Plog Blog: a diplog weblog

Geodes 3.00 (production) begins shipping

2010-05-26T12:05:00.001-04:00

The production release of Geodes 3.00 for Red Hat Enterprise Linux on X86 began shipping on May 17.

Geodes 3.00 for RHEL/X86 is available at no extra charge to all customers who (1) wish to replace their Solaris/Sparc versions of Geodes with Geodes 3.00 for RHEL/X86 and (2) are current with respect to payment of Maintenance Service Charges.

Geodes 3.00 for RHEL/X86 is a port of Geodes 2.x for Solaris/Sparc to the RHEL/X86 platform.

Geodes 3.00 for RHEL/X86 reads binary data and journal files created on Solaris/Sparc as well as those created on RHEL/X86. In short, Geodes 3.00 for RHEL/X86 is compatible with old projects created with Solaris/Sparc versions of Geodes as well as new projects created with the RHEL/X86 version.

CG begins its 20th year!

2010-04-21T15:03:00.008-04:00

[Nota Bene: this post is essentially a re-post (with a small number of changes) of "We Really Know Our SCAT!" from April 29, 2008.]

On March 1, 2010, Computational Geology ("CG") began its 20th year of service to the E&P industry. For a few years prior to that, Deformation, Inc., the predecessor to CG, provided SCAT analysis services to the industry. In short, at CG we've been doing SCAT analysis for roughly 25 years.

When CG introduced the first version of Geodes in 1990, it was one of the very first commercial software packages to incorporate SCAT (if not the first). From Day #1 it has been our philosophy that SCAT is essential for complete, accurate analysis of dip data--from borehole images as well as conventional dipmeter curves, from hand-picked data as well as machine-picked data.

With Andy Bengtson, the inventor of SCAT, we've given oral and poster presentations at AAPG meetings on "What is wrong with tadpole plots?" (Morse and Bengtson, 1988), "No dip or low dip?" (Morse and Bengtson, 1989), and "SCAT dipmeter rules for interpretation of thrust belt kink-fold and detachment structures" (Bengtson and Morse, 1990). (Full citations for these references can be found here.)

As we implemented SCAT in our Geodes program, we introduced novel extensions to SCAT, as described in "Extending SCAT: additional techniques for identifying domain boundaries and determining how azimuth frequency distribution varies with depth" (Morse and Goldberg, 1990a). Within Geodes, we integrated SCAT with isogon-based cross sections to enable users and managers to see What's Really Down There*. (See "GEODES: An interactive, SCAT-based program for complete structural interpretation of dip data" [Morse and Goldberg, 1990b].) To further enable users and managers to see What's Really Down There*, we added to Geodes the ability to convert isogon-based cross sections to local structure maps. Thus, Geodes goes far Beyond SCAT*.

More recently, we presented "Re-interpretation of the north flank of the Qarun Field (Western Desert, Egypt), based on SCAT analysis and reprocessing of the A-17 dipmeter data" at the November 2007 AAPG meeting in Athens (see here and here), a case history describing how we used SCAT and Geodes to identify and correct serious problems with a set of machine-picked dip data from a key well in the steep flank of Qarun Field.

Our licensees are using Geodes around the world, from the subsalt Gulf of Suez, Egypt (Sercombe and others, 1997), to the subsalt / deepwater Gulf of Mexico, to the Canadian Foothills.

Through our Geodes-based 3D Dip* services, Computational Geology also provides Geodes analyses on a consulting basis. Over the years, we've provided Geodes analyses:

To small, mid-sized, and large companies alike;

In both extensional and compressional terranes; and

In both simple and complex structural settings, especially where seismic is fair or poor (e.g., below salt and beneath major faults and unconformities) and where important structural elements (e.g., faults) fall below the limits of seismic resolution.

