rt ll rr tltlttttt\

LMR & EEI Inversion

n
by ;
SigitSulcrnono
S

: aZ N L-

IF-

-Q-]rt^
----J -I

ttrt -z

-ilm-
W
Lab.of ReservoirGeophysics
Dept.of GeophysicalEngineering
Instituteof TechnologyBandung
200s
 LMR & EEI Inversion

1. Introduction 2
2.DongApproximation 2
3. Goodway'sApproach 6
4. EstimatingRp andRs t9
5. ElasticImpedance(EI) 2l
6. ExtendedElasticImpedance(EED 32

ExerciseI 39
ExerciseII 65

LMR & EEI Inversion

By. Sigit Sukmono

1. Introduction
Lambda-Mu-Rho(LMR) and ExtendedElastic Impedance(EED inversion techniqueswere developedfrom various
studies.It was SmithandGidlow (1987)who first showedthat pre-stackdatacanbe stackedusingdifferentweightsto get
fluid factorandapparentPoissonratio sectionsto predictthe fluids andlithology.
In 1996,Dong showedthat the relationshipsof the changesin bulk modulus,shearmodulusand Lame'sconstantscanbe
expressedin the AVO parameters.Goodwayet al (1997) gavea more comprehensive discussionson the applicationof
Lame' andshearmodulusaslithology andfluid indicator.

Connoly(1999)introducedthe EI as a generalizationof AI equationfor non-normalincidenceangle,which basicallyis

the inversionof AVO data.The EI equationwas then normalizedby Whitcombe(2002)and David et al (2002)which
give the EEI equation.

2. DongApproximation

Dong(1996)showedthat the changein Bulk modulus,shearmoduluso

Lame'sconstantanddensitycanbe expressed
in
AVO parameters
of A, B andC definedby Aki andRichard(1980)

Basedon the following equations

e=E (1)
LMR & EEI Inversion

By. Sigit Sukmono 2

 Which canbe rewrittenas

K - a'^o-
4
-
t^ F,P (2)
J

). - a2p- 2F ' p (3)

It - F'p (4)
The aboveequationscanbe integratedto become

B + 2C )a 2P
A , K= ( 3A + 1
(5 )
1.5
A J . = ( 2A + B + C) a ' p (6 )
( C - B ) a' p
^
Ltt-- (7 )

WhereAK, M andAp arethe changesof Bulk modulus,Lame'sconstantandshearmodulusof the adjacentlayers.

LMR & EEI lnversion

By. Sigit Sukmono 3

Previousstudiesshowthat it is very difficult to get the value of C directly from seismic,thereforepeoplepreferto use
C/A ratio which alsoknownasf value.The f valueis 0.8 for rockswhich follow Gardneret al (1974)equation.

Thebulk modulusreflectivity& c* be obtainedby substitutingequations(5) and(2) :

R,.=^K
-( o* B
^k- - )fq') (8)
2K 3py )34K)

WhereK = (o/B)2

(8) canbewrittenin theformof first orderAVO equation

Thefirsttermin equation :

R(0 ):A +B s i n20 (e)

Wheresin20 : ll (3+2f) ( 10)

If f :0.8 (Gardner'sequation),
thensin20k= 0.22or 0k: 28o.In otherwords,Rk is proportional
with R(28o).

LMR & EEI Inversion

By. Sigit Sukmono 4

Usingthe sameapproach,we cangetthe Lamereflectivity :

(11)

Wheresinz0,,: ll (2+f) (12)

If f : 0.8 (Gardner'sequation),
thensin201:0.36 or 0^ = 37omeansthatR, is proportional
with R(37).

R,=+=(o
1\#) (13)

Wheresin20u= -ll f ( 14)

LMR & EEI Inversion

By. Sigit Sukmono

3. Goodway'sApproach
P-wavetendsto travel along matrix than fluid. This makesAI is not too sensitiveto fluid. To overcomethis weakness,from
combinationof Rp and Rs, Goodway(1997) introducedthree elasticparameters: lambda-rho(l,p), mu-rho (pp) and Bulk
modulus(K), which canbe combinedasindicatorsof lithology andfluids.

K + 4l3p
e=E
Sl =p x0
pp = sl2
r p =Alz -2s 12
K = p(Vp2- 4/3 Vs2)
Wherep = rigiditymodulus,l,: incompressibility K = bulkmodulusandSI: shearimpedance.
modulus,
FigureI showsthe generalstepsfor performingLMR inversion.Thefinal outputof LMR inversionis the layerproperties
of
Lambda,Mu andRho.The maindifferencebetweenprimerAVO analysisand LMR inversionis that the formergivesthe
boundaryproperties
whereasthelaterprovideslayerproperties.

