1.

We are given the following data about a reservoir:

Formation
Shale A
Sandstone A
Shale B
Sandstone B
Shale C
Sandstone C

Density [kg m-3]

2400
2250
2450
2300
2400
2300

Thickness [m]
100
200
100
300
100
200

Formation Velocity [m s-1]

2650
2800
2750
3000
2700
2900

To find the reflectivity series of the formation, we need to first calculate the acoustic
impedance of all 6 layers. In addition, we need to find the time taken for the seismic to pass
through each layer; assuming that the seismic travels normally down through horizontal
layers, using the following equations:

We obtain the following for all 6 layers (Arns 2011):

Z (kg/m2s)
6
6.36 x 10
6
6.30 x 10
6
6.74 x 10
6
6.90 x 10
6
6.48 x 10
6
6.67 x 10

Z1
Z2
Z3
Z4
Z5
Z6

Time (s)
0.075
0.14
0.073
0.20
0.074
0.14

Next, we find the reflection coefficient (R) in between each of the layers (eg: in between
Shale A and Sandstone A and in between Sandstone A and Shale B... etc.). This is done using
the following equation (Arns 2011):

We obtain the following for all 5 reflection coefficients:

R1
R2
R3
R4
R5

-0.00474
0.0337
0.0117
-0.0314
0.0144

Therefore, deriving the reflectivity series we get:

Reflection Coefficient (R)

Reflectivity Series
0.04
0.02
0
0

0.1

0.2

0.3

0.4

0.5

0.6

-0.02
-0.04

time (s)

Figure Error! No text of specified style in document.-1: Reflectivity Series of the formation
To find the porosity of each of the layers, we assumed that each sandstone layer was pure
sandstone, made of 100% quartz. For each of the shale layers, we assumed that they were
pure shale, made up of 100% clay. We then used to following equation to find the porosity
(Mavko, Mukerji & Dvorkin 1998):
(

B = Formation or Bulk Density

= Porosity
g = Grain Density
fl = Fluid Density
We further assumed that all the layers of Shale, Sandstone B and Sandstone C were
saturated with brine of density 1.029 g/cc, while Sandstone A was saturated with 30 API oil
or a light gas of density 0.112 g/cc. The density of quartz is 2.650 g/cc and the density of clay
is 2.580 g/cc (Dvorkin 2008).
For the density of 30 API oil:

Hence solving the equation for each of the layers led to the following porosities:
Formation
Shale A
Sandstone A (for light gas)
Sandstone A (for oil API 30)
Shale B
Sandstone B
Shale C
Sandstone C

Porosity
0.116
0.158
0.225
0.084
0.216
0.116
0.216

It should be noted that there are slightly different velocities for Shale A and C despite having
the same formation densities. The same could be said for Sandstone B and C. This could be
due to slight differences of bulk modulus, shear modulus, grain density and fluid density.
Since fluid density changes at different depths and there is actually a range of densities, bulk
modulus and shear modulus for quartz and for shale (Mavko et. Al 1998).
A) If Sandstone A was saturated with light oil API 30 (continual homogeneous
replacement of water for 40 years):
As oil is produced from the reservoir, the pore pressure would remain relatively constant
due to the oil being homogeneously replaced by water (assuming pressure is always above
bubble point pressure). Since the question also assumes that structural integrity is kept
constant and does not compact. As a result, the effective stress remains relatively constant,
since overburden stress is constant. This is seen in the relationship (Al-Awad 2000):

Where, Se = Effective stress

St = Overburden stress
Pp = Pore pressure
Due to the increasing water influx, water saturation will gradually increase. As a result, the
bulk density will increase homogeneously. In addition, water would generally have a higher
bulk modulus than that of relatively light oil.
From Nurs Critical Velocity Relation we know that (Mavko et. Al 1998):
(

Since we know that the bulk modulus of quartz is 36.6 GPa and the shear modulus is 45 GPa
(Dvorkin 2008), and we know that for sandstone we have a porosity of 0.225 and a critical
porosity of 0.4 (Mavko et. Al 1998). This means that Kdry is equal to 16.0 GPa and dry = 19.7
GPa, which will stay the same throughout.
In addition, we know from Smith, Sondergeld & Rai (2003) that:

As water saturation increases and oil saturation decreases; Kfl increases. This is due to water
having a higher bulk modulus than oil. We assume for oil Kfl = 1.0 GPa (Chen et. al 1991) and
for brine 2.330GPa (Dvorkin 2008).
Therefore, looking at the Gassmann-Biot Equation:
(

We see that, since K0, Kdry and stay the same, but Kfl increases, this will result in an
increase in Ksat.
From the equation of VPsat, we can calculate the formation velocity:

