NANJING INSTITUTE OF GEOPHYSICAL PROSPECTING AND INSTITUTE OF PHYSICS PUBLISHING JOURNAL OF GEOPHYSICS AND ENGINEERING

J. Geophys. Eng. 2 (2005) 213–221 doi:10.1088/1742-2132/2/3/005

Reservoir characterization using seismic

data after frequency bandwidth
enhancement
Yongsheng Ma1, Xuan Zhu1, Tonglou Guo1, Tony Rebec2
and Kostia Azbel2
1
Sinopec Southern E&P Company, No 201 Guan-Shang-Zhong-Lu Road, Guan-Du District,

Downloaded from https://academic.oup.com/jge/article-abstract/2/3/213/5127600 by guest on 21 May 2020

Kunming City, Yunan Province 650200, China
2
Paradigm Geophysical, Houston, TX 77024, USA

Received 8 April 2005

Accepted for publication 8 June 2005
Published 1 August 2005
Online at stacks.iop.org/JGE/2/213

Abstract
Reservoir characterization is a crucial prerequisite to predict the economic potential of a
hydrocarbon reservoir or to examine different production scenarios. Unfortunately, it is
impossible to determine the exact reservoir properties at the required scale. The most abundant
seismic data have a resolution of around 30 m. Wells resolve the reservoir down to the
centimetre scale, but only at some points in the vertical direction. This paper presents a
method, referred to as frequency bandwidth enhancement (FBE), for enhancing the frequency
bandwidth and restoring high frequencies. The method increases the resolution of seismic data
by padding the frequency spectrum of seismic wavelets, thus pushing the notch corresponding
to the time limit of resolution to a higher part of the spectrum. This approach (patent pending)
results in sharper wavelets capable of identifying thinner beds. A by-product of extending the
frequency spectrum is the elimination of the tuning effect of beds thinner than the new limit of
resolution. When tuning curves before and after the process are compared, it is observed that
although different, the differences are minuscule and insignificant compared to the benefits
coming from being able to resolve thinner beds. The procedure enunciated here is robust and
helps define trends better, leading to more confident interpretations. Such applications could
redefine prospects, which in some cases may have been declared unsuccessful on the basis of
interpretation of seismic data with the original bandwidth. The reservoir characterization is
realized with the aid of coherence cube processing, which is an extremely powerful tool to
efficiently exploit the wealth of structural and stratigraphic information encapsulated in the
seismic waveforms of 3D seismic data volumes.

Keywords: reservoir characterization, frequency bandwidth enhancement, coherence

cube processing

1. Introduction with contrasting velocity. Low-porosity carbonate bodies

Reservoir characterization comprises determining reservoir
architecture, establishing fluid-flow trends, constructing
reservoir models and identifying reserve growth potential.
However, geophysicists are often frustrated at their inability to
extract and understand the subtle stratigraphic detail contained
in 3D seismic volumes. Seismically, stratigraphic bodies
with definitive shapes show up if they are encased in rocks
associated with thin shales and encased in shaly carbonate
rocks having a narrow frequency bandwidth may not be
seen on seismic data. Often we come across examples
where the initially processed 3D seismic volume results in
interpretations that sometimes are geologically suspect, e.g.,
cases involving complex faulted patterns or subtle stratigraphic
plays. Similarly, post-mortem analysis may cite small fault
displacements or obscure seismic data as reasons for dry wells.

1742-2132/05/030213+09$30.00 © 2005 Nanjing Institute of Geophysical Prospecting Printed in the UK 213

