See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/301509491

Interpretation of fractured zones using seismic attributes — Case study from

Teapot Dome, Wyoming, USA

Article  in  Interpretation · May 2016

DOI: 10.1190/INT-2015-0210.1

CITATIONS READS

5 2,798

4 authors, including:

Christoph Eichkitz M.G. Schreilechner

Geo5 GmbH Geo5 GmbH
69 PUBLICATIONS   223 CITATIONS    56 PUBLICATIONS   304 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

John C. Davis
Heinemann Oil GmbH
92 PUBLICATIONS   8,859 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

Geophysics and Groundwater detection View project

KOX Project View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Christoph Eichkitz on 22 November 2017.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

 t Technical papers

Interpretation of fractured zones using seismic attributes — Case study

from Teapot Dome, Wyoming, USA
Sarah Schneider1, Christoph Georg Eichkitz2, Marcellus Gregor Schreilechner2, and John C. Davis3
Downloaded 04/20/16 to 178.189.59.158. Redistribution subject to SEG license or copyright; see Terms of Use at http://library.seg.org/

Abstract
We have used poststack seismic attributes to describe the fracture network of the naturally fractured
Tensleep Formation at Teapot Dome, Wyoming, USA. The attributes include coherence, coherence based on
spectral decomposed seismic data, attributes based on curvature, and textural attributes based on the gray-level
co-occurrence matrix (GLCM). Results were compared with image log interpretations of four wells. Seismic
attribute analysis allowed determination of strikes and dips as well as the intensity of fractures. The GLCM-
based attributes proved especially valuable for building a discrete fracture network.

Introduction ment of the uplifted basement over a steeply dipping

Fractures are discontinuities in a rock that can either
contribute to fluid flow or act as barriers. This makes
understanding the fracture network within a fractured
reservoir essential for the enhancement of hydrocarbon
production. Traditionally, fractures are characterized
from cores and image logs or other approaches that
combine geologic and structural data with geostatistical
methods. Improvements in seismic acquisition and
processing, as well as the growth of computer-aided
techniques in the recent past, have led to the develop-
ment of analytical tools, such as discrete fracture net-
work (DFN) modeling.
In this study, a DFN based on poststack seismic
attribute calculations is used to characterize the frac-
ture network of the Tensleep Formation at Teapot
Dome in Wyoming, USA. The used poststack seismic
attributes are coherence, curvature, coherence on spec-
tral decomposed seismic cubes, and textural attributes
based on the gray-level co-occurrence matrix (GLCM).
All attributes are calculated as volumes integrating the
structural dip into calculations. Calculation of GLCM
attributes can be performed in several directions. Based
on the comparison on attribute response from several
directions, it is possible to determine anisotropy effects
in the subsurface, which can be related to fracturing.
The Teapot Dome oilfield is located approximately
30 mi north of Casper in Natrona county and covers
nearly 40.5 km2 (10,000 acres) (Friedmann and Stamp,
2006) (Figure 1). The doubly plunging anticline extends
into the basement (Cooper et al., 2001, 2006) and was
formed during the Laramide orogeny by reverse move-
basement thrust (Wilson et al., 2015).
The stratigraphic units at Teapot Dome consist of
Devonian to Upper Cretaceous strata (Figure 2), and
include nine oil-bearing and six water-bearing forma-
tions (Friedmann and Stamp, 2006). The deepest hydro-
carbon-producing target within Teapot Dome is the
Pennsylvanian Tensleep Formation (Chiaramonte et al.,
2008, 2011), a sandstone deposited in a desert environ-
ment (Kerr and Dott, 1988), interrupted by occasional
marine transgressions that created thin evaporite and
carbonate beds (Zhang, 2005). The reservoir consists
of several intervals in which the Tensleep B Sandstone
(Figure 3) is continuous and is the main producing hori-
zon (Friedmann and Stamp, 2006; Chiaramonte et al.,
2008, 2011).
The Opeche Shale Member and anhydrite of the Min-
nekahta Limestone Member of Goose Egg Formation
(Figure 3) regionally seal the Tensleep Formation
throughout Wyoming (Chiaramonte et al., 2008, 2011).
The Pennsylvanian Tensleep Formation occurs also
as a naturally fractured reservoir interval in several
Rocky Mountain oil fields and has been the subject
of extensive investigations of fracturing (Cooper, 2000;
Cooper et al., 2006; Cooper and Lorenz, 2007). Previous
fracture studies of the Tensleep Formation include ana-
log field studies at Alcova Anticline (Gilbertson, 2006)
and Fremont Canyon (Zhang, 2005; Wilson et al., 2013b,
2015). Seismic attribute analyses have been carried out
by Ouenes et al. (2010), Gao (2013), Wilson et al. (2012,
2013a, 2013b, 2015), Di and Gao (2014), and Thachapar-
ambil (2015). A study of open fractures seen on five

1
MOL Group, Budapest, Hungary. E-mail: sschneider@mol.hu.
2
Geo5 GmbH, Leoben, Austria. E-mail: christoph.eichkitz@geo-5.at; marcellus.schreilechner@geo-5.at.
3
Heinemann Oil GmbH, Leoben, Austria. E-mail: jcdbaldwin@gmail.com.
Manuscript received by the Editor 10 December 2015; revised manuscript received 5 February 2016; published online 18 April 2016. This paper
appears in Interpretation, Vol. 4, No. 2 (May 2016); p. T273–T284, 11 FIGS.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1190/INT-2015-0210.1. © 2016 Society of Exploration Geophysicists and American Association of Petroleum Geologists. All rights reserved.

