 703, 803
selected, with 1024 samples per trace. The preprocess- and 903) are displayed after the five basic preprocess-
ing consisted of the following steps: ing steps. Deconvolution has done a good job with
respect to sharpening the events. Note that near traces
1) Direct wave mute. Careful direct wave muting have been created up to zero offset. Actually, due to
was performed so that the reflection data were the many multiples, the interpolation results are a little
undisturbed. noisy for the larger times (larger than 2 s). Later we
2) 3-D to 2-D spherical correction. A simple time will see that we fail to do a good job of multiple re-
gain was applied to simulate line source instead moval on the interpolated near offsets. However, they
of point source responses. are only meant to yield a better multiple estimation
3) Replacement of bad traces. On careful inspec- and will be omitted in the later processing (i.e., stack-
tion of the shots it appeared that several chan- ing and migration).
nels in each shot contained data that are not con-
sistent with their neighboring traces (phase and
amplitude distortions). They were killed and Multiple Elimination
reinterpolated from the good traces using a
rough normal moveout (NMO) correction and Method
spline interpolation. After the basic preprocessing sequence, the data
4) Wavelet deconvolution. Predictive decon- are ready for the most important preprocessing step:
volution was applied with a gap of 20 ms and a multiple elimination. As can be seen in Figure 2, a lot
filter length of 240 ms. of multiples are present in the data, especially in the
5) Receiver sensitivity correction. Even after in- deeper part of the sections. Therefore, effective mul-
terpolation to replace bad traces, the receivers tiple elimination that preserves the primary ampli-
appeared to show a consistent sensitivity be- tudes is necessary to obtain reliable AVO inversion
havior throughout the shot records. Least- results. We will compare and integrate two methods,
squares inversion techniques were used to cor- the surface-related multiple-elimination method and
rect these amplitude fluctuations. Also the the parabolic Radon tranform multiple-elimination
sources showed a fluctuating amplitude behav- method.
140
DELPHI Stepwise Approach to AVO Processing
shot number
503 603 703 803 903
Q)
E
3.b..L,;==
Fig. 1. Shot records 503, 603, 703, 803, and 903 before preprocessing (NMO correction applied).
shot number
503 603 703 803 903
Q)
E
:0::
Fig. 2. Shot records 503, 603, 703, 803, and 903 after basic preprocessing and interpolation of
missing shots and traces (NMO correction applied).
141
Surface-related and Radon multiple put of another multiple elimination method.

This makes the method more efficient.
elimination 2) Each iteration is carried out as a linear least-
The surface-related multiple elimination method, squares optimization step, yielding faster and
described by Verschuur et al. (1992), is based on wave better results (i.e., no local minima). In addi-
theory. It can be proven that by taking temporal and tion, the restrictions on the estimated wavelet
lateral auto-convolutions of the seismic data, an ac- deconvolution filter can be relaxed. Therefore,
curate prediction of the surface-related multiples is varying signatures for different sources or even
obtained. Subsurface information is not needed, but source directivity are included in a more con-
information on the free surface reflectivity (assumed venient way (Verschuur and Berkhout, 1993).
to be –1 for marine data) and the source wavefield is
required. As the latter is not known in practice, the In conclusion, we propose to make use of an effi-
method is applied adaptively. By eliminating the cient multiple removal procedure to get an initial guess
multiples, the source signature is estimated as well. of the multiple free data and use that as input for an
The generalized Radon transform multiple sup- iterative formulation. Then only one or two iterations
pression method originally was described by will be needed for the final surface-related multiple
Hampson (1986). By adding the events in a seismic elimination result. The examples will show that the
record (e.g., a CMP gather) along curved paths, each Radon multiple elimination method provides a very
event maps to a restricted area in the transform do- good initial guess for the multiple free data.
main. In the case that primaries and multiples have
different moveouts, they map to different parts in the
Radon domain. In this domain, the multiples are se- Multiple Elimination
lected and an inverse transform is applied. Next, the
predicted multiples are subtracted from the input Results
data, yielding the primary gather. From an implemen- The initial multiple elimination results obtained
tation point of view, the parabolic Radon transform with the parabolic Radon transform method are dis-
is more efficient than a hyperbolic transform since the played in Figure 3. (Note that the Radon transform
procedure can be applied in the Fourier domain for method is applied on CMP gathers, although shots
each individual frequency component (see also Kabir are shown here). Comparing the results with the in-
and Verschuur, 1993). By applying a partial NMO cor- put data of Figure 2 shows that the Radon transform
rection to the input data, the residual moveouts often method does a very good job in the shallow data
can be assumed to be approximately parabolic. Us- (above 2 s) but below 2 s some multiples still remain.
ing least-squares matrix inversion to transform the Using more severe muting in the Radon domain may
data to the Radon domain, optimum resolution can distort primary reflection energy.
be achieved. If the offset geometry of the subsequent This result was used as an initial multiple predic-
data gathers is (approximately) constant, a very effi- tion operator (as the upper part is multiple free) for
cient implementation of the Radon transform can be the surface-related multiple-elimination method. Only
achieved (Kelamis and Chiburis, 1992.) one iteration had to be applied. The surface-related
multiple-elimination method also provides an esti-
Integration of surface-related and mate of the residual source signature deconvolution
operator. This filter was applied to the output to simu-
parabolic multiple elimination late zero-phase results. The remaining distortions of
Following the theory of surface-related multiple the wavelet are due to propagation and absorption
elimination (Verschuur and Berkhout, 1994), it can be effects only; (i.e., subsurface-related effects). Addition-
shown that the adaptive surface-related multiple ally, a dip filter was used to remove those dips from
elimination procedure can be written as an iterative the data that do not contribute at the target.
process. For this iterative procedure, an initial esti- For the shots under consideration, Figure 4 shows
mate of the multiple free data is used as multiple pre- the final result. It appears that, partly due to
diction operator. The iterative formulation has two deconvolution, the result has higher frequencies and
major advantages: is noisier than the Radon result. But in the deeper data,
it was possible to predict and remove the multiples
1) The iteratitive procedure begins with a better that were left by the Radon method. For the upper
guess for the multiple free data, e.g., the out- part, the Radon result might even be better, although
142
Fig. 3. Shot records 503, 603, 703, 803, and 903 after parabolic Radon multiple elimination
(NMO correction applied).
Fig. 4. Shot records 503, 603, 703, 803, and 903 after surface-related multiple elimination and
wavelet deconvolution.
143
at stack level this difference was not visible. Both the the stacked section after basic preprocessing, but be-
Radon and the surface-related method have some dif- fore multiple elimination. Figure 6 shows the stack
ficulties at the very near offsets. Therefore, a near-off- after multiple elimination and application of the esti-
set mute was applied before stacking. Figure 5 shows mated residual wavelet deconvolution filter. Figure 6
800
900
1000 _. 111
1100
l-
Q)
.0
E
::l
c 1200
Q.
"0
u
1300
1400
1500
1600
Fig. 5. Stacked section after basic processing.
144
shows an improvement in the multiple removal for effect of multiple removal after migration is shown
both shallow (e.g., first-order multiples at 1.1 s) and in Figure 7. Deeper structures are better imaged.
deeper multiples (e.g., around CMP 1300 at 2.8 s). The
800
900
1000
1100
....
(])
.0
E
:::l
c 1200
0-
"0
()
1300
1400
1500
1600
Fig. 6. Stacked section after multiple elimination and residual wavelet deconvolution.
145
800
900
1000
1100
....
Q)
.£l
E
::J
c 1200
0..
-0
u
1300
1400
1500
1600
depth (m)
Fig. 7. Poststack depth migration of stack after multiple elimination and residual wavelet
deconvolution.
146
Constrained Linear ∆Z ∆ cp
= Γ1 c (4)
Z p
Inversion and
∆ cp ∆µ
After preprocessing and multiple elimination, we = Γ2

used linearized inversion on CMP gathers to estimate cp µ . (5)
the relative elastic contrast parameters. We assumed
a locally flat and low contrast medium. In our algo- Lithology and hydrocarbon
rithm, the nonlinear Zoeppritz equation for the elas-
tic angle dependent plane-wave P-P reflection coeffi- indicators
cient R(φ) is linearized. Following Aki and Richards Since the estimates are derived from a linear com-
(1980), R(φ) is written as a weighted sum of the rela- bination of the data, any linear combination of the
tive contrasts in the elastic parameters P-wave veloc- original parameters can be taken. This means that we
ity cp , S-wave velocity cs and density ρ can, for example, estimate the relative P-wave veloc-
ity contrast ∆cp/cp and the relative shear modulus con-
trast ∆µ/µ and compute, from a linear combination of
1 ∆ cp c2s ∆ cs 1 cs2 ∆ρ
R( φ ) = 2 sec2φ − 4 2 sin2φ + (2 − 2 2 sin2φ) those two, a contrast deviation factor
cp cp cs cp ρ
(1)
∆ cp k ρ cs ∆µ
∆D = c − . (6)
where φ equals the angle of the incident P-wave, ∆cp p 2 cp µ
equals contrast in the P-wave velocity over an inter-
face and cp equals the average P-wave velocity over The contrast deviation factor ∆D shows deviations
the interface. Similar definitions apply for ∆cs, cs, ∆ρ from an empirical linear relation between P-wave and
and ρ. This can also be written in terms of tan2φ and S-wave velocities (Castagna et al., 1985),
sin2φ:
1 ∆Z 1 ∆cp ∆µ cp = (k ρ ) cs + c (7)
R( φ ) = + tan 2 φ − 2 γ2 2
2 Z 2 cp µ sin (2)
with where k [(kg/m3)-0.5] and c [m/s] are constants.
Well-log velocities are used to determine the con-
cs
Z = cp ρ, µ = ρc2s and γ=c . (3) stants k and c. Differentiating this relation to obtain a
p relation in relative contrasts gives
Available well data can be used to estimate the ∆ cp k ρ cs ∆µ