Y Ma et al
In such cases, the usual practice is to create a new version of the
3D volume with some target-oriented processing to improve
imaging in the zone of interest that will, in turn, lead to a more
accurate interpretation. In some cases this helps, but in others
some questions still remain unresolved.
In the latter, more often than not, more accurate
stratigraphic interpretation is needed but the available
bandwidth of the seismic data is inadequate to image or resolve
the thickness of many of the thin targets seen in the wells. This
problem can be addressed by having data of reasonable quality
and augmenting it by some frequency restoration procedure
that would improve the vertical resolution (Wang 2002,
2003). Frequency restoration is necessary because seismic
waves propagating in the subsurface are attenuated and this
phenomenon is frequency dependent—higher frequencies are
absorbed more rapidly than lower frequencies. Consequently,
the highest frequency recovered on most seismic data is
usually about 80–100 Hz. This enables confident mapping
of subsurface horizons of interest, clarifies detailed geological
settings and eventually leads to more profitable seismic
exploration programmes.
The coherence cube analysis (Bahorich and Farmer 1995,
Marfurt et al 1998, 1999) provides accurate maps of the spatial
change in the seismic waveform that can readily be related to
geologic features and depositional environments. Faults and
fracture systems can be spatially imaged and directly mapped
from the coherence cube without the tedious task of drawing
faults on each vertical section and proceeding blindly without
the knowledge of their spatial position in the early crucial phase
of the interpretation. Stratigraphic features can be readily
detected in the volume, relieving the interpreter of the tedious
task of locating them, thus saving time for detailed analysis
(Maione 1999).
2. Frequency bandwidth extension
We are aware that seismic waves propagating in the subsurface
get attenuated. Since this loss is frequency dependent, seismic
signals with higher frequencies are absorbed more rapidly than
those of lower frequencies (Wang and Guo 2004). Attempts
are usually made to determine the subsurface attenuation
in terms of the attenuation constant α or the quality factor
Q (Wang 2004). The conventional methods used for their
determination from surface seismic data not only have their
limitations but also have a certain level of uncertainty.
The frequency bandwidth enhancement (FBE) approach
to enhance the frequency bandwidth results in sharper wavelets
capable of identifying thinner beds. Resolving thin beds from
seismic data implies identifying individual reflections from
the top and bottom of a bed, and the limit of resolution is
defined as the smallest bed separation that can be identified
as two distinct events in seismic data. Ricker (1953), Widess
(1973) and Kallweit and Wood (1981) studied the limit of
resolution more than two decades ago by convolving wavelets
of known characteristics with two spikes, the distance (time
interval) between the spikes representing the top and bottom
of the structure under study. Through their analysis they
quantified the thinnest bed to be resolved as a function of the
214
wavelet’s characteristics (breadth or frequency information).
The interference between wavelets as beds become thinner
(wedge model) results in thickness and amplitude deviations
from the real ones. These differences are graphically displayed
and analysed using tuning curves where apparent versus real
thickness and amplitudes are compared.
Ricker (1953), Widess (1973) and Kallweit and Wood
(1981) quantified the time limit of resolution, but gave no
insight into the possible ramifications of doing it in the
spectral domain. Our method described below deals with
the expression of a thin bed in the frequency domain and a
methodology for extending the relevant part of the spectrum
and, as a consequence, decreases the limit of resolution.
Moreover, we show that the expression, in the frequency
domain, of two spikes convolved with a wavelet is a notch in
Downloaded from https://academic.oup.com/jge/article-abstract/2/3/213/5127600 by guest on 21 May 2020
the amplitude spectrum at a frequency that is a function of the
spikes’ separation (in time) and events’ polarity. Furthermore,
the notch is present in the spectrum for beds thinner than
the time limit of resolution, implying that conducting the
analysis in the frequency domain will allow us to push the
limit of resolution to a higher degree, i.e. we can resolve
smaller thickness of beds. The basic technique described
below increases the limit of resolution (thinner beds in the time
domain) by extending the frequency spectrum of the wavelet
such that the (frequency) value of the highest identifiable
frequency notch corresponds to the limit of resolution of
the extended spectrum. The resultant seismic data are of
much higher frequency and allow us up to a 30% increase
in resolution. The effect of padding the frequency spectrum
where no seismic information is recorded in the first place is
also analysed.
We will use a Kallweit and Wood (1981) resolution criteria
to illustrate the technique since they used a broadband wavelet,
similar to that used in our analysis, to quantify resolution. The
analysis, done for spikes of the same polarity and amplitude,
can be easily extended to include spikes of different polarities
and amplitudes. It is stated without proof that such an analysis
would result in conclusions similar to those observed in the
test case. The practical time limit of resolution, as defined
by Kallweit and Wood (1981), for a broadband wavelet with
a maximum frequency fU and a white spectrum occurs at
a one-quarter-wavelength condition and approximates TR =
1/(1.4fU ), provided that the wavelet’s band ratio exceeds two
octaves.
The frequency representation of two spikes of the same
polarity separated at a time interval t corresponds to a
notch at frequency fN = 1/(2t). The thinner the bed
being analysed, the larger the value of fN . The notch in
the frequency spectrum for the time limit of resolution will
fall at a frequency fR = 1/(2TR ) or fR = 0.7fU ; that is,
the notch falls at 70% of the maximum frequency. As the
bed thickness decreases, the representation in time is an
increase in the amplitude of the wavelet where upper and
lower limits cannot be distinguished (the events are in tune).
The representation in the frequency (spectral) domain
corresponds to a notch in the amplitude spectrum at
frequencies higher than fR (0.7fU ) and up to nearly fU . The
technique presented here is based on the fact that thinner
 Reservoir characterization using seismic data after frequency bandwidth enhancement

O rig in a l FBE

Downloaded from https://academic.oup.com/jge/article-abstract/2/3/213/5127600 by guest on 21 May 2020

Figure 1. Stacked section before (left) and after (right) FBE processing. Many detailed subtle stratigraphic features can be seen on the FBE
data (the green line interpretation).

