Fault plugging performance evaluation method and device

Abstract

The invention belongs to the technical field of oil and gas geophysical prospecting and well logging, and discloses a fault plugging performance evaluation method and device.The method comprises the steps that wavebands used for comparison are extracted from seismic waveform information on the two sides of a fault, and one waveband on the left side of the fault and one waveband on the right side of the fault serve as a comparison group; determining a mapping relation between the sampling points of the two wave bands; obtaining the distance sum of the two wave bands; performing normalization processing on the similarity values of all the comparison groups to obtain normalization coefficients of the two wave bands in each comparison group; and determining the fault plugging property according to the normalization coefficients of the two wavebands in each comparison group. According to the method, lithology or shale content inversion of seismic data does not need to be carried out, the seismic data are directly adopted to evaluate the fault plugging performance, the limitation that lithology inversion of a well-free area and an area with complex geological conditions is difficult to carry out is avoided, the number of evaluation intermediate processes is small, the number of adjustable parameters is small, therefore, the applicability is higher, the influence of human factors is avoided, and the evaluation efficiency is improved. And the evaluation reliability is higher.

Description

Technical Field

[0001] The invention belongs to the technical field of oil and gas geophysical prospecting and well logging, and particularly relates to a fault plugging evaluation method and device. Background Art

[0002] The opening or closing of the fault affects whether the oil and gas in the reservoir can reach the target area along the fault plane and the channels therein, thereby realizing the search and development of oil and gas fields. At this time, the analysis of fault plugging plays a bridging role. By linking the fault plugging property with actual data and the characteristics of the target area, the distribution of oil and gas can be inferred. Therefore, it is particularly important to use seismic data to evaluate the plugging property of faults.

[0003] At present, seismic data is mainly used to carry out qualitative and quantitative evaluation of the lateral sealing of faults. There are mainly the following methods. Bouvier proposed the Clay Smear Potential (CSP), also known as the shale smear potential or shale contamination potential, which is expressed by CSP. Based on the statistical analysis of actual data, Lindsay et al. proposed a parameter to characterize the continuity of the shale smear layer - the shale smear factor (SSF). After Yielding proposed the shale fault mud ratio SGR (Shale Gouge Ratio) algorithm, SGR was used by scholars to verify the fault sealing and was called a mainstream method.

[0004] All of the above methods require lithologic inversion of seismic data before evaluating the lateral sealing of faults. However, in actual production, it is difficult to conduct accurate lithologic inversion using seismic data, especially in deep formations. Due to strong compaction, the difference in longitudinal wave impedance between mudstone and sandstone is small, and it is difficult to obtain lithologic profiles and mud content using post-stack seismic data. On the other hand, due to the influence of the seismic inversion algorithm itself, it involves intermediate links such as time-depth calibration, seismic wavelet extraction, and low-frequency model establishment. In addition, in areas without wells, the low-frequency model cannot be constructed due to the lack of logging data, which in turn makes it impossible to conduct lithologic inversion and lateral sealing evaluation of faults. Summary of the invention

[0005] In view of the above problems, the present invention provides a fault plugging evaluation method and device, which adopts the following technical solutions:

[0006] A fault plugging evaluation method comprises: extracting seismic waveform information on both sides of a fault from seismic data of a target layer segment, respectively extracting bands for comparison from the seismic waveform information on both sides of the fault, taking a band on the left side of the fault and a band on the right side of the fault as a comparison group, and obtaining a plurality of comparison groups; comparing two bands in each comparison group, and determining a mapping relationship between sampling points of the two bands; summing the distances between sampling points with a mapping relationship in the two bands of each comparison group, and obtaining a distance sum of the two bands; characterizing a similarity value of the two bands in each comparison group by the distance sum of the two bands of each comparison group, and normalizing the similarity values ​​of all comparison groups, and obtaining a normalization coefficient of the two bands in each comparison group; and determining the fault plugging performance according to the normalization coefficient of the two bands in each comparison group.

[0007] Furthermore, the bands for comparison are extracted from the seismic waveform information on both sides of the fault, including the following steps:

[0008] The time derivative of the seismic amplitude in the seismic waveform information on both sides of the fault is taken to find the point with the smallest change in the seismic waveform, and the band for comparison is extracted horizontally.