Interpretation / May 2016 T273

 image logs through the Tensleep Formation was done
by Schwartz (2006).
Methodology
The aim of this study is to calculate volumetric frac-
ture intensities and volumetric strike and dip of frac-
Downloaded 04/20/16 to 178.189.59.158. Redistribution subject to SEG license or copyright; see Terms of Use at http://library.seg.org/
tures for the Tensleep Formation based mainly on
seismic attributes and later on use this information
for a DFN. The Rocky Mountain Oilfield Testing Center
(RMOTC) provides public access to an extensive collec-
tion of data about Teapot Dome for scientific and tech-
nical research. Three-dimensional seismic data, well
headers, well deviation surveys, formation tops, petro-
physical logs of 27 wells, and GIS coordinates were
used in this study.
To establish a DFN, a workflow of seven steps has
been generated (Figure 4). The first five steps consist
of the generation of synthetics, seismic interpretation,
time-depth conversion, and structural modeling. The
sixth step (Figure 4f), seismic attribute calculation, is
the most time-consuming part of this study. The last
step (Figure 4g) of the workflow is the creation of a
DFN based on the seismic attributes and log data.
Input data are a 3D poststack migrated seismic vol-
ume, with 345 inlines and 188 crosslines, and digital
well data from 27 wells. The well logs used include
sonic and density logs, plus image logs from four wells.
Figure 1. Location of Teapot Dome relative to the Powder River Basin (modified after Cooper et al., 2006).
T274 Interpretation / May 2016
Seismic and well data must share a common domain
for interpretation and modeling. To link the two types of
data, synthetic seismograms for 12 wells were gener-
ated in step 1, making it possible to identify the seismic
reflectors (Figure 4b) that represent the tops of the Sec-
ond Wall Creek Sandstone (pink horizon), Morrison
Formation (blue horizon), Alcova Limestone (green
horizon), and Tensleep Formation (yellow horizon).
The top of the Fremont Canyon Sandstone (orange hori-
zon) was assigned to a reflector based on interpreta-
tions by Wilson et al. (2013b). In step 2 (Figure 4b),
these five horizons were picked manually on every fifth
inline and crossline. The 3D autotracking was then used
to create continuous horizons on every line, and the fi-
nal tracked horizons served as input to generate 3D sur-
faces. Faults were interpreted by picking every fifth
inline or crossline.
Structural modeling in step 3 (Figure 4c) involved
building a framework of grid cells to be assigned prop-
erties required for reservoir characterization. “Fault
modeling” is a process of representing the shapes of
picked faults by key pillars. In this study, each key pillar
has three shape points that can be edited separately to
tilt the pillars and model listric faults.
After fault modeling, the skeletal framework of the
structural model was built by pillar gridding. Distances
between inlines and crosslines defined the dimensions
of grid cells.
 Horizons inserted into the structural model include
the Alcova Limestone, Tensleep Formation, and Fre-
mont Canyon Sandstone; these honor the grid incre-
ments and faults defined in previous steps. The
construction of horizon-fault lines helped to model
the displacement of the horizons along the individual
faults.
Downloaded 04/20/16 to 178.189.59.158. Redistribution subject to SEG license or copyright; see Terms of Use at http://library.seg.org/
Figure 2. Stratigraphic column of Teapot Dome (modified
after Cooper et al. [2006] and Wilson et al. [2015]).
Thickness isochore surfaces were used to add zones
between the already modeled horizons. The isochores
were based on the vertical distances between formation
tops in wells and are in the depth-domain. To integrate
these with the time-domain seismic information, it was
necessary to convert the seismic structural model from
time to depth. A 3D grid-based seismic velocity model
was built in step 4 (Figure 4d) by inverting the available
sonic well logs, then scaling them up to transfer the
velocities into the grid cells penetrated by the wells.
Other grid cells were populated with velocities interpo-
lated by stochastic sequential Gaussian simulation. A
P-wave velocity cube generated with Hampson and
Russel software provided a secondary data source used
in collocated cokriging to guide the interpolation.
In step 5 (Figure 4e), the isochore surfaces and the
corresponding well tops were used to define strati-
graphic intervals within the depth-converted structural
model. A vertical subdivision or layering defines the
height of the 3D grid cells. Proportional layering was
used to avoid pinchouts and to honor the 2 ms sample
rate. The completed structural model contains approx-
imately 1.7 million grid cells with an average grid spac-
ing of 33.5 m (110 ft) in the inline and crossline
directions and an average 1.8 m (6 ft) spacing in the ver-
tical direction.
The sixth step (Figure 4f) in this workflow was to
calculate poststack seismic attributes. Coherence, cur-
vature, spectral decomposition, and directional GLCM
attributes were calculated to assess fractures in the
Tensleep Formation.
The final step (step 7 [Figure 4g]) is the construction
of a DFN. Seismic attributes that might be relevant for
the determination of fractured zones and indicators of
Figure 3. Detailed overview of the Tensleep Formation and
its subdivisions (modified after Wilson et al., 2015).
Interpretation / May 2016 T275

