About This Item

Share This Item

The AAPG/Datapages Combined Publications Database

AAPG Special Volumes

Abstract

Torres-Verdín, C., A. Grijalba-Cuenca, and H. W. J. Debeye, 2006, A comparison between geostatistical Previous HitinversionNext Hit and conventional geostatistical-simulation practices for reservoir delineation, in T. C. Coburn, J. M. Yarus, and R. L. Chambers, eds., Stochastic modeling and geostatistics: Principles, methods, and case studies, volume II: AAPG Computer Applications in Geology 5, p. 187-205.

DOI:10.1306/1063816CA53235

Copyright copy2006 by The American Association of Petroleum Geologists.

A Comparison between Geostatistical Previous HitInversionNext Hit and Conventional Geostatistical-simulation Practices for Reservoir Delineation

C. Torres-Verdiacuten,1 A. Grijalba-Cuenca,2 H. W. J. Debeye3

1The University of Texas at Austin Austin, Texas, U.S.A.
2The University of Texas at Austin Austin, Texas, U.S.A.; present address: Occidental Petroleum Corporation, Houston, Texas, U.S.A.
3Fugro-Jason Rotterdam, The Netherlands

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

The authors express their deepest appreciation to Repsol-YPF for providing the comprehensive Previous HitdataNext Hit set used to construct the field examples described in this chapter. A note of special gratitude goes to Baker Atlas, Halliburton, and Schlumberger, sponsors of the Center of Excellence in Formation Evaluation at the University of Texas at Austin, for their partial funding of this work. Thanks are extended to Fugro-Jason for a generous donation of its complete line of software to the University of Texas at Austin and used to perform the work described in this chapter. Sagar Ronghe and two anonymous reviewers provided valuable constructive comments that improved the first version of the chapter.

ABSTRACT

Geostatistical Previous HitinversionNext Hit provides a quantitative way to integrate the high vertical resolution of well logs with the dense aerial coverage of poststack three-dimensional Previous HitseismicNext Hit amplitude Previous HitdataNext Hit. A systematic field study is presented in this chapter to understand the relative merits of geostatistical Previous HitinversionNext Hit over standard geostatistical-simulation procedures that do not make explicit use of three-dimensional Previous HitseismicNext Hit amplitude Previous HitdataNext Hit. It is shown that, by making quantitative use of the poststack Previous HitseismicNext Hit amplitude Previous HitdataNext Hit, geostatistical Previous HitinversionNext Hit considerably reduces the space of stochastic realizations that honor both the well-log Previous HitdataNext Hit and the spatial semivariograms. Sensitivity analysis also shows that geostatistical Previous HitinversionNext Hit remains less affected by a perturbation of semivariogram parameters than standard geostatistical simulation. Tests of cross-validation against well-log Previous HitdataNext Hit show that geostatistical Previous HitinversionNext Hit yields additional information over the average trends otherwise obtained with stochastic simulation. In the vicinity of existing wells, geostatistical Previous HitinversionNext Hit can potentially infer vertical variations of resolution similar to that of well logs and, at worst, of vertical resolution equal to that of the Previous HitseismicNext Hit amplitude Previous HitdataNext Hit at locations distant Previous HitfromNext Hit wells. A drawback of geostatistical Previous HitinversionNext Hit is the need to convert well-log Previous HitdataNext Hit Previous HitfromNext Hit depth to Previous HitseismicNext Hit traveltime. In addition, geostatistical Previous HitinversionNext Hit may be rendered computationally prohibitive when Previous HitappliedNext Hit to large Previous HitseismicNext Hit and well-log Previous HitdataNext Hit sets.

Pay-Per-View Purchase Options

The article is available through a document delivery service. Explain these Purchase Options.

Protected Document: $10
Internal PDF Document: $14
Open PDF Document: $24