[0009] Furthermore, the two bands in each comparison group are compared to determine the mapping relationship between the sampling points of the two bands, including the following steps:

[0010] Construct a cumulative distance matrix, correspond the columns of the matrix to the first band in the comparison group, correspond the rows of the matrix to the second band in the comparison group, and represent the cumulative distance between two sampling points mapped between the first band and the second band through the elements in the grid of the matrix;

[0011] Calculate the cumulative distance represented by each element in the grid in the cumulative distance matrix;

[0012] According to the cumulative distance represented by the elements in each grid in the matrix, the shortest path between the comparison points of the first band and the second band is determined to obtain the shortest distance between the comparison points of the first band and the second band;

[0013] According to the shortest path between the comparison points of the first band and the second band, the mapping relationship between the sampling points of the two bands is determined.

[0014] Further, the cumulative distance represented by each element in the grid in the cumulative distance matrix is ​​calculated, including the following steps:

[0015] For the leftmost column of grids in the matrix, start the calculation from the upper right corner grid, and calculate from top to bottom along the first column of the grid. Sum the distance between the two sampling points mapped between the first band and the second band and the distance between the upper and lower adjacent grids to obtain the cumulative distance represented by the elements in the grid.

[0016] For the top row of grids in the matrix, calculate from the first row of grids in the matrix from left to right, sum the distance between the two sampling points that map the first band and the second band to each other and the distance of the adjacent grid on the left, and obtain the cumulative distance represented by the elements in the grid;

[0017] For the remaining grids in the matrix, the distance between the two sampling points mapped between the first band and the second band is summed with the minimum cumulative distance value between the three sampling points in the upper left of the first band and the second band to obtain the cumulative distance represented by the elements in the grid.

[0018] Further, according to the cumulative distance represented by the elements in each grid in the matrix, the shortest path between the comparison points of the first band and the second band is determined to obtain the shortest distance between the comparison points of the first band and the second band, including the following steps:

[0019] Starting from the lower right corner of the matrix, find the point with the smallest cumulative distance between the three sampling points in the upper left corner of the first band and the second band, and proceed in sequence to find the shortest path between the comparison points of the first band and the second band by backtracking to obtain the shortest distance between the comparison points of the first band and the second band, where the starting point of the shortest path is the point in the upper left corner of the matrix.

[0020] Furthermore, the similarity values ​​of all comparison groups are normalized to obtain the normalization coefficients of the two bands in each comparison group, including the following steps:

[0021] Sort the similarity values ​​of the two bands of all comparison groups, and determine the minimum similarity value and the maximum similarity value of the two bands of the comparison group;

[0022] According to the minimum similarity value and the maximum similarity value of the two bands of the comparison group, the similarity values ​​of all comparison groups are normalized to obtain the normalization coefficients of the two bands in each comparison group.

[0023] Further, the fault sealing property is determined according to the normalized coefficients of the two bands in each comparison group, including the following steps:

[0024] The normalization coefficients of the two bands in each comparison group are assigned to the fault according to the time period, and the size of the normalization coefficient is indicated by color. The larger the normalization coefficient, the stronger the fault blocking property.

[0025] Furthermore, the method further comprises the following steps:

[0026] Determine the top and bottom of the target layer and extract the seismic data of the target layer.

[0027] The present invention also provides a fault plugging evaluation device, comprising:

[0028] A data acquisition module is used to extract seismic waveform information on both sides of the fault from the seismic data of the target layer segment, respectively extract bands for comparison from the seismic waveform information on both sides of the fault, and use a band on the left side of the fault and a band on the right side of the fault as a comparison group to obtain multiple comparison groups;

[0029] A first calculation module is used to compare the two bands in each comparison group to determine the mapping relationship between the sampling points of the two bands;

[0030] A second calculation module is used to sum the distances between the sampling points having a mapping relationship in the two bands of each comparison group to obtain the sum of the distances of the two bands;

[0031] A third calculation module is used to normalize the similarity values ​​of all comparison groups by using the distance between the two bands of each comparison group and the similarity value representing the two bands in each comparison group to obtain a normalization coefficient of the two bands in each comparison group;

[0032] The fourth calculation module is used to determine the fault sealing performance according to the normalization coefficients of the two bands in each comparison group.