LMR & EEI Inversion

By. Sigit Sukmono 6

 AVO Analvsis

Estimate:
Reflectivity-P(Rp)
Reflectivjty-S(Rs)

Invert to :
AcousticImp-P
Acous{icImp-S

Transformto
Lambda,Mu, Rho
Figure1. Generalstepsfor performingLMR inversion
Cross-plotand
Interpretation

LMR & EEI lnversion

By. Sigit Sukmono 7

Shearmodulusor rigidity modulusMu is the capabilityof rocksto resistshearstraindueto the shearstresswhich changes
the shapebut retain the volume. Mu scaledby Rho can indicatethe rock type. Shear-ablerocks such as shaleor un-
compactedsandshavelower Mu-Rho,whereasrigid rockssuchascompactedsandsor tight carbonateassociate with bigger
Mu-Rho.
ModulusMu is the capabilityof rocksto resistshearstrain due to the shearstresswhich changesthe shapebut retainthe
volume.Mu scaledby Rho canindicatethe rock type. Shear-ablerockssuchas shaleor un-compacted sandshavelower Mu-
Rho,whereasrigid rockssuchascompactedsandsor tight carbonateassociate with biggerMu-Rho.
IncompressibilitymodulusLambdascaledwith densityRho canindicatethe presenceof fluid as it's valuereflectsthe fluid
resistanceto the changeof volumedue to the compressional stress.Rocksand fluids can not be compressed easilymeans
that their Lambdais relatively high. On the other hand, gas is compressible;thereforethe presenceof gas in rocks will
decrease its Lambda.

The small Lambda-Rhoindicatea porousrock. For the sameporosity,rocks filled by gashave smallerLambda-Rhothan
rocksfilled by wateror oil. Conversely,tight rockshavebiggerLambda-Rho.

Figures2 to ll providecomparisonbetweenthe usageof lambda-mu-rho

and otherseismicpropertiesto identify litohology
andgas.

Figure 2 showsthe comparisonon the changesof Ip vs Is and Lamda-rhovs Mu-Rho valuesfor wet sandsand vaxious
degreegas saturatedsands.Figure 3 and 4 illustrate the use of P and S-impedancefor sandstone- shale - coal
discrimination.Figure5 and6 illustratethe useof Lambdha-Mu-Rho - shale- coaldiscrimination.
for sandstone

Figure7 showsthe discriminationof GasChargedand Brine ChargedCarbonates usingVp-Vs cross-plots.Figure 8 shows

cross-plotsof variousseismicpropertiesfor the differentiationof shale,brine carbonateand gascarbonate.Figure 9 to 11
illustratethe identificationof gasandporoussandsusingLambda-Mhu-Rho display(Winardhi,2004).

LMR & EEI Inversion

By. Sigit Sukmono 8

_l
 Zp vs Zs for Biot-Gassmann Analysis
2650
a
I
2600
I
2550 -
I
t
2500 I
I
2450
I
24AO
3500 4000 4500 5000 5500
Zp

Lambda-mu-rhofor Biot-Gassmann
7.25
a
I
6.75
I
I
I
r
6.25
t-
Figure2. Cross-plotsof Ip vs Is andLamda-rhovs I
I
Mu-Rhofor wet sandsandvariousdegreegas 5.75
saturatedsands 2.5 5 7.5 10 12.5 15
Lambda-rho

o Wet Sand r Gas Sand- 90% to 0% Sw

LMR & EEI Inversion

By. Sigit Sukmono 9

 +-- a
F_ ==
L

--=
-E
!5
P-impedance
vs GammaRay aa=
--

Figure3. Sandstone
- shale- coaldiscrimination
basedon P-impedance
(Winardhi,2004).

Sandstone-Shale-Coal

LMR & EEIInveNion

By. SigitSukmono l0
 iii
xii

P-impedance
vs S-
impedance
Figure4. Sandstone
- shale- coal discriminationbasedon P aadS-impedance l tr .- .-
(Winardhi,2004).
cross-plot

Sl€ldd LMR& EEIlnversion

By. Sigil Sukmono lt
 .lJ

LamDqa-r(novs uzunmat(ay

$ l0lnn

Figure5. Sandstone
- shale- coaldiscrimination
basedon Lambdha- Rho
(Winardhi,2004).

gdEra LMR & EEI Inversion

By. Sig;tSukmono 12
 IJ

Lamooa-Knovs Lermocta-Der-lvlu

0I$It{ !8t!
Figure6. Lambda-per-Muascoal discriminator(Winardhi,2004)

gdErd LMR & EEI lnversion

By. Sigit Sukmono l3
 S-,'\ave II L-il--. lllliL,Ll- I-li-:Tr
jtTFfffirrli+tr,irl
I r fi:: ii lr
if t l i!?5

ts0
lr it Ti
:.:l t.:;.:. lqk

1m
18?5

1N

1m
1m
11
,,:l

il ll
$0 5!O tr(
glo$

l*
I

Figure7,Discrimination andBrineCharged
ofGasCharged Carbonates (Winardhi.2004)
usingVp-Vscross-plots

gdEra LMR & EEI lnversion

By. SigitSukmono 14
 DIG.B L.mdaRho.MoRho D|IG.Blo.iruRho
CRosgPLoT
cRossFLor

ts
a
E20 :.