FBE
FBE Original
O iginal
Figure 2. Direct merge of the seismic section before (right) and after (left) FBE processing. Additional small reflectors can be identified in
the red circled areas on the FBE data.

beds can be better resolved in the frequency domain than
in the time domain. Based on Kallweit’s model, the time
limit of resolution can be reduced by 30% by extending the
wavelet’s maximum frequency to a value such that the notch
at the highest usable frequency (close to fU ) before extension
corresponds to 1/(1.4fUE ) where fUE corresponds to the new
(extended) maximum frequency.
In practice, the extension of the frequency bandwidth by
padding is imperfect and results in wavelets that are not white
and, for this reason, do not honour Kallweitt’s time limit of
resolution; nevertheless, the time limit of resolution is still
reduced by 30% by making fUE larger than 1.4fU . By padding
amplitudes between fU and fUE , where there is no seismic
signal, the wavelet becomes sharper with the resultant decrease
in the limit of resolution. Since no real signal exists from fU
to fUE , it will be impossible to see the effect of beds thinner
than TRN on the extended spectrum and the resultant tuning
curves will have different characteristics than those observed
in the usual case. Namely, amplitudes will not increase for
wavelets convolved with thinner beds than the new limit of
resolution.
3. Coherence cube processing
We have used several coherence formulations (Bahorich and
Farmer 1995, Marfurt et al 1998, 1999) within this research
project. These algorithms are based on the following basic
mathematical solutions: correlation (C1), semblance (C2) and
eigen-decomposition (C3).
Numerous hybrids of these algorithms have been
developed and some will be discussed here.
The correlation algorithm (C1). The basic correlation
approach has been around since the early days of digital signal
processing. When applied to two seismic traces it can be
defined as the degree of linear relationship between them, a
measure of how much they look alike or the extent to which

215
Y Ma et al

Downloaded from https://academic.oup.com/jge/article-abstract/2/3/213/5127600 by guest on 21 May 2020

Figure 3. Amplitude spectra of the seismic data before FBE processing. The peak frequency is about 35 Hz with bandwidth from 10 Hz to
80 Hz.

Figure 4. Amplitude spectra of the seismic data after FBE processing. The peak frequency is about 70 Hz with bandwidth from 10 Hz to
130 Hz.

216
 Reservoir characterization using seismic data after frequency bandwidth enhancement

Downloaded from https://academic.oup.com/jge/article-abstract/2/3/213/5127600 by guest on 21 May 2020

Original Stack
Original Stack FBE
FBE

Figure 5. Comparison of a seismic section from 500 ms to 2000 ms before (left) and after (right) FBE processing.

Before FBE After FBE

Figure 6. Time slide (1000 ms) of seismic data before (left) and after (right) FBE processing.

one can be considered a linear function of the other. It is
interesting to note that the frequency domain equivalent of
correlation, in the time domain, is coherence.
The semblance algorithm (C2). The introduction of the
semblance algorithm by Barhorich and Farmer (1995) to the
coherence cube methodology added a significant contribution,
especially for revealing detailed stratigraphic features. This
is made possible in part due to the shorter temporal apertures
which can now be employed. Semblance is the energy of a
summed trace divided by the mean energy of the components
of the sum which is the energy of the stacked trace normalized
by the energy of the components of the stack. It is this
technique which forms the basis of the C2 algorithm.
The eigen-decomposition algorithm (C3). This is a multi-trace
eigen-decomposition process that is more robust with higher
resolution than previous algorithms. Consider two seismic
traces whose amplitudes are crossplotted sample by sample
on the Cartesian coordinate system. The distribution of the
general shape of the plotted points can be represented by an
ellipse and the pattern formed by these points is governed by
the coherence of the two input traces plotted. The ellipsoidal
shape is not a measure of the individual samples but more a
measure of the overall waveform shape being input.
The coherence algorithms used are typically referred to
as C1, C2 and C3. The methodology originally patented by
Bahorich and Farmer (1995) describes a correlation technique
as a part of the approach for providing the numerical similarity

