Amplitude

Variation with
Offset
presented by
Roxy Frary
 Theory
Just some background

ok a lot of background
 Snells Law
sin(Q1 ) sin(Q 2 ) sin(F1 ) sin(F 2 )
= = =
VP1 VP 2 VS1 VS2
 Reflection
Coefficients
r2VP 2 - r1VP1
RC =
r2VP 2 + r1VP1
I P 2 - I P1
=
I P 2 + I P1
DI P
=
2I PA
 Zoeppritz
Equations
(Aki & Richards, 1980)

R(q ) = f ( r1, r2 ,VP1,VP 2 ,VS1,VS2 , q )

 (Much-needed)
Simplifications
Aki & Richards, 1980

1 2 2 Dr 1 DVP 2 2 DVS
RPP (Q a ) (1- 4 p VSa ) + - 4 p VSa
2 ra 2 cos (Q a ) VPa
2
VSa
attempt to separate the
density dependence, P-
wave, and S-wave

still complicated
 2
VP 2 cosQ1 - VP1 cosQ 2 sin Q1
RPP (Q1 ) + 2 (V 2
S1 - V 2
S2 )
VP 2 cosQ1 + VP1 cosQ 2 VP1
(Much-needed)
Simplifications
Hilterman, 1983

Separates into
acoustic/fluid and
shear terms by
assuming constant density

still complicated
 Ds 2 1 DVP
RPP (q1 ) R0 + A0 R0 + 2
sin q + (tan 2
q - sin 2
q1 )
(1- s a )
1 1
2 VP
(Much-needed)
1 - 2s
A0 = B0 - 2(1 + B0 ) Simplifications
1-s
Shuey, 1985
DVP
VPa
B0 =
+ Dr
DVP
VPa ra

Each term describes a

Normal incidence reflection coefficient different angular range of
Intermediate angles the offset curve
Approaching the critical angle
RPP (q1 ) A + Bsin 2 q1 + Csin 2 q1 tan 2 q1 Weighted
Stacking
A (or R0) is the normal (Geostack)
incidence, or zero- Smith and Gidlow, 1987
offset stack
reducing the prestack
information to AVO
B is the AVO slope or attribute traces
compute local incident
gradient angle at each time, then do
a regression analysis

3rd term is the far-

offset stack
 RPP (q1 ) A + Bsin 2 q1 + Csin 2 q1 tan 2 q1 The Most
Ds 2 1 DVP
RPP (q1 ) R0 + A0 R0 + 2
(1- s a )
sin q1 +
2 VP
(tan 2 q1 - sin 2 q1 ) Simple

Simplification
Hilterman, 1989
RPP (q1 ) R0 cos q1 + 2.25Ds sin q1
2 2

near-offset stack At small angles, R0

images the P-wave dominates

dominates at larger
impedance contrasts angles
far-offset stack images
Poissons ratio contrasts
Poissons Ratio
Koefoed, 1955

( )
2
VP
VS -2
s=
( )
VP
2
2 V -1
S
 Incidence Angle
Koefoed, 1955
Shuey, 1985

Ds 2 1 DVP
RPP (q1 ) R0 + A0 R0 + 2
sin q1 + (tan 2 q1 - sin 2 q1 )
(1 - s a ) 2 VP
 VP Contrast
Koefoed, 1955
Shuey, 1985

Ds 2 1 DVP
RPP (q1 ) R0 + A0 R0 + 2
sin q1 + (tan 2 q1 - sin 2 q1 )
(1 - s a ) 2 VP
 Ds 2 1 DVP
RPP (q1 ) R0 + A0 R0 + 2
sin q + (tan 2
q - sin 2
q1 )
(1- s a )
1
2 VP
1

Rule #1
Theoretical Conclusions
from
Koefoed, 1955
modified by
Shuey, 1985

An increase (decrease) of
Poissons ratio for the
underlying medium
produces an increase
(decrease) in the reflection
coefficient at larger angles
of incidence
 Ds 2 1 DVP
RPP (q1 ) R0 + A0 R0 + 2
sin q + (tan 2
q - sin 2
q1 )
(1- s a )
1
2 VP
1

