Visual estimation of wavelet phase: Difference between revisions

From SEG Wiki
Jump to navigation Jump to search
m (Reverted edits by Ifarley (talk) to last revision by Ageary)
(Undo revision 19066 by Ifarley (talk))
Line 15: Line 15:
  | isbn    = ISBN 978-1-56080-280-8
  | isbn    = ISBN 978-1-56080-280-8
}}
}}
One of the most important questions an [[Dictionary:Interpreter|interpreter]] should ask when first viewing a seismic image is “what is the phase of these data?”  The answer to this question, which refers to the [[Dictionary:Phase|phase]] of the [[Dictionary:Source|source]] [[Dictionary:Wavelet|wavelet]] in the processed data, is critical to [[Dictionary:Interpretation|interpretation]] because it relates seismic response to geology.  Fundamentally the response to a given subsurface boundary across which there is an [[Dictionary:Acoustic_impedance|acoustic impedance]] contrast varies for different source wavelets.
One of the most important questions an [[Dictionary:Interpreter|interpreter]] should ask when first viewing a seismic image is “what is the phase of these data?”  The answer to this question, which refers to the [[Dictionary:Phase|phase]] of the [[Dictionary:Source|source]] [[Dictionary:Wavelet|wavelet]] in the processed data, is critical to [[Dictionary:Interpretation|interpretation]] because it relates seismic response to geology.  Fundamentally the response to a given subsurface boundary across which there is an [[Dictionary:Acoustic_impedance|acoustic impedance]] [[Dictionary:Contrast|contrast]] varies for different source wavelets.
[[File:Polarity standard.jpg|thumb|300px|{{figure number|1}} SEG polarity standard]]
[[File:Polarity standard.jpg|thumb|300px|{{figure number|1}} SEG polarity standard]]
Line 32: Line 32:
The most important step in visually estimating wavelet phase is to select a [[Dictionary:Reflection|reflection]] which can be confidently identified as the seismic response to a subsurface boundary across which there is a well-known and consistent acoustic impedance [[Dictionary:Contrast|contrast]].  Equally important is to ensure that this boundary is sharp (step-like) and isolated, that is, there is no [[Dictionary:Interference|interference]] in its reflection response from the responses to over- or underlying reflectors (this depends on the distance to the adjacent reflectors and the resolving power of the seismic wavelet).  The following table lists boundaries which can satisfy these two conditions, some being more reliable (“best”) than others (“use with care”)<ref name=Herron2011>Herron, Donald A., 2011, First Steps in Seismic Interpretation: Society of Exploration Geophysicists, [http://dx.doi.org/10.1190/1.9781560802938 http://dx.doi.org/10.1190/1.9781560802938].</ref>:
The most important step in visually estimating wavelet phase is to select a [[Dictionary:Reflection|reflection]] which can be confidently identified as the seismic response to a subsurface boundary across which there is a well-known and consistent acoustic impedance [[Dictionary:Contrast|contrast]].  Equally important is to ensure that this boundary is sharp (step-like) and isolated, that is, there is no [[Dictionary:Interference|interference]] in its reflection response from the responses to over- or underlying reflectors (this depends on the distance to the adjacent reflectors and the resolving power of the seismic wavelet).  The following table lists boundaries which can satisfy these two conditions, some being more reliable (“best”) than others (“use with care”)<ref name=Herron2011>Herron, Donald A., 2011, First Steps in Seismic Interpretation: Society of Exploration Geophysicists, [http://dx.doi.org/10.1190/1.9781560802938 http://dx.doi.org/10.1190/1.9781560802938].</ref>:


[[File:Estimation of wavelet phase from visual inspection.png|center|300px|{{table number|1}}]]
<div class="center" style="width: auto; margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><big>'''Estimation of wavelet phase from visual inspection of data'''</big>
<span style="color:#008000">Sea floor
Hydrocarbon/water contact (seismic “flat spot”)</span>
<span style="color:#FF8C00">Top of salt/volcanics
Base of salt
“Basement”</span>


==Importance of the flat spot==
<span style="color:#008000">Green = best</span>     &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp;        <span style="color:#FF8C00">Orange = use with care</span>
 