Downloaded 04/20/16 to 178.189.59.158. Redistribution subject to SEG license or copyright; see Terms of Use at http://library.seg.org/
Figure 4. Workflow of the creation of a DFN using seismic
attribute calculations and image log data. (a) Step 1: genera-
tion of synthetic seismograms to identify seismic reflectors for
selected well tops. (b) Step 2: interpretation of horizons and
faults in the seismic section. (c) Step 3: structural modeling to
provide basic grid geometry. (d) Step 4: building a 3D grid-
based seismic velocity model to depth convert the structural
model. (e) Step 5: creation of different stratigraphic intervals
(zones) of the model and defining height of 3D grid cells
(layering). (f) Step 6: calculation of poststack seismic attrib-
utes to extract fractures in the Tensleep Formation. (g) Step 7:
establishing a DFN based on seismic analysis and image logs.
T276 Interpretation / May 2016
fracture intensity need to be upscaled within the struc-
tural model. Together with log data, these attributes can
then act as driver for the construction of a DFN. In this
work, the aim was to determine attributes that are
capable of describing fracture intensities and fracture
strike and dip. As the creation of a DFN was not the
direct target of this work it is not described.
Seismic attribute methodology
A seismic attribute is a quantitative extraction of a
seismic characteristic (Chopra and Marfurt, 2005) that
visually enhances features of interest that may be too
subtle in a traditional seismic image. Seismic attributes
support the interpretation of seismic data and are either
directly sensitive to geologic features or allow defini-
tion of structural or depositional environments (Chopra
and Marfurt, 2007). Poststack seismic attributes used
here include coherence, curvature, spectral decomposi-
tion, and textural attributes.
Coherence measures the similarity between seismic
waveforms from one trace to another and highlights lo-
cations of low coherence in which there are lateral
differences in seismic response. These low-coherence
events may be caused by variations in structure, stratig-
raphy, lithology, porosity, or the presence of hydrocar-
bons (Marfurt et al., 1998). Coherence is a helpful
attribute to detect and image faults and fractures, as
well as changes in stratigraphic features (Bahorich
and Farmer, 1995). Coherence, as developed by Bahor-
ich and Farmer (1995), is based on the crosscorrelation
of adjacent seismic traces in the inline and crossline
directions. Several other algorithms exist in addition
to crosscorrelation-based coherence, such as sem-
blance-based coherence (Marfurt et al., 1998), eigen-
structure-based coherence (Gersztenkorn and Marfurt,
1999), gradient-structure tensor-based coherence (Bak-
ker, 2002), least-squares-based coherence (Bednar,
1998), higher order statistics-based coherence (Lu et al.,
2005), and entropy measurement-based coherence (Co-
hen and Coifman, 2002). In this study, semblance-based
coherence was used for all coherence estimation. Un-
like the methodology based on crosscorrelation, this co-
herence calculation takes several traces into account
simultaneously.
Curvature measures the bending of a surface and has
a physical relation to fracture intensity; it is widely used
to gather additional information for fracture prediction
(Gao et al., 2011). In two dimensions, curvature can be
defined as the reciprocal of the radius of an osculating
circle that is tangent to the curve at any point. This im-
plies that a sharply bent structure leads to a small circle
radius that has a large value of curvature. The 2D cur-
vature can be extended to define curvature in three di-
mensions, using two orthogonal planes cut a surface
and describing a curve at their intersection. Curvature
can be calculated at any point along this curve (Rob-
erts, 2001).
Roberts (2001) describes several curvature attrib-
utes, such as mean curvature, minimum and maximum
 curvatures, dip curvature, strike curvature, most posi-
tive and most negative curvature, Gaussian curvature,
and a shape index. According to Chopra and Marfurt
(2007), most positive and most negative curvature
attributes are best correlated with geologic features.
Curvature attributes are especially useful for describing
tensile fractures associated with the crests of anticlines.
Downloaded 04/20/16 to 178.189.59.158. Redistribution subject to SEG license or copyright; see Terms of Use at http://library.seg.org/
rocks. They compare their results with full spectrum co-
herence cubes and come to the conclusion that discrete
frequency coherence cubes delineated more faults and
fractured zones. To improve fault and fracture detec-
tion within this study, spectral frequency cubes ex-
tracted from CWT-based spectral decomposition are
integrated within semblance-based coherence calcu-

Gao (2013) uses curvature and curvature gradient lations.

