Method and system for constructing a three-dimensional geological model of a marine area

Abstract

This invention discloses a method and system for constructing a three-dimensional geological model of a marine area. The method includes: determining a first model, and performing stratigraphic interpretation on first data based on the first model to obtain second data; performing deviation verification, coordinate format unification, and spatial error verification on the second data to obtain fourth data; and constructing a second model based on the fourth data. This method, by constructing a first model based on geological data, performing stratigraphic interpretation on the first data based on the first model, and generating a second model based on the interpretation results, can improve the accuracy of geological model construction while also shortening the construction time and improving model construction efficiency.

Description

Technical Field

[0001] This invention relates to the field of marine geological modeling technology, and in particular to a method and system for constructing a three-dimensional marine geological model. Background Technology

[0002] Current marine 3D geological modeling requires the participation of multiple disciplines, including geology, geophysics, data processing, and modeling. However, the existing work model suffers from the following core problems: Fragmented workflow: Each discipline proceeds linearly from "geological interpretation → physical interpretation → modeling" without a fixed workflow framework. For example, after geological interpretation is completed, the modeling team is directly handed over, skipping geophysical cross-validation, leading to contradictions between the model and geophysical data; Lack of handover standards: There are no unified standards for deliverables among disciplines, and data formats, coordinate benchmarks, and depth benchmarks are inconsistent. The data processing team needs to repeatedly communicate to supplement information, resulting in low handover efficiency; Lack of collaboration mechanisms: Multiple disciplines work in isolation. When there are deviations between the structural features of geological interpretation and the results of geophysical interpretation, there is no collaborative correction mechanism. The final modeling requires readjustment, with a rework rate exceeding 30%; Dispersed quality control: "Final inspection" is only conducted after modeling is completed. Quality control points are not set up in key stages such as geological interpretation and data preprocessing. Early errors are not detected in time, leading to systematic deviations in the final model, and the source of errors is difficult to trace. Therefore, the existing modeling methods cannot meet the requirements of high-precision 3D geological modeling for professional collaboration consistency and quality traceability. Summary of the Invention

[0003] This invention provides a method and system for constructing a three-dimensional geological model of a marine area, in order to solve the problems of large modeling errors and inability to meet the requirements of professional collaboration consistency and quality traceability of the model.

[0004] According to one aspect of the present invention, a method for constructing a three-dimensional geological model of a marine area is provided, comprising: A first model is determined, and stratigraphic interpretation is performed on the first data based on the first model to obtain the second data. The first model is a model constructed based on the third data that can characterize the stratigraphic structure changes in the target sea area. The third data includes borehole data, preprocessed gravity data, and geological maps of the target sea area to provide basic geological constraints. The preprocessing includes Bouguer correction and seafloor topography correction. The second data is the stratigraphic, fault, and rock trap results obtained after geological interpretation based on seismic data, multibeam bathymetry data, and magnetic data. The first data consists of processed seismic data, multibeam bathymetry data, magnetic data, and other field-acquired data. The processing includes static correction / time-depth conversion of seismic data, tidal level / sound velocity correction of multibeam bathymetry data, and normalization and denoising of magnetic data. The second data is subjected to deviation verification, coordinate format unification and spatial error verification to obtain the fourth data; the fourth data is the standardized result data after the second data has passed the deviation verification, and has been annotated with the general transverse Mercator projection coordinates and the theoretical lowest tide depth benchmark, and the coordinate format has been unified and the spatial error has been verified. A second model is constructed based on the fourth data; the second model is used to characterize the three-dimensional spatial distribution of geological bodies within the target sea area.

[0005] According to another aspect of the present invention, a system for constructing a three-dimensional geological model of a marine area is provided, characterized in that the system comprises: a second data determination module, a fourth data determination module, and a second model construction module; wherein, the second data determination module is used to determine a first model and perform stratigraphic interpretation on the first data based on the first model to obtain second data; the first model is a model constructed based on third data that can characterize the stratigraphic structure changes of the target marine area; the third data includes borehole data of the target marine area, preprocessed gravity data, and geological maps, used to provide basic geological constraints; the preprocessing includes Bouguer correction and seafloor topography correction; the second data is the result data of stratigraphy, faults, and rock traps obtained after geological interpretation based on seismic data, multibeam bathymetry data, and magnetic data; the first data is processed field-collected data such as seismic data, multibeam bathymetry data, and magnetic data; the processing includes static correction / time-depth conversion of seismic data, tidal level / sound velocity correction of multibeam bathymetry data, and normalization and denoising of magnetic data; The fourth data determination module is used to obtain the fourth data by verifying the deviation of the second data, unifying the coordinate format, and verifying the spatial error. The fourth data is the standardized result data after the second data has passed the deviation verification and has been marked with the general transverse Mercator projection coordinates and the theoretical lowest tide depth benchmark, and after unifying the coordinate format and verifying the spatial error. The second model construction module is used to construct a second model based on the fourth data; the second model is used to characterize the three-dimensional spatial distribution of geological bodies within the target sea area. The second data output by the second data determination module must pass the deviation verification before it can be transmitted to the fourth data determination module; the fourth data output by the fourth data determination module must pass the format and accuracy verification before it can be transmitted to the second model construction module.

[0006] The technical solution of this invention involves determining a first model, interpreting the first data based on the first model to obtain second data, performing deviation verification, coordinate format unification, and spatial error verification on the second data to obtain fourth data, and constructing a second model based on the fourth data. This method, by constructing a first model based on geological data, interpreting the first data based on the first model, and generating a second model based on the interpretation results, can improve the accuracy of geological model construction while also shortening the construction time and increasing model construction efficiency.

[0007] It should be understood that the description in this section is not intended to identify key or essential features of the embodiments of the present invention, nor is it intended to limit the scope of the invention. Other features of the invention will become readily apparent from the following description. Attached Figure Description

[0008] To more clearly illustrate the technical solutions in the embodiments of the present invention, the accompanying drawings used in the description of the embodiments will be briefly introduced below. Obviously, the accompanying drawings described below are only some embodiments of the present invention. For those skilled in the art, other drawings can be obtained based on these drawings without creative effort.

[0009] Figure 1 A flowchart illustrating a method for constructing a three-dimensional geological model of a marine area, provided in an embodiment of the present invention; Figure 2 This is a schematic diagram of a three-dimensional geological model construction system for marine areas provided in an embodiment of the present invention; Figure 3 This is a schematic diagram of another marine three-dimensional geological model construction system provided in an embodiment of the present invention; Figure 4 This is a schematic diagram of the structure of the second data determination module provided in an embodiment of the present invention; Figure 5 This is a schematic diagram of the structure of the second data generation unit provided in an embodiment of the present invention. Detailed Implementation

[0010] To enable those skilled in the art to better understand the present invention, the technical solutions of the present invention will be clearly and completely described below with reference to the accompanying drawings of the embodiments of the present invention. Obviously, the described embodiments are only some embodiments of the present invention, and not all embodiments. Based on the embodiments of the present invention, all other embodiments obtained by those skilled in the art without creative effort should fall within the scope of protection of the present invention.

[0011] It should be noted that the terms "first," "second," etc., in the specification, claims, and accompanying drawings of this invention are used to distinguish similar objects and are not necessarily used to describe a specific order or sequence. It should be understood that such data can be interchanged where appropriate so that the embodiments of the invention described herein can be implemented in orders other than those illustrated or described herein. Furthermore, the terms "comprising" and "having," and any variations thereof, are intended to cover a non-exclusive inclusion; for example, a process, method, system, product, or apparatus that comprises a series of steps or units is not necessarily limited to those steps or units explicitly listed, but may include other steps or units not explicitly listed or inherent to such processes, methods, products, or apparatus.

[0012] Figure 1 This is a flowchart illustrating a method for constructing a three-dimensional geological model of a marine area, provided by an embodiment of the present invention. This embodiment is applicable to the collaborative construction of a marine geological structure framework. The method can be executed by a three-dimensional geological model construction system, which can be implemented in hardware and / or software and can be configured in any electronic device with network communication capabilities. Figure 1 As shown, the method includes: S110. Determine the first model and interpret the first data based on the first model to obtain the second data; the first model is a model constructed based on the third data that can characterize the changes in the stratigraphic structure of the target sea area; the third data includes borehole data, preprocessed gravity data, and geological maps of the target sea area, used to provide basic geological constraints; preprocessing includes Bouguer correction and seafloor topography correction; the second data is the result data of stratigraphy, faults, and rock traps obtained after geological interpretation based on seismic data, multibeam bathymetry data, and magnetic data; the first data is the processed seismic data, multibeam bathymetry data, magnetic data, and other field-collected data; processing includes static correction / time-depth conversion of seismic data, tidal level / sound velocity correction of multibeam bathymetry data, and standardization and denoising of magnetic data.

