By Haseeb Ahmed

M.Phil Geophysics
Institute of Geology, University of the Punjab

AVO ANALYSIS

Amplitude versus offset (AVO) is

primarily the variation in seismic
reflection amplitude with change in
distance between shot point and the
receiver

Its another name is AVA (amplitude

variation with angle)

AVO analysis is conducted on CMP data

FIG. SHOWING AVO (A) & (B)

AVO INTRODUCTION

It can physically explain presence

of hydrocarbon in the reservoirs
and
the
thickness,
porosity,
density, velocity, lithology and
fluid content of the reservoir of the
rock can be estimated.

THE ZOEPPRITZ EQUATIONS

Zoeppritz derived the amplitudes of the

reflected and transmitted waves using the
conservation of stress and displacement
across the layer boundary

which gives
unknowns.

Inverting the matrix form of the Zoeppritz

equations gives us the exact amplitudes as a
function of angle

four

equations

with

four

THE ZOEPPRITZ EQUATIONS

sin 1
RP cos
1
R
S sin 2
1
TP

TS cos 21

cos 1
sin 1

sin 2
cos 2

cos 2
sin 2
2VS22VP1
2VS 2VP1
VP1

cos 21
cos
2

cos
2

1
2
VS1
1VS12VP 2
1VS12

VS1
2VP 2
2VS 2
sin 21
cos 22
sin 22

VP1
1VP1
1VP1

sin 1
cos
1

sin 21

cos 21

THE AKI-RICHARDS EQUATION

The Aki-Richards equation is a linearized

approximation to the Zoeppritz equations.

The initial form (Richards and Frasier, 1976)

separated the velocity and density terms:

R ( ) a

VP

VS
b
c
VP

VS

THE AKI-RICHARDS EQUATION

Where;

1
,
2 cos 2
V
b 0.5 2 S
VP
a

V
c 4 S
VP

sin ,

sin 2 ,

2 1

, 2 1 ,
2
VP 2 VP1
VP
, VP VP 2 VP1 ,
2
V V
VS S 2 S1 , VS VS 2 VS1 ,
2

and i t .
2

WIGGINS VERSION OF THE

AKI-RICHARDS EQUATION

R( ) A B sin C tan sin

2

A more intuitive, but totally equivalent, form was

derived by Wiggins.

He separated the equation into three reflection

terms, each weaker than the previous term:

WHERE ?
1 VP
A

2 V p

VS
1 VP
B
4

2 Vp
VP
1 VP
C
2 Vp

VS
VS
2

VS
VP

INTERPRETING THE AKI-RICHARDS EQUATION

The first term, A, is a linearized version of the zero offset

reflection coefficient and is thus a function of only density
and P-wave velocity.

The second term, B, is a gradient multiplied by sin2, and

has the biggest effect on amplitude change as a function
of offset. It is dependent on changes in P-wave velocity,
S-wave velocity, and density.

The third term, C, is called the curvature term and is

dependent on changes in P-wave velocity only. It is
multiplied by tan2*sin2 and thus contributes very little to
the amplitude effects below angles of 30 degrees. (Note:
Prove to yourself that tan2*sin2 = tan2 - sin2, since the
equation is often written in this form.)

OSTRANDERS GAS SAND MODEL

Ostrander (1984) was one of the first to write

about AVO effects in gas sands and proposed a
simple two-layer model which encased a low
impedance, low Poissons ratio sand, between two
higher impedance, higher Poissons ratio shales.
(This model is shown in the next slide).

Ostranders model worked well in the Sacramento

valley gas fields. However, it represents only one
type of AVO anomaly (Class 3) and the others will
be discussed in the next section.

* Note : The model consists of a low acoustic impedance and Poissons

ratio gas sand encased between two shales.

SYNTHETIC FROM OSTRANDERS

MODEL

(a) Well log responses for

the model.

(b) Synthetic seismic.

WET AND GAS MODELS

Wet Sand Model

Gas Saturated Model

AVO MODELS

In the next two slides, we are going to compute the top and base
event responses from Models A and B, using the following values,
where the Wet and Gas cases were computed using the BiotGassmann equations:
Wet: VP= 2500 m/s, VS= 1250 m/s, = 2.11 g/cc, = 0.33
Gas: VP= 2000 m/s, VS= 1310 m/s, = 1.95 g/cc, = 0.12
Shale: VP= 2250 m/s, VS= 1125 m/s, = 2.0 g/cc, = 0.33

We will consider the AVO effects with and without the third term
in the Aki-Richards equation.

AVO WET MODEL

AVO - Wet Sand (Model A) Base

0.100

0.000

0.080

-0.020

Amplitude

Amplitude

AVO - Wet Sand (Model A) Top

0.060
0.040

-0.060

0.020

-0.080

0.000

-0.100
0

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

Angle (degrees)
R (All three terms)

-0.040

R (First two terms)

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

Angle (degrees)
R (All three terms)

R (First two terms)

These figures show the AVO responses from the (a) top and (b) base
of the wet sand. Notice the decrease of amplitude, and also the fact
that the two-term approximation is only valid out to 30 degrees.

