SPE 109272

Integrated Property and Fracture Modeling Using 2D Seismic Data: Application to an

Algerian Cambrian Field
A. Ouenes, D. Klepacki, and T. Royer, Prism Seismic, and A. Boufrioua, E. Mouhouche, M. Hamoud, K. Djermouni,
and H. Harhad, Sonatrach

Copyright 2007, Society of Petroleum Engineers

This paper was prepared for presentation at the 2007 SPE Annual Technical Conference and
Exhibition held in Anaheim, California, U.S.A., 1114 November 2007.
This paper was selected for presentation by an SPE Program Committee following review of
information contained in an abstract submitted by the author(s). Contents of the paper, as
presented, have not been reviewed by the Society of Petroleum Engineers and are subject to
correction by the author(s). The material, as presented, does not necessarily reflect any
position of the Society of Petroleum Engineers, its officers, or members. Papers presented at
SPE meetings are subject to publication review by Editorial Committees of the Society of
Petroleum Engineers. Electronic reproduction, distribution, or storage of any part of this paper
for commercial purposes without the written consent of the Society of Petroleum Engineers is
prohibited. Permission to reproduce in print is restricted to an abstract of not more than
300 words; illustrations may not be copied. The abstract must contain conspicuous
acknowledgment of where and by whom the paper was presented. Write Librarian, SPE, P.O.
Box 833836, Richardson, Texas 75083-3836 U.S.A., fax 01-972-952-9435.

Abstract
The use of 2D seismic lines to derive integrated 3D reservoir
models remains a major challenge for the E&P industry. The
use of 3D seismic in developing 3D reservoir models is well
established, but there remain areas where 3D seismic is rare
and 2D seismic lines are abundant. This paper describes a
unique workflow that fully utilizes the data available in the 2D
seismic lines. The first step in the workflow is to interpret key
seismic horizons and use them in inversion and spectral
imaging. The second step consists of interpolating the 2D
seismic attributes over the entire field and creating pseudo-3D
seismic cubes. The third step consists of using the various
pseudo-3D seismic cubes to derive 3D geologic and fracture
models. The fourth step is to use the derived models in a
reservoir simulator to verify the validity of the models and to
design reservoir management strategies to optimize recovery
This workflow was applied to a complex fractured field in
Algeria which produces from a Cambro-Ordovician reservoir.
Twenty-one 2D seismic lines were used in the project to
derive a new structural interpretation and to create three
pseudo 3D seismic attributes. These seismic attributes were
used as input in REFRACTTM, Prism Seismic fracture
modeling software, to create geologic and fracture models.
The resulting porosity and permeability models were input in
the EclipseTM reservoir simulator software. Ninety percent of
the well performances were matched, confirming the
reliability and accuracy of the derived geologic and fracture
models and the usefulness of the workflow.
Introduction
Higher oil prices have given a large impetus to seismic
acquisition throughout the world. Seismic crews are working

relentlessly to shoot new seismic surveys. Due to the

important backlog for acquiring new 3D seismic surveys, a
large number of producing fields still have only 2D seismic
data. Due to the urgency for developing the producing assets,
accurate 3D reservoir models are required to characterize and
simulate a large number of reservoirs that have only 2D
seismic data.
The quantitative use of seismic attributes in reservoir
modeling is not yet commonplace in all companies.
Conversely, almost all E&P companies use seismic data for
structural interpretation. Although this task is extremely
important, it represents only a portion of the information
contained in the seismic data. Whereas the arrival times of the
seismic events contain structural information, the amplitudes
of the seismic events contain information about rock and fluid
properties.
2D seismic data are typically used for structural interpretation
and for picking well locations. In other words, the use of 2D
seismic data in 3D reservoir modeling is extremely rare, if not
unknown, to most engineers and geologists. When dealing
with the development of complex reservoirs with no 3D
seismic data available, it is imperative to incorporate the
exiting 2D seismic data in reservoir modeling. This paper
describes the steps used in a workflow that incorporates 2D
seismic lines in 3D property and fracture modeling. To
illustrate each step, an oil field in Algeria producing from a
Cambrian reservoir is used as an example.
An Algerian Cambrian Reservoir
The studied oil reservoir is an anticline, oriented NE-SW. It
was discovered in the late sixties, and produced under primary
recovery until the mid nineties, when gas injection was
initiated. More than thirty wells were drilled since the
discovery, and currently nine wells are still producing. The
reservoir produces from the Cambrian Ra and Ri reservoirs,
which are present in the giant Hassi Messaoud1-2 field and
surrounding fields, such as El Gassi3. The reservoir produces
from the matrix, which has its permeability enhanced by
fractures. The reservoir behaves as a single porosity system,
where the storage is in the matrix and the permeability of the
matrix is enhanced by fractures in some places.

