OTC-27246-MS

Geophysical Reservoir Characterization and Monitoring at Brazilian

Pre-Salt Oil Fields
Paulo Roberto Schroeder Johann, and Rubens Caldeira Monteiro, Petrobras

Copyright 2016, Offshore Technology Conference

This paper was prepared for presentation at the Offshore Technology Conference held in Houston, Texas, USA, 2–5 May 2016.

This paper was selected for presentation by an OTC program committee following review of information contained in an abstract submitted by the author(s). Contents
of the paper have not been reviewed by the Offshore Technology Conference and are subject to correction by the author(s). The material does not necessarily reflect
any position of the Offshore Technology Conference, its officers, or members. Electronic reproduction, distribution, or storage of any part of this paper without the
written consent of the Offshore Technology Conference 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 OTC copyright.

Abstract
In 2006, the Brazilian pre-salt oil field province was discovered from a pioneer well at Lula oil field. The
province is characterized by carbonate reservoirs, microbial and coquina rocks, buried at a depth that
surpasses 5,000 m, distributed in the Santos and Campos sedimentary basins, located at the east Brazilian
coast. During the past ten years, upon the discovery of several oil fields and their respective productions,
which now exceeds 1,000,000 boepd, there has been major progress in the application of new geophysical
technologies with greater impact on the reservoir characterization and monitoring, in both exploratory and
development production phases.
This paper will present such progress made by the application of geophysical technologies in the
acquisition, processing and interpretation stages oriented to the reservoir characterization and monitoring.
More specifically, in regards to the reservoir characterization area this paper will address the new
technologies that influenced the definition of the external and internal geometries of carbonate reservoirs,
both from stratigraphic and structural point of view.
New methods of seismic characterization of reservoirs, from the elastic inversion, the extraction of
geometric attributes and the use of new technologies to reveal geological fractures corridors will be
therefore detailed. Another major challenge described will be the implementation of 4D seismic technol-
ogy for monitoring the behavior of fluid motion and pressure variation in the Brazilian pre-salt carbonate
reservoirs.
As for the reservoir monitoring, this paper will show the progress of the pioneer project of 4D seismic
monitoring of microbial carbonates through NODES technology in an ultra deepwater area where the
development of production applies the alternating injection of water and gas (WAG).
Finally, we will present remaining geosciences challenges and the opportunities for the use of new
technologies that can help us in the reservoir characterization and monitoring of these Brazilian pre-salt
carbonate reservoirs.
Keywords: Reservoir, Geosciences, Monitoring, Pre-Salt, Carbonate

The Brazilian Pre-Salt Oil Fields Province

Pre-Salt oil fields province (Figure 1) present challenges for its exploitation: long distance to shore; ultra
deepwater; very deep reservoirs; very heterogeneous carbonate reservoirs, seismic imaging complexity,
2 OTC-27246-MS

thick salt layer, and presence of contaminants in the fluids. The pre-salt reservoirs are located about 300
km to shore in an area without existing infrastructure and with water depth ranging from 2,000 to 2,300
m. A variable thickness of salt layer overlain the reservoir imposes lateral variations of lithology and,
consequently, lateral seismic velocities contrasts that need to be duly considered.

Figure 1—The pre-salt province from Santos sedimentary basin, at the south, extending north trough the Campos basin comprises an
area of approximately 149,000 km2 (Gabrielli de Azevedo, 2011).

Since 2006, with the discovery of these first fields in the pre-salt, many advances have been
implemented with the application of new geophysical technologies resulting in great impact on the
characterization and monitoring of the reservoirs from Exploration to Production phases.
To reach an optimal exploitation of a reservoir, it is indispensable an accurate seismic image of the
subsurface that will allow the identification of stratigraphic zones, sealing, and production of hydrocar-
bons. The precise definition of the geological structural geometry and positioning of these zones are
essential for the wells re-allocation, navigation trough the production zones during well drilling, and
volumetric calculations of resources and reserves.
Stages of a Reservoir: from Exploration to Production
The objective of the application of geophysics will change troughout the different stages of an oil field
development. In a simple way, the systematics adopted for Exploration & Production (E&P) of an oil field
life cycle may be divided in Exploration, Appraisal, Field Development, Production and Decommission-
ing. This paper is focusing from after Exploration to before Decomissioning stages.
OTC-27246-MS 3