[0013] The first set of data consists of field-acquired data that has undergone standardized processing by geophysical professionals. This includes seismic data volumes, multibeam echo sounding grid data, and magnetic anomaly data, excluding preliminary interpretation results. The signal-to-noise ratio is ≥3, and the resolution meets the preset requirements. The standardized processing includes at least static correction, time-depth conversion, and tidal level correction.

[0014] The second data consists of stratigraphic, fault, and rock mass trap data obtained through geological interpretation based on the first data. It includes first, second, and third information and serves as the basic data for constructing the three-dimensional geological model. The fourth data is generated after standardization processing, including deviation verification, coordinate format unification, and spatial error verification, before it can be used as modeling input. It does not directly drive the construction of the three-dimensional geological model.

[0015] The third type of data consists of basic geological constraint data for the target sea area, including borehole data, gravity data corrected by Bouguer / topography, and geological maps, which are used to construct the first model.

[0016] The first layer comprises the stratigraphic stratification results of the target marine area, identified based on borehole data, stored in EXCEL format, including a stratigraphic division table and a fault attribute table. The stratigraphic division table includes: stratigraphic designation, lithological description, and thickness range. The fault attribute table includes: fault number, strike, dip, dip angle, and a vector map of the interpretation results.

[0017] The first model is a basic model for characterizing the changes in the stratigraphic structure of the target sea area, constructed based on the third data. It includes stratigraphic stratification, tectonic framework, and geological structural trend, with no missing stratigraphic information. It provides core geological constraints for generating the second data based on the first data, and its accuracy directly determines the geological rationality of the second data and the subsequent fourth data.

[0018] Specifically, the strata of the target sea area are layered based on the third data to obtain the first layer. Within the first layer, Bouguer correction and topographic correction are performed sequentially based on gravity data. Using the seabed topography as the primary factor, a three-dimensional density interface inversion method is employed to obtain the depth-density interface. Combining borehole data, the stratigraphic boundaries of the shallow first layer are extended to the deeper layers based on the spatial attitude of the depth-density interface and the correspondence between stratigraphic density and depth. The boundaries of deep macroscopic structural units (uplifts and depressions) are delineated based on the depth-density interface and gravity anomaly characteristics and superimposed onto the first layer, resulting in a geological structural framework that includes fine shallow stratification and deep structural morphology. Verification is performed based on structural features such as faults and bedding planes marked on geological maps. If the construction is accurate, geological structural strike markings are added to the geological structural framework to obtain the first model. The first model is then validated for missing stratigraphic layers. Based on the validation results, the first data is interpreted to obtain the second data.

[0019] Among them, the characteristics of gravity anomalies include at least: high gravity corresponds to bulges and low gravity corresponds to depressions.

[0020] The second data obtained in this step is the basic result of geological interpretation. It has not yet been standardized and is not suitable for direct modeling. It needs to be processed by subsequent deviation verification, coordinate labeling and format error verification to generate the fourth data before it can enter the second model construction stage.

[0021] Furthermore, after acquiring the second data, the interface fit and fault deviation are verified. After the deviation verification, the second data needs to be further processed by spatial coordinate annotation, coordinate format unification, and spatial error verification to generate standardized fourth data. This fourth data is the only direct input for the construction of the second model, and second data that has not passed the standardization process must not be transmitted to the second model construction module.

[0022] Furthermore, the above steps are generated by the second data determination module. The second data module includes: a data acquisition unit and a second data generation unit. The data acquisition unit is used to receive and collect the third data, and to perform standardized verification on the processing quality of gravity data and the format and completeness of other data in the third data, generating a third sub-result based on the verification results; the processing quality of the gravity data is used to characterize the completeness of Bouguer correction and terrain correction; the standardized verification verifies whether the signal-to-noise ratio and resolution of the third data meet the preset signal-to-noise ratio and resolution. The second data generation unit is used to generate the second data.

[0023] Furthermore, the data acquisition unit is configured with the geophysical exploration specialty, while the second data generation unit is configured with the geology specialty. When the two units process data, their respective specialties will work collaboratively.

[0024] The geophysical exploration team is responsible for the entire process of processing raw geological data, including seismic, gravity, magnetic, and multibeam sonar data. The goal is to eliminate data noise, correct environmental interference, improve the resolution of effective signals, and output first-level data (seismic, multibeam, and magnetic) and pre-processed gravity data (as part of the third-level data) that meet preset standards. The data acquisition unit coordinates the access of third-level data components, such as borehole data and geological maps from the geology team, and performs format and integrity checks. The geology team is responsible for the entire process of building the first model and generating the second-level data. The data processing team is responsible for the entire process of format unification and format verification of the second-level data, including coordinate unification, depth correction, format conversion, and spatial error verification—that is, the entire process of generating the fourth-level data.

[0025] Furthermore, after each unit or module completes its corresponding processing work, it is necessary to verify the accuracy of the output data based on its configured professional technical specifications and preset quality control standards. Only if the verification passes can the output results be transmitted to the downstream receiving modules or units. If the verification fails, it is not allowed to proceed to the next stage and must be backtracked, corrected, and re-verified.

[0026] The above steps, with their fixed processes and handover standards, reduced the handover time for a single step from 48 hours to 8 hours, and shortened the construction cycle of the second model by 30%.

[0027] S120. The second data is subjected to deviation verification, coordinate format unification and spatial error verification to obtain the fourth data. The fourth data is the standardized result data after the second data has passed the deviation verification, and is annotated with the general transverse Mercator projection coordinates and the theoretical lowest tide depth benchmark, and the coordinate format is unified and the spatial error is verified.

[0028] The Universal Transverse Mercator (UTM) projection coordinate system is a globally unified plane rectangular coordinate system based on the conformal transverse secant cylindrical projection. Its core is to divide the Earth's surface into 6° longitude zones and use plane coordinates (east distance, north distance) to accurately express geographical locations.

[0029] Specifically, the second data is subjected to deviation verification. Based on the deviation verification results, the second data is labeled with spatial coordinates and the coordinate format is standardized. Then, spatial error verification is performed to obtain the fourth data, and the format of the fourth data is .dat (borehole layer) / .grid (seismic interpretation).

[0030] Further, the spatial error verification steps are as follows: Select a predetermined number of evenly distributed checkpoints from the standardized second data; calculate the difference between the converted coordinates and the theoretical coordinates of the checkpoints; compare the obtained difference with a preset spatial error. If the comparison result shows the difference is less than or equal to the preset spatial error, convert the data format of the converted data to a standardized format to obtain the fourth data. If the comparison result shows the difference is greater than the preset spatial error, recalibrate the second data until the preset spatial error is met, and then convert the data format of the converted data to a standardized format to obtain the fourth data.

[0031] The preset value of spatial error should be set according to actual work and relevant standards and specifications to ensure model accuracy on the one hand and modeling efficiency on the other.

[0032] In the above steps, the fourth data is the final standardized result data after the second data has undergone full-process standardization processing. It is the only direct driving data for constructing the second model, inherits all the core geological information of the second data, eliminates various deviations and format inconsistencies, and meets the requirements for high-precision three-dimensional geological modeling of marine areas.

[0033] S130. Construct a second model based on the fourth data; the second model is used to characterize the three-dimensional spatial distribution of geological bodies within the target sea area.

[0034] The second model is the final model representing the three-dimensional spatial distribution of geological bodies in the target sea area, constructed from the fourth data after standardization of the second data. The output format is .STL, .FBX, .OBJ, Geo3dml; its accuracy is directly determined by the quality of the standardization processing of the fourth data.

[0035] Specifically, based on the stratigraphic data in the fourth set of data, a three-dimensional stratum model is constructed using interpolation. Based on fault parameters, a three-dimensional fault model is built within the stratum model to cut through the stratigraphic layers and reconstruct the alteration effect of faults on the strata. Within the constructed three-dimensional fault model, a three-dimensional solid model of the rock mass is built based on the rock mass boundary data to clarify the spatial relationship between the rock mass and the strata, resulting in the second model.

