IP Library › Granted Patent US 12,730,240
Granted Patent B2
US 12,730,240 · App. 18/296,006 · Granted Sep 8, 2026

Structural trend predictor for 2D cross sections

Inventor: Simon A. Stewart (Dhahran, SA)
Assignee: Saudi Arabian Oil Company
G01V1/301G01V1/345
View Patent ↗
Loading inventors, assignments & file history…
Monitor This Case
Get email alerts when status or documents change.
Order Certified Copies
Most orders are placed with the USPTO same day — all within 24 business hours.
Order via The Patent Place →
Pre-filled with this patent's details
Quick Facts
Patent No.
US 12,730,240
App. No.
18/296,006
Granted
Sep 8, 2026
Kind
B2
Abstract

Systems and methods include a computer-implemented method for identifying geological structural trends. A cross section with visible geological fault markers for geological structures is received. An angle of inclination of a fault is measured. An average seismic velocity to convert z-axis values from a two-way travel time to a depth is determined. A depth conversion is implemented. A horizontal scale and a vertical scale are compared to determine an aspect ratio of a depth section of the cross section, including determining a vertical exaggeration. The aspect ratio of the depth section is corrected for the vertical exaggeration to obtain an accurate measurement of fault inclination in the cross section. A structural style and an expected true fault inclination are determined for the depth section. An angle of obliquity and a structural trend are determined using the expected true fault inclination compared with the measured angle of inclination of the fault.

Claims (46)

1 . A computer-implemented method, comprising:

receiving a cross section with visible geological fault markers for geological structures;

measuring, using the cross section, a fault inclination angle;

determining, using the cross section, an average seismic velocity to convert z-axis values from a two-way travel time to a depth, and implement a depth conversion;

comparing a horizontal scale and a vertical scale to determine an aspect ratio of a depth section of the cross section, comprising determining a vertical exaggeration;

correcting the aspect ratio of the depth section for the vertical exaggeration to obtain an accurate measurement of the fault inclination angle in the cross section;

determining, for the depth section, a structural style and an expected true fault inclination;

determining, using the expected true fault inclination compared with the angle of inclination of the fault, an angle of obliquity and a structural trend; and

adjusting drilling operations of a well, by modifying drilling parameters of a drill bit, relative to the angle of obliquity and the structural trend.

2 . The computer-implemented method of claim 1 , wherein the cross section is a two-dimensional (2D) reflection seismic line.

3 . The computer-implemented method of claim 1 , wherein the cross section is a potentiometric field profile or seismic refraction line.

4 . The computer-implemented method of claim 1 , wherein determining the average seismic velocity is based on knowledge of rock types and corresponding average seismic velocities.

5 . The computer-implemented method of claim 1 , wherein determining the vertical exaggeration is based on an equation tan δ″=VE tan δ′ where δ′ is the inclination of a line observed on a 1:1 aspect ratio section, VE is a vertical exaggeration, and δ″ is the fault inclination on the cross section that is vertically exaggerated.

6 . The computer-implemented method of claim 1 , wherein an angle of obliquity greater than zero and less than 90° includes two possible intersections with a given cross section.

7 . The computer-implemented method of claim 1 , wherein the angle of obliquity is positive or negative with respect to a cross section line.

8 . A non-transitory, computer-readable medium storing one or more instructions executable by a computer system to perform operations comprising:

receiving a cross section with visible geological fault markers for geological structures;

measuring, using the cross section, a fault inclination angle;

determining, using the cross section, an average seismic velocity to convert z-axis values from a two-way travel time to a depth, and implement a depth conversion;

comparing a horizontal scale and a vertical scale to determine an aspect ratio of a depth section of the cross section, comprising determining a vertical exaggeration;

correcting the aspect ratio of the depth section for the vertical exaggeration to obtain an accurate measurement of the fault inclination angle in the cross section;

determining, for the depth section, a structural style and an expected true fault inclination;

determining, using the expected true fault inclination compared with the angle of inclination of the fault, an angle of obliquity and a structural trend; and

adjusting drilling operations of a well, by modifying drilling parameters of a drill bit, relative to the angle of obliquity and the structural trend.

9 . The non-transitory, computer-readable medium of claim 8 , wherein the cross section is a two-dimensional (2D) reflection seismic line.

10 . The non-transitory, computer-readable medium of claim 8 , wherein the cross section is a potentiometric field profile or seismic refraction line.

11 . The non-transitory, computer-readable medium of claim 8 , wherein determining the average seismic velocity is based on knowledge of rock types and corresponding average seismic velocities.

