DHI / AVO Analysis Best Practices:

A Worldwide Analysis
Kurt W. Rudolph
Exploration Company
Houston, Texas, U.S.A.
(c) 2001 The American Association of Petroleum
Geologists and Kurt W. Rudolph
No slides, figures, text or other matter contained
herein may be reproduced without the written
permission of both the American Association of
Petroleum Geologists and Kurt W. Rudolph .
INTRODUCTION
DHI TECHNOLOGY PROVIDES CLEAR TECHNICAL AND COMMERCIAL
BENEFITS, AS EVIDENCED BY A HIGHER SUCCESS RATE (+20%) IN DHI
PLAYS
DHI TECHNOLOGY IS AN INCREASINGLY IMPORTANT ELEMENT OF
PETROLEUM GEOSCIENCE ANALYSIS, IN PART DUE TO:
+ IMPROVEMENTS IN TECHNOLOGY, ESPECIALLY SEISMIC DATA QUALITY
+ EXPLORATION PORTFOLIO WEIGHTED TOWARDS DHI PLAYS (TERTIARY
OFFSHORE)
A BEST PRACTICES APPROACH TO DHI ANALYSIS HAS BEEN DEVELOPED
TO ENSURE OPTIMAL APPLICATION OF THIS CRITICAL TECHNOLOGY:
+ GUIDELINES FOR DHI ANALYSIS
+ SPECIFICATIONS OF OPTIMAL PROCESSING STREAM
+ DHI RISKING SYSTEM
WILDCAT SUCCESS RATE
APPLICATION OF DHI TECHNOLOGY vs.
GEOLOGIC and ECONOMIC SUCCESS
DHI TECHNOLOGY
APPLICABLE
DHI TECHNOLOGY
NOT APPLICABLE
GEOL.
SUCCESS
ECON.
S
U
C
C
E
S
S

R
A
T
E
N=95
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
OUTLINE OF PRESENTATION
DESCRIPTION OF WORLDWIDE HISTORICAL RESULTS OVER LAST FOUR
YEARS STATISTICAL AUDIT OF PREDICTIONS USING BEST
PRACTICES
LEARNINGS FROM KEY DHI TECHNOLOGY APPLICATIONS EXAMPLES
OF IMPROVED TECHNOLOGIES AND IDENTIFIED PITFALLS IN:
SEISMIC PROCESSING
AVO ANALYSIS
GAS vs. OIL PREDICTION
EMERGING TECHNOLOGIES
CONCLUSIONS WHAT HAVE WE LEARNED, WHERE WE ARE GOING
DHI RATING AND RISKING PROCEDURE
DHI QUALITY FACTORS HOW GOOD DOES ANOMALY LOOK BASED HOW GOOD DOES ANOMALY LOOK BASED
ON ALL RELEVANT CHARACTERISTICS? ON ALL RELEVANT CHARACTERISTICS?
DHI CONFIDENCE FACTORS HOW CONFIDENT AM I OF THE DATA HOW CONFIDENT AM I OF THE DATA
SUPPORTING THE ANOMALY? SUPPORTING THE ANOMALY?
THESE FACTORS COMBINED INTO A RISK MATRIX TO ESTIMATE THE
CHANCE OF VALIDITY WHAT IS THE PROBABILITY THAT THE WHAT IS THE PROBABILITY THAT THE
ANOMALY IS A VALID HYDROCARBON EFFECT? ANOMALY IS A VALID HYDROCARBON EFFECT?
RISK MATRIX CALIBRATED BASED ON HISTORICAL STATISTICS
WHAT ARE THE RESULTS OF SIMILAR ANOMALIES THAT HAVE BEEN WHAT ARE THE RESULTS OF SIMILAR ANOMALIES THAT HAVE BEEN
DRILLED IN THE AREA? DRILLED IN THE AREA?
DHI RATING AND RISKING PROCEDURE
DHI Quality
Amplitude Strength
AVO
Anomaly Terminations
Lateral Contrast
Fluid Contact Reflection
Conformance
DHI Confidence
Well Calibration
Physical Properties
Impedance Signature
Seismic Data Quality
Seismic Data Quantity
Success Rate Calibration
Historical Statistics
Basin-Keyed
DHI
Chance of
Validity
Matrix
Quality
C
o
n
f
i
d
e
n
c
e
Estimated
DHI Chance
of Validity
Results, Learnings
PREDICTED vs. ACTUAL DHI TECHNICAL SUCCESS
WELL RESULTS HAVE BEEN USED TO AUDIT THE DHI CHANCE OF
VALIDITY
STRONG CORRELATION BETWEEN TECHNICAL SUCCESS AND HIGH
PREDRILL CHANCE OF VALIDITY
SOME UNDER-PREDICTION OF SUCCESS FOR BEST ANOMALIES
E.G. ALL (24 OF 24) OF 75 E.G. ALL (24 OF 24) OF 75- -100% CHANCE OF VALIDITY ANOMALIES 100% CHANCE OF VALIDITY ANOMALIES
WERE TECHNICAL SUCCESSES WERE TECHNICAL SUCCESSES
UNDERPREDICTION INFLUENCED BY HIGH TECHNICAL SUCCESS
RATE IN WEST AFRICA HAS BEEN ADDRESSED BY ADJUSTING HAS BEEN ADDRESSED BY ADJUSTING
RISK MATRIX FOR THIS AREA RISK MATRIX FOR THIS AREA
(CHANCE OF VALIDITY)
PREDICTED vs ACTUAL DHI TECHNICAL SUCCESS
SORTED BY RISK TIERS
0
20
40
60
80
100
0-25% 25-50% 50-75% 75-100%
CHANCE OF VALIDITY
S
U
C
C
E
S
S