Rule #2
Theoretical Conclusions
from
Koefoed, 1955
1- 2s
A0 = B0 - 2(1+ B0 ) modified by
1- s Shuey, 1985

When Poissons ratio of the

media are equal, an
increase (decrease) of
Poissons ratio causes an
increase (decrease) in
reflection coefficient at
larger angles of incidence
 Ds 2 1 DVP
RPP (q1 ) R0 + A0 R0 + 2
sin q + (tan 2
q - sin 2
q1 )
(1- s a )
1
2 VP
1

Rule #3
Theoretical Conclusions
from
Koefoed, 1955
modified by
Shuey, 1985

Interchange of the media

affects the shape of the
curves only slightly RPP
simply changes sign when
the elastic properties are
interchanged except at
large angles
Industry Use:
Gas Sands
Since 1982
 Gas Sands
Ostrander, 1984
Hypothetical gas
model
 But how do we
see this in seismic
data?
Ostrander, 1984

Sacramento Valley

Sand reservoir at 1.75 s

Fault at SP 95
Reservoir limits SP 75-
135
 CDP Gathers
Ostrander, 1984
offset increases to the left

A & B show an increase in

amplitude with offset
change in Poissons ratio
gas-saturated sand

C shows a decrease in
amplitude with offset
uniform Poissons ratio
no gas sand
Another Example
Ostrander, 1984

Nevada

Amplitude anomaly at 1.6

s

Decrease in amplitude
with offset on gathers
uniform Poissons ratio
BASALT
 But different Gas Sands
have different signatures
Rutherford & Williams,
1989

Class 1: high impedance

o gradient is usually greatest

Class 2: near-zero
impedance contrast
o seem to suddenly appear at
larger offsets, when amplitudes
rise above noise level

Class 3: low impedance

o large reflectivities at all offsets
Class 1 Gas Sand
Example
Rutherford & Williams,
1989

Arkoma Basin
Pennsylvanian-aged
Hartshorn sand

dim out

polarity change at mid-

offset
Class 2 Gas Sand
Example
Rutherford & Williams,
1989

Gulf of Mexico
Brazos area
mid-Miocene

not a classic gas sand

anomaly 2.1 s
Class 2 Gas Sand
Example (Contd)
Rutherford & Williams,
1989

AVO effects are

pronounced in mid- and far-
offset synthetics

constant reflection angle

display confirms synthetic
data
Class 3 Gas Sand
Example
Rutherford & Williams,
1989

Gulf of Mexico
High Island area
Pliocene

most typical large

reflectivity at all offsets
Class 4 Gas Sand
Castagna & Swan, 1997

Low impedance as well, but

reflectivity decreases with
offset
 Industry Use:
Fluid Identification
Since 1997
 Substituting and
neglecting second-
order perturbations
yields Fluid Line
B = (1 - 8g 2 )A - 4gDg Foster & Keys, 1999

B = (1 - 8g 2 )A plotting in the slope-

g = VS V
intercept domain

P R(q ) A + Bsin 2 q + ...

DVPa Dra
A= +
2VPa 2 ra
DVPa VSa2 Dra DVSa
B= -4 2 +
2VPa VPa 2 ra VSa
 Fluid Line
(Contd)
Foster & Keys, 1999

R(q ) A + Bsin 2 q + ...

B = (1 - 8g 2 )A - 4gDg
B = (1 - 8g 2 )A

g = VS V
Reflections from wet sands/shales fall on the
Fluid Line (little contrast in ) hydrocarbon-
bearing sands do not P
Abrupt decrease (increase) in causes the
reflection to fall above (below) the Fluid Line
like the tops and bases of sands
 B = (1- 8g 2 )A - 4gDg
B = (1- 8g 2 )A
V
g = SV
P

Fluid Line and

Gas Sands
Foster & Keys, 1999

Class 1: high-impedance
below Fluid Line, to the right of
the slope axis
Class 2: negligible impedance
contrast intersection with
slope axis
Class 3: low-impedance
negative intercept and slope
Class 4: even lower impedance
negative intercept, slope is
zero or positive
 Fluid Line, Gas
Sands, and Rock
B = (1 - 8g 2 )A - 4gDg
Properties
B = (1 - 8g 2 )A Foster & Keys, 1999
VS
g = VP

