Seabed Hazard Based on Quantitative Analysis Using Seismic Data

and Well Data in Bundi Field, Malay Basin

by

Puteri Shahirah Nazihah Binti Salihan

20585

Progress report submitted in partial fulfilment of

the requirements for the
Bachelor of Technology (Hons)
Petroleum Geoscience

September 2018

Department of Geosciences
Universiti Teknologi PETRONAS
32610 Bandar Seri Iskandar
Perak Darul Ridzuan
 ABSTRACT

Safety always being the major concerns in all industry especially oil and gas
exploration. Unsafe seabed will lead to poor installation of platform which could
potentially harm the workers and expensive exploration cost. Bundi-1 and South
Bundi-1 wells was set up and drilled in 1990 by Esso Production Inc. (EPSI) to test
the hydrocarbon potential and reservoir quality within Bundi field area.
Unfortunately, at significant depth they encountered with abnormal pressure from
the logging reading and finally these wells have been unplugged and abandoned till
now. Thus, hazard assessment in this area is essential to identify all possible
constraints and hazards from natural and geological features which may affect the
operational or environmental integrity of a proposed drilling operation. Plus, this
study was conducted with aim to evaluate and assess potential hazard in seabed,
Group A/B and top of Group F of Bundi field quantitatively whereby this technique
was still not well developed. Geological parameters such as geomorphology, fault,
resistivity log, density log, gamma ray log and buried channel were selected as a
main indicator for hazard identification throughout this study which each of these
geological parameters were interpreted through TWT map and dip map that has
been produced through horizon picking using Petrel. Seismic attributes such as
variance and dip were applied to observe gas seepage and sediment flow that have
been one of the major geological hazards in the subsurface exploration. Other than
that, six geological parameters for this hazard study were further correlated using
SPSS software to see the relation between each parameter either dependent or
independent variable plus evaluate the percentage of hazard occurrence in this field.
From result of quantitative analysis, identified hazard were plotted and produced a
hazard map of this area based on the percentage of hazard occurrence for future
development uses.

2
 Contents
ABSTRACT............................................................................................................................... 2

INTRODUCTION ..................................................................................................................... 7

1.1 Background of Study ................................................................................................. 7

1.2 Problem Statements ................................................................................................... 8

1.3 Objectives .................................................................................................................. 8

1.4 Scope of Study ........................................................................................................... 9

1.5 Study Area ................................................................................................................. 9

LITERATURE REVIEW ........................................................................................................ 11

2.1 Tectonic Setting of South-East Asia ........................................................................ 11

2.1.1 Pre-Tertiary Evolution History ........................................................................ 13

2.1.2 The India-Asian Collision ................................................................................ 15

2.2 Geographic location of Malay Basin and Bundi field. ............................................. 16

2.3 Tectonic setting of Malay Basin .............................................................................. 18

2.3.1 Tectonic setting of Bundi ................................................................................. 19

2.3 Stratigraphy and paleoenvironment of Malay Basin ................................................ 21

2.3.1 Stratigraphy of Bundi Field.............................................................................. 22

2.4 Drilling hazard ......................................................................................................... 25

METHODOLOGY .................................................................................................................. 28

3.1 Data availability ....................................................................................................... 28

3.1.1 3D seismic data set........................................................................................... 28

3.1.2 Well data .......................................................................................................... 29

3.2 Project Workflow ..................................................................................................... 30

3.3 Data gathering, loading and preliminary study ........................................................ 31

3.4 Geophysical Study ................................................................................................... 31

3.4.1 Well Correlation............................................................................................... 31

3.4.2 Synthetic generation for wells and Seismic-Well tie ....................................... 32

3.4.3 Horizon and Fault Picking ............................................................................... 33

3.4.4 Generation of TWT structure maps ................................................................. 33

3
 3.4.5 Seismic Attribute Analysis .................................................................................... 34

3.5 Hazard Studies ......................................................................................................... 35

3.6 Quantitative Analysis ............................................................................................... 37

3.7 FYP 1 Gantt Chart ................................................................................................... 38

3.8 FYP II Gantt Chart ................................................................................................... 39

3.9 Project Milestone ..................................................................................................... 40

• Final Year Project I (May-August 2018): ................................................................ 40

• Final Year Project II (September-December 2018): ................................................ 40

RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONS ............................................................................................ 41

4.1 Introduction .............................................................................................................. 41

4.2 Study Area ............................................................................................................... 41

4.3 Well Information...................................................................................................... 43

4.4 Well Correlation....................................................................................................... 45

4.5 Seismic Interpretation .............................................................................................. 47

4.5.1 Fault Interpretation.................................................................................................. 47

4.5.2 Horizon Interpretation ............................................................................................. 48

4.6 Qualitative Hazard Assessment ............................................................................... 51

CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS .................................................................. 58

5.1 Conclusions .............................................................................................................. 58

5.2 Recommendations .................................................................................................... 58

REFERENCES ........................................................................................................................ 59

APPENDICES ......................................................................................................................... 60

4
 LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 1: Summarizing of potential offshore hazard ................................................................. 8
Figure 2: Study area is indicated by the red mark.................................................................... 10
Figure 3:Global plate tectonic framework of Southeast Asia. After Hamilton (1979). ........... 12
Figure 4: Major tectonic elements of Southeast Asia. Modified from Metclafe (1996). ........ 13
Figure 5: Distribution of land-masses and oceans during Permo-Triassic times. After Metcalfe
(1996). ...................................................................................................................................... 14
Figure 6: Extrusion tectonics hypothesis model. After Tapponnier et al., 1982. ..................... 15
Figure 7: Geographic location of Malay Basin (Madon et al., 1999) ...................................... 17
Figure 8: Oil and gas discoveries in the Malay Basin (Madon et al., 1999) ............................ 17
Figure 9: Shear model for kinematic evolution of Malay Basin ( Mazlan Madon, 1997 a) ... 20
Figure 10: Cross sections of the Malay Basin (A) NW-SE section. (B, C, D) NE-SW sections.
Modified from Esso (1985) ...................................................................................................... 20
Figure 11: Stratigraphy and depositional environment of Malay Basin (EPIC, 1994) ............ 24
Figure 12: Polarity at seabed.................................................................................................... 29
Figure 13: Workflow of project ............................................................................................... 30
Figure 14: Synthetic seismogram (Theory) ............................................................................. 33
Figure 15: Final Year Project I Gantt Chart ............................................................................. 38
Figure 16: Final Year Project II Gantt Chart ........................................................................... 39
Figure 17: Arbitrary cross section between South Bundi-1 and Bund-1 wells. ....................... 42
Figure 18: Base map of Bundi field with available wells ........................................................ 42
Figure 19: Well correlation between Bundi-1 and South Bundi-1 well................................... 46
Figure 20: Fault interpretation in inline 794 ............................................................................ 47
Figure 21: 11 picked faults from study area ............................................................................ 48
Figure 22: Horizon picking (inline and crossline) of Bundi field ............................................ 48
Figure 23: Horizon interpretation at crossline 3077............................................................... 49
Figure 24: TWT structure maps of picked horizon which A) seabed B) Group A & B and C)
Top of Group F ........................................................................................................................ 50
Figure 25: TWT structure map of seabed with arbitrary zon ................................................... 51
Figure 26: Cross section of Arbitrary_A zone ......................................................................... 52
Figure 27: Cross section of Arbitrary_B zone ......................................................................... 52
Figure 28: Spectrum of channel types based on plan view (Miall, 1977)................................ 53
Figure 29: Dip map of seabed with diameter of channels ........................................................ 54
Figure 30: Dip map of Group A & B horizon with diameter of channel ................................. 55
Figure 31: Dip map of Top Group F horizon with diameter of channels................................. 55
Figure 32: Cross section of high sinuosity meandering channel in seabed.............................. 56

5
Figure 33: Cross section of low sinuosity meandering channel within seabed ........................ 56
Figure 34: Cross section of high sinuosity meandering channel within Group A & B............ 57
Figure 35: Cross section of distributory channels within Top Group F ................................... 57