The Exploration identifies an exploratory lead, searching for features of interest generating potential
and hydrocarbon accumulation. This stage defines a lead/prospect for an evaluation of the opportunity,
validating the project’s alignment of the strategies and goals of the company, offering corporate visibility
to the project. Alternative reservoirs scenarios should be established taking into account key uncertainties
about the expected production curves and a data acquisition plan for the next stage to reduce these
uncertainties and mitigate project risks.
To this stage follows the Appraisal, a selection stage that aims the analysis of all possible technical
alternatives, their economic evaluation, and the selection and preparation of conceptual engineering
design of such suitable alternative for project implementation. The approval for the next stage is given on
a technically and economically viable alternative best suited to the strategic objectives of the company and
being consistent with the strategic drivers.
From the reservoirs point of view, the data acquisition plan proposed in the previous stage must
indicate a significant reduction of identified uncertainties for the scenarios considered. The base case
should present high reliability and maturity of reservoir models. It is at this stage that the Conceptual Plan
of exploitation for the field should be determined, from the exploitation alternatives will be generated.
The Production Development stage establishes the Basic Project, where selected alternatives are more
precisely detailed. Based on the time time and costs of similar projects, at this stage are defined the basic
engineering project operations and risks plans, and the majority of the financial commitments of the
project are made. It aims to get the project imprimatur for early implementation.
The Production stage aims the implementation and execution of the project, where the project design
is detailed, supervised, indicators monitored and process controls applied, followed by project decom-
misioning stage.
Thus, the Reservoir Characterization is a set of processes resulting in a comprehensive model
describing and depicting the reservoir and should ensure data consistency in an interdisciplinary approach,
integrating conceptual, geophysical, structural, stratigraphic, petrophysical and flow upscaled models,
duly adjusted to historical production data, allowing a scenario analysis and uncertainties quantification
for assessing the risk associated with reservoir development.
The Reservoir Monitoring is the regular monitoring of physical property changes over time, to define
frequency or magnitude of variations to use it optimization of reservoir production and predictions of
geomechanical events.
In geologically complex oil and gas fields, with water depths progressively going deeper and lower oil
price times, to extend the life of an oil field and maximizing oil and gas recovery becomes a harder task.
For offshore and greater depth oil fields, where the number of wells is reduced and the drilling of wells
has a significantly higher cost than onshore fields, the monitoring of undrained areas is done using
geophysical methods, especially seismic and gravimetric methods that enable to investigate the efficacy
and drainage patterns in areas between the wells, and the geomechanical behavior of reservoir.

Challenges for Reservoir Geophysics in Pre-salt Reservoirs

● Complex 3D seismic velocity fields at different geological context. Geological setting with Albian
carbonates overburden salt layers, salt top layers with a strong variation in relief and stratified salt
layers colocated with homogeneous halite diapirs overburden microbional pre-salt reservoirs cause
waveform disturbance.
● Interbedded multiples overlapping the microbial reservoirs. Stratified salt layers colocated with
homogeneous halite diapirs overburden microbional pre-salt reservoirs generated seismic multi-
ples.
4 OTC-27246-MS

● The variation in geological facies and diagenesis in carbonates are more complex in than clastic
reservoirs. Spatial distribuition of microbial reservoirs facies is an important ongoing Petrobras
project. Diagenesis characterization for these reservoirs is a middle term research project.
● Low seismic resolution. High velocity fields (⬎ 5,000 m/s) and low frequency (⬍ 30 Hz
dominant) at reservoirs buried at great depths (⬎ 5,000m) imply seismic horizons with thickness
more than 50m.
● Acoustic impedance ambiguity. For some different petrophysic facies seismic acoustic impedance
shows similar values.
● Elastic inversion instable results. Pre-condition of seismic data and large offsets in acquisition
geometry are required to improve elastic impedance reliability.
● 4D seismic signal for monitoring the behavior of fluid motion and pressure variation in the pre-salt
carbonate reservoirs.

Geophysical Reservoir Modeling

The reservoir model is the composition of geophysical, geological and flow models. This paper focuses
on the geophysical reservoir model.
The Reservoir Geophysics operates mainly in the stages of Appraisal and Production Development.
The reservoir characterization is more uncertain in the Appraisal stage, mainly due to the lack of
information. The proposition of a data acquisition plan to mitigate risks and geophysical uncertainties has
the compromise on reducing uncertainties in the Production Development stage. In the Production stage
the main role of Reservoir Geophysics is to monitor the exploitation of the reservoir, identifying possible
areas not optimally drained by wells, for example.
A Geophysical Reservoir Model is a representation of acoustic and elastic properties of rocks and
fluids of a reservoir. This model should express the main geophysical characteristics of the reservoir under
study as a direct result of the application of multiple techniques for reservoir characterization or
monitoring. Importantly, this geophysical model will be representative of a particular moment in time, and
have to be updated whenever new geophysical, geological, or engineering data justifies such a review.
While the geological information is almost punctual in mapview, geophysical data is widely distributed
in area; on the other hand, the vertical resolution for geophysical data in very low compared to the
properties measured in the well, particularly in carbonate reservoirs with interval velocities above 4,000
m/s and dominant frequency below 30 Hz. So, geophysical and geological data need to to work together
for proper reservoir characterization.
Considerable uncertainties are associated with the reservoir model and it should capture the most
relevant of them. Identification of possible scenarios which correspond to different conceptions of the
reservoir under study will lead to robust estimations of gross rock volume (GRV) and, consequently of
stock tank oil in place (STOIP). Such structural uncertainty needs to be considered in the 3D Reservoir
Geological Model.
Applying concepts of business process management, the Petrobras Reservoir Geophysics Department
has all processes of Geophysical Reservoir Modeling defined in standard operating procedures, created in
cooperation with all senior geophysicists, based on industry best practices, using performance indicators
and integrated reservoir auditing. Each activity presented in this following methodological diagram
(Figure 2) has its execution set in a standard procedure known for all professionals from different business
units.
OTC-27246-MS 5

Figure 2—The geophysical reservoir modeling workflow.

