English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

. Significant uncertainties occur through varyingmethodologies when interpreting faults using seismic data. Theseuncertainties are carried through to the interpretation of how faults mayact as baffles or barriers, or increase fluid flow. How fault segments arepicked when interpreting structures, i.e. which seismic lineorientation, bin spacing and line spacing are specified, as well as what surfacegeneration algorithm is used, will dictate how rugose the surface is andhence will impact any further interpretation such as fault seal or faultgrowth models. We can observe that an optimum spacing for faultinterpretation for this case study is set at approximately 100 m, both foraccuracy of analysis but also for considering time invested. It appears thatany additional detail through interpretation with a line spacingof ≤ 50 m adds complexity associated with sensitivities by the individualinterpreter. Further, the locations of all seismic-scale fault segmentationidentified on throw–distance plots using the finest line spacing are alsoobserved when 100 m line spacing is used. Hence, interpreting at a finerscale may not necessarily improve the subsurface model and any relatedanalysis but in fact lead to the production of very rough surfaces, whichimpacts any further fault analysis. Interpreting on spacing greater than 100 moften leads to overly smoothed fault surfaces that miss details that couldbe crucial, both for fault seal as well as for fault growth models. Uncertainty in seismic interpretation methodology will follow through tofault seal analysis, specifically for analysis of whether in situ stresses combinedwith increased pressure through CO2 injection will act to reactivatethe faults, leading to up-fault fluid flow. We have shown that changingpicking strategies alter the interpreted stability of the fault, wherepicking with an increased line spacing has shown to increase the overallfault stability. Picking strategy has shown to have a minor, althoughpotentially crucial, impact on the predicted shale gouge ratio.

solid earth

Fault interpretation uncertainties using seismic data, and the effects on fault seal analysis: a case study from the Horda Platform, with implications for CO&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; storage