Chapter 1 Introduction to Deepwater Systems: Denitions and Concepts

Overview This course provides the working geophysicist with a broad overview of the petroleum systems of deepwater settings. The six main elements of petroleum systems will be covered: reservoirs, traps, seals, source rocks, generation, migration, and timing. The course is designed to teach students approximately 80% of what is important. For those interested in further study of a specic topic, each chapter has extensive references for the current literature. About 10% of the current cutting-edge information remains proprietary and cannot be included. Deepwater depositional systems are the one type of reservoir system that cannot be easily reached, observed, and studied in the modern environment, in contrast to other siliciclastic and carbonate reservoir systems. The study of deepwater systems requires many remote-observation systems, each of which can provide only one view of the entire depositional system. As a consequence, the study and understanding of deepwater depositional systems as reservoirs have lagged behind those of the other reservoir systems, whose modern processes are more easily observed and documented. For this reason, geoscientists use an integrated approach, working in interdisciplinary teams with multiple data types (Figure 1-1). The types of data used in the study of deepwater deposits include detailed outcrop studies, 2D and 3D seismic-reection data (both for shallow and deep resolution), cores, log suites, and biostratigraphy. These data sets are routinely incorporated into computer reservoir modeling and simulation (Figure 1-1). The following chapters integrate all of these data types and disciplines to characterize the many facets of deepwater systems. Technologies for deepwater exploration and development are improving rapidly. The intent of the course is to provide information that will be usable even as the technologies advance beyond what we present here. With that in mind, this chapter introduces basic deepwater terminology and concepts for deepwater systems that will be used throughout this book. We will 1) introduce the key denitions of deep water used throughout the course, 2) 3) 4) 5) 6) dene the common elements for all deepwater systems, discuss the sequence stratigraphic expression of key intervals and surfaces that bound the deepwater elements, review the regional controls on the deposition of deepwater systems, discuss scale problems in the comparison between modern and ancient deepwater systems, and summarize how our understanding of deepwater systems has evolved and discuss the important role that technology has played.

Downloaded 10 Dec 2011 to 198.3.68.20. Redistribution subject to SEG license or copyright; Terms of Use: http://segdl.org/

Distinguished Instructor Short Course 1-1

Petroleum Systems of Deepwater Settings

Denitions of Deep Water Geoscientists routinely use several terms to describe the sedimentary processes and characteristics of deepwater settings and deposits. For the sake of consistency in this book, we dene these terms as follows. The term deep water is used informally in industry in two ways. First, deep water refers to sediments deposited in water depths considered to be deep, i.e., those under gravity-ow processes and located somewhere in the upper- to middle-slope region of a basin. Sediment gravity-ow processes are operative in lakes in relatively shallow water and in cratonic basins where water depths may be less than 300 m. Thus, unless stated otherwise, we use the term deepwater systems to refer to marine-sediment gravity-ow processes, environments, and deposits. Other authors have used slightly different terms for describing these processes and their deposits, such as turbidite systems (Mutti and Normark, 1987, 1991), turbidite system complex (Stelting et al., 2000), and submarine fans (Bouma et al., 1985). Second, the engineering denition of deep water refers to modern water depths specically, to depths greater than 500 m. That is the depth at which traditional development rigs cannot be implemented. For this book, when we refer to specic water depths,

Figure 1-1. Diagram showing the different data types used in the study of deepwater systems. Clockwise from upper left: 2D and 3D seismic-reection data (shallow and deep), wireline logs, biostratigraphy, reservoir modeling and simulation, cores and borehole-image logs, and outcrop Downloaded 10 Dec 2011 to 198.3.68.20. Redistribution subject to SEG license or copyright; Terms of Use: http://segdl.org/ studies.
1-2 Society of Exploration Geophysicists / European Association of Geoscientists & Engineers