attributes to describe the fractured Tensleep Forma-
tion. Shear fractures along the northwest-trending up-
thrust and northeast-trending transfer faults were
best described by curvature gradient attributes.
Spectral decomposition divides the seismic response
of the subsurface into different spectral bands. This en-
ables the detection of subtle structural and stratigraphic
features that are carried by certain frequency compo-
nents and that normally would be buried within broad-
band data (Li and Lu, 2014). Other applications, in
addition to imaging geologic discontinuities, are map-
ping variation in thickness and the quantitative predic-
tion of bedding thickness (Partyka et al., 1999). Seismic
data commonly are converted into the frequency domain
either by a short window discrete Fourier transform
(Partyka et al., 1999) or by a continuous wavelet trans-
form (CWT) (Castagna et al., 2003).
Case studies (Sun et al., 2010; Li and Lu, 2014)
have demonstrated that a combination of spectral de-
composition and coherence improves the detection
of structural features. Sun et al. (2010) use discrete fre-
quency coherence cubes to detect fractures in volcanic
Textural attributes describe the spatial arrangement
of neighboring amplitudes and provide information
about the spatial dependencies of rock units, depositio-
nal facies, and reservoir properties (Gao, 2011). Texture
attributes are based on statistics, making them an alter-
native to ordinary attribute analysis (Vinther, 1997) be-
cause they are less sensitive to seismic waveform than
coherence or curvature (de Matos et al., 2011). Various
methods are available for texture analysis. We have
used statistical texture classification based on the
GLCM (Haralick et al., 1973) to describe fracture inten-
sities and fracture strike and dip. The GLCM measures
the occurrence of different combinations of pixel
brightness values in a digital image and was originally
developed to classify textures in 2D pictures. The cal-
culations have been extended to full 3D volumes (Eich-
kitz et al., 2013). Attributes based on the GLCM can be
classified into three general attribute groups: a contrast
group, an orderliness group, and a statistics group (Har-
alick et al., 1973).
Gao (2003, 2007, 2009, 2011) and Eichkitz et al. (2013,
2014, 2015a, 2015b) demonstrate that GLCM-based

Figure 5. Series of coherence time slices (1100 ms). (a) Coherence of the raw seismic data, (b) coherence of dip-steered (event
steering) seismic data, (c) coherence of dip steered and fault enhancement filtered seismic data, and (d) results from Petrel’s ant-
tracking algorithm applied to coherence cube of panel (c). The enhancement of fault (red arrow) and circular structures (blue
arrows) could be improved by dip steering and filtering of the raw seismic data.

Interpretation / May 2016 T277

 attributes are effective for identifying and illuminating
seismic facies such as channel structures and sedimen-
tary facies within these channels. Because of the sensi-
tivity of textural attributes to dip and azimuth of seismic
reflections, Gao (2003) highlights features, such as roll-
over structures and listric faults. The evaluation of tex-
tural attributes in specific directions can be used to
Downloaded 04/20/16 to 178.189.59.158. Redistribution subject to SEG license or copyright; see Terms of Use at http://library.seg.org/
Figure 6. (a) Coherence attribute on time slice 1200 ms and
(b) most positive curvature attribute on time slice 1200 ms.
Faults can still be detected in curvature attributes, although
they have minor throw (red arrows).
Figure 7. (a) Karst feature on seismic section and coherence time slice, (b) most positive curvature attribute (red) indicates
flanks of the karst feature, (c) most negative curvature attribute (blue) indicates thalweg of the karst feature, (d) fault on seismic
section and coherence time slice, (e) most positive curvature attribute (red) indicates upthrown fault part, and (f) most negative
curvature attribute (blue) indicates downthrown fault part.
T278 Interpretation / May 2016
delineate faults and fractures with a preferred orienta-
tion (Gao, 2003, 2009, 2011; de Matos et al., 2011) and to
determine their intensities, strikes, and dips (Eichkitz
et al., 2014, 2015a, 2015b). The workflow for seismic
fracture detection using GLCM-based attributes is di-
vided into five steps. The first step is calculation of each
GLCM-based attribute in 13 directions and using 64 gray
levels to transform the seismic amplitude volume into a
gray-level cube.
The second step is determination of minimum and
maximum values and their directions for each GLCM-
based attribute. In step 3, the ratios between maxima
and minima are calculated and the ratios used to set
a threshold. The threshold value is applied in step 4
to identify areas with higher directional variability
and to visualize only the directions of minima and
maxima. The ratio between maximum and minimum
GLCM-based attribute values is an indicator of fracture
intensity. Finally, in step 5, the minimum and maximum
values are used to determine the dip and azimuth of
fractures.
Seismic attribute interpretation of fractures
Seismic attribute analysis was used to highlight
faults and fractured zones within the Tensleep Forma-
tion and to support the development of a DFN. To opti-
mize the interpretation of faults and fractures, a large
number of poststack seismic attributes must be calcu-
lated. All coherence cubes generated in this study are
based on the semblance-based coherence algorithm
in OpendTect (dGB Earth Sciences). To obtain optimal
results, it was necessary to calculate volumetric dip
 cubes (steering cubes) for dip guidance and to apply
different noise-reducing filtering methods. The best re-
sults were obtained using a discrete scan method (event
steering in OpendTect) and filtering the raw seismic
data with a fault enhancement filter. A series of coher-
ence time slices is compared in Figure 5; the coherence
calculated on dip-steered and filtered seismic data (Fig-
Downloaded 04/20/16 to 178.189.59.158. Redistribution subject to SEG license or copyright; see Terms of Use at http://library.seg.org/
Petrel’s ant-tracking algorithm was applied to the co-
herence in Figure 4c.
Unlike coherence, most positive and negative curva-
ture attributes can be used to detect faults that have
died out (Figure 6) and become flexures (Chopra and
Marfurt, 2007). The combined use of most positive
and negative curvature attributes can define the flanks