LIST OF TABLES
Table 1: Stratigraphic section of Bundi and South Bundi field ............................................... 23
Table 2: Classification of shale ................................................................................................ 25
Table 3: Effect of different solution on shale .......................................................................... 27
Table 4: Log data availability of Bundi-1 and South Bundi-1 well ......................................... 29
Table 5: Key milestone of FYP I ............................................................................................. 40
Table 6: Key milestone of FYP II ............................................................................................ 40
Table 7: Well information of Bundi-1 well ............................................................................. 43
Table 8: Well information of South Bundi-1 well ................................................................... 44

6
 CHAPTER 1

INTRODUCTION

1.1 Background of Study

Offshore geological hazards refer to any geologic features or process, existing

or potential that would prevent the exploration and development of petroleum
resources. Once offshore hazards have been identified, special procedures or
methmay be required for bottom-founded structures and facilities and proposed
drilling sites need to carefully be assessed. There are a lot of potential geologic
hazards that has been faced in oil and gas industry such as active faulting and
seismicity, slope instability, mass wasting process, buried and filled channels,
hydrocarbon seeps, shallow gas, gas hydrate and complex seabed morphology.
Sometimes drilling delays caused by pipe stuck in difficult formations which lead
to expensive proposition.
This study is the first step in making a census of the geohazard-bearing features
present in Bundi field. Indeed, well in that field was unplugged and abandoned after
drilled at certain depth due to abnormal pressure detected.
In that case, further hazard study on this area are needed to quantify the risks
posed present hazard that will impact and cause adverse effect on any upcoming
exploration and development drilling operation. A few of geological parameters
will be used and played as main variables for identification, evaluation and analysis
of presence seabed hazard. From the tittle itself, ‘quantitative analysis’ refer to use
numerical method to observe and interpret the presence of hazard, define its
probability and measure its real extent and thickness.

7
 Figure 1: Summarizing of potential offshore hazard

1.2 Problem Statements

Quantitative analysis on hazard present in Bundi area have not yet being well
developed. Most from the previous study, their proposed model mainly focused on
qualitative analysis of the geological hazard in that area. From these statistical
results, it has the advantage of being able to withstand the supervision of technical
experts and can produce the hazard results in a format that stating the qualities of
uncertainty and possibility, both of which are fundamental components of risk
assessment.
Throughout geohazard assessment, few geologic variables will be used to
determine the degree of hazard including the location of hazard characteristic,
potential magnitude and rate of occurrence (recurrence) of hazard event. However,
geological parameters such as structure and morphology will be mainly used in this
study to show the features of seabed hazard clearly.

1.3 Objectives

The ultimate goal of this project is to evaluate and assess potential hazard
qualitative and quantitatively in Bundi field for future development process.
Apart from that, this project outcome may contribute in reducing uncertainties

8
 and minimizing the risk of development and exploration in this area. The key
objectives of study as follow:

• To be able generate seabed map and subsurface map by correlating

seismic data and well data from Bundi and South Bundi.
• To identify the accurate geological parameters for hazard analysis
• To produce statistical analysis of the geological hazard in Bundi.
• To propose a model and hazard map using qualitative and quantitative
analysis

1.4 Scope of Study

If geohazards exist on the seabed, they must be identified, ranked with

all associated risks determined, at the earliest opportunity in the well planning
process. Only such processes can then ensure that “best” operational guidelines
and contingencies will exist to prevent and eliminate risks and operational loss
at lowest possible levels. This study is about detecting and imaging hazard in a
seabed of Malay Basin which involves:
• Seismic well tie between 3D seismic data and well data from Bundi and
South Bundi gas field
• Horizon picking, and interpretation based on the geological parameters
that has been set for hazard study
• Produce a hazard map and quantitative analysis of the hazard for Bundi
field

1.5 Study Area

Malay Basin is situated in the southern part of the Gulf of Thailand, between
Vietnam and Peninsular Malaysia. This basin was resulted due to tectonic extension
in Late Eocene to Early Oligocene, followed with Indian-Asian continent collision
(Tapponnier et al., 1986; Hutchison, 1989). The basin composed of a thick
succession (>8 km) of Oligo-Miocene to Recent sediments, which then overlie by
a pre-Tertiary basement composed metamorphic, igneous and sedimentary rocks.
Malay Basin’s structural evolution can be classified into three stages of tectono-
stratigraphic (Tjia, 1994; Madon, 1998; Negah et al., 1996 and Tjia and Liw, 1996):
1) a pre-Miocene syn-rift phase; 2) an Early to Middle Miocene post-rift phase
dominated by thermally-induced subsidence and basin inversion; and 3) a Late

9
Miocene to Recent phase dominated by thermally-induced subsidence but lacking
significant basin inversion. The presence of folding in the Malay Basin as seen in
seismic sections justifies the presence of compressional forces. This project focused
on Bundi field which is located approximately 270km NNE of Kemaman supply.

Figure 2: Study area is indicated by the red mark

10
 CHAPTER 2

LITERATURE REVIEW

This chapter mainly describes about the geographic location and regional geology of
study area from previous study done by other researchers. It comprises of the theory of
basin evolution and sediment formation with study area. Potential offshore geohazard

2.1 Tectonic Setting of South-East Asia

At present, South East Asia is known as a region of many islands where the
continental crust and transition are basically underlying the shallow shelf seas of
approximately 200 m while the oceanic crust underlies deeper ocean basin. The
series of mega tectonic features in Southeast Asia can be described basically by
plate tectonics, a rigid lithospheric entity interaction called a plate. Three large
lithospheric plates are: Indian-Australia, Pacific, and Philippine plate that
surrounds Southeast Asia and still collide with Eurasia as small as about 6 to 8 cm
per year.
The border between these three plates is an active subduction zone that
surrounds the region from the Ryuku arc in the northeast, through the Philippines,
Java, and Sumatra, to Myanmar to the northwest. These active plate margins are
found in between shallow to deep seismicity, the advanced Benioff-Wadati zone,
the trench, the rise complex and the volcano arc. The Indian-Australian slab
movement in the north causes a highly oblique convergent boundary across the arc
of Sumatra, which causes a strong right-lateral shear component for the
deformation associated with subduction (McCaffrey, 1996; Malod and Kemal,
1996).
Certain region within South-East Asia is the pre-Tertiary continental core
(Sundaland) that underlies most of it western region from Myanmar to western
Borneo (Figure 3). It is located to the south of the Eurasian Plate and is attached to

11
 and located in between India and South China (Figure 3). During the Mesozioc and
early Cenezoic, the region from Peninsular Malaysia to southwestern Borneo was
a contagious part of this continental terrain that formed a vast landmass (Figure 3).
However, the western part of the South-East Asia was relatively older than the
eastern part. This might be due to tectonic evolution in Late Cretaceous-Tertiary
approximately 50 to 60 million years ago.

Figure 3:Global plate tectonic framework of Southeast Asia. After Hamilton (1979).

The South China Sea basin in the other hand, is the oceanic crust that was spread
during the Oligocene (32 million years ago) and cover the region between Vietnam
and Borneo (Taylor and Hayes, 1980; Briais et al., 1993). During the rifting, the
Luconia and Reed Bank blocks are pulled together from the north-west of Borneo
and eventually collided with the West Borneo Basement to form an uplifted
accretionary prism named the Rajang Fold-Thrust Belt (Figure 3) (Hazebroek and
Tan, 1993).

