Colorado School of Mines

Fundamentals in Well Log Interpretation

GPGN-532-A

Final project based on the paper:

Dynamic Reservoir Characterization

of a C02 Huff'n'Puff.

Central Vacuum Unit, Lea County, New Mexico

(Davis T.L., Benso n R.D., Roche S.L. and Scuta M.S.; 1997 , Expanded
Abstracts, SPE Inter nat io nal Meeting)

Efrai n Mendez
Golden, ca.
December 3, 1998
 EXECUTIVE SUMMARV
Oyoamic Rcservoir Characlerizalioo can be notably enhanced by the use of 40, 3C
scismolo gy. Afier a feasibility analysis, this technology can be applied to monitor fluid
front movements during field production and lO determine the variability, with ~ime,
in rock/fluid properties of the reservoir. rhe improved reservoir characterization will
increase the hydrocarbon recovery, reduc ing operaling costS with a resulting better
reservoir management. The end resull is ncreased reserves produced al a lower COSI.

OBJECfIVE OF THI S T ECH NICAL REI)ORT

/ ro describe the methodology known as 40, 3C seismology, ils basic principies,
applications and economic j ustificalion 10 be applied in reservoir characlerization

CO NTENTS

40, 3C Seismology. What does it mean?

11. Physical principies and imp1ementation

III. Application
IV. Economic j ustification
V. Conclusions and Recommendations

40, 3C SEISMOLOGV. WHAT DOES IT MEAN?

/11 is well known that Ihreedimensional (30) seismology has been {he most impacting
~ e..+ technology over Exploration and Production industry during last years. Today, 3D
ttd;
Sr
seismic shows high costlbenetit ratios by reducing the dry-hole ris k as well as by
1 me improving the fie ld development and production strategies. Conventional 3D seismic

,. ~
4 =::11:0~:c:~~~o::~:m:dso:;~~i;h:p;:::hre::i:::~U1P~:ai::n~~:r~:: :1:::
framework and some stratigraphic features ofthe reservoirs. Nowadays, new altcmalives
lA r~ - in the knowledge of reservoir rack and fluid properties come out by the combined use of
tn>f/... - three component (3C) seismic data, tha! is, by using compressional and shear waves,
acquired during 3D, 3C seismic surveys.

Oynamic: Reservoir Charoc:te";zGtioo

Efro jn Mendu
bec: 3. 1998
 Recently, the time as "the fourth dimension", has been added to this technology oblaining
whal we know as "40 (time lapse), 3C seismology". This powerfullool consists in the
repeated acquisition of 30, 3C seismic surveys. over producing fields, with the pUrpse
of monitoring fluid movemcnts and changes in reservoir properties by comparing Ihe
~ seismic response from each other survey.
Ahhough this is nOI yet a matute technology, Ihe increascd hydrocarbon recovery and
reduction in operating costs are doing Iha140, 3C seismology hegins to be recognized as
an integral part of dynamic reservoir characterizalion. As Rbonda Duey (1998) said,
"Someday 4D seismic lechnology may be used as routinely as 3D seismic is toclay".

11. BA81C PRJNCIPLES AND IMPL EMENTATION

,... In exploration seismology. two body waves are generated artificial1y propagating through
~ the subsurface with different mode of propagalion related to the nature of rock
defonnation (Figure 1). According to Hook 's Law, eaeh wave stresses the rock inducing
a strain proportional 10 the stress. Ouring thc passage ofthe primary or eompressional (P)
wave, Ihe rock changes volume but nol shape in response to altemaling compressive and
tensional stresses whereas, with the trave1-path of Ihe slower secondary or shear (8)
wave, the rock changes shape but not volume (Danbom, 1986).
The magnitudes ofthe velocides Vp and V.r are influenced by the elastieily oflhe roekA'~ wlw d.
they are travelling. With isotropic media Vp provides a measure of the bulk rock
compressibility, rigidily and dcnsity, whereas Vs is sensitive to rigidity and density. As
wc know, 8 waves can not propagate in a fl uid (rigidity equals to zero). ~ ~ hand,
Ihe ratio Vp/Vs appears strongly correlated with the reservoir produclion charaeteristies,
showing a strong dependence on porosily and playing an important role in seismic
interpretadon nol only as lithology identifier but also for anisotropic inlensity estimation.
Al] rock systerns are anisotropie lO sorne degree. rneaning thal one o'" more physical
properties ehange as they are mcasured in differenl directions. The effect of ani~ropy on
P wave trave1tirnes is usually small, however S waves exhibit splitting (biref~nce) ,

thut is, depcndenec of velocity on the dircclion of polarization. In a fractured medium, the
incident S wavc splits into two components, a fasl 81 and a slow S2 (Figu re 2). Thc