= . (8)
relation between the P-wave velocity and the S-wave cp 2 cp µ
velocity γ. Note that interfaces satisfying Equation (7) will
In the inversion algorithm, the NMO-corrected show a contrast deviation factor ∆D equal to zero.
CMP data are converted to the reflection coefficients Equation (6) needs the trend in the relation
(scaled with the wavelet) for a number of angles us- k ρ (ρ)[cs/cp] at every point in the subsurface to com-
ing the P-wave macro model. pute deviations from Equation (7).
The relative contrasts can be found by least- In our algorithm, we compute the ratio Γ from
squares inversion. Using Equation (2) we estimated the data using the relation
the relative contrast in acoustic impedance Z, in P-
wave velocity cp and in the shear modulus µ at each
time sample by minimizing the difference between ∆ cp ∆µ
R(φ) given by Equation (2) and the NMO-corrected cp (x ,t) = Γ(x ,t) µ (x,t) (9)
CMP data. The output of the inversion consists of
three time sections: one for each estimated contrast. and average the ratio in time and in lateral direction
In our algorithm, a Bayesian approach is used in to get <Γ(x,t)>.
the statistical inversion. The available well data are This averaged ratio is used to compute deviations
used in the following relations to stabilize the inver- from the trend in the ratio between the P-wave veloc-
sion: ity contrast and in the shear modulus contrast. This
147
anomaly indicator or contrast deviation factor section acoustic impedance contrast with a polarity reversal
is defined by in amplitude versus offset of about 2.7 s.
The highly faulted area at CMP 1100 at 2800 m
∆ cp ∆µ shows also anomalies. One should note that the as-
IND(x,t) = c (x,t) − < Γ (x,t) >
µ ( x ,t) .
(10)
p sumptions of a (locally) flat layered medium are vio-

lated here.
Inversion results
The depth migrated section was interpreted to VSP
show the main fault structures. The large reflector near The Mobil data also contained three-component
the base Cretaceous or ‘X’ unconformity as well as zero-offset vertical seismic profiles recorded in wells
the large fault blocks in the Jurassic section are easily A and B. We used the VSP data for Well B to investi-
recognized in Figure 8. We also tried to follow the gate how they tie to the surface data. In this section,
main reservoir sands. we address:
At well A, we made crossplots of the P-wave ve- • Preprocessing of the raw VSP data (Well B)
locity cp and the shear modulus µ around the three • Pseudo VSP generation from a shot record along
hydrocarbon bearing sands at 2000 m, 2300 m and the line near Well B
2600 m. The crossplots are shown in Figures 9 and 10. • Comparison of the Pseudo VSP data with the
From these figures we conclude that the relation be- preprocessed real VSP data
tween cp and µ is approximately linear for shales
and nonhydrocarbon sandstones. The oil-bearing
sandstones have a slightly lower cp/ µ ratio. The VSP preprocessing
gas-bearing sandstones have a larger deviation in Some results will be shown on the preprocessing
cp/ µ ratio from the trend, which is clearest in Figure of the raw three-component VSP data (Well B—start-
9. From this well data analysis we conclude that it ing at the sea bottom at 500 m depth). Here we intro-
should be possible to detect the gas sands as an duce a fast and efficient method to suppress the noisy
anomaly in the ratio of the relative P-wave and µ con- and spiky parts in the VSP data registrations. The
trasts (Equation 10). method will be applied to the zero-offset vertical seis-
The first output section from the inversion is the mic profile for Well B. The registration tool used to
estimated contrast in acoustic impedance. A poststack record Well B consisted of four detectors each mea-
depth migrated section from 900 m to 4000 m is shown suring three-component data. Figure 15 illustrates the
in Figure␣ 1. The estimated relative contrasts in cP and raw VSP data registrations for the four detectors. Only
µ are combined as stated in Equation␣ (10), and the re- the vertical component is shown. Figure 16 shows
sult is shown in Figure 12. The overlaid interpreta- again the registrations for detector␣ 1 together with a
tion is the same as in Figure 8. blowup of a selected part of the data. The blowup of
The indicator (Figure 12) shows clearly the strong the data registrations is shown here to give a better
AVO anomalies in the area below the X-reflector be- view of the noise in the VSP data. As can be seen from
tween well A and B. From well data, we know that at the raw VSP data registrations, there are many bad
well B, this layer does not contain any hydrocarbons. traces.
The gas and oil sands at well A around 2600 m are not Furthermore, one can see that several registrations
clearly present as an anomaly in the indicator. Com- were made at each depth level, in which many traces
paring the crossplots of the well data in Figures 9 and are noisy. The objective is to remove the bad traces in
10, we could already have concluded that it would be a fast and efficient way before common depth level
difficult to see this reservoir as an anomaly. stack so that we obtain only one clean trace per depth
The area indicated by Q at 2000 m around CMP level. In the following, we illustrate an efficient sort-
1375 shows also a very strong anomaly. The NMO ing and stacking method, the so-called alpha-trim
corrected CMP data are shown in Figure 13. Here we stack. For an extensive discussion and applications
see a strong increase in amplitude versus offset, which of this process, the reader is referred to Scheick and
might be related to a gas–filled sandstone. The area Stewart (1991) and Frinking (1994). Figure␣ 18 illus-
indicated by P at 3100 m around CMP 1234 shows an trates the alpha-trim stack procedure of sorting and
anomaly in the same layer, in which at Well B a gas stacking at a certain depth level. For each time sample,
sand has been found. The NMO-corrected CMP data the data are sorted in ascending order of amplitude.
is again shown in Figure 14. Here we can see a small This is repeated for all time samples. Next a window
148
well A
900
1000
1100
....
(])
.c
E
;::)
c:: 1200
Q.
"'0
()
1300
1400
1500
well 8
1600
Fig. 8. Interpreted depth migration.
149
150
Fig. 9. Crossplot of the P-wave velocity versus µ at Well A around 2000 m and 2300 m.
Fig. 10. Crossplot of the P-wave velocity versus µ at Well A around 2600 m.
151
152
1600
1400
800
1200
1000
Fig. 11. Depth migration of acoustic impedance contrast (from 900 m).
~ ~
Ii
.... ....~
§ §
I !
§ §
§ §
..
§ ..
§
..
~
Q
..
§
..8 ....8
..51 ..
~
....
8 .8...
....
~
....51
i... i
po
5!
...... ...51
i... i...
...~
Q
...~
§... §...
...~
Q
::!
...
§...
~
I... Q
I...
I I...
Fig. 12. AVO anomaly indicator (in depth) with structural interpretation and well locations overlaid.
153
154
Q at 2 s.
Fig. 13. NMO-corrected CMP gather at CMP 1375 showing event

P at 2.7 s.
Fig. 14. NMO-corrected CMP gather at CMP 1222 showing event
155
depth[m]
a) b)
c) d)
Fig. 15. Raw VSP data registrations (Well B—vert. component; detectors 1 to 4).
156
Fig. 16. (a) Data registrations for

detector 1 and (b) partial blowup.
Fig. 17. Alpha-trim sorting and stacking procedure applied to VSP data (several registra-
tions at one depth level).
157
depth [m]
~ ~
Ql Ql
E E
+= +=
a)
depth [m]
500 1500 2500 3500
Fig. 18. VSP data after alpha-trim stacking for different α values: (a) α = 0, (b) α = 0.7, (c) α = 1, (d)
VSP data after manual trace editing.
158
is selected within which the data are stacked. The (1994). First we will show the result of the pseudo
width of the window depends on the value of α, which VSP generation from the shot record with all multiples
varies between α = 0 and α = 1. α = 0 selects all traces included (Figure 20). Acoustic two-way wavefield
at each depth level before stack (i.e., a mean stack of extrapolation operators are used in this pseudo VSP
all traces per depth) and α␣ =␣ 1 corresponds to select- generation. (Only reflected wavefields in the shot
ing only 1 trace (the median filtering technique). In- record are used as input; the direct source wavefield
creasing the parameter a reduces the number of traces is not included.) The seismic data are affected by very
(data points) used for stacking. The value of α must strong multiples, and the primaries are not clearly vis-
be chosen such that the stacked result contains at least ible because of these strong multiples. Therefore the
one clean trace per depth level. Figure 18 shows the pseudo VSP was also generated from the same shot
result of applying the alpha-trim stacking for a val- record after adaptive surface multiple elimination was
ues 0, 0.7, and 1 (Figures 18a, b and c, respectively). applied. A blocked version of the true velocity log
Afterward we regularized the data in depth and we used for the generation of the pseudo VSP is displayed
interpolated missing traces. With increasing values of next to the pseudo VSP to show its relation in depth
α we remove more and more noisy data points. We with the migrated section. Figure 21 shows the pseudo
chose α = 0.7 (Figure␣ 18b) as optimal for removing VSP generated from the same shot record (822, i.e., at
noisy data points and preserving the amplitudes of Well B) after surface-related multiple elimination. The
the useful data. primaries are more identifiable compared to the
The lower part of Figure 18 compares the alpha- pseudo VSP in Figure 20. Note the downgoing mul-
trim stacking procedure for α (Figure␣ 18c) with a con- tiple reflections from the sea bottom (at 500 m depth).
ventional method for VSP preprocessing (Figure 18d). The transformation of the surface data into pseudo
The conventional method for VSP preprocessing is VSP data provides a better understanding of complex
manual removal of noisy traces before common depth events (e.g., internal multiples). Reference arrows
level stacking. This is a very time consuming method. show the relation of the different data sets in the dif-
Finally the alpha-trim method is compared with the ferent planes (x-t, z-t, x-z). This facilitates following
median filtered version, which shows that the alpha- an event from the shot record to the VSP data and
trim method looks even better. Note that with manual tracing it back to the intersection with the direct source
trace editing, a complete trace is removed and useful wavefield at the original reflector depth. In fact the
information within this trace is lost. The alpha-trim pseudo VSP data can be used as a tool to map a time
stacking procedure determines for each time slice event in the shot record into depth. The generation of
which samples will be rejected. In this way useful in- the pseudo VSP data provides an unambiguous tie
formation will be preserved that would otherwise be between seismic events on a time section and their
rejected as a bad trace. The same procedure for sup- geologic interface in depth.
pressing the noisy parts of the raw VSP data was ap-
plied on the two horizontal components recorded in Comparison pseudo VSP and real
Well B. Figure 19 illustrates the result of alpha-trim
stacking on the horizontal-1 and horizontal-2 com- VSP
ponent of the data. The optimal value for α was found Here we give some final remarks regarding the
to be α = 0.6. The conversion from the direct P- to an value of the pseudo VSP data. First we would like to
S-wave can be clearly identified, although reflections discuss the comparison between real VSP and pseudo
are very difficult to distinguish. VSP data (generated after surface-related multiple
elimination). Note that only primaries should be com-
Pseudo VSP generation from pared. Because the acquisition of the real VSP data is
completely different from the surface data, the data
surface data have different frequency content. The pseudo VSP
So far we have described the preprocessing of the data have a lower frequency band, and therefore a
real VSP data. In the following, we will show the gen- lower resolution, than the real VSP data. On the other
eration of pseudo VSP data from a real shot record hand, after proper preprocessing (this may include a
(shot point 822; CDP No. 1572) at Well B. To avoid the thorough study of the sources and detectors that are
influence of interpolated near-offset traces, the pseudo used in both situations), the pseudo VSP may have a
VSP was generated at 200 m offset. For an extensive better signal-to-noise ratio. Hence, in practical situa-
overview and discussion on the generation of pseudo tions, both VSPs may enhance each other significantly.
VSP data from surface data, see Alá’i and Wapenaar Of fundamental importance in the pseudo VSP gen-
159
depth [m]
500 1500 2500 3500
a) b)
Fig. 19. (a) Original VSP data (Well B—hor. 1-component) and (b) after alpha-trim stacking (α–
TS) α = 0.6. (c) hor. 2-component) and (d) after α–TS α = 0.6.
160
III 1111
I I , ..
I
'I I
depth [m]
Fig. 20. Integrated shot record /pseudo VSP / migrated section (all multiples included).
161
depth [m]
Fig. 21. Integrated shot record / pseudo VSP / migrated section (after surface-related multiple elimination).
162
eration method is that we can walk away from the Castagna, J. P., Batzle, M. L., and Eastwood, R. L., 1985,
well with the optimally determined matching param- Relationships between compressional-wave and
eters at the well and extend our geologic knowledge shear-wave velocities in clastic silicate rocks: Geo-
laterally in all directions. We expect that the inherent physics, 50, 571-581.
simplicity of pseudo VSP data will allow a more de- Berkhout, A. J., and Rietveld, W. E. A., 1994, Determi-
tailed interpretation of lateral variations in the reser- nation of macro models for prestack migration:
voir. Part 1, Estimation of macro velocities: 64th Ann.
Internat. Mtg., Soc. Expl. Geophys., Expanded
Abstracts, 1330-1333.
Discussion and Frinking, P. J. A., 1994, Integration of L1 and L2 filter-
ing with applications to seismic data processing:
Conclusions Delft University of Technology.
The anomaly indicator used in this article shows Hampson, D., 1986, Inverse velocity stacking for mul-
AVO anomalies in the data. This means that anoma- tiple elimination, J. CSEG, 22, No. 1, 44-55.
lies in cp/ µ ratio, which are related to hydrocarbons, Kabir, M. M. N., and Verschuur, D. J., 1993, Parallel
can be detected by inversion of prestack data, but computation of the parabolic Radon transform:
nonhydrocarbon-related AVO anomalies are also applications for CMP-based preprocessing: 63rd
present. The general trend in the relation between cp Ann. Internat. Mtg., Soc. Expl. Geophys., Ex-
and cs must be determined to find the anomalies. But panded Abstracts, 193-196.
the trend can be estimated from the data. For AVO Kelamis, P. G., and Chiburis, E. F., 1992, Land data
inversion of the deeper data, it is important to remove examples of Radon multiple suppression: First
multiple reflections, to obtain the correct angle de- Break, 10, No. 7, 275-280.
pendent reflectivity. Rietveld, W. E. A., and Berkhout, A. J., 1994, Determi-
We demonstrated the generation of pseudo VSP nation of macro models for prestack migration:
data. The pseudo VSP facilitates an accurate compari- Part 2, Estimation of macro boundaries: 64th Ann.
son between real VSP data and surface data. In addi- Internat. Mtg., Soc. Expl. Geophys., Expanded
tion, pseudo VSPs can be used for lateral prediction. Abstracts, 1334-1337.
Schieck, D. G., and Stewart, R. R., 1991, Prestack me-
dian f-k filtering: 61st Ann. Internat. Mtg., Soc.
Acknowledgments Expl. Geophys., Expanded Abstracts, 1480-1483.
This research was performed under the direction Verschuur, D. J., and Berkhout, A. J., and Wapenaar,
of the international DELPHI consortium project. The C. P. A., 1992, Adaptive surface-related multiple
authors would like to thank the participating compa- elimination: Geophysics, 57, 1166-1177.
nies for their financial support and the stimulating Verschuur, D. J., and Berkhout, A. J., 1993, Integrated
discussions at the DELPHI meetings. approach to wavelet estimation and multiple
elimination: 63rd Ann. Internat. Mtg., Soc. Expl.
Geophys., Expanded Abstracts, 1095-1098.
References Verschuur, D. J., and A. J. Berkhout, 1994, Multiple
Aki, K., and Richards, P. G., 1980, Quantitative seis- technology, Part 1: Estimation of multiple reflec-
mology: W. H. Freeman and Co. tions: 64th Ann. Internat. Mtg., Soc. Expl.
Alá’i, R., and Wapenaar, C. P. A., 1994, Pseudo VSP Geophys., Expanded Abstracts, 1493-1496.
generation from surface measurements: A new
tool for seismic interpretation, J. Seis. Expl., 3, No.
1, 79-94.
163

