Integrated Extended Elastic Impendence and Geomechanical

Calculation: a Breakthrough of Reservoir Analysis

La Ode Marzujriban*
Dewi Rahma Ahmadi*
*Geophysics Program Study of Hasanuddin University
Abstract
Elastic impedance (EI) is a method to predict the condition of lithology and fluid
content in the subsurface with several parameters such as primary velocity, secondary
velocity, density, and angle of incidence. Meanwhile, EI has a limitation in term of
range of the angle of incidence and the equation still can be extended into new
formula known as EEI (Extended Elastic Impedance). By using EEI we can cover the
limitation of angle that EI cannot solve. In this paper, we try to build script in matlab
for EEI calculation based on well logging and seismic data to perform lithology and
fluid discrimination. Moreover, we also add Geomechanical calculation to support
perforation activity based on elastic properties such as Youngs modulus and
Poissons ratio. Our previews research shows that the Geomechanical calculation can
represent the depth of penetration that very essential for perforation and fracturing
activity. So here, we performing zone selection based on criteria of the reservoir and
Geomechanical calculation. The result of the study shows that by integrating EEI and
Geomechanical calculation we can support reservoir characterization and fracturing
placement activity. We also can perform discrimination in 2D seismic data that
resulted from seismic inversion. In the end, we realized that this application is very
powerful to support exploration and production activity even for perforating activity.
Keyword: Extend Elastic Impendence, Geomechanical Calculation, 2D Seismic Data

SPE SC UH Research Team (La Ode Marzujriban, DewiRahmaAhmadi)

pg. 1

Introduction
Nowdays, challenge in the world of seismic exploration was full of subsurface
ambiguities, which can lead in to difficult task in most regions in term of gathering
and analyzing data quickly and efficiently. We always looking for the best method to
imaging the subsurface and more accurate with low risk decision making to reduce
drilling risk and increasing production. Knowledge and advanced techniques provide
vast amount of information that can help to address the challenges which improves
our interpretation of lithology and fluid content.
One of method to predict lithology subsurface is seismic inversion with combined
with Elastic Impedance (EI). EI is a generalization of Acoustic Impedance with
several parameters such as primary velocity, secondary velocity, density, and angle of
incidence (Supriyono, 2010). Meanwhile, EI has limitation in term of range of the
angle of incidence and the equation still can be extended into new formula known as
EEI (Extended Elastic Impedance). By using EEI we can cover the limitation of angle
that EI cannot solve.
Now, application and software about predicting lithology and fluid content with EEI
has been circulated to help geoscientist to analyze the reservoir. In addition,
knowledge about the best zone to perforation is also important to maximize
production. So, we need some application which integrating lithology, fluid content,
and the best zone to perforating.
In this paper, we build script in matlab for EEI and geomechanical calculation based
on well logging and seismic data to describe lithology, fluid content, and the best
zone to perforating with economical cost.

SPE SC UH Research Team (La Ode Marzujriban, DewiRahmaAhmadi)

pg. 2

Methodology
In commonly, the parameters to predict lithology and fluid content are acoustic
impedance (AI), elastic impedance (EI), and extended elastic impedance (EEI). The
formula of these parameters then used to build the script in Matlab.
Acoustic Impendenceis a attribute of lithology that state the relation between primary
velocity (Vp) and bulk density ():
Al = Vp x
ElasticImpendence depends on primary velocity, secondary velocity, density and
angle of incidence. This formula is obtained from derivative of Aki-Richard equation
which is introduced by Connoly (2002) stated bellow :

where,

with

the formula then modified by Whitecombe, by introducethe value of 0, 0,

and 0 and change parameter of EI that previously stated by Connolly and gives EI
function returns the impedance value which is normalized for all angles, which is:

Cause EI has a limitation. The equation EI requires sin2 more than 1. In additional,
reflectivity value can be more than 1 when sin2 increased. In fact, there is no
impedance contras could give reflectivity value more than 1, except if the value of
impedance is negative. Practically, when sin2 is reaching or exceeding into 1 than
log EI which is defined will increase inaccurately (Whitecombe et.al, 2000).

SPE SC UH Research Team (La Ode Marzujriban, DewiRahmaAhmadi)

pg. 3

To solve this problem, then we need to change 2 definition of EI which change sin 2
with tan so that this equation can be defined to the value of . In this terminology
also will be defined as factor of scale from normal reflectivity with multiply the cos ,
ensure reflectivity never exceeding 1 value.
by substituted to term two aki-ricard equation :

the from the relation we can defined that

then we give the reflectivity with Rs scale

and we can defined

Based on equation above, we define new equation, as following:

where,

Scale of reflectivity has physical meaning that between A on =0 and B on =90.

EEI value on =0 is equivalent to AI and =90 will has reflectivity value which is
the same with B, which also is Gradient Impedance (GI). (Whitcombe,et.al,2000).