AVO GAS MODEL

AVO - Gas Sand (Model B) Base

0.000

0.250

-0.050

0.200

Amplitude

Amplitude

AVO - Gas Sand (Model B) Top

-0.100
-0.150
-0.200
-0.250

0.100
0.050
0.000

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

Angle (degrees)
R (All three terms)

0.150

R (First two terms)

10 15

20 25

30 35

40 45

Angle (degrees)
R (All three terms)

R (First two terms)

The above figures show the AVO responses from the (a) top and (b)
base of the gas sand. Notice the increase of amplitude, and again the
fact that the two-term approximation is only valid out to 30 degrees.

SHUEYS EQUATION

Shuey (1985) rewrote the Aki-Richards equation using VP, , and .

Only the gradient is different than in the Aki-Richards expression

1 2

B A D 2( 1 D )

1 ( 1 )2

VP / VP
where : D
,
VP / VP /

2 1
2
2 1

THIS FIGURE SHOWS A COMPARISON BETWEEN THE TWO FORMS OF

THE AKI-RICHARDS EQUATION FOR THE GAS SAND CONSIDERED
EARLIER.

AVO EFFECTS

(a) Gas sandstone case: Note

that the effect of and is
to increase the AVO effects

Class
1

b) Wet sandstone
case: Note that the
effect of and is
to create apparent
Class
AVO decreases.
1
Class
2

Class
2
Class
3

Class
3

BACK-TREND AVO

For brine-saturated clastic rocks

over a limited depth range in a
particular locality, there may be
a
well-defined
relationship
between the AVO intercept (A)
and the AVO gradient (B). linear
A versus B trends, all of which
pass through the origin (B = 0
when A = 0).

Thus, in a given time window,

non-hydrocarbon-bearing clastic
rocks often exhibit a welldefined back- ground trend;
deviations from this background
are indicative of hydrocarbons
or unusual litholo- gies.

POSSIBLE DEVIATION B/W GAS AND

BRINE

Deviations
from
the
background petro- physical
trends,
as
would
be
caused by hydrocarbons or
unusual litholo- gies, cause
deviations
from
the
background A versus B
trend. This figure shows
brine sand-gas sand tie
lines for shale over brinesand reflections falling
along a given background
trend

GENERAL CLASSIFICATION

Rutherford and Williams

(Geophysics, 1989) for
Class I (high impedance)
and
Class
II
(small
impedance
contrast)
sands. However, we differ
from
Rutherford
and
Williams in that we
subdivide their Class III
sands (low impedance)
into two classes (III and
IV).

AMPLITUDE VS ANGLE

CLASS 1 (DIM OUT)

Amplitude decreases with increasing angle, and may

reverse phase on the far angle stack

Amplitude on the full stack is smaller for the

hydrocarbon zone than for an equivalent wet
saturated zone.

Wavelet character is peak-trough on near angle stack

Wavelet character may or may not be peak-trough

on the far angle stack.

CLASS 2 (PHASE REVERSAL)

There is little indication of the gas sand on the near angle

stack.

The gas sand event increases amplitude with increasing

angle. This attribute is more pronounced than anticipated
because of the amplitude decrease of the shale- upon-shale
reflections.

The gas sand event may or may not be evident on the full
stack, depending on the far angle amplitude contribution to
the stack.

Wavelet character on the stack may or may not be troughpeak for a hydrocarbon charged thin bed.

CLASS 2 (PHASE REVERSAL)

Wavelet character is trough-peak on the far

angle stack.

Inferences about lithology are contained in the

amplitude variation with incident angle.

AVO alone, unless carefully calibrated, cannot

unambiguously distinguish a clean wet sand
from a gas sand, because both have similar
(increasing ) behavior with offset.

CLASS 3 (BRIGHT SPOT)

Hydrocarbon zones are bright on the stack section

and on all angle limited stacks.

The hydrocarbon reflection amplitude, with respect to

the background reflection amplitude, is constant or
increases slightly with incident angle range.

Even though the amplitude of the hydrocarbon event

can decrease with angle, as suggested for the Class 4
AVO anomalies, the surrounding shale-upon-shale
reflections normally decrease in amplitude with angle
at a faster rate.

CLASS 3 (BRIGHT SPOT)

Wavelet character is trough-peak on all

angle stacks. This assumes that the
dominant phase of the seismic wavelet
is zero and the reservoir is below
tuning thickness

Hydrocarbon prediction is possible from

the stack section.

CONT

BEHAVIOR OF THE VARIOUS GAS SAND CLASSES.

Thank you