9
AVO Analysis of Mobil Offshore

Data by a Linearized Inversion in
the τ – p Domain
Ganyuan Xia
Department of Geological Sciences and Institute for Geophysics,
University of Texas at Austin
Mrinal K. Sen
Institute for Geophysics, University of Texas at Austin
Paul L. Stoffa
Department of Geological Sciences and Institute for Geophysics,
University of Texas at Austin
diagnostic for direct detection of hydrocarbons.

Abstract We first applied the weighted stack technique
We developed a linearized inversion scheme in successfully to synthetic data and tested for the sen-
the τ – p domain based on a weighted stack technique, sitivity of the results to the background velocity. Given
using a modification of an algorithm proposed by the correct background velocity, the algorithm recov-
Smith and Gidlow (1987). The algorithm assumes that ers the P-wave and S-wave reflectivities and the fluid
the background velocity model is known and obtains factor very well. The results are, however, sensitive
perturbations to the background from the weighted to the background velocity model. Then we applied
stack. The weights are computed from a linearized the inversion technique to the Mobil AVO data set.
approximation of the reflection coefficients. We as- We derived four sections from the data—∆α/α, ∆β/β,
sume that the background shear-wave velocity fol- ∆Q/Q, and ∆F. The fluid factor profile indicates a hy-
lows the mud-rock line, and we use Gardner’s equa- drocarbon (gas) zone at around 1.97 s which corre-
tion to relate density to compressional wave velocity. lates well with the well-log data. We performed the
The inversion results in estimates of fractional changes inversion using CMP gathers and assuming a 1-D
in compressional wave velocity (∆α/α) and shear- earth model, and we derived the background veloc-
wave velocity (∆β/β). Two other factors, pseudo ity by interactively perturbing the velocity model until
Poisson’s ratio (∆Q/Q) and a fluid factor (∆F), are also the reflection events were aligned. We believe that a
calculated by a linear combination of the two pertur- more sophisticated velocity analysis may help in bet-
bation parameters. The fluid factor can be used as a ter resolving lateral continuity of parameters.
165
Xia, Sen, and Stoffa
Introduction Estimates of Fractional

Most commonly used seismic waveform inver-
sion methods employ automated model fitting in Changes of Rock Property
which synthetic waveform data for an earth model The reflected P-wave amplitude can be related to
are matched against the observed seismograms. This the relative change in compressional-wave velocity,
is not a trivial task since the generation of synthetic shear-wave velocity, and density by the following lin-
seismograms is fairly time consuming. Iterative linearized approximation of the reflection coefficient
ear inverse methods (e.g., McAulay, 1985; Wood, 1993) (Aki and Richards, 1980):
suffer from the fundamental limitation that the start-
ing solution should be close to the optimal answer. 1 β2 2  ∆ρ 1 ∆α β2 ∆β
R≈ 1 − 4 2 sin θ  + − 4 sin 2 θ
The inverse problem is nonlinear, especially for large 2 α  ρ 2 cos θ α
2
α 2
β
offset data, and to overcome this complication, glo- (1)
bal optimization methods such as simulated anneal-
ing (SA) and genetic algorithms (GA) have recently where R is the reflection coefficient of P-waves, α is
been proposed (e.g., Sen and Stoffa, 1995). Note that the average P-wave velocity, β is the average S-wave
there are two attributes that can be exploited in ana- velocity, ρ is the average density, θ is the average of
lyzing the seismograms; they are traveltimes and the angle of incidence and angle of transmitted P-wave,
reflection amplitudes. While the former are largely and ∆α, ∆β and ∆ρ are the changes in α and β across
affected by the low-frequency component (also called the interface, respectively. The linearized formulation
the background) of the velocity model, the latter are works well for most seismic reflection surveys where
primarily caused by high-frequency variations in the ∆α/α, ∆β/β, and ∆ρ/ρ are sufficiently small such that
velocity model. The application of a hybrid method the second-order terms can be neglected and the inci-
was proposed (e.g., Cary and Chapman, 1988) in dence angle does not approach critical angle. It also
which traveltimes first were matched by a Monte partly compensates for locally converted shear waves
Carlo search while waveform and amplitude fitting (Simmons and Backus, 1994).
were done by a gradient search algorithm. Full wave- Equation (1) can be arranged in such a way that
form inversion methods use a one-step procedure in the terms become increasingly important with increas-
which traveltime, waveform, and amplitude are fit- ing incidence angles (Shuey, 1985)
ted simultaneously. The resulting algorithms are
computationally intensive. 1  ∆α ∆ρ 
The variation in lithology or elastic properties of R≈  + 
2 α ρ 
rock layers is manifested in the seismograms as varia-
tion in reflection amplitude as a function of offset. This   1 ∆α β 2 ∆β β 2 ∆ρ  2
effect, popularly known as AVO (amplitude variation  + −4 2 −2 2  sin θ
 2 α α β α ρ 
with offset), has been used in the industry for direct
detection of hydrocarbons. Castagna and Backus 1 ∆α
(1993) serves as the general reference on this subject. +
2 α
( tan 2 θ − sin 2 θ ). (2)
The limited success in applying AVO in oil explora-
tion is partly due to the simplistic approaches and lin- The first term within brackets in Equation (2) is
earity assumptions employed. It is imperative to stress the normal incidence reflection coefficient. The third
that, depending on the accuracy of background ve- term becomes important only at large incidence
locity, the overall results from AVO inversion may be angles.
misleading. The approach that we use here is a modi- For a normal moveout-corrected CMP gather af-
fied version of the Geostack technique outlined by ter τ – p transform, the ray parameters along constant
Smith and Gidlow (1987), in which the linearized in- intercept time (τ) slices are known. Given the interval
version technique is used to estimate fractional velocity, the local angles of incidence are also known
changes in elastic properties directly. Our analysis is for a constant τ slice. The interval velocities can be
done in the τ – p domain. We will show the formula- derived from stacking velocities, nearby well logs, or
tion of the problem, followed by application to syn- nonlinear background estimation. These velocities are
thetic and real data. generally spatially varying.
166
AVO Analysis of Mobil Offshore Data
However, given the background velocities and the

τ – p transformed data, we have four unknown model  ∆α 
parameters to solve for, namely, ∆α/α, ∆β/β, ∆ρ/ρ,and
 α 
β2/α2. The parameter β2/α2 is generally the least resolved
 ∆β  = WRi , (8)
parameter. Often it is preferable to include β2/α2 as a 


