Estimation of pore pressure and oil saturation changes in the reservoir using petro-elastic

modeling and 4D AVO inversion attributes in the Ravva field

Downloaded 01/08/14 to 202.134.59.72. Redistribution subject to SEG license or copyright; see Terms of Use at http://library.seg.org/

Kondal Reddy*, Menal Gupta, Ray McClenaghan, Kausik Saikia, Susanta Mishra, Challapalli Rao, Sivasankar
Joysula, Arvind Kumar and Vivek Shankar, Cairn India Ltd., Gurgaon, Haryana, India

Summary

A 4D seismic survey was carefully planned, executed and

interpreted on the Ravva Field. Geoscience and 4D seismic
studies carried out on the field have provided key
information that defines fault compartments, position of the
current OWC and reveals potential undrained areas. The
4D seismic data has been used to optimize sub-surface
targets, and underpinned Cairn India’s 2010-11 infill
drilling campaign, which was instrumental in arresting the
production decline in the field. The infill drilling results, as
well as on-going dynamic reservoir surveillance programs
are in line with 4D interpretations. All these results are
being used to up-date the reservoir model for optimal
reservoir management and development.

The 4D response in Ravva Field is result of a combination

of changes in fluid saturation and pore pressures and hence
requires discrete separation of the pressure and saturation
components of the 4D effect to enable quantitative
interpretation. A 4D simultaneous AVO inversion was
carried out using base and monitor datasets to derive the
quantifiable elastic property changes in the reservoir.
In this paper, we will first discuss the initial 4D
interpretation results, the pitfalls of 4D interpretation based
on AI – Vp/Vs domain and the importance of pressure and
saturation decoupling from the 4D signal in order to
identify bypassed oil areas. Next, we will discuss the
methodology of decoupling of 4D signal using petro-elastic
model and 4D inversion volumes and finally we will show
the estimated saturation sections and maps portraying the
water flooding signature in the flank side of the structure
and undrained areas in the crestal portion.
Introduction
The Cairn India operated Ravva Field is located off the
shore of the Godavari Delta, within the KG Basin, on the
east coast of India (Figure.1). The field was discovered in
1987, and consists of two main structural compartments;
referred to as the ‘RAD’ and ‘REFB’ blocks, which are
separated by a shale-filled erosional unconformity cut of
Pliocene age. The field comprises a series of tilted and
rollover fault blocks formed as the Pliocene Godavari delta
edge collapsed, and these together with the overlying
Pliocene shale provide the trapping mechanism in the field.
The main reservoirs are multi Darcy sands of Middle
Miocene age. The field was put on production in 1993 and
Figure 1: Location map of Ravva Field.
water injection started in 1997. Currently, production in the
field is declining with increasing water cut.
Methodology
The implementation of 4D seismic technology in the Ravva
Field was carried out in several planned, inter-related
stages, namely: feasibility study, survey design, acquisition,
processing, qualitative 4D interpretation, 4D simultaneous
inversion, pressure and saturation decoupling and multi-
disciplinary integration.
Feasibility study to initial 4D interpretation
To assess the Acoustic Impedance change (∆Ip) and
seismic response caused by production and water injection
in the reservoir, a feasibility study was carried out. Rock
physics modeling and fluid substitution studies on well logs
and 3D synthetic based on simulation model were carried
out. The ∆Ip in the reservoirs was estimated to be of the
order 2% to around 12% discussed by Ghosh et al. (2007).
The first survey, Baseline, was acquired during 2000-01
and a second survey, Monitor, was acquired during 2009-
10. The Monitor survey was designed and executed with a
position accuracy of <5m. Processing of the Baseline and
Monitor surveys included analysis of trace pairs for
repeatability and only those trace pairs, with minimum

