Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Abstract. Carbonate ramps have a gently dipping surface less than 1 and show
homoclinal or distally steepend morphologies. Carbonate rocks make up only
20% of the sedimentary rock record yet account for more than 60% of the worlds
proven hydrocarbon reservoirs. Reservoirs in ramp settings make up only 10 to
15% of the whole carbonate reservoirs but show more subtle play types than many
rimmed shelves, with wide opportunities for stratigraphic and structural trapping
and lateral variations in reservoirs quality. 3-D seismic imaging represent a robust
methology for the interpretation of carbonate reservoirs and structures. Accurate
seismic imaging of the reservoir architecture has become an important predictive
tool for reservoir characterization because it helped to build 3-D geological
framework within which depositional facies can be distributed in time and space.
Calculation of volume-based attributes produced new volumes of data in addition
to reflectivity volumes to extract 3-D geometries within the reservoir.
Introduction
The original concept of the carbonate ramp (Ahr, 1973), as an alternative to the
steep-sloped, reef-rimmed shelf, was a carbonate slope with a low-gradient (<1)
from shoreline to basin (Burchette and Wright, 1992).
Petroleum exploration in 1960s (e.g. Smackover Fromation, Bishop, 1969) led
the oil industry to the develop regional facies maps that showed extensive
grainstone belts along and parallel to the shoreline. Detailed analysis of seismic
lines from carbonate platforms from across the globe revealed major differences.
The most puzzling of these was the absence of a distinct shelf margin (shelf-slope
break) from seismic profiles. This shelf margin could be seen in the modern
Bahamas, Barrier Reef and other classic carbonate localities. Therefore facies
models of Wilson (1970) were calibrated to this specific morphology. The absence
of this shelf-slope break feature suggested that standard facies models could not be
applied to such platforms. Therefore another set of models as created that evolved
into the present-day ramp model(Fig. 2).
Alexander Wunderlich
Alexander Wunderlich
Physical Properties
Porosity is the most important physical factor that influences velocity. Vp and Vc
increase with decreasing porosity, but large departures from this general trend are
possible. Choquette and Pray (1970) classified carbonate porosities into 15 basic
types which, combined with other elements, provide a detailed geologic
characterization. The most important and frequently observed types of porosity are
Fig.4. Velocities (Vp and Vs) versus porosity in 173 gassaturated carbonate core samples.
Overall, dolomites show higher velocities than limestones at a given porosity
Geometrical relations
There are four basic reflections configurations found in seismic data. These are
parallel or subparallel, prograding, mounded or draped, and onlap fill (Macurda,
1997).
Parallel or subparalle reflections (Fig. 4) imply that during the deposition a
regional increase in accommodation potential was essential and that there is
nothing inherent in the reflection which gives us the information about how fast or
slow it was. Progradational reflections are really good to differentiate.
Progradation takes many forms as for example sigmoid, oblique (Fig. 5) and
shingled reflections. And all of these have a consequence for reservoir prediction
(Macurda, 1997). Mounded and draped reflections assume to be reefs (Fig. 6) or
buildups. But the question is first, if they are real geological feature or if they are
just geophysical artifacts like sideswipes, noise trains or overmigration. Seismic
patterns of onlap and onlap fill imply a termination of low-angle strata against a
steeper stratigraphic surface (Catuneanu, 2002). The onlap pattern is most
commonly found in two settings: at the base of a slope (Fig. 7) or on the shelf
according to transgression.
Alexander Wunderlich
Fig.4. Seismic profile from the northeastern Gulf of Mexico, perpendicular to the Early
Cretaceous shelf edge, showing parallel and subparallel reflections (modified after
Macurda, 1997).
Fig.6. Seismic profile depicting Cretaceous Sligo buildups (1,2) on the shelf margin of the
northeastern Gulf of Mexico (modified after Macurda, 1997).
Alexander Wunderlich
Fig.7. Miocene buildup, Luconia Province, Malaysia. This buildup is not situated on a
carbonate ramp, instead it is on platform. But the main geometries are the same (modified
after Masaferro et al., 2004)
Example 1: Morgan, W.A, 1985; Silurian Reservoirs in UpwardShoaling Cycles of the Hunton Group, Mt. Everette and Southwest
Reeding Fields, Kingfisher County, Oklahoma
This Oil-field is characterized by two main productive facies. One of them is a
skeletal buildup (Fig. 8) from the Clarita Formation (Hunton Group).