12
Figure 4: Major tectonic elements of Southeast Asia. Modified from Metclafe (1996).

2.1.1 Pre-Tertiary Evolution History

It all started during Palaeozoic and Mesozoic when the supercontinent Pangaea
started to break up and evolution of Tethys Ocean occurred. During Palaeozoic, the
Tethys Ocean covered the area between Pangaea, Gondwanaland and Laurasia.
Metcalfe (1988, 1991, 1996) claimed that South-East Asia is believed to have
several major tectonostratigraphic terranes which formed during the splitting og
Pangaea and the opening and closure of successive Tethys.
There is evidence that suggests that the South-East Asian tectonostratigraphic
terranes were once part of the supercontinent Gondwanaland during early
Palaeozoic period (Hutchison, 1989: Metcalfe, 1996). Late Palaeozoic-Mesozoic
floras and faunas that is unrelated to Gondwanaland but have affinities with South
and North China were found in East Malaya and Indochina. Hutchison (1989)
believed that these terranes were once part of the Gondwanaland and started rifted
off the mass land sometime during the Ordovician and Silurian, and settled to the
north, south-east of Laurasia by the late Permian. On the other hand, the Sibumasu
contain the obvious Gondwanaland features of Carboniferous-Early Permian

13
 glaciomarine diamictites and Early Permian cool-water faunas suggesting that it is
composed of terranes originated from NW Australian Gondwanaland as to have
this kind of features, the Sibumasu must have been close to Godwanaland at least
until Carboniferous-Permian times. Hutchison (1993) believed that due to
glaciation that this terrane became separated from Gondwanaland during the late
Early Permian and eventually collided with East Malaya-Indochina during the late
Triassic Indosinian Orogeny (Metcalfe, 1996).

Figure 5: Distribution of land-masses and oceans during Permo-Triassic times. After

Metcalfe (1996).

The Carboniferous-Permian rifting phase of these continental ended with the

collision of the Sibumasu terrane and the East Malaya-Indochina terrane in the late
Triassic and the closure of the Palaeo-Tethys Ocean and had resulted in the Indosinian
Orogeny (Hutchison, 1989). This tectonic evolution involved the suturing of the
allochthonous continental terranes that had rifted off from Gondwanaland since the
Late Palaeozoic (Gatinsky and Hutchison, 1986; Sengor and Hsu, 1984; Sengor, 1987;
Melcalfe, 1988, 1996). This eventually resulted the creation of the Song Ma Suture
(Late Devonian), the Bentong-Raub Suture (Late Triassic), and the Woyla-Meratus-
Boyan Sutures (Middle-Late Cretaceous).

14
2.1.2 The India-Asian Collision

Collision of India and Asian plate occurred about 50-45 million years ago has been
major caused for the formation of South-East Asia in Cenozoic time (Dewey et al.,
1989). This event involved the processes of strike-slip tectonics, marginal basin
formation, and arc collision during the Cenozoic.

Figure 6: Extrusion tectonics hypothesis model. After Tapponnier et al., 1982.

Tapponier et al. in 1982 had demonstrated the overview of India-Asia

collision during the Middle to Late Eocene by conducting a simple experiment
of continental indentation using plasticine. The event is believed to cause the
extrusion of continental along major strike-slip faults. Sundaland were
displaced to the south-east and east by almost a thousand kilometers away from
the collision zone and this displacement was taken up along major strike-slip
fault zone. From the India-Asia collision also, pull-apart basins namely Pattani
Trough and Malay Basin were formed along the NW-trending strike-slip faults
(Daines, 1985; Polochan and Sattayarak, 1989). The extensional basins from the
Fulf of Thailand to Natuna was named as the Malay-Natuna-Lupar Shear Zone
by Daines (1985). Major strike-slip faults such as the Wang Chao, Three
Pagodas and Red River show left-lateral displacement of several hundred
kilometers (Lacassin et al., 1993; Maluski et al., 1993; Scharer et al., 1990,
1993, 994) supporting the extrusion model.

15
2.2 Geographic location of Malay Basin and Bundi field.

The Malay Basin is located in the southern part of Gulf of Thailand, between
Vietnam and Peninsular Malaysia, which estimated coverage area about 80,000 km2
and composed of sediments deposit approximately 14km (Arshad, Mohd, & H.D.,
1995) and approximately 250km wide and 500km long. Malay basin was made up from
two parts which is the southern part which control by a NW-SE structural trend
meanwhile northern part with northerly trending structure. The basin continues
southeastwards close to Indonesia’s Natuna Basin and northwestwards to merge with
Thailand’s Pattani Trough (Madon, Abolins, Hoesni, & M., 1999). Extending from
Bintang to Bergading field, a major basement saddle which seperates from a smaller
north-trending sub-basin from the main NW-trending main Malay Basin in the
Malaysia-Thai Joint Development Area (JDA).
Average of sediment within Malay Basin about of 338000 km3. Malay
Basin’s northeast part lies in between Vietnam's border. According to Ngah (1990)
Malay Basin is located near to 3 basin which are the Pattani Basin, West Natuna Basin
and Penyu Basin. It is also seen as the southeast end of the Three Pagodas which is
the main slip of the strike slip fault elongated from Malaysia to Thailand. It is located
entirely offshore where the water column is less than 200 meters. It runs almost
perpendicular to the Penyu Basin in the east and west and while West of Natuna Basin
in the south and is parallel to the Pattani Basin in the Gulf of Thailand to the north. The
Tenggol Arch and Pattani Basin by Narathiwat High has been main boundary which
separated Malay Basin with Penyu Basin.

According to Madon et al. in 2010, exploration and development of petroleum

within Malay Basin started in 1968 and currently they already in mature stage. Total
oil and gas accumulations which have been discovered so far were about 13 fields and
still producing. Early exploration activities within this basin in pre-1980s has been
reviewed by Armitage (1980), Ahmad Said (1982) and Chua and Wong (1997). In this
study, the well data was coming from Bundi and South Bundi area which both are gas
fields. Bundi and South Bundi are wildcat well drilled by Esso in Block PM 5 to test
hydrocarbon and reservoir quality of groups E, F, H and I. Bundi well is located
approximately 280 km North-Northeast (NNE) direction from Kemaman Supply Base

16
meanwhile South Bundi well located 275 km North-Northeast (NNE) direction from
Kemaman Supply Base.

Figure 7: Geographic location of Malay Basin (Madon et al., 1999)

Figure 8: Oil and gas discoveries in the Malay Basin (Madon et al., 1999)

17
2.3 Tectonic setting of Malay Basin

Malay Basin was composed of two parts which the southern part with NW-SE
structural trend meanwhile northern part with northerly-trending structures. Collision
of Malaya and Indochina which caused by indentation of India to Eurasia, this basin
developed by transtensional shear and extensional of crust in pre-Tertiary (Tapponeir,
Peltzer, Le Dain & Armijo, 1982). During late Eocene-Oligocene to early Miocene,
extension occurred which resulting in formatin of synrift half-graben, whereby now
seen only as basin flanks.

Malay Basin is known due to its complex structure that consists several extensional
grabens whereby most of the grabens have not been penetrated because of their great
depth but were interpreted from magnetic, gravity and seismic data. From seismic
mapping, several smaller grabens were found the west-central margin including
Dungun Graben described above and the Tok Bidan Graben (Liew, 1994). The
structural history of Malay Basin can be divided into two phase which were synrift
phase and a post-rift phase. Madon, Abolins, Hassan, Yakzan and Zainal (2006)
claimed that the synrift phase occurred when there were active faulting and extension
about Eocene to Oligocene time meanwhile the post-rift phase (early Miocene and later)
was when the extensional faulting had stopped, however the sedimentation kept
continues causing but the basin to subside. The post-rift thermal subsidence produces
by a broad sagging of the basin which was then interrupted by basin inversion during
early to middle Miocene (Tjia, 1994).

During late Upper Miocene which is in late of Group I times, basin inversion of
Malay Basin started which occurred episodically and it seems to have continued well
into Pliocene. Resulting from basin inversion event causing sedimentary basin to be
uplifted and produced structural evidences such as compressional anticlines, inverted
and uplifted half-grabens and reverse throws on half-graben normal faults. These
features are mostly found in the axial (along same line as axis of rotation) region of the
basin. Inversion in the Malay Basin occurs when the initial sinistral shear is reversed
causing fault block bounded by East trending faults to rotate clockwise causing sinistral
oblique slip to occur along the bounding faults. This oblique slip then causes shortening
in the North-South direction, causing reverse dip-slip activation of faults. Due to this
shearing, the intensity of this inversion is greater at the centre and towards the
Southeast. Many of the anticlines are oriented roughly E-W and are en echelon, parallel

18
to the basement normal faults that bound major synrift half graben. The location and
geometry of the inversion anticlines appear to have been strongly controlled by the
basement fault.