priori information based on well logs or some other  β 
empirical relationship. For example, for young clastic
rocks, the mudrock line (Castagna, Batzle and Eastwood,
1985) gives the following linear relationship between where W is the weighting matrix (Menke, 1984). Thus
P-wave velocity and S-wave velocity: ∆α/α and ∆β/β can be directly obtained by a simple
weighted stacking at each τ.
α = 1.36 + 1.16β (3) Having derived ∆α/α and ∆β/β sections, we can
also derive two other model parameters to highlight
where the velocities are in km/s. Thus β2/α2 can be the fluid-content information (Smith and Gidlow,
derived by combining the mudrock line with the 1987). A pseudo-Poisson’s ratio reflectivity is defined to
smooth background P-wave velocity. reflect the changes in Poisson’s ratio by the following
To avoid unstable inversion results, we often use equation
another a priori assumption for densities. For ex-
ample, Hamilton’s equation (Hamilton, 1980) or ∆Q ∆α ∆β
= −
Gardner’s equation (Gardner et al., 1974) can be used Q α β (9)
to relate ∆ρ/ρ to ∆α/α. Gardner’s relation is as follows
where Q = α/β. Q increases monotonically with in-
∆ρ 1 ∆α creasing Poisson’s ratio σ.
= . (4) P-wave velocities decrease across the interface
ρ 4 α
between the water-bearing and gas-bearing sand-
Substituting equation (4) into (2) we obtain stone, while S-wave velocities remain about the same.
Therefore, Poisson’s ratio as well as Q decrease at the
5 ∆α β 2  ∆β 1 ∆α  2 1 ∆α
R≈ − 2 4 +  sin θ + tan 2 θ . (5) top of a gas-filled sand and increases at the bottom. Q
8 α α  β 2 α  2 α is much more convenient to use than Poisson’s ratio.
A fluid factor reflectivity can be defined to search
Sorting equation (5) in terms of ∆α/α and ∆β/β we have for any deviation from the assumed relationship be-
tween a and b, which for the mudrock line becomes
 5 1 β2 1 2  ∆α  β 2  ∆β ∆α β ∆β . (10)
R≈ − sin 2
θ + tan θ  +  −4 2 sin 2 θ  . ∆F = − 1.16
8 2 α 2
2  α  α  β α α β
(6) Note that ∆F is zero if α and β follow (in this case) the
mudrock line. Any deviation from the mudrock line
Rewriting equation (6) in a matrix form we obtain should be indicated by a non-zero value of ∆F. Since
gas-bearing sandstone separates nicely from the wa-
ter-bearing sandstone, ∆F should be negative at the
 ∆α 
top of a gas-filled sand and positive at the bottom.
 5 1 β 2
  β 2
 α 
( Ri ) =   8 − 2 α 2 sin 2 θi + 2 tan 2 θi  ,  −4 α 2 sin 2 θi    ∆β  .
1
Note also that magnitude of ∆F indicates explicitly
   the magnitude of deviation from the assumed
 β 
mudrock line. The mudrock line, however, is true only
(7) for a narrow band of lithology.
Equation (10) can be generalized as
This represents an overdetermined system which can
∆α ∆β
be solved by least squares at each τ , ∆F = − g( t ) , (11)
α β
where
167
β have been recovered well. In essence, the technique

g(t ) = M , (12) has successfully derived the band-limited reflectivity
α estimates.
One crucial requirement for the success of this
g(t) is defined as the gain factor, which is time-variant, technique is the right timing, i.e., a proper alignment
and M is a constant depending on the local rock prop- of the reflections using NMO. To test the sensitivity
erty. Scanning through different M to maximize ∆F of the algorithm to the timing, we applied NMO cor-
was done by Fatti et al. (1994). rection using a sweep of wrong velocity models. Re-
The parameters Q and F are completely deter- sults from one such inversion are shown in Figure 2.
mined from the data and the assumed functional re- Our analysis based on this model indicates that 1%
lationship between α and β, i.e., the mudrock line. error in the background velocity can produce only
We note that this type of a priori information also can marginally acceptable results. The fluid factor, how-
be tested and evaluated as part of a larger nonlinear ever, is a relatively robust model parameter. It does
optimization procedure. In other words, the coeffi- not show strong dependency on the background ve-
cients that describe the functional relationship be- locity.
tween α and β, and α and ρ, also can be found as part
of the background relation between these parameters.
Once a background has been determined, the frac- Results from Inversion of
tional quantities ∆α/α , ∆β/β, etc. can be extracted from
the τ – ρ seismograms within angles of 45o. Mobil Data
We applied the Geostack technique to the 2-D seis-
mic line from the Mobil AVO data set. The line was
Evaluating the Algorithm: shot in the Norwegian North Sea, with 25 m shot spac-
ing and slightly more than 1000 shotpoints with off-
A Synthetic Example sets ranging from 263 to 3238 m. The data were ac-
We include here a synthetic example to test our quired in intermediate water depth, with major noise
ability to estimate high-frequency fractional changes coming from water column reverberations. Two wells
in the material properties. The model used is shown (Well A and Well B) were drilled along the line; an-
in Figure 1a. The P-wave and S-wave velocity con- other well (Well C) was drilled slightly off the line.
form to the mudrock line, except at 2.2 s, where the The well data also were provided along with the seis-
higher β/α is an indication of the presence of gas. Syn- mic data.
thetic seismograms (Figure 1b) were constructed for We chose to work on the part of the line from shot
this model using a 40 Hz Ricker source wavelet. The number 317 to shot number 916, covering 600
reflection coefficients were computed by using exact shotpoints, equivalent to 15 km lateral coverage. Ac-
Zoeppritz’s equation, and the traveltimes were ob- cording to our CDP sorting convention, this part of
tained by ray tracing. The τ – p seismograms were the line corresponds to CDP numbers 380 to 979. Fig-
moveout corrected using the true velocity model, and ure 3 shows the stacked section. Two on-line well lo-
the postcritical reflections were muted out (Figure 1c). cations are at CDP number 503 and 885, correspond-
The weights for deriving ∆α/α, ∆β/β, ∆Q/Q, and ∆F ing to wells A and B, respectively. The crossplot of α
are displayed in Figure 1d. To the first order, at larger versus β (Figure 4) shows a similar relation between
ray parameters, the weights for ∆α/α have about the α and β as the mudrock line, but with a different slope.
same amplitude. When applying the weighted stack, The background P-wave velocity was determined
the contributions to ∆α/α from these larger ray pa- by smoothing the interval velocity, which was ob-
rameters tend to cancel out. This implies that infor- tained by an interactive τ - p NMO (Stoffa et al., 1992)
mation about ∆α/α is mainly manifested in smaller method. Figure 5 shows one of the interval velocity
ray parameters. On the other hand, information about models derived from this technique. The seismic data
∆F comes mainly from the larger ray parameters. Re- were carefully processed to preserve the amplitude
cently, there were attempts (e.g., Ross, 1995) to look information. The major processing steps include:
for AVO anomalies by contrasting near-offset and far-
offset stacks. This simple approach was very cheap, 1) transforming CDP sorted data to τ – p domain
but seemed effective. Figure 1e shows the results of (Figure 6a)
weighted stacks. When compared with the true re-
flection coefficients, we find that the four parameters
168
2) applying a ray parameter dependent predic-

tive deconvolution to remove water column re- Acknowledgments
verberation We thank Milo Backus for many helpful com-
3) muting any postcritical reflections and apply- ments. The work was supported by a grant from the
ing the τ – p NMO correction (Figure 6b), the Texas Advanced Research Program of the Texas
background velocity of Figure 5 was used Higher Education Coordinating Board, Contract No.
4) computing the weights based on the back- ARP264. The University of Texas Institute for Geo-
ground velocity provided physics Contribution Number is 1165.
5) weighted stacking
The final results are displayed as ∆α/α, ∆β/β, ∆Q/ References

Q, and ∆F sections in Figures 7a, 7b, 7c, and 7d, re- Aki, K., and Richards, P. G., 1980, Quantitative Seis-
spectively. Figure 7e is a closeup of the fluid factor mology: W. H. Freeman and Co.
section for part of the line marked with a rectangle in Cary, P. W., and Chapman, C. H., 1988, Automatic 1D
Figure 7(d). Two predominant gas reservoirs are ob- waveform inversion of marine seismic reflection
vious, as indicated by the strong negative values of data: Geophys. J. Int., 93, 527-546.
the fluid factor. We marked the proposed well loca- Castagna, J. P., Batzle, M. L., and Eastwood, R. L., 1985,
tion in Figure 7e. Detailed comparison between well Relationships between compressional-wave and
data and the inverted fluid factor section were done shear-wave velocities in clastic silicate rocks: Geo-
at one well location (Figure 8). Note the strong nega- physics, 50, 571-581.
tive amplitude in the ∆F section at slightly before 2.0 Castagna, J. P., and Backus, M. M., Eds., 1993, Offset-
s, which correlates well with the well data. Diffrac- dependent reflectivity—Theory and practice of
tion curves also are apparent in all four sections, sug- AVO analysis: Soc. Expl. Geophys.
gesting that inversion of migrated data may produce Fatti, J. L., Vail, P. J., Vail, Smith, G. C., Strauss, P. J.,
better results. and Levitt, P. R., 1994, Detection of gas in sand-
stone reservoirs using AVO analysis: A 3-D seis-
mic case history using the Geostack technique:
Discussion Geophysics, 59, 1362-1376.
We have applied a Geostack technique in the in- Gardner, G. H. F., Gardner, L. W., and Gregory, A. R.,
version of Mobil data in the τ – p domain. The tech- 1974, Formation velocity and density—The diag-
nique essentially estimates fractional changes in elas- nostic basics for stratigraphic traps: Geophysics,
tic properties by least squares fitting of reflection 39, 770-780.
amplitudes to a linearized version of the Zoeppritz’s Hamilton, E. L., 1980, Geoacoustic modeling of the
equation. Unlike any previous application we prefer sea floor, J. Acous. Soc. Am., 68, 1313-1340.
to invert the data in the τ – p domain because the trans- McAulay, A. D., 1985, Prestack inversion with plane-
formation automatically corrects for geometric layer point-source modeling: Geophysics, 50, 77-
spreading and does not require that the velocity func- 89.
tion be known. We, however, assumed that the struc- Menke, W., 1984, Geophysical data analysis: Discrete
ture can be approximated as locally 1-D at each CMP inverse theory: Academic Press.
location, and we determined the background veloc- Ross, C. P., 1995, Improved mature field development
ity using an interactive τ – p velocity analysis proce- with 3D/AVO technology: First Break, 13, 139-
dure. Such an assumption is probably violated at sev- 145.
eral locations, as we were unable to align the reflec- Sen, M. K., and Stoffa, P. L., 1995, Global optimiza-
tion events perfectly at every CMP location. We be- tion methods in geophysical Inversion: Elsevier
lieve that a more accurate velocity analysis tool will Science Publishing Co., Netherlands.
be able to produce improved results. Nonetheless, the Shuey, R. T., 1985, A simplification of the Zoeppritz
results are quite encouraging as we were able to match Equation: Geophysics, 50, 609-614.
the fluid factor log with that obtained from our in- Simmons, J. L., and Backus, M. M., 1994, AVO model-
version. So, at locations where well data are not avail- ing and the locally converted shear wave: Geo-
able, the fluid factor estimates obtained from our in- physics, 59, 1237-1248.
version can be relied upon. An improved background Smith, G. C., and Gidlow, P. M., 1987, Weighted stack-
velocity model and migration prior to inversion will ing for rock property estimation and detection of
help resolve lateral continuity of our inversion results. gas: Geophysical Prospecting, 35, 993-1014.
169
Stoffa, P. L., Wood, W. T., Shipley, T. H., Taira, A., and velocity analysis methods: J. Geophys. Res.,
Suyehiro, K., Moore, G. F., Botelho, M. A. B., 97, 1687-1713.
Tokuyama, H., and Nishiyama, E., 1992, Deep Wood, W. T., 1993, Least squares inversion of field
water high-resolution expanding spread and seismic data for an elastic 1-D earth: unpublished
split-spread marine seismic profiles: Acquisition Ph.D. dissertation, University of Texas at Austin.
a)
Fig. 1. Synthetic example of inversion of τ − p seismograms for perturbation in the background

parameters: (a) true velocity and smoothed background velocity models; P-wave velocity and S-
wave velocity conform the mudrock line except for the layer at about two-way time 2.22 s, where the
higher S-wave velocity indicates the presence of gas; (b) synthetic τ − p seismograms; (c) the τ − p
seismograms after applying normal moveout correction and proper muting; (d) four sets of weights
for estimating ∆α/α, ∆β/β, ∆Q/Q, and ∆F; (e) estimated band-limited ∆α/α, ∆β/β, ∆Q/Q, and ∆F (dashed
lines) in comparison with the their broadband true values (solid lines). True background velocities
are used.
170
b)
c)
171
b
~ ~
en..
<l
a: 0.2 ~ 0.2
o
LL o
(f) o LL 0
l-
I:
(!}
w
-0.2 a~ -0.2
~ o ~ 0
0.2 TAU (s) 0.2 TAU (s)
P (sJkm) P (sJkm)
d)
Q LL
a
<l
<l
a: 0.2 a: 0.2
oLL o
LL
o
~ ~
I
B-0.2 (!}
w
-0.2
w
~ 0 ~ o
0.2 TAU (s) 0.2 TAU (s)
P (sJkm) P (sJkm)
t!.a / a t!.O/O t!.F