ure 5c) has reduced noise and shows sharper faults. To and bottoms of circular patterns (Figure 7a–7c) that
improve fault and fracture visualization (Figure 5d), may be karst features in dolomitic intervals in the upper

Figure 8. Spectral decomposition images at (a) 30, (b) 40, and (c) 50 Hz. (d) Seismic amplitude coherence on spectral decom-
position cubes of (e) 30, (f) 40, and (g) 50 Hz. Arrows indicate faults (red) and karst structures (blue) visible at particular frequen-
cies. (h) RGB blending of these coherence slices (red: 30 Hz, green: 40 Hz, and blue: 50 Hz) clearly indicates faults.

Interpretation / May 2016 T279

 Tensleep Formation. Curvature attributes also indicate
the upthrown and downthrown sides of faults (Fig-
ure 7d–7f).
Spectral decomposition was used to separate the
seismic broadband spectrum and highlight features car-
ried by different frequencies. The decomposition of the
seismic signal was done in OpendTect and based on
Downloaded 04/20/16 to 178.189.59.158. Redistribution subject to SEG license or copyright; see Terms of Use at http://library.seg.org/
CWT analysis using a Morlet wavelet. The output fre-
quency cubes were generated in 5 Hz steps from 5 to
90 Hz and were then filtered with a dip-steered median
filter. The filtered cubes were used as input for coher-
ence calculations.
Figure 8 shows semblance-based coherence time sli-
ces based on spectral decomposition cubes of 30, 40,
Figure 9. GLCM-based energy calculated for (a) maximum
and (b) minimum values, corresponding to the highest and
lowest directional variation of seismic response.
Figure 10. The ratio of maximum and mini-
mum calculated energy can be used to map
areas with higher tendencies of directional
variability associated with highly fractured
zones. A decrease in fracture intensity can
be observed from the fractured (a) Tensleep
B Sandstone, (b) the overlying Opeche Shale,
and (c) Minnekahata Limestone, which is re-
garded to be sealing units.
T280 Interpretation / May 2016
and 50 Hz. The frequency dependency of geologic struc-
tures is apparent in Figure 8a–8c. RGB blending enhan-
ces the faults and also reveals more circular features
(Figure 8d).
Seismic attributes based on the GLCM were used for
estimating the strike and dip of fractures. Figure 9
shows the maximum and the minimum of the GLCM-
based attribute energy. This attribute shows highest val-
ues when calculated along the strike of a feature and is
therefore a useful indicator of the strike direction of
fractured zones (Figure 9a). Figure 10 shows GLCM-
based energy that indicates areas with high directional
variability. These areas are zones of fractures that have
different fracture azimuths as indicated by colors.
The effectiveness of an attribute in DFN modeling
can be judged by comparison with image log data (Tha-
chaparambil, 2015). The GLCM-based attribute calcula-
tions were used to generate fracture strikes and dips
that were plotted as rose diagrams to compare with dia-
grams based on image logs (Figure 11). It was first nec-
essary to upscale the fault and fracture estimates. The
GLCM energy attribute produced a good match (Fig-
ure 11) and is a potential indicator for fracture strike
and dip estimation. For further calculation of a DFN,
this information can be used as driver for fracture inten-
sities modeling.
Conclusions
Seismic attribute analyses demonstrated consistent
delineation and enhancement of faults and fractures
in this 3D seismic survey case study. The attribute is
a good way to calculate volumetric estimation of frac-
ture intensities, which can later be used for the con-
struction of a DFN model of the Tensleep Formation
at Teapot Dome, Wyoming.
Prior dip steering and filtering of the raw seismic
data created the high-quality seismic coherence cubes.
Downloaded 04/20/16 to 178.189.59.158. Redistribution subject to SEG license or copyright; see Terms of Use at http://library.seg.org/

Figure 11. Rose diagrams for well 48-X-28. Comparison of fracture strike and dip of image log data (orange) with maximum azimuth
and dip of GLCM-based attributes energy (blue), entropy (green), homogeneity (rose), contrast (turquoise), variance (violet), and
dissimilarity (yellow). The last column shows the results of Thachaparambil (2015), where spectral edge attribute calculations were
converted into discrete objects called seismic discontinuity planes (SDPs) to compare their azimuth and dip with image log data.