This paper will present the progress made by the application of geophysical technologies in the
acquisition, processing and interpretation stages oriented to the reservoir characterization and monitoring,
following the methodology presented in Figure 2.

Illumination Studies, 3D Reservoir Seismic Acquisition and Processing

From the geophysical point of view, E&P projects start with illumination studies, acquisition & processing
of seismic data on an Exploratory focus. From this seismic data, regional horizons are interpreted, which
will allow the first estimates of the volume of oil in place.
The first geophysical model of a new area is frequently built from legacy data, inherited from the
Exploration, with parameters not necessarily designed for reservoir modeling. The production asset
identifies the necessity of new a seismic acquisition and processing and initiate processes of illumination
studies, seismic survey parametrization, and processing workflow definition.
Geological complexity demands the use of special seismic acquisition and processing techniques in
order to optimize the seismic information. Using illumination studies makes it possible to delineate a
seismic acquisition design and parameterization, under imposed constraints, to get maximum multiplicity,
far-trace offset, for example. The Table 1 shows a summary of the acquisition parameters used for
reservoir characterization of the pre-salt reservoirs at Campos and Santos basins.
6 OTC-27246-MS

Table 1—Seismic acquisition parameters for different surveys for pre-salt reservoir projects at Campos and Santos basins.

The relative strength signal of seismic reflections in the salt in pre-salt areas, derived from stratified
or high constrast inclusions, resulting in multiple reflections superimposed to the data. The application of
inter-bed multiple attenuation (IMA) methods is providing an effective way to model and attenuate those
multiple reflections (Figure 3). This processing technique is also being a differential for pre-salt
reservoirs.
OTC-27246-MS 7

Figure 3—Inter-bed multiple attenuation in a pre-salt reservoir: a) Inline stacked migrated section before IMA; b) after IMA; and c) the
difference. (Cypriano et al., 2015)

Another good example of evolution in the seismic processing aimed at the characterization of
reservoirs and improved seismic resolution is the application of the recent technologies of broadband
processing workflow (Figure 4). The enhancement of the vertical resolution is a key issue faced in pre-salt
seismic imaging. To achieve this it is necessary to extend the range of usable signal frequencies at both
high and low ends.

Figure 4 —Broadband processing applied to Santos basin pre-salt reservoirs.

8 OTC-27246-MS

Petrogeophysical Modeling
This process works in the modeling of the seismic signature response from lithological data and fluid to
be used in the quantitative interpretation of seismic inversion data and identification parameters of the
rock-fluid system that influence the seismic response. After data quality control and well logs edition is
selected and calibrated to a petrogeophysical model.
The selection of petrogeophysical models are based on rock type and saturating fluid and its calibration
is done using plugs, side samples and well logs. Discrimination of petrogeofísical behavior of lithology
and fluid is made in a crossplot chart of the properties and petrophysical parameters against the acoustic
or elastic response of the reservoir. The use of acoustic or elastic stresses attributes variation in saturation
effects by the relationship between the petrophysical parameters. Are commonly used attributes such from
impedance of the compressional wave (Ip), impedance of shear waves (Is), velocities of compressional
waves (Vp) and shear (Vs), Poisson’s ratio (PR) and combinations of these attributes. Figure 5 shows the
variation of the expected acoustic impedance between two seismic surveys for various carbonate and
turbites reservoirs in the Campos Basin. This type of analysis allows us to understand the risk to obtain
the 4D signal in future campaigns of seismic acquisitions.

Figure 5—Shows the variation of the expected acoustic impedance between two seismic surveys for various carbonate and turbite
reservoirs in the Campos Basin. Usually, a low Kdry increases the likelihood of good 4D seismic signal.

Based on the seismic response of the rock-fluid system, and synthetic seismograms 1-D and 1,5-D,
through the Zoeppritz equation, or their approximations, and Gassmann equation, replacement fluids are
modeled, aiming to provide, quantitatively, changes in seismic compressional and shear velocities
between different hypothetical scenarios fluid saturation, pressure and temperature.
The petrographic analysis of data, petrophysical properties and elastic and acoustic attributes (Figure
6) allow in this way to quantify the viability AVO analysis of seismic inversion viability, the viability of
time-lapse seismic and estimation of parameters for geomechanical modeling.
OTC-27246-MS 9

Figure 6 —Integrated analysis of petrographic, petrophysical and seismic data.

Model-based Seismic Velocity Modeling

There are complex 3D seismic velocity fields at different geological context. Geological setting with
Albian carbonates overburden salt layers, salt top layers with a strong variation in relief and stratified salt
layers associated with homogeneous halite diapirs overburden microbional pre-salt reservoirs cause
waveform disturbance and is an important challenge for reservoir geophysics in pre-salt reservoirs (Figure
7).