Introduction to Deepwater Systems: Denitions and Concepts

we use the terms as follows. Deep water refers to water depths from 500 to 2000 m, and ultradeep water is any water deeper than 2000 m. Common Deepwater Elements and Terminology In August 1982, a group of leading deepwater experts met in Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, for what was termed the COMFan I conference (COM = Committee). The meeting produced the consensus that it was extremely difficult to compare modern submarine fans studied on the modern ocean oor with ancient ones studied primarily in outcrop (Bouma et al., 1985). As a consequence, there was a need to develop a common language used by different workers in the eld. Although many classications have been proposed for deepwater systems that link disparate data sets, in our experience, three groups of studies were inuential in dening terminologies that industry geoscientists now use routinely: (1) Mutti and Normark (1987, 1991); (2) Chapin et al. (1994) and Mahaffie (1994); and (3) Reading and Richards (1994), Richards et al. (1998), and Richards and Bowman (1998). These classications focused on the kinds of reservoir elements, their architecture and geometry, and related deposits. After the COMFan I meeting, Emiliano Mutti and William Normark worked together for several years, attempting to identify the elements common to modern and ancient turbidite systems. They produced two seminal papers that were highly inuential in geoscientists understanding and description of turbidite systems (Mutti and Normark, 1987, 1991). They identied ve elements common to modern and ancient turbidite systems: channels, overbank, lobes (sheets), channel-lobe transition, and erosional features (Appendix 1-A). Note that the channel-lobe transition is a zone and erosional features are not depositional features. Chapin et al. (1994) and Mahaffie (1994) presented a reservoir classication developed by Shell Oil Company for the key architectural elements the company used in reservoir characterization during development of their deepwater discoveries in the northern Gulf of Mexico. They emphasized three main sand-bearing reservoir elements: sheets (layered and amalgamated), channels (single and multistory), and thin beds comprising levees (Figure 1-2; Appendix 1-A). This classication largely describes the geometry of the elements. As such, workers in industry commonly use it. The classication was based largely on the classication of turbidite elements introduced by Mutti (1985) and is reviewed in greater detail in Chapter 3. Richards et al. (1998) identied ve architectural elements common to all turbidite systems: wedges, channels (including chutes and braided and leveed channels), lobes, sheets, and slides (Figure 1-3; Appendix 1-A). Richards et al. (1998) noted that the occurrence of these elements is controlled primarily by the sediment grain size and the type of sediment delivery system (which we review in Chapter 3 of this book). Elliott (1998) proposed three additional elements common to modern and ancient deepwater systems: mass-transport complexes, condensed sections, and slides. Appendix 1-A includes the terms for elements that will be used throughout this book. The key characteristics of each of these deepwater elements will be reviewed in Chapters 47. Each deepwater element will be summarized in terms of its appearance in seaoor images, and in 2D and 3D 10 Dec 2011 to 198.3.68.20. Redistribution subject towirelineorlogs, and imaging logs. Downloaded seismic data, outcrops, cores, SEG license copyright; Terms of Use: http://segdl.org/

Distinguished Instructor Short Course 1-3

Petroleum Systems of Deepwater Settings

Downloaded 10 Dec 2011 to 198.3.68.20. Redistribution subject to SEG license or copyright; Terms of Use: http://segdl.org/

1-4 Society of Exploration Geophysicists / European Association of Geoscientists & Engineers

Figure 1-2. Reservoir classication for deepwater reservoirs, with emphasis on the northern Gulf of Mexico. After Chapin et al. (1994). Reproduced with permission of the GCSSEPM Foundation.

Introduction to Deepwater Systems: Denitions and Concepts

Figure 1-3. Principal architectural elements of deepwater clastic systems. After Reading and Richards (1994). Reproduced with permission of AAPG. Sequence Stratigraphic Expression of Key Surfaces and Intervals It is critical that we understand the key stratigraphic intervals and surfaces that bound deepwater systems and related elements. These intervals and surfaces have been dened by integrating observations from modern and ancient turbidite systems, as derived from 2D and 3D seismic data, wireline logs, biostratigraphic data, reservoir pressure data, and outcrops. Two key intervals/surfaces are present in deepwater systems: condensed sections and sequence boundaries. Recognizing these surfaces allows us to place deepwater systems within a sequence stratigraphic framework for the purposes of correlation, mapping, and characterization (Chapter 3). Condensed sections are relatively thin layers of strata that reect reduced sedimentation rates (Loutit et al., 1988). In deepwater systems, they can form during (1) relative highstands of sea level, (2) a major switch in the shallow marine development, or (3) a regional subsidence event with reduced rates of sedimentation. On seismic proles, a condensed section exhibits a laterally continuous reection(s) that drape(s) the underlying sequence (Figure 1-4). The seismic-stratigraphic expression of a condensed section will differ, depending on its thickness and the frequency of the seismic data. The lithologic expression of condensed sections varies greatly both within and between basins. These differences reect different oceanographic/depositional conditions at the time the condensed section was formed. Sequence boundaries have both erosional and conformable stratigraphic expressions in deep water. Where the sequence boundary is erosional, the condensed section and additional sediments are removed from the underlying sequence (Figure 1-4). The amount Downloaded 10 the sequence Redistribution subject to SEG license or copyright; in of Use: http://segdl.org/ of erosion along Dec 2011 to 198.3.68.20.boundary varies considerablyTermsthe overall deepwater depo-