1.9
e)
2
'- --
2.1
2.2
, ----
-.:=-:
:0: <=:: -
Fig. 1. Continued. ~2.3 ---
I-
2.4
\
r..-:::"-=,-:'
2.5 ----
--=-
2.6
2.7
172
a) b)
Fig. 2. (a) A 1.0% higher than the true background velocity model was used to NMO correct the τ − p
data; (b) estimated band-limited ∆α/α, ∆β/β, ∆Q/Q, and ∆F (dashed lines) in comparison with the their
broadband true values (solid lines).
173
~
STACKED SECTION
~
"
1.6
1.7
1.8
1.9
2.0
2.1
:§
2.2
><
.....
...~
~ fJ}
~
2.3 ...::s
~
::s
2.4 ~~~~:t~ ~:~;~: .~ ~":A wf~T ;.~\t!Z;.~J!~;~:i)At.l·~~~}~/~~j~~~~JJ.:~· f;~~_:·~ ~~t , ~~:~~~.~~~,~~fff.t~~\~,~ .:;;~~.;~t"l',\',_-~~&l;~tgl{(':':.~~i~}:\~\:::tr#l .:i ;1~.~::'1~j..~ i';.~~~~jl~ Q..
fJ}
.....
0
I-h
2.6 I-h
~
2.6
2.7
2.8
638 636 532 629 526 523 520 617 514 511 608 505 502 499 496 493 490 487 485 482 479 476 473 470 467 464 461 458 455 452
CDP DEPTH POINT (SPACING 25 m)
·10000.00 0 .00 10000.00
Fig. 3. Stacked section from CDP#450-540 (Well A located at CDP#503).

Fig. 4. P-wave velocity plotted against S-wave velocity (well-log data from Well A).
175
Fig. 5. Blocky and smoothed background velocity models obtained by using an interactive traveltime analy-
sis program (Stoffa et al., 1992).
176
a) b)
Fig. 6. Mobil data at CDP#503 (near Well A). (a) the τ − p transformed data; (b) the τ − p seismograms
after NMO and muting.
177
!
'"""' ~aa SECTION
00 a)
1.6
1.7
1.8
1.9
2.0
2.1
., ....><
- 2.2 ~
CJ)
~
~
2.3 .?
~
Fig. 7. Results 2.4

=
0.
CJ)
from the inver-
sion of Mobil
8'
2.5 ~
~
data: (a) Lia/a
section for part
of the line from 2.6
CDP# 450 to 540;
(b) Lif3!{3 section;
2. 7
(c) IlQIQ sec-
tion; (d) fluid
factor section 2.8
for line CDP# 538 535 fi32 529 526 523 520 517 514 51 1 508 505 502 499 496 493 490 487 485 482 479 476 473 470 467 464 461 458 455 452
380-979; (e) an
CDP DEPTH POINT (SPACING 25 m )
expanded plot
of fluid section
for line CDP#
450-540 as
marked by a
-400 .00 -200.00 0.00 200.00 400 .00
rectangle in (d).
b) ~13 / 13 SECTION
1.6
1.7
1.8
1.9
t.fu~i~r~€:fux.;•.1.}kt':r."1F
Mi·~;~;;~~i~h~~~:~ -t~'J'!S~""':ir~:'!m~~mlt¥tjJ i snt~'i.t~~!:nJ
2.0 -E:~T
~6;;;:.;u! i4#'.;;n~~~~:"J7"'1iRi~.ii~"".#.;Wt(l~ z, r.,:.}Fl!'~f~~1%''ift~~~~~,,~ ~
0
2.1-lU l _ . ' ~1tl{J~~"FfK\W~~~..:::.t.! ...· ,-< iei.~~;";':.>. ~ ·· !,!"I',~
.ttUk~Tr:1;'l:~i :!. ;;m:::a;~ ; \;;~:. . .
>
::s
~
<
"r:IJ
3:
Fig. 7. 2.2
-....
r:IJ
Continued. 0
~ 1-+\
2.3 ~
0
0'"
2.4 -lS;£'~i~~Q~~~f~i~~d~·~~t~;~~ft ~ r-~:~~~J~~~~Y·:S?~~.=_~~.·':;:~~:~~r~- '·,!~~~'~~:tt~~~:~_-_~~}~.~'~_~~:,-;'<':.~:;~~i'~~:···::·-· ~' ":~~~'~ .(~~Z.~"!f~~l;:: ~:~~::~:~~\~:' -....
0
~
r:IJ
2.5 -fjW~Q~"1f~:: ~~;~j~~~~j ~-iiH:tf 'i: .'~ " ';"': i'f$~~ .J::;~;?,;. t ~- \;,~~.,x;~'>;·f:!.~~i:'1'·":i. :~:7 ..... :,~ j . . ; ~".;,.;' U?;~ ~'. iw.;,,::~~t~ ~-~- _ ~.;~i.:;.&~i !~;~f.t1~i;~~?~··~· ~> ""·~~~i'.~~ ,·~~_fl~~t~ts;_~
;. ... ::r
0
I"t
I'D
2.6 _ff ~·_ J;.}w~~; ~~\\i~7V· '-~. .'-. ·~ .: ~~·~ ;~~;':.v~:·?~·i~~)~~~J~J{i{~~~~~M,~"~ ·~·.':\;"i~~ ~~.( ~.._~\~~~4~J;~i.~~jl~':.~;$Jr;~·~~t1~~);~~~~t£~~~.l!;· '
Cj
~ " \' , ,~:~~~j
~
.....
~
L· . ~ . : ~~io·~-.{J;;4.::.¥~~t.~ ~~~r~~?:~~ :.:1,~~~~': ~'; . ,_'_'~_~:- ' ~~~;,~?'l~~r.r"::·, · ·:,'~ ~~~~~5·~.EI\:~.:-_ --"'~ : : ~:~~,_yv.:...~ _.:~:;~\;S;L~}~l¥,::~~~~~~~:~;i~~.i-~";:;. >. :~ ·~r; ::,~~; ti7;~):t j
2.7
2.8
538 535 532 529 526 523 520 517 514 511 508 505 502 499 496 493 490 487 485 482 479 476 473 470467 464 461 458455 452
~
'I
\C
~
00 AQ/Q SECTION
0 c)
1.6
1.7
1.8
1.9
2.0
2.1
~·~ t ~ ~1 .:~r:-.:<~ -·- Y
.
3 ....><
f;] 2.2 ...~
Fig. 7. en
Continued. ~ t'I)
2.3 ...
=
~
~
=
2.4 -I ~:r~;':~·";l . ~.~~~~~~i'~·--;":t'~!t~~~Jf.7~;lJ~T~~··~';::;.·;r!1}:~~~">~~~~r.~~! ~~. '.'.~J~: ~:l:i;;ti~J.;;?~~1;:~--:M~!~~r..~"1~jf\~~f:.t"I?JWj"firJ~~.t: t"t·i. ·:"~~·,~~rf'.~? .:~ l} · ~:.:,~~~~fl
.. en
....
0
t-+.
t-+.
2.5 -f '~;. ··.·: · ,: :·~ : ;':l f.i~. : - ~:~~:.:Jl~;:t~~:f!.,~~·::t.~;t\'&.1~W:1W~*~~~1Ii]~l&.~&;ir:~rt:}_~'~~~~:J'?~~ ·~:;.1~ ~~~·:~~-r.~~;~~1t~";1ty€:~~~ ~
2.6
2.7
2.8
538 535 532 529 526 523 520 517 514 511 508505 502 499 496 493 490 487 485 482 479 476 473 470 467 464 461 458 455 452
-2000.00 0.00 2000.00

I ••
• • •
r-:"~~_-:~~r- .-
IC=,;,~ ~Q.__ ~'\~~~~'::"",,;,:;~::~:~:,~~~~~:{,.?~-:~~.:-~~;:~~;'~:' :f.t -:-;:J<-~~
, -"" ·-f <:J'

{- ..
• !
. . ..
, " ." -~ " ...... •
, "
"
,
I>'
~" #- ,
·· . t.""" .. ' ..~(?:.: ... '~
• f
;<
~:v:t .. 'ff'''
-..
~t
_,I I . • ,1'tIt .. p~,."
r OJ (i~' r'
I r'
.. • f ,.F~_·'~· ,
4.' ~ .. .. ...0 , ..J<. ,'.$ 1
! " _, 4("-~~{'.fI7' ./ ' ... f I ...
r tr.:"''''' lI~..;r ; .,r'''.
, • .j _~f "
r f • o. - . ' ,I." fa'
' , .... , ..,J'-'" '"' .-'
.. -,- .: 4't "J .. .'
I
.l
. i~;', .. (.,1 "

.~:
.' d -- " •
,. 01.-
.' ' ,
.. . . ~
'.!, {";
~ . .-
" } "
.",1 •
r'
"j
•
'i-O', .,
"
• •• :11 II II ' ..
I- I - . -. •••
~
00
~
~
00 e) FLUID FACTOR SECTION
N
drIlled well proposed well

( ....
I
1.6
1.7
1.8
1.9
2.0
2.1
....... 2.2 ....><

~ ~
Fig. 7. ~ 2.3 en
Continued. ;:!; I'D
E=: .?
2.4 ~
=s
Q..
2.5 en
8"
2.6 ~
~
2.7
2.8
2.9
540 535 530 525 520 515 510 505 500 495 490 485 480 475 470 465 460 455 45{
CDP DEPTH POINT (SPACING 25 m)
-1000.00 -500 .00 0.00 500.00 1000.00

a) b)
a /~ P
ill
~
~ 2100
«
3:
6 2200
3:
I-
2300
Fig. 8. (a) Well-log data from Well A; (b) the estimated fluid factor section around the well location
(center). The strong negative anomalies at around 1.97 s correlate with the well data very well. Location
of the well is marked with an arrow.
183