Figure 7—Shows an important challenge for seismic imaging, the salt top horizon with a strong variation in relief.
10 OTC-27246-MS

The thicker layers of salt in Santos Basin may distort the reservoir structure image if velocity variations
for seismic migration are not properly accounted for. One may assume that salt is a homogeneous layer
of halite, but higher or lower velocity salts may occur and provide a gross rock volume that imply in unreal
resources and reserves (Oliveira et al., 2015).
A high-resolution and high-accuracy velocity model may be obtained from the combination of prior
velocity field analysis with well logs information, time-depth table obtained from synthetic trace at the
position of the wells and the conceptual geological model of the area (Borges et al., 2015).
This is a critical activity to appropriate convert time-to-depth and perform depth-depth calibration
(PSDM), generating impedance volume, estimated volume and velocity for the seismic reprocessing, and
more recently, to estimate parameters for geomechanical studies.
The initial average velocity data are converted to interval velocity after a treatment for removing
anomalous velocities points for each geological interval considered. The stratigraphic horizons could be
regional, but should take into account the large velocity variations such as the boundary between the
shales and the albian carbonate top, and between Albian carbonate and Aptian evaporites or microbialites
layers. Igneous rocks that form volcanic cones or salt domes with large thickness variation also must be
considered. This methodology for velocity modeling envisages the creation of a stratigraphic grid for
interpolation of velocities, regularization and calibration with data from wells expressed in time-depth
tables.
Some recent improvements in this process allow us to mitigate the uncertainty in structures position
trough modeling the salt layer incorporating well calibrated data to the model, once there are still few well
log data available for the salt intervals (Figure 8). This methodology has provided improved results of
geomechanical modeling incorporating seismic data.

Figure 8 —Velocity modeling incorporating the stratifications within the layers of salt. A) Velocity model (Vp) incorporating laminates
(3D); B) The relationship between Vp and other properties from wells (1D), in this case with density (rho); and C) densities model (rho)
obtained from Vp through the chosen equation (3D). (Oliveira et al, 2015a&b in Maul & Gobatto, 2015).

Reservoir Seismic Inversion

The seismic inversion methodology aims to transform the seismic reflection data in a quantitative
description of the property of a reservoir rock at seismic scale (acoustic and/or elastic parameters). In
OTC-27246-MS 11

petrogeophysical modeling it was evaluated the technical feasibility of seismic inversion, indicating the
type of inversion more reliable. The simultaneous seismic inversion provides volumes of elastic attributes
that may be interpreted in terms of lithology or fluid content at seismic scale. Before the seismic inversion
itself is recommended to carry out the step of pre-conditioning of the seismic data.
The key steps for pre-contioning area: (i) muting from incidence angles; (ii) pre-stack noise attenua-
tion; (iii) optimizing incidence angle stack; (iv) post-stack noise attenuation and (v) inverse Q filtering
using 3D Q model (amplitude only). This last step may not be applied if the results do not prove favorable.
In the model-based inversion approach, the low frequency model is obtained from well data, but the
seismic velocity model could also be used. The deliverables of this process are essentially volumes and
maps of the acoustic and/or elastic impedance, among others, in order to assist the process of interpretation
of seismic horizons (Figures 9 and 10).

Figure 9 —Pre-contioning phase. Muting from incidence angles, pre-stack noise attenuation and optimizing incidence angle stack
steps.

Figure 10 —High seismic lateral resolution and detailed seismic inversion images before and after data precontinioning.
12 OTC-27246-MS

Seismic Attributes and Facies Interpretation

Since the quality of seismic data and its resolution may be limiting the quantitative integration of the
seismic model, it is essential to maximize the amount of information obtained from seismic data. There
are several attributes (Figure 11) that can be used to support the process of interpretation of the reservoir,
from the distribution of faults and fractures in a field to seismic facies classification. The recognition,
classification and interpretation of seismic facies allows a better understanding of the distribution of
reservoir properties (Figure 12), both in the reservoir characterization and in monitoring with integrated
4D interpretation. The seismic facies methodology is applied immediately after the seismic inversion.

Figure 11—An Albian carbonate reservoir seismic facies interpretation on the top of a salt layer, highlithing major faults (Campos basin
oilfield).

Figure 12—Seismic facies section indicating the pre-salt reservoir in orange with good well lithological correlation.
OTC-27246-MS 13

Reservoir Structural-Stratigraphical Seismic Interpretation

The 3D seismic interpretation uses data from various sources, which are: seismic amplitude, impedance
volumes, seismic attributes and seismic facies, well logs, cores, interpreted geological marks and
geological correlations, etc. Special techniques of extracting and interpreting seismic attributes are used
for seismic structural characterization to define a three-dimensional geophysical structural model consis-
tent for geological modeling of the reservoir (Figures 13 and 14).

Figure 13—a) interpretation of faults that directely affect reservoir permo-pororities distribution; b) seismic atribute used to revel the
porosity distribution from seismic data; c) seismic section with structural-stratigraphic interpretation (internal reservoir zones) of an
Albian carbonate reservoir that overrides the pre-salt reservoirs (Campos basin).
14 OTC-27246-MS

Figure 14 —Seismic structural interpretation of the main geological faults at pre-salt reservoirs. Extraction of special seismic attributes,
vectors bricks (small yellow), allow us a derived geological fracture corridors interpretation.

