Beruflich Dokumente
Kultur Dokumente
, then
R() = A + B sin
2
, (1)
where A =
1
2
v
p
v
p
+
, B =
v
p
2v
p
4
v
s
v
p
v
s
v
s
v
s
v
p
, and v
p
, v
p
, v
s
, v
s
, , donate
the average value and dierence of compressional (P-wave) velocity, shear wave velocity and density in adjacent
formation, respectively.
Connolly
[1]
constructed an equation for calculating reectivity similar to acoustic impedance as follows
R() =
EI
i+1
EI
i
EI
i+1
+ EI
i
1
2
EI
EI
1
2
ln(EI), (2)
where EI is called as elastic impedance. Comparing Eq.(1) and (2) and by simple computation, EI expressions
can be written as follows
EI() = v
(1+sin
2
)
p
v
(8K sin
2
)
s
(14K sin
2
)
, (3)
where v
p
is P-wave velocity, v
s
is S-wave velocity, is density and K =
v
si
v
pi
2
+
v
si+1
v
pi+1
/2 is the average
value of the square of the ratio of P to S velocity. is the incident angle of P-wave. The main problems in
calculating EI using Eq.(3) is that its value dramatically decreases with incident angle, which probably lose
some information for analyzing elastic impedance at near and far angles, for example, the dierence of uid or
lithology change.
Therefore, in order to eliminate the eects, Whitcombe et al.
[3]
deduced a new formula of EI by normalizing
the original EI equation, as follows
EI() =
0
, (4)
where
0
,
0
,
0
are constant coecient, which donate average value of v
p
, v
s
, in reservoir intervals, respectively.
, , are v
pi
, v
si
,
i
and at dierent depth, respectively, and
a = 1 + sin
2
, b = 8K sin
2
, c = 1 4K sin
2
. (5)
Although Eq.(4) can remove the eect of dramatic EI decrease with incident angle and keep the same
orders of magnitude with post-stack acoustic impedance, the reectivity R() are probably larger than 1 con-
icting with the real seismic recorder. Thus, Whitcombe
[3]
further modied the EI equation, and replaced sin
2
and 90
, (6)
Peng Z M et al.: Discriminating Gas and Water Using Multi-Angle Extended Elastic Impedance Inversion 641
where
p = cos + sin, q = 8K sin, r = cos 4K sin. (7)
EEI value calculated by Eq.(6) not only eliminates the eect of EI dramatic decrease with incident angle,
but also controls the reectivity within [1,1] and is more suitable to real seismic recorder and benecial to
directly detect lithology and uid.
3 MEEI WELL MODEL AND FLUID CRITERION FOR CARBONATE RESERVOIRS
Fluid detection using EEI needs to build the uid discrimination model according to the prior information.
In general, the relationship between EI and water saturation at xed incident angle is adopted and then the
interpretation scheme is determined. However, these methods have two disadvantages: one is that it is dicult
to predene a reasonable incident angle; the other is that the multi-angle information of pre-stack seismic data
is lost under the xed incident angle. In the study we found that the EEI inversion results of target layers show
low value abnormity under the gas-bearing or water-bearing conditions in xed incident angle (for example,
16
), and it is hard to discriminate the gas and water in reservoir. Some literatures also introduce the approach
to partition gas and water boundary by EI inversion for the limited partial stack seismic section at near and
far incident angle and the cross-plot analyses are done for inversion results and data samples are articially
classied for gas or water. However, this method is probably aected by various articial factors, because these
data are not completely divided, and cause the large interpretation error.
This paper presents a new model for discriminating uid using multi-angle extended elastic impedance,
(MEEI), in which the change trend of EEI with incident angles is observed continuously by calculating a series
of EEI within the ecient range of incident angles for reservoir zone. Then the corresponding uid criterions
are determined by prior information of uid-bearing (for example, log interpretation results). The analyses of
logging data (P-wave velocity, S-wave velocity and density) from several wells show that the proposed method can
construct an ecient uid-bearing pattern for carbonate reservoirs. Fig. 1 shows EEI varying with the incident
angle (theoretical angle ) of gas-bearing and water-bearing reservoirs of well X6. This well was interpreted as
gas-bearing layer at 43844386 m and 44714480 m depth and as water-bearing layer at 44884511 m. We
can see from the gure that EEI value increases with the incident angle decreasing for water-bearing reservoirs
and EEI value decreases with the incident angle increasing for water-bearing reservoirs, while it changes slowly
for gas-water-bearing. To further verify the regularity and obtain a consistent conclusion, the same analyses
are also done for the other wells in this area. Fig. 2 shows that EEI values for gas-bearing and water-bearing
layers of well X4 and X5 are consistent with Fig. 1. The EEI change trend of gas-bearing layer in well X1 is
also basically consistent.
The calculation of real data from several wells shows that MEEI analysis is eective for discriminating gas
and water in carbonate reservoirs and its response is obvious. Comparing with acoustic impedance, EEI also
642 Chinese J. Geophys. Vol.51, No.3
shows low value for gas-bearing or water-bearing reservoirs. However, MEEI for the dierent uid in reservoir
interval show the dierent responses as follows: (1) EEI increases with the increase of incident angle for water-
bearing case; (2) EEI decreases with increasing incident angle for gas-bearing case; (3) EEI changes slowly with
the increase of incident angle for gas-water-bearing case.
