1 Introduction

Chapter 1
Introduction
Accurate interpretation of geophysical data in particular, reflection
seismic data is one of the most important elements of a successful oil and
gas exploration program. Despite technological advances in data acquisition
and processing and the regular use of powerful computers and sophisticated
software applications, you still face a tremendous challenge each time you
begin to reconstruct the geologic story contained in a grid or volume of seismic data that is, to interpret the data. On occasion, this interpretive tale
can be clearly told; but most of the time, each page of each chapter is slowly
turned, and rarely is the full meaning of the story completely understood.
Where the correlation of one reflection record with another is very
easy, little needs to be said. Almost anyone can understand such a
correlation. On the other hand, this is a rare occurrence. The usual
thing is for the correlation to be so difficult as to be impossible. It
is for this reason that correlation procedure can hardly be described
in words (Dix, 1952).
Although Dix is speaking about the correlation of individual reflection records, which were used routinely before the advent of continuous
common-depth-point (CDP) profiling, he clearly recognized the essence
of interpretation as the considered extraction of geologic information from
indirect geophysical measurements. His words are no less relevant and
applicable now than they were 60 years ago, even in view of the high standards of data quality made possible by advances in seismic acquisition and
processing, to say nothing of accompanying developments in interpretation
technology. In the modern interpretation environment, you still face correlations that are so difficult as to be impossible because these correlations
1
Downloaded 17 Feb 2012 to 198.3.68.20. Redistribution subject to SEG license or copyright; Terms of Use: http://segdl.org/
SEG-SEISMIC-11-0601-001.indd 1
05/12/11 2:04 PM
2First Steps in Seismic Interpretation
define the frontiers of opportunity, the ones posing the sternest challenges
and ultimately leading to the greatest rewards.
The primary aim of this book is to describe Dixs correlation procedure in
terms of the science, data, tools, and techniques now used in seismic interpretation in the oil and gas industry. As an individual geoscientist, you develop
and apply your own approach and style when interpreting seismic data. You
continually revise and refine correlation procedures during the course of your
career and expand them as you complete different interpretation projects.
With experience, you learn to check and recheck the validity of your procedures to fully understand the rules of evidence that govern their use:
What are the physical laws that control the phenomena you observe
and consider as evidence?
What are the uncertainties in your evidence?
You must have a good understanding of seismic acquisition and processing principles as well as fundamentals of geology before beginning to
collect interpretive evidence and solve interpretation problems correctly.
Continuing from Dix, then, you must also know when enough interpreting
is enough:
The threshold of impossibility is reached by different interpreters at
different levels. The important thing is for each interpreter to understand his limitations. Obviously it is foolish to go ahead and correlate when no correlation is possible. This involves giving a definite
interpretation that is almost sure to be misleading and therefore very
expensive (Dix, 1952).
The primary goal of seismic interpretation is always to describe geology,
and all aspects of interpretation facilitate and support this goal. The products of seismic interpretation are an important subset of the indispensable
elements used by geoscientists to define and develop oil and gas prospects.
Although seismic interpretation is a very important part of the explorationdevelopment-production stream, it is only one of the elements used when
integrating all available data to build a geophysically consistent and geologically reasonable picture of subsurface structure and stratigraphy. Drawing this picture accurately is a critical factor in successful identification of
drillable prospects and exploitation of known hydrocarbon accumulations.
Interpretation, the description of geology, depends critically on seismic data quality: The better the quality, the more accurate and reliable the
interpretation. In the most general terms, quality is the degree to which
05/12/11 2:04 PM
Chapter 1: Introduction 3
something fulfills its intended purpose; because you use seismic data for
different purposes, depending on where you are in the value stream (e.g.,
exploration versus production), you know that data quality appropriate and
acceptable for one project may not be for another. For example, the quality
of a high-resolution seismic survey used to detail the shallow subsurface
and identify potential drilling hazards would be completely inadequate and
essentially useless for deep exploration. In the same way, a 3D survey purposely acquired and processed to image deep subsalt targets would have