A grid of twenty one 2D seismic lines cover the entire field

(Fig. 1). This grid pattern, with a spacing between 2D seismic
lines of 1 km or less, facilitates the use of the 2D seismic in
reservoir modeling. As the workflow incorporates
interpolation of the 2D seismic attributes, large or irregular
lines spacing may produce inaccurate models in the areas
between the 2D seismic lines.
Workflow-Overview
The proposed workflow has many similarities with the
workflow using 3D seismic, where high resolution seismic
attributes are used to estimate 3D reservoir properties such as
lithology, porosity and fracture density4-5. However, additional
tasks are required to incorporate the 2D seismic data.
The first step in the workflow is to interpret key seismic
horizons. This provides a structural framework for the
reservoir. The second step consists of generating and
interpolating the 2D seismic attributes over the entire field and
creating pseudo-3D seismic cubes. The third step consists of
using the various pseudo-3D seismic cubes to derive 3D
geologic and fracture models. The fourth step is to use the
derived models in a reservoir simulator to verify the validity
of the models and to design reservoir management strategies
to optimize recovery.
The complexities of using 2D, versus 3D, seismic data are
concentrated in the first two steps of the workflow. At the
conclusion of the second step, the workflow resembles the one
used when dealing with 3D seismic data, as the information
found in the 2D seismic was transformed into pseudo-3D
seismic attributes. The following sections describe each step in
detail.
Seismic Tasks
For both 2D and 3D data, the use of seismic data in reservoir
modeling involves structural interpretation, seismic-well ties,
high resolution inversion, and spectral imaging. The use of 2D
data requires additional processes: mistie correction, attribute
interpolation, and generation of pseudo-3D volumes. Each of
these seismic tasks is described in detail in the following
sections.
Seismic Mistie Correction and Structural Interpretation
The workflow starts with mistie correction and structural
interpretation. Unlike lines extracted from a 3D volume,
which tie exactly, lines from a 2D survey may exhibit misties
differences in time, phase, or amplitude at line
intersections. These differences are minimized in a least
squares sense.
Faults and key horizons are interpreted on the 2D lines. These
data are used to produce a time structure map estimated over
the entire field (Fig. 1). Using an average velocity map
derived from the well data, the shallowest time horizon was
converted to depth. The depth maps for underlying horizons
were generated by adding isopachs to the overlying depth
map.

SPE 109272

As the studied field is fractured, and the faults play a major

role in controlling the distribution of the fractures, fault
mapping is an important component of the structural
interpretation. To assist in the mapping of the faults, we
compute structural derivatives of the depth maps and use the
high curvature lineaments observed on these derivative maps
to asses fault orientations (Fig. 2). In the studied field, there
were several tectonic events, creating faults in different
directions. To capture all these faults, the curvature maps were
computed in four directions: N-S, E-W, NW-SE, and NESW. The curvature map in each direction provides a better
definition of a set of specifically-oriented faults; using all four
directions helps with the overall mapping of all fault
orientations. In the studied field, the faults are near vertical in
the reservoir zone; therefore it was sufficient to use the
curvature maps at the top of the reservoir and extend the faults
lineaments to the bottom of the reservoir. This task is easily
accomplished in CRYSTALTM 6, Prism Seismic geomodeling
software, where fault planes can be easily built by picking
fault traces on the curvature maps and automatically
converting them into fault planes without the need for any
time-consuming pillar gridding.
High Resolution Inversion
The key to successful use of seismic attributes in reservoir
modeling is to generate attributes that are related to rock and
fluid properties. When only post-stack seismic is available, the
two most useful processes that can be applied to the seismic
data are high resolution inversion and spectral imaging. The
post-stack seismic inversion produces acoustic impedance
(the product of velocity and density), and spectral imaging
produces various frequency-dependent seismic attributes.
High resolution inversion algorithms have been used for
more than a decade7-11 by select companies4-5,11. These early
adopters do not rely on the commonly used inversion software
that does not provide the high resolution needed for reservoir
modeling. In this project, one of the model-based high
resolution inversion algorithms available in CRYSTALTM was
used to derive the impedance sampled at 1ms. The high
resolution impedance is the result of a combination of the log
and seismic data. In this project, fourteen wells had sonic logs
and could be used in the inversion workflow. The inversion
process starts by tieing the well data with the seismic, and
using the resulting time-domain impedance log data, along
with structural framework created from the seismic horizons
and faults, to populate the impedance values within the a priori
model. One of the challenges for the inversion process is
obtaining sonic and density logs that cover a large depth
interval, as these logs are usually recorded only in the
reservoir interval. To circumvent such a problem, one can
generate pseudo-logs by finding petrophysical correlations
between the sonic logs and other recorded logs. Another
peculiarity when dealing with 2D seismic data is the inability
to use wells that are not reasonably close to the 2D lines. This
constraint will further reduce the number of wells that can be
used for the inversion. Once the wells that have sonic logs
and are sufficiently close to a 2D seismic line are tied to the
seismic, an initial impedance model, sampled at 1ms, is
estimated for each 2D seismic line. The inversion process will