</div>
 
==Significance of a "flat spot"==


Many interpreters who work regularly with marine seismic data use the seafloor reflection as an indicator of wavelet phase because the acoustic impedance contrast between seawater and sediment is almost always positive and the seawater/sediment boundary is well-defined and isolated.  The significance of using a seismic “flat spot” is that the acoustic impedance contrast between hydrocarbon- and brine-saturated rocks is almost always positive.  The importance of “flat” in “[[Dictionary:Flat_spot|flat spot]],” within the larger context of “[[Dictionary:Bright_spot|bright spots]]” and “[[Dictionary:DHD,_DHI|direct hydrocarbon indicators (DHIs)]],” is that this flatness allows an interpreter to conclude that the thickness of the hydrocarbon accumulation where the “flat spot” is observed is above tuning, that is, the hydrocarbon-saturated portion of the [[Dictionary:Reservoir|reservoir]] is seismically resolved (the response at the upper seal-to-hydrocarbon-saturated reservoir boundary is separate from the response at the lower hydrocarbon-saturated to brine-saturated reservoir boundary).  This satisfies the condition that the “flat spot” reflection is isolated and can be used for visual estimation of wavelet phase.
Many interpreters who work regularly with marine seismic data use the seafloor reflection as an indicator of wavelet phase because the acoustic impedance contrast between seawater and sediment is almost always positive and the seawater/sediment boundary is well-defined and isolated.  The significance of using a seismic “flat spot” is that the acoustic impedance contrast between hydrocarbon- and brine-saturated rocks is almost always positive.  The importance of “flat” in “[[Dictionary:Flat_spot|flat spot]],” within the larger context of “[[Dictionary:Bright_spot|bright spots]]” and “[[Dictionary:DHD,_DHI|direct hydrocarbon indicators (DHIs)]],” is that this flatness allows an interpreter to conclude that the thickness of the hydrocarbon accumulation where the “flat spot” is observed is above tuning, that is, the hydrocarbon-saturated portion of the [[Dictionary:Reservoir|reservoir]] is seismically resolved (the response at the upper seal-to-hydrocarbon-saturated reservoir boundary is separate from the response at the lower hydrocarbon-saturated to brine-saturated reservoir boundary).  This satisfies the condition that the “flat spot” reflection is isolated and can be used for visual estimation of wavelet phase.
Line 44: Line 53:
</gallery>
</gallery>


==Boundaries==
==Other boundaries==
The problem with using boundaries such as top and/or base of [[Dictionary:Salt|salt]], top of volcanics and [[Dictionary:Basement|basement]] (which can take on a variety of geologic and economic meanings) for estimating wavelet phase is that these boundaries often may be gradational and not sharply defined, so their seismic responses are effectively [[Dictionary:Composite|composite]] responses to multiple, closely-spaced impedance contrasts rather than to a single, well-known impedance contrast.  At the same time, the impedance properties of the materials above and below these boundaries, especially for basement, are not necessarily well known or regionally consistent, and so neither the magnitude nor the sign of the impedance contrast across such boundaries can be inferred confidently without well control.  Finally, reflections such as the base of salt or basement most often are observed at considerable depth on a seismic section, and so their [[Dictionary:Character|character]] is more likely to be suspect in terms of [[image fidelity]] (more so reflection focusing rather than positioning).
The problem with using boundaries such as top and/or base of [[Dictionary:Salt|salt]], top of volcanics and [[Dictionary:Basement|basement]] (which can take on a variety of geologic and economic meanings) for estimating wavelet phase is that these boundaries often may be gradational and not sharply defined, so their seismic responses are effectively [[Dictionary:Composite|composite]] responses to multiple, closely-spaced impedance contrasts rather than to a single, well-known impedance contrast.  At the same time, the impedance properties of the materials above and below these boundaries, especially for basement, are not necessarily well known or regionally consistent, and so neither the magnitude nor the sign of the impedance contrast across such boundaries can be inferred confidently without well control.  Finally, reflections such as the base of salt or basement most often are observed at considerable depth on a seismic section, and so their [[Dictionary:Character|character]] is more likely to be suspect in terms of [[image fidelity]] (more so reflection focusing rather than positioning).

Revision as of 19:31, 18 September 2014

First Steps in Seismic Interpretation
First Steps in Seismic Interpretation Herron.jpg
Series Geophysical Monograph Series
Title First Steps in Seismic Interpretation
Author Donald A. Herron
DOI http://dx.doi.org/10.1190/1.9781560802938
ISBN ISBN 978-1-56080-280-8
Store SEG Online Store

One of the most important questions an interpreter should ask when first viewing a seismic image is “what is the phase of these data?” The answer to this question, which refers to the phase of the source wavelet in the processed data, is critical to interpretation because it relates seismic response to geology. Fundamentally the response to a given subsurface boundary across which there is an acoustic impedance contrast varies for different source wavelets.

Figure 1  SEG polarity standard

In the ideal case the source wavelet for a given data set is determined using wavelet extraction techniques; however, there are many situations in which an interpreter must estimate wavelet phase “on the fly” because there is neither the time nor the software for doing a complete and accurate wavelet extraction. At these times an interpreter must make a visual estimate of wavelet phase using a few simple but certainly not absolute or foolproof criteria.


