The impact of seismic interpretation methods on the analysis of faults: a case study from the Snøhvit field, Barents Sea

Five seismic interpretation experiments were conducted on an area of interest containing a fault relay in the Snøhvit field, Barents Sea, Norway, to understand how the interpretation method impacts the analysis of fault and horizon morphologies, fault lengths, and throw. The resulting horizon and fa...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Published in:Solid Earth
Main Authors: J. E. Cunningham, N. Cardozo, C. Townsend, R. H. T. Callow
Format: Article in Journal/Newspaper
Language:English
Published: Copernicus Publications 2021
Subjects:
Online Access:https://doi.org/10.5194/se-12-741-2021
https://doaj.org/article/10e5b20628594f35a250f9c49d442f79
id ftdoajarticles:oai:doaj.org/article:10e5b20628594f35a250f9c49d442f79
record_format openpolar
spelling ftdoajarticles:oai:doaj.org/article:10e5b20628594f35a250f9c49d442f79 2023-05-15T15:38:45+02:00 The impact of seismic interpretation methods on the analysis of faults: a case study from the Snøhvit field, Barents Sea J. E. Cunningham N. Cardozo C. Townsend R. H. T. Callow 2021-03-01T00:00:00Z https://doi.org/10.5194/se-12-741-2021 https://doaj.org/article/10e5b20628594f35a250f9c49d442f79 EN eng Copernicus Publications https://se.copernicus.org/articles/12/741/2021/se-12-741-2021.pdf https://doaj.org/toc/1869-9510 https://doaj.org/toc/1869-9529 doi:10.5194/se-12-741-2021 1869-9510 1869-9529 https://doaj.org/article/10e5b20628594f35a250f9c49d442f79 Solid Earth, Vol 12, Pp 741-764 (2021) Geology QE1-996.5 Stratigraphy QE640-699 article 2021 ftdoajarticles https://doi.org/10.5194/se-12-741-2021 2022-12-31T06:28:36Z Five seismic interpretation experiments were conducted on an area of interest containing a fault relay in the Snøhvit field, Barents Sea, Norway, to understand how the interpretation method impacts the analysis of fault and horizon morphologies, fault lengths, and throw. The resulting horizon and fault interpretations from the least and most successful interpretation methods were further analysed to understand their impact on geological modelling and hydrocarbon volume calculation. Generally, the least dense manual interpretation method of horizons (32 inlines and 32 crosslines; 32 ILs × 32 XLs, 400 m) and faults (32 ILs, 400 m) resulted in inaccurate fault and horizon interpretations and underdeveloped relay morphologies and throw, which are inadequate for any detailed geological analysis. The densest fault interpretations (4 ILs, 50 m) and 3D auto-tracked horizons (all ILs and XLs spaced 12.5 m) provided the most detailed interpretations, most developed relay and fault morphologies, and geologically realistic throw distributions. Sparse interpretation grids generate significant issues in the model itself, which make it geologically inaccurate and lead to misunderstanding of the structural evolution of the relay. Despite significant differences between the two models, the calculated in-place petroleum reserves are broadly similar in the least and most dense experiments. However, when considered at field scale, the differences in volumes that are generated by the contrasting interpretation methodologies clearly demonstrate the importance of applying accurate interpretation strategies. Article in Journal/Newspaper Barents Sea Snøhvit Directory of Open Access Journals: DOAJ Articles Barents Sea Norway Solid Earth 12 3 741 764
institution Open Polar
collection Directory of Open Access Journals: DOAJ Articles
op_collection_id ftdoajarticles
language English
topic Geology
QE1-996.5
Stratigraphy
QE640-699
spellingShingle Geology
QE1-996.5
Stratigraphy
QE640-699
J. E. Cunningham
N. Cardozo
C. Townsend
R. H. T. Callow
The impact of seismic interpretation methods on the analysis of faults: a case study from the Snøhvit field, Barents Sea
topic_facet Geology
QE1-996.5
Stratigraphy
QE640-699
description Five seismic interpretation experiments were conducted on an area of interest containing a fault relay in the Snøhvit field, Barents Sea, Norway, to understand how the interpretation method impacts the analysis of fault and horizon morphologies, fault lengths, and throw. The resulting horizon and fault interpretations from the least and most successful interpretation methods were further analysed to understand their impact on geological modelling and hydrocarbon volume calculation. Generally, the least dense manual interpretation method of horizons (32 inlines and 32 crosslines; 32 ILs × 32 XLs, 400 m) and faults (32 ILs, 400 m) resulted in inaccurate fault and horizon interpretations and underdeveloped relay morphologies and throw, which are inadequate for any detailed geological analysis. The densest fault interpretations (4 ILs, 50 m) and 3D auto-tracked horizons (all ILs and XLs spaced 12.5 m) provided the most detailed interpretations, most developed relay and fault morphologies, and geologically realistic throw distributions. Sparse interpretation grids generate significant issues in the model itself, which make it geologically inaccurate and lead to misunderstanding of the structural evolution of the relay. Despite significant differences between the two models, the calculated in-place petroleum reserves are broadly similar in the least and most dense experiments. However, when considered at field scale, the differences in volumes that are generated by the contrasting interpretation methodologies clearly demonstrate the importance of applying accurate interpretation strategies.
format Article in Journal/Newspaper
author J. E. Cunningham
N. Cardozo
C. Townsend
R. H. T. Callow
author_facet J. E. Cunningham
N. Cardozo
C. Townsend
R. H. T. Callow
author_sort J. E. Cunningham
title The impact of seismic interpretation methods on the analysis of faults: a case study from the Snøhvit field, Barents Sea
title_short The impact of seismic interpretation methods on the analysis of faults: a case study from the Snøhvit field, Barents Sea
title_full The impact of seismic interpretation methods on the analysis of faults: a case study from the Snøhvit field, Barents Sea
title_fullStr The impact of seismic interpretation methods on the analysis of faults: a case study from the Snøhvit field, Barents Sea
title_full_unstemmed The impact of seismic interpretation methods on the analysis of faults: a case study from the Snøhvit field, Barents Sea
title_sort impact of seismic interpretation methods on the analysis of faults: a case study from the snøhvit field, barents sea
publisher Copernicus Publications
publishDate 2021
url https://doi.org/10.5194/se-12-741-2021
https://doaj.org/article/10e5b20628594f35a250f9c49d442f79
geographic Barents Sea
Norway
geographic_facet Barents Sea
Norway
genre Barents Sea
Snøhvit
genre_facet Barents Sea
Snøhvit
op_source Solid Earth, Vol 12, Pp 741-764 (2021)
op_relation https://se.copernicus.org/articles/12/741/2021/se-12-741-2021.pdf
https://doaj.org/toc/1869-9510
https://doaj.org/toc/1869-9529
doi:10.5194/se-12-741-2021
1869-9510
1869-9529
https://doaj.org/article/10e5b20628594f35a250f9c49d442f79
op_doi https://doi.org/10.5194/se-12-741-2021
container_title Solid Earth
container_volume 12
container_issue 3
container_start_page 741
op_container_end_page 764
_version_ 1766370029709819904