If you choose CG as your supplier of dip-analysis software and consulting services, you'll be partnering with a firm that has been working with SCAT for over 20 years, a firm that recognized from the get-go that SCAT is essential for accurate, complete analysis of geological dip data, a firm that has been active in extending SCAT and converting SCAT results to cross sections and structure maps, and a firm that has been applying all these techniques around the world to all kinds of structural problems in all kinds of geological settings.

We Really Know Our SCAT* and with that knowledge we'll help you to see What's Really Down There*.

__________
* 3D Dip, Beyond SCAT, We Really Know Our SCAT, What's Really Down There, and Geodes are Marks and Trademarks of Computational Geology, Inc.

Geodes 3.00 (gamma) for RHEL/X86

2010-04-21T14:54:00.003-04:00

Geodes 3.00 (gamma) for RHEL/X86 was distributed to a small number of customer sites on March 29.

The gamma release differs from the previous, beta release in that the gamma release reads binary data and journal files created on Solaris/Sparc as well as those created on RHEL/X86, whereas the beta release only reads binary data and journal files created on RHEL/X86. In short, the gamma release is compatible with old projects created with Solaris/Sparc versions of Geodes as well as new projects created with the RHEL/X86 version.

If no significant issues are reported by May 1, the gamma release will become the production release of Geodes 3.00 for RHEL/X86 and it will be available at no extra charge to all customers who (1) wish to replace their Solaris/Sparc versions of Geodes with Geodes 3.00 for RHEL/X86 and (2) are current with respect to payment of Maintenance Service Charges.

Beta testing of Geodes 3.00 for RHEL/X86 ends

2009-10-05T15:07:00.003-04:00

The beta testing period of Geodes 3.00 for RHEL/X86 ended on 1 October. No significant errors were reported, so we are preparing the production version for distribution.

Beta version of Geodes 3.00 for RHEL/X86 distributed for customer testing

2009-09-03T15:01:00.007-04:00

We're happy to announce that on 7 August the beta version of Geodes 3.00 for RHEL/X86 was distributed to selected customer sites for testing. Thus, the beta version has already been under customer testing for approximately three weeks.

The beta testing period will end on 1 October. Provided that no major errors are discovered in the last few weeks of the beta test period, we anticipate distributing the production version of Geodes 3.00 for RHEL/X86 by 1 November.

Geodes 3.00 for RHEL/X86 is a port of Geodes 2.60 for Solaris/SPARC to the RHEL/X86 platform. Geodes 3.00 for RHEL/X86 is a 32-bit application developed on RHEL WS release 4 (Nahant Update 6).

Nota bene: "RHEL" = Red Hat Enterprise Linux

No Dip or Low Dip?

2009-05-12T12:12:00.005-04:00

We recently finished a Geodes analysis of the dip data from a Marcellus well. It was a nice example of "No Dip or Low Dip?", the title of a 1989 oral paper presented by Jim Morse and Andy Bengtson. Here's the abstract:

Can we distinguish between zero planar dip (no dip) and low planar dip (low dip) using just dipmeter tadpole plots? No, but we can accomplish this using SCAT. Moreover, SCAT lets us test interpretations, whereas tadpole plots do not.

Because of scatter, most dip angles from no-dip settings are not exactly zero; rather, they are low, just like those from low-dip settings. Therefore, no-dip and low-dip settings cannot be distinguished on the basis of dip angle. Accordingly, they cannot be distinguished by examining the patterns of the tadpole-plot "heads."

No dip and low dip should be distinguishable, however, on the basis of azimuth: no-dip settings should have uniform azimuth distributions, whereas low-dip settings should have a subtle concentration of data at the true azimuth. It is difficult if not impossible to detect this subtle concentration by examining the tadpole-plot "tails." Therefore, we cannot confidently distinguish between zero and low dip using tadpole plots.

