A Whole Lotta Shakin’ Going On

Seismic contractors are continually searching for methods that will expedite seismic data acquisition – which is why several efforts have been made over the past three decades to develop procedures that will allow vibrators to shake simultaneously at different source stations, with the data being recorded by a common receiver grid.

The attraction of simultaneous-source shaking is that the clock time required for data acquisition across a prospect is reduced by a factor N, with N being the number of source stations where vibrators shake simultaneously.

The data that are acquired tend to be a complicated mixture of wavefields that have traveled from different source stations to each receiver station. In this original recorded state, the data are too confusing to be used to interpret Earth properties. In order to use simultaneous-source data for geologic interpretation, this complicated composite wavefield has to be segregated into the individual wavefields that were generated at each respective source station.

If the wavefield-separation procedure is successful, the result is a set of data that is equivalent to data that would be acquired if a vibrator at each of the N source stations generated single-source data at different clock times.

In early applications, simultaneous-source techniques involved only two vibrator stations. The operational procedures usually were that the vibrator at station A did an upsweep while the vibrator at station B did a downsweep; or the vibrator at station A worked with a phase shift that differed by 180 degrees relative to the vibrator at station B.

Although the segregated wavefields generated by these early methods were often usable for subsurface imaging, the data contained more noise than desired, and these initial simultaneous-source concepts never became widely used.

A relatively recent technology development known as the High Fidelity Vibroseis System (HFVS) is an important advance in the quest to acquire vibrator data simultaneously at several source stations. The technology was developed and patented by Mobil and is now offered by most seismic contractors. Several competing simultaneous-vibrator techniques have subsequently appeared on the scene through research by other oil companies and by seismic contractors.

There are two principal attractions of all of these simultaneous-source procedures – data quality is acceptable, and the number of simultaneous sources can be expanded to as many as six or eight distance-separated vibrators.

An example of the HFVS concept being tested in a vertical seismic profile (VSP) experiment is displayed as figure 1: Data from vibrators occupying five different offset source stations were acquired with the vibrators at all stations shaking simultaneously and then shaking individually.

The responses of the vertical and inline horizontal geophones at two of these stations are illustrated on the display after the patented HFVS methodology was applied to separate each individual wavefield from the composite wavefield. When these wavefields were compared against wavefields generated by vibrators shaking individually at each source station, only minor differences between simultaneous-source data and single-source data were observed.

Figure 2 shows an example comparing single-source data and simultaneous-source data acquired in this VSP experiment. The concept exhibited in these two figures shows that VSP data can be acquired from five source stations in the same clock time needed to acquire data from only one source station.

In many situations, this increased imaging capability provides critical data at attractive cost savings.

Although VSP data are used in this example, HFVS technology and its several competing equivalents were developed to reduce the cost of 3-D seismic data acquisition. Numerous examples demonstrating how each of the currently available simultaneous-source technologies applies to 3-D data acquisition are in the literature or can be provided by seismic contractors.

Simultaneous-source technology seems to be good enough to warrant discussions with seismic contractors about its use and the potential cost savings that may result.

There may be a small add-on fee for some simultaneous-source services if a seismic contractor has to pay a royalty to use the technology. Additional data processing also is required to break the composite wavefield into its individual source-station components such as the examples shown on figure 1 – but these data-processing costs are not significant.

Under some operating conditions, several of the simultaneous-source techniques that are now available are attractive both technically and economically.

Comments (0)


Geophysical Corner

The Geophysical Corner is a regular column in the EXPLORER that features geophysical case studies, techniques and application to the petroleum industry.