Knowing the polarity convention

Before making a visual estimate of wavelet phase, an interpreter must know the polarity convention used in display of his data. These conventions or “standards” are not global and vary among different user communities, countries and continents. If not described beforehand, an interpreter should never hesitate to ask about the display convention being used for data he’s viewing for the first time. Following is the SEG polarity standard as defined in the SEG Dictionary of Applied Geophysics (4th ed., 2002) (Figure 1): "For a positive reflection [the seismic response to a boundary across which there is an increase in acoustic impedance], a minimum-phase wavelet (top) begins with a down-kick; the center of a positive symmetrical (zero-phase) wavelet (bottom) is a peak. In the North Sea and some other areas the opposite convention is used for zero-phase wavelets."[1]

This convention is also known as positive standard polarity, and its reverse is called negative standard polarity.

Selecting a reflection

The most important step in visually estimating wavelet phase is to select a reflection which can be confidently identified as the seismic response to a subsurface boundary across which there is a well-known and consistent acoustic impedance contrast. Equally important is to ensure that this boundary is sharp (step-like) and isolated, that is, there is no interference in its reflection response from the responses to over- or underlying reflectors (this depends on the distance to the adjacent reflectors and the resolving power of the seismic wavelet). The following table lists boundaries which can satisfy these two conditions, some being more reliable (“best”) than others (“use with care”)[2]:

Estimation of wavelet phase from visual inspection of data

Sea floor Hydrocarbon/water contact (seismic “flat spot”) Top of salt/volcanics Base of salt “Basement”

Green = best             Orange = use with care

Significance of a "flat spot"

Many interpreters who work regularly with marine seismic data use the seafloor reflection as an indicator of wavelet phase because the acoustic impedance contrast between seawater and sediment is almost always positive and the seawater/sediment boundary is well-defined and isolated. The significance of using a seismic “flat spot” is that the acoustic impedance contrast between hydrocarbon- and brine-saturated rocks is almost always positive. The importance of “flat” in “flat spot,” within the larger context of “bright spots” and “direct hydrocarbon indicators (DHIs),” is that this flatness allows an interpreter to conclude that the thickness of the hydrocarbon accumulation where the “flat spot” is observed is above tuning, that is, the hydrocarbon-saturated portion of the reservoir is seismically resolved (the response at the upper seal-to-hydrocarbon-saturated reservoir boundary is separate from the response at the lower hydrocarbon-saturated to brine-saturated reservoir boundary). This satisfies the condition that the “flat spot” reflection is isolated and can be used for visual estimation of wavelet phase.

Figure 2 shows a pronounced “flat spot” on a seismic line from the Gulf of Mexico displayed with the SEG positive standard polarity convention.[2] This image uses a variable-density trace format which is suitable for estimating wavelet phase but not necessarily the format of choice for everyone; some interpreters prefer to view data with a wiggle trace overlay on a variable-density display or a variable-area wiggle display because these formats more clearly show the curvilinear shape of individual traces (Figure 3 illustrates the four most common trace display formats). The “flat spot” is a high-amplitude symmetric peak, and based on this observation an interpreter can reasonably infer that the data are approximately zero-phase. Independent well-to-seismic ties confirm that this “flat spot” correlates to the hydrocarbon/water contact in an established producing reservoir. Notice that as the hydrocarbon-bearing interval above the “flat spot” thins to the right the seismic responses from the top (trough) and base (peak) of this interval interfere, giving rise to a “trough-over-peak” reflection. Some interpreters cautiously use this trough-over-peak signature, with prior knowledge or assumption of rock properties, to directly identify thin pay sands which are at or below seismic resolution. Two examples of this trough-over-peak signature are visible in the upper left quadrant of Figure 2.

Other boundaries

The problem with using boundaries such as top and/or base of salt, top of volcanics and basement (which can take on a variety of geologic and economic meanings) for estimating wavelet phase is that these boundaries often may be gradational and not sharply defined, so their seismic responses are effectively composite responses to multiple, closely-spaced impedance contrasts rather than to a single, well-known impedance contrast. At the same time, the impedance properties of the materials above and below these boundaries, especially for basement, are not necessarily well known or regionally consistent, and so neither the magnitude nor the sign of the impedance contrast across such boundaries can be inferred confidently without well control. Finally, reflections such as the base of salt or basement most often are observed at considerable depth on a seismic section, and so their character is more likely to be suspect in terms of image fidelity (more so reflection focusing rather than positioning).

See also

References

  1. Sheriff, R. E., 2002, Encyclopedic dictionary of applied geophysics (4th ed.): Society of Exploration Geophysicists, SEG Geophysical Reference Series No.13., http://dx.doi.org/10.1190/1.9781560802969
  2. 2.0 2.1 2.2 Herron, Donald A., 2011, First Steps in Seismic Interpretation: Society of Exploration Geophysicists, http://dx.doi.org/10.1190/1.9781560802938.

External links

find literature about
Visual estimation of wavelet phase
SEG button search.png Datapages button.png GeoScienceWorld button.png OnePetro button.png Schlumberger button.png Google button.png AGI button.png