Distinguished Instructor Short Course 1-5

Petroleum Systems of Deepwater Settings

Figure 1-4. Seismic prole across one deepwater depositional sequence (upper Pleistocene) in the northern deep Gulf of Mexico. Key intervals/surfaces include a condensed section (laterally continuous doublet reections) and erosional sequence boundary. Depositional elements include channel-ll, levee-overbank, and mass-transport complex. After Weimer (1990). Reprinted with permission of AAPG. sitional systems (intraslope versus base of slope). Generally, the greatest amount of erosion occurs in submarine canyons in the upper slope/outer shelf, where the largest volume of sediment is removed. The amount of erosion of the slope or intraslope basins varies greatly. Erosion tends to be focused in a linear downslope direction. In some deepwater systems, the base of slope can be an area of extensive erosion, where major slides that are sourced from the slope erode downward as the depositional gradient decreases (e.g., Figure 1-4). In most places, the erosional sequence boundary can be traced laterally to a point where the erosion surface ends and grades into a depositional surface directly overlying the condensed sections. The depositional surface becomes the correlative conformity of Vail et al. (1977). In a vertical prole, shales and sandstones are interbedded, with no erosion surface between the sequences. Within intraslope basins, the sequence boundaries can form prominent onlap surfaces, even though there is no erosion. Regional Controls on Deepwater Systems The deepwater systems described in this book result from the complex interaction of many factors that affect all sedimentary basins. As petroleum geoscientists, our focus is on the nal product or deposit. To properly interpret reservoir characteristics such as sand content, sand trend, continuity, connectivity, and reservoir quality, we must be cognizant of the processes by which the deposit formed. Several outstanding summary books and papers have addressed these major controls on the deposition of deepwater systems (Nelson and Nilsen, 1984; Bouma et al., 1985; Stow et al., 1985; Pickering et al., 1989;
Downloaded 10 Dec 2011 to 198.3.68.20. Redistribution subject to SEG license or copyright; Terms of Use: http://segdl.org/

1-6 Society of Exploration Geophysicists / European Association of Geoscientists & Engineers

Introduction to Deepwater Systems: Denitions and Concepts

Richards et al., 1998). We briey review the important controls below to establish the background for the remaining chapters. Three main inuences that control the nature of deepwater depositional systems are tectonics, sediment supply, and sea-level uctuations (Figure 1-5). Tectonics affect deepwater deposition in four ways: (1) where sediments are delivered to the basin, (2) in the geometry of the basin margin and the basin itself, (3) in the bathymetry of the basin, and (4) in the way local tectonics affect the distribution of a deepwater system. Hinterland and climate affect the rate, type, and source of sediment supply, and these in turn affect the depositional processes of the basin and the shape, type, and nature of both nearshore and shelf systems. Sea-level uctuations can affect deepwater systems through eustatic changes and tectonically induced changes and by varying the supply of clastic input. A slightly different way to view regional controls on deepwater systems is to recognize the inuences of the sediment delivery system on reservoir characteristics (Figure 1-6). As exploration and development geoscientists, we deal with the nal deposits of large, complex, and repeated processes of erosion, transportation, and deposition (lower right portion of Figure 1-6). Factors that inuence the complex sedimentary cycle include (1) the nature of the basins drainage in terms of gradients, provenance, sediment type, and climate; (2) the shelf (widths, gradients, accommodation); (3) the capacity of the shelf edge to store shallow-marine sediments prior to their resedimentation to deep water (i.e., highstand deltas); (4) the nature of the sediment gravity ows to deep water (large catastrophic ows from earthquakes, moderate episodic ows from major oods, or small continuous [hyperpycnal] ows from continuous oods); and nally, (5) the rheology of the ows (low-concentration versus high-concentration ows versus sandy-debris ows) and their resulting deposits.

Figure 1-5. Diagram illustrating the controls on the development of deepwater clastic deposiDownloaded After Richards et al. (1998). Reproduced copyright; Terms of Use: of Elsevier. tional systems. 10 Dec 2011 to 198.3.68.20. Redistribution subject to SEG license or with permissionhttp://segdl.org/