[0036] The interpolation methods include smooth surface interpolation, Kriging interpolation, inverse distance weighted interpolation, or natural neighborhood interpolation, with smooth surface interpolation being the preferred method and spatial error verification performed. Smooth surface interpolation is the preferred method for marine geological modeling, as it can better restore the continuous and gentle spatial distribution characteristics of marine strata and avoid false local anomalies caused by methods such as Kriging interpolation.

[0037] The above steps produce a second model and report that conform to the industry standards for marine geological modeling and can be directly used in scenarios such as oil and gas exploration and engineering construction, increasing the reusability of results by 50%.

[0038] Furthermore, after acquiring the second model, it is validated by obtaining the model data of the verification well. The verification well model data is compared with the second model data, and the validation result is determined based on the deviation. If the deviation is less than or equal to ±30m, the second model is correctly constructed. If the deviation is greater than ±30m, the second model has a large deviation and is reconstructed. This validation index is based on the industry application requirements of marine 3D geological modeling, and the ±30m verification well deviation threshold is defined over a 500km radius in sea area B. 2 The field experiments verified that it can meet the model accuracy requirements of mainstream scenarios such as oil and gas exploration and marine engineering site selection, and is consistent with the accuracy standards of high-precision marine geological models in the industry.

[0039] Furthermore, after acquiring the second model, it undergoes joint verification by combining geological, geophysical, data processing, and modeling expertise. A model verification report is generated based on the verification results, and models with a joint verification rate exceeding a preset verification rate are stored. The generation results for each step of the verified model are named according to the specialty-stage-VX.X-timestamp and saved to the collaborative platform.

[0040] The above steps allow the collaborative platform to retain all versions of deliverables and modification records, and problems can be traced back to specific professions and processes, reducing the rework rate from 30% to 8%.

[0041] The validation wells are selected for verifying the accuracy of the second model and calibrating the geological interpretation results. Validation wells must meet the requirements of data integrity, spatial representativeness, and independence. Data integrity includes complete stratification depths, core structure, logging curves, and structural drilling records. Spatial representativeness means that the well locations must cover different structural units of the study area, including uplift zones, depression zones, slope zones, and fault zones. Independence means that the measured data from the validation wells were not used in the construction of the second model.

[0042] The preset verification rate can be set to 90%, which is obtained based on historical statistical verification of sea area B.

[0043] Furthermore, the joint verification process involves: verifying the corresponding data included in the second model within different disciplines, quantifying and weighting the verification results obtained from each discipline to obtain the joint verification rate. Further, if any verification fails, a system alert is issued, and the failed verification results are corrected using drilling data or measured data.

[0044] The above steps clarify the handover standards for each specialty, the real-time collaboration mechanism, and the quality control points for the entire process, so as to achieve seamless integration of multi-professional results and ensure the consistency and accuracy of the three-dimensional geological model of the sea area.

[0045] Optionally, a first model is determined, and the first data is interpreted hierarchically based on the first model to obtain the second data, including steps A1-A3: Step A1: Divide the stratigraphy based on the third data, and construct the first model based on the geological stratification and the third data.

[0046] Specifically, drilling data is acquired from the third dataset. Based on the drilling data, abrupt changes in rock formations, rock contact relationships, and stratigraphic age data are determined. The strata are then divided according to these data to obtain the first stratum. Bouguer correction and topographic correction are applied to the gravity data sequentially. Using the seafloor topography as the primary factor, a three-dimensional density interface inversion method is employed to obtain the depth-density interface. Combining the borehole data, the stratigraphic boundaries of the shallow first stratum are extended to the deeper layers based on the spatial attitude of the depth-density interface and the correspondence between stratigraphic density and depth. Based on the depth-density interface and gravity anomaly characteristics (high gravity corresponds to uplift, low gravity corresponds to depression), the boundaries of deep macroscopic structural units (uplifts, depressions) are delineated and superimposed onto the first stratum, resulting in a geological structural framework that includes fine shallow stratification and deep structural morphology. On this geological structural framework, geological structural trends are marked according to faults, bedding planes, and other structural features identified in geological maps, resulting in the first model.

[0047] For example, abrupt changes can be the interface between sandstone and mudstone, or the intrusive contact between igneous and sedimentary rocks.

[0048] Step A2: Perform missing layer verification on the first model to obtain the first sub-result; missing layer verification is to verify whether there is missing layer information in the first model.

[0049] Specifically, the stratigraphic data of the wells drilled within the target sea area are determined, single-well stratigraphic columns are compiled, and the stratigraphic age, thickness, and contact relationships of each well are determined to identify the actual missing strata. Virtual wells corresponding to the single-well stratigraphic columns are selected from the first model, and the vertical stratigraphic sequence of the virtual wells is read. The model-predicted missing strata are recorded, and the obtained missing strata from the model are compared with the actual missing strata. If they match, it indicates that the first model does not have any missing structural strata, and the first sub-result is that the first model is constructed correctly; if they do not match, the first model has missing structural strata, and the first sub-result is that the first model is constructed incorrectly.

[0050] Step A3: Based on the first sub-result, perform geological interpretation on the first data using the first model to obtain the second data; the geological interpretation is used to perform stratigraphic interpretation on the first data based on the first model, and to determine fault and rock mass changes.

[0051] Specifically, if the first sub-result indicates that the first model is constructed correctly, then the first data is geologically interpreted based on the first model to obtain the second data. If the first sub-result indicates that the first model is constructed incorrectly, then the stratigraphic information corresponding to the strata with the erroneous structure is obtained, and the data of the aforementioned processing steps is checked and re-verified to determine the cause of the error. The first model is then corrected based on the stratigraphic information and the cause of the error. After reconstructing the first model, the missing data verification is performed again, with no more than two consecutive corrections. If the stratigraphic data is still missing after the second correction, then the third data is collected again and the first stratigraphic data is recalibrated until the missing data verification of the first model passes and meets the requirements. Then, the first data is geologically interpreted based on the first model to obtain the second data.

[0052] The two revision attempts were limited based on practical experience in marine geological modeling and the 500km range of sea area B. 2 The experimental data summary of the work area shows that if two corrections still fail to pass the missing data verification, it indicates that there is a collection deviation or failure of basic constraints in the third data (drilling / gravity / geological map). Continuing to correct is an invalid operation, which can easily lead to a significant extension of the modeling cycle. Re-collecting and calibrating the third data is the optimal practical solution in this scenario.

[0053] Further, the process of determining the second data is as follows: Tracing the stratigraphic interfaces of each layer of the first model on the seismic profile, determining the spatial distribution and depth variations of each layer, yields the first information. Identifying fault reflection characteristics on the seismic profile and combining them with the linear structural features of multibeam bathymetry, the strike, dip, dip angle, and displacement of the faults are determined, yielding the second information. Magnetic anomaly data and seismic impedance anomaly data are extracted from the first data. The threshold for high-value magnetic anomalies relative to the surrounding rock is determined by the mean ± 2 standard deviations after removing extreme values. Volcanic rocks exhibit geophysical characteristics of high magnetic anomalies and low seismic impedance relative to the surrounding rock; intrusive rocks exhibit geophysical characteristics of high magnetic anomalies and high seismic impedance relative to the surrounding rock. Combining these lithological anomaly characteristics, the spatial distribution range of the rock mass is delineated, and the contact relationship between the rock mass and the surrounding strata is determined based on the anomaly boundary gradient and contact zone impedance abrupt change characteristics, yielding the third information. The first, second, and third information are then correlated with the stratigraphic layers to obtain the second data.

[0054] For example, consider the construction of a three-dimensional geological model of the target sea area (referred to as Sea Area B) in Region A. This sea area has a water depth of 50-120m and an area of ​​approximately 500km². 2 The geological structure is complex, with active faults and volcanic rock masses. The third set of data collected includes: drilling data from 15 exploration wells (including lithological descriptions, logging curves, and stratification depths), and 500km... 2 The dataset includes 3D seismic data (sampling rate 2ms) and high-precision gravity and magnetic data. The first data set consists of seismic, multibeam bathymetry, and magnetic field acquisition data after standardization processes such as static correction, time-depth conversion, and tidal level correction. First, based on drilling data from well G-1, an angular unconformity between the Cretaceous (K) and Paleogene (E) strata was identified at a depth of 1250m. This unconformity was used as the key interface for stratigraphic division, establishing the first stratigraphic unit comprising six main stratigraphic units, including E, N, and Q. A 3D inversion was performed on the Bouguer gravity anomaly data at a depth of 5000m. The inversion results showed a distinct density interface at a depth of 2000m, interpreted as the top surface of the bedrock. Based on this, the boundary of the central depression zone was delineated, and two uplift zones and one depression zone were marked on the stratigraphic division, forming a geological structural framework. By overlaying multibeam geomorphic data with the geological structure framework, a linear structure trending 55° northeast was found that coincides with the boundary height of the uplifted area determined by gravity inversion. This structure was marked as the main strike of the F1 fault, and finally, the first model containing strata, tectonic units and fault strike was generated.