Seismic Geomechanics
Geophysical techniques can access physical properties by the use of elastic waves due to the control of
its propagation being dependent of elastic properties and density through rocks and fluids. The elastic
properties are derived from the contribution of grains, its contact, and type of cement, inter- or
intra-granular discontinuities, and fractures. The isotropic/anisotropic behavior is also an important
property to be properly modeled.
A major problem is the geomechanical modeling in the salt layers due to well logs info scarcity. A
solution was developed to face this question trough the modelisation of salt using derived velocity models
and elastic seismic inversion (Figure 15). The positioning of stratified and high contrast inclusions in salt
layers allow engineers to satisfactorily attribute density and elastic properties, like Young and Poisson
coefficients to the halite, low-velocity and high-velocity salts in order to obtain a more realistic
representation of geomechanical models. For facies classification and interpretation and for uncertainty
analysis one may apply Bayesian inference approach that provides a facies probability volume, useful for
geotechnical risk and new well locations planning (Figure 16).
OTC-27246-MS 15

Figure 15—Geomechanical models workflow: upper left - geological simplified model; upper right - velocity-based model; lower left -
amplitude-based model; and lower right - detailed impedance-based model (Maul & Gobatto, 2015).

Figure 16 —Upper: stratified salts obtained from seismic inversion (halite - blue; anhydrite - red and low-velocity salts - yellow); lower:
density section extracted from a 3D density model in seismic scale widely used for geomechanical modeling.
16 OTC-27246-MS

Geophysical Reservoir Uncertainty Analysis

At all stages of geophysical modeling of reservoirs the uncertainties have to be considered. These
uncertainties will impact the calculation of different scenarios for rock volume and hence in the estimation
of the OOIP and reserves of each oil field studied.
Methodologies are been implemented in all reservoir characterization processes in order to define
scenarios and access geophysical uncertainties. Uncertainties in geophysical modeling impact directly in
gross rock volume since it defines reservoir top and base and facies variations, specially in greenfields,
where there are few wells and still quite distant from each other. The variation in gross rock volume or
volume of equivalent oil in place may superimpose over other uncertainties, such as lateral variation of
electrofacies between wells.
The Figure 17 shows a seismic section with uncertainties related to seismic interpretation. Using as a
base case the deterministic interpreted seismic horizon, new surfaces are generated incorporating uncer-
tainties. Those uncertainties are derived from vertical seismic resolution and seismic data quality,
expressed by wavelength (or resolution) and RMS amplitude (signal to noise ratio and imaging). This
procedure addresses uncertainties associated to misinterpretations, uncertainties between the geological
markers and the seismic interpreted impedance constrast, as well as some distortions in seismic image of
the pre-salt reservoir top.

Figure 17—Seismic section with seismic interpretation uncertainties.

Feasibility Studies for Reservoir Monitoring - Time-lapse Seismic

For 4D seismic feasibility studies for reservoir monitoring a Petrobras standard methodology has been
stablished. This methodology was developed from several case histories at Campos basin. The workflow
presents four main phases with several steps each one with inputs, procedures and tools and outputs for
successive next step (Figure 18). We start with some rock and fluid properties to run fluid substituition
equations e related pressure law. The dry compressibility and poisson ration parameters outputs will be
OTC-27246-MS 17

introduce in the next step. The 3D petrophysical model uses 3D flow simulation model, 1D feasibility
output and 3D acoustic impedance input to run the Petroelastic modeling. The output of this phase is an
elastic model for each production scenario. In the next phase we build the 4D synthetic seismic volume
with multi years realizations. In the last phase we calibrate the 4D model and run the seismic evaluation
and design step (SED) for a potential new seismic campagn. We also could update the dynamic model
with more realible seismic data (Figure 19).

Figure 18 —Petrobras 4D seismic feasibility workflow for reservoir monitoring.

Figure 19 —Feasibility studies for reservoir monitoring and flow model integrated to 4D seismic data.

Aiming to rationally evaluate a technical chance of success of implementing a reservoir monitoring

system, it is necessary to identify seismic detectatibility of expected impedance variations derived from
18 OTC-27246-MS

oil and gas production. Besides detectability, is also important to take into account seismic acquisition
technique to assure the appropriate repeatability. This feasibility is more relevant for pre-salt oil fields
where elastic deformations in carbonates may be reduced when compared to Brazilian turbiditic sandstone
reservoirs.

4D Seismic & Non-Seismic Acquisiton and Processing

The Figure 20 shows the evolution of seismic technologies since 1999 when it was applied for the
characterization and monitoring of the reservoirs in the oil fields of the sedimentary basins of Santos,
Campos and Espirito Santo, offshore Brazilian coast.

Figure 20 —Twenty years of Brazilian offshore seismic projects and technology evolution. The last project is already in the planning
phase.

