Quick Search:    advanced search

GSW Home   GeoRef Home   My GSW Alerts   Contact GSW   About GSW   Journals List   Help

This Article Figures Only Full Text Full Text (PDF) Submit a response Alert me when this article is cited Alert me when eLetters are posted Alert me if a correction is posted Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Alert me to new issues of the journal Download to citation manager Citing Articles Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Porter, T. R. Search for Related Content

Seismic metadata management

Optimization with GIS

GeoSynergy, Houston, Texas, U.S.

Corresponding author: tporter@geosynergy.com

The first 20% of the full text of this article appears below.

As 3-D seismic surveys grow in size and complexity, logistics and planning play an ever-more-important role in determining their efficiency and profitability. The metadata (information describing the seismic data) associated with these surveys are rapidly increasing in volume and variety, but they are still usually stored in disparate locations such as trace headers, coordinate files, and paper or electronic observer logs. Because these metadata can be considered vital preplan information for a repeat survey, it is more important than ever that they be efficiently gathered, stored, analyzed, and archived.

Combining previously autonomous metadata sources with GIS (e.g., digital orthophotos and CAD files of pipelines or wells) into one data warehouse allows real interdependencies through spatial, attribute, and temporal analysis.

However, although the industry has numerous powerful geologic and geophysical planning, evaluation, processing, and analysis tools, few tools exist to effectively manage today's complex 3-D projects. A system called Matrix has been developed to address these requirements. This paper will present the issues critical to building such a system and case studies illustrating the benefits that can be derived from it.

	Background

 
In land, transition zone, and mixed-mode seismic projects, significant effort and expense are invested in designing and securing an exploration prospect. This includes mineral leases, surface permits, and any other effort to collect data that better define the area and/or reduce liability.

Seismic operations are becoming more difficult to conduct due to increased culture, permits, restrictions, divided interests, and sophisticated acquisition methods. Valuable information is gathered and compiled during feasibility, evaluation, and design stages. Minerals, permitting, and presurvey/hazard information is provided prior to and during advance, survey, and drilling operations. As some of these interdependent operations usually run concurrently, it can be extremely challenging to achieve production, quality, and safety objectives.

Obviously, a system for managing, analyzing, and presenting information . . . [Full Text of this Article]