SPE 109272

update this initial model so synthetic traces generated from the

model best match the seismic traces. From these 2D acoustic
impedance sections. we compute an average impedance map
in a specific time interval over the entire field. This average
impedance map is computed over a reservoir interval in two
steps. The first step is to estimate at each seismic trace an
average impedance in the defined reservoir interval. These
average impedance values are then snapped to a regular grid.
The second step consists of interpolating between all these
values to create an average impedance over the entire grid as
shown in Fig. 3. Various methods can be used to generate the
average impedance map; in this project, minimum curvature
interpolation was deemed satisfactory to generate these
average maps. The studied reservoir was divided into two
zones: the Ri zone and the Ra zone. Each zone was divided
into four (4) stratigraphic layers, and an average impedance
map was generated for each layer. The resulting eight average
impedance maps were used to create a pseudo 3D cube of
impedance.
Spectral Imaging
The first applications of spectral imaging, or spectral
decomposition, were mostly in seismic interpretation12.
However, the multitude of spectral imaging attributes can
produce some attributes that are related to rock and fluid
properties - thus its use by early adopters in property and
fracture modeling13-16.
Although the published literature dealing with spectral
decomposition shows its application to 3D seismic, it can be
used also on 2D seismic lines. In this study, spectral imaging
was applied to each 2D seismic line to generate a number of
attributes. After careful examination of all the attributes, two
of them were deemed appropriate for the reservoir modeling
effort - the total energy (an integration of the energy across all
frequencies) and the outer bandwidth (the difference in Hertz
of the 2nd percentile energy frequency and the 98th percentile
energy frequency).
Using the same approach described previously for the
acoustic impedance, average value attribute maps (Fig. 4) are
used to generate pseudo-3D seismic cubes. This operation is
easily accomplished in REFRACTTM,18 which reads the eight
2D seismic attribute maps and the grid in depth to create a
pseudo-3D seismic attribute cube (Fig. 5). This pseudo-3D
attribute cube provides a value in every cell of the 3D
geocellular grid. Creation of these pseudo-3D attribute cubes
allows rock property modeling to be guided by seismic
attributes.
Sequential Geologic Modeling
The Cambrian reservoir exhibits strong lateral and vertical
heterogeneities; consequently, building accurate 3D models of
any petrophysical property is a very challenging exercise. The
pseudo-3D seismic attribute volumes are used to provide data
in the inter-well regions to generate more reliable models.
Given the availability of three seismic attributes, the
geologic modeling can be done in two different ways. One
simple way is to use a geostatistical method such as collocated