Start with top of Class 3 gas

sand at point 1
To get to point 2:
increase porosity
Alternatively, to get to point 3:
reduce porosity
Point 4:
replace gas with brine
To get to point 5:
reduce porosity of brine
 Fluid Line, Gas
Sands, and Rock
Properties
(Contd)
Foster, Keys & Lane, 1999
Point 1: at normal incidence,
the reflection is negative, and
becomes more negative with
increasing offset
Point 2: reflection is more
negative, but less variation with
offset than Point 1
Point 3: small amplitude at
normal incidence, but will be
more negative with increasing
offset (more than 1 or 2)
Point 4: small positive
amplitude at normal incidence,
B = (1- 8g 2 )A - 4gDg and decreases with offset
B = (1- 8g 2 )A Point 5: large positive
VS amplitude, decreases with
g = VP
offset (more than 4)
 Fluid Line, Gas
Sands, and Rock
Properties
(Contd)
Foster, Keys & Lane, 2010

Increasing the shale content

increases acoustic impedance
by reducing porosity (solid
brown line) must also
decrease because pure shale
lies on the Fluid Line
Adding clay past the critical
concentration reduces acoustic
impedance (dashed brown line)

B = (1- 8g 2 )A - 4gDg
B = (1- 8g 2 )A
VS
g = VP
AVO for hydrocarbon
detection
Foster, Keys & Lane, 2010
 Evaluation of
potential to
differentiate
hydrocarbons
from water
Well 1: central structure
Well 2: west structure

Step 1 forward model

the expected AVO
response for brine- and
hydrocarbon-filled sands
from well log
information
 Well information
Well 1: a & b
Well 2: c & d
a & c indicate the expected
AVO for individual sand units
b & d are derived from
synthetic gathers modeled
from the well logs
We should expect a
reflection from the top of a
gas sand to peak at zero
offset and become larger
with increasing angle
Amplitudes should
decrease downdip from a
gas/water contact
Class 3 at the top of the
reservoir section, Class 2
deeper as porosity
Note change in amplitude convention decreases
 Seismic data
3D prestack time-migrated
gathers

Blue points are background

data, containing wet sands
and shales used to define
the Fluid Line

Red points are the reservoir

predominantly Class 3
sand
 Applying AVO
scheme to stacked
seismic data
dark-green over light-green: top
and bottom of Class 3 sand
purple (Class 2) sands seen at
depth
gas/water contact (AVO anomaly)
terminates downdip
 Check with
structure in map
view
anomaly extends to the
eastern structure as well
AVO for lithology
discrimination
Foster, Keys & Lane, 2010
 Evaluation of
potential to
differentiate
reservoir sands
Back to basics: thicker
sands in a main channel
feeding a turbidite fan,
porosity decreases further
from the sediment source

Class 2 sands (b) have

lower porosity than Class 3
sands (a)
 AVO extraction
to map view
Well A found a commercial
reservoir
Well B found poor porosity
 Fluids cannot support
shear, so maximum
value of is 0.5
Typical values: More on
o 0.05 for very hard rocks
Poissons Ratio

( )
2
o 0.45 for loose, VP
unconsolidated sediments VS -2
s=
( )
o Close to 0.0 for gas sands
VP 2

At 0.33, S-wave velocity 2 V -1
is half P-wave velocity S
As gas saturation
increases, Poissons ratio
decreases
 The slope of the More on A & B:
plotting in the
background trend
slope-intercept
depends only on the domain
background Castagna, Swan & Foster,
1998
B = (1- 8g 2 )A R(q ) A + Bsin q + ...
2

DVPa Dra
A= +
2VPa 2 ra
DVPa VSa2 Dra DVSa
B= -4 2 +
2VPa VPa 2 ra VSa
A normal incidence
B AVO gradient/slope
B = (1- 8g 2 )A - 4gDg
B = (1- 8g 2 )A
VS
g = VP
 Shale/brine sand and More on A & B:
plotting in the
shale/gas sand
slope-intercept
reflections domain (Contd)
Castagna, Swan & Foster,
1998
R(q ) A + Bsin q + ...
2

DVPa Dra
A= +
2VPa 2 ra
DVPa VSa2 Dra DVSa
B= -4 2 +
2VPa VPa 2 ra VSa
A normal incidence
B AVO gradient/slope
B = (1- 8g 2 )A - 4gDg
B = (1- 8g 2 )A
VS
g = VP
 Shale/brine sand and More on A & B:
plotting in the
shale/gas sand
slope-intercept
reflections laboratory domain (Contd)
measurements Castagna, Swan & Foster, 1998

R(q ) A + Bsin 2 q + ...