For offshore environment, Petrobras invests in high-density seismic data, with a receiver line interval
of 50m, since 1999, when Petrobras started a series of seismic acquisition programs oriented to reservoir
characterization.
Since 2004 we have invested massively in a 4D seismic program for reservoir monitoring more than
90% of Petrobras proved reserves.
In the last years there has been a focused effort on applied seimic reservoir monitoring through Jubarte
PRM project and more recently for the NODES pilot project at Santos basin.
In the year of 2015 it was carried out seismic acquisition pilot project for 4D seismic monitoring of
water alternating gas injection (WAG) in an oil field in the Santos Basin. The acquisition was made by
Seabed Geosolutions™ and seismic processing is being carried out by CGG™ in Rio de Janeiro (Figure
21).
OTC-27246-MS 19

Figure 21—4D Seismic acquisition with NODES technology. a) Santos basin production area during seismic suvey; b) seismic vessel
Hugin Seabed Geosolutions; c) Petrobras onboard supervisor; d) ROV crew to manager NODES deployment; e) project map; f)
navigation crew; g) detail of NODES deployment pannels.

The Figures 22 and 23 show the key horizons and the carpet of 954 receivers positioned at more than
2,000m of ultra-deepwater at Santos basin. The potential benefits of the NODES seismic technology
potential are:

Figure 22—Survey design of the NODES pilot project at Santos basin.

20 OTC-27246-MS

Figure 23—Total of 954 seismic receiver stations (NODES) were deployed to the bottom of the sea at a water depth of more than 2,000m.

● The quantification of 4D signal of pre-salt microbial carbonates

● The better imaging of the reservoirs under the salt layer
● The imaging of 30 km2 of reservoir under production at Santos basin
● The monitoring of the area of injectors and producers wells in the WAG project
The seismic processing of the NODES 4D project is being executed by CGG in Brazil with the
following main steps: clock drift and subsample correction, tide and water layer correction, geophone
orientation analysis, shot and receiver domain denoise, receiver domain attenuation, 3D SRME, surface
consistent amplitude correction, 3D regularization, Kirchhoff PSDM TTI, residual multiple attenuation,
WAZ residual moveout correction, etc.
Non-Seismic methods such as marine eletromagnetics (EM) for reservoir appraisal and monitoring
were carried out for an ultra-deep water reservoir in Campos basin, to assess the adoption of time-lapse
marine EM as a reliable standalone tool or to provide complementary information to 4D seismic, adding
value to reservoir management (Zerilli et al., 2015). The Figure 24 shows an appilication of CSEM
methodology with the difference of the modeled eletric field amplitude between 2013-2002, based on
resistivity calculated on a flow simulator of an oil field in Campos basin.
OTC-27246-MS 21

Figure 24 —Time-lapse radial electric field magnitude changes map of the reservoir after 11 years of production (2002-2013) for the 400
ⴛ 400 m receiver grid, north-heading and west-heading towlines 200 ⴛ 200 m grid at -2350 m b.m.s.b. at Campos basin oil field. Color
bar represents the difference between the 2002 - 2013 normalized radial electric field magnitude attribute maps displayed as
percentages (Zerilli et al., 2015).

4D Geophysical Inversion
The 4D seismic inversion may provide some gain on vertical resolution and also quantification of 4D
effects. The main products from this methodology are the volumes of pressure and fluid saturation
changes between base-monitor or monitor-monitor surveys due to oil or gas production and water and gas
injection. The 4D signal is impacted by the presence of a gas phase created by gas out of solution or by
gas injection in water alternating gas (WAG) injection process, as proposed for the pre-salt oil field.
During the production life cycle it will be possible to map the water-oil contact variations and understand
possible compartimentalized pressure changes. The Figure 25 shows a delta IP base-monitor from a
Campos basin oilfield. The blue color indicates increase of water saturation and red color indicates
increase in gas saturation or decrease in pressure.
22 OTC-27246-MS

Figure 25—Delta IP base-monitor. Blue color indicates increase of water saturation and red color indicates increase in gas saturation
or decrease in pressure.

4D Integrated Interpretation
Using an appropriate strategy for 4D seimic, saturation and pressure changes can be identified and
mapped, even considering small IP changes (heavy oil, Cretaceous reservoir and low 4D feasibility). The
reallocation or cancellation of new wells due to the better understanding of the reservoir dynamic behavior
from 4D interpretation add value to the technology.
The clear multidisplinary nature of 4D monitoring is essential for successful 4D planning, execution,
and interpretation, as pointed by Calvert (2005). The integration between geophysicists, geologists and
reservoir engineers is a sine qua non necessity to better understand the reservoir response to production
and injection. The 3D geological model needs to be revisited, for example, searching for barriers
suggested by 4D anomalies and some stratigraphic units detailing. The exploitation history compared to
4D anomalies allows us to identify areas where production, injection or overpressure really occurs. Even
during this monitoring phase, this revistitation may point a demand for an update of the reservoir
geological model (Figures 26 and 27).
OTC-27246-MS 23

Figure 26 —4D anomaly (geobodies) and water saturation lines increase in the flow model in a Campos basin oil field. The differences
between 4D seismic anomalies, compared to the saturation predicted from flow simulation, allow us to detect some new saturation
behavior not estimated originally by the flow model.