co-kriging to incorporate one soft dataset. Unfortunately,

such methods cannot use all three seismic attributes
simultaneously. Our experience has shown that the spectral
imaging attributes contain valuable geologic information and
could be very beneficial to include as a constraint when
estimating geologic attributes, hence the use of a neural
network approach that can include many seismic attributes
simultaneously. In this project, Prism Seismic sequential
geologic modeling approach is used to estimate various
geologic models.
Prism Seismics sequential modeling approach uses
multiple seismic attributes as a building block to estimate in a
sequential manner dependent petrophysical properties such as
facies, shale volume, porosity, water saturation, and
permeability. The sequential method identifies first the
reservoir property that has the potential to be the primary
property controlling most of the other subsequent reservoir
properties. In this study, the facies was chosen as the primary
reservoir property. Thus, the first geologic model built using a
neural network approach will be a facies model constrained by
the three seismic attributes. The input at the wells is the facies
logs. The constraints are the three seismic attributes available
in the geocellular grid. The neural network will attempt to find
a relationship between the facies at the wells and the three
seismic attributes also available at the wells. Once this
relationship is found, it is applied to every cell of the grid to
create a 3D facies model. This facies model can subsequently
be used to estimate a secondary reservoir property.
The secondary reservoir property in this study is shale
volume, which is available at many wells. In estimating the
shale volume, one can use the newly created facies model in
addition to the available three seismic attributes. As a result,
the shale volume model (Fig. 6) is constrained by four
reservoir properties. This process could similarly estimate all
the subsequent reservoir properties, including the core
porosity and permeability. However, given the presence of
fractures in this reservoir, the modeling of permeability
requires some additional considerations.

Fracture Modeling
Both E&P and service companies are developing various
fracture modeling approaches, with most of the serious efforts
done by service companies that develop and market
commercial software. Among all the approaches used, we will
only address those that deal with the creation of 3D reservoir
models of fracture density available as a geocellular grid. In
this category we do not include the azimuthal anisotropy
methods used by geophysical service companies, as this
requires a 3D dataset with a wide range of source-receiver
azimuths.
Among the different fracture modeling approaches used or
proposed in commercial software, one can distinguish three
competing methods: the geomechanical approach, the discrete
fracture network (DFN) approach, and the continuous fracture
modeling (CFM) approach.

Geomechanical methods
These methods rely on geomechanical concepts, ranging from
simple curvature methods to simple and complex structural
reconstruction approaches. Unfortunately, these methods lack
geologic realism, focusing on the time when the fractures were
created rather than present time. The initial state of the
fractures could be dramatically different from todays
situation, where diagenesis could have cemented all the
fractures. As a result, the derived fracture models only
account for tectonic and mechanical effects, and thus
completely miss the role played by the geology, facies, and
diagenesis. Such methods and software provide models that
show a very high fracture density near faults, even though
these fracture zones are the preferred paths taken by
mineralizing fluids which could cement all the open fractures
in these zones. The results of these geomechanical models can
therefore be misleading, possibly resulting in dry holes where
a large number of cemented fractures are encountered. Such
deficiencies and unpleasant surprises resulting from these
geomechanical approaches have been illustrated with real field
examples19.
Discrete Fracture Networks (DFN)
This approach was originally developed more than 20 years
ago in the hydrogeology work. It became known after its
successful application to the sp, Sweden nuclear waste site,
where extensive fracture data was collected at many boreholes
drilled a few meters apart. Whereas the hydrogeology
community can afford a wellbore every few meters, this is not
the case in the petroleum industry20-21, which has been
applying this method since the late 90s. The main assumption
behind the DFN approach is that at every scale, the flow of oil
and gas in a fractured reservoir is dominated by a limited
number of discrete fractures. Thus, by modeling the geometry
and properties of these discrete features, one can hopefully
drill successful wells and create reservoir models that are able
to both reproduce the past well performances and make a
reasonable forecast. Unfortunately, after more than ten years
of application to oil and gas reservoirs, to the best of our
knowledge there is not a single publication or presentation that
shows the comparison between the fracture density predicted
by a DFN model and those measured by logs acquired after
drilling. Additionally, there is not a single paper or
presentation showing the successful history match of
individual well performances for any fractured reservoir
simulated with permeability and porosity estimated from a
DFN model. Despite well-funded consortiums on both sides
of the Atlantic and significant DOE research funds, the DFN
method has yet to deliver on its promises. With the recent
availability of this approach in PetrelTM, more geoscientists
will be able to experiment with it and hopefully report their
success or failures. Given the poor track record of the DFN
approach in solving any practical problem in fractured
reservoirs, many geoscientists have chosen the Continuous
Fracture Modeling (CFM) approach.
Continuous Fracture Modeling (CFM)
The CFM21-23 approach was developed in the early 90s to
address the complex problems encountered with fractured oil