10
Rock/Fluid Properties and their

Effects on Seismic Responses
C.-S. Yin
ARCO International Oil and Gas Company, Plano, Texas
M. L. Batzle
Colorado School of Mines, Golden, Colorado
C. C. Mosher
ARCO Exploration and Production Technology, Plano, Texas
The seismic response of a hydrocarbon zone is The seismic response of a hydrocarbon zone is
determined by several factors, including pore fluid determined by several factors, including pore fluid
and rock properties, bed geometry, propagation ef- and rock properties, bed geometry, propagation ef-
fects, etc. In this study, hydrocarbon and brine densi- fects, etc. One of the key objectives in seismic pros-
ties and compressibilities have been computed based pect evaluation is to obtain pore fluid properties or
on fluid pressure, temperature and salinity distribu- detect changes in fluid properties. With high-quality
tions in the study area. For Well A, petrophysical seismic data and robust seismic processing capabili-
trends derived for shale, wet-sand and gas-sand re- ties, we are getting closer to reaching this goal. To ef-
veal distinct AVO behavior on the crossplot plane for fectively map the pore fluid properties using seismic
different interfaced lithologies. For a target zone with data, a thorough understanding of the fluid proper-
averaged bedding thickness less than a seismic wave- ties described through drilling and wireline logging
length, the effect of “tuning” would tend to distort should be established. Results presented in the first
the modeling results with wider dispersion of points part of this study are a demonstration of efforts in
on the AVO crossplot. The preprocessing applied to this direction.
seismic data prior to AVO analysis are critical to pre- Another important issue in seismic prospecting
serving information related to rock and fluid proper- is to be able to describe lithology and its variation in
ties. It will be shown that careful application of sur- the hydrocarbon zone. Studies have shown that dif-
face-consistent amplitude corrections, channel balanc- ferent lithologies tend to follow different
ing, and hyperbolic Radon filtering can significantly petrophysical trends in crossplots of density–veloc-
improve the quality of the seismic data. ity and shear-compressional velocities. These trends
can then be translated to AVO behavior in the prestack
domain for different geologic time intervals. This
C.-S. Yin worked on this project while with ARCO analysis helps the interpreter identify robust lithol-
Exploration and Production Technology, Plano, Texas. ogy indicators as the geologic environment changes.
185
Yin, Batzle, and Mosher
To make a quantitative link between well-log and procedure, several lithologic models are run simulta-
seismic responses, the effect of seismic tuning cannot neously and iteratively compared to log data (Quirein
be ignored. In the prestack domain, reflection strength et al., 1986). Mixtures of these lithologies or
from a thin-layer is also incident-angle dependent, mineralogies that best fit the logs are chosen, and a
which is superimposed on the angular dependence measure of the fit or inconsistency is given as well.
of medium elastic properties. A detailed analytical The complete process involves several steps, includ-
study on thin-layer tuning helps to understand the ing adjustments in calibration zones. Results will have
nature of offset-dependent seismic tuning, and sug- varying amounts of error depending on sensitivities
gests methods to separate the tuning effect from that to particular lithologies or mineralogies, hole condi-
caused by intrinsic elastic properties. An added com- tions, and calibration. If a constant set of parameters
plication is that offset tuning is itself strongly depen- is used, errors can be systematic over the logged
dent on elastic properties of the media involved. depth.
The preprocessing applied to seismic data prior The two reservoir intervals are plotted in Figure
to inversion is critical to preserving information re- 3. Hydrocarbon contents were probably most sensi-
lated to rock properties. We show the impact of pretive to the resistivity and density logs. Both the total
processing steps on the quality of seismic data. For amounts and relative proportion of gas versus oil
the workshop data set, channel imbalance and con- depend on the assumed physical properties. The pri-
tamination from multiple reflections represent signifi- mary feature of these zones is the abrupt distinction
cant noise sources. Careful application of surface-con- between the gas and oil legs. This is probably suffi-
sistent amplitude corrections, channel balancing, and
hyperbolic Radon filtering significantly improves the
Table 1. Averaged reservoir properties.
quality of the data.
Oil (stock tank) 0.822 g.cm3
Oil (in situ) 0.654 g/cm3
Pore Fluid Properties Reservoir pressure 3458 psi
The exact reservoir seismic signature is controlled Bubble Point 3270 psi
to a large extent by the in situ properties of the pore GOR 770 SCF/BBL
fluids. The general range of hydrocarbon properties Compressibility 1.7 x 10–5 psi–1
as a function of composition at reservoir conditions Temperature at 1984 m (shallow) 40°C
are shown in Figures 1 and 2. These calculations were Pressure at 1984 m (shallow) 2984 psi
based on the relationships of Batzle and Wang (1992). Temperature at 2620 m (deep) 54°C
Since free gas was detected at both reservoir levels, Pressure at 2620 m (deep) 3984 psi
the oils must be gas-saturated at these pressures and API 40.64
temperatures. More direct information on average oil
properties is listed in Table 1. These averaged values Table 2. Calculated hydrocarbon properties.
did not provide for equilibrium gas content. The re-
sulting recalculated values based on the given oil den- Shallow Reservoir at 1984 m (Gas = 0.6, saturated)
sity and gas gravities of 0.6 and 0.7 are shown in Table GOR 877 SCF/BLL
2. Modulus 758 MPa
Since original logs were not available, brine sa- Velocity 1123 m/s
linities could not be derived directly. However, some Density 0.601 g/cm3
recent studies of salinity with depth have been con-
ducted (Steve Franks, personal communication of data Deep Reservoir at 2620 m (Gas = 0.6, saturated)
by Egeberg and Aagaard, 1989). In their study area GOR 1164 SCF/BBL
off the coast of Norway, salinities remained relatively Modulus 609 MPa
low and constant at about 50 000 ppm total dissolved Velocity 1060 m/s
solids down to 3 km depth. Using this salinity, brine Density 0.542 g/cm3
density and modulus were calculated and are also
presented in Figures 1 and 2. Deep Reservoir at 2620 m (Gas = 0.6, unsaturated)
Mineral and pore fluid logs were provided as part GOR 670 SCF/BBL
of the initial data set. These compositions were de- Modulus 885 MPa
rived from an unknown suite of logs using Velocity 1175 m/s
Schlumberger’s ELAN log inversion process. In this Density 0.641 g/cm3
186
Rock/Fluid Properties
GAS, LIVE OIL, and BRINE Density

WELL A Mobil/SEG Workshop
1.2 . . . . - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - ,
BRINE DENSI1Y at 2.0 and 2.7 km

1 . . . . . .. . ... .. ........... (50,000 ppm) . ............ . . . . .. .
6)" 0.8 ..... ~ .....

E
-
-S2
~
C>
0.6 ·
~ ... -'"I
Cf) .~ ... ~o
z -t;, .. . -f
w t
o 0.4
GaS~$~;
t. ~lcv~
0.2 .................. •
Oil Gas
O~------------------------------~
10 20 30 40 50 60 70 0.7 1
API GRAVITY
Fig. 1. Calculated density for gas, live oil, and brine, as functions of the API gravity, at depths
of 2.0 km and 2.7 km, respectively.
187
GAS, LIVE OIL, and BRINE Modulus

WELL A Mobil/SEG Workshop
3000~------------------------------~
_ _ _ _B_RI_N_E_M_O_DU_L_US
_ _ _ _ _ _ 2.7 km
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - 2.0km
50,000 ppm NaGI
2500 . . .......... . H . . . . ····· H . H.·
--
en
2000 . ...... ·. . H. . .......... ... .. ....... .... ... .. ... ....... H .H
::J
-.J
:J
o
~ 1500 ... . ..
~
-.J
::J
~ 1000 ·
:J
-.J
LL
500 . .......... .
Gas
'{,:t~
Oil ~~'+-{{\
O~--------------------------~--~
10 20 30 40 50 60 70 0.7 1
API GRAVITY
Fig. 2. Calculated bulk modulus for gas, live oil, and brine, as functions of the API gravity, at
depths of 2.0 km and 2.7 km, respectively.
188
,
<:;'
.-
"
-":~~:
Fig. 3. Relative fractions of pore fluids and solid minerals for the upper (a) and lower (b) reservoir intervals in Well A.
..... -.-.- "
<',
~:~ ...
,
-':5 ";.
_.-.-.--
·3 (
.... ~:.
oo~z
._._._.j' ",
.: ....
~ ..., .:.... ~
_.-'" "
'-.~ (~
'j
.....
."
.........
-
.... .....
<:~
<-. osoz g
. ....::z:::0.
- .~
\
1 UJ
C
<.1" ..'
··s r.~"
......... ~
)
.J
r.. .•. ,
...... ;,
oooz
f
r S'
< ...
j
_J
~:?-
'"
- :s:-
-~.;~.:..-:"'''' '-
Q)
OS6~
)
co
~
co
-·.4.
'0 Q)
:::I ai en
0 ~ co
U u. (!)
.... o
....~
&I) N 1.0
N ci
a)
S3wn10J\ 3J\U'd13H
189
190
b)
.....
-::--'
,
,
,
S3wn10J\ 3J\UY13~
0\
,
.....
,,
,/
···
.
,
·
,,,
,
·,,,
,,
,
,,
,
,
,,
·,,,
···,
·
··
'"ci
o
osa
009Z
OS9Z
OOLZ
c
z
a.
~
w
-E
Fig. 3. Continued.
cient for preliminary seismic modeling. More detailed and Vs–Vp for shale (a), wet-sand (b) and gas-sand (c),
analysis of the logs is needed to extract exact fluid respectively, from Well A in depth range from 1900 to
content, and this is often important in geophysical 3100 m. The points for each crossplot can be fitted
applications due to the sensitivity to small fractional reasonably well by linear regression, as shown in the
gas content. figures.

