4D Seismic Warping in Two Steps for Overburden and Reservoir - Example of a Compacting Carbonate Field

Fiore, J.; Hubans, C.; Brechet, E.

doi:10.3997/2214-4609.20140763

Cited by 6 publications

(5 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Thus, this experiment enables monitoring in situ aseismic behavior of faults developed in shales. Moreover, seismic velocities are sensitive to aseismic deformation, as observed during slow slip events [Rivet et al, 2011[Rivet et al, , 2014 and reservoir monitoring [Calò et al, 2011;Fiore et al, 2014;Hillers et al, 2015]. Fluid pressure, flow rate, deformation, and seismic data were continuously recorded from several 20 m long boreholes drilled from the tunnel toward the fault zone.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Changes in seismic velocity around active faults associated with seismic slip [e.g., Brenguier et al, 2008;Niu et al, 2008;Stehly et al, 2015] can provide valuable information about the fault behavior. Moreover, seismic velocities are sensitive to aseismic deformation, as observed during slow slip events [Rivet et al, 2011[Rivet et al, , 2014 and reservoir monitoring [Calò et al, 2011;Fiore et al, 2014;Hillers et al, 2015]. As seismic waves are sensitive to changes in the poroelastic properties of the rock, they also allow monitoring processes like pore-pressure changes, water table variations, and stress state changes using ambient noise monitoring [Sens-Schoenfelder and Wegler, 2006;Meier et al, 2010;Hillers et al, 2014;Rivet et al, 2015] or 4-D P waves tomography [Calò et al, 2011].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Seismic velocity changes associated with aseismic deformations of a fault stimulated by fluid injection

Rivet

Barros

Guglielmi

et al. 2016

Geophysical Research Letters

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Fluid pressure plays an important role in the stability of tectonic faults. However, the in situ mechanical response of faults to fluid pressure variations is still poorly known. To address this question, we performed a fluid injection experiment in a fault zone in shales while monitoring fault movements at the injection source and seismic velocity variations from a near‐distance (<10 m) monitoring network. We measured and located the P and S wave velocity perturbations in and around the fault using repetitive active sources. We observed that seismic velocity perturbations dramatically increase above 1.5 MPa of injection pressure. This is consistent with an increase of fluid flow associated with an aseismic dilatant shearing of the fault as shown by numerical modeling. We find that seismic velocity changes are sensitive to both fault opening by fluid invasion and effective stress variations and can be an efficient measurement for monitoring fluid‐driven aseismic deformations of faults.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Seismic velocity changes associated with aseismic deformations of a fault stimulated by fluid injection

Rivet

Barros

Guglielmi

et al. 2016

Geophysical Research Letters

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…As a refinement, both Fiore et al . (2014) and Griffiths et al . (2015) included a density term, on the understanding that density fluctuations are correlated to velocity fluctuations such that

\frac{Δ I}{I} \approx \frac{Δ ρ}{ρ} + \frac{Δ v}{v} \approx α \frac{Δ v}{v}

.…”

Section: Time‐shift Measurement and Methodsmentioning

confidence: 95%

“…Fiore et al . (2014) define a two‐step procedure that firstly warps the overburden data without considering the amplitude term. The resultant low‐frequency time shifts are then applied to the monitor data prior to the seismic at the reservoir interval being warped by WFI but this time with the amplitude effect included.…”

Section: Time‐shift Measurement and Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Review Paper: Methods of measurement for 4D seismic post‐stack time shifts

MacBeth

Amini

Izadian

2020

Geophysical Prospecting

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The estimation of time-lapse time shifts between two, or several, repeated seismic surveys has become increasingly popular over the past eighteen years. These time shifts are a reliable and informative seismic attribute that can relate to reservoir production. Correction for these time shifts or the underlying velocity perturbations and/or subsurface displacement in an imaging sense also permits accurate evaluation of time-lapse amplitudes by attempting to decouple the kinematic component. To date, there are approximately thirty methods for time-shift estimation described in the literature. We can group these methods into three main families of mathematical development, together with several miscellaneous techniques. Here we detail the underlying bases for these methods, and the acknowledged benefits and weaknesses of each class of method highlighted. We illustrate this review with a number of time-lapse seismic examples from producing fields. No method is necessarily superior to the others, as its selection depends on ease of implementation, noise characteristics of the field data, and whether the inherent assumptions suit the case in question. However, cross-correlation stands out as the algorithm of choice based on the Pareto principle and waveform inversion the algorithm delivering best resolution. This is a companion study to the previous review of time-shift magnitudes and a discussion of their rock physics basis.

show abstract

“…Geomechanical simulations may explain changes in seismic wave transit time in 4D seismic data due to the effects of reservoir production (Stammeijer, 2004, Herwanger, 2013. Other effects that may be related to 4D timeshift, such as subsidence (Fiore et al, 2014) and variation in pore pressure in layers above the reservoir (Garcia and Macbeth, 2013), are related to geomechanical effects. In addition, these effects may show some significant complexities depending on the geometry (Dussault et al, 2007) or overburden lithology (Wong and Macbeth, 2016).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Analysis of 4D seismic timeshifts overburden and its relationship with the geomechanical model of reservoirs in a Campos Basin field

Cardoso¹,

Moraes²,

Lima³

2019

Proceedings of the 16th International Congress of the Brazilian Geophysical Society&Expogef

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

4D Seismic Warping in Two Steps for Overburden and Reservoir - Example of a Compacting Carbonate Field

Cited by 6 publications

References 0 publications

Seismic velocity changes associated with aseismic deformations of a fault stimulated by fluid injection

Seismic velocity changes associated with aseismic deformations of a fault stimulated by fluid injection

Review Paper: Methods of measurement for 4D seismic post‐stack time shifts

Analysis of 4D seismic timeshifts overburden and its relationship with the geomechanical model of reservoirs in a Campos Basin field

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About