SPE 109272

and gas reservoirs. The goals of the CFM approach are to have
the: ability to predict fracture density in 3D with a useful
vertical resolution of a few meters; to use any type of fracture
indicator and not be limited to image logs as in the DFN
approach; to use multiple 3D high resolution seismic attributes
to provide interwell information; and to generate a fracture
permeability and porosity that is able to match most of the
individual well performances when input in a reservoir
simulator.
All the stated objectives of the CFM method were attained,
and many case studies illustrate its successful application to
various fractured reservoirs. Unlike the geomechanical or
DFN approaches, the CFM approach has been extensively
validated with the drill bit4,5,19, documented with published
results of the predicted fracture density log versus the
measured log. The ability of the CFM models to provide
permeability and porosity models to reservoir simulators that
match individual well performances, independent of the
recovery mechanism, was also proven and published4,14,19.
The CFM approach does not focus on the fractures themselves
but rather on the factors that determine where fracturing
occurs. It is common knowledge that structure, lithology, bed
thickness, porosity, faults, and other geologic factors control
the intensity of fracturing within the reservoir. Furthermore,
one can derive a very good estimation of these drivers using
seismic data. For example, the structure and the faults can be
accurately derived from seismic interpretation. Bed thickness
variations can be derived from isochrons or from the tuning
frequency spectral attribute. Lithology, porosity and other rock
properties can be derived from high resolution seismic
attributes obtained in pre-stack and post-stack inversions.
These seismic attributes can be generated at a vertical
resolution of 1-3 meters, which is similar to the thickness of
intervals that control flow in fractured reservoirs. This enables
the correlation of the fracture data available at the wells with
the high resolution drivers available in the 3D reservoir
volume. Once this correlation or relationship is found, it can
be applied to any gridblock, as the input for this relationship
are the fracture drivers. This process can be accomplished
using a neural network.
Application of the CFM Approach to a Cambrian
Reservoir
Cambro-Ordivician reservoirs in Algeria have a variety of
fracture problems where their effects vary from being almost
unnoticeable to controlling entirely the reservoir performance.
Since the lower Ri and upper Ra reservoirs have good matrix
properties, the effects of fractures that enhance the matrix
permeability is not easy to model. For example, a tight sand in
the Ri or Ra reservoir with important fracturing could have the
same permeability as a good very porous sand with no
fractures at all. During primary production, the fractures are
not a major concern except during drilling. However, gas
injection highlights the presence of the fractures and could
lead to very unpleasant surprises when not accounting for their
effects.

SPE 109272

The best way to account for the effects of the fractures is to

create reservoir models that are able to reproduce the correct
reservoir dynamics. SONATRACH has benefited from the
CFM approach in many of its fractured Cambrian reservoirs.
In all these reservoirs, independent of the degree of fracturing,
a reservoir model that reproduced the majority of individual
well performances was successfully built using the CFM
method. One of the keys to these successes is the ability to
use the core permeability as a fracture indicator.

distance to faults, and a deformation cube which is computed

in 3D based on the length and the offset of the faults. All these
drivers are available in 3D as geocellular models. Ten
permeability realizations were generated, and an average
permeability is shown in Fig. 7. Because the geocellular grids
are made of cells that are 100m x 100m in the X and Y
directions, the core permeability models require a calibration
to the well test data to capture the large scale effects due to
both the fractures and the grid block size.

When examining PLT and core data, one can notice in many
of the Cambrian reservoirs that a tight sand with fractures
behaves in some places in a similar way to a good sand with
no fractures. This observation prompted us to adopt the core
permeability as the well input in the CFM approach. With this
input at the wells, the model will capture both the tight zones
that have an enhanced permeability due to intensive fracturing
as well as the unfractured zones with good matrix porosity and
permeability. As the reservoir acts as a single porosity single
permeability system, the resulting permeability derived by the
CFM method is able to reproduce correctly both the
permeability mainly controlled by the fractures as well as the
permeability mainly controlled by the matrix.