217
Y Ma et al
Semblance
Figure 7. Time slide of coherence processing results comparison of C2 (semblance algorithm, left) and C3 (eigen-decomposition solution,
right) methods.
Figure 8. Comparison of a time slide (1680 ms) of seismic data (left) and coherence cube data (right).
of a cube of seismic traces. This resulted in the C1 algorithm.
Further work performed by Bahorich and Farmer (1998, 2000)
produced the superior C2-based semblance algorithm. In 1996
Marfurt et al announced the eigen structure algorithm (C3)
with, in most cases, a significant response improvement over
the semblance-based formulation. The eigen solution (C3) has
proved to be highly successful, with increased robustness, in
revealing both subtle faults and stratigraphy in one execution.
These results are far superior to the correlation (C1) and
semblance (C2) solutions used in the past and available on
workstations. An additional improvement was made which
gives an option to remove the structural effect from the
technique caused by the instability of the zero crossing on the
seismic trace. This is achieved by a higher fidelity dip/azimuth
search. Recently, a major breakthrough was accomplished
218
Downloaded from https://academic.oup.com/jge/article-abstract/2/3/213/5127600 by guest on 21 May 2020
Eigen
by introducing an eigen gradient term which produces a
significant lift in the sensitivity resulting in higher resolution.
This capability, called high-resolution eigen, makes even the
most subtle waveform changes visible to the eye with both
faulting and stratigraphic detail.
The ability to measure three-dimensional spatial
variations in the seismic waveform with full dip and azimuth
comprehension is extremely powerful in exploiting 3D data
volumes. The basic seismic waveform contains a measure
of time, amplitude, frequency, phase and absorption. Spatial
variations in these measurements are the seismic response to
lateral variations in the physical and geometric properties and
characteristic of the rocks. Measuring these combined changes
in the seismic response allows the interpreter to physically
locate and map these changes in space and time thus giving a
 Reservoir characterization using seismic data after frequency bandwidth enhancement

Downloaded from https://academic.oup.com/jge/article-abstract/2/3/213/5127600 by guest on 21 May 2020

Before FBE After FBE

Figure 9. Time slide (1680 ms) of the coherence cube data before (left) and after (right) FBE processing.

Before FBE After FBE

Figure 10. Time slide of adaptive eigen: comparison before (left) and after (right) FBE processing.

better understanding of the subsurface model. The coherence
cube methodology as applied here is an attempt to capture
these changes.
3D seismic coherence is computed by measuring
waveform similarity within an aperture which includes traces
and time samples within a user-specified space and time
window control. The waveform similarity is measured along
all possible planes within the dips specified. Faults can
be identified by their low similarity measurement when the
aperture is straddling the fault location. Subtle changes in the
seismic waveform which show the extent and internal details
of stratigraphic features can also be identified by using the
technique. Results here indicate that the illumination of the
subsurface is a function of offset. The imaging of fault and
fraction systems is clearly visible using the coherence cube.
4. Real data examples
The frequency restoration procedure described above has been
run on a 3D seismic data set from an onshore oilfield in
southwest China, and convincing and promising results have
been obtained. Figures 1 and 2 show the application of FBE
on the migrated 3D seismic data using the approach discussed
above (padding the frequency spectrum of seismic wavelets to