!6
i ,0

DftG€ \rb-\bcRosSPLoT Dl{G€ \h . vp/v. RATb

ciossPtot

DNG.B\h - !DlV. RAIIO DNG-B lD-b CRoSSPLoT

cRoSSPLOr

'+
Figure8. Cross-plots ofvariousseismic properties i1i'
Pt. .i
for the differentiationof shale.brinecarbonate
and
gascarbonate (Winardhi,2004)

SGlEld LMR & EEI lnveBion

By. SigitSukmono l5
Figue 9. Identificalion of residual gas using
Lambda-Mhudisplay(Winardhi,2004).

g.nEG LMR& EEIlnversion

By.SigitSukmono t6
 !
!

Lambda
Rho

Figwe 10.Identificationofgas sandandporoussand

usingLambda-Rho aadMhu-Rhodisplays(Winarclhi,
2004).
- Mu -Rho

golEla LMR & EEI Inv€rsion

By.SigitSulmono l?
 New
discovery Gas
Field
n3
r0t r5 r?t llt 133 I l1 37 I l?t 1 fis I 2d tsr 2B

I
':l
,,:1
,l '1Lambda- Rho
eoo
I

Figure11.IdentificationofprospectivezonesusingLambda-Rho
(Winanlhi,2004).

gGlEld LMR& EEI Inversion

By.SigitSuknono 18
4. Estimating Rp and Rs
In the flow-chartin Figure 1, it is shownthat to get the Lambda-Mu-Rho,
we needto estimatethe Rp andRs. It canbe done
usinggraphicalanalysis(seediscussionin AVO) or usingthe mathematicalderivationasdiscussed below.
Aki-Richardequation(SheriffandGeldart,1995):

R@)=[io+tan , e)l*- 2,]T. p2 t lp-l

-
[-#sin
4L"si n20l -l
[ i[, a - ) p _l

which simplifiedby SmithandGidlow (1987):

&*4o) _r4( 2ry',*&'lri* e*!^3*rf 0

R(0\=!(
2\ o p) a"\ B p) 2a
In the caseof smallto moderateimpedancechange:

Rp
^
=!L(Po) - r Pa'a+ aa'P=!( Y* &)
2 pd 2 pa 2la p)

L(ry*&)
Rs=
2\B p)

LMR & EEI Inversion

By. Sigit Sukmono T9

For 0 <35 ando/B between1.5-2.0,thethird termsof Aki-Richardequationis negligible:

R(0):Rp(1+tan20)-8Rs(B/o)2
sin20

Rp andRs canbe determinedusingthe following equations:

a'd-' - a'd-' atcz - ozct

Rp - ; Rp =
ctdz - czdt crd, - crdz
whereal anda2 aremigratedamplitudesof nearandfar-anglestack,01 is the averageof nearanglestackand02 is the average
of far anglestack,and :

cr =(!+tan'er) w2 - (1 + tan 'or)

2
dt' = -*[4-l
La)
sin,o, dz = -*[41
LdJ
sin2 0,

LMR & EEI Inversion

By. Sigit Sukmono 20

5. ElasticImpedance(EI)
Lineaization of Zoeppritzequationfor P-wavereflectivity is sufficientlyaccuratefor smallchangesof elasticparameter
for subcriticalangle:

R@)- A+Bsin20 + Csin'?tan' 0

where:

I LV o
A= 1( * * g ''l, C =
2
2[ vp P )
L Vo_ 4 L +L_ 2 l .4 , .g ..
B= -r;
2 vo v; 1 V

Vp =
Q to{ t , ) + v r(t,-))
2
L Vo = VoG , )- Vo Q,- t)

v,' (t,) v ,' (t,-r)

vr' _ v : ( , ) - r I G,_,)
V;
LMR & EEI Inversion

By. Sigit Sukmono 21

By definingthe function f(t) is a parameteranaloguewith AI, then reflectivity as function of angleor EI can be written as
follows
(t,)- f (t,-,)
R(e\_ f
f (t,)+ f (t,_,)
In the caseof small to moderateimpedancechange,then :

R@\-!M! =LLrr(Er"\
2EI 2

L V, L V,
^ V:
'a

2Vo t/; r,
Lttn@re)=t(+.+). sin2 0
v: a,p
"
- L- ':

v; p
LVo
*l sinzotanzo
Z Vp

LMR & EEI Inversion

By. Sigit Sukmono

22
 v
By substifutingK to weset:
*re ocf '
'
4"

ln q+Ee-AKsi# q-&txrifr 0**-sin2ntar|0

1a4=lo$O+sin2
2 2Vo p V, Ve

Sincesin20 tan20 : tan2&sin2A andby substitutingeveryform of Axlx with Alnx,then :