[0055] Furthermore, after obtaining the first model, the verification well V-1, which was not involved in the modeling, was selected for missing data verification. Actual logging of this well showed a limestone layer (bioherm) at a depth of 800-820m. Checking the virtual well generated by the first model at this location revealed that this limestone layer was missing. The first sub-result was determined to be "missing stratigraphic layer," and the system automatically backtracked to the seismic interpretation stage, prompting for verification and supplementary interpretation of the T3 stratigraphic layer. After correcting the first model, geological interpretation was performed based on it to generate the second data.

[0056] Furthermore, after revising the first model, geological interpretation was performed to generate second data. Specifically, the layers defined by the first model were traced on the seismic profile to generate a top-to-bottom depth grid (GRID format) for 10 layers (T0-T9), with a plane error requirement of <100m, thus obtaining the first information. Combining seismic reflection termination characteristics and linear structures, the F1 fault was precisely interpreted, with a strike of 45°, dip of 60°, and displacement of 50-100m, generating a fault polygon file (SHP format), thus obtaining the second information. Based on high magnetic anomalies and seismic impedance anomalies, the M1 rock mass, with an area of ​​approximately 5 km², was delineated. 2 The data is then analyzed to determine its intrusive contact with the surrounding rock, yielding the third piece of information. The first, second, and third pieces of information are then integrated according to stratigraphic correspondence to form a standard second data package.

[0057] The above parameter values ​​were obtained based on historical statistical verification of sea area B.

[0058] Furthermore, in the same work area of ​​sea area B, three-dimensional geological models were constructed using the method of this invention (experimental group) and the fragmented traditional method in the background technology (control group), and key indicators were compared. In the traditional method, geology, geophysical exploration, and data processing professionals work independently in a linear sequence, with handover relying on manual communication. This invention, however, adopts the aforementioned modular collaborative process. The comparison results are shown in Table 1 below: Table 1 Results of the control experiment in sea area B All indicators in the table above are based on sea area B, 500 km away. 2 According to the actual modeling experiment statistics in the work area, all modeling data in the experimental group were standardized fourth data, while the control group did not perform data standardization and directly used geological interpretation data for modeling. Therefore, the model accuracy and reuse rate of the experimental group were significantly better than those of the control group.

[0059] Optionally, stratigraphy is performed based on the third data, and a first model is constructed based on the geological stratification and the third data, including steps B1-B3: Step B1: Determine the first stratum based on borehole data; the first stratum is used to characterize the stratigraphic stratification of the target sea area.

[0060] Specifically, drilling data is obtained from the third dataset. Based on the lithological data in the drilling data, abrupt changes in lithology and rock contact relationships are determined. Stratigraphy is then divided based on these abrupt changes and rock contact relationships. The age of the strata is determined using fossil assemblages and isotopic dating data. Following the order of oldest to youngest, the names, thicknesses, lithologies, and contact relationships of each stratum are labeled according to the obtained lithological stratigraphy, rock contact relationships, and chronological stratigraphy, thus obtaining the first stratigraphic level.

[0061] Among them, the abrupt change surface is the critical surface of lithological abrupt change in core / rock cuttings.

[0062] Among them, the contact relationships of rocks can be: conformable contact, which occurs due to gradual changes in lithology; parallel unconformity, which occurs due to abrupt changes in lithology and without changes in stratigraphic dip; and angular unconformity, which occurs due to abrupt changes in lithology and with large differences in stratigraphic dip angle.

[0063] Furthermore, the first stratigraphic level is saved in EXCEL format, including: a stratigraphic division table and a fault attribute table. The stratigraphic division table includes: stratigraphic designation, lithological description, and thickness range. The fault attribute table includes: fault number, strike, dip direction, dip angle, and interpretation result vector map.

[0064] Step B2: The preprocessed gravity data is inverted using the three-dimensional density interface inversion method to obtain the depth density interface; combined with the borehole data, the stratigraphic boundary of the shallow first layer is extended to the deep layer according to the spatial occurrence of the depth density interface and the correspondence between the stratigraphic density and the depth density interface; the boundary of the deep macroscopic structural unit is delineated according to the depth density interface and the gravity anomaly characteristics and superimposed on the first layer to obtain a geological structural framework that includes shallow fine stratification and deep structural morphology.

[0065] Among them, topographic correction mainly focuses on seabed topography.

[0066] Among them, the characteristics of gravity anomalies can be at least: high gravity corresponds to bulges and low gravity corresponds to depressions.

[0067] Among them, the deep macroscopic structural units can be at least: uplifts and depressions.

[0068] The depth-density interface is the boundary between underground strata of different densities.

[0069] Specifically, the gravity data underwent Bouguer correction and topographic correction sequentially. Using the seabed topography as the primary factor, a three-dimensional density interface inversion method was employed to obtain the depth-density interface. The deep stratigraphic interface obtained from the gravity data inversion was compared with the shallow interface controlled by the borehole, and the inversion parameters were adjusted to ensure consistency between the shallow interface inversion results and the borehole measurements. Using the calibrated gravity-density interface data, the stratigraphic interfaces in areas not controlled by the borehole were extended to determine the uplift and depression morphologies of the strata. Based on the uplift and depression morphologies of the strata, the deep macroscopic structural units were marked on the first stratum, thus obtaining the geological structural framework.

[0070] Furthermore, before inverting the gravity data to obtain the depth-density interface, the correspondence between gravity anomalies and strata is clarified, namely, high gravity anomaly areas correspond to strata uplift, and low gravity anomaly areas correspond to strata depression.

[0071] Furthermore, the steps for determining the depth-density interface are as follows: determine the stratification interface of different density strata, obtain the gravity anomaly value of the stratification interface, perform inversion calculation on the gravity anomaly value, and obtain the burial depth and spatial morphology of the density stratification interface.

[0072] Step B3: Mark the geological structure orientation on the geological structure framework according to the structural features such as faults and strata marked in the geological map to obtain the first model.

[0073] Specifically, the stratigraphic distribution in the geological structure framework is compared with the stratigraphic distribution in the geological map. If the stratigraphic distribution order is consistent, the geological structure trend is obtained and marked in the geological structure framework to obtain the first model.

[0074] Among them, the geological structure trend is the extension direction of the intersection line between the structural plane or linear structure and the horizontal plane.

[0075] Among them, structural surfaces can be at least: fault planes, bedding planes, and joint planes. Linear structures can be at least: fault lines, fold axial traces, and volcanic chains.

[0076] Optionally, based on the first sub-result and the first model, the first data is geologically interpreted to obtain the second data, including steps C1-C4: Step C1: Determine the first information based on the first model and the first data; the first information is used to characterize the burial depth changes of different layers.

[0077] The first piece of information consists of grid data of spatial distribution and depth variation at each stratum, stored in GRID format, with a planar error of <100m. The planar error threshold of 100m was obtained based on historical statistical verification of sea area B.

[0078] Specifically, the stratigraphic interfaces of each layer of the first model are traced on the seismic profile to determine the spatial distribution and burial depth variation of each layer, thereby obtaining the first information, which is then stored in GRID format.

[0079] Step C2: Determine the second information based on the linear structural features interpreted from the first data and multibeam bathymetry data; the second information is used to characterize the strike, dip, dip angle, fault displacement, and spatial distribution changes of the fault.

[0080] The second piece of information consists of fault attitude and distribution vector data stored in SHP format. The fault attitude includes: strike, dip, dip angle, and displacement.

[0081] Specifically, by identifying fault reflection features on seismic profiles and interpreting linear structural features from multibeam bathymetry data, the strike, dip, dip angle, and displacement of faults are determined, resulting in secondary information, which is then stored in SHP format.

[0082] Among them, linear structural features specifically refer to the strip-shaped, highly extended topographic features and structural traces interpreted from multibeam bathymetry data, which are the core basis for fault interpretation.

[0083] Step C3: Determine the third information based on the first data; the third information is used to characterize the spatial distribution range of the rock mass and the contact relationship between the rock mass and the surrounding strata.

[0084] The third piece of information includes data on the spatial distribution range of the rock mass and the trap results of its contact relationship with the surrounding rocks, including vector boundaries and attribute tables, to distinguish the anomaly characteristics of volcanic / intrusive rocks.

