Discrimination of lithofacies in tight gas reservoir using field-specific rock physics modeling scheme. A case study from a mature field of middle Indus Basin, Pakistan

Durrani, Muhammad Zahid Afzal; Rahman, Syed Atif; Talib, Maryam; Sarosh, Bakhtawer

doi:10.1007/s11600-023-01069-6

Cited by 1 publication

(1 citation statement)

References 45 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Today, AVO analysis and seismic inversion are routinely used to derive seismic features indicative of hydrocarbons, including acoustic impedance (AI), shear impedance (Z S ), elastic impedance (EI), Lamé parameters (LMR), and the V P /V S ratio. These properties help characterize rock matrix, pore fluid, and reflectivities, which can be extracted from seismic traces and combined with observed velocities to compute density [16] . Pre-stack (AVO) inversion employs fluctuations in reflection amplitudes within Common Midpoint Gathers (CMP) to determine elastic properties (V P , V S , ρ) and infer petrophysical properties and fluid/gas saturation [12] .…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Amplitude Variation with Offset (AVO) Inversion for Reservoir Visualization: A Case Study of Taje Field, Niger Delta, Nigeria

Oborie,

Francis,

Eteh

2024

adv. in geol. and geotech. eng. res.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Amplitude Variation with Offset (AVO) inversion analysis was performed on pre-stack seismic data and well information gathered from the shallow offshore area of the Niger Delta. This analysis aimed to improve reservoir visualization and employed the Hampson Russell Geoview, AVO, and STRATA software tools. The seismic data were provided in Seg-Y format, covering an in-line range from 4503 to 5569, an x line range from 1434 to 2026, and an angle of incidence range of 0 to 45°. The study centered on the Taje well_026. Within the subsurface, the authors identified five distinct reservoirs, labeled A to E, located at various depths ranging from 3057.50 to 3115.00 m, 3115.00 to 3157.50 m, 3157.50 to 3190.00 m, 3190.00 to 3200.00 m, and 3200.00 to 3239.00 m, respectively. These reservoirs exhibited different fluid compositions. Reservoir A, primarily composed of sandstone, contained brine, whereas Reservoirs B and D, dominated by shale, contained gas. On the other hand, Reservoirs C and E, both comprised of sandstone, held oil. Reservoir C is distinguished by its clean sandstone unit. The inversion results revealed that both Reservoirs C and E consisted of low impedance sand layers surrounded by higher impedance shale layers. The gas migrated from the reservoir and was trapped within the shale units due to deformation of the lithological units, likely induced by stress accumulation. This migration process was facilitated by the shale’s inability to undergo smearing, possibly as a result of faulting mechanisms.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%