Figure 27—Seismic 4D anomalies over flow simulator 100ⴛ100 grid in a Campos basin oil field: a) map-view of acoustic impedance 4D
anomaly of flow model layer 16. b) transversal vertical flow model section showing that 4D anomaly going trough others layers.
24 OTC-27246-MS

4D Reservoir Model Coupling

For the reservoir monitoring it is indispensable to have the geophysical reservoir model coupled to the
geological model and to the flow simulator. It is important to guarantee that the upscaling process does
not lead to information losses, since the spatial resolution of seismic is much more detailed than the one
provided by the simulator. (Figure 28 and 29)

Figure 28 —Seismic volume amplitudes with the superposition of the 3D geological model grid, and the flow lines at a Campos basin
oil field. In the blue color the oil flow lines and in the red the gas flow lines. The changes in the flow lines colors represent fluids and
flow rates.

Figure 29 —Seismic horizons ’top’ (in blue) and ’base’ (B) of the reservoir converted to depth using the velocity of the initial model,
emphasizing the coupling of seismic data to the grid flow model.
OTC-27246-MS 25

The seismic and the flow simulator models may be coupled using an adjusted seismic velocity model.
This model allows 4D seismic volumes time to depth conversion, enabling the incorporation of 4D seismic
anomalies to the geological and flow models.
4D Seismic Integrated to Geomechanics Modeling
Since production-induced stress-changes cause wave velocity changes, the seismic techniques may be
applied also for geomechanical monitoring. Inside the reservoir there is a combination of fluid saturation,
pore-pressure and related stress changes that causes time-lapse seismic velocity changes (Herwanger and
Koutsabeloulis, 2011).
Figure 30 shows that the application of special 3D seismic attributes to reveal faults and 4D seismic
attributes that can help define compartimentalized areas of the reservoirs, the main directions and relief
of pressure and water saturation distributions.

Figure 30 —Amplitude horizon map of reservoir top at Campos basin oil field; b) seismic structural discontinuities and c) time strain
computation indicates a compartmentalization (yellow values indicate a pore pressure increase), especially around the injector well.

The integration of the reservoir simulation and the reservoir geomechanical models with 4D seismic
interpretation results in a well-calibrated simulation model. These calibrated models have a good
probability of accurately predicting future reservoir production and help reservoir management of field
development and production.
4D Seismic Uncertainty Analysis
As well as analysis of uncertainties in the context of reservoir characterization our methodology foresees
that each step of the workflow to monitor reservoirs should consider the associated uncertainties. Finally
in the 4D seismic anomalies interpretations we must work with at least three scenarios of results, in an
optimistic scenario, the most likely and pessimistic case. These scenarios are essential for the processes
of geological and flow modeling that follow. This uncertainties analysis will provide to the decision-
makers a robust view of the situation of the reservoirs under study.
Remaining Geosciences Challenges and Opportunities
The geophysics for reservoir characterization and monitoring of the microbial and coquina carbonate
reservoirs of the Brazilian pre-salt oil field province is still in its early stages, because those discoveries
are very recent – all of them dated from the last ten years - and the number of drilled wells – less than
200 – is still too small compared to the final design planned for the implanted projects, considering the
26 OTC-27246-MS

areal extension of those province of approximately 149,000 km2, divided into two huge sedimentary
basins along the southeastern coast of Brazil.
Furthermore, these microbial and coquina carbonate rocks are little known to the world’s oil industry,
what poses great challenges for the community of Brazilian and foreign companies geologists who are
dealing with those reservoirs. This geological complexity is not only related to the permoporous and facies
and diagenesis distribution characteristics of the reservoirs, but also to their structural features, geological
faults and fractures.
The seismic imaging of those reservoirs presents serious difficulties, since they are subjacent to rather
thick (up to 2,000 m) geological saliferous deposits with huge thickness variations due the halokinetic
movements. In this situation, the presently available multiple attenuation and seismic migration algo-
rithms are unable to correctly image the structural and stratigraphic areas without having the amplitudes
affected by distortions in the seismic waves paths.
New reservoir-oriented seismic imaging technologies, methodologies and algorithms, associated with
new seismic data acquisition technologies are still in development by the industry in the years to come to
supply the needs for reservoir characterization and monitoring of the microbial and coquina carbonate
reservoirs.
The big challenge will be to keep continuously improving the seismic imaging in parallel with the
implementation of high-investment projects, some in the production development phase, others under-
going long-duration production tests, some running production pilots plants and others already operating
in permanent production systems.
The microbial carbonate reservoirs production responds nowadays for an average of 1,000,000 barrels
of equivalent oil per day and already represents more than 40% of the Brazilian production. Those
numbers are only possible due to the integrated business process and the intensive technology applications
from appraisal to production.
The geophysical technology, being applied since the inception of the exploratory phase, following the
appraisal and production development phases of the discoveries until the final production stage of fields
is the main tool used by geophysicists, geologists and reservoir engineers to reduce subsurface uncer-
tainties, allowing them to make decisions with greater robustness, thus optimizing the return on the
financial investment in projects of this nature and with such challenging features: very recent findings,
offshore areas in ultra deep waters (⬎ 2,000 m); reservoirs located at great depths below sea level (⬎
5,000 m) and characterized by rocks about which the oil industry still has insufficient knowledge and
expertise to exploite.
But in fact, this huge technical challenge is exactly the great motivator for the geosciences and
petroleum engineering professionals in Brazil, due to its strategic importance to a country which now
ranks as the world’s sixth largest economy but still has many serious social disparities to overcome.
Nowadays time-lapse seismic is a standard technology for reservoir management, reporting a recovery
factor increment around 3% in some of the deepwater turbidite oi fields with 4D seismic interpretation and
infill drillings wells. New ongoing pioneer 4D project in ultra-deep water oil field time-lapse pilot project
at microbial carbonate reservoir may support more extensive 4D projects in a successful scenario.