[0085] Specifically, magnetic anomaly data and seismic impedance anomaly data are extracted from the first data. The threshold of the high magnetic anomaly zone relative to the surrounding rock is determined by the mean ± 2 times the standard deviation after removing extreme values. Volcanic rocks exhibit geophysical characteristics of high magnetic anomaly and low seismic impedance relative to the surrounding rock, while intrusive rocks exhibit geophysical characteristics of high magnetic anomaly and high seismic impedance relative to the surrounding rock. The spatial distribution range of the rock mass is delineated based on these lithological anomaly characteristics. The contact relationship between the rock mass and the surrounding strata is determined based on the anomaly boundary gradient and the contact impedance abrupt change characteristics of the contact zone, thus obtaining the third information.

[0086] The mean ± 2 standard deviations were obtained based on historical statistical verification of sea area B.

[0087] Step C4: Determine the second data based on the first information, the second information, and the third information.

[0088] Specifically, the first, second, and third information are matched with the stratigraphic positions to obtain the second data.

[0089] Optionally, the second data is subjected to deviation verification, coordinate format standardization, and spatial error verification to obtain the fourth data, including steps D1-D3: Step D1: Perform deviation verification on the second data to obtain the second sub-result. Deviation verification verifies the fit of the structural interface and the magnitude of the deviation between faults in different layers. If the fit of the structural interface, the deviation of the fault strike, and the deviation of the dip angle are outside the threshold range, the first data is re-interpreted geologically to generate the second data until the deviation verification is passed.

[0090] The deviation verification process involves the following steps: if the interface fit, fault strike deviation, or dip angle deviation are outside the threshold range, the first data will be geologically interpreted again to generate the second data, until the deviation verification passes.

[0091] The setting of the deviation verification threshold should follow the requirements for data interpretation consistency and result accuracy in the "Specifications for Marine Geological Survey" (GB / T 12763.8-2007) and the provisions for accurate determination of structural elements and map quality in the "Specifications for Marine Regional Geological Survey" (DZ / T 0292-2016), in order to ensure that the geological interpretation results meet the data input standards for high-precision marine three-dimensional geological modeling.

[0092] Specifically, the structural interface fit is determined based on the second data, and this fit is compared with a preset value to determine the fit result. The deviations in fault strike and dip are determined based on the second data, and these deviations are compared with preset deviations to generate a deviation result. A second sub-result is determined based on both the fit and deviation results. That is, if the fit result shows a structural interface fit greater than or equal to the preset value, and the deviation is less than or equal to the preset deviation, then the second sub-result is structurally consistent. If the fit result shows a structural interface fit less than the preset value, or a deviation greater than the preset deviation, then the second sub-result is structurally inconsistent. In this case, the first data is re-interpreted geologically to generate the second data, until the deviation verification passes.

[0093] Furthermore, the specific steps for determining the tectonic interface fit degree based on the second data are as follows: Obtain the tectonic interface from the seismic data interpretation, and the co-interface plane from the multibeam and magnetic data interpretations from the second data. Using the tectonic interface from the seismic data interpretation as a reference, superimpose and compare the positions of the co-interface planes from the multibeam and magnetic data interpretations, calculate the ratio of the area of ​​the matching region to the total interpreted interface area, and obtain the tectonic interface fit degree.

[0094] Furthermore, the specific steps for determining the deviation of fault strike and dip angle based on the second data are as follows: taking the regional geological structure framework calibrated by the first model as the core constraint, and the seismic data interpretation results as the comparison benchmark, comparing the interpretation results of multibeam and magnetic data, and calculating the absolute value of the deviation of fault strike and dip angle in the interpretation results.

[0095] Step D2: Based on the second sub-result, perform spatial coordinate annotation on the second data to complete the unification of coordinates and depth references; the spatial coordinate annotation is based on the universal transverse Mercator projection coordinates and the theoretical lowest tide depth.

[0096] Specifically, if the second sub-result has a consistent structure, spatial coordinates are labeled on the second data, and coordinate and depth corrections are performed to unify the coordinates and depth references. If the second sub-result has an inconsistent structure, the second data is waited for correction until the structural interface fit, fault strike deviation, and dip angle deviation of the second data are within the threshold range. Then, spatial coordinates are labeled on the corrected second data, and coordinate and depth corrections are performed to unify the coordinates and depth references.

[0097] Step D3: Standardize the format and verify the spatial error of the second data after benchmark unification. If the spatial error is within the preset range, the verification is passed. After the verification is passed, the fourth data is obtained. The preset spatial error value is set according to actual work and relevant specifications. The fourth data is the direct standardized input data for constructing the second model.

[0098] Specifically, the second data after benchmark unification undergoes format standardization and spatial error verification. The second data with format standardization and spatial error within the preset range is used as the fourth data. The second data with format standardization and spatial error outside the preset range is corrected.

[0099] Further, the spatial error verification steps are as follows: Select a predetermined number of evenly distributed checkpoints from the standardized second data; calculate the difference between the converted coordinates and the theoretical coordinates of the checkpoints; compare the obtained difference with a preset spatial error. If the comparison result shows the difference is less than or equal to the preset spatial error, convert the data format of the converted data to a standardized format to obtain the fourth data. If the comparison result shows the difference is greater than the preset spatial error, recalibrate the second data until the preset spatial error is met, and then convert the data format of the converted data to a standardized format to obtain the fourth data.

[0100] Furthermore, the verification indicators for this step are formulated based on industry practice standards for interpreting marine geophysical exploration data, taking into account the actual data grid accuracy of the target marine area, as well as the interpretation accuracy characteristics of seismic, multibeam, and magnetic multi-source data.

[0101] Furthermore, the fourth data obtained in this step is the standardized final result data, which is the only valid input for the construction of the second model. Its format, coordinates, and spatial errors all meet the industry standards for high-precision three-dimensional geological modeling of marine areas, and can be directly transmitted to the second model construction module for modeling.

[0102] Furthermore, the data format was converted to a unified format: structured data was converted to .dat format borehole layer data, and raster data was converted to .grid format seismic interpretation results.

[0103] Among them, the checkpoints are selected based on high-precision coordinates that simultaneously possess both the original benchmark and the target benchmark.

[0104] Coordinate correction involves transforming the coordinates of the original geological data to UTM projected coordinates. Depth correction involves adjusting the depth based on the theoretical lowest tide level.

[0105] Furthermore, after obtaining the fourth data, a format verification tool is used to verify whether the fourth data can be loaded normally with 100% accuracy, without any issues such as corrupted format, lost data, or garbled attributes. If any issues are found, the problematic data is re-converted.

[0106] Optionally, after constructing the second model based on the fourth data, steps E1-E5 are included: Step E1: Perform data verification on the second model to obtain the first result; data verification involves checking whether there are missing layers in the second model and whether it is consistent with the fourth data.

[0107] Specifically, the data on strata, faults, and rock masses in the second model are compared with those recorded in the fourth model. If they are consistent, the second model is checked for missing information, and the first result is generated based on the results of the check.

[0108] Furthermore, the first result also needs to consider whether the spatial reference of the data is completely consistent. Specifically, the spatial reference refers to whether the coordinate system is a UTM projection system and whether the depth is based on the theoretical lowest tide level.

[0109] Step E2: Verify the rationality of the geological model for the second model to obtain the second result; the rationality of the geological model is used to characterize whether the evolution law of the geological structure framework in the second model is similar to the evolution law of the geological structure framework of the actual target sea area.

[0110] Specifically, the first verification result is determined based on the consistency between the strata arrangement in the second model and the surface layer of the target sea area. The second verification result is determined based on the first and second time points. The third verification result is determined based on the contact relationship of the rock mass.

[0111] Furthermore, based on the consistency relationship between the strata arrangement order in the second model and the surface strata of the target sea area, the specific steps for determining the first verification result are as follows: obtain the strata arrangement order from oldest to newest in the second model, compare it with the stratigraphic table of the target sea area, determine the consistency relationship between the stratigraphic sequence and the stratigraphic table of the target sea area based on the comparison results, and generate the first verification result based on the consistency relationship. That is, if the strata arrangement order is consistent with the order recorded in the stratigraphic table of the target sea area, the consistency relationship is that the stratigraphic sequence is consistent; if the strata arrangement order is inconsistent with the order recorded in the stratigraphic table of the target sea area, the consistency relationship is that the stratigraphic sequence is inconsistent, and the out-of-order strata, duplicate strata, or missing strata are identified.