Porosity within the Clarita buildup facies ranges from 0 to 15% and is mainly
biomoldic and solution-enhanced. The trap is formed by a combination of updip
loss of porosity (associated with a facies change from porous, dolomitized crinoiddominated packstone and wackestone to non-porous arthropod packstone and
wackestones of the shallow shelf facies). The trap is also formed by an overlying
seal provided by the non-porous deep ramp facies of the overlying Henryhouse
Formation (Morgen, 1985).
Fig.8. Depositional model for the Clarita Formation. During the Late Silurian, crinoid-rich
skeletal build-ups accumulated near a shelf edge. Subaerial exposure resulted in local
solution brecciation of some build-ups, and probably was influential in their dolomitization.
Vertical scale is exaggerated (modified after Morgan, 1985).
10
Alexander Wunderlich
Fig.9. Idealized depositional setting of Mission Canyon Formation at Little Knife Field.
Zone D within the transitional open to restricted marine facies is the main productive
portion (modified after Lindsay and Kendall, 1985).
Conclusion
(1) Carbonate ramps have a gently sloping surface with a dip of less than 1. They
can also be subdivided into inner-, mid-, and outer-ramp environments.
(2) Carbonate ramps have characteristic combinations of seismic facies that aid in
their recognition and in the evaluation of their hydrocarbon potential.
(3) Ramps and their associated sediments form prolific petroleum source and
reservoir systems and offer a range of subtle stratigraphic play types and lateral
facies variations (Burchette and Wright, 1992). The reservoirs can be found in
mid- or outer ramp isolated buildups. Grainstone and packstone reser-voirs are
common as well, but they show difficult reservoir heterogeneity.
(4) Seismic imaging of carbonate depositional architectur (in 2-D as well as in 3D) has seen marked improvement over the last 10 years and has allowed
interpreters to better delineate the complex histories of carbonate platform
sequences.
11
References
Ahr W.M. (1973) The carbonate ramp--an alternative to the shelf model. Trans., Gulf
Coast Assoc. Geol. Soc., 23: 221-225
Ahr W.M. (1989) Sedimentary and tectonic controls on the development of an early
Mississippian carbonate ramp, Sacramento Mountains area, New Mexico. In: Crevello,
Wilson, Sarg, Read Controis on Carbonate Platform and Basin Development. Soc.
Econ. Paleontol. Mineral., Spec. Publ., 44: 203-212
Aigner, T (1984) Dynamic stratigraphy of epicontinental carbonates, Upper Muschelkalk
(M. Triassic), South-German Basin. Neues Jahrb. Geol. Pal~iontol., Abh., 169: 127159
Burchette T.P. (1987) Carbonate-barrier shorelines during the basal Carboniferous
transgression: the Lower Limestone Shale Group, South Wales and western England.
In: Miller, Adams, Wright (Editors) European Dinantian Environments. Wiley,
London, pp. 239-263
Burchette T.P, Wright, (1992) Carbonate ramp depositional systems. Sediment. Geol., 79 .
3-57
Catuneanu O (2002) Sequence stratigraphy of clastic systems: concepts, merits, and pitfalls
Journal of African Earth Sciences, Volume 35, Issue 1, Pages 1-43
Choquette P.W., L.C. Prag (1970) Geologic nomenclature and classification of porosity in
sedimentary carbonates: AAPG Bull., v. 54, p. 207-250
Faulkner T.J (1989.) Carbonate Facies on a Lower Carboniferous Storm-Influenced Ramp
in SW Britain. Ph.D. thesis, University of Bristol (unpublished)
Lindsay, Kendall (1985 Depositional facies, Diagensis, and Reservoir Character of
Mississippian Cyclic Carbonates in the Mission Canyon Formation, Little Knife Field,
Williston Basin, North Dakota. In Roehl P, Choquette W.P (1985) Carbonate Petroluem Reservoirs, Springer Verlag
Macurda D (1997) Carbonate Seismic Facies Analysis. in Carbonate Seismology edited by
Palaz, Marfurt (1997) SEG Special Publication
Masaferro J.L, Bourne R, Jauffred J. C. (2004) Three-Dimensional Seismic Volume
Visualization of Carbonate Reservoirs and Structures. In Seismic Imaging of
Carbonate Reservoirs, AAPG Memoir 81
Morgan W (1985) Silurian Reservoirs in Upward-Shoaling Cycles of the Hunton Group,
Mt. Everette and Southwest Reeding Fields, Kingfisher County, Oklahoma. In Roehl
P, Choquette W.P (1985) Carbonate Petroluem Reservoirs, Springer Verlag
12
Alexander Wunderlich
13