12 . The non-transitory, computer-readable medium of claim 8 , wherein determining the vertical exaggeration is based on an equation tan δ″=VE tan δ′ where δ′ is the inclination of a line observed on a 1:1 aspect ratio section, VE is a vertical exaggeration, and δ″ is the fault inclination on the cross section that is vertically exaggerated.

13 . The non-transitory, computer-readable medium of claim 8 , wherein an angle of obliquity greater than zero and less than 90° includes two possible intersections with a given cross section.

14 . The non-transitory, computer-readable medium of claim 8 , wherein the angle of obliquity is positive or negative with respect to a cross section line.

15 . A computer-implemented system, comprising:

one or more processors; and

a non-transitory computer-readable storage medium coupled to the one or more processors and storing programming instructions for execution by the one or more processors, the programming instructions instructing the one or more processors to perform operations comprising:

receiving a cross section with visible geological fault markers for geological structures;

measuring, using the cross section, a fault inclination angle;

determining, using the cross section, an average seismic velocity to convert z-axis values from a two-way travel time to a depth, and implement a depth conversion;

comparing a horizontal scale and a vertical scale to determine an aspect ratio of a depth section of the cross section, comprising determining a vertical exaggeration;

correcting the aspect ratio of the depth section for the vertical exaggeration to obtain an accurate measurement of the fault inclination angle in the cross section;

determining, for the depth section, a structural style and an expected true fault inclination;

determining, using the expected true fault inclination compared with the angle of inclination of the fault, an angle of obliquity and a structural trend; and

adjusting drilling operations of a well, by modifying drilling parameters of a drill bit, relative to the angle of obliquity and the structural trend.

16 . The computer-implemented system of claim 15 , wherein the cross section is a two-dimensional (2D) reflection seismic line.

17 . The computer-implemented system of claim 15 , wherein the cross section is a potentiometric field profile or seismic refraction line.

18 . The computer-implemented system of claim 15 , wherein determining the average seismic velocity is based on knowledge of rock types and corresponding average seismic velocities.

19 . The computer-implemented system of claim 15 , wherein determining the vertical exaggeration is based on an equation tam δ″=VE tan δ′ where δ′ is the inclination of a line observed on a 1:1 aspect ratio section, VE is a vertical exaggeration, and δ″ is the fault inclination on the cross section that is vertically exaggerated.

20 . The computer-implemented system of claim 15 , wherein an angle of obliquity greater than zero and less than 90° includes two possible intersections with a given cross section.