© 2013 SEG DOI http://dx.doi.org/10.1190/segam2013-1021.1

SEG Houston 2013 Annual Meeting Page 4981
 Estimation of pore pressure and oil saturation changes in the reservoir

source & receiver distance error, were selected as the input

to the 4D processing sequence. Processing sequences are
∆Ip
Downloaded 01/08/14 to 202.134.59.72. Redistribution subject to SEG license or copyright; see Terms of Use at http://library.seg.org/

customized and supported by robust data conditioning

through cross-equalization and spatial matching of both
datasets. This ensured seismic data repeatability and 4D
integrity to enhance the production-related reservoir
Hardening
anomalies in the difference volumes.
Z1 Z2 Z3 Z4
The integrated study of all attributes with field geology and
production data has enabled detailed reservoir
characterization of dynamic changes in the reservoir No Change
between 2000 and 2010. The Ravva Field reservoirs exhibit
Class II AVO response and fluid effects are more
pronounced at far angles. 4D analysis of seismic sections
clearly shows diminished amplitudes in the monitor due to
water replacing oil, a water flooding response.
Softening
1 Km
4D Simultaneous AVO Inversion and interpretation

The 4D response in the Ravva Field is the result of a

combination of changes in fluid saturation and pressures
∆Vp/Vs
and hence requires discrete separation of the pressure and
saturation components of the 4D signal to enable
quantitative interpretation. The reservoir pressure has been Hardening
maintained in the RAD block with efficient water injectors.
However, a slight increase in reservoir pressures was Z1 Z2 Z3 Z4
observed near the injectors. Conversely, the REFB block
has undergone pressure reduction by more than 400 psi due
to inadequate water injection support. Josyula et al. (2012) No Change
discussed that lack of pressure maintenance resulted in gas
exsolution and therefore has contributed to the 4D signal.

A 4D Simultaneous AVO Inversion was carried out to

derive the quantifiable elastic property changes in the 1 Km Softening
reservoir. To understand the dynamic changes in the
reservoir, ∆Ip map (Figure 2a) and ∆Vp/Vs map (Figure 2b) Figure 2: (a) ∆Ip map (Upper) at the top of the reservoir
are generated. In both maps, the red contour represents the (b) ∆Vp/Vs map (Lower) at the top of the reservoir.
original OWC (OOWC). A distinct increase in Ip and Vp/Vs
(hardening) was observed above OOWC, which can be
attributed to water flooding. The decrease in AI (softening)
and slight change in ∆Vp/Vs map below OOWC, indicates
pore pressure increase in the reservoir. Softening response
was observed in both maps at the crestal portion of the
structure representing gas coming out of solution.
Moved OWC

Figure 3 is a cartoon that simplifies the possible 4D change

Pressure and
mechanisms in RAD block. The efficient edge water drive Original OWC Saturation -
Mixed
sweep contributes to the 4D changes in the reservoir and Saturation
Pressure and Dominated
can be classified into 4 zones of 4D changes between the Saturation -
Mixed
injector and producer pairs (Figures 2 and 3). These zones Pressure

can be interpreted from ∆Ip and ∆Vp/Vs maps.

Only

1. Zone 1 (Z1 - Below OOWC): No saturation change Figure 3: Classification of zones of 4D changes based on the roles
expected and the 4D changes observed may be of pressure and saturation in the RAD structure.
attributed to changes in reservoir pressures only.