In addition to noise reduction and sharpening of faults,
seismic attributes also highlighted geologic features
other than faults and fractures, such as karst features.
Most positive and negative curvature attributes helped
to determine the upthrown and downthrown sides of
faults and could detect minor faults that were not ap-
parent on coherence time slices. This makes informa-
tion from curvature attributes a useful supplement to
coherence interpretations. Coherence based on spec-
tral decomposition cubes revealed faults and karst fea-
tures at different frequencies and could delineate
anomalies otherwise buried in broadband data. Use
of two different attributes offered the possibility of
enhancing geologic features not clearly recognizable
on simple coherence slices. The GCLM-based attributes
mapped fractured zones as areas of high directional
variability; directional color coding indicates fracture
strike trends. The resulting interpretation was con-
firmed by plotting the fracture trends as rose diagrams
and comparing them with image log data. The GLCM-
based energy attribute proved especially valuable for
building a DFN, as the fracture model closely compared
with fracture models from previous studies.
Acknowledgments
We would like to thank the RMOTC for providing the
data and the permission to publish the results of this
study. Critical and constructive reviews by S. Yuan
and two anonymous reviewers helped to improve an
early version of this paper.
References
Bahorich, M. S., and S. Farmer, 1995, 3-D seismic disconti-
nuity for faults and stratigraphic features: The coher-
ence cube: The Leading Edge, 14, 1053–1058, doi: 10
.1190/1.1437077.
Bakker, P., 2002, Image structure analysis for seismic in-
terpretation: Ph.D. dissertation, Technische Universiteit
Delft.