[)ynamie Reservoir Ch(U"'(lcteri:zation

efral"MemH:Z
t>ec 3, 1998
 degree of splitting gives a rough measure oflhe fracture intensity (Figure 3), whereas the
polarization of the [aster SI wave is generally parallel to the str ike of the fractures.
Fractures are probably he mosl importan! anisolropic property in fluid flow because they
cause/ several rock properties, such as penneability, 10 have difIerenl values parallelto
the fracture planes Ihan Ihey do perpendicular t~~~e~./U
This clcar dependence 00 fluids and fracturing ~~icomponcnt seismology valuablc
for the reservoir engineer (Figures 3 10 5). Now, by cxtending Ihis knowledge, he
differences between successivc seismic surveys will indicatc changes in producing
rescrvoirs, such as fluid movemi~t.J~d the change of reservoir properties., mainly
pcnneability, with tlIt. time. Davis 1ft (1997), refers "The penneability of a fonnation, or
the corme<:tivity ofthe pore space, will be the target in 40, 3C seismology".
A question arises. Could we be confident and optimistic about the success of a 40, 3C
project? Before making decisions we need to establish a feasibility study where several
aspects must be considered. Firstly, available infonnation is analyzed to detennine
expected changes in reservoir conditions and properties during productionlinjection
phases. Afier that, seismic resolution and seismic response changes related 10 the
reservoir changes necd to be estimated and compared to the known seismic noise leve] in
the area. Peeters __ (1998), refers: "Time lapse seismic is often more complicated than
single surveys due to the effect of temperatu re, pressure and compaction, which come on
top of saturation and fluid fill effects", As a result of this fcasibility analysis,
reconunendations and a cosUbenefit analysis for acquisition, processing and analysis
techniques must be done considering how often data collection should be repeated. A
pilot field study in a smaller area can be proposed to reduce the involved risk.

111. APPLIC ATlON

#1'>. The Reservoir Characterization Project (RCP) of Colorado School of Mines, is an
industry sponsored consortium whose mission is to develop and apply 3D and 40, 3C
seismology and associated technologies to improve reservoir perfonnance and
hydrocarbon recovery while reducing environmental impacl. The phase VI of this project
corresponds to the repeated acquisition of a 3D, 3C seismic survey during a CO2 injection

Oynomlc Reser-tOir Charocterization

EfroinMendu
Oec 3, 1998
program in Vacuum field , New Mexico (Figure 6). The main objective is to demonstrate
the capability of repeated (time-Iapse) 3D, 3C seismology to detect and monitor changcs
in rock/fluid properties assoeiated with the CO2 injection, soak, and wilhdrawal ("puff"
or produclion phase) processes.
Vacuum Field is located on a !arge E-NE anticJina! Slructure. The San Andres and
Grayburg fonnalions eorrespond 10 the rim of a broad carbonate shelf province to the
north and northwesl, and the rim of a deeper intraeralonic basin, on Ihe southeast and
easl. San Andres carbonates at depths from 4200ft to 4800ft are Ihe main produclion
zones. The producing interva! shows average porosity of 11.6% and average penneability
of22.3md, wilh an initial reservoir pressure of 1628 psia at 4500ft. Reservoir pressure Is
maintained aboye Ihe bubble point pressure (764 psia) by waterflooding. The production
data suggest an effective penneabilily pathway extending northwesl from CVU-97 where
the reservo!r tends 10 higher produclions than in the soulheasl portion of he mapped area.
In Ihis sense Ihcre is a SW to NE trend thal separales a higher production rone in the NW
portion from a !ower perfonnance in the SE portion.
The C(h "huff-n-pufl" occurred in well CVV-97. A base 3D, 3C SUlvey (Oclober 28 10
Novembcr 13, 1995) was shot prior 10 injection, which occurred from November 13 10
Oecember 8. The "soak" period extended from Deccmber 8 to December 28, afier which
Ihe wetl was relumed lo produclion. A second 3D, 3C survey was acquired from
December 21 10 Oecember 28 during the "soak" periodo
Ouring the injection process and "soak" periad the reservoir pore pressure and fluid are
altered. lllercfore, severa! dynamic changes 10 the reservoir propenies between the base
and repeated surveys are expected. Examples of P and S migraled seclions before and
after the injection program revel seismic differences in the signal (Figure 7). Time-Iapse
interpretation consisted in manipulating these differences to reveal characteristics of the
dynamic response of the bulk rock/fluid properties lo the changing reservoir conditions
The P and S waves show a CO 2 bank fonned to the south of injection well. In this sense,
a P wave amplitude anomaly (Figure 8) and a shear wave anisotropy anomaly (Figure 9)
coincide with the COl bank. The polarization angle of SI also confinns the regional
maximum horizontal stress direction. The velocity anisotropy anomaly can be explained