The calibration approach uses the well test data to first

calibrate the core permeability at the wells. These calibrated
core permeabilities have now captured the large scale effects ,
and are input to a new REFRACTTM project. The drivers that
will be used in this new project are the ten previously
generated models of permeability. The CFM approach is used
once more to estimate the calibrated permeability in 3D using
the calibrated permeability at the wells and the generated ten
realizations of core permeabilities. The resulting models are
averaged in one single permeability model, which is then used
as input in a reservoir simulator.

Fractured reservoirs have been divided into three major types.

The Type I reservoirs are those where the fractures provide
both the storage capacity and the permeability. Type II
reservoirs are those where the matrix holds the storage while
the fractures provide the permeability. Type III are those with
a matrix porosity that varies from low to high and the fractures
are simply assisting the production from the matrix. The
Algerian Cambrian reservoirs are mostly Type III reservoirs,
although one is tempted to identify some tight reservoir areas
as Type II. In this case, many authors suggest the use of dualporosity and even dual porosity/dual permeability systems to
simulate such reservoirs. However, such a representation
requires the derivation of additional rock properties, such as
shape factor, to characterize the matrix-fracture transfer. Our
experience has shown that single porosity and permeability
systems describe adequately these Cambrian reservoirs as long
as the permeability is correctly modeled to account for the
effects of the fractures.
The estimation of the permeability is accomplished in the
CFM model in two steps. The first step involves the use of the
core permeability at the wells and the geologic, geophysical
and geomechanical drivers available in the 3D reservoir
volume. The second step is to use the derived permeability
models and well test data to calibrate the models so that they
have the correct magnitude corresponding to the reservoir
scale permeability.
In the first step, the CFM model uses the core permeability at
the wells and a collection of drivers derived in the sequential
geologic modeling. In the case of this project, the estimation
of the core permeability used the three seismic attributes,
along with all the derived geologic models including facies,
shale volume, and porosity. In addition to the geophysical and
geologic drivers, the estimation of the permeability uses ten
geomechanical drivers: the four slopes and curvatures, the

Model Validation in a Reservoir Simulator

The final porosity model estimated from the sequential
geologic modeling and the resulting average permeability
derived in the CFM approach was provided to SONATRACH
simulation engineers, who used EclipseTM in a single
porosity/single permeability system. The PVT and flow
functions were added to the simulation input and thirty years
of history was simulated. In this thirty years of history the
reservoir has undergone both primary production, and gas
injection. The validation of a model is achieved when a
majority of the individual well performances are matched
without the need for any history matching. Although such
results are the norm rather than the exception when using the
CFM approach and a multitude of 3D seismic attributes, the
authors have to admit that such results were not expected
using limited 2D seismic data.
Out of the 33 wells , 90% of them have their pressure (Figs. 8)
and GOR (Fig. 9) matched within reasonable tolerances.
These matches include the difficult-to-match GOR that was
able to capture the gas breakthrough at some of the wells and
show no breakthrough at the wells that were not reached by
the gas. This match of the GOR both at the wells affected and
not affected by the gas breakthrough confirms the ability of
the derived model to account for the complex fracture
network. Such models are the result of a detailed process
where the seismic information is fully utilized because it is the
only available information in the interwell region. This
valuable seismic information was heavily used in the CFM
approach since its inception fifteen years ago, and with this
new workflow it is extended to 2D seismic data.
Conclusions
After many years of successful modeling, simulating and
drilling fractured reservoirs, the CFM approach was applied to
reservoirs that have only 2D seismic data. A robust workflow
was tested on a complex fractured Cambrian field in Algeria
which leads to the creation of a dynamic model that matches

90% of the individual well performances.

The key behind the entire process is the successful use of high
resolution inversion and spectral imaging to generate useful
seismic attributes. 2D maps of the average values of these
seismic attributes in thin intervals are turned into pseudo-3D
seismic attributes that are used as constraints in subsequent
geologic and fracture modeling.
The sequential geologic modeling approach was used to
generate 3D models of facies, shale volume, and porosity, all
constrained by the seismic attributes and previously generated
geologic models.
The core permeability was used as fracture indicator. A 3D
model of core permeability using geologic, geophysical and
geomechanical drivers was derived using the CFM approach.
The resulting permeability model was calibrated to well test
and was used as input in a black oil simulator.
The resulting EclipseTM model was able to match individual
well performances for the 30 years history at 90% of the
wells. This match included the hard-to-match GOR at both the
wells that has seen gas breakthrough and those that did not
have the gas breakthrough. This match indicates the ability of
this workflow to correctly model the fracture network and to
account for its effects when injecting gas. Such
accomplishments were previously achieved with 3D seismic,
but were not expected with the use of limited 2D seismic data.