little or no value for shallow hazards assessment. At the same time, quality may be less than optimal owing to problems in data acquisition or processing, and you need to be able to recognize these shortcomings, seeking
advice from acquisition and processing specialists as needed, accounting
for the shortcomings during interpretation, and making appropriate recommendations for improvements.
There are three primary elements of seismic data quality: detection (signal-to-noise), resolution (temporal and spatial), and image fidelity (focusing
and positioning). All efforts in seismic data acquisition and processing are
designed to optimize data quality and interpretability. You are responsible
for assessing data quality for each of your interpretation projects and for
communicating this assessment as part of any presentation of project results.
Seismic interpretation is, by the nature of seismic data and the earth
itself, nonunique and highly subjective. You bring your perspective and
powers of observation to bear on the interpretation problem at hand, the
effects of which cannot be clearly identified in or separated from your maps
and calculations and yet are a controlling factor in your results. Stephen
Jay Gould recognizes and appreciates the importance of talent for observation in naturalists, which can easily apply to interpreters:
All field naturalists know and respect the phenomenon of search
image the best proof that observation is an interaction of mind
and nature, not a fully objective and reproducible mapping of outside upon inside, done in the same way by all careful and competent people. In short, you see what you are trained to view and
observation of different sorts of objects often requires a conscious
shift of focus, not a total and indiscriminate expansion in the hopes
of seeing everything. The world is too crowded with wonders for
simultaneous perception of all; we learn our fruitful selectivities
(Gould, 1993).
Although acquiring, processing, and analyzing seismic data are mathematically intensive and now almost exclusively digital, interpretation
05/12/11 2:04 PM
activity per se is still primarily a visual (human and therefore fallible) process. Correlation of seismic records involves pattern recognition, depending
heavily on the display of data and your knowledge and understanding of
patterns in geology. Interpretation of any element of geology from seismic
data involves answering the questions What is it? and Where is it?
answers that are rarely independent of each other. In other words, you often
interpret what something is by where it is in relation to other features, or
where and how large a feature should be because of what it is. Hence, we
confirm the importance of migration of seismic data and, ultimately, the
ability to visualize and reconstruct in depth what is only indirectly measured
in time. Of course, it goes without saying that you will not be too terribly
successful in the oil and gas business if you cant accurately specify what,
where, and how big your exploration targets are.
Seismic acquisition, processing, and interpretation are related, as shown
in Figure 1. Acquisition and processing can be thought of as forward processes in which acoustic-impedance contrasts in the subsurface produce
measurable seismic responses (acoustic impedance [AI] and reflection coefficient [RC] are defined in Chapter 2). The interpretation of this response,
which in Figure 1 is called ideal but often is very far from being so, is an
inverse process that describes the original AI contrasts and ultimately the
subsurface geology. Notice that the forward processes of acquisition and
processing can give rise to different, nonunique responses, depending on
the particular acquisition and processing techniques used. This is another
way of saying that acquisition and processing determine data quality. The
inverse process of interpretation can result in many different descriptions of
geology, again because of varying data quality and also because the fundamental relationships among subsurface geometry, acoustic impedance, and
geology are nonunique. In your better humors, you thank your good fortune
for this nonuniqueness because it is an important factor contributing to your
job security.
Your domain of information in interpretation consists of facts (there
may not be as many of these as you would like to believe), observations,
inferences drawn from observations and their resultant models, and, of
course, experience gained from having established facts, made observations, drawn inferences, and revised models over time. Taken together, these
still represent a relatively small volume of your domain, the largest portion of which is the unknown. Accurate, well-integrated interpretations can
reduce the volume of the unknown, but only if you maintain awareness of
the distinctions among facts, observations, and models, all of which can be
considered interpretive evidence. This awareness is a critical element in
your assessment of technical risk in exploration projects, which, contrary to
05/12/11 2:04 PM
Acoustic Reflection Ideal
Lithology impedance coefficient seismic
response
+
+
No
depth
scale
implied
No
time
scale
implied
Data acquisition and processing