Assignments (1)
ASSIGNMENT OF ASSIGNOR'S INTEREST Recorded May 4, 2023
From: STEWART, SIMON A.
To: SAUDI ARABIAN OIL COMPANY
Reel/Frame 063537/0698 →
Continuity (1)
Related Publication 20240337766A1 · Oct 10, 2024
References Cited (42)
US 4357660A · Hepp · 1982 [cited by examiner]
US 6711293B1 · Lowe · 2004 [cited by applicant]
US 6757614B2 · Pepper et al. · 2004 [cited by applicant]
US 8725477B2 · Zhang et al. · 2014 [cited by applicant]
US 9005983B2 · McGuinness et al. · 2015 [cited by applicant]
US 10990882B2 · Borrel et al. · 2021 [cited by applicant]
US 20110118985A1 · Aarre · 2011 [cited by examiner]
US 20140118350A1 · Imhof et al. · 2014 [cited by applicant]
US 20140185413A1 · Aarre · 2014 [cited by examiner]
US 20150073715A1 · Aarre · 2015 [cited by examiner]
US 20150134255A1 · Zhang · 2015 [cited by examiner]
US 20200158898A1 · Le Guern · 2020 [cited by examiner]
US 20210247534A1 · Bø · 2021 [cited by examiner]
WO WO1999064896 · 1999 [cited by applicant]
Stewart, Interpretation validation on vertically exaggerated reflection seismic sections, Elsevier, 2012 (Year: 2012). [cited by examiner]
Alcalde et al., Fault interpretation in seismic reflection data an experiment analysing the impact of conceptual model anchoring and vertical exaggeration, Solid Earth, 2019 (Year: 2019). [cited by examiner]
Kai et al., Research and application of a new seismic data conversion method based on radian operation, Society of Exploration Geophysicists, 2021 (Year: 2021). [cited by examiner]
Zongjie, Fault recognition in a fractured-vuggy reservoir, Society of Exploration Geophysicists, 2021 (Year: 2021). [cited by examiner]
Zuo et al., A new method of fault identification based on stratigraphic inclination coherence analysis in high steep formation area, Society of Exploration Geophysicists, 2020 (Year: 2020). [cited by examiner]
Analysis of geological structures, 1st ed., Cambridge University Press, Aug. 1990, pp. 127 and 128. [cited by applicant]
Anderson “The dynamics of faulting,” Transactions of the Edinburgh Geological Society, Mar. 1905, 8(3):387-402, 16 pages. [cited by applicant]
Balanced Geological Cross-sections: An essential technique in geological research and exploration, vol. 6, Crawford and Padovani (eds)., Jan. 1989, 139 pages. [cited by applicant]
Boyer et al. “Thrust Systems,” AAPG Bulletin, Sep. 1982, 66(9): 1196-1230, 36 pages. [cited by applicant]
Catuneanu, “Model-independent sequence stratigraphy, Earth-Science Reviews,” Jan. 2019, 188:312-388, 77 pages. [cited by applicant]
Confalonieri et al., “A historical perspective of explainable Artificial Intelligence,” WIREs Data Mining and Knowledge Discovery, Oct. 2020, 11(1), 21 pages. [cited by applicant]
Fernandez et al. “Quantifying and correcting errors derived from apparent dip in the construction of dip-domain cross-sections,” Journal of Structural Geology, Jan. 2003, 25(11):35-42, 8 pages. [cited by applicant]
Groshong “3-D Structural Geology: A practical guide to quantitative surface and subsurface map interpretation,” Geology, Second Edition, Springer-Verlag, Berlin, Jan. 2006, pp. 49-53, 5 pages. [cited by applicant]
Gunderson et al., “Machine learning applications to seismic structural interpretation: Philosophy, progress, pitfalls, and potential,” 2021, AAPG Bulletin, 106:11, 2187-2202, 16 pages. [cited by applicant]
Healy et al., “Stress, faulting, fracturing and seismicity: the legacy of Ernest Masson Anderson,” Geological Society, 367(1):6 pages. [cited by applicant]
Hubbert “Graphic Solution of Strike and Dip from Two Angular Components,” AAPG Bulletin, Jan. 1931, 283-286, 4 pages. [cited by applicant]
Judge et al., “Assessing uncertainties in balanced cross sections,” Journal of Structural Geology, Apr. 2011, 33(4):458-467, 10 pages. [cited by applicant]
McClay et al., “4-D Evolution of Rift Systems: Insights from Scaled Physical Models,” AAPG Bulletin, Jun. 2002, 86(6):935-959, 25 pages. [cited by applicant]
Mitchum et al., “Seismic stratigraphy and global changes of sea level, part 2: the depositional sequence as a basic unit for stratigraphic analysis,” AAPG Memoir, 1977, 26:53-62, 10 pages. [cited by applicant]
Mitchum, et al., “Seismic stratigraphy and global changes of sea level, part 6: stratigraphic interpretation of seismic reflection patterns in depositional sequences,” AAPG Memoir, 1977, 26:117-133, 17 pages. [cited by applicant]
Roberto et at., “Modeling and reasoning techniques in geologic interpretation,” IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics—Part A: Systems and Humans, Sep. 1999, 29(5):460-473, 14 pages. [cited by applicant]
Stewart et al., “Salt tectonics in the North Sea Basin: a structural style template for seismic interpreters,” Deformation of the Continental Crust: The Legacy of Mike Coward. Geological Society, London, Special Publica… [cited by applicant]
Stewart, “Vertical exaggeration of reflection seismic data in geoscience publications 2006-2010,” Marine and Petroleum Geology, May 2011, 28(5):959-965, 7 pages. [cited by applicant]
Van Hoek et al., “Geometric attributes for seismic stratigraphic interpretation,” The Leading Edge, Sep. 2010, 1056-1065, 8 pages. [cited by applicant]
Vilone et al., “Notions of explainability and evaluation approaches for explainable artificial intelligence,” Information Fusion, May 2021, 76, 89-106, 18 pages. [cited by applicant]
Williams, Tectonics and seismic sequence stratigraphy: an introduction, Tectonics and Seismic Sequence Stratigraphy, 1993, 71:13 pages. [cited by applicant]
Xia et al., “Geometric Primitives in LiDAR Point Clouds: A Review,” IEEE Journal of Selected Topics in Applied Earth Observations and Remote Sensing, 2020 13, 687-707, 24 pages. [cited by applicant]
Xu et al., “Seismic facies analysis: Past, present and future,” Earth-Science Reviews, 224:103876, 30 pages. [cited by applicant]