© 2013 SEG DOI http://dx.doi.org/10.1190/segam2013-1021.1

SEG Houston 2013 Annual Meeting Page 4982
 Estimation of pore pressure and oil saturation changes in the reservoir
2. Zone 2 (Z2 - Above OOWC, Wedge area): Small to
medium saturation changes are expected and 4D
Downloaded 01/08/14 to 202.134.59.72. Redistribution subject to SEG license or copyright; see Terms of Use at http://library.seg.org/
changes are due to combined effects of saturation and
pressure changes and require decoupling.
3. Zone 3 (Z3 - Above OOWC, Max. res. thickness):
Here maximum saturation changes are expected due
to the large thickness of the reservoir. The 4D signal
is probably dominated by the saturation effect but
still has significant pressure imprint.
4. Zone 4 (Z4 - Crest): Small to medium saturation
changes are expected and 4D changes are due to
combined effects of saturation and pressure changes.
However, gas breakout can lead to a larger 4D signal
dominated by saturation.
The Ip and ∆Vp/Vs maps in RAD area show water flooding
signature in flank portions of the structure indicating the
movement of the OWC from the original 1707m to present
depth 1650m subsea. Although from the Figure 2 it might
seem that ∆Ip is more sensitive to pressure changes and
∆Vp/Vs is more sensitive to saturation changes, we should
not neglect the fact that ∆Ip and ∆Vp/Vs can be sensitive to
both pressure and saturation to variable degrees.
Pressure and Saturation decoupling
Hydrocarbon production changes the equilibrium state of
the reservoir and creates a variation in pressure and
saturation. This variation is further contorted in case of
water flooding where reservoir heterogeneities cause
formation of pressure cells and uneven sweep. These
changes get manifested in ∆Vp/Vs and ∆Ip and often mask
each other as happens in Zone-2 and Zone-3. Thus a
decoupling methodology is imperative to separate pressure
and saturation effects from ∆Vp/Vs and ∆Ip.
Several methods have been applied to decouple pressure
and saturation effects using inverted seismic attributes.
Tura et al. (1999) estimated changes in dynamic reservoir
properties using cross-plots of P & S impedances obtained
from seismic inversion. Cole et al. (2002) proposed a
method to estimate pressure and saturation by forward
modeling of rock and fluid physics relationships. Lumley et
al. (2003) proposed a 4D seismic cross-plot inversion
method using a coordinate transformation. All these
techniques tend to be field specific and hence require
considerable modifications before they can be applied
generally. The decoupling of 4D signal in the Ravva Field
was done using a Petro-Elastic Model based approach
(PEM) to transform the 4D inversion derived elastic
properties into Saturation (Sw) and Pressure (P) proxies
(Figure 4). PEM defined the relationship between the
reservoir properties like porosity, pore fluid, effective
pressure etc. and elastic properties. It was calibrated with
the pore compressibility measurements done on the cores to
© 2013 SEG
SEG Houston 2013 Annual Meeting
correctly predict the elastic behavior of rocks from pore
pressure changes in the reservoir. Next, PEM was inverted
to devise mutually orthogonal Saturation (∆Sw) and
Pressure (∆P) proxies from ∆Ip and ∆Vp/Vs (Figure 5).
These ∆Sw and ∆P depict the changes related to pore fluid
type and pore pressure respectively. As can be seen in
Figure 5a and c there are no anomalies below the OOWC in
∆Sw as expected. All 4D anomalies pertaining to injection
pressure can be seen on ∆P (Figures 5b and d).
Additionally, down-dip area in the estimated ∆Sw map and
section shows increase in water saturation (water flooding)
and crestal part of the map shows undrained areas. The
estimated ∆P map and section was more complex due to the
overburden and underburden related stress changes.
The estimated absolute saturation volumes of base and
monitor surveys also shows water flooding signature in the
flank side of the structure and undrained areas in the crestal
portion (red ellipse in Figure 6). Huang et al. (2009)
demonstrated that a strong relationship exists between the
seismic difference signatures and the cumulative produced
or injected volumes. A similar exercise was carried out in
Ravva Field to explain the observed 4D response with the
available well production data, pressure data and new infill
drilling well logs in proximity to the identified anomaly.
The production and injection activity at most of the wells is
consistent with the observed and interpreted 4D response.
Conclusions
A 4D seismic survey was carefully planned, executed and
interpreted on the Ravva Field. Integrated geoscience and
4D seismic studies have provided key information that
defines fault compartments, position of the current OWC
and reveals potential undrained areas in RAD and REFB
blocks of the field. The pressure and saturation decoupling
from the 4D signal has helped in identifying by-passed oil
areas and reduced the uncertainty associated with locating
and designing infill wells. The estimated saturation sections
and maps delineate the current moved OWC and reveal the
water flooding front in the flank of the two fault blocks and
delineate undrained areas in the crestal portion. All these
results are being used to up-date the reservoir model for
continued optimal reservoir management and development.
Acknowledgements
The authors gratefully acknowledge the full support of the
Ravva Field Joint Venture partners, Oil and Natural Gas
Corporation, Videocon Industries Limited and Ravva Oil
(Singapore), in the planning and execution of the 4D
studies and for their permission to publish this work. We
also like to gratefully acknowledge Prof. Colin MacBeth,
Heriot-Watt University for his guidance in the 4D
interpretation. Finally we would like to acknowledge
CGGVeritas for carrying out the 4D inversion work.
DOI http://dx.doi.org/10.1190/segam2013-1021.1
Page 4983
 Estimation of pore pressure and oil saturation changes in the reservoir
Downloaded 01/08/14 to 202.134.59.72. Redistribution subject to SEG license or copyright; see Terms of Use at http://library.seg.org/