SPE SC UH Research Team (La Ode Marzujriban, DewiRahmaAhmadi)

pg. 4

One of method reduces discrepancies between observed and modeled seismic data is
using inversion process. By inversion, we convert seismic reflection amplitude to
impedance profile (rock property information) and estimate model parameters (in
term of impedance instead of reflectivity) (Russell,1988).
The parameter to maximized production of oil and gas is to do perforating and
fracturing activity. By Geomechanical calculation we can know the best zone to do
perforating based on elastic properties such as Youngs modulus and Poissons ratio.
Geomechanical is a study of the rock elastic or plastic behavior and has direct impact
on well integrity (Bataee,2013). From the Geomechanical study we can calculate the
value of brittleness of a formation. Considering Perez (2014) that the modulus
important to fracturing is the static linear elastic rock property, and must be measured
by stress-strain testing from core measurement.
We calculate the brittleness from Youngs modulus and Poissons ratio. Youngs
modulus is reflect how the rocks maintain a fracture can be defined in terms of bulk
modulus as

Where is bulk modulus which is measure of a materials resistance to change in

volume and is known as incompressibility. It is treated as a porosity indicator.

Poissons ratio is measure of the strength of material of the rock (Copra and
Castagna, 2014) which is can know from

SPE SC UH Research Team (La Ode Marzujriban, DewiRahmaAhmadi)

pg. 5

From the above two equations, each computed Youngs modulus (E) and Poissons
ratio (v) brittleness value obtained in term of geomechanics as stated bellow:

By combining the value of Youngs modulus and Poissons ratio brittleness, it will
get brittleness average, BA.

After we write all of formula of impedance and geomechanical calculation we

performing an analysis trough cross plotting those data. The cross plots and analyses
are useful in differentiating between fluid and lithology in the reservoir (Omudu et al.
2007) both from well log and seismic data.
Result
This section shows result from cross plots. First, we predict lithology (shale-sand)
based on analysis well log data from cross plot between vs and density (Figure 1).
Generally, shale has higher density than sand. The left side show cross plot and the
right side show log GR. From Figure 1 show specific separated for sand (blue color)
and shale (red color). In addition, we analysis Cross plot between EI in 0 and EI in
(0-90) show Figure 2 and cross plot EEI in 0 and EEI (0-90) show Figure 3. This
is we do to see the differences separation by change the angle. Figure3 show cross
plot between EI (0) and EI (90) then EEI (0) and EEI (90) show the higher
separation than other angle. And then we analyzed EI and EEI based on seismic
inversion to compare the result of well log analysis. We take a sample in interest zone
then calculate the EI and EEI the plot of in 90 was shows in Figure 5. Moreover, EI
cannot show best separation compared to EEI in desired angle of incidence. Figure 6

SPE SC UH Research Team (La Ode Marzujriban, DewiRahmaAhmadi)

pg. 6

show that the interest zone and Poissons ratio shown that the value was decreased. It
can be assumed that the interest zone contain fluid that dominated by hydrocarbon
because the high Poissons ratio will lead to high water saturation. Moreover the
value of brittleness wasincrease, brittleness also can lead to high of Vquartz that can
be assumed as good reservoir.In addition brittleness value can be a good
correspondence for good perforation zone, because high brittleness means easier to be
fracked compare to the low one as show above of interest zone.

Figure 1. Cross plot Vp and Density

Figure 2. Cross plot EI (0) and EI (90)

SPE SC UH Research Team (La Ode Marzujriban, DewiRahmaAhmadi)

pg. 7

Figure 3. Cross plot EEI (0) and EEI (10-90)

Figure 4. Cross plot EEI (0) and EEI (10-90)

SPE SC UH Research Team (La Ode Marzujriban, DewiRahmaAhmadi)

pg. 8

Figure 5. P-Velocity, S-Velocity, Elastic Impedance ( 90), and Extended Elastic

Impedance (90) in interest zone.

Figure 6. Extended Elastic Impedance (90), Youngs Modulus, Poissons Ratio, and
Brittleness in interest zone.

Conclusion
The result of this study show that Extended Elastic Impedance can use determine
lithology which are reservoir and non-reservoir especially from cross plot between
EEI in 0 and EEI in 90 using both well logging and seismic data compare with
Elastic Impedance. In addition, we can integrating EEI with Geomechanical
Calculation to support perforation activity based on elastic properties such us
Youngs Modulus and Poissons Ratio to determined brittleness value to maximize
production.

SPE SC UH Research Team (La Ode Marzujriban, DewiRahmaAhmadi)

pg. 9

References
Bataee, M. &Irawan, S., 2013. Geomechanical Application in Petroleum
Engineering.
Copra, Satinderdll. 2014. AVO. SEG Course Notes
Russell, B. (1988). Introduction to seismic inversion methods. SEG Course Notes.
Supriyono.2010.Studi

AnalisisInversi

Extended

Elastic

Impedance

(EEI)

untukmemprediksi Property FisisBatuandari data Seismik (StudiKasusLapangan

KR

FormasiTalangAkarCekunganJawa

Barat:

Undergraduate

thesis,

Departement of physic, Diponegoro University.

Omudu, M. L. and J. O. Ebeniro, S. Olotu.,( 2007), Optimizing Quantitative
Interpretation for Reservoir Characterization: Case Study Onshore Niger Delta:
A paper presented at the 31st Annual SPE International Technical Conference
and Exhibition in Abuja, Nigeria.
Whitecombe, etc. 2002. Extended Elastic Impedance for Fluid and Lithology
Prediction, Geophysic, 67,62-66

SPE SC UH Research Team (La Ode Marzujriban, DewiRahmaAhmadi)

pg. 10