In contrast, the subtle azimuth concentration we expect in low-dip settings is clearly evident on SCAT's A-Plot (dip azimuth vs. depth). Moreover, no dip and low dip almost always exhibit different patterns on dip vs. azimuth and tangent plots, azimuth-frequency histograms, and apparent dip vs. depth plots. Thus, once we choose between the two settings on the basis of the A-Plot pattern, SCAT lets us test our hypothesis by examining these other displays.

--from Morse, James D., and C. A. Bengtson, 1989, No dip or low dip? (abstract): AAPG Bulletin, v. 73, p. 1167-1168 (http://search.datapages.com/data/doi/10.1306/44B4A7B7-170A-11D7-8645000102C1865D).

For the Marcellus well in question, in addition to determining that it had drilled a low-dip setting (and not a zero-dip setting), we were able to estimate both the dip and the azimuth with confidence.

Building better maps and models with Geodes

2009-05-07T17:03:00.005-04:00

The oil industry is drilling in many areas of complex structure and/or fair-to-poor seismic in which structural interpretation of seismic and well data is often difficult. Structure maps, sections, and 3D models in these areas are often poorly constrained, increasing the risk of costly errors (dry holes, missed opportunities, etc.).

Geodes® users have markedly improved their 3D models despite poor seismic resolution. They have taken advantage of many of the benefits of Geodes, especially Geodes’ ability to predict structure away from the borehole (!) by analyzing how dip and azimuth change along the borehole.

For each horizon, Geodes calculates a structure map extending a few hundred meters from the borehole. Geodes exports these "patch" maps as XYZ grids that can be imported into 3D modeling packages, thereby populating the model with high-resolution, accurate structural control in the vicinity of each borehole. Thus, in addition to forcing models to honor the tops and dips at the borehole, this work flow forces models to honor the structural shape, derived from the in-hole dip data, away from the borehole. 3D modeling packages can then "stitch" the patches together in a way that honors the seismic between the patches. The end result is better maps, sections, and 3D models, reducing the risk of costly errors.

Geodes: It's not just SCAT, it's BS!

2009-05-07T16:52:00.001-04:00

Beyond SCAT, that is!

Geodes implements several innovative techniques in dipmeter analysis, including SCAT, enabling you to analyze your dipmeter data quickly, accurately, and completely.

Geodes goes well beyond SCAT by enabling you to identify domain boundaries (surfaces across which structural orientation changes abruptly) and determine the dip & azimuth or trend & plunge on a domain-by-domain basis. Geodes helps you recognize and deal with false and missing data, provides several methods for filtering the data, and helps you deal successfully with scattered data. Additionally, Geodes reveals certain kinds of faults that are difficult to pick on seismic or log correlations.

But that's not all. Geodes also helps you convert the results of your dipmeter analyses to local structure sections and maps, allowing you to see away from, and outside, your wellbore. In short, Geodes delivers CDA--complete dipmeter analysis.

Nota bene: Beyond SCAT and CDA are Marks of Computational Geology, Inc.

Computational Geology joins twitter!

2009-05-07T16:28:00.002-04:00

Will twitter be a valuable way to communicate with our customers?

Who knows? We'll try it for awhile and see.

Follow us at http://www.twitter.com/cgeology.

Hiatus!

2009-05-07T16:21:00.004-04:00

It's been exactly one year and one day (!) since our last blog post--making this hiatus a major, regional unconformity, not just a minor, local disconformity!

We expect to blog now on a semi-regular basis.

Stay tuned!

First things first! (II)

2008-05-06T10:33:00.008-04:00

In a previous post, I wrote,

What's the first step in analyzing a dip log--from either a conventional dipmeter tool or a borehole image tool?

The answer is, "it depends": was the data set picked by hand or by machine? If the data set was picked by machine using a correlation algorithm that uses a search angle, the first step is to check the data set for missing and/or false data.

