Rock‐physics forward modelling to predict seismic behaviour: A case study for exploration target in Mahanadi basin, East Coast of India

Abstract

ABSTRACTOne of the major aspects of rock‐physics forward modelling is to predict seismic behaviour at an undrilled location using drilled well data. It is important to model the rock and fluid properties away from drilled wells to characterize the reservoir and investigate the root causes of different seismic responses. Using the forward modelling technique, it is possible to explain the amplitude responses of present seismic data in terms of probable rock and reservoir properties. In this context, rock‐physics modelling adds significant values in the prospect maturation process by reducing the risk of reservoir presence in exploration and appraisal phases. The synthetic amplitude variation with offset gathers from the forward model is compared with real seismic gathers to ensure the fidelity of the existing geological model. ‘Prospect A’ in the study area has been identified from seismic interpretation, which was deposited as slope fan sediments in Mahanadi basin, East Coast of India. The mapped prospect has shown class‐I amplitude variation with offset response in seismic without any direct hydrocarbon indicator support. The existing geological model suggests the presence of an excellent gas reservoir with proven charge access from the fetch area, moderate porosity and type of lithology within this fan prospect. But, whether the seismic response from this geological model will exhibit a class‐I amplitude variation with offset behaviour or ‘dim spot’ will be visible; the objective of the present study is to investigate these queries. A rock‐physics depth trend analysis has been done to envisage the possibilities of class‐I reservoir in ‘Prospect A’. Forward modelling, using a combination of mechanical and chemical compaction, shows the synthetic gas gathers at ‘Prospect A’, which are class I in nature. The study has also depicted 2D forward modelling using lithology and fluid properties of discovery well within similar stratigraphy to predict whether ‘dim spot’ will be seen in seismic. The estimated change in synthetic amplitude response has been observed as ∼5% at contact, which suggests that the changes will not be visible in seismic. The study connects the existing geological model with a top‐down seismic interpretation using rock‐physics forward modelling technique to mature a deep‐water exploratory prospect.