[0112] Furthermore, the specific steps for determining the second verification result based on the first and second times are as follows: obtain the first time from the second model, determine the chronological relationship between fault or fold formation and stratigraphic deposition based on the first time, and compare the chronological relationship of the obtained times with the second time. If the comparison result shows that the times correspond, then the second verification result is that the fault structure is reasonable; if the comparison result shows that the times do not correspond, then the second verification result is that the fault structure is unreasonable.

[0113] The first time period refers to the formation time of the fault layer or fold in the second model and the sedimentation time of the strata; the second time period refers to the tectonic movement time of the target sea area at different periods, generated based on the tectonic evolution information of the target sea area.

[0114] The second verification result is used to characterize the correspondence between the first and second time periods, and to characterize whether the cutting relationship between the strata and faults in the second model meets the requirements.

[0115] The cutting relationship between strata and faults is used to determine whether the construction of the second model conforms to the temporal changes of geological structural evolution. The cutting relationship between strata and faults must satisfy the following conditions: the formation time of the fault is later than the strata it cuts; strata deposited after the formation of the fault will not be cut by the fault.

[0116] Further, the specific steps for determining the third verification result based on the contact relationship of the rock mass are as follows: First, verify the contact relationship between the intrusive rock and the surrounding rock. That is, determine the contact type of the intrusive rock and the surrounding rock based on the state of the rock mass and the surrounding rock in the second model. Compare the obtained contact type with the measured lithology of the rock mass samples of the corresponding strata to determine whether the intrusive rock and the surrounding rock in the second model match the actual situation. Next, verify the contact relationship of the volcanic rock. Determine the eruption contact type based on the state of the volcanic rock and the surrounding rock in the second model. Compare the obtained contact type with the measured lithology of the volcanic rock samples of the corresponding strata to determine whether the volcanic rock and the surrounding rock in the second model match the actual situation. Combine the verification results of the intrusive rock and the volcanic rock to obtain the third verification result.

[0117] The contact types include: intrusive contact type and eruptive contact type.

[0118] Furthermore, intrusive contact types include: conformable intrusive contact and unconformable intrusive contact. The criteria for conformable intrusive contact are that the rock mass boundary is parallel to the bedding or foliation of the surrounding rock; the rock mass morphology is mostly a sill or saddle, and the surrounding rock shows no obvious metamorphic phenomena or only slight thermal contact metamorphism. The criteria for unconformable intrusive contact are that the rock mass boundary is oblique to the bedding or foliation of the surrounding rock; the rock mass morphology is mostly a stock or dike; the contact zone of the surrounding rock has an obvious thermal contact metamorphic zone, and the degree of metamorphism weakens with distance from the rock mass; xenoliths of the surrounding rock are visible in the rock mass.

[0119] Furthermore, eruption contact types include: conformable eruption contact and unconformable eruption contact. The criteria for conformable eruption contact are: the volcanic rock and the underlying surrounding rock are in parallel unconformable contact; volcanic breccia, tuff, and overlying strata are visible at the base of the volcanic rock in parallel contact with the volcanic rock. The criteria for unconformable eruption contact are: the volcanic rock and the underlying surrounding rock are in angular unconformable contact; there is an erosion surface at the base of the volcanic rock; the underlying surrounding rock is folded or faulted; and eruption structures such as lava flows and volcanic cones are visible in the volcanic rock.

[0120] Step E3: Verify the drilling deviation of the second model to obtain the third result.

[0121] Specifically, the drilling data of the verification well is determined, and the obtained drilling data is compared with the drilling data in the second model. The third result is determined based on the proportion of data with a deviation less than or equal to the preset deviation in the total data.

[0122] Among them, the verification wells are actual drilling wells within the target sea area that were not involved in the modeling and that meet the requirements of data integrity, spatial representativeness, and independence. They are located in the same geological structure framework as the drilling wells used for modeling and constitute the core subset of the fifth data.

[0123] The fifth data is the measured drilling data of the target sea area, which is the general term for drilling data used for modeling and drilling data of verification wells used for validation. The drilling data of verification wells is a subset of the fifth data, which is not involved in the model construction and meets the requirements of data integrity, spatial representativeness and independence.

[0124] Step E4: Weight the first result, the second result, and the third result, and determine the verification result based on the preset pass rate.

[0125] The validation results are used to characterize whether the construction of the second model conforms to the actual geological structure framework of the target sea area. The validation results mainly include: validation passed and validation failed.

[0126] Specifically, the first, second, and third results are weighted to obtain the total verification score. The total verification score is then compared with the preset pass rate. If the total verification score is greater than the preset pass rate, the verification result is considered successful; if it is less than or equal to the preset pass rate, the verification result is considered unsuccessful.

[0127] The weighting is as follows: data validation result (first result) 40%, geological model rationality validation result (second result) 30%, and drilling deviation validation result (third result) 30%. The total validation score is calculated as Σ(single result score × weight), with a score of ≥90% considered passing. This validation index is based on industry application requirements for marine 3D geological modeling. The 90% total validation score threshold takes into account the comprehensive requirements of data integrity, geological rationality, and accuracy in agreement with measured data. It meets the model accuracy requirements of mainstream scenarios such as oil and gas exploration and marine engineering site selection, and is consistent with the accuracy standards of high-precision marine geological models in the industry.

[0128] Step E5: Correct the second model based on the verification results.

[0129] Specifically, if the verification result is successful, the results generated at each stage are acquired and stored according to a unified rule: Specialty-Stage-VX.X-Timestamp. If the verification result is unsuccessful, the area with deviation in the second model is identified, and the stratigraphic information of that area is determined. The acquired stratigraphic information is compared with the measured drilling data, and the cause of the problem is determined based on the comparison results. The aforementioned processing units or models are then traced back based on the identified cause of the problem.

[0130] Local deviations only correct the output data of the corresponding unit / module, regenerate the second data and standardize it into the fourth data, and then locally update the second model based on the new fourth data, without the need for a full model reconstruction, thus improving modeling efficiency. Global deviations (overall geological framework / multiple layers / main fault deviations) are traced back to the first model construction stage, the third data is re-collected and the first model is reconstructed, and then the subsequent steps are completed in sequence. The verification requirements for remodeling after tracing back are: the regenerated second model must be verified in all dimensions again, and the total verification score must be ≥90% to pass.

[0131] Here, "specialty" refers to the processing mechanism configured for each unit or module. For example, the specialty corresponding to the second model building module is the modeling specialty, which includes various building mechanisms for constructing geological 3D models.

[0132] The technical solution of this embodiment involves determining a first model, interpreting the first data based on the first model to obtain second data, performing deviation verification, coordinate format unification, and spatial error verification on the second data to obtain fourth data, and constructing a second model based on the fourth data. This method, by constructing a first model based on geological data, interpreting the first data based on the first model, and generating a second model based on the interpretation results, can improve the accuracy of geological model construction while also shortening the construction time and increasing model construction efficiency.

[0133] Figure 2 This is a schematic diagram of a marine three-dimensional geological model construction system provided in an embodiment of the present invention. It is applicable to situations involving the collaborative construction of a marine geological structure framework. Figure 2 As shown, the three-dimensional geological model construction system 1 for this marine area includes: a second data determination module 2, a fourth data determination module 3, and a second model construction module 4. The second data determination module 2 is used to determine the first model and interpret the first data based on the first model to obtain the second data. The first model is a model constructed based on the third data that can characterize the changes in the stratigraphic structure of the target marine area. The third data includes borehole data, preprocessed gravity data, and geological maps of the target marine area, used to provide basic geological constraints. Preprocessing includes Bouguer correction and seafloor topography correction. The second data is the result data of stratigraphy, faults, and rock traps obtained after geological interpretation based on seismic data, multibeam bathymetry data, and magnetic data. The first data is processed seismic data, multibeam bathymetry data, magnetic data, and other field-collected data. Processing includes static correction / time-depth conversion of seismic data, tidal level / sound velocity correction of multibeam bathymetry data, and standardization and denoising of magnetic data.

[0134] The fourth data determination module 3 is used to obtain the fourth data by verifying the deviation of the second data, unifying the coordinate format, and verifying the spatial error. The fourth data is the standardized result data after the second data has passed the deviation verification, and has been annotated with the universal transverse Mercator projection coordinates and the theoretical lowest tide depth benchmark, and the coordinate format has been unified and the spatial error has been verified.