2.3.1 Tectonic setting of Bundi

Bundi and South Bundi structures were formed by a combination of structural

events occurring during extensional and compressional phase of the structural history
of Malay Basin. The early extensional phase during Oligocene gave rise to the
formation of half-grabens. These half-grabens are not clearly seen on seismic at South
Bundi due to poor seismic resolution below the Group K level.

The later compressional phase of the Malay Basin resulted in the structural
inversion and east-west orientation of the Bundi-South Bundi-West Bundi anticline.
Associated with this tectonic movement is the formation of fault-bend-fold with
displacement of the major NW-SE trending basement involved fault sometimes as
reactivated pre-existing normal fault as seen on seismic as the north bounding faults for
South Bundi and the east bounding fault of West Bundi.
The Bundi prospect is relatively low relief anticline structure and being part of the
fault-bend-fold associated with displacement on the major NW-SE trending basement
involved fault to the south of the prospect. The resulting closure is fault independent
although an additional fault splay from the southern bounding fault has displacement
up to 40 m in the group H and I within the structural closure. Area and relief vary with
increasing depth. The shallower group E section has a 30 m vertical relief with an area
of 4450 acres, whereas the deeper group I section has a 65 m relief covering an area of
about 3300 acres. Dips are gentle and do not exceed 5˚ even in the deeper sections. The
crest of the anticline shifts slightly to the south in the younger section and the direction
of critical closure changes from north to east.

19
 Figure 9: Shear model for kinematic evolution of Malay Basin
( Mazlan Madon, 1997 a)

Figure 10: Cross sections of the Malay Basin (A) NW-SE section. (B, C, D) NE-SW
sections. Modified from Esso (1985)

20
2.3 Stratigraphy and paleoenvironment of Malay Basin

Each of Malay Basin strata is perfectly divided into seismostratigraphic units called
Group whereby these groups are bounded by seismic reflector. Seismic reflector act as
a division between beds or facies with different properties whereby these reflectors
usually define as major sequence boundaries such as unconformities on the basin flanks.
This nomenclature was created by Esso in 1960s which this group was arranged
alphabetically in order of increasing age from A to M and currently still preferred within
oil and gas industry. The stratigraphic development of the Malay Basin is directly
related to its structural evolution. According to Ismail, Rudolph and Abdullah (1994),
extensional phase occurred resulted in basin development which subsidence was
controlled by faulting. Initially, sedimentation in isolated depocentres deposited thick
syn-rift succession of alternating sand-dominated and shale-dominated, fluviolacustrine
sequences. Group M to K which fill the extensional sub-basins comprise the deposits
of braided streams, coastal plains, lacustrine deltas and lakes. Initially, sediments
deposited in confined depositional centers producing thick succession of alternating
sand-dominated and shale-dominated in fluviolacustrine arrangements. Group M to K
consists sediment which were deposited in braided streams, coast plains, lacustrine
environments.

During Lower Oligocene, extensional faulting event ceased, and the event continued
with thermal subsidence and causing deposition of Group L to D. In Upper Miocene,
existence of abundance coal bearing strata within the succession shows the basin surely
at or near to sea level. Group I and J composed of progradational to aggradational fluvial
to tidally-dominated estuarine sands. Group H and F were said deposited during sea
level rise which sediments dominantly from marine to deltaic environment are
dominantly marine to deltaic sediments with fluvial/estuarine channels influences.
Meanwhile, Group E and D composed of sediments dominantly deposited in
fluvial/estuarine channels area with and cultimated with erosional unconformity
(Madon et al., 1999).

During Upper to Middle Miocene time, inversion of half-grabens occurred localized

resulted from reactivation of bounding faults and uplifted of southeastern part of Malay
Basin which have been caused by tectonic subsidence and compressional deformation.
Observation from seismic data shows obvious unconformity that already overlain by
undeformed marine sediments such as Group A and B and this unconformity represents

21
truncates and uplifted of older strata such as Group H at the southern part of the basin.
Group A and B composed of marine clays and silts which were deposited during marine
transgression in nearshore to shallow marine environment.

2.3.1 Stratigraphy of Bundi Field

Bundi-1 is planned as a deep well to test porosity development in a basin margin

position on strike with, but structurally deeper than the successful Larut-1 well, 45 km
to the southeast. On the other hand, South Bundi-1 well was drilled primarily to test the
hydrocarbon potential and reservoir quality of groups E, F, H, and I sandstones found
to be hydrocarbon bearing in the Bundi-1 well. It was also drilled to further evaluate
Bundi prospect and provide useful geologic and stratigraphic controls in this northern
part of Malay Basin.

The group E section in Bundi-1 and South Bundi-1 is made up of sandstones

interbedded with shales and siltstones. Coaly bed can be scattered throughout the
section. The sandstones thickness ranges from 3 m to 20 m in Bundi-1 whilst in South
Bundi-1 the sandstones thicknesses vary from 3 m to 15 m.They are made up of channel
and point bar sandstones deposited in lower coastal plain environment. The age of this
group is Late Miocene and is about 370 m of thickness in Bundi-1 and 399 m thick in
South Bundi-1.

The drilling of Bundi-1 and South Bundi-1 is terminated shallower than targeted
end due to severe abnormal pressure. The development of the overpressure has been
described by Madon (2007) as disequilibrium compaction being the main mechanism
and was generated when burial and sedimentation rate is high during syn-rift phase at
the centre of the basin. It was also described that the overpressure at the basin flanks
are generated due to lateral transfer of the excess pressure into permeable rocks.

22
 Table 1: Stratigraphic section of Bundi and South Bundi field

Group Stratigraphic Description

Group A • Age: Pliocene to Recent

& Group B • Composition: Unconsolidated claystones and siltstone

rich in fossils and pyrite
• Environment: inner neritic to holomarine environment
• Thickness: 1008 m at Bundi-1, 1012 m at South Bundi-1

Group D • Age: Late Miocene

• Composition: intercalated claystones siltstones and
sandstone
• Environment: delta front with varying lagoonal and tidal
flat influences
• Thickness: 136m at Bundi-1, 147m at South Bundi-1

Group E • Age: Late Miocene

• Composition: Sandstone interbedded with shales and
siltstones, coal bed scattered throughout the section
• Environment: channel and point bar in lower coastal plain
environment
• Thickness: 370m at Bundi-1, 399m at South Bundi-1

Group F • Age: Middle to Late Miocene

• Composition: alternating shales and siltstones with minor
sandstone beds
• Environment: coastal fluvial plain environment with
varying tidal influences
• Thickness: 181m at Bundi-1, 163m at South Bundi-1

Group H • Age: Middle Miocene

• Composition: shales interbedded with siltstones, thin
sandstones and abundant coaly beds

23
 • Environment: lower coastal plain with tidal and marine
influences
• Thickness: 633m at Bundi-1, 641m at South Bundi-1

Group I • Age: Early Miocene

• Composition: shale and sandstone sequences
• Environment: tidal influence coastal fluvio-marine
environment

Figure 11: Stratigraphy and depositional environment of Malay Basin (EPIC, 1994)

24
2.4 Drilling hazard

75% of drilled formation was made up of shale which more than 90% caused wellbore
instability problems. Clay minerals properties in the shale formation was agreed to be
the main cause in instability which lead to serious operating problems with severe
economic consequences exploration and production oil and gas that occurred almost
twenty years ago whereby cost the industry at least half a billion dollars per annum
(Anderson et al., 2010). Apart from shale’s mineralogy which may lead to instability,
shale instability in borehole also may also depends on [1] overburden/overlying pressure,
[2] the pore pressure in the shale which exceeds the hydrostatic pressure, [3] clay
absorbing water rate, tectonic forces and [4] the microfractures presence along cleavage
planes on clay platelets. Shale’s effect can cause collapse of well through caving,
sloughing or heaving which surely lead to holes enlargement. Accumulation of drill
cuttings or shales around drill bit and drilling pipes will resulting in bit-balling that
significantly reduce the diameter of borehole plus indirect problems include clogging
the surface and shaft lines due to the scattering and fragmentation. This issue will also
lead to holes tightness and drill pipes trapped that may cause well abandonment. O'Brien
and Chenevert were among the first to try to directly link shales instability to their clay
mineral compositions. They classified the shales problem into the five main categories,
where clay mineralogy is related to their relative hardness and their tendency to hydrate
and disperse, thus leading to problems such as sloughing, caving, dispersion and bit-
balling as table 1.