For a case study, see "Re-interpretation of the north flank of the Qarun Field (Western Desert, Egypt), based on SCAT analysis and reprocessing of the A-17 dipmeter data", (here and here), a paper presented at the November 2007 AAPG meeting in Athens. The paper describes how CG used SCAT and Geodes to identify and correct serious problems with a set of machine-picked dip data from a key well in the steep flank of Qarun Field. The original data set, which was correlated with a search angle that turned out to be much too low, suffered from both missing data and false data.

So the first step in analyzing a dip log is to determine whether or not the data set in question was machine-picked. If it was machine-picked, the next step is to check the data set for missing and/or false data and to correct any problems, if possible, by filtering the machine-picked data and/or by reprocessing the conductivity curves.

Ever get that sinking feeling . . .

2008-04-30T12:42:00.006-04:00

. . . that your logging-company rep doesn't really know SCAT?

We often run into situations in which a logging company (or a consultant or a consulting company) has agreed to generate SCAT Plots for a client, but only after the client asks about SCAT Plots first. This has always struck us as rather weird: why would a client want to rely on the services of a firm that didn't think to mention SCAT Plots from the get-go? Would you use a medical office if you had to ask them to take your blood pressure?

People who really know and understand SCAT aren't going to mention it as an afterthought. And they're not going to wait for a client to ask them about it. If they really know and understand SCAT, it's going to be the first thing they think of when a client mentions geological dip data--it's going to be "top of mind". If a logging-company rep or a consultant discusses dip data with you without bringing up SCAT early in the conversation, chances are pretty good that he or she doesn't really know and understand SCAT.

At Computational Geology, we've been doing SCAT-based analysis and interpretation of geological dip data for over twenty years. As I pointed out in an earlier post,

From Day #1 it has been our philosophy that SCAT is essential for complete, accurate analysis of dip data--from borehole images as well as conventional dipmeter curves, from hand-picked data as well as machine-picked data.

In short, SCAT is essential for complete, accurate analysis of dip data. But there's more to SCAT than just SCAT Plots, which will be the subject of a future post.

We Really Know Our SCAT!

2008-04-29T17:12:00.018-04:00

Last month, Computational Geology ("CG") began its 18th year of service to the E&P industry. For a few years prior to that, Deformation, Inc., the predecessor to CG, provided SCAT analysis services to the industry. In short, at CG we've been doing SCAT analysis for well over 20 years.

When CG introduced the first version of Geodes in 1990, it was one of the very first commercial software packages to incorporate SCAT (if not the first). From Day #1 it has been our philosophy that SCAT is essential for complete, accurate analysis of dip data--from borehole images as well as conventional dipmeter curves, from hand-picked data as well as machine-picked data.

With Andy Bengtson, the inventor of SCAT, we've given oral and poster presentations at AAPG meetings on "What is wrong with tadpole plots?" (Morse and Bengtson, 1988), "No dip or low dip?" (Morse and Bengtson, 1989), and "SCAT dipmeter rules for interpretation of thrust belt kink-fold and detachment structures" (Bengtson and Morse, 1990). (Full citations for these references can be found here.)

As we implemented SCAT in our Geodes program, we introduced novel extensions to SCAT, as described in "Extending SCAT: additional techniques for identifying domain boundaries and determining how azimuth frequency distribution varies with depth" (Morse and Goldberg, 1990a). Within Geodes, we integrated SCAT with isogon-based cross sections to enable users and managers to see What's Really Down There*. (See "GEODES: An interactive, SCAT-based program for complete structural interpretation of dip data" [Morse and Goldberg, 1990b].) To further enable users and managers to see What's Really Down There*, we added to Geodes the ability to convert isogon-based cross sections to local structure maps. Thus, Geodes goes far Beyond SCAT*.

Most recently, we presented "Re-interpretation of the north flank of the Qarun Field (Western Desert, Egypt), based on SCAT analysis and reprocessing of the A-17 dipmeter data" at the November 2007 AAPG meeting in Athens (see here and here), a case history describing how we used SCAT and Geodes to identify and correct serious problems with a set of machine-picked dip data from a key well in the steep flank of Qarun Field.