SPE 109272

Syd Arne Field, paper SPE 103282, presented at the 2006 SPE
Annual Technical Conference and Exhibition, San Antonio.
5. Pinous, O., Zellou, A., Robinson, G., Royer, T., Svikhnushin, N.,
Borisenok, D., Blank, A.: Continuous Fracture Modeling of a
Carbonate Reservoir in West Siberia, paper SPE 103284 presented
at the 2007 International Oil Conference and Exhibition in Mexico,
Verra Cruz.
CRYSTAL:
Integrated
Geomodeling
Software,
6.

www.prismseismic.com/software/crystal/index.htm.
Prism
Seismic
7. D u b rule, O., Thibaut, M., Lamy, P. and Haas, A, Geostatistical
reservoir characterisation constrained by 3D seismic data Petroleum
Geoscience 4, (1998), pp 121-128.
8. Tien-When Lo, Bashore, W: Seismic Constrained Facies
Modeling Using Stochastic Seismic Inversion and Indicator
Simulation, A North Sea Example, 1999 SEG Annual meeting
9. Dasgupta, S., Hong, M., La Croix, P., Al-Mana, L., Robinson,
G.Prediction of Reservoir Properties by Integration of Seismic
Stochastic Inversion and Coherency Attributes in Super Giant
Ghawar Field, 2000 SEG Annual Meeting.
10. Robinson, G. C., Stochastic Seismic Inversion Applied to
Reservoir Characterization, The Recorder, (2001) v26, n1, 36-40.

11. Francis, A, Limitations of Deterministic Inversion and

Advantages of Stochastic Seismic Inversion, The Recorder,
February 2005, 5-11

REFRACT and CRYSTAL are Trademarks of Prism Seismic

Petrel and Eclipse are Trademarks of Schlumberger

12. Partyka, G., Gridley, J., and Lopez, J.: Interpretational

applications of spectral decomposition in reservoir characterization,
The Leading Edge, 1999, Vol.18, 353-360.
13. Shen, F., Robinson, G., Jiang: Instantaneous Spectral Analysis
Applied to Reservoir Imaging and Producibility Characterization,
SEG 2003 Annual Meeting
14. Ouenes, A., Zellou, A., Robinson, G., Balogh, D., Araktingi, U.,
Improved reservoir simulation with seismically derived fracture
models, SPE 90822, presented at the 2004 SPE Annual Technical
Conference and Exhibition.
15. Ouenes, A., Robinson, G., Zellou, A., (2004), Impact of Prestack and Post-stack Seismic on Integrated Naturally Fractured
Reservoir Characterization, SPE 87007, SPE Asia Pacific
Conference on Integrated Modelling for Asset Management, Kuala
Lumpur, Malaysia
16. Zellou, A., Robinson, G., Royer, T., Zahuczki, P., Kiraly, A.,
Fractured Reservoir Characterization Using Post-Stack Seismic
Attributes: Application to a Hungarian Reservoir, presented at the
2006 EAGE conference, Vienna, Austria.
17. Castagna, J. P. and Sun, S., Instantaneous spectral analysis:
Detection of low frequency shadows associated with hydrocarbons,
The Leading Edge, (2003) Vol.22, 120-127.

References
1. Kouider A., Tiab, D., Mazouzi, A.: Application of Artificial

18. REFRACT, Integrated Fracture Modeling Software.

www.prismseismic.com/software/refract/index.htm,
Prism
Seismic

As a result, fields which do not have 3D seismic could still be

modeled in 3D using the available 2D seismic data, assuming
a reasonable spacing between the lines.
Acknowledgments
The authors would like to thank the management of Sonatrach
for permission to publish this work. The authors would also
like to thank Gary Robinson, Abdel Zellou, Udo Araktingi and
Farouk Boudjemaa from Prism Seismic for their contributions
throughout the project.