Table 2: Classification of shale

25
Incorrect drilling fluid used can affect the productivity due to interaction between the
drilling fluid filtrate and the clay within the potential producing formation. Drilling
fluid or mud significantly used throughout drilling operations usually used to maintain
bottom-hole pressure, transport cuttings, lubricating drill strings. Chenevert, Kelly et al.
and Simpson examined the utilization of oil-based mud to prevent from bit balling
occurrence and to control the stability of borehole. According to Degouy et al. (1993),
they claimed that there are several advantages of oil-based mud compared to water-
based fluid which are enhance stability of borehole, longer life, low reservoir damage
factor, reduced torque in deviated wells and excellent stability for high temperatures
and with the presence of pollutants. From research made by O'Brien and Chenevert
1973, they surely claimed that K-based mud will create sudden effect on the swelling
and spreading of the shale. Table 3 shows that using of K+ in chloride solution is more
effective compared to Ca2+, Mg2+ and Na+ as it more recover from well blocking due to
Class 2 shale (high illite and fairly smectite) swelling. From field experience in most
wells, the use of K+ in drilling fluid able to provide shale stabilization for more than
48-72 hours. However outside of this period, encountered shales begin to swell and in
part particularly where caustic potash is used instead of caustic soda. Using of SO / 50
salt mixtures produce better results. Both alkalinity of mud and filtrate are maintained
as low and close as possible. The use of biopolymers alone is not recommended for
drilling through the sloughing of shale formation as loss of fluid will occurred to the
formation in the form of a polymer solution. This problem occurred due to increase in
osmotic pressure which resulting in weakening the bundle of shale bonds that can cause
shale swelling and heaving.
All in all, when penetrating through shale which contains water formation it is
more secure to keep up a similar level of salinity and total solid dissolved in both water
and mud formation systems. Drilling mud containing the same ions as in the shale
formation should be used when drilling through the formation of troublesome shale. If
initial step dip exists, the pore pressure must exceed and the plug back cementing job
under pressure is better when drilling through step dip gumbo-plastic shales.

26
Table 3: Effect of different solution on shale

27
 CHAPTER 3

METHODOLOGY

3.1 Data availability

This chapter laid out the technique utilized for the task by integrating
the accessible information which are geophysical well logs, seismic areas, check
shot and base guide of the seismic lines. Those two complementary sources are
used to determine the probability of hazard either seabed hazard or drilling
hazard occurrence in Bundi field from the seabed map or structural map which
have been produced.

3.1.1 3D seismic data set

Commonly, seismic information gives a relatively consistent data and

subsurface perspectives that can resolve and show basic and stratigraphic
changes through reflection events. The dataset has undergo zero-phase
processed with SEG normal polarity, in which a positive (peak) event (black
seismic reflection on seismic sections) represents a downward increase in
acoustic impedance, and a negative (trough) event (white seismic reflection on
seismic sections) represents a downward decrease in acoustic impedance
(Brown, 2004). From figure 11, it can be concluded that the seismic data in this
project is in American Polarity. A 3D Bundi field seismic data in Malay Basin
which has the total of 815 inline from 290 ms to 1105 ms meanwhile and 3401
crosslines which from 603 ms to 4004 ms.

28
 Figure 12: Polarity at seabed
3.1.2 Well data

A composite well log contains diverse kind of logs including Gamma

Ray, Resistivity, Neutron Porosity, Density, Caliper logs and additionally sonic
log will be utilized in assessing petrophysical properties in the wells. This
composite log well logs give a total data on the lithology patterns and any
abnormal occurrence along the wells.

Table 4: Log data availability of Bundi-1 and South Bundi-1 well

Log Availability

Well Final Depth Gamma Resistivity Neutron Density Caliper Sonic

Name Ray Porosity

Bundi -1 2784 m RKB / / / / / /

South 2645 m RKB / / / / / /

Bundi-1

29
3.2 Project Workflow

Figure 13: Workflow of project

30
3.3 Data gathering, loading and preliminary study

Data gathering has been the most vital part in this examination since all
the imperative investigation and assessments require adequate or a few
arrangements of information. The information was loaded into Petrel 2013
software. Earlier starting the research, it is vital to have some concise on the
local topography of the study area which is Bundi field, Malay Basin. The
review of the area additionally incorporates on the well summary of Bundi and
South Bundi well to study on the drilling progress of the area. Different sources
additionally have been utilized for the literature research on possible offshore
hazard for example, online sources and perusing materials. A brief discussion
on this information will incredibly aid more entire comprehension and having
an entire thought on this extent of concentrate for up and coming investigation.

3.4 Geophysical Study

The geophysical study aimed to provide geophysical understanding in

the study area. Interpretation of Bundi field seismic data was conducted along
two wells. The main steps in the geophysical covers:

• Well correlation
• Synthetic generation for wells and Seismic-Well tie
• Horizon and fault interpretation
• Generation of TWT structure maps

3.4.1 Well Correlation

Well logs give detailed information at the location of borehole.

When there are more than one wells drilled in the area of interest, their
stratigraphy can be correlated with than one another using well
correlation method. This correlation is based on characteristics of the
well log response. To remove post-depositional tilting, datum (flatten)
the logs from different wells on what is believed to be a time marker
(correlation horizon that is registered to a common depth).

Well correlation is done based on the top and base of the

formation data provided from well completion report. On other hand,
the correlation also was done based on the lithology marker which is

31
 coal. Coal was detected based on the Gamma Ray and Resistivity log.
Gamma ray is used to measure radioactivity material in sediments
meanwhile resistivity it is used to measure resistance of formation.

3.4.2 Synthetic generation for wells and Seismic-Well tie

Seismic well tie aims to bridge the gap between the time and depth
domains by first introducing a synthetic seismogram. A ‘tie’ between
the changes in the rock properties in a borehole and seismic reflection
data at the same location is essential in providing an accurate horizon
picking for seabed and formation tops.
Synthetic seismogram is the seismic traces at a wellbore generated from
wireline log data (Schlumberger Oilfield Glossary; 2013). Seismic
waves in theory, is the combination of density and velocity values of a
solid body, and in the case of geophysics, the solid body is the lithology
within the subsurface. Therefore, by collecting the density and velocity
values of the lithologies, it is possible for a user to generate a synthetic
seismic trace by combining sonic log (velocity) and RHOB log
(density). After combining the sonic and density logs by multiplication,
reflection coefficient will then be produced. Reflection coefficient then
needs to be convolved with wavelet to produce synthetic seismic trace.

[𝑅𝑒𝑓𝑙𝑒𝑐𝑡𝑖𝑜𝑛 𝐶𝑜𝑒𝑓𝑓𝑖𝑐𝑖𝑒𝑛𝑡]𝑅(𝑐)
𝑍2 − 𝑍1
=
𝑍2 + 𝑍1
[𝐴𝑐𝑜𝑢𝑠𝑡𝑖𝑐 𝐼𝑚𝑝𝑒𝑑𝑎𝑛𝑐𝑒]𝑍 = 𝜌𝑣
Where, 𝜌 = 𝐷𝑒𝑛𝑠𝑖𝑡𝑦 , 𝑣 = 𝑣𝑒𝑙𝑜𝑐𝑖𝑡𝑦

32
 Figure 14: Synthetic seismogram (Theory)
3.4.3 Horizon and Fault Picking

Fault interpretation is the first step in seismic interpretation.