Distinguished Instructor Short Course 1-7

Petroleum Systems of Deepwater Settings

Figure 1-6. Schematic cross section across a margin, illustrating the sediment delivery systems inuence on reservoir characteristics. After Gareld et al. (1998). Reproduced with permission of AAPG. Problems in Deepwater Depositional Systems Research: Gaps in Scale Behind Modern and Ancient Data Sets Bouma et al. (1985) summarized a major barrier in the geologic communitys ability to compare modern and ancient deepwater systems. The inherent problem is the different resolution of the technologies used, which causes a major gap in scale (Figure 1-7). For example, in the middle 1980s, modern fan studies consisted of shallow-penetration surcial studies focusing on the upper 10 m of the fan. These studies routinely used high-resolution seismic data (sparker or small water gun for source), shallow-penetration cores (piston or gravity), and side-scan-looking systems. Modern submarine fans were rarely studied using 2D deep-penetration proles. In contrast, ancient systems were studied using outcrops and subsurface data sets. Excellent outcrop exposures of turbidite systems may be as high as 100 m and as long as 1 km. Unfortunately, most outcrops worldwide do not have these dimensional characteristics (see Weimer et al., 2000b, and many references within). In fact, two gaps in scale exist in the study of deepwater systems. One gap is between modern fan geometries and multifold seismic data. The second gap is between 3D seismic data and outcrops and reservoirs. Since the middle 1980s, the petroleum industrys extensive use of 3D seismic data sets has largely bridged the gap between modern fan geometries and the geometries of subsurface deepwater systems and reservoirs. The extensive use of shallow 3D seismic for offshore drilling-hazard (e.g., shallow-ow problems, seaoor-stability issues) and reservoir-analog studies has allowed for the highly accurate imaging of different turbidite elements. Such images are of the same scale as modern seaoor studies. Many companies Downloaded of studies for a Redistribution subject to SEG license or have used these kinds10 Dec 2011 to 198.3.68.20.competitive advantage. copyright; Terms of Use: http://segdl.org/
1-8 Society of Exploration Geophysicists / European Association of Geoscientists & Engineers

Introduction to Deepwater Systems: Denitions and Concepts

The second gap in scale is where most reservoir development problems arise, i.e., with early water breakthroughs, abrupt pressure drops, and gas coning (Weimer et al., 2000a). Many of the features that control reservoir performance are subseismic in scale. That is, they are beneath the vertical resolution of conventional 3D seismic-reection data. Features such as lateral bed continuity, vertical bed connectivity, reservoir quality, and net sand content normally cannot be determined from seismic images, yet these are the features that control uid ow within the reservoir. Also, small-offset faults and fractures, which are common and critical components of reservoirs, cannot be imaged by conventional seismic. Newer seismic techniques, such as spectral deconvolution, are improving our ability to detect small-scale stratigraphic and structural compartments; however, there still are natural physical limits to the resolution of seismic images. Because it is so important that we be aware of these scale issues, Chapters 48 describe each deepwater element, integrating all data sets that geoscientists routinely use in their daily workow. Historical Evolution of Concepts about Deepwater Systems and the Role of Technology Fisher (1991) described the important relationships among technology, the evolution of different scientic and exploration successes, and their effects on improving recovery efficiencies (Figure 1-8). His main point was that technology plays a dual role in inuenc-

Figure 1-7. Graph illustrating different deepwater elements and the relative scale of resolution
for different data systems. After Bouma et al. (1985) and Morris and Normark (2000). ReproDownloaded 10 Dec 2011 to the GCSSEPM Foundation. duced with permission of198.3.68.20. Redistribution subject to SEG license or copyright; Terms of Use: http://segdl.org/