[0033] Furthermore, the data acquisition module is specifically used for:

[0034] The time derivative of the seismic amplitude in the seismic waveform information on both sides of the fault is taken to find the point with the smallest change in the seismic waveform, and the band for comparison is extracted horizontally.

[0035] Furthermore, the first calculation module is specifically used for:

[0036] Construct a cumulative distance matrix, correspond the columns of the matrix to the first band in the comparison group, correspond the rows of the matrix to the second band in the comparison group, and represent the cumulative distance between two sampling points mapped between the first band and the second band through the elements in the grid of the matrix;

[0037] Calculate the cumulative distance represented by each element in the grid in the cumulative distance matrix;

[0038] According to the cumulative distance represented by the elements in each grid in the matrix, the shortest path between the comparison points of the first band and the second band is determined to obtain the shortest distance between the comparison points of the first band and the second band;

[0039] According to the shortest path between the comparison points of the first band and the second band, the mapping relationship between the sampling points of the two bands is determined.

[0040] Furthermore, the third computing module is specifically used for:

[0041] Sort the similarity values ​​of the two bands of all comparison groups, and determine the minimum similarity value and the maximum similarity value of the two bands of the comparison group;

[0042] According to the minimum similarity value and the maximum similarity value of the two bands of the comparison group, the similarity values ​​of all comparison groups are normalized to obtain the normalization coefficients of the two bands in each comparison group.

[0043] The beneficial effects of the present invention are as follows: the present invention does not need to carry out lithology or mud content inversion of seismic data, and directly uses seismic data to evaluate the fault plugging property, thus avoiding the limitation that lithology inversion is difficult to carry out in areas without wells and areas with complex geological conditions. The present invention is directly driven by seismic data, does not require the participation of wells, has fewer intermediate processes and fewer adjustable parameters, and therefore has stronger applicability, avoids the influence of human factors, and has higher reliability in fault plugging property evaluation.

[0044] Other features and advantages of the present invention will be described in the following description, and partly become obvious from the description, or be understood by implementing the present invention. The purpose and other advantages of the present invention can be realized and obtained by the structures pointed out in the description and the drawings. BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE DRAWINGS

[0045] In order to more clearly illustrate the embodiments of the present invention or the technical solutions in the prior art, the following briefly introduces the drawings required for use in the embodiments or the description of the prior art. Obviously, the drawings described below are some embodiments of the present invention. For ordinary technicians in this field, other drawings can be obtained based on these drawings without paying creative work.

[0046] Figure 1 A schematic flow chart of a fault plugging evaluation method according to an embodiment of the present invention is shown;

[0047] Figure 2 A schematic diagram showing a cumulative distance matrix and an optimal path display according to an embodiment of the present invention is shown;

[0048] Figure 3 A schematic diagram showing the mapping relationship between sampling points in two bands of each comparison group according to an embodiment of the present invention is shown;

[0049] Figure 4 A schematic diagram of fault sealing evaluation results according to an embodiment of the present invention is shown;

[0050] Figure 5 A schematic structural diagram of a fault plugging performance evaluation device according to an embodiment of the present invention is shown. DETAILED DESCRIPTION

[0051] In order to make the purpose, technical solution and advantages of the embodiments of the present invention clearer, the technical solution in the embodiments of the present invention will be clearly and completely described below in conjunction with the drawings in the embodiments of the present invention. Obviously, the described embodiments are part of the embodiments of the present invention, not all of the embodiments. Based on the embodiments of the present invention, all other embodiments obtained by ordinary technicians in this field without creative work are within the scope of protection of the present invention.

[0052] It should be noted that the terms "first", "second", etc. in the present application are used to distinguish similar objects, and are not necessarily used to describe a specific order or sequence.

[0053] The present invention provides a fault plugging evaluation method and device, which directly compares the seismic data characteristics on both sides of the fault based on seismic data for quantitative evaluation of the fault plugging. Since the method does not require the participation of well data, it is also applicable to exploration areas without wells, while avoiding indirect errors introduced in the inversion process.

