4D Seismic History Matching

1. Primary funding is provided by
The SPE Foundation through member donations
and a contribution from Offshore Europe
The Society is grateful to those companies that allow their
professionals to serve as lecturers
Additional support provided by AIME
Society of Petroleum Engineers
Distinguished Lecturer Program
www.spe.org/dl

2. SPE Distinguished Lecture Tours
2

3. Society of Petroleum Engineers
Distinguished Lecturer Program
www.spe.org/dl
Paul Mitchell
TAQA
4D Seismic History Matching

4. Outline
• Time-Lapse (4D) seismic
• 4D Seismic History Matching (4D SHM)
• The value of 4D SHM
• Harding & Gryphon case study
• 4D Assisted Seismic History Matching (4D ASHM)
• Future directions
• Conclusions
4

5. BaselineMonitor4D Difference
Introduction to Time-Lapse or 4D Seismic
5
7x vertical
exaggeration
GOC
OWC

6. How Does 4D Work? Water Sweep…
6
Velocity Density
Practical Applications of Time-Lapse
Seismic., Johnston, D.H., 2013.
0 1mm

7. How Does 4D Work? Gas Sweep…
7
Velocity Density
Practical Applications of Time-Lapse
Seismic., Johnston, D.H., 2013.
0 1mm

8. Practical Applications of Time-Lapse Seismic.,
Johnston, D.H., 2013.
4D Chance of Success
• 4D Detectability
– Rock & fluid properties
– Depletion process
– Resolution
• 4D Repeatability
– Acquisition geometry
– Processing
– Overburden complexity
– Signal-to-noise
84D Repeatability
4DDetectability
Low
Medium
High
Higher effort
Lower effort

9. Reservoir Monitoring with 4D Seismic
• Production data
– temporally dense
– spatially sparse
• 4D seismic data
– spatially extensive
– temporally sparse
• Complementary
9
Water
injector
Base reservoir surface

10. Principle of 4D Seismic History Matching
10
Models that
match
production
data
Models that
match 4D
seismic data
True model
4D seismic history matching using information from
the flooded zone, Jin, L., et al., 2012.

11. 4D Seismic History Matching Workflow
11
Geological Model
Simulation Model
Production data
Match?
Update
Update
Petro-Elastic
Model
SyntheticReal
Match?
4D Seismic
Update

12. 2000-1990
2000-1990
Seismic History Matching Example
12
Real 4D Seismic
Synthetic 4D
Seismic
2002-1990
2002-1990
2005-1990
2005-1990
2011-1990
2011-1990
OWC
OWC
GOC
GOC
1600
1700
1600
1700 0 1kmHorizontal Scale
Injector Producer
IncreaseDecrease
Acoustic Impedance
Depth(m)Depth(m)
Injector Producer

13. The Value of 4D SHM
13
• $1-2bn annual
spend on 4D
seismic globally
• Greater value can
be extracted from
the data
* Source: SeismicBase
by IHS Markit
*

14. Harding & Gryphon Fields
• North Sea
– 320km NE Aberdeen
• TAQA and Total
operated fields
• Oil production
– Gas caps remain
• Morrone
undeveloped
14
Gryphon
Maclure
Harding North
Harding Central
Harding South
Morrone
Harding South East
Tullich
Aberdeen

15. Production & Seismic History
15
Harding first oil
Oil Phase
Gas Phase
Gas blow-
down
1990 2000
2002
2005 2011
Gryphon
Harding

16. Geology
16
OWC
GOC
Massive sand
Injected
sands
Injectite wing
Water injector
Oil producer
0 1000m
Horizontal Scale
4x vertical exaggeration

17. Geological and Simulation Models
Harding Central
Harding South
Gryphon
Harding North
Maclure
Tullich
Harding SE
Morrone
17
~2km

18. OWC
GOC
Initial Models
18
Geological Model - Facies
Morrone Harding S Harding C Harding N Gryphon Maclure
1600
1800
GOC
Simulation Model – NG Property
OWC
1600 NG
0
1
Depth(m)
1800
Depth(m)
2km