LIn(EI) = (LLn(Vo;(l+ tan20) + Lln(p)Q- 4K sin20) - Ltn(V,;8Ksin2d)

If K madeto be constant,the aboveequationcanbe written as :

q)-
Lrn(EI1= nnfu)L+tan2 4tn\,rrKsin2', sn'z
)* Nn(oo-+x
et)
t^
o)V,GsKsn2
Lln(EI| = nnfu|L+tan2 il
,1r-or'i"'al)

LMR & EEI Inversion

By. Sigit Sukmono 23

To eliminatethe logarithmand differentialfunctionsin both sidesof aboveequation,we can integrateand exponentiation
the aboveequationto become:

Fr -- I/ (l+sin' qrr (-8.,Ksinz07 ,^r(l-4K sinz01

ure r p / s IJ

or in shorterversion

EI e = V;V,up'
wherea: (1 + sin20), b : -8K sin20,c: (1-4K sin20)andK : (VsA/p)2.
EI is generalizationof AI for incidentangleunequalwith 0. EI valuescanbe obtainedby invertingnon-zerooffset seismic
data.SinceS-waveis not affectedby the fluid, then EI will havedifferent valueswith AI when the wave is passingthru the
fluids. Thenfor fluid imaging,EI hasbettercapabilitythanAI.

Figure12 showsthat the transformationof anAI log from 0oto 30'results in a generallysimilar1ogbut with lower
absolutevalues. The impedancedecreases with an increasein oil saturation.Thepercentageof decrease is greaterfor EI
thanAI (Connolly,1999)
Figure13 and 14 illustratethe sensitivitiesof gamma-ray,AI andEI(30o)logs for the identificationof oil interval.

Figure15 showsthe generalstepsin performingEI inversion.Figures16to 18 illustrateanglestackat 15,20,24 degree

andtheir respectiveEI inversionresults.

LMR & EEI Inversion

By. Sigit Sukmono 24

)
Acoustic
lmpedance
vSaturation Elastic
lmpedance
vSaturation
i 0E+0

change 160/o
change
o
6.0E+0 o
lu

5.0E+0

0ilSaturation

Figwe 12.Thetransformationof an AI log from 0' to 30oresultsin a generallysimilarlog but with lower
absolutevalues, The impedalcedecreases with an increase
in oil sarurallon.tne Dercenlase
oI oecfease
is greaterfor EI tlan AI (Connolly,1999)

Sclotd LMR & EEI Inversion

By. SigitSukmono 25
 t'.d-r.

=
=

Figure13.Comparison ofgamma-ray, AI andEI(30o)logs.

Positionsof oil intervalis shown(Cormolly,1999).

g.dda LMR& EEIhversion

By.SigitSukmono za
 t: f i Jt t

T I
t
==rt'
I

Figure14.Comparisonofgamma-ray,AI andEI(30o)logs.Positions
of
oil intervalis shown(Connolly,1999).

gc'tda LMR & EEI Invelsion

By.SigitSukmono 21
Nearanglestack Far anglestack

Invertto near- Invert to far-

angleEI angleEI

Figure15.Generalstepof EI inversion

LMR & EEI Inversion

By. Sigit Sukmono 28

 AngleStackat 15degree

AngleStackat 20 degree

Figue 16.Illustrationof anglestackat 15 and20 degree(Winardhi,2004)

Scnntd LMR & EEI Inversion

By.SigitSukmono 29
 AngleStackat 24 degree

Elasticlmpedanceat 15degree
Figure17,Illustrationof anglestackat24 degreeandEl al l5 degree(Winardhi.2004)

S|dEG LMR & EEI Inversion

By. SigitSulmono 30
 Elasticlmpedance
of 20 degree

Figure18.IllustrationofEI sections
at 20and24
degree(Winardhi,2004)

Elasticlmpedanceof 24 degree

gdord LMR & EEI Inversion

By.SigitSukmono 3l
To makeEI be comparablewith AI, andto not usethe dimensionvariable,Whitcombe(2002)modifiedthe aboveequationby
of os,9odanpo
introducingreferenceconstantS

n, l( ( o)'r , )"-l
EIve - evo'P ol =
" [( a"\"
l o l|\B
l +r )t| alI
l-L | |
whereo: Vp, F: Vs. os,Foandpoarereferencevaluestakenfrom the averagevaluesof well data.

6. ExtendedElasticImpedance(EEI)
Theweaknessof EI equationis in the limited rangeof sin20which coversonly valuesbetween0 and 1, meaningthat the
availableangleis between0o and90o.To expandthe capabilityof EI equation,Whitcombe,Connolly,ReagenandRedshaw
(2002)introducedthe modifiedEI equationor widely known asExtendedElasticImpedance(EED.