Wireline log measurements of lithology and elas- Based on these trends, certain AVO behavior be-
tic properties of the formation provide a more direct tween interfaced lithologies can be mapped quanti-
way of estimating pore fluid properties. Figure 4 tatively onto the A–B plane, where A and B are the
shows such an estimate on pore fluid bulk modulus angular reflection coefficients from a plane interface
along with other measured and derived logs, for the between two elastic media (Aki and Richards, 1980;
upper and lower reservoir intervals. The estimates are Swan, 1993); i.e.,
based on the Biot-Gassmann theory and the constraint
of lithology-dependent constant frame-modulus-ra- Rpp(θ) = A + Bsin2θ (1)
tio, as well as well-log measurements on lithology,
bulk density, P- and S-wave velocities. The estimated where Rpp is the P-P reflection coefficient as a func-
fluid bulk modulus for the upper reservoir in Well A, tion of incidence angle θ. A and B are related to the
is in good agreement with the values shown in Tables elastic properties of the two media across the inter-
1 and 2, while the values for lower reservoir are on face. Figure 7 is a schematic plot showing AVO re-
the high side compared to that listed in the tables. sponses from shale/shale and shale/sand interfaces,
The discrepancy may be caused by the systematic er- with two parameters, the slope s (or angle ψ) and the
rors introduced in the ELAN logs. The end results also deviation ∆B, which are connected to regional
could depend on the mixing law between different lithological trend behavior. The slope term has been
lithologies when complex lithology is involved. discussed by Foster and co-workers (1993). The de-
The importance of knowing precise pore fluid viation term can be approximated by
properties in a basin cannot be overemphasized in
petroleum exploration. They provide us with the ba-
(2)
sis for assessing quantitatively our risk in seismic pros-
pecting. As indicated in Figures 1 and 2, for example,
at a depth of 2 km in this basin, the density ratio be- where ∆ρ and ∆Vs are the density and compressional
tween an API 40 oil and brine is about 1:2; an API 0.7 velocity differences between the target lithology
gas and brine is about 1:5. The compressibility (in- (sand) and the background lithology (shale), respec-
verse of the bulk modulus) ratio between an API 40 tively. Figure 8 shows calculated angle and deviation
oil and brine is about 4.5:1; an API 0.7 gas and brine is for the trends on the A–B plane from Figures 5a, 5b,
about 27:1. These ratios combined with seismic lithol- 6a and 6b. Figure 9 shows the A–B crossplot from
ogy inversion methods give us a more quantitative wireline log measurements in Well A.
measure of risk on prospects in this basin at this depth The connection between the petrophysical trends
range. for different lithologies and their AVO expressions
derived from the logs can then be used to infer rock
and fluid property variations from seismic data.
Petrophysical Trends and
Their Implications on AVO Effects of Tuning on AVO
Responses Responses
Various studies in rock physics have shown that In a typical sedimentary basin at seismic frequen-
within a specific depth interval in a sedimentary ba- cies, we rarely see a “clean” reflection from any single
sin, crossplots of bulk density (ρΒ) versus compres- interface. Usually, a reflection event on a seismic sec-
sional-wave velocity (Vp), and shear-wave velocity (Vs) tion is the result of constructive and/or destructive
versus compressional-wave velocity show coherent interferences from multiple reflectors that are spatially
trends for different lithologies (e.g., Gardner et al., distributed with a length scale less than seismic wave-
1974; Tosoya and Nur, 1982; Castagna et al., 1985; Han, length. For the case of a single thin-layer (Figure 10),
1986; Krief et al., 1990; Castagna et al., 1993, Foster et the maximum tuning thickness becomes a function
al., 1993). Figures 5 and 6 show crossplots of ρΒ–Vp of incident angle. It can be shown based on a theory
191
b)
Fig. 4. Continued.
RockIFluid Properties
193
Shale, 1900 - 3100 m

3r-----~----~------._----~----__.
a) 2 .75~ ·················+········· ·· ···· ···· ···· ··i····· ...........+ .................. j

.........·vi -
2.5[------:--~~~,a~·4~~~~~----t-----_J
~ ."":," .. ~
2.25r·· ..········ .. ··+····················· · · t. ············· .. ·····+·· . ············· + .. ···.. ······ 4

PB (g/cm 3 ) 2 f-·-····· ····-····_;--·- _ · - · -,7-········-···-f- - ··-·······-····r---··---
1.75r-----~-----4------4_----_+----~
1.5" ·····················, ····················· .. ; ............................. + ..................... +............................~
1 . 2 5 ~-·-··---·--+-··········-·······i-······················+····-······ ·-······-f-·----·---------·-
1L-----~2~~--~3~----~4----~~5----~6·
Vp (km/s)
Wet-Sand
b) 2.75"····················· ,.................... I······ ····· ················ . · . j . ..... ....... .. .... .. +...............................~

2 . 5 I -...- -.....--+-...- ......- ....-'....-~ "".:p.,-.--~ ...- - - -..--
..- ..--....•..+......
.. to;-•
• I,
2.25!------~----~
~~~··-·~------+-----~
PB (g/cm 3 ) 2" ...... . ...., . . . . ........ ; .... ······················1······· ····················· 1
1 . 7 5 ~- ...... - ....- .....+-........-....... --i......... ..............+ -----.-... j - ----------_._---
1.5!------~----~------4_----_+----~
1.25~ ········ · ···· · ·· ·· · ···· · · ···· , ..................... ;. ..................... + ..................... 1
Vp (km/s)
Gas-Sand
3
c) 2.75
II
./
2.5
:;...///
2.25 :;..-'<'t
2~
.-
1.5
1. 25
1
2 3 4 5 6
Vp (km/s)
Fig. 5. Crossplots of bulk density (ρΒ) versus P-wave velocity (Vp) for
shale (a), wet-sand (b) and gas-sand (c), from wireline log measure-
ments in depth interval of 1900–3100 m, Well A.
194
Shale, 1900 - 3100 m
a) 3 .5 ~----~------~----~------~----~
2.5~----~------~----~
V~----~----4
Vs (km/s) 21----+----+-:,-..:-:-::.;,*",.~---+-----j "le.
1.5 ~----~-----
~~~~. ~--~----~----~
~~
l ~----~----~~----~------~----~
O.5~-----i~----~------~----~----~
O~-----2~-----3~-----4~-----5
~----~6
i
Vp (km/s)
Wet-Sand
b)
3 f ···....·····_····· ,········ ·· ···········f ········ ············t ··· ··········· ··1·····-·····················
./
Vs (km/S)2·: f .. . ....... . ;............................... j ~r · ····
1.5 f ····················· ; ........... o~··I
/~ · ·············· · · · · ·· , ............................... ! .................... j
I f · ················· ; · · ························· ····t · ·····················f······················ ····· ··· · ! · · · · · · ······· ······· i
O.5f ····················· ;······························t···················· , ..................... !
O L------2~-----3L------4~-----5~--~~6
Vp (km/s)
Gas-Sand
4~--~~--~1----~----~--~
c) 3 .5 ~----~------~----~------~----4
3~----~------r------+-------~----~
I
I
2.5r-----~------r!:-----
...-~r!_-~-_----~----4
Vs(km~) 2~----~------~r:.~.~~e~~'~~~-r------~----4
...... ,.."""'.<.. ! •
1.5~----~--~~·+1------+------+-----~
l~----~------r------+-------~-----~
0.5 r----L--l------+-----------.
, I ; .-
O~-----2L------3L------4L-----~5~----~6
Vp (km/s)
Fig. 6. Crossplots of S-wave velocity (Vs) versus P-wave velocity (Vp)

for shale (a), wet-sand (b), and gas-sand (c), from wireline log mea-
surements in depth interval of 1900–3100 m, Well A.
195
Fig. 7. Schematic diagram showing the key parameters on the A–B crossplot translated from the petrophysical
trends.
196
Shale Angle on the A-B Plane

55~--~~--~----~---+----+---~
50 ---) ------ ----------------1------------------- - -------------

I
'V (deg.) 45 f----~,------_____t--_+___-~
I ---+------j
40 -------------------- ------------- --------~ ------------------------1--------------------------------------
35r---~~--_r----~~~~--+_--~
!
i
30~--~~--~----~--~----~~~
2 2.5 3 3.5 4 4.5 5
Vp (km/s)
B-Deviation, ShalelWet-Sand
0 . 05r-----,r----r----T---~~~~==~
o ----I-) - - -- -- ---~-----
---,-t---r---l
+
~B
I
- 0 • 05 1
- 0.1 ' ---
I
2 2.5 3 3.5 4 4.5 5

Vp (km/s)
Fig. 8. Calculated angle and deviation on the A–B plane from the trend re-
gression relations shown in Figures 5 and 6.
197
A-B crossplot from Well A

depth: 1900 - 3100 m
B
0.4
• •
•
0.3
• I
• •••
, •0.2
• •
••
,•• • •
• ••
•• • • •• •
•
•
••
• •• -. •
J. • ••
•
•• •
-0.4 - 0.3 -0.2
• • • •
..I! '- III
• • •• • • •
r •
• •
...- .,• •
••
•
-0 . 2 •
• •
• • •
• •
•
-0.3 •
•
•
•
•
-0 . 4
Fig. 9. A–B crossplot based on wireline log data from Well A.
198
of wave propagation in thinly laminated medium On the trace display, the signal is dominated by low-
(e.g., Foster and Yin, 1995) that, for a sinusoidal inci- frequency multiples. Figure 14 shows the data after
dent wave with frequency f, the angular reflection preprocessing. At this stage, Q compensation, surface-
coefficients of a single thin-layer (A‘ and B‘), with layer consistent amplitude corrections, channel balancing,
thickness h and compressional velocity Vp, is related and first-power of time amplitude correction has been
approximately to those of the single interface by the applied. Surface-consistent amplitude effects and
following relation: channel imbalance have been minimized. The data
are still dominated by multiples, especially on the near
A‘ = 2A sin x traces. The data after multiple suppression are shown
in Figure 15. Hyperbolic Radon filtering (Foster and
B‘ = 2B sin x – Ax cos x (3) Mosher, 1992) and ensemble averaging deconvolution
were used to suppress multiple reflections. After
where x = 2πfh/Vp is the tuning parameter of the layer. multiple suppression, the primary events stand out
For relatively small incident angles, the maximum clearly on the trace display, and the near-trace ampli-
tuning thickness increases as the angle increases, as tude dominance on the amplitude display has been
shown in Figure 11. greatly reduced.
The degree of tuning depends also on the ratio of A processed section that includes DMO and
A/B. The tuning trajectory on the A-B plane is highly poststack time migration is provided for reference
sensitive to the ratio as demonstrated in Figure 12. (Figure 16). Rotated fault blocks with amplitude
Consequently, the A–B crossplot derived from seis- anomalies can be seen between 2 and 3 s near Well A.
mic data tends to be more scattered than that com- Based on the CDP gather at Well A, the angular re-
puted from well-log data, as will be discussed in the flection coefficients, A and B, were then obtained. Fig-
next section. ure 17 shows the A–B crossplot from seismic at the
well location. It should be noted that it shows a simi-
lar trend behavior as that shown in Figure 9, but with
Seismic Data: Processing a wider dispersion, which is caused primarily by the
thin-bed tuning on reflections as discussed in the pre-
and Analysis vious section.
The quality of the workshop data was seriously
affected by channel imbalances and multiple reflec-
tions. Figures 13 through 15 illustrate steps that were Summary
taken to mitigate these effects. Plots are shown for the Density and compressibility of hydrocarbon and
initial data (Figure 13), data after preprocessing (Fig- brine have been computed as functions of composi-
ure 14), and data after multiple suppression (Figure tion for the North Viking Graben in the North Sea.
15). Data processing was accomplished using a mix- The computed values are based on estimated pres-
ture of stock and custom processes in the ProMax seis- sure, temperature and salinity distributions in the
mic processing package from Advance Geophysical area, provided by engineers and previous studies. The
(a division of Landmark, Inc.). For each of the three compressibility ratio between oil and brine is about
processing phases, two plots are shown: amplitude 4.5, six times less than that of gas and brine. The den-
display (a) and trace display (b). The amplitude dis- sity contrasts between different pore fluids are not as
play shows RMS amplitude in a window from 3 to 5 s dramatic.
as a function of source index number and recording For the depth interval of 1900 to 3100 m in Well
channel number. In the trace display, two adjacent A, crossplots of density versus velocity, and shear
CDPs are combined into a 120-channel record at each versus compressional velocities, show coherent lin-
of the well locations, and normal moveout is applied ear trends. These basin- and age-specific trends can
in all cases. then be mapped onto the AVO-crossplot plane to
For initial data shown in Figure 13, several prob- make quantitative links between fluid/lithology prop-
lems can be seen in the amplitude display. Amplitudes erties and prestack seismic responses. However, due
are dominated by the near channels of the first few to the low-frequency nature of seismic waves, this
hundred shots. In addition, significant channel im- quantitative link is distorted most of the time by the
balance produces horizontal striping in the display. effect of thin-bed tuning. The A-B crossplot generated
199
B
•
A
8'
•
A'
Fig. 10. A–B representation of a plane interface and a thin-layer. The P-P reflectivity of the
interface and the thin-layer are denoted by Rpp and Hpp, respectively.
200
Fig. 11. The “tuning surface” of P-P reflection from a thin-layer: the ratio of Rpp/Hpp as a function of
incident angle (degrees) and layer thickness (feet) for a 30-Hz incident wave.
201
a) AlB = 0.25
2 2.5
8'
0.5
0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 A'
Fig. 12. Effect of tuning on A and B as functions of the ratio of A/B, and the tuning parameter, x = 2πfh/Vp, in
which f is the frequency, h is the layer thickness, and Vp is the P-wave velocity of the layer. ρA and ρB are the
ratios of A‘/A and B‘/B, respectively. (a) A/B = 0.25; (b) A/B = 0.75; (c) A/B = 2:0.
202
b) AlB = 0.75
2.5
1.5
(\ ",l
v • -' r
I
0.5 1 1.5 2 2 .5
x
B'
0.5
0.4
0.3
(A,B)
0.2
•
0.1
O . 5 A'
o \£-......-~0-.~1---0~.-2---0~.-3---O~.-4--~
Fig. 12. Continued.
203
c) AlB = 2
r ,rB
0 .5 1 1.5 2 2.5
x
B'
0.5
0.4
0 .3
0.2
(A, B)
0. 1
•
oL--------=~~~----~~--~----~
0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 A'
Fig. 12. Continued.
204
a)
Near
:::0
o
Channel
r::
-~. ..
~
~
a
"1:l
~
::1-
....
~
rJl
Far
I 1001
Shot Number
N
ffi Fig. 13. Amplitude display (a) and trace display (b) of initial seismic data.
206
u
~
.~
~
....~
~
.~
.......
~
~
~
Q)
....
\IJ
b)
~
>.
o
o
o
o
'O!:j"
~
Q,)
~
Fig. 13. Continued.
-
a)
Near
~
o
Channel
::
r....
-~
p..
~
o
"'0
n>
....::+
n>
en
.'ar
1 1001
Shot Number
N
o Fig. 14. Amplitude display (a) and trace display (b) of the data after preprocessing.
'1
u
u
~
~
~
'J'l
~
~
~
~
~
,......
Q..)
.""""
'J'l
'J'l
~
~
~
~
Q..)
Q..)
.""""
Q..)
208
~
Q.c
eJJ
b)
o
o
o
o
~
~
~
~
~
--
-
<
Fig. 14. Continued.
a)
Near
~
o
Channel ~.....
....
=Q..
""C
a
"'0
~
:+
....
~
IJ)
"F ar
1 1001
Shot Number
N
~ Fig. 15. Amplitude display (a) and trace display (b) of the data after multiple suppression.
210
0
b)
u
• ...-1
~
==
rJ'1
rJ'1
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
• ...-1
• ...-1
rJJ.
rJ'1
~
~
~
~
::
::
~
~
~
~
~
o
o
o
o
~
~
~
Q)
~
~
Q)
-
Fig. 15. Continued.

