- Copyright © 2004 Society of Exploration Geophysicists
This paper presents a very simple alternative for calibration of well and seismic data. The methodology does not use synthetic seismograms and is useful if there is at least one well with a check-shot survey in the project. The key concept of the method is to compare well and seismic data in terms of velocity values.
The main benefit of a successful calibration is the generation of an appropriate project environment that allows us to expand our chance to see more and more geologic features from integrated data. In particular, pseudofacies volumes, AVO, acoustic impedance volumes, pseudorock property volumes obtained using NNA, and other state-of-the-art products that help characterize hydrocarbon reservoirs and traps, strongly depend on a highly reliable calibration between available wells and a seismic volume. In fact, the starting point of any interpretation project is the calibration between wells and 2D/3D seismic. This process is as old as the seismic method itself, and strategies range from purely qualitative excessively analytical.
More than 15 years ago, after 1D modeling became regularly available, synthetic seismograms started to provide interpreters with a reliable way to fit both synthetic and real seismic traces from 2D and 3D surveys. Today it is a very popular technique that helps correlate “tops” from wells to “reflective surfaces” from seismic data.
But for a geoscientist facing a great volume of data, calibration using synthetic seismograms presents at least two difficulties:
Synthetics are a simulation of a seismic trace that use many parameters, which must be tested in order to get the best approximation to real traces. Sometimes, it takes a considerably long time to test wavelet, phase, frequency, multiples, etc. for each well, and then to evaluate the best solution …