[0054] like Figure 1 As shown, a fault plugging evaluation method comprises the following steps:

[0055] S1. Determine the top and bottom of the target layer segment, and extract the seismic data of the target layer segment. For example, determine the top and bottom of the target layer segment according to the layer positions and faults provided by the seismic data personnel, and extract the seismic data of the target layer segment.

[0056] S2. Extracting seismic waveform information on both sides of the fault from the seismic data of the target layer segment, respectively extracting bands for comparison from the seismic waveform information on both sides of the fault, taking a band on the left side of the fault and a band on the right side of the fault as a comparison group, and obtaining multiple comparison groups.

[0057] Among them, extracting bands for comparison from the seismic waveform information on both sides of the fault includes the following steps: taking the time derivative of the seismic amplitude in the seismic waveform information on both sides of the fault, finding the point with the smallest change in the seismic waveform, and horizontally extracting the bands for comparison.

[0058] S3. Compare the two bands in each comparison group to determine the mapping relationship between the sampling points of the two bands.

[0059] Since the conventional point-to-point Euclidean distance cannot effectively compare the similarities of seismic waveforms of different lengths, the present invention uses an algorithm to find the best comparison path. Specifically, step S3 includes:

[0060] S31, construct a cumulative distance matrix, correspond the columns of the matrix to the first band in the comparison group, correspond the rows of the matrix to the second band in the comparison group, and represent the cumulative distance between two sampling points mapped between the first band and the second band through the elements in the grid of the matrix.

[0061] For example, we first form an N*M grid, where the columns correspond to the first band A, the rows correspond to the second band B, N is the number of sampling points of the first band A, and M is the number of sampling points of the second band B. Each element in the grid represents the cumulative distance between the two sampling points of the first band A and the second band B mapped to each other.

[0062] The specific calculation method of the cumulative distance is as follows:

[0063] dis(x, y) = |xy| (1)

[0064] Where x and y are the numerical values ​​corresponding to each waveform sample point, and dis(x, y) represents the Euclidean distance between two sample points.

[0065] For the elements in the leftmost column of a matrix:

[0066] D[i,0]=dis(A i ,B0)+D[i-1,0] (2)

[0067] In the formula, unless otherwise specified, the row and column subscripts of the elements all start from 0. D[i,0] represents the cumulative distance corresponding to the element in the i-th row and the 0th column, dis(A i , B0) represents the distance between two sample points in the i-th row and the 0th column calculated by formula 1, and D[i-1,0] represents the cumulative distance corresponding to the i-1th row and the 0th column.

[0068] For the elements in the top row of a matrix:

[0069] D[0,j]=dis(A0,B j )+D[0,j-1] (3)

[0070] Where D[0, j] represents the cumulative distance corresponding to the element in row 0 and column j, dis(A0, B j ) represents the distance between two sample points in the 0th row and the jth column calculated by formula 1, and D[0, j-1] represents the cumulative distance corresponding to the 0th row and the j-1th column.

[0071] For elements elsewhere in the matrix:

[0072] D[i, j] = dis(A i , B j)+min(D[i-1,j],D[i,j-1],D[i-1,j-1]) (4)

[0073] Where D[i, j] represents the cumulative distance corresponding to the element in the i-th row and j-th column, dis(A i , B j ) represents the distance between two sample points in the i-th row and j-th column calculated by formula 1.

[0074] S32, calculating the cumulative distance represented by the elements in each grid in the cumulative distance matrix, as follows:

[0075] S321. For the leftmost column of grids in the matrix, start the calculation from the upper right corner grid, and calculate from top to bottom along the first column of the grid. Sum the distance between the two sampling points where the first band and the second band are mapped to each other and the distance between the upper and lower adjacent grids to obtain the cumulative distance represented by the elements in the grid. The calculation formula is shown in Formula 2.

[0076] S322. For the top row of grids in the matrix, calculate from the first row of grids in the matrix from left to right, sum the distance between the two sampling points where the first band and the second band are mapped to each other and the distance of the adjacent grid on the left, and obtain the cumulative distance represented by the elements in the grid. The calculation formula is shown in Formula 3.