219
Y Ma et al
Before FBE
Figure 11. Time slide (1680 ms) of bright spot volume display before (left) and after (right) FBE processing.
Before FBE
Figure 12. Time slide of relief-enhanced eigen: comparison before (left) and after (right) FBE (right) processing.
push the notch corresponding to the time limit of resolution
to a higher part of the spectrum). The FBE process has
increased their bandwidth from 40 Hz or less to over 100 Hz
(figures 3 and 4) using this patent-pending new technique.
Geologists can redefine thin beds, pinchout, small faults, and
new prospects using these high frequency seismic sections
with higher confidence.
Figures 3 and 4 show the frequency bandwidth of the
3D seismic data before and after the FBE processing. The
cascaded dipole differentiation filters (e.g. 1, −1) of various
orders have been used during the FBE processing, which
can shift and increase the dominant frequency of zero phase
seismic trace data. Higher orders (and strengths) of filters can
220
Downloaded from https://academic.oup.com/jge/article-abstract/2/3/213/5127600 by guest on 21 May 2020
After FBE
After FBE
be obtained by convolving (cascading) lower order filters with
one another. The process is most effective on zero phase data.
Figure 5 compares the FBE processing result from the
500 ms to 2000 ms section. The FBE processing has
significantly increased the frequency bandwidth, sharpened the
wavelet and enhanced the reflection image for much easier and
more confident interpretation. Figure 6 shows the time slide at
1000 ms with significant high frequency features and great
detail after FBE processing.
Figure 7 shows the time slide (1680 ms) of coherence
processing results using the C2 semblance method (left) and
C3 eigen method (right). The eigen-decomposition method
gives much higher resolution, more clear, detailed and sharp
 Reservoir characterization using seismic data after frequency bandwidth enhancement
features than that of the C2 method on the same seismic
data, which will provide detailed structure interpretation and
reservoir characterization.
Figure 8 shows a comparison of the time slide (1680 ms)
of seismic data (left) and the coherence data (light) using the
adaptive high resolution eigen method. There are fracturing
zones on the top of the structure and small faults developed
along the major fault zone on the coherence cube time slide,
which cannot be identified from the time slide seismic data.
Figure 9 shows a comparison of the coherence cube time
slide (1680 ms) before (left) and after (right) FBE processing.
FBE processing has significantly improved and increased the
resolution of the seismic data. Much more detailed geological
features can be identified and interpreted (the area outlined in
red) from the coherence data after FBE processing. Figure 10
shows the coherence results using the adaptive eigen method
before (left) and after (right) FBE processing.
The bright spot technique and relief-enhanced eigen
method are displayed in figures 11 and 12. The ‘bright spot’
volume was created by running the coherence technique on
seismic inversion data and numerically merging the inversion
volume with the coherence volume. The relief-enhanced
eigen solution provides a very novel product which enhances
both structural and stratigraphic features to be highlighted.
These plots have significantly helped geologists and reservoir
engineers to understand and interpret fluid distribution, special
reservoir structure, and conduct reservoir characterization with
greater confidence.
5. Conclusions
The FBE method described in this paper differs from
conventional industry methods. It reduces the limit of
resolution of seismic data by padding the frequency spectrum
of seismic wavelets, thus pushing the notch corresponding to
the time limit of resolution to a higher part of the spectrum.
These result in sharper wavelets capable of identifying thinner
beds. A by-product of extending the frequency spectrum is the
elimination of the tuning effect of beds thinner than the new
limit of resolution (TRN ). When tuning curves before and after
the process are compared, it is observed that although different,
the differences are minuscule and insignificant compared to the
benefits of being able to resolve thinner beds. The procedure
enunciated here is robust and helps define trends better, leading
to more confident interpretations. Such applications could
redefine prospects, which in some cases may have been
declared unsuccessful on the basis of interpretation of seismic
data with poor bandwidth. Running the coherence cube
technique on seismic data shows that improved stratigraphic
results can be achieved on good quality seismic data.
Acknowledgments
This project was made possible by the dedication and effort
of many professionals at the Southern E&P Company of
SINOPEC, and Paradigm Geophysical. The support of
SINOPEC and Southern E&P Company management in
facilitating the whole project is specifically acknowledged. We
also acknowledge the Southern E&P Company of SINOPEC
and Paradigm Geophysical’s permission to publish this work.
Downloaded from https://academic.oup.com/jge/article-abstract/2/3/213/5127600 by guest on 21 May 2020
References
Bahorich M S and Farmer S L 1995 3D seismic coherency for faults
and stratigraphic features The Leading Edge 14 1053–8
Bahorich M S and Farmer S L 1998 Apparatus for seismic signal
processing and exploration US Patent 5838564
Bahorich M S and Farmer S L 2000 Seismic signal processing and
exploration US Patent 6092026
Kallweit R S and Wood L C 1981 The limits of resolution of zero
phase wavelets Geophysics 47 1035–46
Maione S J 1999 Revealing the geology of the Gulf of Mexico
recorded by 3D seismic Offshore Technology Conference
(Houston, Texas) paper 11055
Marfurt K J, Kirlin R L, Farmer S L and Bahorich M S 1996
Method and apparatus for seismic signal processing and
exploration US Patent 5563949
Marfurt K J, Kirlin R L, Farmer S L and Bahorich M S 1998
3D seismic attributes using a semblance-based coherency
algorithm Geophysics 63 1150–65
Marfurt K J, Sudhaker V, Gersztenkorn A, Crawford K D and
Nissen S E 1999 Coherency calculations in the presence of
structural dip Geophysics 64 104–11
Ricker N 1953 Wavelet contraction, wavelet expansion and the
control of seismic resolution Geophysics 18 769–92
Wang Y 2002 A stable and efficient approach of inverse Q filtering
Geophysics 67 657–63
Wang Y 2003 Quantifying the effectiveness of stabilized inverse Q
filtering Geophysics 68 337–45
Wang Y 2004 Q analysis on reflection seismic data Geophys. Res.
Lett. 31 L17606
Wang Y and Guo J 2004 Modified Kolsky model or seismic
attenuation and dispersion J. Geophys. Eng. 1 187–96
Widess M B 1973 Quantifying resolving power of seismic systems
Geophysics 47 1160–73
221