R
A
T
E

(
%
)
MEAN PREDICTED
CHANCE OF
VALIDITY
MEAN POST-
DRILL SUCCESS
Under
Prediction
Over
Prediction
N=97
DRILLED ANOMALY RESULTS
SORTED BY RISK TIERS
0
20
40
60
80
100
0-25% 25-50% 50-75% 75-100%
CHANCE OF VALIDITY (COV)
%
SHALE/SILT
WET
LOW GAS SAT.
OIL
GAS & OIL
GAS
Valid
Anomalies
False
Anomalies
P
r
e
d
i
c
t
e
d

S
u
c
c
e
s
s

R
a
t
e
N=97
DHI QUALITY FACTORS
ALL INDIVIDUAL QUALITY FACTORS DISPLAY A SMALL POSITIVE
CORRELATION WITH SUCCESS
HIGHER SCORE FOR VALID ANOMALIES HIGHER SCORE FOR VALID ANOMALIES
NO SINGLE CHARACTERISTIC OR TECHNOLOGY IS A PANACEA - ALL
ARE IMPORTANT FOR OPTIMAL PREDICTIVE CAPABILITIES
EXAMPLE FLUID CONTACT REFLECTIONS EXAMPLE FLUID CONTACT REFLECTIONS
DHI QUALITY FACTORS
VALID vs. FALSE ANOMALIES
0.0
1.0
2.0
3.0
4.0
A
m
p
.

S
t
r
e
n
g
t
h
A
V
O
T
e
r
m
i
n
a
t
i
o
n
s
L
a
t
e
r
a
l

C
o
n
t
r
a
s
t
F
i
t

t
o

S
t
r
u
c
t
.
F
l
u
i
d

C
o
n
t
a
c
t
FACTOR
A
V
E
.