In conclusion, as water saturation increases; Kfl increases. This in turn increases Ksat as well
as density, but since there is no compaction there is no increase in the dry bulk modulus. As
a result, formation velocity increases (assuming linear fluid substitution of light oil with
brine). This is because Ksat increase is dominant over bulk density increase.
If we assume that the initial bulk density is that initial and final bulk density is given by
(Dvorkin 2008):
(
Condition
Initial (Assuming it is 100%
saturated by oil)
75% oil and 25% brine
50% oil and 50% brine
25% oil and 75% brine
Final (Assuming it is 100%
saturated by brine water at the
end of 40yrs)

Time
(yrs)

Bulk Density
(g/cc)

Kfl (GPa)

Ksat (GPa)

VP
(km/s)

2.25

1.00

17.35

4.403

10
20
30

2.26
2.27
2.28

1.17
1.40
1.75

17.57
17.86
18.30

4.404
4.409
4.421

40

2.29

2.33

18.99

4.446

If we assume that, density and Ksat increases linearly due to homogeneous replacement of
water, the following graph would be produced over 40 years:

Vp vs. Time
Vp (km/s)

4.45
4.44
4.43
4.42
4.41
4.4
0

10

20

30

40

Time (yrs)

Figure -2: Graph of Vp vs. Time for 40 years

B) According to the results of the Valhall Field, they combined 4D seismic with OBC
technology (Ocean Bottom Cables) called the LoFs project. This produced a great
repeatability in results, which help cancel out random noise errors due to different
cable positions every time a monitor survey needs to be conducted. No doubt, noise
plays a very big role in observed seismic differences. In addition, with good weather
a complete survey can be taken in less than 3 weeks. As a result, in the Valhall field,
an average of 2 surveys is taken annually; producing 60 good quality seismic images
per year with no additional costs (Van Gestel, Kommedal, Barkved, Mundal, Bakke &
Best 2008). There are some fields such as the Fionaven and Weyburn Fields in which
seismic is conducted once a year (Davis, Terrell & Benson 2003). However, for a
signal to noise ratio (SNR) of 12:1, this would produce very high resolution and
trustworthy seismic (Evans, Hartley & Keshavarz 2009).
For our case, we have a SNR much greater than 12:1 (only 1% noise). As a result, the
resolution and trustworthy of the seismic images would be very high. Comparing this to the
Valhall field, which could complete a survey in less than 3 weeks (for good SNR and
weather) for an area of 50km2, our own area of 100km2 would take about 6 weeks.
Since seismic is expensive (costs about $250,000 a survey, depending on area and other
factors), it would also depend on the economics and the time required to process the data
(roughly about 15 days for Valhall Field). Assuming that economics for this project was good,
a recommended of 4 to 5 surveys could be conducted a year. Since the more readings we
conduct, the better the resolution and it will show the difference in fluid properties much
clearer.

Sources:

Al-Awad M.N.J., 2000, Relationship between Reservoir Productivity and Pore Pressure
Drop, College of Engineering, King Saud University, Riyadh.
Arns C., 2011A, PTRL 3003B Reservoir Geophysics: Lecture Notes 2, The University of
New South Wales, Sydney
Christiansen R., Batzle M. & Han D-h, 1998, Seismic signature of reservoir recovery
processes, Colorado School of Mines, Colorado, Available at:
http://www.rpl.uh.edu/papers/1998_seismic_sig.pdf, Accessed on April 28 th 2011.
Davis T.L., Terrell M.J. & Benson R.D., 2003, Multicomponent seismic characterization
and monitoring of the CO2 flood at Weyburn Field, Saskatchewan, The Leading Edge.
Dvorkin J., 2008, Yet another Vs Equation, Geophysics, Vol. 73, No.2; pp E35-E39.
Evans B.J, Hartley B. & Keshavarz N., 2009, Towards the E-Field: Continuous
Monitoring of Pore Fluid Phase Using Horizontal Wells, Available at:
http://www.pesa.com.au/publications/pesa_news/oct_nov_09/images/pn102_3639.pdf, Accessed on May 15th 2011.
Mavko G., Mukerji T. & Dvorkin J., 1998, The Rock Physics Handbook, Cambridge
University Press, New York.
Smith T., Sondergeld C., Rai C., 2003, Gassmann fluid substitutions: A tutorial,
Geophysics, Vol. 68, No.2; pp 430-440.
Van Gestel J.P., Kommedal J.H., Barkved O.I., Mundal I., Bakke R. & Best K.D., 2008,
Continuous seismic surveillance of Valhall Field, The Leading Edge.