Acknowledgments
The authors would like to thank Petrobras and its partners for publishing this paper. We also acknowledge
our colleagues for the many fruitful discussions on the subject.

References
Asrilhant, B.; and Beyda, T. T. 2015. Understanding Complexity and Uncertainty in E&P Mega Projects: The Need for
a New Managerial Approach. Presented at the Offshore Technology Conference, Rio de Janeiro, 27-29, October.
OTC-26140-MS. http://dx.doi.org/10.4043/26140-MS.
OTC-27246-MS 27

Azevedo, J.S.G. Brazil: The Next Oil Giant? Oxford (2011).

Borges, F.; Apoluceno, D.; Selbach, H.; Maul, A.; Lima, G. 2015. Thickness-based Approach for Evaporites Seismic
Velocities in Campos Basin. Presented at the 14th International Congress of the Brazilian Geophysical Society, Rio
de Janeiro, 03-06, August. http://dx.doi.org/10.1190/sbgf2015-158.
Calvert, R. 2005. Insights and methods for 4D reservoir monitoring and characterization. Tulsa: SEG & EAGE, 2005.
Distinguished Instructor Series no. 8.). 220. P. ISBN 1-56080-128-X.
Camargo, G.; Borges, F.; Johann, P.; Spínola, M.; Nam, N. X. 2015. Prestack classification applied to siliciclastic and
carbonate deepwater reservoirs. SEG Technical Program Expanded Abstracts 2015: pp. 2791–2795. http://dx.doi.org/
10.1190/segam2015-5913574.1.
Cypriano, L. et al. 2015. The Impact of Inter-bed Multiple Attenuation on the Imaging of Pre-salt Targets in the Santos
Basin Off-shore Brazil. Presented at the 77th EAGE Conference & Exhibition 2015, Madrid, 1-4 June. http://
dx.doi.org/10.3997/2214-4609.201412691.
Grochau, M. H.; Benac, P. M.; Alvim, L. M.; Sansonowski, R. C.; Pires, P. R. M.; Villaudy, F. 2014. Brazilian carbonate
reservoir: A successful seismic time-lapse monitoring study. The Leading Edge, 33 (2), 164 –170. http://dx.doi.org/
10.1190/tle33020164.1.
Herwanger, J. and Koutsabeloulis, N. 2011. Seismic Geomechanics: How to Build and Calibrate Geomechanical Models
using 3D and 4D Seismic Data. Houten: EAGE, 182 p. ISBN. 978-90-73834-10 –1.
Lecerf, D.; Hodges, E.; Shaoping, L.; Valenciano, A.; Chemingui, N., Johann, P.; and Thedy, E. A. 2015. Imaging
primaries and high-order multiples for permanent reservoir monitoring: Application to Jubarte field. The Leading
Edge, July 2015, 34(7): 824 –828. http://dx.doi.org/10.1190/tle34070824.1.
Maul, A. R.; Silva, F. J.; Fernandes, L. F.; Gonzalez-Sanchez, G. A. 2015. Observing Amplitude Uncertainties for a
Pre-salt Reservoirs Using Illumination Study (Hit-maps). Presented at the 77th EAGE Conference & Exhibition 2015,
Madrid, 1-4 June. http://dx.doi.org/10.3997/2214-4609.201412921.
Oliveira, L. C.; Fernandes, L. F.; Maul, A. R.; Rosseto, J. A.; Gonzalez-Farias, M. L. A.; Gonzalez-Sanchez, G. A. 2015.
Geological Velocity Approach in Order to Obtain a Detailed Velocity Model for the Evaporitic Section – Santos
Basin. Presented at the 14th International Congress of the Brazilian Geophysical Society, Rio de Janeiro, 03-06,
August. http://dx.doi.org/10.1190/sbgf2015-273.
Zelilli, A et al. 2015. Cooperation Agreement Petrobras and Schlumberger – Subproject: Next generation deep reading
electromagnetic (EM) technologies for reservoir appraisal and monitoring and integrated basin scale geological
research. Technology Development Phase 1a: Feasibility Study – Marine Eletromagnetics for Reservoir Appraisal and
Monitoring, volume 1. Internal Report. 189 pages.