Click
to view article in PDF format.
GCStratal
Slicing Makes
Seismic
Imaging of Depositional Systems Easier
By
Hongliu Zeng1
Search and Discovery Article #40196 (2006)
Posted June 4, 2006
*Adapted from the Geophysical Corner column, prepared by the author and entitled
“Seismic
Imaging? Try
Stratal Slicing,” in AAPG
Explorer, June, 2006. Editor of Geophysical Corner is Bob A. Hardage. Managing
Editor of AAPG Explorer is Vern Stefanic; Larry Nation is Communications
Director.
1Research scientist, Bureau of Economic Geology, University of Texas, Austin, Texas ([email protected])
Many people today view land surfaces from commercial airplanes or on satellite images and are amazed by the geomorphic forms of river channels, deltas, barrier islands, dune fields, and other features. These views show us modern stratal-time surfaces of exposed landforms.
Three-D seismic
technology has now made it possible
to image similar, but much older, geomorphic features and stratal surfaces
preserved in the rock record. Historically, interpreters have analyzed vertical
sections of 3-D
seismic
volumes line by line and found field-scale (50 meters or
thicker) geologic and depositional features. Sometimes, reservoir-scale
(three-10 meters thick) features can be detected in these vertical sections, but
many of these small-scale targets cannot be resolved and interpreted because of
data
bandwidth limitations.
For example, in the vertical view in Figure 1a the
seismic
facies around the dash line are interpreted to be fluvial deposits,
based on the presence of discontinuous, patchy events and frequent lateral
changes in amplitudes. Wells drilled through the interval support this
interpretation
.
However, correlating individual channel-fill sand bodies and marginal facies
(levee, crevasse splay, etc.) on adjacent vertical views is difficult because
these facies elements are thin (three-10 meters) and the seismic
resolution
barely resolves the tops and bases of the thickest units. In this particular
section view, it is not possible to decide what depositional elements are
represented by the circled features.
uGeneral statementuFigure captionsuSlicesuStratal slicinguAppendix
uGeneral statementuFigure captionsuSlicesuStratal slicinguAppendix
uGeneral statementuFigure captionsuSlicesuStratal slicinguAppendix
|
Time, Horizontal, and Stratal Slices One strategy to
map depositional systems with high resolution is to change the emphasis
of As a demonstration
of this principle, a stratal slice made by the method described in this
article and then passed through the dash line in
Figure 1a shows high-quality images of fluvial channels, crevasse
splays, floodplain, and a mud plug (Figure 1b).
Although most of these depositional elements are less than 10 meters
thick -- and thus below vertical To implement
horizontal-view For either horizontal view to be an accurate representation of a stratal surface, one must assume the formation being sliced is flat-lying when time slicing is used (Figure 2a), or that the formation has a sheet-like geometry (Figure 2b) when horizon slicing is used. Many depositional
sequences, however, are characterized by thickness changes (Figure
2c), which cause horizon-slice and time-slice surfaces to sample
One such method is
“stratal slicing” (Figure 2c), or
proportional slicing, which divides the variable-thickness vertical
interval between two In principle, no major angular unconformities (truncations) or other discordant reflections should occur between the reference events.
Stratal slices
provide a stratigraphic resolution that cannot be achieved using
vertical sections alone. The Four stratal
slices were taken inside a 30-ms (36-m) interval (Figure
3, S1 through S4). In map view, the four stratal slices image four episodes of fluvial deposition (Figure 4, S1 through S4). The fluvial systems on stratal slices S1, S2, and S4 are fully resolved without interference from overlying or underlying units. Stratal slice S3 shows a narrow (35 to 70 meters, or 1 to 2 traces wide), well-developed meandering feature interpreted to be a small coastal plain channel (Figure 4, arrows). Wireline logs indicate this channel-fill sandstone is about four meters thick. Image S3 is only six ms (seven meters) above slice S2 and is contaminated by some interference from the S2 fluvial system. Even so,
identification of the meandering channel across stratal surface S3 is
unambiguous. The image resolution achieved in this case is much smaller
than vertical resolution and probably represents the limit of resolution
expected from stratal-slice analysis for this
The software used to make stratal slices, including necessary
reconditioning of |