Dyl'lOmic: Il:I:.serYOir CMr<1(:tui:z:D.tiQfl

Efrain Mendu
Dec:3.1998
 by variations in pore pressure which could affee! the percentage of open fractures
affecting the degree of shear wave splitting. Also changes in fluid viscosity may affect
the wettability ofthe rock frame and rigidity of this type of media.
Pore pressure changes and variations in fluid properties have produced a multicomponent
40 signature detectable using the seismic data. Tt can be considered a significant advance
in geophysical applications toward reservoir monitoring.

IV. ECONOMIC JUSTIFI CATION

After he feasibility analysis has dictated a "good candidate reservoir for 40, 3C
seismology", the economic justification can be supported considering that the data
obtained may be used to enhance hydrocarbon reeovery, revitalize old fields, reduce
operation wsts, prolong well life andlor change production slrategies. Even more, new
well localions can be pro)Xlsed by identifying bypassed accumulations in the interwell
regions where only seismic data can provide infonnation.
Ideal1y enhanced acquisilion repeatability should consider the sume acquisition method
for each survey and accurate source and receiver positioning (perhaps even using a
pennanent receiver installation). These aspccts should also tend lo deerease the eosts for
each new repeated survey. The end result is inereased reserves produced at a lower cost ,

V. CONCLUSIONS ANO RECOMMENOATlONS

40, 3C seismology can help to make better decisions and simulate scenarios to
optimize production, improve oil rewvery and reduce costs. Better reservoir
management can be achieved by upd ating and improving the static and dynamic
reservoir model periodically.
Project success in a 40, 3C seismology campaign requires tha! a change in
petrophysica[!fluid propenies will change the seismic response of the reservoir. A
feasibility analysis will hclp lo make decisions about the implementation of this
,. teehnique under particular cond itions.
Oynamic Reservoir Characterization is a multidisciplinary teehnology that needs not
onJy the se ismic interpretation but also the integrated analysis ofborehole and
production data, reservoir simulation and modeling.
Dynornic Rescrvoir Chorocterizotion
Efrain Mendez
Dcc 3. 1998
 REFERENCES

l. Arestad J.F., Davis T.L. and Benson R.O.; 1996, "Utilizing 3-D, 3-C Seisrnology for
RescIVoir Property Characterizalion al Joffre Field, Alberta, Canada". Applications of 3-D
Seisrnic Data to Exploralion and Production. Edited by Weirner P. and Davis T.L. AAPG
Studies in Geology, No. 42-5EG Geophysical Developrnents Scries, No. 5, p. l 7 l -178

2. Danborn S.H. and Dornenico S.N .; 1986, "Shear Wave Exploraton". Geophysical
Developrnenl Scrics, V.l, Sodety of Exploration Geophysicists.

3 Davis T.L., Denson R. D., Roche S.L., and Scuta M.S.; 1997, "Dynamic ReseIVoir
Characterizalon of a COl Huff' n' Puff, Central Vacuurn Unit, Lea County, New M exico~ .
Expandcd Abstracts, 1997 Annual Technical Conference and Exhibition, Sociely of
PetroleumEngineers, lnc.

4. Duey R., 1997; "4D Seismic on Cuning Edge of ReseIVoir Monitoring Technology". Hart's
Show Special Edition, AAPG Annual Convcntion

5. Ehrorn D., Shcriff R. E. , 1992; " Anisotropy and ReseIVoir Development". Reservoir
Geophysics, Invesligations in Gcophysics No. 7. 50ciety ofExploralion Geophysicists

6. King G.; 1996, "4-D seisrnic improves reseIVoir rnanagement decisions. Parts I and 2",
World Oil, MaTCh and April1996

7. Hardage B.A.; 1996, "Combining P-Wave and S-Wave Seismic Dala to lmprove Prospect
Evalualion". Report oflnvesligations No. 237, Bureau ofEconornic Gcology, The University
ofTexas atAustin

8. Lurnley D.E., Behrens R.A. and Wang l .; 1997, "Assessing Ihe technical risk of a 4-D
seismic project". The Leading Edge, 16, p.1287- 1291

9. Mueller M.C.; 1992, "Using shear waves to predict laleral variability in vertical fracture
intensily". The Leading Edge, II,p.29-35