-
o
o
o
~
Fig. 16. Processed section which includes DMO and poststack time migration.
211
A-B crossplot from CMP-gather at Well A

TWT: 1900 - 2900 msec.
B
0.4
o '
•
• •
• • • 0.2 •
•
• : .
•
I
.~ .. •
•
•• • • •
• •• •• -I. •
• e 0 .• ~ • • •
•
. .. -.: . • ••
• • •
• •., .. : -.. :
·-i • • .... ~
. . '
• • ••
.. .. ... A
. ...............
_ 0 ~.-4~~~~_-
OL.-3~~~~_-OL.-2~4-~~~-~L.-l~.~~~~~~+-~~.+-.~~0~.-
1 ~~~.-+0
~.-
2~1-~~O
~.-
3~~~~
0.4
. .. •
.. ( ..... •
• ·1· -....
",.Sot
• -• ••
•• •
. •..••••
\4'
• •
\
• • •• • •••• •
-0 . 2
• ••
•
•
-0 . 3
-0.4
Fig. 17. A–B crossplot from CDP gather at Well A, for time interval 1900–2900 msec.
212
from the CDP gather at the location of Well A shows a Egeberg and Aagaard, 1989, Applied Geochemistry,
linear coherent trend with wider dispersion, reflect- 4, 131-142.
ing the tuning effect. Foster, D. J., and Mosher, C. C., 1992, Suppression of
Any perfect theory would fail to work with poor multiple reflections using the Radon transform:
quality data. The quality of the seismic data was seri- Geophysics, 57, 386-395.
ously affected by channel imbalances and multiple Foster, D. J., Smith, S. W., Dey-Sarkar, S., and Swan,
reflections. Careful application of surface consistent H. W., 1993, A closer look at hydrocarbon indica-
amplitude corrections, channel balancing, and hyper- tors: 63rd Ann. Internat. Mtg., Soc. Expl.
bolic Radon filtering significantly improves the qual- Geophys., Expanded Abstracts, 731-733.
ity of the original data. The poststack time-migrated Foster, D. J., and Yin, C. S., 1995, Wave propagation in
section shows some interesting geologic features that elastic thin layers: SPIE Proceedings for Math-
are not apparent on the original section. ematical Methods in Geophysical Imaging III, 25-
42.
Gardner, G. H. F., Gardner, L. W., and Gregory, A. R.,
Acknowledgments 1974, Formation velocity and density: The diag-
We thank ARCO Exploration and Production nostic basis for stratigraphic traps: Geophysics,
Technology for permission to publish this expanded 39, 770-708.
abstract. We would also like to thank Robert Keys, Han, D.-H., 1986, Effects of porosity and clay content
Doug Foster, John Castagna, and Bruce VerWest for on wave velocities in sandstone: Geophysics, 51,
their help and constructive comments. 2093-2107.
Krief, M., Garat, J., Stellingwerff, J., and Ventre, J., 1990,
A petrophysical interpretation using the veloci-
References ties of P- and S-waves (full waveform sonic): The
Aki, K., and Richards, P. G., 1980, Quantitative seis- Log Analysis, Nov.-Dec. 1990, 355-369.
mology: Theory and methods: W. H. Freeman and Quirein, J., Kimminau, S., LaVigne, J., Singer, J., and
Co. Wendel, F., 1986, A coherent framework for de-
Batzle, M. L., and Wang, Z.-J., 1992, Seismic proper- veloping and applying multiple formation evalu-
ties of pore fluids, Geophysics, 57, 1396-1408. ation models: SPWLA 27th Ann. Log. Symp., pa-
Castagna, J. P., Batzle, M. L., and Eastwood, R. L., 1985, per DD, 17.
Relationships between compressional-wave and Swan, H. W., 1993, Properties of direct AVO hydro-
shear-wave velocities in clastic silicate rocks: Geo- carbon indicators, in Castagna, J. P., and Backus,
physics, 50, 571-581. M. M., Eds., Offset-dependent reflectivity: Theory
Castagna, J. P., Batzle, M. L., and Kan, T. K., 1993, Rock and practice of AVO analysis: Soc. Expl. Geophys.,
physics: The link between rock properties and 78–92.
AVO response, in Castagna, J. P., and Backus, M. Tosoya, C., and Nur, A., 1982, Effects of diagenesis
M., Eds., Offset-dependent reflectivity: Theory and clays on compressional velocities in rocks:
and practice of AVO analysis: Soc. Expl. Geophys., Geophys. Res. Lett., 9, 5-8.
78–92.
213

Comparison of Seismic Inversion Methods On A Single Real Data Se 1998

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Comparison of Seismic Inversion Methods On A Single Real Data Se 1998

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Downloaded 06/27/14 to 134.153.184.170. Redistribution subject to SEG license or copyright; see Terms of Use at http://library.seg.

Robert G. Keys and

Society of Exploration Geophysicists

ISBN 1-56080-030-5 (Series)

Society of Exploration Geophysicists

© 1998 Society of Exploration Geophysicists

Published in 1998 by the Society of Exploration Geophysicists

1. A data set for evaluating and comparing seismic inversion methods 1

2. A numerical study of linear viscoacoustic inversion 13

3. AVO inversion of a Mobil data set 45

4. AVO migration/inversion analysis 57

5. Amplitude-preserved processing and analysis of the Mobil AVO data set 75

6. A comparison of AVO analysis techniques 97

8. DELPHI stepwise approach to AVO processing 139

10. Rock/fluid properties and their effects on seismic responses 185

This page has been intentionally left blank

Topics Presentation No.

Table 2. A list of presentations at the 1994 SEG Post-Convention Workshop on “Comparison

2. Buland, A., and M. Landrø, AVO inversion of a Mobil data set

This page has been intentionally left blank

A Data Set for Evaluating and

plitude with offset to detect the presence of hydro-

Table 1. Files in the AVO Data Set.

File Name Format Description

FarField.dat ASCII Far Field Source Signature

The information supplied in this data set can ben-

Evaluating and Comparing Seismic Inversion Methods

* 120 119 118 3 2 1

Fig. 2. Streamer configuration. Receiver spacing is 25 m. Data are recorded on 120

Air Gun Array Diagram

(80) * (120) (120) (80)

(150) (150) (150) (150)

(150) (150) (150) (150)

*Air gun volume in cubic inches.

Table 2. Instrument settings and source and receiver geometry

Instrument Type: TI DFS 5.5

Geometry and Source

Total Length: 2975 m

Fig. 4. Source pulse recorded on hydrophone at 250 m below air-gun array.

Evaluating and Comparing Seismic Inversion Methods

Two-Way Traveltime (ms)

enced by errors and extraneous noises that are typi-

A Numerical Study of Linear

matrices, whereas Minkoff (1995) and Buland et al.

Z Z G(t; ~x) = K (~x)(1 +  (~x)e,t= )H (t) (6)

Viscoacoustic Wave ~v;t = , 1 r

;mod and ρ by p + δp, K + δK, and ρ + δp and dropping

Z Z   as the cross-correlation in time of adjoint fields with

p;t = ,Kmod(1 + mod)v;z , r , Kmod Kr;mod(1 + mod )v;z

inversion amounts to (approximate) solution of the

Martinez, R. D., 1993, Wave propagation effects on

Normal Residual % Class I Class II Class III I

Q=oo 0.11 0.10 0.12

Q = 100 0.10 0.10 0.094

Q = 50 0.28 0.10 0.32

Fig. 1. The reference velocity model.

IIIterations I Class II Class III Class IIIII

Fig. 2. The reference density model.

Fig. 4. The density reflectivity model.

Linear Viscoacoustic Inversion

AVO Inversion of a Mobil Data Set

The Radon transform

Macro model estimation

Z Z G(t; ~x) = K (~x)(1 + (~x)e,t= )H (t) (6)

Viscoacoustic Wave ~v;t = , 1 r

;mod and ρ by p + δp, K + δK, and ρ + δp and dropping

Z Z as the cross-correlation in time of adjoint fields with

p;t = ,Kmod(1 + mod)v;z , r , Kmod Kr;mod(1 + mod )v;z