Two modificationsweremade.First modificationis by replacingsin20with tan x, which givesrangebetween-oo{s oo,BrId

morevariablex valuesbetween-90oand90o.The secondmodificationwasmadeto ensurethat the resultedreflectivitynever
exceedunity; this wasdoneby scalingthe reflectivitywith cosx. To do thesemodification,the first stepis by replacingthe
Zoeppritzlinear equation: '

R ( e ) :A +B si n 2 0

to become(seeFigure20) :

R ( x ) :A +B ta n x

(r4cosx+.Bsinx)
R_
cosr

LMR & EEI Inversion

By. Sigit Sukmono

32
The scaledreflectivityRs is thenRs: R cosx, which gives
R s : A c o sx+B si n x

Thenthe equivalentof the EI equationsis

E Er P.L
o = dtli.flrtJh ) l
fr \p / ^\s/ \"1

wherep: (cosx * sinx), e: -8K sinX,r: (cosx - 4K sinx)

Figure19 showsthat thereis a high degreeof correlationbetweenelasticparameters
andequivalentEEI curvesshowing.

Figure21 showsthat thereis alsoquitehigh correlationof EEI functionwith watersaturationandgamma-ray.

stepfor performingEEI inversion.

Figure22 showsthe suggested

LMR & EEI Inversion

By. Sigit Sukmono 33

 otF
R2- 0.97
EEl(4s.)

I R2= 0.99
r!(19i,)

K R2= 0.99

EF(10)

Pp R2= 1,00

EF'(45o)
Figure 19. Comparisonbetween
elastic parametersand equivalent
EEI curYesshowinghigh degee of R2= 0,99
correlations(Connolly, 1999).
EE4-5A)

gctEfd LMR & EEI InversioD

By. SigiiSulanono 34
 EEI Gorrelations
o.6
d,
E
o.4 -s w
- Garnma

o.2

-0.50.0.25 0,00 015 0.50 0,75 1.m t-asdn2u

r€ngsoyEr$tiEh
nnss0llheer iin20ii phyEically
0D86ft5ll0118 definad
-90 -70 -50 -30 -10 10 30 50 70 soo
i( (d€gr€6)

Figure20. Illustrationof EEI firnctionR =

A + B tar X (Whitcombaet al.,2002) Figure 21. Corelation of EEI fimction with water
saturationard gamma-ray(Whitaombeet a1.,2002)

gcnoG LMR & EEI IDversion

By- Sigit Sutmono 35

 Figure22. Generalstepsfor EEI Inversion

Intercept
A Gradient
B

R=l*BtanX,

EEIInversion
Transform to fup,pp or ?"lpusinggeneralized
Iinear/non-linearregression

LMR & EEI Inversion

By. Sigit Sukmono 36

l )l l_*Jl
References

1. Connolly,P.,ElasticImpedance, TheLeadingEdge,18,No.4, 438-452,1999.

2. David,N.W., 2002,Shortnote: Elasticimpedance normalization,
Geophysics v.67, 1,60-62.
J. David,N.W., et a1,2002, Elasticimpedance for fluid andlithologyprediction,Geophysicsv.67,1,63-67.
4. Dong, W., 1996, A sensitivecombinationof AVO slope and intercept for hydrocarbonindication, 58th
ConferenceandTechnicalExhibition,EAGE, Amsterdam,paperM044
5. Goodway,8., Chen,T., and Downton,J., 1997,ImprovedAVO fluid detectionand lithology discrimination
using Lame's petrophysicalparameters;l.p, pp and l/p fluid stack, from P and S inversion, 67th Ann.
Intemational Mtg : SEG,expanded abstracts,
183-186.
Kamal, J.M., 2005, Studikasuskarakterisasireservoirkarbonatmenggunakan metodaseismicinverseLanba-
Mu-RhodanEEI padalapanganX, Masterthesis,Dept.of GeophysicalEngineering,ITB.
7. Whitcombe,D.N., Connolly,P.A., Reagen,R.L., andRedshaw,T.C., Extendedelasticimpedancefor fluid and
lithologyprediction,Geophysics, 67, 63-67,2002.
8. Winardhi,S.,2004,Seismic-based lithologyandfluid identification.
9. Yustiana,F.,2}l3,Integrasi AVO, inversi,dan estimasiparameterelastic(1.,p and p) untuk identifikasifluida
danlitlogi di LapanganMutiah, PT. CaltexPacificIndonesia,Masterthesis,Dept.of GeophysicalEngineering,
ITB.