In practice application, gas-bearing cases of a few wells show inconsistent result with the above uid
criterion, in which EEI increases with incident angle increasing. It is caused by absence of S-wave velocity in
this well and using Castagna equation to t it. Because the relationship between P-wave and S-wave velocity
is not linear, it causes the uncertainty of calculating results. Generally, according to Castagna equation, P-
wave and S-wave velocity at most layers are correlative. However, practice shows that those zones with poor
correlation between v
p
and v
s
are just the places for favorable reservoir bodies. Therefore, the results and their
accuracy will be aected due to the absence of S-wave velocity in uid discrimination using MEEI inversion.
For the sake of analyzing problem, the label of the abscissa is the theoretical angles (not the actual incident
angle) in Fig. 1 and Fig. 2, which change within 0
90
, 13
, and 21
, 15
and 25
) are shown in Fig. 4a, 4b, and 4c. Similarly, we can see from the regions marked
as purple ellipses in the gures that the color of inversion results within water-bearing reservoir interval lightens
gradually with incident angles increasing, indicating that EEI values increase with incident angles increasing.
The inversion results of real seismic data are all consistent with uid discrimination criterion established
in this paper. Moreover, model-based inversion of MEEI was realized for the 3-D working area of 100 m
2
.
Consistency verication has been done by using 3 wells of the 6 wells drilled in the area as constraining conditions
and taking the others as the unknown wells, the resultant consistency ratio is 100%. The test results show that
the proposed method based on MEEI for discriminating uid is ecient and feasible.
5 CONCLUSIONS
The uid discrimination criterions are established by analyzing logging data at reservoir intervals and
forward calculation in this paper. The test results for real 3-D seismic data show that it is an eective approach
to discriminating gas and water in carbonate reservoirs using MEEI inversion and is better than EEI inversion
under the xed incident angle or EEI cross-plot analysis between near and far angles. Although the present
method is used to detect uid in carbonate reservoirs, it also has referential signicance to lithology identication
in sand-shale formation or clastic reservoirs.
Peng Z M et al.: Discriminating Gas and Water Using Multi-Angle Extended Elastic Impedance Inversion 643
The actual incident angles is (a) 5
, (b) 13
, (c) 21
, (b) 15
, (c) 25
.
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
Authors would like to express their gratitude to Sichuan Geophysical Company of CNPC Sichuan Petroleum
for permitting to publish this project. This work has been supported by the Aeronautic Science Foundation of
China (20060112116), Research Fund for the Doctoral Program of Higher Education of China (20070614016)
and National Natural Science Foundation of China (60572092).
REFERENCES
[1] Connolly P. Elastic impedance. The Leading Edge., 1999, 18(4): 438452
[2] Whitcombe D N. Elastic impedance normalization. Geophysics, 2002, 67(1): 6062
[3] Whitcombe D N. Extended elastic impedance for uid and lithology prediction. Geophysics, 2002, 67(1): 6367
[4] Kenneth D, Martin L, Hege R. Shear-wave elastic impedance. The Leading Edge, 2000, 19(11): 12221229
[5] Ezequiel F G, Tapan M, Gray M, et al. Near and far oset P-to-S elastic impedance for discriminating zz water
from commercial gas. The Leading Edge, 2003, 22(10): 10121015
644 Chinese J. Geophys. Vol.51, No.3
[6] Ni Y. A new method for calculation of elastic wave impedance. Oil Geophysical Prospecting (in Chinese), 2003, 38(2):
147150
[7] Ma J F. Forward modeling and inversion method of generalized elastic impedance in seismic exploration. Chinese J.
Geophys. (in Chinese), 2003, 46(1): 118124
[8] Ma J F, Morozov I B. Ray-path elastic impedance. CSEG National Convention, 1012 May 2004
[9] Ma J F, Morozov I B. Fluid detection study from Zoeppritz elastic impedance, 75th Annual Internat. Mtg., Soc.
Expl. Geophys., Expanded Abstracts, 2006
[10] Gan L D, Zhao B L, Du W H, et al. The potential analysis of elastic impedance in the lithology and uid prediction.
Geophysical Prospecting for Petroleum (in Chinese), 2005, 44(5): 504508
[11] Wang B L, Yin X Y, Zhang F C. Elastic impedance inversion and its application. Progress in Geophysics (in
Chinese), 2005, 20(1): 8992
[12] Cao M Q, Wang J S, Shao L H. Prestack elastic wave impedance inversion technique and application. Oil Geophysical
Prospecting (in Chinese), 2006, 41(3): 323326
[13] Yuan S J, Yu C Q. Elastlc impedance and seismic inversion in anisotropic media. Progress in Geophysics (in Chinese),
2006, 21(2): 520523
[14] Peng Z M, Li Y L, Ye L, et al. Discriminating gas and water in carbonate reservoirs using multi-angle extended
elastic impedance inversion. SPG/SEG Kunming 2006 International Geophysical Conference, Expanded Abstracts,
168171, Oct. 2006
[15] Peng Z M, Li Y L, Liang B, et al. Application prestack elastic impedance inversion in gas and water recognition of
the reservoir. Natural Gas Industry (in Chinese), 2007, 38(4): 4345, 52
[16] Li Y, Goodway B, Downton J. Recent advances in application of AVO to carbonate reservoirs. Cseg Recorder, 2003.
3540
[17] Wang D W, Liu Z, Chen X H, et al. Feasibility analysis on division of ow units using time-lapse seismic data.
Chinese J. Geophys. (in Chinese), 2007, 50(2): 592597
[18] Aki K, Richards P G. Quantitative Seismology: Theory and Methods. Volume 1, W. H. Freeman and Company,
1980