[0077] S323. For the remaining grids in the matrix, sum the distance between the two sampling points that map the first band and the second band to each other and the minimum cumulative distance value between the three sampling points in the upper left corners of the first band and the second band to obtain the cumulative distance represented by the elements in the grid. The calculation formula is shown in Formula 4.

[0078] S33, according to the cumulative distance represented by the elements in each grid in the matrix, determine the shortest path between the comparison points of the first band and the second band, and obtain the shortest distance between the comparison points of the first band and the second band, as follows:

[0079] Starting from the lower right corner of the matrix, find the point with the smallest cumulative distance between the three sampling points in the upper left corner of the first band and the second band, and then find the shortest path between the comparison points of the first band and the second band by backtracking to obtain the shortest distance between the comparison points of the first band and the second band. The starting point of the shortest path is the point in the upper left corner of the matrix.

[0080] S34: Determine a mapping relationship between sampling points of the two bands according to the shortest path between comparison points of the first band and the second band.

[0081] like Figure 2 As shown, Figure 2The calculated cumulative distance matrix and the shortest path are displayed. The gray value represents the size of the cumulative distance corresponding to each element. The smaller the gray value, the smaller the distance. The red line in the figure is the shortest path found.

[0082] S4. Sum the distances between the sampling points having a mapping relationship in the two bands of each comparison group to obtain the sum of the distances of the two bands.

[0083] For example, Figure 3 As shown, the 0th sampling point of the first band A is compared with the 0th, 1st, and 2nd sampling points of the second band B, and the distances between the 0th sampling point of the A waveform and the 0th, 1st, and 2nd sampling points of the second band B are summed to obtain the final distance sum D.

[0084] S5. By using the distance between the two bands of each comparison group and the similarity value representing the two bands in each comparison group, the similarity values ​​of all comparison groups are normalized to obtain the normalization coefficient of the two bands in each comparison group, as follows:

[0085] S51, sorting the similarity values ​​of the two bands of all comparison groups, and determining the minimum similarity value and the maximum similarity value of the two bands of the comparison group.

[0086] The sum of the distances between the two bands of the comparison group represents similarity; the smaller the distance, the more similar the waveforms of the two bands are.

[0087] S52, according to the minimum similarity value and the maximum similarity value of the two bands of the comparison group, the similarity values ​​of all the comparison groups are normalized to obtain the normalization coefficient c of the two bands in each comparison group, which is as follows:

[0088]

[0089] Where D max , D min are the minimum and maximum similarity values ​​of the two bands of the comparison group, respectively.

[0090] S6. Determine the fault sealing property according to the normalized coefficients of the two bands in each comparison group.

[0091] For example, the normalization coefficient c of the two bands in each comparison group is assigned to the fault according to the time period, and the size of the normalization coefficient c is represented by color. The larger the normalization coefficient c, the stronger the fault blocking property, and vice versa.

[0092] Actual seismic data show that the fault sealing evaluation method of the present invention has good operability and predictability. Figure 4 As shown, Figure 4In order to apply the present invention in the actual work area, the gray value is an intuitive display of the blocking property of the fault. A smaller gray value in the figure indicates a large waveform difference, which further indicates that the fault blocking property is strong.

[0093] Based on the above fault sealing evaluation method, Figure 5 As shown, the present invention also provides a fault plugging evaluation device, including a data acquisition module, a first calculation module, a second calculation module, a third calculation module and a fourth calculation module.

[0094] Among them, the data acquisition module is used to extract the seismic waveform information on both sides of the fault from the seismic data of the target layer segment, extract the bands for comparison from the seismic waveform information on both sides of the fault respectively, and take a band on the left side of the fault and a band on the right side of the fault as a comparison group to obtain multiple comparison groups; the first calculation module is used to compare the two bands in each comparison group to determine the mapping relationship between the sampling points of the two bands; the second calculation module is used to sum the distances between the sampling points with a mapping relationship in the two bands of each comparison group to obtain the sum of the distances of the two bands; the third calculation module is used to characterize the similarity values ​​of the two bands in each comparison group by the sum of the distances of the two bands in each comparison group, normalize the similarity values ​​of all comparison groups, and obtain the normalization coefficients of the two bands in each comparison group; the fourth calculation module is used to determine the fault blocking property according to the normalization coefficients of the two bands in each comparison group.