\O. Nestvold E.O.; 1996, "The impact of 3-D Se ismic Data on Exploration, Field Development,
and Production". Applicatio ns of 3-D Seismic Data 10 Exploration and Production. Edited by
Weimer P. and Davis T .L. AAPG Studies in Geology, No. 42-5EG Gcophysical

...... Developments Series, No. 5,p.I -7

11 . Peeters M.; 1998, " From Pictures 10 Properties". Paper presente<! on the inauguration of the

... Baker Hughes Distinguished Chair of Petrophysics & Borehole Geophysics". Colorado

,....
SchoolofMines

12. Wang Z .; 1997, " Feasibility oftirne-Iapse scisrnic reseIVoir monitoring: The physical basis".
The LeadingEdge, 16,p. 1327-1 329

13. _~. 1997, 1998, "Reservoir Characterization Project, Phases VI and VII". Final
Reports. Colorado School ofMines

[)yno.lTlie Ru~t'V(Iir Charaetari:ZOotion

Efrain Me nde.:z

[)ae 3,1 998

 ----, :- - - - :

C I
I
L _ J
I
I
P-WAVE

,iL
o _____
I

,1
.J

Compreulon Teosion
S-WAVE

o
~------:

, ,
= __J
Clockwl,.

Fig. 1. Distortion of an elementary cube of a medium caused by passage of

a P wave (above) and an S wave (below). (Danbom, 1987)

Fig. 2. Principies of S wave splitting in a fractured rack medium. The

incident S wave spl its into two components, the fast SI polarized in the
direction of the max imum horizontal stress (a- ma,)' whereas S2 is polarized
in the direction of minimum horizontal stress (cr min)' (Hardage, 1996)
Fig. 3. Spatia lly coincidem P and S wave seismic sequences. Note that even
mough each sequence spans three identical black peaks on me right si de of
each image, the internal architecture of the S wave sequence allows providing
more infonnation about reservoir flow paths and compartmem boundaries.
(Hardage, 1996)

4.7
4.8
4.'
5 .0
51
5.2
5.3
5.4

4.7
4.8
4.'
5 .0
5. 1
5.2
5.3
5.4

Fig. 4. S) and 8 2 images across [he Austin Chalk. The 8 2 reflection is delayed
by about 50msec rclative lo S. reflection. Note the prominent amplitude
anomaly towards the middle. This represents a highly fractured zone 250m
wide. This efTect appears with consistent ampl itude on me S .. whereas on the
S2 section, the Austin Chalk shows laterally variant amplitudes (Mueller, 1992)
Fig. 5. Velocity ratio map VpfVs (computed from the SI and P datasets)
for Nisku carbonate reservoir interval, Joffre Field, Albena, Canada. Core
porosity contours overlap VpfVs. Blue and magenta colors show higher
VpfVs zones which strongly agree with the hi ghesl porosity values.
(Areslad, 1996)
Fig. 6. Location map of Vacuum Field. Lea County, New Mexico.
(Colorado School ofMines, 1998)
 , ., 'H~f11!'11 1 1 '- ""~3' !It:'. - ="~-' ~~' ~ =:~ r;'-~ :-~! .A ~::_.

- ~
II - _.._ ..~:' ... :i;.;.;. ,-ir
'<.~"""" ~ ~

,1 . " .,. . '.

,~~~f;Hf~~I~r~: ~\:
" ;, ~'4 ~
n, ' :-r"~" 1 1)' : _ ..... I ~t
'!!" ~ ; 1 111 1
! t""-, '''., II'I::;~ 1 ~_."

~
~.,

~ "~~

li r,]
......-.."-- -
,.___
-
"L.
J: 'I~IV''''''':;;;;J.

I
,!,:t
_ _
~'.: -
""-r
- : ..c. ..
..
(a) (e)

_n J..... -:::: .... ~,.., i r::.::-"~::'::'"",,:~ :: Fig. 7. lnline 69 (migrated sections). (a) P
wave from the initial and repeat surveys

f;~Ei~,J~+t:"~'~-.

(0.1 0 10 1. 65s); (b) SI wave (polarization:

118) and S2 wavc (polarization: 28) from
the initial survey (0.5 to 3.25s); (e) SI wa ve
(polarization : 118) and S2 wave
(polarization: 28) from the rcpeal survey
-
- 'O-
:..... _
- _~ _
(0.5 to 3.25s). (Davis, 1997)

(b)
Fig. 8. P wave amptude difference anomaes at the reservoir zone (percent difference of the RMS
amplitude) computed by subtracting the repeat survey values from the initial survey values .
(Colorado School of Mines, 1997)