Faults are interpreted before horizons because horizons are displaced by
faults. This means that by marking the faults first, it allows a clearer
view of the horizon displacement shown in seismic.
Horizons interpretation is the second and final step in seismic
interpretation before producing TWT maps. Horizon interpretation is
done based on well tops data that interpreted during well log correlation.
Well tops, are horizon markers that are marked based on well log
data. Since well data is considered to be more accurate than seismic due
to various reasons such as a much higher vertical resolution compared
to seismic. Other than that, well logs also provide information regarding
the type of lithology that is available at depths penetrated by wells.
Seismic data could not provide this information as it only shows the
boundaries between different lithology instead of the type of lithology
itself.

3.4.4 Generation of TWT structure maps

TWT maps or Time maps are maps that are produced through
the horizon interpreted during seismic interpretation. It is called time
map because their unit is in Two Way Time. This is because the seismic
interpretation is done at seismic cube which in TWT unit. Reason for
this is because the seismic data are gathered by using the reflection
theory of waves and this measurement is done based on the time taken

33
 for the seismic wave travel from the shot point to reflector and from
reflector to receivers thus the term “Two Way Travel Time”.
Producing TWT Maps is done simultaneously with Quality
Control (QC) of seismic interpretation. In the majority (99%) of cases,
upon the completion of horizon interpretation, usually there will be mis-
ties in seismic interpretation. Mis-ties happen at the crossing point
between Inline and Crossline interpretation. This results in a condition
termed “Bull’s Eye” in which the presence can be seen in TWT maps
and thus, the QC process is done only after TWT maps are produced.

3.4.5 Seismic Attribute Analysis

Seismic attribute is characterized as the quantifiable properties

from the seismic data. As indicated by Backe et al (2011), seismic
attribute allows the detailed interpretation on the subsurface structural
as well as ease the interpretations by revealing structures that are below
the seismic data resolutions. As a continuation of seismic fault and
horizon interpretation, the determination of the seismic attribute to be
extracted is vital in providing additional information of the study area.
However, seismic attribute such as Coherence (Variance) and Structural
Smoothing can be tested for this study.
i. Coherence used to measure of similarity between waveforms or
traces in 2D or 3D seismic volumes. This attribute was utilised
to highlights the discontinuity features of the events during the
structural interpretation. High coherent means that the
lithologies is laterally continuous whereas low coherent in
seismic waveforms indicate changes in waveform or
discontinuity which can be fault or fracture. Advantages of
coherence attributes are easy visualization of faults, channels
and other geological features, unbiased view of the features in
the seismic volume, no interpretation is required for viewing
them and improve accuracy and time effectiveness
ii. Structural Smoothing to enhance the visualization of reflectors
and smooths along coherent reflections while preserving
important discontinuities such as faults or channels.

34
3.5 Hazard Studies

Hazard survey usually was conducted to minimize the risk of harm to personnel
and equipment, and to protect the natural environment. The risk management
process is a key factor in the success and sustainability of oil and gas facilities and
must be cultivated into the entire process life cycle. Jensen and Cauquil (2013) stated
that purpose of any hazard survey is to determine all constraints and hazards that
may arise man-made, natural and geological features which may affect operational
or environmental integrity of a proposed drilling operation, and to allow appropriate
operational practices to reduce any risk identified. In addition, the proposed hazard
survey area should be sufficient coverage to plan any potential relief well locations
and provide sufficient data to fully assess potential hazards in these locations. As
such, hazard identification happens at every major step to improve performance and
reduce the risk of a major accident. Few geological parameters have been selected
which act as main indicator in identifying potential hazard within Bundi field, Malay
Basin:

1. Geomorphology: Analyzing seabed structures that potentially harm

to oil and gas development such as slope. Slope are arbitrarily classified
as flat, gentle, moderate or steep. Flat slope is defined as the horizon
seafloor. Slope less than 5 degrees are considered gentle, 5-10 degrees
slope is moderate and slope greater than 10 degrees is steep. Steep slope
considered to be hazards especially those with sediment cover which can
lead to slide.

2. Fault: Generally, fault is not considered hazardous to petroleum

source development. However, active faults however pose a potential
hazard to offshore operation and facilities. Active faults are hazardous
because of possible ground rupture and as potential sources of shaking.

3. Density The value of density in rocks can give an impact on the

stability of seabed especially in shallow area. Unconsolidated sediment
can lead to failure sediment flows, turbidities (mass movement) or
subsidence. Moreover, crossover of neutron porosity log and density log
shows the presence of gas which indicate gas-charged sediments.

35
 4. Resistivity: Able to record the resistivity of formation. Resistivity
logging able to detect or infer abnormal pressure within the subsurface.
Sometimes, this abnormal pressure caused by gas zone or gas trapped in
sediment after migrating upward from deeper reservoir.
5. Buried Channel: Are identified by irregular erosional contact
between younger and older sediments. The channel was cut during lower
sea level and have been subsequently buried by transgressing seas.
Infilling sediments in the channels may shows crossbedding or
unconformable bedding. Shallow-buried channel are hazardous because
the load-bearing capacity may differ between the younger and older
sediments. In addition, bearing capacity within buried channel can vary.
Channel fill, if permeable can cause the loss drilling fluid during drilling
operations.
6. Gamma Ray: Gamma ray used to measure radioactivity material in
sediment. High radioactivity will give high gamma ray reading which
will have an impact on shale with high organic content thus giving high
gamma reading as opposed to sand which contain less organic material
thus giving low gamma reading.

From the seismic data and well log data, several seabed maps will be produced
and analyzed based on geological parameter such as geomorphology and fault to
identify any possible hazard around that area. Porosity, Resistivity and Gamma Ray
variables will be used to observe the wireline well log data to derive in lithological
changes and detect any abnormal pressure. Next, buried channel will be observed
from the horizontal display (timeslices) which this method able to reveal any shallow
gas trap or plough marks.

36
3.6 Quantitative Analysis

From six geological parameters that have been selected which act as main
indicator in identifying potential hazard, quantitative analysis of the hazard which
is the crucial method throughout this project will be done using Statistical Package
for the Social Sciences (SPSS).
SPSS software is used to perform quantitative analysis and this software has
been widely used by researchers to perform quantitative analysis since its
development in the 1960s by Norman H. Nie, in collaboration with C. Hadlai Hull
and Dale Bent.
SPSS software can read and write data from other statistical packages,
databases, and spreadsheets. When entering data into the software, one has to click
on “variable view.” The variable view enables the user to customize it by data type
and consists of the following headings: Name, Type, Width, Decimals, Label,
Values, Missing, Columns, Align, and Measures. These headings enable the user to
characterize the data. For this project, the variables that will be used is based on
those six geological parameters in identifying presence hazard. For this project,
SPSS will be used to correlate between each geological parameter and observe the
distribution trends which indicate the percentage of hazard occurrence based on the
correlation result.

Once the potential hazard has been identified, zoning process or produce hazard
map are essential for this study. A hazard map is a map that focus areas which are
affected by or vulnerable to a hazard which may be used for future development in
Bundi field to minime risk and hazard.

37
3.7 FYP 1 Gantt Chart

For this Final Year Project 1 (FYP 1), the crucial output throughout these 14 weeks is to generate several TWT structure to further analyze
on hazard presence which will be conducted on Final Year Project 2 (FYP 2) later. Throughout this 14 weeks, preliminary studies on this
study area, methodology from other researches have been made to gain deeper understanding tectonic setting of Bundi field. Data loading,
seismic well tie, well correlation, fault and horizon picking was carried out within this FYP 1 to be able generate TWT structure map by
the end of FYP 1.

