Rock Physics Modeling Assisted Reservoir Properties Prediction: Case Study in Malay Basin

 
 
 
  • Abstract
  • Keywords
  • References
  • PDF
  • Abstract


    Shear velocity log is not measured at all wells in oil and gas fields, thus rock physics modeling plays an important role to predict this type of log. Therefore, seismic pre stack inversion is performed and elastic properties are estimated more accurately. Subsequently, a robust Petro-Elastic relationship arising from rock physics model leads to far more precise prediction of petrophysical properties. The more accurate rock physics modeling results in less uncertainty of reservoir modeling. Therefore, a valid rock physics model is intended to be built. For a better understanding of reservoir properties prediction, first of all rock physics modeling for each identified litho-facies classes should be performed separately through well log analysis.

     

     


  • Keywords


    Litho-facies, reservoir modeling, reservoir properties prediction, rock physics modeling, petrophysical properties

  • References


      [1] Ghosh D., Halim MFA, Brewer M and Viratno B (2010), “Geophysical issues and challenges in Malay and adjacent basins from an E & P perspective,” Leading Edge, vol. 29, pp. 436–449.

      [2] Ghosh D., Babasafari A., Ratnam T., and Sambo C. (2018), "New Workflow in Reservoir Modelling - Incorporating High Resolution Seismic and Rock Physics", Offshore Technology Conference. doi:10.4043/28388-MS.

      [3] Ghosh D., Sajid M and Ibrahim NA (2014), “Seismic attributes add a new dimension to prospect evaluation and geomorphology offshore Malaysia,” Leading Edge, vol. 33, pp. 536–545.

      [4] Avseth P, Mukerji T, Mavko G (2010), “Quantitative seismic interpretation: Applying rock physics tools to reduce interpretation risk” Cambridge University Press.

      [5] Johansen, A., Jensen, E., Mavko, G., and Dvorkin, J. (2013), “Inverse rock physics modeling for reservoir quality prediction” Geophysics, vol. 78, No. 2, P. M1–M18.

      [6] Jensen, E., Johansen, A., Avseth, P. and Bredesen, K. (August 2016), “Quantitative interpretation using inverse rock-physics modeling on AVO data”, The Leading Edge.

      [7] Bredesen, K., Jensen, E., Johansen, T. and Avseth, P. (2015), “Quantitative seismic interpretation using inverse rock physics modelling”, Petroleum Geoscience.

      [8] Russell B. (2014), “Rock Physics Templates”.

      [9] Russell B. and Smith T. (2007), “The relationship between dry rock bulk modulus and porosity–an empirical study,” CREWES Res. Rep., vol. 19, pp. 1–14.

      [10] Russell B. (2013), “A Gassmann-consistent rock physics template,” in CSEG Recorder, pp. 22–30.

      [11] Mavko, G., Mukerji, T., and Dvorkin, J. (2009), “The Rock Physics Handbook: Tools for Seismic Analysis of Porous Media” Cambridge University Press.

      [12] Avseth, P., Jørstad, A.,van Wijngaarden, A. J., and Mavko, G. (2009), “Rock physics estimation of cement volume, sorting, and net-to-gross in North Sea sandstones” The Leading Edge, 28, 98–108.

      [13] Dvorkin, J., Gutierrez, M. A., and Grana, D. (2014), “Seismic reflections of rock properties” Cambridge University Press.


 

View

Download

Article ID: 18385
 
DOI: 10.14419/ijet.v7i3.32.18385




Copyright © 2012-2015 Science Publishing Corporation Inc. All rights reserved.