Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by Rock Man on July 3, 2018 at 8:25

Do you know if this 3D is a high intensity version that can map geomechanical properties and other subsurface characteristics?

Permalink Reply by Doug Cox on July 3, 2018 at 8:29

Wireless, dynamite every 85', 290'span,show everything ...

Permalink Reply by Rock Man on July 3, 2018 at 13:46

Fold????

Permalink Reply by Doug Cox on July 3, 2018 at 14:26

Yes, 3D Fold............1997 was a 2D

Permalink Reply by Hydrocarbonite on July 3, 2018 at 14:39

3D Fold ??  Explain guys for us novice curiosity... 

Permalink Reply by Rock Man on July 3, 2018 at 16:58

2D vs 3D seismic:

2D is basically a single line of seismic, e.g. receivers set out on either side of a highway and vibrators / dynamite / seismic data sources generated down the highway. Then the data from the receivers is processed and you get a "straight line" slice of the subsurface. 

3D will have a blanket of receivers set out in a grid across a much larger area as seismic sources are generating sound waves into the subsurface. Receiver grids are moved and more data is generated. Then all the data in receivers is "processed" to create a 3 dimensional grid that merges all this data into a usable format.

As a comparison, 2D is thousands of bits of data while 3D is hundreds of million bits of data.

Suggest you google "3D seismic" to get a better explanation than this.

Permalink Reply by Rock Man on July 3, 2018 at 16:50

Understand it is 3D - by fold I mean "intensity" of seismic data.

The higher the fold, the more that can be extracted from the data. Lower fold will give you basic structure info while higher fold can give you reservoir characteristics.

Schlumberger Definition "FOLD"

A measure of the redundancy of common midpoint seismic data, equal to the number of offset receivers that record a given data point or in a given bin and are added during stacking to produce a single trace. Typical values of fold for modern seismic data range from 60 to 240 for 2D seismic data, and 10 to 120 for 3D seismic data.

Permalink Reply by Hydrocarbonite on July 4, 2018 at 1:57

thx RM,  very informative videos per google search.  3D shoots very expensive

Permalink Reply by Rock Man on July 4, 2018 at 7:40

Comment to HC - from permitting thru processing, 3D can run anywhere for $40 to $120 thousand per square mile of data acquired.

Expensive but GOOD 3D and subsequent interpretation will prevent a lot of dry holes and optimize a lot of drilling. Especially when reservoir issues (e.g. geomechanics) can be evaluated using the data and horizontals can be landed in optimum areas.

Plus locate laterals where they do not intersect faults (and end up out of target zone)

Permalink Reply by littleasy on July 4, 2018 at 3:39

Similar to the difference between a single X-ray picture and a CAT scan.  The Devil is in the details!!!

Permalink Reply by East Tex on July 4, 2018 at 5:59

The 3D is very high fold and very wide azimuth.  Being shot with analyzing the Reservoir in mind.   Very technical 3D I hear.

Permalink Reply by Bob Zimmerman on July 4, 2018 at 7:41

One of these days they will have seismic by which you view a prospect from the underneath looking up. That assuming it's not out there already. 

• ‹ Previous
• 1
• …
• 44
• 45
• 46
• 47
• 48
• …
• 59
• Next ›
• Page