Figure 15: Final Year Project I Gantt Chart

38
3.8 FYP II Gantt Chart

For this Final Year Project II (FYP II), the crucial output throughout these 14 weeks is to generate quantitative analysis using SPSS software and
generate hazard map for uses of upcoming development in Bundi field. In FYP 2, the progress will be more focusing on the main part of this
project which identifying hazard presence quantitatively in the field.

Figure 16: Final Year Project II Gantt Chart

39
3.9 Project Milestone

Several key milestones have been identified from Final Year Project I and Final
Year Project II. The key milestones are summarized as below:

• Final Year Project I (May-August 2018):

Table 5: Key milestone of FYP I

Week Milestone
6 Submission of Extended Proposal
7 Proposal Defense Presentation
12 Generate Seabed and Subsurface Map
13 Interim Report Submission

• Final Year Project II (September-December 2018):

Table 6: Key milestone of FYP II

Week Milestone
5 Identify Hazard
8 Quantitative Analysis of Hazard
10 Produce Zoning and Hazard Map
10 Pre-SEDEX
12 Submission of Technical Paper
13 VIVA Presentation
14 Final Submission of Dissertation

40
 CHAPTER 4

RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONS

4.1 Introduction

This chapter examined the results of geological, geophysical,

petrophysical and hazard study in Bundi field. Basically, this section includes a
description on the geological interpretation from well log as well as well
correlation from 2 wells which are Bundi and South Bundi to gain a general
understanding on the sediment distribution in the study area.

4.2 Study Area

This project focused on Bundi field which is located approximately 270km

NNE of Kemaman supply. From figure 17, we can clearly see that within Bundi
area, 2 wells which are Bundi-1 and South Bundi that is separated by major
fault. The base map indicates position of wells used within the seismic survey.
The distance between the Bundi-1 and South Bundi-1 wells is 4704 m. From
the cross section, the area within South Bundi-1 wells seems to be uplifted due
to the fault occurrence. A 3D Bundi field seismic data in Malay Basin which
has the total of 815 inline and 3401 crosslines which ranging from 290 ms to
1105 ms and from 603 ms to 4004 ms.

41
Figure 17: Arbitrary cross section between South Bundi-1 and Bund-1 wells.

Figure 18: Base map of Bundi field with available wells

42
4.3 Well Information

Throughout this project, there are two wells that being used to study
deeper on the subsurface of Bundi field which are Bundi-1 and South Bundi-1
well. Bundi-1 is a wildcat well drilled by EPMI in Block PM 5. It is located
approximately 280 km NNE of Kemaman Supply Base meanwhile South
Bundi-1 was an exploration well drilled by EPMI in Block PM 5 which was
located around 275 km NNE of Kemaman Supply Base.

Table 7: Well information of Bundi-1 well

Bundi-1 Well

Vertical wildcat
Classification
Bundi structure
Prospect
6o 41’ 40.90’’ N
Latitude
104o 11’ 15.94 E
Longitude
Atwood Hunter / Semi-Submersible
Rig Name/Type
72 m
Water Depth
22 m
Rotary Kelly Bushing
(RKB) Elevation
2979 m RKB
Proposed Total Depth
2784 m RKB
Final Total Depth
25/01/1991
Date Spudded
01/03/1991
Date Abandoned
45 MMBL
Pre-Drill Reserves
Plugged and abandoned as gas discovery
Status

43
 Table 8: Well information of South Bundi-1 well

South Bundi-1 Well

Vertical wildcat
Classification
Bundi structure
Prospect
6o 39’ 29.38’’ N
Latitude
104o 11’ 40.448 E
Longitude
Chris Chenery / Semi-Submersible
Rig Name/Type
69 m
Water Depth
22 m
Rotary Kelly Bushing
(RKB) Elevation
2612 m
Proposed Total Depth
2645 m
Final Total Depth
16/09/1991
Date Spudded
13/10/1991
Date Abandoned
60 MMSTB Recoverable oil
Pre-Drill Reserves
Gas shows
Status

44
4.4 Well Correlation

Well Correlation usually used to correlate structural or stratigraphic units

between two wells that have equivalent in time, age or stratigraphic position. To
identify stratigraphically significant markers, the cored well along with several
adjacent wells were used to interpret the first order stacking pattern and depositional
environment.
. In general, correlation logs usually focus on transgressive and regressive
cycles, which are usually easily seen on well logs. Transgressive is a regressive
cycle faced by the maximum flood surface, so the order pattern based on log
correlation is usually selected on the surface of the maximum flood.
Once the main order is selected, they have been correlated across the field. The
correlation process is guided by maintaining a consistent arrangement pattern and
the thickness for each interval. The arrangement pattern provides a good guide for
correlation in that a coarsening upward sequence capped by maximum flooding
surface shale will generally remain a coarsening upward sequence across the length
of the field the chance of misinterpretation to happen is minimized. Coals also can
be the key to this well correlation which is characterized by low Gamma Ray and
high Resistivity value. In Gamma Ray log, coal can be sen by a sharp deflection of
log towards the left. Flooding surfaces are mud, therefore is characterized with high
Gamma Ray values.
For this project, there are 10 correlations between Bundi-1 and South Bundi-1
wells, composed of 5 top formations and 5 lithologies correlation. Those 5 top
formations are top of Group D, E, F, H and I meanwhile another 5 lithologies
correlation were based on coal presence in those wells.

45
Horizon A Horizon A
Horizon B Horizon B
Horizon C Horizon C

Horizon E Horizon A

Figure 19: Well correlation between Bundi-1 and South Bundi-1 well

46
4.5 Seismic Interpretation

4.5.1 Fault Interpretation

Fault able to act as an important role in the migration and accumulation of the
hydrocarbon however it also may be caused hydrocarbon migrated away from the
reservoir rock. Fault is interpreted as a point of discontinuity of the reflectors which is
displaced at the adjacent fault block. 11 faults were interpreted and picked from the
study area. Faults are marked when there is an observable displacement identified in
the seismic sections. Faults were interpreted at every 10 seismic intervals for both Inline
and Crossline. This is considered as the optimized interval for fault interpretation.
Interpretation interval should be carefully considered based on complexity of fault
system and time available. Figure shows the image of fault in Inline 794 seismic
section. After all the faults are interpreted in the seismic section, they are modelled to
produce a fault model.

Figure 20: Fault interpretation in inline 794

47
 Figure 21: 11 picked faults from study area

4.5.2 Horizon Interpretation

Throughout this study, three horizons have been picked which are seabed, Group A and
B and Top of Group F. Seabed was interpreted as the first reflector which seismic waves
reached. Based on the well report, Group A and B which in have a thickness around
1400 m whereby the top of formation of this group start around 325 m below the
subsurface. Meanwhile, the top of Group F started around 1629 m. The horizons were
picked for every 50 intervals for crossline and evert 25 intervals for inline. The intervals
are chosen based on the structure of the field. If the structure is more complicated, the
smaller the interpretation interval can be chosen. From the horizons picked, TWT
surface maps were generated using Petrel 2013.

Figure 22: Horizon picking (inline and crossline) of Bundi field

48
Figure 23: Horizon interpretation at crossline 3077

49
A B C

Figure 24: TWT structure maps of picked horizon which A) seabed B) Group A & B and C) Top of Group F

50
4.6 Qualitative Hazard Assessment

i. Incised Valley
Refer to figure 24, specifically for seabed and Group A & B, the elevation within
meandering channel area is quite lower than other area which indicate incised valleys.
Incised valley systems are defined as fluvially-eroded, elongate topographic lows that
are considerably wider than a single channel form (Dalrymple et al., 1994; Zaitlin et
al., 1994). They typically are several kilometers wide and tens of meters deep (Zaitlin
et al., 1994; Schumm and Ethridge, 1994). Incised valley systems have been
scientifically and economically important since the introduction of the concept of
sequence stratigraphy. Incised valley systems are formed by fluvial incision because
of: 1) sea-level fall; 2) tectonic uplift; 3) climatic change resulting in increased
discharge; or 4) stream capture that increases discharge in the combined system
(Schumm and Ethridge, 1994; Thorne, 1994; Posamentier, 2001). In coastal settings,
incised valleys are usually formed by fluvial incision during relative sea-level fall and
shelf exposure and then filled during relative sea-level rise (Dalrymple et al., 1994;
Nordfjord et al., 2006). Zaitlin et al. (1994) has divided incised valleys into two
different types based on the overall gradient of the fluvial-estuarine complex: 1)
piedmont incised valleys; and 2) costal-plain incised valleys. Piedmont incised valleys
are steeper and more structurally controlled. From the cross section in figure 26 and 27,
we can observe that the main meandering channel cuts off the incised valley. This
major incised valley may be formed during the sea-level fall fell below the shelf break
and the Sunda Shelf was exposed.