Interpretation / May 2016 T281

 Bednar, J. B., 1998, Least squares dip and coherency attrib-
utes: The Leading Edge, 17, 775–778, doi: 10.1190/1
.1438051.
Castagna, J. P., S. Sun, and R. W. Siegfried, 2003, Instanta-
neous spectral analysis: Detection of low-frequency
shallows associated with hydrocarbons: The Leading
Edge, 22, 120–127, doi: 10.1190/1.1559038.
Downloaded 04/20/16 to 178.189.59.158. Redistribution subject to SEG license or copyright; see Terms of Use at http://library.seg.org/
Chiaramonte, L., M. D. Zoback, J. Friedmann, and V.
Stamp, 2008, Seal integrity and feasibility of CO2
sequestration in the Teapot Dome EOR pilot: Geome-
chanical site characterization: Environmental Geology,
54, 1667–1675, doi: 10.1007/s00254-007-0948-7.
Chiaramonte, L., M. D. Zoback, J. Friedmann, V. Stamp,
and C. Zahm, 2011, Fracture characterization and the
fluid flow simulation with geomechanical constraints
for a CO2-EOR and sequestration project Teapot Dome
Oil Field, Wyoming, USA: Energy Procedia, 4, 3973–
3980, doi: 10.1016/j.egypro.2011.02.337.
Chopra, S., and K. J. Marfurt, 2005, Seismic attributes — A
historical perspective: Geophysics, 70, no. 5, 3SO–
28SO, doi: 10.1190/1.2098670.
Chopra, S., and K. J. Marfurt, 2007, Volumetric curvature
attributes for fault/fracture characterization: First
Break, 25, 35–46, doi: 10.3997/1365-2397.2007019.
Cohen, I., and R. R. Coifman, 2002, Local discontinuity
measures for 3-D seismic data: Geophysics, 67, 1933–
1945, doi: 10.1190/1.1527094.
Cooper, S. P., 2000, Deformation within a basement-cored
anticline Teapot Dome, Wyoming: Master’s thesis, New
Mexico Institute of Mining and Technology.
Cooper, S. P., L. B. Goodwin, and J. C. Lorenz, 2006,
Fracture and fault patterns associated with basement-
cored anticlines: The example of Teapot Dome, Wyo-
ming: AAPG Bulletin, 90, 1903–1920, doi: 10.1306/
06020605197.
Cooper, S. P., and J. C. Lorenz, 2007, Tensleep Formation
fracture study compendium: Enhanced Oil Recovery In-
stitute, University of Wyoming, 406.
Cooper, S. P., J. C. Lorenz, and L. B. Goodwin, 2001, Litho-
logic and structural controls on natural fracture charac-
teristics Teapot Dome, Wyoming: Technical Report,
Sand2001-1786, Sandia National Laboratories.
de Matos, M. C., M. Yenugu, S. M. Angelo, and K. L. Marfurt,
2011, Integrated seismic texture segmentation and clus-
ter analysis applied to channel delineation and chert
reservoir characterization: Geophysics, 76, no. 5,
P11–P21, doi: 10.1190/geo2010-0150.1.
Di, H., and D. Gao, 2014, Gray-level transformation and
Canny edge detection for 3D seismic discontinuity en-
hancement: Computers and Geosciences, 72, 192–200,
doi: 10.1016/j.cageo.2014.07.011.
Eichkitz, C. G., J. Amtmann, and M. G. Schreilechner, 2013,
Calculation of grey level co-occurrence matrix-based
seismic attributes in three dimensions: Computers
and Geosciences, 60, 176–183, doi: 10.1016/j.cageo
.2013.07.006.
T282 Interpretation / May 2016
Eichkitz, C. G., J. Amtmann, and M. G. Schreilechner,
2015a, Directional grey level co-occurrence matrix-
based attributes for fracture detection: 77th Annual
International Conference and Exhibition, EAGE, Ex-
tended Abstracts, Tu N105 11.
Eichkitz, C. G., J. C Davis, J. Amtmann, M. G. Schreilech-
ner, and P. de Groot, 2015b, Grey level co-occurrence
matrix and its application to seismic data: First Break,
33, 71–77.
Eichkitz, C. G., M. G. Schreilechner, P. de Groot, and
J. Amtmann, 2014, Mapping directional variations in
seismic character using gray-level co-occurrence ma-
trix-based attributes: Interpretation, 3, no. 1, T13–
T23, doi: 10.1190/INT-2014-0099.1.
Friedmann, S. J., and V. Stamp, 2006, Teapot Dome: Char-
acterization of a CO2-enhanced oil recovery and storage
site in eastern Wyoming: Environmental Geosciences,
13, 181–199, doi: 10.1306/eg.01200605017.
Gao, D., 2003, Volume texture extraction for 3D seismic
visualization and interpretation: Geophysics, 68, 1294–
1302, doi: 10.1190/1.1598122.
Gao, D., 2007, Application of three-dimensional seismic
texture analysis with special reference to deep-marine
facies discrimination and interpretation: Offshore An-
gola, West Africa: AAPG Bulletin, 91, 1665–1683, doi:
10.1306/08020706101.
Gao, D., 2009, 3D seismic volume visualization and
interpretation: An integrated workflow with case stud-
ies: Geophysics, 74, no. 1, W1–W24, doi: 10.1190/1
.3002915.
Gao, D., 2011, Latest developments in seismic texture
analysis for subsurface structure, facies, and reservoir
characterization: A review: Geophysics, 76, no. 2, W1–
W13, doi: 10.1190/1.3553479.
Gao, D., 2013, Integrating 3D seismic curvature and curva-
ture gradient attributes for fracture characterization:
Methodologies and interpretational implications: Geo-
physics, 78, no. 2, O21–O31, doi: 10.1190/geo2012-0190.1.
Gao, D., T. Wilson, L. Zhu, and K. J. Marfurt, 2011, 3D seis-
mic curvature and curvature gradient for fractured res-
ervoir characterization at Teapot Dome (Wyoming), in
K. J. Marfurt, D. Gao, A. Barnes, S. Chopra, A. Corrao, B.
Hart, H. James, J. Pacht, and N. C. Rosen, eds., Attrib-
utes: New views on seismic imaging — Their use in
exploration and production: 31st Annual Gulf Coast
Section Society of Economic Paleontologists and
Mineralogists Foundation Bob F. Perkins Research
Conference Proceeding: GCSSEPM 31, 750–775.
Gersztenkorn, A., and K. J. Marfurt, 1999, Eigenstructure-
based coherence computations as an aid to 3-D
structural and stratigraphic mapping: Geophysics, 64,
1468–1479, doi: 10.1190/1.1444651.
Gilbertson, N. J., 2006, 3D geologic modeling and frac-
ture interpretation of the Tensleep Sandstone, Alcova
anticline, Wyoming: M.S. thesis, Colorado School of
Mines.
 Haralick, R. M., K. Shanmugam, and I. Dinstein, 1973, Tex-
tural features for image classification: IEEE Transac-
tions on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics, 3, 610–621,
doi: 10.1109/TSMC.1973.4309314.