[0135] Furthermore, the fourth data determination module 3, upon receiving the second sub-result, judges the second sub-result. If the second sub-result passes the deviation verification, the second data is processed, and the fourth data is transmitted to the second model construction module. If the second sub-result fails the deviation verification, the second data is rejected.

[0136] Among them, the data processing major is responsible for the entire process of format unification and format verification of the second data, including coordinate unification, depth correction, format conversion, and spatial error verification, which is the entire process of generating the fourth data.

[0137] The second model construction module 4 is used to construct the second model based on the fourth data; the second model is used to characterize the three-dimensional spatial distribution of geological bodies within the target sea area.

[0138] The second data output by the second data determination module 2 must pass the deviation verification before it can be transmitted to the fourth data determination module 3; the fourth data output by the fourth data determination module 3 must pass the format and accuracy verification before it can be transmitted to the second model construction module 4.

[0139] Furthermore, the second model construction module 4 is configured with modeling and data processing specialties to be responsible for the entire process of second model construction. Optionally, the marine 3D geological model construction system 1 also includes: a model verification module 5, which is used for the final verification after model construction. It is used to evaluate the accuracy of the second model from three dimensions: model data integrity, geological rationality, and drilling deviation, and to store the second model based on the evaluation results.

[0140] For example, such as Figure 3 As shown, the marine 3D geological model construction system 1 includes: a second data determination module 2, a fourth data determination module 3, a second model construction module 4, and a model verification module 5. After generating the second data, the second data determination module 2 verifies and standardizes the format of the second data to obtain the fourth data. The fourth data is then verified to ensure that the format is completely standardized and that the spatial error between adjacent layers is less than a preset value. The second model construction module 4 generates the second model based on the verification results of the fourth data. If the verification result indicates that the fourth data meets the requirements, the second model is generated. If the verification result indicates that the fourth data does not meet the requirements, the second model is not generated, and the system waits for the second data determination module to send new fourth data.

[0141] Furthermore, the process for determining the fourth data is as follows: After generating the second data, a deviation check is performed on the second data, and a second sub-result is generated based on the deviation check result; based on the second sub-result, spatial coordinates are labeled on the second data, and coordinate format is standardized and spatial error is checked to obtain the fourth data. The fourth data is the only valid data transmitted from the fourth data determination module 3 to the second model construction module 4. The data collaboration module 6 performs a final check on the format, signal-to-noise ratio, and resolution of the fourth data. Only after the check passes can the data handover be completed, ensuring the standardization and accuracy of the modeling input data.

[0142] Optionally, the marine 3D geological model construction system 1 also includes: a data collaboration module 6, used to verify the output of each unit and module according to the verification node, to verify and trace the accuracy of the verification results and the fifth data, and to detect data changes in real time within a set time range. When the signal-to-noise ratio, resolution, or format of the data changes, the corresponding data of each module is updated synchronously. The verification is a real-time verification throughout the entire process. The verification node is after the unit / module output and before the data handover. The verification content includes whether the data format, signal-to-noise ratio, and resolution meet the preset requirements. The fifth data is the measured drilling data of the target marine area, including drilling data used for modeling and drilling data of verification wells that did not participate in the modeling. The accuracy verification refers to tracing all upstream units or modules of a unit or module that are unqualified by the verification result and conducting data correctness verification.

[0143] The detection frequency of real-time data changes should be adapted to the geophysical / geological data processing characteristics of marine geological modeling. It should be the regular refresh cycle of real-time data interaction of mainstream geological modeling software in the industry (Surfer, GoCAD, Petrel). This can capture small changes in data format, signal-to-noise ratio, and resolution in a timely manner, while avoiding excessive system resource consumption caused by excessively high detection frequency, thus balancing real-time performance and practicality.

[0144] For example, such as Figure 3 The diagram shows another structural schematic of a marine 3D geological model construction system provided in this embodiment of the invention. A model verification module 5 and a data collaboration module 6 are added to the basic structure. The connection relationships and data interaction logic of the four modules are marked. That is, the marine 3D geological model construction system 1 includes: a second data determination module 2, a second model construction module 4, a model verification module 5, and a data collaboration module 6. Further, the data collaboration module 6 is connected to the second data determination module 2, the second model construction module 4, and the model verification module 5, and acquires the data transformation status of each module in real time. Based on the module to which the acquired transformation data belongs, it determines the subsequent modules of that module and updates the corresponding data representation content of the subsequent modules based on the transformation data. The data collaboration module 6 is also used to further verify the content generated in each module or unit, and correct the data based on the verification results. That is, the data collaboration module 6 acquires the aforementioned modules of the module that failed verification, locates the module that may have caused the failure based on the reason for the failure, corrects the output content of that module and the aforementioned modules, tracing back to the data acquisition unit. If the data acquisition unit outputs abnormally, it re-acquires the third data.

[0145] Furthermore, the data collaboration module 6 is also used to conduct collaborative verification of various modules and units when data is transmitted between different modules or units or when there are discrepancies in system warnings.

[0146] Furthermore, the data collaboration module 6 is also used to allocate a transmission interface for each module or unit.

[0147] Optionally, the second data determination module 2 includes: The data acquisition unit 21 is used to receive and collect the third data, and to perform standardized verification on the processing quality of gravity data and the format and integrity of other data in the third data, and generate the third sub-result based on the verification results; the processing quality of gravity data is used to characterize the completeness of Bouguer correction and terrain correction; the standardized verification is used to verify whether the signal-to-noise ratio and resolution of the third data meet the preset signal-to-noise ratio and resolution.

[0148] The second data generation unit 22 is used to generate second data.

[0149] Furthermore, such as Figure 4 The diagram shows the structure of the second data determination module provided in this embodiment of the invention, including a data acquisition unit 21 and a second data generation unit 22, with the functional outputs of each unit labeled. The data acquisition unit 21 is configured with a geophysical exploration specialty, and the second data generation unit 22 is configured with a geological specialty. During processing, the configured specialties of the two units work together. Specifically, the data processing specialty is responsible for the entire process of unifying the coordinates and depth of the second data and performing format conversion.

[0150] The geophysical exploration team is responsible for the entire process of processing raw geological data, including seismic, gravity, magnetic, and multibeam sonar data. Their goal is to eliminate data noise, correct for environmental interference, improve the resolution of effective signals, and output standardized data volumes that conform to preset standards. The geology team is responsible for the entire process of building the first model and generating the second set of data.

[0151] Optionally, the second data generation unit 22 includes: The first model construction subunit 221 is used to construct the first model based on the third sub-result and the third data, and to perform missing verification on the first model to obtain the first sub-result. If the first sub-result shows that there is a missing layer, the first model is corrected and re-verified, and the correction is not more than 2 times. Missing verification is to verify whether there is missing layer information in the first model.

[0152] The second data generation subunit 222 is used to perform geological interpretation of the first data based on the first model according to the first sub-result to obtain the second data; the geological interpretation is used to perform stratigraphic interpretation of the first data based on the first model, and to determine fault and rock mass changes.

[0153] For example, such as Figure 5The diagram shown is a structural schematic of the second data generation unit 22 provided in an embodiment of the present invention. It includes a first model construction subunit 221 and a second data generation subunit 222, and the process connection relationship of the subunits is marked.

[0154] To illustrate the implementation process of this method in detail, the marine three-dimensional geological model construction device provided in the embodiments of the present invention can execute the marine three-dimensional geological model construction method provided in any of the embodiments of the present invention, and has the corresponding functions and beneficial effects of executing the marine three-dimensional geological model construction method. For detailed process, please refer to the relevant operations of the marine three-dimensional geological model construction method in the foregoing embodiments.

[0155] Based on the above description of the implementation methods, those skilled in the art can clearly understand that the embodiments of the present invention can be implemented using software and necessary general-purpose hardware, and of course, they can also be implemented using hardware, but in many cases the former is a better implementation method. Based on this understanding, the technical solutions of the embodiments of the present invention, or the parts that contribute to the prior art, can be embodied in the form of a software product. This computer software product can be stored in a computer-readable storage medium, such as a computer floppy disk, read-only memory (ROM), random access memory (RAM), flash memory, hard disk, or optical disk, etc., including several instructions to cause a computer device (which may be a personal computer, server, or network device, etc.) to execute the methods of the various embodiments of the present invention.

[0156] It is worth noting that in the embodiments of the above system, the various structures included are only divided according to functional logic, but are not limited to the above division, as long as the corresponding functions can be achieved; in addition, the specific names of each functional structure are only for easy distinction between each other and are not used to limit the scope of protection of the present invention.