Image Gallery

See Also: Bulletin Article

The geometries of clay smears produced in a series of direct shear experiments on composite blocks containing a clay-rich seal layer sandwiched between sandstone reservoir layers have been analyzed in detail. The geometries of the evolving shear zones and volume clay distributions are related back to the monitored hydraulic response, the deformation conditions, and the clay content and strength of the seal rock. The laboratory experiments were conducted under 4 to 24 MPa (580–3481 psi) fault normal effective stress, equivalent to burial depths spanning from less than approximately 0.8 to 4.2 km (0.5 to 2.6 mi) in a sedimentary basin. The sheared blocks were imaged using medical-type x-ray computed tomography (CT) imaging validated with optical photography of sawn blocks. The interpretation of CT scans was used to construct digital geomodels of clay smears and surrounding volumes from which quantitative information was obtained. The distribution patterns and thickness variations of the clay smears were found to vary considerably according to the level of stress applied during shear and to the brittleness of the seal layer. The stiffest seal layers with the lowest clay percentage formed the most segmented clay smears. Segmentation does not necessarily indicate that the fault seal was breached because wear products may maintain the seal between the individual smear segments as they form. In experiments with the seal layer formed of softer clays, a more uniform smear thickness is observed, but the average thickness of the clay smear tends to be lower than in stiffer clays. Fault drag and tapering of the seal layer are limited to a region close to the fault cutoffs. Therefore, the comparative decrease of sealing potential away from the cutoff zones differs from predictions of clay smear potential type models. Instead of showing a power-law decrease away from the cutoffs toward the midpoint of the shear zone, the clay smear thickness is either uniform, segmented, or undulating, reflecting the accumulated effects of kinematic processes other than drag. Increased normal stress improved fault sealing in the experiments mainly by increasing fault zone thickness, which led to more clay involvement in the fault zone per unit of source layer thickness. The average clay fraction of the fault zone conforms to the prediction of the shale gouge ratio (SGR) model because clay volume is essentially preserved during the deformation process. However, the hydraulic seal performance does not correlate to the clay fraction or SGR but does increase as the net clay volume in the fault zone increases. We introduce a scaled form of SGR called SSGR to account for increased clay involvement in the fault zone caused by higher stress and variable obliquity of the seal layer to the fault zone. The scaled SGR gives an improved correlation to seal performance in our samples compared to the other algorithms.
Desktop /Portals/0/PackFlashItemImages/WebReady/Three-dimensional-structure-of-experimentally-produced.jpg?width=50&h=50&mode=crop&anchor=middlecenter&quality=90amp;encoder=freeimage&progressive=true 3722 Bulletin Article

See Also: CD DVD

Desktop /Portals/0/images/_site/AAPG-newlogo-vertical-morepadding.jpg?width=50&h=50&mode=crop&anchor=middlecenter&quality=90amp;encoder=freeimage&progressive=true 4465 CD-DVD

See Also: Field Seminar

This three-day field trip will examine examples of tight-oil reservoirs (Cretaceous Niobrara Formation, Codell member of Carlile Formation from the Denver and North Park basins), tight-gas reservoirs (Cretaceous J Sandstone, Codell and Williams Fork Sandstone, from both the Denver and Piceance basins), CBM reservoirs (Cretaceous Cameo Coals from the Piceance Basin) and potential oil shale resources (Green River Formation of the Piceance Basin).
Desktop /Portals/0/PackFlashItemImages/WebReady/ace2015-ft-12-hero.jpg?width=50&h=50&mode=crop&anchor=middlecenter&quality=90amp;encoder=freeimage&progressive=true 14707 Field Seminar

See Also: Map

Desktop /Portals/0/images/_site/AAPG-newlogo-vertical-morepadding.jpg?width=50&h=50&mode=crop&anchor=middlecenter&quality=90amp;encoder=freeimage&progressive=true 4399 Map

See Also: Short Course

The course is a practical and applied introduction to geochemical techniques routinely employed in shale-gas condensate and tight-oil reservoir assessment with an emphasis on tools and techniques. Participants should have a solid background in petroleum geology.
Desktop /Portals/0/PackFlashItemImages/WebReady/sc-introductory-geochemistry-for-condensate-rich-shales-and-tight-oil.jpg?width=50&h=50&mode=crop&anchor=middlecenter&quality=90amp;encoder=freeimage&progressive=true 10167 Short Course