Figure 25: TWT structure map of seabed with arbitrary zon

51
 Figure 26: Cross section of Arbitrary_A zone

Figure 27: Cross section of Arbitrary_B zone

52
ii. Channel Classification
Numerous river classification schemes have been developed and channels can
be separated into two major groups depending on their freedom ‘to adjust their
shape: (1) confined channels, which are bedrock-controlled and are relatively fixed
over a relatively significant period; and (2) un-confined channels, which are free to
adjust and avulse (Schumm, 1977). Based on their planform geometry alone,
alluvial channels have been traditionally classified as straight, meandering, and
braided (Leopold and Wolman, 1957). Another popular classification is that single
channels with varying sinuosity are divided into straight and meandering, and that
multiple channels with varying sinuosity are divided into braided and anastomosing
(Miall, 1977).

Figure 28: Spectrum of channel types based on plan view (Miall, 1977)
Leopold and Wolman (1957) and Rust (1978) have used a sinuosity of 1.5 to
separate high-sinuosity rivers from straight rivers. Schumm (1977, 1981)
demonstrated that there is a strong relationships between the channel pattern and
the type of the sediment transported by the channel, thereby allowing fluvial
channels to be classified into three types: 1) bed-load channels, which are a straight
or of very-low sinuosity; 2) mixed-load channels, which are of moderate-sinuosity;
and 3) suspended load channels, which are of high sinuosity.
From figure 24, we can clearly see that meandering channels within Group A &
B is still preserved till current seabed. Thus, hazard assessment is not mainly focus
on the seabed only as some of deeper features were still preserved up to the latest
seabed. From research made by Ethridge and Schumm in 2007, equal width sinuous
pattern suggests moderate to high lateral stability, and low bed load to suspended

53
load deposits. A wide bend sinuous pattern suggests low to moderate lateral
stability, and higher bed load to suspended load deposits. Group A & B to seabed
consists of high sinuosity of meandering channel trending from N-S however apart
from the main channel, on a seabed also, it consists another low sinuosity
meandering channel trending from N-S. Next, within Top of Group F consists of
distributary channels. The high sinuosity meandering channel in seabed and group
A & F was filled sediments excessively (sedimentation >accommodation) which
caused the seismic pattern curved upwards rather than downwards or smiley pattern.
From the dip maps below, along the channel the dip angle is larger than 4o. This
depression is due to the sediments was filled by the gas leaking from the subsurface,

Low sinuosity
meandering channel

High sinuosity
meandering channel

Figure 29: Dip map of seabed with diameter of channels

54
 High sinuosity
meandering channel

Figure 30: Dip map of Group A & B horizon with diameter of channel

Distributary channel

Figure 31: Dip map of Top Group F horizon with diameter of channels

55
 Figure 32: Cross section of high sinuosity meandering channel in seabed

Figure 33: Cross section of low sinuosity meandering channel within seabed

56
Figure 34: Cross section of high sinuosity meandering channel within Group A & B

Figure 35: Cross section of distributory channels within Top Group F

57
 CHAPTER 5

CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

5.1 Conclusions

As a conclusion, using Bundi and South Bundi well data and 3-D seismic data,
5 geological parameters were selected which are Geomorphology, Fault, Porosity,
Resistivity and Buried Channel to identify any potential hazards in Bundi field. During
the progress completing FYP 1, the horizon was hardly picked as this field was a gas
field. However, quality checking (QC) was a crucial step in seismic interpretation to
avoid formation of bull eyes on the TWT structure map. Quantitative analysis using
SPSS software will be done to quantify these geological parameters to produce a hazard
map for upcoming uses development of oil and gas in this Bundi field. Apart from other
potential hazard, the leaking of gas in Bundi field was the main hazard in this field and
with this study, improvements will be made in order to avoid this hazard for future uses.

5.2 Recommendations

The statistical method used in correlation of the parameters and hazard

calculation could lead to not so accurate results since this project only utilized well data
as a source of subsurface information from 2 wells only. Thus, for future study, an area
with more wells data present will have more reliable impact towards this research.

58
 REFERENCES

Aird, P., & Norge, B. P. Assessing Geo-Hazards.

Briais, A., Patriat, P. and Tapponnier, P., 1993. Updated interpretation of magnetic
anomalies and reconstructions of South China Sea basin: implications for the Tertiary
evolution of Southeast Asia. Journal of Geophysical Research, 98, 6299-6328.
Chiocci, F. L., Cattaneo, A., & Urgeles, R. (2011). Seafloor mapping for geohazard
assessment: state of the art.

Conn, P., & Arthur, J. (1990). Quantitative Gas Hazard Analysis: Present Limitations
and the Way Forward. In Safety in Offshore Drilling (pp. 235-256). Springer,
Dordrecht.

Creaney, S., Hussein Abdul Hanif, Curry, D. J., Bohacs, K. M., and Hassan Redzuan,
1994, Source facies and oil families of the Malay Basin, Malaysia: AAPG Bull., 78, p.
1139.

EPIC, 1994. Regional study of the Malay Basin-Final Portfolios. Esso-PETRONAS

Integrated Collaborative Study, Unpublished report, Esso Production Malaysia
Inc.

Ethridge, F. G., & Schumm, S. A. (2007). Fluvial seismic geomorphology: a view from
the surface. Geological Society, London, Special Publications, 277(1), 205-222.

Gallagher, J. W., & Heggland, R. (1995). Shallow gas evaluations based on

conventional 3-D seismic data. In SEG Technical Program Expanded Abstracts
1995 (pp. 518-520). Society of Exploration Geophysicists.

Heggland, R., Nygaard, E. T., & Gallagher, J. W. (1996, January). Techniques and
experiences using exploration 3D seismic data to map drilling hazards.
In Offshore Technology Conference. Offshore Technology Conference.

Ismail, M. T., Rudolph, K. W., & Abdullah, S. A. (1994). Structural and sedimentary
evolution of the Malay Basin. AAPG Bulletin (American Association of
Petroleum Geologists) ;(United States), 78(CONF-940803--).

Jensen, P. J., & Cauquil, E. (2013). Guidelines for the Conduct of Offshore Drilling
Hazard Site surveys, International Association of Oil & Gas Producers (No.
373-18, p. 1). Report

59
Lacassin, R., Leloup, P.H. and Tapponnier, P., 1993. Bounds on strain in large Tertiary
shear zones of SE Asia from bounding restoration. Journal of Structural Geology, 15,
677-692.

Madon, Mazlan. (1999). Malay Basin.

Madon, M., Yang, J. S., Abolins, P., Hassan, R. A., Yakzan, A. M., & Zainal, S. B.
(2006). Petroleum systems of the Northern Malay Basin.

Roy, S., & Cooper, G. A. (1993). Prevention of bit balling in shales: Some preliminary
results. SPE drilling & completion, 8(03), 195-200.

Talabani, S., Chukwu, G., & Hatzignatiou, D. (1993, January). Drilling successfully
through deforming shale formations: Case histories. In Low Permeability Reservoirs
Symposium. Society of Petroleum Engineers.

Wilson, M. J., & Wilson, L. (2014). Clay mineralogy and shale instability: an
alternative conceptual analysis. Clay Minerals, 49(2), 127-145.

APPENDICES

60
61
62
63