Distinguished Instructor Short Course 1-9

Petroleum Systems of Deepwater Settings

ing recovery efficiencies. First, as technology improves, so do production techniques. Second, as technology improves our abilities to image the subsurface, new scientic disciplines evolve that also affect recoveries. In a similar way, the geologic communitys understanding of deepwater systems has always depended strongly on the technology available at any given time. Since the early 1950s, there have been several paradigm shifts in the concepts that shaped exploration and development of deepwater reservoirs. Seven major developments are reviewed here, in terms of the impact of technological improvements that have driven parallel advances in several scientic disciplines. Many of these technological and conceptual developments and breakthrough papers are described in greater detail in other chapters in the book. 1) Process sedimentology and facies models for modern depositional systems developed initially in the 1950s and 1960s. These models tended to focus primarily on depositional systems exposed on land or in marginal-marine environments (i.e., rivers, deltas, and marginal-marine carbonate sediments). Because researchers lacked the technology to image and sample the seaoor, modern deepwater systems were largely ignored. However, ume studies by Kuenen and Migliorini (1950) advanced the concept of turbidity currents as an important process by which sediment is transported from shallow water to deep water. The rst indirect indications of large-scale, naturally occurring sediment gravity ows followed the development and distribution of seaoor communications cables in the late 1800s and early 1900s. Periodic cable breakages on the deep ocean oor (from 200 to 3500 m of water depth) were recognized to have been caused by erosion associated with turbidity currents. Examples came from the Grand Banks of Newfoundland, offshore eastern Canada (Heezen and Ewing, 1952); the Magdelena Fan, offshore Colombia (Heezen, 1956); and the Congo River and continental slope (Heezen et al., 1964). 2) By the 1960s, the concepts of depositional systems began to develop in the general geologic community and to replace older ideas about classical layer-cake stratigraphy. Outcrops of deepwater strata were beginning to be recognized and described in detail by such pioneering studies as those by Bouma (1962) and Mutti and Ricci Lucchi (1972) using modern process sedimentology. During this time, two important developments were occurring in seismic-reection-data acquisition and processingthe use of a common-depth point (CDP) and the digital recording of data. Their inuence was legion and led to extensive collection of seismic data globally. Last, the development and routine use of side-scan sonar data played an increasingly important role in the study of modern submarine-fan surfaces. By the middle 1970s, 2D seismic-reection data were being acquired globally, and seismic stratigraphy was the next major discipline to evolve. Prior to the publication of seismic stratigraphic concepts in AAPG Memoir 26 (Payton, 1977), seismic-reection data had been used almost exclusively for structural interpretation. With publication of this landmark book, seismic interpreters began to view 2D seismic in terms of mappable seismic facies that were interpretable as depositional systems. This allowed workers to interpret deepwater depositional systems and to interpret the paleobathymetric setting within a sequence stratigraphic framework (Brown and
Downloaded 10 Dec 2011 to 198.3.68.20. Redistribution subject to SEG license or copyright; Terms of Use: http://segdl.org/

3)

1-10 Society of Exploration Geophysicists / European Association of Geoscientists & Engineers

Introduction to Deepwater Systems: Denitions and Concepts

Figure 1-8. Graph showing the U.S. discovery and recovery efficiencies (dashed line) since 1950. Solid line is a normalized curve. Also plotted are the timing of (a) major technology developments (black arrows) and (b) key concepts for deep water (white arrows). Figure is modied signicantly from Fisher (1991).

Fisher, 1977; Vail et al., 1977). The use of regional 2D seismic data allowed workers to image ancient systems at scales that were not possible with outcrop studies. In addition, bright-spot technology began to be used routinely in the early to middle 1970s. Because exploration was focusing primarily on uvial-deltaic reservoirs globally, bright-spot technology was applied initially to those kinds of reservoirs. When exploration began to focus more on deepwater reservoirs, this technology was used extensively for direct hydrocarbon detectionwith varying degrees of success (Chapter 2). 4) By the middle 1980s, sequence stratigraphy was evolving with the integration of outcrop data, subsurface data (seismic and wireline logs), and initial attempts at quantitative stratigraphic modeling of basin ll. Different depositional elements of deepwater systems were recognized as distinct but predicable facies associations in a sequence10 Dec 2011 to 198.3.68.20. Redistribution subject to SEG license or copyright; Terms of Use: http://segdl.org/ a search for Downloaded stratigraphic framework. Outcrops were being reevaluated, in

Distinguished Instructor Short Course 1-11

Petroleum Systems of Deepwater Settings

the stratigraphic features recognized on seismic data. In turn, our understanding of detailed stratal architecture from outcrop studies began to inuence how elds were developed, because depositional elements were studied to improve our understanding of ow-unit continuity. 5) A major breakthrough in the understanding of deepwater deposits came with the development of and rapid improvement in 3D seismic data. These data, along with parallel advances in water-bottom imaging technology, such as GLORIA side-scan sonar, allowed detailed stratigraphic and facies relationships to be characterized in three dimensions. For the rst time, geoscientists had insight into the complex channel-related processes common to deepwater systems. Finally, as 3D seismic data became less expensive and quicker to acquire, it was integrated into the daily workows of geoscientists using computer workstations. Several important trends appeared during the early and middle 1990s. (a) Politically, many global deepwater basins were opened to exploration in such diverse settings as Nigeria, Angola, the Nile Delta, Brazil, Brunei, and Kutei. (b) Routine acquisition and interpretation of 3D seismic data from these basins generated remarkably detailed images of the deepwater depositional elements. (c) As a consequence, many of the arguments about where deepwater systems t within a stratigraphic framework began to disappear. Instead, industry focused on seismic- to subseismic-scale problems associated with exploration and production. The discipline we informally call 3D seismic stratigraphy began to emerge. (d) All of the above observations were leading researchers to reexamine some of the fundamental concepts about sedimentary processes associated with deepwater systems. Research began to focus on numeric modeling of deepwater processes, as well as on experimentally generating sediment gravity ows in large umes. A better understanding of the physics of sediment gravity ows has evolved and has inuenced the interpretation of lithofacies, which in turn impacts reservoir description and development. (e) Industry increasingly has been using 4D seismic data to image the movement of uids in reservoirs. Industry is beginning to develop different techniques for collecting these sorts of repeated 3D data, with minimal variation in acquisition and processing. Multicomponent seismic is also being developed, although its application to deep-marine settings has been extremely limited. Currently (early 2004), industry is in a phase of major capital investment to develop many of the new deepwater discoveries of the past several years. Most of the reservoir problems occur at subseismic scale. Thus, signicant investment in technology and research is targeted to improve the accuracy of 3D earth models for predicting and managing uid recovery. Construction of such models requires the integration of all available technologies for dening the distribution of lithofacies and ow units for uid-ow modeling.