Kerr, D. R., and R. H. Dott Jr., 1988, Eolian dune types
preserved in the Tensleep Sandstone (Pennsylvanian–
Permian), north-central Wyoming: Sedimentary Geology,
Downloaded 04/20/16 to 178.189.59.158. Redistribution subject to SEG license or copyright; see Terms of Use at http://library.seg.org/
56, 383–402, doi: 10.1016/0037-0738(88)90062-0.
Li, F., and W. Lu, 2014, Coherence attribute at different
spectral scales: Interpretation, 2, no. 1, SA99–SA106,
doi: 10.1190/INT-2013-0089.1.
Lu, W., Y. Li, S. Zhang, H. Xiao, and Y. Li, 2005, Higher-or-
der-statistics and supertrace-based coherence-estima-
tion algorithm: Geophysics, 79, no. 3, P13–P18, doi:
10.1190/1.1925746.
Marfurt, K. J., R. L. Kirlin, S. L. Farmer, and M. S. Bahorich,
1998, 3-D seismic attributes using a semblance-based
coherency algorithm: Geophysics, 63, 1150–1165, doi:
10.1190/1.1444415.
Ouenes, A., T. Anderson, D. Klepacki, A. Bachir, D. Bou-
khelf, U. Araktingi, M. Holmes, B. Black, and V. Stamp,
2010, Integrated characterization and simulation of
the fractured Tensleep Reservoir at Teapot Dome for
CO2 injection design: Presented at the SPE Western
Regional Meeting, SPE 132404.
Partyka, G., J. Gridley, and J. Lopez, 1999, Interpretational
applications of spectral decomposition in reservoir
characterization: The Leading Edge, 18, 353–360, doi:
10.1190/1.1438295.
Roberts, A., 2001, Curvature attributes and their applica-
tion to 3D interpreted horizons: First Break, 19, 85–
100, doi: 10.1046/j.0263-5046.2001.00142.x.
Schwartz, B., 2006, Fracture pattern characterization of
the Tensleep Formation, Teapot Dome, Wyoming:
M.S. thesis, West Virginia University.
Sun, D. S., Y. Ling, X. Y. Guo, J. Gao, and J. X. Lin, 2010,
Application of discrete frequency coherence cubes in
the fracture detection of volcanic rocks in full-azimuth
seismic data: 80th Annual International Meeting, SEG,
Expanded Abstracts, 1342–1346.
Thachaparambil, M. V., 2015, Discrete 3D fracture network
extraction and characterization from 3D seismic data —
A case study at Teapot Dome: Interpretation, 3, no. 3,
ST29–ST41, doi: 10.1190/INT-2014-0219.1.
Vinther, R., 1997, Seismic texture classification applied
to processed 2D and 3D seismic data: 67th Annual
International Meeting, SEG, Expanded Abstracts, 721–
724.
Wilson, T. H., V. Smith, and A. L. Brown, 2013a, Developing
a strategy for CO2 EOR in an unconventional reservoir
using 3D seismic attribute workflows and fracture
image logs: 83rd Annual International Meeting, SEG,
Expanded Abstracts, 2563–2567.
Wilson, T. H., V. Smith, and A. L. Brown, 2013b, Characteri-
zation of Tensleep reservoir fracture systems using out-
crop analog, fracture image logs and 3D seismic: Rocky
Mountain Section Meeting, AAPG, Abstract, Search and
Discovery article #50877.
Wilson, T. H., V. Smith, and A. L. Brown, 2015, Developing
a model discrete fracture network, drilling, and en-
hanced oil recovery strategy in an unconventional nat-
urally fractured reservoir using integrated field, image
log, and three-dimensional seismic data: AAPG Bulletin,
99, 735–762, doi: 10.1306/10031414015.
Wilson, T. H., V. Smith, A. L. Brown, and D. Gao, 2012,
Modeling discrete fracture networks in the Tensleep
sandstone: Teapot Dome, Wyoming: Annual Convention
and Exhibition, AAPG, Abstract, Search and Discovery
article #50658.
Zhang, Q., 2005, Stratigraphy and sedimentology of the
Tensleep sandstone at the Teapot Dome and in out-
crops, Wyoming: M.S. thesis, Colorado School of Mines.
Sarah Schneider received a master’s
degree (2015) in petroleum geo-
physics from the Montanuniversitaet
Leoben, Austria. During her master’s
studies, she worked as a researcher
at Joanneum Research, Institute of
Geophysics and Geothermics (now
Geo5 GmbH), where she finished
her master’s thesis related to seismic
attributes. Currently, she is participating in a graduate pro-
gram of MOL Group in Budapest, Hungary.
Christoph Georg Eichkitz received
a master’s degree (2005) in applied
geophysics from the Montanuniversi-
taet Leoben, Austria, where his re-
search was focused on modeling of
microgravity data. He cofounded
Geo5 GmbH in July 2015, where he
is responsible for seismic interpreta-
tion, attribute calculation, and struc-
tural modeling. Prior to founding Geo5 GmbH, he
worked for Joanneum Research, Institute of Geophysics
and Geothermics, for eight years. His main research inter-
ests include seismic attributes calculation, pattern recog-
nition, and interpretation workflows.
Marcellus Gregor Schreilechner re-
ceived an M.S. (1996) and a Ph.D.
(2007) in applied geosciences from
the Montanuniversitaet Leoben, Aus-
tria, where he is also a lecturer for ap-
plied geophysics. Currently, he is the
head of the Institute of Geophysics
and Geothermics at Joanneum Re-
search, the second largest nonuniver-
sity research organization in Austria. His main research
interests include the sequence stratigraphic interpretation
of seismic reflection data, interpretation of well-log data,
and application of seismic attributes for reservoir charac-
terization.
Interpretation / May 2016 T283
 John C. Davis received an M.S.
(1963) and a Ph.D. (1967) in geology
from the University of Wyoming,
USA. After a brief stint on the faculty
at Idaho State University, he joined
the University of Kansas where he
served as chief of the Mathematical
Geology Section of the Kansas Geo-
Downloaded 04/20/16 to 178.189.59.158. Redistribution subject to SEG license or copyright; see Terms of Use at http://library.seg.org/
Department of Chemical and Petroleum Engineering. His
textbook Statistics and data analysis in geology leads in
its field. After retiring in 2003, he joined the faculty of the
Montanuniversitaet Leoben, Austria, where he was a pro-
fessor for geostatistics and reservoir characterization until
2006. Currently, he is a chief geologist for Heinemann Oil
GmbH in Leoben.

logical Survey and professor in the

T284 Interpretation / May 2016

View publication stats