Our licensees are using Geodes around the world, from the subsalt Gulf of Suez, Egypt (Sercombe and others, 1997), to the subsalt / deepwater Gulf of Mexico, to the Canadian Foothills.

Through our Geodes-based 3D Dip* services, Computational Geology also provides Geodes analyses on a consulting basis. Over the years, we've provided Geodes analyses:

To small, mid-sized, and large companies alike;

In both extensional and compressional terranes; and

In both simple and complex structural settings, especially where seismic is fair or poor (e.g., below salt and beneath major faults and unconformities) and where important structural elements (e.g., faults) fall below the limits of seismic resolution.

If you choose CG as your supplier of dip-analysis software and consulting services, you'll be partnering with a firm that has been working with SCAT for over 20 years, a firm that recognized from the get-go that SCAT is essential for accurate, complete analysis of geological dip data, a firm that has been active in extending SCAT and converting SCAT results to cross sections and structure maps, and a firm that has been applying all these techniques around the world to all kinds of structural problems in all kinds of geological settings.

We Really Know Our SCAT* and with that knowledge we'll help you to see What's Really Down There*.

__________
* 3D Dip, Beyond SCAT, We Really Know Our SCAT, What's Really Down There, and Geodes are Marks and Trademarks of Computational Geology, Inc.

Geodes Users Group ("GUG")

2008-04-29T13:29:00.002-04:00

The Geodes Users Group ("GUG") provides Geodes users with a forum for asking questions they think might be of interest to the entire user group and for exchanging tips, case histories, and ideas.

Additionally, the GUG is a place for users to suggest new features and for the community to weigh in on whether the suggested features are of general interest.

Finally, the GUG provides a means for Computational Geology ("CG") to keep users informed of happenings at CG--new releases, new features, new applications, and so forth.

If you are interested in participating in the GUG and if you are a licensed Geodes user, send us an email at info@cgeology.com.

First things first!

2008-04-29T12:20:00.005-04:00

What's the first step in analyzing a dip log--from either a conventional dipmeter tool or a borehole imaging tool?

Feel free to submit your answers in the "Comments" section. I'll supply my answer next week.

Update (2008-05-09): the answer is posted here.

"SCAT doesn't work in __________."

2007-04-03T11:35:00.000-04:00

Over the years, I've often been told that "SCAT doesn't work in __________." First I was told that SCAT doesn't work in the Gulf of Mexico. Then I was told that it doesn't work in the Gulf of Suez. Most recently I was told that SCAT doesn't work in the deepwater Gulf of Mexico. I've even been told that SCAT doesn't work in any extensional setting, period!

Fortunately, not everyone has taken this point of view. Instead, some Geodes users and some of our consulting clients have have been willing to give Geodes and SCAT a try in the Gulf of Mexico, the Gulf of Suez, the deepwater Gulf of Mexico, etc. As a result, they've now proven that Geodes and SCAT work just fine in these basins and in every other basin for which people have made the claim that SCAT doesn't work.

To anyone who is tempted to say, "SCAT doesn't work in __________", I'd urge you to just give it a try! After all, what do you have to lose?

IMHO, If the strata you are dealing with are planar or curved, the jury's in: Geodes and SCAT will work just fine.

Of course, if the strata you are dealing with are neither planar nor curved, the jury might still be out. :-) :-)

Welcome to Plog Blog!

2007-03-01T13:38:00.000-05:00

Greetings!

Welcome to Plog Blog, a diplog weblog!

I'll be making comments, observations, and suggestions on dip logs, image logs, and the geological analysis and interpretation thereof. From time to time I'll stray from these central topics and make observations on more general topics.

Meantime, I hope you'll visit www.CGeology.com, the website of Computational Geology, Inc. If you ever forget CGeology.com, you can get there via www.dipmeter.com.

Cheers,

Tad

Tad Pole
Chief Blogging Officer, Computational Geology, Inc.