Scientific Quarterly Journal of Geosciences

Scientific Quarterly Journal of Geosciences

Selecting the Optimum Method for Length and Area Balancing of 3D Seismic Interpretation of Two Oilfields at the Eastern Khuzestan

Document Type : Original Research Paper

Authors
Hamed Sa'adatnia 1
Abdolrahim Javaherian 2
Iraj Abdollahi Fard 1
Kazem Kazemi 1
1 Exploration Directorate, National Iranian Oil Company, Tehran, Iran
2 Institute of Geophysics, University of Tehran, Tehran, Iran
Abstract
A powerful and independent test for the validity of a structural interpretation is the restoration of the structure to the shape it had before deformation. Such construction is a key in understanding of regional tectonics and plays a vital role in exploration industry. Exploration for oil and gas, in particular, requires the best possible control on underground structures to locate exploration and production wells. A map or cross section can usually be restored by methods based on more than one kinematic model, however, different methods will produce somewhat different restored geometries. It follows that any given restoration methods does not necessarily represent the exact pre-deformational geometry. The internal consistency of the restoration by any relevant technique validates the interpretation. The optimum method can be investigated through qualitative and quantitative testing techniques. The main aim is to select an optimum method for length and area balancing of the two oilfields in the east of Khuzestan. In this study, three line-length, vertical simple shear, and flexural slip methods are compared quantitatively with 3D seismic data of the two oilfields in the Eastern Khuzestan, and finally the flexural slip method is recommended as the optimum method.
Keywords
Balancing
Balancing methods
Restoration

Subjects

Brewer, R. C. & Groshong R. H., 1993- Restoration of cross section above intrusive salt domes: Am. Assoc. Petrol. Geol. Bull., 77, 1769-1780.
Bucher, W. H., 1933- The deformation of the Earth’s crust, Princeton University Press, Princeton, New Jersey.
Chamberlain, R. T., 1910- The Appalachian folds of Central Pensylvanian: J. Geol.,18, 228-251.
Dahlstrom, C. D. A., 1969- Balanced cross-sections: Canadian J. Earth   Sci., 6, 743-757.
Elliott, D., 1983- The construction of balanced cross-sections: J. Struct. Geol., 5, 101.
Gougel, J., 1962- Tectonics, W. H. Freeman, San Francisco
Groshong, R., 1990- Unique determination of normal fault shape from hanging-wall bed geometry in detached half grabens: Eclogae Geologicae Helvetiae, 83, 455-471.
Groshong, R. H, 1999- 3-D structural geology: A practical guide to surface and subsurface map interpretation, Chapter 8, Springer-Verlag, Heidelberg, 324 p.
Marshak, S. & Woodward, N., 1988- Introduction to cross section balancing. In: Basic methods of structural geology, eds. Marshak, S. & Mitra, G., Prentice Hall, Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey, 303-332.
Mc Clay, K. R., ed., 1992- Thrust tectonics, Chapman and Hall, London, 447 pp.
Mitra, S. & Namson, J., 1989- Equal-area balancing: Am. J. Sci., 289,563-599.
Rowan, M. G. & R. Kligfield, 1989- Cross section restoration and balancing as an aid to seismic interpretation in extensional terrains: Am. Assoc. Petrol. Geol. Bull.,73, 955-966.
Verral, P., 1982- Structural interpretation with applications to North Sea problems. Course Notes, Joint Association of Petroleum Exploration Courses (JAPEC), London.
Woodward, N. B., Boyer, S. E. & Suppe, J., 1985- An outline of balanced cross-sections: Studies in Geology 11, Department of Geological Sciences, University of Tennessee, Knoxville, 170 pp.
Scientific Quarterly Journal of Geosciences
Volume 15, Issue 57
Autumn 2006, Vol. 15, No. 57
Autumn 2006
Pages 16-25