Intelligence to Characterize Naturally Fractured Zones in Hassi

Messaoud Oil Field Algeria, Journal of Petroleum Science and
Engineering, Volume 49, Issues 3-4, 15 December 2005, Pages 122141.
2. Guehria, F.M., Yawanarajah, S., Touami M.: Reservoir
Characterization of Fractured Cambrian Reservoirs, Algeria, paper
SPE 96955 presented at the 2005 SPE Annual Technical Conference
and Exhibition, Dallas.
3. Hadidi, B., Ovens, J; Modeling and Early Monitoring of Miscible
Gas Injection in the Tight El Gassi Field, Algeria, paper SPE
107155 presented at the 2007 EUROPEC/EAGE Conference and
Exhibition, London.
4. Christensen, S.A., Ebbe Dalgaard, T., Rosendal, A., Christensen,
J.W., Robinson, G., Zellou, A., Royer, T:, Seismically Driven
Reservoir Characterization Using an Innovative Integrated Approach:

19. Laribi, M., Boubaker, H, Beck, B., Chen, H.K, Amiri-Garroussi,

K, Rassas, S, Rourou, A, Boufares, T, Douik, H., Saidi, N., and
Ouenes, A.: Integrated Fractured Reservoir Characterization and
Simulation: Application to Sidi El Kilani Field, Tunisia., Journal of
Petroleum Technology, August 2004, and paper SPE 84455 presented
at the 2003 SPE Annual Technical Conference and Exhibition,
Denver.

20. Dershowitz, B., Lapointe, P., Eiben, T., Wei, L.:

Integration of discrete feature network methods with
conventional simulator approaches, paper SPE 49069
presented at the 1998 SPE Annual Technical Conference and
Exhibition, New Orleans.

SPE 109272

21. Sabathier, J.C, Bourbiaux, B.J., Cacas, M.C., Sarda, S. :A

New Approach of Fractured Reservoirs, paper SPE 39825
presented at the 1998 International Petroleum Conference and
Exhibition of Mexico.
22. Ouenes, A., Richardson, S., Weiss, W.: Fractured
reservoir characterization and performance forecasting using
geomechanics and artificial intelligence, paper SPE 30572
presented at the 1995 SPE Annual Technical Conference and
Exhibition.

23. Ouenes, A.: Practical application of fuzzy logic and

neural networks to fractured reservoir characterization,
Computers and Geosciences, Shahab Mohagegh (Ed.) v. 26,
no 7
24. Zellou, A., Ouenes, A: Integrated Fractured Reservoir
Characterization Using Neural Networks and Fuzzy Logic:
Three case studies , Soft Computing and Intelligent Data
Analysis in Oil Exploration, Elsevier, Amsterdam

Fig.

Fig. 1: Time structure or isochron showing the layout of

the twenty one 2D seismic lines and their regular pattern

Fig. 2: Picking some faults along lineaments

revealed by on one of the curvature maps
computed from the structure map.

3: Impedance map in the Ri reservoir interval computed by

interpolating the average impedance estimated at each
seismic trace along the 2D seismic lines.

Fig. 4: Total energy map in the Ri reservoir interval

computed by interpolating the average spectral imaging
attribute estimated at each seismic trace along the 2D
seismic lines.

Fig. 5: Illustration of the process used to create a pseudo

3D seismic attribute. Each 2D map is inserted at the
corresponding layer in a depth grid to create the pseudo
3D attribute.

SPE 109272

Fig. 6: 3D shale volume model derived from the sequential

geologic modeling that is constrained by all the
geophysical and geologic attributes.

Fig. 7: 3D core permeability model derived from the

sequential geologic process that is constrained by all the
geophysical, geomechanical and geologic attributes.

SPE 109272

Fig. 8a: Pressure match at wells A,B,C,D. The blue stars

are the scarce pressure measurements.

Fig. 9a: Simulated vs. measured GOR at wells I,J,K,L. The

two upper wells are not mismatched and the high GOR
values are the result of the gas lift. Notice the ability of the
lower wells to capture the gas breakthrough.

Fig. 8b: Pressure match at wells E,F,G,H. The simulated

pressure history at all the wells was obtained by using the
derived porosity and permeability model and no history
matching was needed to get these results.

Fig. 9b: Simulated vs. measured GOR at wells M,N,O,P.

The lower well could not match the GOR breakthrough
showing the limitation of using only limited 2D seismic