6)

7)

Downloaded 10 Dec 2011 to 198.3.68.20. Redistribution subject to SEG license or copyright; Terms of Use: http://segdl.org/

1-12 Society of Exploration Geophysicists / European Association of Geoscientists & Engineers

Introduction to Deepwater Systems: Denitions and Concepts

Short-course Organization This course is organized to start at the regional scale, then focus on local- and reservoir-scale issues, and nish at the regional scale, summarizing the six components of the petroleum systems. Chapter 2 gives an overview of recent deepwater drilling trends and results and the regional geology of deepwater settings. Chapter 3 presents the regional sequence stratigraphic framework within which deepwater systems develop. Chapters 48 address the main reservoir elements in deepwater settings: channels and their sedimentary ll (Chapter 4), levees-overbanks (Chapter 5), sheets (Chapter 6), mass-transport complexes and slides (Chapter 7), and hybrid-type deepwater reservoirs and the pitfalls in interpreting deepwater deposits (Chapter 8). Chapter 9 summarizes the many kinds of traps in deepwater settings. Chapter 10 summarizes the remaining elements of the petroleum systems: seals, source rocks, generation and migration, and timing. Time and space do not allow us to cover all the topics that are important to an understanding of the petroleum systems of deepwater settings. These topics include sedimentary processes, reservoir characterization, reservoir modeling, biostratigraphy of deepwater systems, and the occurrences of ore deposits in deepwater settings. Instead, these topics will be summarized in a forthcoming companion book by Weimer and Slatt. Appendix 1-A: Denitions of Deepwater Elements Used in this Book Depositional lobes (Mutti and Normark, 1987, 1991): Lobes are areas of sand deposition . . . in
modern systems they lie immediately downslope from the main channel. In ancient systems [they] are represented by roughly tabular, nonchannelized bodies that have individual thicknesses, generally of 315 m. Each lobe is made up of relatively thick and coarse sandstone beds that are generally parallel sided even at the scale of large exposures.

Sheet (Mahaffie, 1994): Sheet sands most closely resemble . . . fan lobe deposits and are characterized
in outcrop . . . by their laterally-continuous, tabular external geometries. Differences in internal architectures allow for further subdivision . . . into two distinct subunits: amalgamated sheets and layered sheets. Amalgamated sheets . . . are characterized by high net:gross comprising stacked assemblages of top-absent Bouma sequences. Layered sheets are characterized by lower net:gross sand percentages (with) complete or base-absent Bouma A sequences.

Channel (Mutti and Normark, 1991): [Channels] are elongate negative-relief features produced and/or
maintained by turbidity-current ow . . . (they) represent relatively long-term pathways for sediment transport. Channel shape and position within in a turbidite system are controlled by depositional processes . . . or erosional downcutting. . . . Channel relief can be dominantly erosional or depositional in origin or can result from a combination of both processes.

Downloaded 10 Dec 2011 to 198.3.68.20. Redistribution subject to SEG license or copyright; Terms of Use: http://segdl.org/

Distinguished Instructor Short Course 1-13

Petroleum Systems of Deepwater Settings

Overbank (Mutti and Normark, 1991): Overbank deposits are generally ne-grained thin-bedded turbidite sediments that can be laterally extensive and are adjacent to the main channels in a turbidite system . . . [and consist of] two parts: (1) those with levee relief, where overbank deposition along the margins of an active channel has constructed relief, and (2) the most distal parts of an overbank environment without major relief.

Thin beds (Shew et al., 1994): [Thin beds] are interpreted to include levee, interchannel, and outer
fan/fringe deposits . . . [and are] composed of very ne sands and/or silt and contain abundant ripple bedding, pinch-and-swell structures, some convolute bedding, minor bioturbation, and mostly graded beds.