LMR & EEI Inversion

By. Sigit Sukmono 37

 Exercises

LMR & EEI Inversion

By. Sigit Sukmono 38

lLl ) l __]
Exercise-I
Objective
the stepsin performingLMR andEEI inversionandutilize the resultsfor delineatingprospectivereservoirs.
To understand
Materials

l. FigureI.1. Cross-plot betweenP andS-waveat well B-01for intervaltop K01-K02

2. FigureI.2. Cross-plot betweenP andS-impedance at well B-01for intervaltop K01-K02
3. FigureI.3. Cross-plotbetweenLambda-RhoandMu-Rhoat well B-01 for intervaltop K01-K02
4. FigureI.4. CDP gatherdata.
5. FigureI.5, Seismicstackdataof line ITB-01
6. FigureI.6. Gradientsectionof Line ITB-01
7. FigureI.7. Equationof Vp vs Vs usedfor extractingRp andRs
8. FigureI.8. (a) Rp and(b) Rs sectionsof Line ITB-01
9. FigureI.9. Initial P-Impedancemodelof Line ITB-01
10. FigureI.10.FinalP-Impedance inversionresultof Line ITB-01
11. FigureI.11.Initial S-Impedance modelof Line ITB-01
12. FigureI.12.FinalS-Impedance inversionresultof Line ITB-01
13. FigureI.13.FinalLambda-Rho inversionresultof Line ITB-01
t4. FigureI.14.FinalMu-Rhoinversionresultof Line ITB-01
15. FigureI.15. Cross-correlationbetweenEEI andLambdaandMu
16. FigureI.16.Comparison between(a) EEI-19vs Lambda,and(b) EEI-58vs Mu
17. FigureI.17.Initial EEI (19)modelwith high cut frequency12Hz of Line ITB-01

LMR & EEI Inversion

By. Sigit Sukmono 39

18. FigureI.18.FinalEEI (19)inversionresultof Line ITB-01
19. FigureLl9. Initial EEI (-58)modelof Line ITB-01
20. FigureI.20.FinalEEI (-58)inversionresultof Line ITB-01
21. FigureI.21.Cross-correlation betweenEEI(19)andLambda-Rho
22. FigureI.22. Cross-correlationbetweenEEI(19)andLambda-Rho.
23. FigureI.23.Lanrbda-Rho sectionof Line R(l9) from Emerge
24. FigureI.24 Mu-Rhosectionof Line RG58)from Emerge

Ouestion:

1. Whichpropertiesuoss-plotgivesthe besttool for identifyingthe gaszone?

2. Whyin Zp-Zscross-plotthe HC is clusteredin the left of back-groundtrend?
3. Whatanglegatherrangecanbe usedin the analysis?
4. Whatis the depositionalenvironmentandlithology type of the targettedstructure?
5. Combinethe availablecross-plotsandsectionsto identify the porous,tight andgasintervals.

LMR & EEI Inversion

By. Sigit Sulcnono 4A

l{ ll l1 lr ll l It rl I i____l i- |
 Reservoar
thicknessis
10ftundertop K-01

FigureI.1.Cross-plot
between
P andS-wave
atwollB-01forintervaltopK01-K02(Kamal,2005)

g.lefa LMR & EEI I[versiofl

By.SigitSukmono 4',|
 Reservoarthiclaessis
I Oftundertop K-0I

FigureI.2.Cross-plot
between
P andS-impedance
atwell B-01for intervaltopK01-K02(Kamal,2005).

stddd LMR & EBI lnvenion

By. Sigit Sukmono 42
 Reservoar
thicloessis
1Oftundertop K-0I

Figue I.3. Cross-plotbetweenLambda-Rho

andMu-Rhoatwsll B-01for intervaltop K01-K02(Kamal,2005).

llgtdd LMR & EEIInversion

By. SigitSukmono 43
 Tracc0{a.ndc-0ctrs-jk!o1:2t
h$rtld Orw Oard P-w.

43 1 .7 r 01316i S

lofr

Figure1.4.CDPgatherdata(Karnal,2005).Whatanglerangecanbeused?

g.tEfa LMR& EEIInversion

By. SigitSukmono 44
 rF Di[ rqri*Lr*cftca
rxe?16]] rcie rEli ].9' i8r i6331t0,rr75 r41 rr r7z l?a

dPrrsr iinill;il0is Tid^ld da{Qsi

FigureL5. Seismic
stackdataof lineITB-01Positionof well B-01is given(Kamal,2005).

SGlEtd LMR & EEI hversion

By. Sigit Sukmono 45

 cdot& G'dlidlcl

? :.;9 ]- :

i.t "

FigureI.6.Gradient of LineITB-01(Kamal,2005).
section

g3tEta LMR & EEI lnversion

8,. SigitSukmono 46
FigureL8. (a) Rp and(b) Rs sections
of Line ITB-01
(Kamal,2005).

S.iEld LMR & EEI Inversion

By.sigitsukmono 48
 t6e &r46r&itFE lin

:l
@1@ llt rH4 0c!@
'@(i!)

modelofLjne ITB-01(Kamal,2005).
Figure1.9.lnitial P-L'npedance

sldEtd LMR & EEI Inversion

By. Sigit Suknono 49
 . ' '.;"'..'-' hJ5flEi'6iffifrll&r' .
oF i€ rar,l'irh. ft4 rfl ird @ rh d Eo,-6, d,rq,@,i itl!:E te,d rE ,&a,t{B. ,6,itr
'ffie

tlsure l.lu. -rlnatr-lmDeoanceinversion model(Kamal,2005).

resultofline ITB-01 usingsparse-spike

gdda LMR & EEI lnve$ion

By. SigitSukmooo 50
 1r.3 r70! rri6 r?$ 1m€10?J
il3
,fi
JrBiT

FigureI.11.InitialS-lnpedance
modelof LineITB-01(Kanal,2005).

