Skip to Main Content
Book Chapter

Chapter 10: AVO Anomaly Due to Tuning

January 01, 1993

A prospect with a field analog showing the same responses in amplitude, inversion, and AVO behavior was drilled unsuccessfully. In this example, the difference between the field and a prospect on the same seismic line is in the structural configuration. The field, was a flat-lying stratigraphic trap while the prospect was a stratigraphic trap formed by a wedge.

Case history lessons
  • Field analog was not a structural analog, in that the producing field was essentially flat-lying and the prospect was a wedge.

  • Wedging geometries can produce amplitude, inversion, and AVO anomalies.

  • A strong analog with a producing field on the same seismic line and a number of positive hydrocarbon indicators associated with the prospect probably made this dry hole unavoidable.

You do not currently have access to this article.
Don't already have an account? Register

Figures & Tables


Geophysical Developments Series

Amplitude Variation with Offset: Gulf Coast Case Studies

James L. Allen
James L. Allen
Search for other works by this author on:
Carolyn P. Peddy
Carolyn P. Peddy
Search for other works by this author on:
Franklyn K. Levin
Franklyn K. Levin
Search for other works by this author on:
Society of Exploration Geophysicists
ISBN electronic:
Publication date:
January 01, 1993




A comprehensive resource of eBooks for researchers in the Earth Sciences

This Feature Is Available To Subscribers Only

Sign In or Create an Account

This PDF is available to Subscribers Only

View Article Abstract & Purchase Options

For full access to this pdf, sign in to an existing account, or purchase an annual subscription.

Subscribe Now