S
C
O
R
E
VALID
ANOMALIES
FALSE
ANOMALIES
FLAT SPOTS vs. SUCCESS
HIGH DHI
QUALITY (>=3)
MED-LOW DHI
QUALITY (<3)
POOR/NO FLAT SPOT
GOOD FLAT SPOT
0
20
40
60
80
100
SUCCESS RATE
(%)
AVO vs. SUCCESS
HIGH DHI
QUALITY (>=3)
MED-LOW DHI
QUALITY (<3)
NEGATIVE OR FLAT AVO
POSITIVE AVO
0
20
40
60
80
100
SUCCESS
RATE (%)
SEISMIC DATA QUALITY OVERVIEW
SEISMIC DATA QUALITY IS ABSOLUTELY CRITICAL TO DHI ANALYSIS:
+ INTEGRITY OF AMPLITUDE AND PHASE ON FULL AND PARTIAL
STACKED SECTIONS
+ INTEGRITY OF IMAGE GATHERS (AMPLITUDE, PHASE,
POSITIONING)
+ WELL TIE VALIDATION
POOR SEISMIC DATA QUALITY MOST IMPORTANT CAUSE OF FALSE
ANOMALIES
AVO ANALYSIS OVERVIEW
INTEGRITY OF SEISMIC DATA CRITICAL AMPLITUDE/PHASE,
SEISMIC VELOCITIES, POSITIONING, MULTIPLES, ACQUISITION, ETC.
VALIDATED POSITIVE AVO IS NOT ALWAYS ASSOCIATED WITH
HYDROCARBONS OTHER DHI CHARACTERISTICS REMAIN
CRITICAL; CAREFUL SELECTION OF MUTE PATTERN ALSO
IMPORTANT
3D AVO IS AN INDISPENSABLE TOOL FOR FLUID AND STRATIGRAPHIC
INTERPRETATION INCLUDING ANOMALY RECONNAISSANCE,
SUBTLE CLASS 2 ANOMALIES, HIGH RESOLUTION STRATIGRAPHIC
INTERPRETATION
AVO DISPLAYS (ENVELOPE, FLUID FACTOR, ETC.) CAN BE
MISLEADING WHEN USED ALONE AUDIT WITH GATHERS AND
ANGLE STACKS NECESSARY
GAS vs. OIL PREDICTION OVERVIEW
GENERALLY INCREASED OCCURRENCE OF GAS WITH HIGHER
CHANCE OF DHI VALIDITY CONSISTENT WITH EXPECTATION THAT
GAS DHIs, ON AVERAGE, ARE MORE OBVIOUS
ON AN INDIVIDUAL ANOMALY BASIS, SEISMIC PREDICTION OF OIL vs.
GAS REMAINS A DIFFICULT ISSUE
HOWEVER, WHEN BOTH PHASES ARE PRESENT IN A SINGLE
RESERVOIR, BETTER OPPORTUNITY FOR PREDRILL PREDICTION
EMERGING TOOLS OVERVIEW
MORE WIDESPREAD APPLICATION OF PRESTACK ATTRIBUTES FOR
FLUID AND RESERVOIR PREDICTION VERY SENSITIVE TO DATA
QUALITY
NEW VISUALIZATION TOOLS FOR SEMI-AUTOMATED RECOGNITION
AND MAPPING OF ANOMALIES SCREENING TOOLS AT PRESENT,
NOT A TOTAL REPLACEMENT FOR CONVENTIONAL ANALYSIS
3D ELASTIC INVERSION BECOMING MORE WIDELY USED MORE
DIRECT TIE OF SEISMIC TO GEOLOGIC MODELS
CONCLUSIONS
SEISMIC DATA QUALITY IS PARAMOUNT:
+ AMPLITUDE/PHASE PRESERVATION OF BOTH STACKED AND GATHER
DATA
+ INTEGRITY OF PRESTACK DATA FOR AVO ANALYSIS (EG POSITIONING,
MULTIPLES, RESIDUAL MOVEOUT, MUTE)
3D AVO IS A VERY USEFUL TOOL FOR RECOGNITION OF SUBTLE (CLASS 2)
ANOMALIES
NON-UNIQUENESS OF SEISMIC RESPONSE (PHYSICAL PROPERTIES,
INTERFERENCE) MAKES PREDRILL DISTINCTION OF OIL vs. GAS DIFFICULT
NO SINGLE TOOL IS A UNIVERSAL REMEDY - BEST RESULTS OBTAINED BY
HONORING THE FUNDAMENTALS, INTEGRATING ALL ASPECTS, AND
CONTINUOUS LEARNING.
KEYS TO SUCCESSFUL DHI ANALYSIS
CURRENT & FUTURE TRENDS FOR DHI ANALYSIS
IMPROVED DHI/AVO PROCESSING
+ MORE WIDESPREAD AND IMPROVED APPLICATION OF PRESTACK
MIGRATION, NONHYPERBOLIC MOVEOUT ANALYSIS, Q-
COMPENSATION, ETC.
+ WILL FACILITATE IDENTIFICATION OF SUBTLE AVO ANOMALIES AND
ALLOW USE OF LONGER OFFSETS
FURTHER APPLICATION AND DEVELOPMENT OF PRE-STACK ATTRIBUTES,
INCLUDING ADVANCED USE OF MULTIPLE CUBES
+ QUANTITATIVE AVO
+ USE OF VISUALIZATION TECHNOLOGY FOR N-DIMENSIONAL ANALYSIS
INCREASING DHI/AVO APPLICATIONS IN EXPLOITATION
+ IMPROVED QUANTITATIVE RESERVOIR PREDICTIONS
+ 4D/TIME-LAPSE APPLICATIONS