ItdGid LMR & EEI hversion

By. Sigit Sukhono ll
 i75. 163 rTgi 1799rgrr 1329tLa 135s1g7a

FigureI.12.FinalS-Impedance
invenionresultofLine ITB-01 usingsparse-spike
model(Kamal,2005).

S.dda LMR & EEI Inversion

By.Sigitsukmono 52
 tr jr6t,[4 8,9 F! rF/ 64 t
"le

FigureI.13.FinalLambda-Rlo resultof LineITB-01(Kamal,2005).

inversion

gdEtd LMR & EEI lnve$ion

By.SigitSukmono 53
 rc.h Ddf Nu.frl[l(qr i
liklr.tlh P& srsrhrhaiu

FigureL 14. FinalMu-Rhoinversion

resultof LineITB-01 (Kamal,2005).

stdEta LMR & EBI lnve$ion

By. SigitSuirmono 54
Ltrm.& EEIIny€lsiori
55
 FigweI.16.Comparison (a)EEI-19vs Lambda,
between and(b) EEI-58vs Mu (Kamal,2005).

gdEfc LMR& EEIInversion

By. Sigit Suloaono 56
 nedcFej*agrB

@ ve nm 6rt r !1o t6@ a@: 2:,!016 colt &tr 3tdl2

FigureL l7. InitialEEI(19)modelwithhighcutftequency

12Hz of LineITB-01(Kamal,2005).

gddd LMR & EEI Inversion

By. Sigit Suknono 51
 ,i! ,rs Es Dn r5ii rttr lt4 r33sr5{1
'54

FigureI.18.FinalEEI (19)inversion
resultofLine ITB-01(Kamal,2005).

g3tErd LMR & EEI Inversion

By. SigitSulonono 58
 .,.....,.....,....Tf1 ...,-....,.....,...

FigureI.19.InitialEEI (58) modelofLine ITB-01(Kamal,2005).

g.tEld LMR & EEI Inversion

By.SigitSukmoDo 59
 FigureL20.FinalEEI (58) inversion
resultofLine ITB-01(Kamal,2005).

gdEra LMR & EEI Inversion

By.SigitSukmono 60
Figue L2l. Cross-conelation
between
EEI(19)andLambda-Rho. = (-3.50+ 0.001125
Lambda-Rlo EEI-19)2
(Kamal,2005).

gddd LMR & EEI Inversion

By. SigitSulsnono 61
Figue I.22.Cross-corelation Lambda-Rho= (0.85+ 0.00036EEI-58'
betweenEEI(19)and Lambda-Rho.
(Kamal,2005).

LMR & EEI Inversion

By. SigitSukmono 62
 @0c! r4l&aDtEnLl@r*-

16:3rri 15$ 1574rs$r 16Urrfig If,!

:l

ll

q:?

iaol

FigureI.23.Lambda-Rho
section (Kamal,2005)
ofLine R(I9) fromEmerge

gcnn6 LMK & BtI hverslon

By. Sigit Sukmono 63

 FigureI.24Mu-Rhosectionof LineR(58) ftomEmerge(Kamal,2005)

gcnold LMR & EBI lnversion

By. SigitSuknono 64
ExerciseII

Objective
the stepsin performingLMR andEEI inversionandutilize the resultsfor delineatingprospectivereservoirs.
To understand

Materials
1. FigureII.1. NormalseismicandRp initial modelof inline 153.
2. FigureII.2. NormalseismicandRs initial modelof inline 153p
3. FigureII.3. NormalseismicandR(0:30o)initial modelof inline 153
4. FigureII.4. Ip sectionandthe errortraceof inline 153
5. FigureII.5. EEI (0:30o) andrelatederrorsectionsof inline 153
6. FigureII.6. Lambda-Rho sectionof inline 153
7. FigureII.7. Mu-Rhosectioqof inline 153
8. FigureII.8. Lambdasectionof inline 153
9. FigureII.9. Mu sectionof inline 153
10. FigureII.l0. Intercept* Gradientsectionof inline235
11. FigureII.1l. Poissonratiosectionof inline235
12. FigureII.12.Mu sectionof inline235
13. FigureII.13.Mu-Rhosectionof inline235
14. FigureII.14.Poissonratiomapof intervaltop Rindu-1t 10ms
15. FigureII.15.Intercept* Gradientmapof intervaltop Rindu-l t 10ms
16. FigureII.16.Lambda-Rho sectionof inline235
17. FigureII.IT.Larnbdasectionof inline235
18. FigureII.18 Mu-Rhomapof intervaltop Rindu-l t 10ms
19. FigureII.19 Mu mapof intervaltop Rindu-l t 10ms
20. FigureII.20Lamabda-Rhomapof intervaltop Rindu-l t 10ms
21. FigurelI.2I Lamabda-Rho mapof intervaltop Rindu-l t 10ms

Ouestion:
Combinethe availablesectionsandmapsto identify the porous,tight andgasintervals.