Mass-transport complex (Weimer, 1989): [Mass-transport complexes are] sediments that occur at
the base of sequences and are overlain and/or onlapped by channel and levee sediments. They commonly overlie an erosional base upfan, becoming mounded downfan, are externally mounded in shape, and pinch out laterally. . . . Seismic facies (are) hummocky and mounded reections with poor to fair continuity and variable amplitude. This term is primarily a seismic facies description.

Slides (Jackson, 1997): [Slides are] a mass movement or descent from failure of earth . . . or rock under
shear stress along one or several surfaces. . . . The moving mass may or may not be greatly deformed, and movement may be rotational or planar.

Condensed sections (Loutit et al., 1988): [Condensed sections] are thin marine stratigraphic units consisting of pelagic to hemipelagic sediments characterized by very low sedimentation rates. They are areally most extensive at the time of maximum regional transgression of the shoreline. References Bouma, A. H., 1962, Sedimentology of some ysch deposits: A graphic approach to facies interpretation: Amsterdam, Elsevier. Bouma, A.H., W. R. Normark, and N. E. Barnes, 1985, COMFAN: Needs and initial results, in A. H. Bouma, W. R. Normark, and N. E. Barnes, eds, Submarine fans and related turbidite systems: New York, Springer-Verlag, 712. Brown, L. F Jr., and W. R. Fisher, 1977, Seismic-stratigraphic interpretation of deposi. tional systems: Examples from Brazilian rift and pull-apart basins: AAPG Memoir 26, 213248. Chapin, M. A., P. Davies, J. L. Gibson, and H. S. Pettingill, 1994, Reservoir architecture of turbidite sheet sandstones in laterally extensive outcrops, Ross Formation, western . Ireland, in P. Weimer, A. H. Bouma, and B. F Perkins, eds., Submarine fans and turbidite systems: Gulf Coast SectionSEPM Foundation 15th Annual Research Conference, 5368. Elliott, T., 1998, A renaissance in the analysis of turbidite systems: Implications for reservoir development and management: EAGE/AAPG Research Conference, Developing and managing turbidite reservoirs: Case histories and experiences: Almeria, Spain, October 18. Fisher, W. R., 1991, Future supply potential of U.S. oil and natural gas: The Leading Downloaded Edge, 11, 1521. 10 Dec 2011 to 198.3.68.20. Redistribution subject to SEG license or copyright; Terms of Use: http://segdl.org/
1-14 Society of Exploration Geophysicists / European Association of Geoscientists & Engineers

Introduction to Deepwater Systems: Denitions and Concepts

Gareld, T. R., D. C. Jennette, F J. Goulding, and D. K. Sickafoose, 1998, An integrated . approach to deepwater reservoir prediction: AAPG International Conference and Exhibition, Expanded Abstracts volume, 278279. Heezen, B. C., 1956, Corrientes de turbidez del Ro Magdalena: Boletn de la Sociedad Geogrca de Colombia, 5152, 135143. Heezen, B. C., and M. H. Ewing, 1952, Turbidity currents and submarine slumps, and the 1929 Grand Banks earthquake: American Journal of Science, 250, 849873. Heezen, B. C., R. J. Menzies, E. D. Schneider, M. H. Ewing, and N. C. L. Grainelli, 1964, Congo submarine canyon: AAPG Bulletin, 48, 11261149. Jackson, J. A., ed., 1997, Glossary of geology, fourth edition: Alexandria, Virginia, American Geological Institute, 784 p. Kuenen, P. H., and C. I. Migliorini, 1950, Turbidity currents as a cause of graded bedding: Journal of Geology, 58, 91127. Loutit, T. S., J. Hardenbol, P. R. Vail, and G. R. Baum, 1988, Condensed sections: The key to age determination and correlation of continental margin sequences, in C. K. Wilgus, B. S. Hastings, C. A. Ross, H. W. Posamentier, J. Van Wagoner, and C. G. St. C. Kendall, eds., Sea-level changes: An integrated approach: SEPM Special Publication 42, 183213. Mahaffie, M. J., 1994, Reservoir classication for turbidite intervals at the Mars discov. ery, Mississippi canyon 807, Gulf of Mexico, in P. Weimer, A. H. Bouma, and B. F Perkins, eds., Submarine fans and turbidite systems: Gulf Coast SectionSEPM Foundation 15th Annual Research Conference, 233244. Morris, William R., and William R. Normark, 2000, Scaling, sedimentologic and geometric criteria for comparing modern and ancient sandy turbidite elements, in P. Weimer, R. M. Slatt, J. L. Coleman, N. Rosen, C. H. Nelson, A. H. Bouma, M. Styzen, and D. T. Lawrence, eds., 2000, Global deep-water reservoirs: Gulf Coast SectionSEPM Foundation Bob F Perkins 20th Annual Research Conference, . 1104 p. Mutti, E., 1985, Turbidite systems and their relations to depositional sequences, in G. G. Zuffa, ed., Provenance of arenites: Dordrecht, Netherlands, Reidel, 6593. Mutti, E. and W. R. Normark, 1987, Comparing examples of modern and ancient turbidite systems: Problems and concepts, in J. K. Leggett and G. G. Zuffa, eds., Marine clastic sedimentology: London, Graham and Trotman, 138. Mutti, E. and Normark, W. R., 1991, An integrated approach to the study of turbidite systems, in P. Weimer and M. H. Link, eds, Seismic facies and sedimentary processes of submarine fans and turbidite systems: New York, Springer-Verlag, 75106. Mutti, E., and F Ricci Lucchi, 1972, Le torbiditi dellAppennine settentrionale: Intro. duzione allanalisi di facies: Memorie Societa Geologica Italiana, 11, 161199. Nelson, C. H., and T. H. Nilsen, 1984, Modern and ancient deep-sea fan sedimentation: SEPM Short Course Notes No. 14.
Downloaded 10 Dec 2011 to 198.3.68.20. Redistribution subject to SEG license or copyright; Terms of Use: http://segdl.org/