A normal incidence
B AVO gradient/slope
B = (1- 8g 2 )A - 4gDg
B = (1- 8g 2 )A
VS
g = VP

Porosity differences account for

variation
Background velocity is different
for each sand, so they dont all
plot on same trend
 A & B become more More on A & B:
negative by adding plotting in the
hydrocarbons (decreasing slope-intercept
Poissons ratio) domain (Contd)
Castagna, Swan & Foster,
1998
A normal incidence
B AVO gradient/slope
B = (1- 8g 2 )A - 4gDg
B = (1- 8g 2 )A
VS
g = VP
Top of said layer plots
below background trend
Bottom of said layer plots
above the background
trend
 Cant classify
sands based on
properties of the
sand alone the
advent of Class 4
Castagna, Swan & Foster,
1998

Overlying unit is shale

Class 3

Overlying unit is tight

(calcareous)
Class 4

Key difference: Vs contrast

 Case History
Gulf of Mexico Bright Spot
Nsoga Mahob, Castagna & Young, 1999
Amplitude Anomaly
 AVO Inversion
Brine Model

max changes:
VP 1000 ft/s
VS 3000 ft/s
layer thickness 100 ft
density 1.0 g/cm3

used near-offset inverted P-wave velocity curve

S-wave and Poissons ratio curves related
AVO Inversion
Brine Model

not really all that close

 AVO Inversion
Gas Model

max changes:
VP 1000 ft/s
VS 3000 ft/s
layer thickness 100 ft
density 1.0 g/cm3

used near-offset inverted P-wave velocity curve

constant Poissons ratio of 0.1 in pay zone
AVO Inversion
Gas Model

decently close!
gas model, with
appropriate mechanical
properties, converges to
the real seismic data
 Some Issues
Thin-bed tuning
o Can cause amplitude to
increase/decrease with offset
depending on time-thickness
and frequency
Attenuation
o Signal/noise decrease with
offset
NMO errors
o Conventional velocity analysis
is not perfect enough
o Ambiguity between stacking
velocity and reflectivity
o Can be corrected with full
waveform inversion
 Key Takeaway Conclusions
Important AVO simplification:
Ds 2 1 DVP
RPP (q1 ) R0 + A0 R0 + 2
sin q + (tan 2 q1 - sin 2 q1 )
(1- s a )
1
2 VP
The Rules:
o An increase (decrease) of Poissons ratio for the underlying medium produces an
increase (decrease) in the reflection coefficient at larger angles of incidence
o When Poissons ratio of the media are equal, an increase (decrease) of Poissons
ratio causes an increase (decrease) in reflection coefficient at larger angles of
incidence
o Interchange of the media affects the shape of the curves only slightly RPP
simply changes sign when the elastic properties are interchanged except at
large angles
Gas Sand Classification:
o Class 1 high impedance contrast, high gradient, polarity change, low porosity
o Class 2 near-zero impedance contrast, seem to suddenly appear at larger
offsets
o Class 3 low impedance contrast, high reflectivity at all offsets
o Class 4 low impedance contrast, reflectivity decreases with offset, high
porosity
Lithology and fluid identification
Key Takeaway Conclusions
 References
Aki & Richards, 1980
Hilterman, 1983
Shuey, 1985
Smith and Gidlow, 1987
Hilterman, 1989
Koefoed, 1955
Ostrander, 1984
Rutherford & Williams, 1989
Castagna & Swan, 1997
Foster & Keys, 1999
Foster, Keys & Lane, 2010
Castagna, Swan & Foster, 1998
Nsoga Mahob, Castagna & Young, 1999
Fatti, Smith, Vail, Strauss & Levitt, 1994