[0095] The existing fault sealing evaluation can only be carried out on the basis of the inversion of lithology or mud content of seismic data. There are many intermediate processes and many parameters that need to be adjusted, which leads to the results of the sealing evaluation varying from person to person and being highly multi-solution-prone.

[0096] The present invention does not need to carry out lithology or mud content inversion of seismic data, and directly uses seismic data to evaluate the fault plugging property, thus avoiding the limitation that lithology inversion is difficult to carry out in areas without wells and areas with complex geological conditions. The present invention is directly driven by seismic data, does not require the participation of wells, has fewer intermediate processes and adjustable parameters, and therefore has stronger applicability, avoids the influence of human factors, and has higher reliability in fault plugging property evaluation.

[0097] Although the present invention has been described in detail with reference to the aforementioned embodiments, those skilled in the art should understand that they can still modify the technical solutions described in the aforementioned embodiments, or make equivalent substitutions for some of the technical features therein; and these modifications or substitutions do not make the essence of the corresponding technical solutions deviate from the spirit and scope of the technical solutions of the embodiments of the present invention.

Claims

1. A fault plugging evaluation method, characterized in that: include: Extracting seismic waveform information on both sides of the fault from seismic data of the target layer segment, respectively extracting bands for comparison from the seismic waveform information on both sides of the fault, taking a band on the left side of the fault and a band on the right side of the fault as a comparison group, and obtaining multiple comparison groups; Compare the two bands in each comparison group to determine the mapping relationship between the sampling points of the two bands; The distances between the sampling points with mapping relationship in the two bands of each comparison group are summed to obtain the sum of the distances of the two bands; By using the distance between the two bands of each comparison group and the similarity value representing the two bands in each comparison group, the similarity values ​​of all comparison groups are normalized to obtain the normalization coefficient of the two bands in each comparison group; The fault sealing property was determined based on the normalized coefficients of the two bands in each comparison group.

2. The fault sealing evaluation method according to claim 1, characterized in that: Extracting the bands for comparison from the seismic waveform information on both sides of the fault includes the following steps: The time derivative of the seismic amplitude in the seismic waveform information on both sides of the fault is taken to find the point with the smallest change in the seismic waveform, and the band for comparison is extracted horizontally.

3. The fault sealing evaluation method according to claim 1, characterized in that: Comparing the two bands in each comparison group to determine the mapping relationship between the sampling points of the two bands includes the following steps: Construct a cumulative distance matrix, correspond the columns of the matrix to the first band in the comparison group, correspond the rows of the matrix to the second band in the comparison group, and represent the cumulative distance between two sampling points mapped between the first band and the second band through the elements in the grid of the matrix; Calculate the cumulative distance represented by each element in the grid in the cumulative distance matrix; According to the cumulative distance represented by the elements in each grid in the matrix, the shortest path between the comparison points of the first band and the second band is determined to obtain the shortest distance between the comparison points of the first band and the second band; According to the shortest path between the comparison points of the first band and the second band, the mapping relationship between the sampling points of the two bands is determined.

4. The fault sealing evaluation method according to claim 3, characterized in that: Calculating the cumulative distance represented by each element in the grid in the cumulative distance matrix includes the following steps: For the leftmost column of grids in the matrix, start the calculation from the upper right corner grid, and calculate from top to bottom along the first column of the grid. Sum the distance between the two sampling points mapped between the first band and the second band and the distance between the upper and lower adjacent grids to obtain the cumulative distance represented by the elements in the grid. For the top row of grids in the matrix, calculate from the first row of grids in the matrix from left to right, sum the distance between the two sampling points that map the first band and the second band to each other and the distance of the adjacent grid on the left, and obtain the cumulative distance represented by the elements in the grid; For the remaining grids in the matrix, the distance between the two sampling points mapped between the first band and the second band is summed with the minimum cumulative distance value between the three sampling points in the upper left of the first band and the second band to obtain the cumulative distance represented by the elements in the grid.