Distinguished Instructor Short Course 1-15

Petroleum Systems of Deepwater Settings

Payton, C. E., ed., 1977, Seismic stratigraphy-applications to hydrocarbon exploration: AAPG Memoir 26. Pickering, K. T., R. N. Hiscott, and F J. Hein, 1989, Deep marine environments: Clastic . sedimentation and tectonics: Boston, Unwin Hyman Ltd. Reading, H. G., and M. Richards, 1994, Turbidite systems in deep-water basin margins classied by grain size and feeder system: AAPG Bulletin, 78, 792822. Richards, M., M. Bowman, and H. Reading, 1998, Submarine-fan systems I: Characterization and stratigraphic prediction: Marine and Petroleum Geology, 15, 687717. Richards, M., and M. Bowman, 1998, Submarine fans and related depositional systems II: Variability in reservoir architecture and wireline log character: Marine and Petroleum Geology, 15, 821839. Shew, R. D., D. R. Rollins, G. M. Tiller, C. J. Hackbarth, and C. D. White, 1994, Characterization and modeling of thin-bedded turbidite deposits from Gulf of Mexico using . detailed subsurface and analog data, in P. Weimer, A. H. Bouma, and B. F Perkins, eds., Submarine fans and turbidite systems: Gulf Coast SectionSEPM Foundation 15th Annual Research Conference, 327334. Stelting, C. E., A. H. Bouma, and C. G. Stone, 2000, Fine-grained turbidite systems: Overview, in A. H Bouma and C. G. Stone, eds., Fine-grained turbidite systems: AAPG Memoir 72 and SEPM Special Publication No. 68, 18. Stow, D. A. V., D. G. Howell, and C. H. Nelson, 1985, Sedimentary, tectonics, and sealevel controls, in A. H. Bouma, W. R. Normark, and N. E. Barnes, eds, Submarine fans and related turbidite systems: New York, Springer-Verlag, 1522. Vail, P. R., et al., 1977, Seismic stratigraphy and global changes in sea level, parts 111: AAPG Memoir 26, 51212. Weimer, P., 1990, Sequence stratigraphy, seismic geometries, and depositional history of the Mississippi Fan, deep Gulf of Mexico: AAPG Bulletin, 74, 425453. Weimer, P., R. M. Slatt, P. Dromgoole, M. Bowman, and A. Leonard, 2000a, Developing and managing turbidite reservoirs: Case histories and experiencesResults from the AAPG/EAGE Research conference: AAPG Bulletin, 84, 453464. Weimer, P., R. M. Slatt, J. L. Coleman, N. Rosen, C. H. Nelson, A. H. Bouma, M. Styzen, and D. T. Lawrence, eds., 2000b, Global deepwater reservoirs: Gulf Coast Section SEPM Foundation Bob F Perkins 20th Annual Research Conference. .

Downloaded 10 Dec 2011 to 198.3.68.20. Redistribution subject to SEG license or copyright; Terms of Use: http://segdl.org/

1-16 Society of Exploration Geophysicists / European Association of Geoscientists & Engineers