19. Initial Model 4D Seismic
19
Real 4D Seismic Difference
GOC
OWC
Morrone Harding S Harding C Harding N Gryphon Maclure
2km
1700
1800
Depth(m)
Model 4D Seismic Difference
GOC
OWC
False response Inter-field connectivityPoor shape
1700
1800
Depth(m)

20. Redistribution of Sand Injectites
20
Initial Injectite Density Updated Injectite Density
Morrone
Harding Central
Harding South
Maclure
Harding North
Gryphon
Harding South East
Tullich

21. Updated Model 4D Seismic Difference
GOC
OWC
No response Reduced connectivityBetter shape
1700
1800
Depth(m)
Initial Model 4D Seismic Difference
GOC
OWC
1700
1800
Depth(m)
Updated Model 4D Seismic
21
OWC
Morrone Harding S Harding C Harding N Gryphon Maclure
2km

22. OWC
GOC
Fine-Scale Models
22
Geological Model - Facies
Morrone Harding S Harding C Harding N Gryphon Maclure
1600
1800
Depth(m)
GOC
OWC
1600
1800
NG
0
1
Simulation Model – NG Property
Depth(m)
2km

23. Fine-Scale Model 4D Seismic
23
Real 4D Seismic Difference
GOC
OWC
Morrone Harding S Harding C Harding N Gryphon Maclure
1700
1800
2km
Depth(m)
Model 4D Seismic Difference
GOC
OWC
1700
1800
Depth(m)

24. Production History Match
24
Coarse-Scale ModelFine-Scale Model
Oilproduction(STB/d)
Measured production
Simulated production
+

25. Pressure History Match
1992 1998 2001 2004 2007 2010 2013 20161995
2550
2500
2450
2400
2350
2300
2250
2200
2150
Observations
AveragePressure(psia)
Date
Fine-scale model
Coarse-scale model
25

26. Seismic History Matching Summary
26
Poor Moderate Good
Initial model
Updated model
Geological
Description
History
Match
4D Seismic
Match
Fine-Scale model
Model

27. 4D Assisted Seismic History Matching
• Quantitative
• Automatic
• Intelligent
27
4D Seismic
Attribute Map
Water injector
Oil producer

28. Genetic Algorithm for 4D ASHM
28
Misfit surface
Best solution

29. 4D Attribute 4D AttributeBinary Representation
0
1
0
1
Binary Representation
Quantitative 4D Analysis
29
Real 4D Seismic Attribute Map Model 4D Seismic Attribute Map
Binary Representation

30. 4D ASHM – Harding South Results
30

31. Simulation from Initial PopulationSimulation from Final Population
4D ASHM – Harding South Results
31
Real 4D Seismic Attribute Map Model 4D Seismic Attribute Map

32. Initial Population Oil Production RateFinal Population Oil Production Rate
4D ASHM – Harding South Well Results
4D ASHM using seismic improved production history match
32
Time(days)
OilRate(bbls/day)
Observed production
Simulated production

33. Geological Model
Simulation Model
Production data
Match?
Update
Update
Petro-Elastic
Model
SyntheticReal
Match?
4D Seismic
Update
Future Directions for SHM
33
•Simpler
•Pressure
•Geomechanics
•Heterogeneity
•Fine-scale
•Fast simulation
•Quantitative
•Automatic
•Intelligent
•Frequent repeats
•Appropriate quality
•Cost effective

34. Summary and Conclusions
• Seismic History Matching (SHM) uses 4D seismic data
for improved reservoir models
• It describes the dynamic behaviour of the reservoir
and the underlying geology
• It is an evolving technology that integrates all aspects
of reservoir description
34

35. 35
Your Feedback is Important
Enter your section in the DL Evaluation Contest by completing the
evaluation form for this presentation
Visit SPE.org/dl
#SPEDL
Society of Petroleum Engineers
Distinguished Lecturer Program
www.spe.org/dl