[0157] Note that the above description is merely a preferred embodiment of the present invention and the technical principles employed. Those skilled in the art will understand that the present invention is not limited to the specific embodiments described herein, and various obvious changes, readjustments, and substitutions can be made without departing from the scope of protection of the present invention. Therefore, although the embodiments of the present invention have been described in detail above, the embodiments of the present invention are not limited to the above embodiments. Many other equivalent embodiments may be included without departing from the concept of the present invention, and the scope of the present invention is determined by the scope of the appended claims.

Claims

1. A method for constructing a three-dimensional geological model of a marine area, characterized in that, include: A first model is determined, and the first data is interpreted hierarchically based on the first model to obtain the second data; The first model is a model constructed based on the third data, capable of characterizing the changes in the stratigraphic structure of the target sea area. The third data includes borehole data, preprocessed gravity data, and geological maps of the target sea area, used to provide basic geological constraints. The preprocessing includes Bouguer correction and seafloor topography correction. The second data is the result data of stratigraphy, faults, and rock traps obtained after geological interpretation based on seismic data, multibeam bathymetry data, and magnetic data. The first data is processed field-collected data such as seismic data, multibeam bathymetry data, and magnetic data. The processing includes static correction / time-depth conversion of seismic data, tidal level / sound velocity correction of multibeam bathymetry data, and normalization and denoising of magnetic data. The second data is subjected to deviation verification, coordinate format unification and spatial error verification to obtain the fourth data; the fourth data is the standardized result data after the second data has passed the deviation verification, and has been annotated with the general transverse Mercator projection coordinates and the theoretical lowest tide depth benchmark, and the coordinate format has been unified and the spatial error has been verified. A second model is constructed based on the fourth data; the second model is used to characterize the three-dimensional spatial distribution of geological bodies within the target sea area.

2. The method according to claim 1, characterized in that, The process of determining a first model and performing hierarchical interpretation of the first data based on the first model to obtain the second data includes: Stratigraphic division is performed based on the third data, and a first model is constructed based on the geological stratification and the third data; The first model is subjected to missing information verification to obtain the first sub-result; the missing information verification is to verify whether there is missing layer information in the first model. Based on the first sub-result, the first data is geologically interpreted using the first model to obtain the second data; the geological interpretation is used to perform stratigraphic interpretation on the first data based on the first model, and to determine fault and rock mass changes.

3. The method according to claim 2, characterized in that, The step of dividing the stratigraphy based on the third data and constructing a first model based on the geological stratification and the third data includes: The first stratum is determined based on borehole data; the first stratum is used to characterize the stratigraphic stratification of the target sea area. The preprocessed gravity data was inverted using the three-dimensional density interface inversion method to obtain the depth density interface. Combined with the borehole data, the stratigraphic boundary of the first shallow layer was extended to the deep layer based on the spatial attitude of the depth density interface and the correspondence between the stratigraphic density and the depth density interface. The boundary of the deep macroscopic structural unit was delineated based on the depth density interface and the gravity anomaly characteristics and superimposed on the first layer to obtain a geological structural framework that includes shallow fine stratification and deep structural morphology. Based on the geological structural features such as faults and strata bedding planes marked in the geological map, the geological structural orientation is marked on the geological structural framework to obtain the first model.

4. The method according to claim 2, characterized in that, Based on the first sub-result and the first model, the first data is geologically interpreted to obtain the second data, including: First information is determined based on the first model and first data; the first information is used to characterize the changes in burial depth at different strata. The second information is determined based on the linear structural features interpreted from the first data and the multibeam bathymetry data; the second information is used to characterize the fault's strike, dip, dip angle, fault displacement, and spatial distribution variations. The third information is determined based on the first data; the third information is used to characterize the spatial distribution range of the rock mass and the contact relationship between the rock mass and the surrounding strata. The second data is determined based on the first information, the second information, and the third information.

5. The method according to claim 1, characterized in that, After deviation verification, coordinate format standardization, and spatial error verification of the second data, the fourth data is obtained, including: The second data is subjected to deviation verification to obtain the second sub-result; the deviation verification is to verify the conformity of the structural interface and the magnitude of the deviation between faults in different layers. If the conformity of the structural interface, the fault strike deviation, and the dip angle deviation are outside the threshold range, the first data is re-interpreted geologically to generate the second data until the deviation verification is passed. Based on the second sub-result, spatial coordinate annotation is performed on the second data to achieve coordinate and depth benchmark unification; the spatial coordinate annotation is based on the universal transverse Mercator projection coordinates and the theoretical lowest tide level depth. The second data after benchmark unification is formatted and spatial error is checked. If the spatial error is within the preset range, the check is passed. After the check is passed, the fourth data is obtained. The preset spatial error value is set according to actual work and relevant specifications. The fourth data is the direct standardized input data for constructing the second model.

6. A system for constructing a three-dimensional geological model of a marine area, characterized in that, The system includes: a second data determination module, a fourth data determination module, and a second model construction module; wherein, the second data determination module is used to determine a first model and perform stratigraphic interpretation on the first data based on the first model to obtain second data; the first model is a model constructed based on third data that can characterize the stratigraphic structure changes of the target sea area; the third data includes borehole data, preprocessed gravity data, and geological maps of the target sea area, used to provide basic geological constraints; the preprocessing includes Bouguer correction and seafloor topography correction; the second data is the result data of stratigraphy, faults, and rock traps obtained after geological interpretation based on seismic data, multibeam bathymetry data, and magnetic data; the first data is processed field-collected data such as seismic data, multibeam bathymetry data, and magnetic data; the processing includes static correction / time-depth conversion of seismic data, tidal level / sound velocity correction of multibeam bathymetry data, and standardization and denoising of magnetic data; The fourth data determination module is used to obtain the fourth data by verifying the deviation of the second data, unifying the coordinate format, and verifying the spatial error. The fourth data is the standardized result data after the second data has passed the deviation verification and has been marked with the general transverse Mercator projection coordinates and the theoretical lowest tide depth benchmark, and after unifying the coordinate format and verifying the spatial error. The second model construction module is used to construct a second model based on the fourth data; the second model is used to characterize the three-dimensional spatial distribution of geological bodies within the target sea area. The second data output by the second data determination module must pass the deviation verification before it can be transmitted to the fourth data determination module; the fourth data output by the fourth data determination module must pass the format and accuracy verification before it can be transmitted to the second model construction module.

7. The system according to claim 6, characterized in that, The marine three-dimensional geological model construction system also includes a model verification module, which is used for the final verification after model construction. It is used to evaluate the accuracy of the second model from three dimensions: model data integrity, geological rationality, and drilling deviation, and to store the second model based on the evaluation results.

8. The system according to claim 6, characterized in that, The marine 3D geological model construction system also includes: a data collaboration module, used to verify the output of each unit and module according to the verification node, perform accuracy verification and traceability based on the verification results and the fifth data, and monitor data changes in real time within a set time range. When the signal-to-noise ratio, resolution, or format of the data changes, the corresponding data of each module is updated synchronously. The verification is a real-time verification throughout the entire process. The verification node is after the unit / module output and before the data handover. The verification content includes whether the data format, signal-to-noise ratio, and resolution meet the preset requirements. The fifth data is the measured drilling data of the target marine area, including drilling data used for modeling and drilling data of verification wells not involved in modeling. The accuracy verification refers to tracing back all upstream units or modules of a unit or module with an unqualified verification result to conduct data correctness verification.

9. The system according to claim 6, characterized in that, The second data determination module includes: The data acquisition unit is used to receive and collect third data, and to perform standardized verification on the processing quality of gravity data and the format and completeness of other data in the third data, and generate a third sub-result based on the verification results; the processing quality of the gravity data is used to characterize the completeness of Bouguer correction and terrain correction; the standardized verification is to verify whether the signal-to-noise ratio and resolution of the third data meet the preset signal-to-noise ratio and resolution; The second data generation unit is used to generate the second data.

10. The system according to claim 9, characterized in that, The second data generation unit includes: The first model construction subunit is used to construct a first model based on the third sub-result and the third data, and to perform a missing layer verification on the first model to obtain a first sub-result. If the first sub-result indicates that there is a missing layer, the first model is corrected and re-verified, with no more than two consecutive corrections. The missing layer verification is to verify whether there is missing layer information in the first model. The second data generation subunit is used to perform geological interpretation of the first data based on the first model according to the first sub-result to obtain the second data; the geological interpretation is used to perform stratigraphic interpretation of the first data based on the first model, and to determine fault and rock mass changes.

Images