Origin and nature of crystal reflections: Results from integrated seismic measurements at the KTB superdeep drilling site

Abstract

Abstract. For almost 10 years the KTB superdeep drilling project has offered an excellent field laboratory for adapting seismic techniques to crystalline environments and for testing new ideas for interpreting seismic reflections in terms of lithological or textural properties of metamorphic rock units. The seismic investigations culminated in a threedimensional (3-D) reflection survey on a 19 x 19 km area with the drill site at its center. Interpretation of these data resulted in a detailed, structural model of the German Continental Deep Drilling Program (KTB) location with dominant, steep faults in the upper crust. The 3-D reflection survey was part of a suite of seismic experiments, ranging from wide-angle reflection and refraction profiles to standard vertical seismic profiles (VSP) and more sophisticated surface-to-borehole observations. It was predicted that the drill bit would meet the most prominent, steeply dipping, crustal reflector at a depth of about 6500-7000 m, and indeed, the borehole penetrated a major fault zone in the depth interval between 6850 and 7300 m. This reflector offered the rare opportunity to relate logging results, reflective properties, and geology to observed and modeled data. PostVariscan thrusting caused cataclastic deformation, with partial, strong alterations within a steeply dipping reverse fault zone. This process generated impedance contrasts within the fault zone on a lateral scale large enough to cause seismic reflections. This was confirmed by borehole measurements along the whole 9.1 km deep KTB profile. The strongest, reflected signals originated from fluid-filled fractures and cataclastic fracture zones rather than from lithological boundaries (i.e., first-order discontinuities between different rock types) or from texture-and/or foliation-induced anisotropy. During the interpretation of seismic data at KTB several lessons were learned: Conventional processing of twodimensional (2-D) reflection data from a presite survey showed predominantly subhorizontal layering in the upper crust with reflectivity striking in the Variscan direction. Drilling, however, revealed that all rock units are steeply dipping. This confirms that surface common depth point (CDP) seismics strongly enhances subhorizontal reflectivity and may thus produce a very misleading crustal image. Although this was shown for synthetic examples earlier, the KTB provides the experimental proof of how crucial this insight can be.

Local regularity analysis of strata heterogeneities from sonic logs

“…These values originated from the fluid-filled fractures because the seismic wave velocity behavior with depth indicated the dominating effect of the fluid-filled fractures, cataclastic fracture zones and heterogeneity (Harjes et al, 1997;Pechnig et al, 1997;Baisch and Harjes, 2003;Rabbel et al, 2004). The Hurst values are compared with the porosity values estimated by Pechnig et al (1997) at the pilot and the main boreholes as shown in Figs.…”

Depth-Recursive Tomography Along the Eger Rift Using the S01 Profile Refraction Data: Tested at the KTB Super Drilling Hole, Structural Interpretation Supported by Magnetic, Gravity and Petrophysical Data

“…10), the 10% velocity anomalies can be resolved (within the 6-8 km depth range) if they are wider than *10-12 km, or even only *5-6 km if the 1r resolution corresponding to a lower 68% confidence level is applied. Harjes et al (1997) and Emmermann and Lauterjung (1997) applied the true-amplitude prestack migration to the seismic data on the reflection profile KTB 8502 to obtain an envelope reflectivity section (see the plates 2 or 3, respectively). The profile KTB 8502 is collateral with the S01 refraction profile-see Fig.…”

Geothermal Reservoir Simulation

“…This included large-scale geophysical surveys (Harjes, 1997) indicating the presence of reflectors considered to be pathways for geofluids, geological investigations, particularly, structural and tectonic interpretations (Hirschmann, 1996;, and the interpretation of fluid bearing fracture zones (Lodemann, 1998). Geologically individual fault planes are seldom encountered, and in reality one is dealing with a whole swarm of similarly orientated fractures extending sometimes over considerable distances, within which the movement responsible for the formation of the fractures is accommodated as is flow within the fractures, for example, (Hoehn et al, 1998;Talwani et al, 1999).…”