LMR & EEI Inversion

By. Sigit Sukmono 65

f lsure ll.l. Normat selsmrcanc l(D initialmodelof inlineI53 passing
thruMutiaha5299
(Yustiana.
2003)

S.nEfa LMR & EEI lnversion

By.SigitSukmono 66
FigureIL2.Normalseismic (Yustiana,
andRsinitialmodelofinline 153passingthruMutiah#5299 2003)

g.dEla LMR & EEI Inversion

o/
By.SigitSukmono
 andR(0-30")initialmodelof inline153passingLlruMutiah452991Yustiana.2003.1
Figurel[.3.Normalseismic

g.nold LMR & EEI Inversion

By. SigitSukmono 68
FigureII.4.Ip sectionandtheenortraceofinline153passing
thruMutiah#5299
(yustiarla,
2003)

SctEla LMR& EEIInversion

By. Sigit Sulmono 69
FigureII.5.EEI (0=30o) ofinline 153passing
andrelatederor sections (Yustiana,
thruMutiah#5299 2003)

gclEld LMR& EEIInvenion

By. Sigit Sukmono 70
 FigureII.6.Lambda-Rho
sectionofinline 153(Yustiana,2003)

gsldd LMR & PBI Inversiotr

By. SigitSu.lorono 7l
 ofinline 153(Yustiara,2003)
FigureII.7.Mu-Rhosection

U# LMR & EEI Inversion

By.SigitSukmono 72
FigureiI.8, Lambdasectionof inline I 53 (Yustiana'2003)

LMR & EEI lnve$ion

tt
By. SigitSulmono
 FigureIL9.Mu section
ofinline 153(Yustia.na,
2003)

s# LMR & EEI Inversion

By. Sigit Sukmono 74

 1""i ?

_t

t{

L,- !'
h*l i4
E-l

ta;'
iru",
- tr i- ..
P ),r", r
- rrt F-
l:"-
"

FigureII.l0. Intercept* Gradientsectionofinline 235(Yustiana,2003)

S.dEfa LMR& EEIlnversion

By.SigitSukmono 75
 FigureII.11.Poisson ofinline235(Yustiana,
ratiosection 2003)

S.iEld LMR & EEI lnvenion

By. Sigit Sulamno
 \ l 0'

""t ?a?' P -

I
-:F

ofinline235(Yustiana,
FigurcII.12.Mu section 2003)

gdEra LMR & EEI Inversion

By. Sigit Sukmono 77

 l,=-

FigureII.13.Mu-Rhosection
of inline235(Yustiana,
2003)

Irdda LMR & EEI Inversiol

By. SigitSukmono 78
 t

ratiomapofintervaltopRindu-1+ 10ms(Yustiana,
FigweII.14.Poisson 2003)

ll3lclo LMR & EEI Inversion

By. Sigit Sukmono 79
 -;;.-t''

FigureII.15.Intercept Gradientmapof intervaltop Rindu-1+ 10ms(Yustiana,2003)

gdcta LMR & EEIInversiotr

By. Sigit Sulcnono 80
 FigureII.l6. Lambda-Rho ofinline235(Yustiana,
section 2003)

g.nEfa LMR & EEIhversion

By. SigitSuknono 81
 FigureII.l7. Lambda
sectionof inline235 (Yustiar42003)

galda LMR & EEI Inversion

By. SigitSulonono 82
 ' ' r' ' ' ' -; . : -ji '''L ''

FigureII.18Mu-RlomapofintervaltopRindu-1* 10ms(Yustiana,
2003)

gdEta LMR & EEI Inversion

By. SigitSuionono 83
 FigureII.19Mu mapofintervaltopRindu-l+ l0 ms(Yustiana,
2003)

gcnEt. LMR& EEIInversion

By. SigitSui(mono 84
 -l
"i
-t
-l
-t
!
"i
i" l
;I
J i,'
ittl

-t !u
t'.
[q
t
w
E.
h'
E"
c
_-r_--!:-''-']:._-f_-_.T'.'--:--_T-_
t , D /r ,,c 4
F.

mapof intewaltop Rindu-1+ 10 ms(Yustiana,2003)

Figue II.20 Lamabda-Rho

SdErd LMR & EEI Inversion

By. Sigit Sukmono 85
 FigureII.21 Lamabda-FJro
mapofintervaltop Rindu-l + 10ms(Yustian42003)

g€lEla LMR & EEI Ioversion

By. Sigirsukmono 86