Figure 4. Petro-elastic Model (PEM) was generated using forward Figure 6: 4D saturation sections shows flooding signature in the
modeling flank and undrained areas in the crest of the structure (red ellipse).

Figure 5: (a) , (c) Estimated ∆Saturation map and section shows flooding signature and undrained areas (red box). No 4D changes below OWC.
(b) , (d) Estimated ∆Pressure map and section shows pressure up near injectors and pressure down near producers. 4D changes below OWC.
∆Pressure section shows more complex due to overburden and underburden stress changes.

© 2013 SEG DOI http://dx.doi.org/10.1190/segam2013-1021.1

SEG Houston 2013 Annual Meeting Page 4984
 http://dx.doi.org/10.1190/segam2013-1021.1

EDITED REFERENCES
Note: This reference list is a copy-edited version of the reference list submitted by the author. Reference lists for the 2013
SEG Technical Program Expanded Abstracts have been copy edited so that references provided with the online metadata for
each paper will achieve a high degree of linking to cited sources that appear on the Web.
Downloaded 01/08/14 to 202.134.59.72. Redistribution subject to SEG license or copyright; see Terms of Use at http://library.seg.org/

REFERENCES
Cole, S., D. Lumley, M. Meadows, and A. Tura, 2002, Pressure and saturation inversion of 4D seismic
data by rock physics forward modeling: 72nd Annual International Meeting, SEG, Expanded
Abstracts, 2475–2478.
Ghosh, B., K. N. Raju, S. S. Pandian, and N. Krishnaiah, 2007, A time-lapse seismic (4D) feasibility
study in Ravva Field: 7th International Petroleum Conference, Abstracts, doi:1.4.652
Huang, Y., and C. MacBeth, 2009, Direct correlation of 4D seismic and well activity for dynamic
reservoir interpretation: Presented at the 79th Annual International Meeting, SEG.
Josyula , S., C. G. Rao, S. Sarkar, K. Reddy, M. Gupta, and K. Saikia, 2012, 4D seismic for identification
of potential unswept areas for development in a producing field with water injection support: A case
study of the Ravva Field, east coast of India: 9th Biennial International Conference and Exposition on
Petroleum Geophysics, SPG, Abstracts, doi:536.
Lumley, D., M. Meadows, S. Cole, and D. Adams, 2003, Estimation of reservoir pressure and saturation
by crossplot inversion of 4D seismic attributes: 73 rd Annual International Meeting, SEG, Expanded
Abstracts, 1513–1516.
Tura, A., and D. E. Lumley, 1999, Estimating pressure and saturation changes from time-lapse AVO data:
69th Annual International Meeting, SEG, Expanded Abstracts, 1655–1658.

© 2013 SEG DOI http://dx.doi.org/10.1190/segam2013-1021.1

SEG Houston 2013 Annual Meeting Page 4985