5. The fault sealing evaluation method according to claim 3, characterized in that: According to the cumulative distance represented by the elements in each grid in the matrix, the shortest path between the comparison points of the first band and the second band is determined to obtain the shortest distance between the comparison points of the first band and the second band, including the following steps: Starting from the lower right corner of the matrix, find the point with the smallest cumulative distance between the three sampling points in the upper left corner of the first band and the second band, and proceed in sequence to find the shortest path between the comparison points of the first band and the second band by backtracking to obtain the shortest distance between the comparison points of the first band and the second band, where the starting point of the shortest path is the point in the upper left corner of the matrix.

6. The fault sealing evaluation method according to claim 1, characterized in that: The similarity values ​​of all comparison groups are normalized to obtain the normalization coefficients of the two bands in each comparison group, including the following steps: Sort the similarity values ​​of the two bands of all comparison groups, and determine the minimum similarity value and the maximum similarity value of the two bands of the comparison group; According to the minimum similarity value and the maximum similarity value of the two bands of the comparison group, the similarity values ​​of all comparison groups are normalized to obtain the normalization coefficients of the two bands in each comparison group.

7. The fault sealing evaluation method according to claim 1, characterized in that: According to the normalized coefficients of the two bands in each comparison group, the fault sealing property is determined, including the following steps: The normalization coefficients of the two bands in each comparison group are assigned to the fault according to the time period, and the size of the normalization coefficient is indicated by color. The larger the normalization coefficient, the stronger the fault blocking property.

8. The fault sealing evaluation method according to any one of claims 1 to 7, characterized in that: The following steps are also included: Determine the top and bottom of the target layer and extract the seismic data of the target layer.

9. A fault plugging evaluation device, characterized in that: include: A data acquisition module is used to extract seismic waveform information on both sides of the fault from the seismic data of the target layer segment, respectively extract bands for comparison from the seismic waveform information on both sides of the fault, and use a band on the left side of the fault and a band on the right side of the fault as a comparison group to obtain multiple comparison groups; A first calculation module is used to compare the two bands in each comparison group to determine the mapping relationship between the sampling points of the two bands; A second calculation module is used to sum the distances between the sampling points having a mapping relationship in the two bands of each comparison group to obtain the sum of the distances of the two bands; A third calculation module is used to normalize the similarity values ​​of all comparison groups by using the distance between the two bands of each comparison group and the similarity value representing the two bands in each comparison group to obtain a normalization coefficient of the two bands in each comparison group; The fourth calculation module is used to determine the fault sealing performance according to the normalization coefficients of the two bands in each comparison group.

10. The fault sealing evaluation device according to claim 9, characterized in that: The data acquisition module is specifically used for: The time derivative of the seismic amplitude in the seismic waveform information on both sides of the fault is taken to find the point with the smallest change in the seismic waveform, and the band for comparison is extracted horizontally.

11. The fault sealing evaluation device according to claim 9, characterized in that: The first calculation module is specifically used for: Construct a cumulative distance matrix, correspond the columns of the matrix to the first band in the comparison group, correspond the rows of the matrix to the second band in the comparison group, and represent the cumulative distance between two sampling points mapped between the first band and the second band through the elements in the grid of the matrix; Calculate the cumulative distance represented by each element in the grid in the cumulative distance matrix; According to the cumulative distance represented by the elements in each grid in the matrix, the shortest path between the comparison points of the first band and the second band is determined to obtain the shortest distance between the comparison points of the first band and the second band; According to the shortest path between the comparison points of the first band and the second band, the mapping relationship between the sampling points of the two bands is determined.

12. The fault sealing evaluation device according to claim 9, characterized in that: The third calculation module is specifically used for: Sort the similarity values ​​of the two bands of all comparison groups, and determine the minimum similarity value and the maximum similarity value of the two bands of the comparison group; According to the minimum similarity value and the maximum similarity value of the two bands of the comparison group, the similarity values ​​of all comparison groups are normalized to obtain the normalization coefficients of the two bands in each comparison group.

Images