Interpretation
Figure 1. The interrelationship of seismic data acquisition and processing with
seismic interpretation. The former are forward processes, and the latter is an
inverse process. AI = acoustic impedance; RC = reflection coefficient.
the way you would like it to be, is at best as subjective as the interpretation
on which it is based.
Perhaps the most common intellectual difficulty encountered in correlating seismic data is maintaining a clear distinction between observation
and interpretation (see Figure 2). Observation is the essential foundation
for meaningful interpretation; think of observation as What do I see? and
interpretation as What does it mean? These questions can be easily and
often unwittingly confused, allowing bias to enter an interpretation and
resulting in premature or unwarranted interpretive conclusions. Experience
does not guarantee that you will be able to keep observation and interpretation separate because there is a sense of urgency in the desire to explain
observations and get on with business that can prevent you from devoting
sufficient time to making an appropriate number of careful observations.
Similarly, the lack of patience that often accompanies inexperience can lead
to the same unfortunate result.
05/12/11 2:04 PM

Figure 2. The observe
interprettest cycle when
working with seismic data.
We make observations on
uninterpreted data, explain those
observations in an interpretation
(telling the geologic story
contained in seismic data), and
test conclusions with wells
or additional data, leading to
more observations and revised
interpretation.
Observe
Interpret
Correlate/explain/synthesize
build model
Test
As said before, you can think of the objectives of seismic interpretation

as seeking to answer two questions about subsurface geology:
What is it? What elements of geology can you recognize (observe
and explain)?
Where is it? How accurately can you delineate elements of geology in three-dimensional space?
To be of any use in a successful exploration program, your answers to these
questions require that you understand how to accurately transform measurements and observations made in the reflection time domain into the depth
domain. Except in the simplest cases, the inherent nonuniqueness of interpretation often allows your answers to What is it? to promote erroneous
inferences about Where is it? or How big is it? and vice versa. Which
of these questions can or should be answered first, and the confidence with
which either can be answered at all, clearly depends on the quality of available
data, the tools at hand for analyzing those data, and your skill and experience
as an interpreter. Often, prior knowledge of and experience in an area enable
you to answer one of these questions with greater certainty than the other, and
you effectively conduct a model-based interpretation, in which the course of
the interpretation is guided by more than just observations and correlation
of the data. There is nothing implicitly wrong with such an interpretation
because you should incorporate all available information and experience into
your interpretations. The peril lies in the possibility that prior knowledge can
subconsciously (or otherwise) drive your interpretation, and so contradictory
observations or correlations are downplayed or ignored because they dont
fit the model. In such cases, the objectivity essential to all interpretations is
seriously at risk, and you may see only what you want to see.
05/12/11 2:04 PM
Your fundamental concern in seismic interpretation is recognizing that

reflection seismic data do not (yet) provide one-to-one images of true subsurface geology. You must decide which features in the data are real and
correlative and which are not, and you must always try to understand the
differences between the two. At the same time, you need to determine how
well resolved are the real features you see and how accurate are their spatial
positions; hence, the importance of data quality and the ability to properly
couch interpretation results within the context of that quality. In a philosophical sense, you should maintain healthy skepticism throughout your
interpretations, using methodologies based on assumptions of doubt with
the aim of gaining approximate or relative but never absolute certainty
in your results.
05/12/11 2:04 PM
05/12/11 2:04 PM

1 Introduction

Caricato da

Informazioni sul documento

Copyright

Formati disponibili

Condividi questo documento

Condividi o incorpora il documento

Opzioni di condivisione

Hai trovato utile questo documento?

Questo contenuto è inappropriato?

Copyright:

Formati disponibili

1 Introduction

Caricato da

Copyright:

Formati disponibili

Chapter 1

2First Steps in Seismic Interpretation

4First Steps in Seismic Interpretation

Data acquisition and processing

6First Steps in Seismic Interpretation

As said before, you can think of the objectives of seismic interpretation

Your fundamental concern in seismic interpretation is recognizing that

Potrebbero piacerti anche