Abstract
The truncated gaussian method [6] [8] has been widely used in the past in order to simulate indicators. In this paper we investigate the potential and limitations of this method, from a geostatistical point of view and also from a practical one. First we present the method in detail including the hypotheses behind it. In particular we show that this method ensures consistency for the model in terms of the indicators variograms and cross variograms. Examples of the types of variograms that can and cannot be fitted using this method are presented. Then we discuss how to take into account vertical non stationarity for the indicators, as this seems to be the usual case (due to sequential evolutions in a sedimentary unit). This point will be illustrated via several examples. We then explain how the method can deal with a complex 3D non stationarity, and discuss the practical problems of using it in this case.
Finally we show that even though this method was initially designed for lithofacies presenting sequences (when more than two facies are present), it can be extended to some other cases.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Preview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
References
Beucher H., Galli A., Le Loc’h G., Ravenne C. and Heresim Group (1993) “Including a regional trend in reservoir modelling using the truncated Gaussian method” Proceeding of the Fourth Geostatistics Congress Troia 1992, Kluwer Academic Publishers.
Freulon X., de Fouquet C. “Conditioning a Gaussian model with inequalities” Proceeding of the Fourth Geostatistics Congress Troia 1992, Kluwer Academic Publishers.
Langlais V., (1990) “Estimation sous contraintes d’inégalités” Thèse docteur en Géostatistique, ENSMP Fontainebleau (France)
Lantuejoul C. “Substitution random functions” Proceeding of the Fourth Geostatistics Congress Troia 1992, Kluwer Academic Publishers.
Matheron G.,(1975) Compléments sur les modèles isofactoriels. Rapport interne N 432 — Centre de Géostatistique, ENSMP Fontainebleau
Matheron G., Beucher H., De Fouquet C., Galli A., Guerillot D., Ravenne C.,(1987) “Conditional simulation of the geometry of fluvio deltaic reservoir”, SPE 16753.
Matheron G., “The internal consistency of models in Geostatistics”. Proc. of the third international Geostatistics congress, Sept 5–9, 1988, Avignon, France. Kluwer Academic Publishers.
Ravenne C., Galli A., Mathieu Y., Montadert L., Rudkiewicz J.L. (1987) “Heterogeneities and geometry of sedimentary bodies in a fluvio —deltaic reservoir”, SPE 16752,
Rivoirard J. “Relation between the indicators related to a regionalized variable” Proceeding of the Fourth Geostatistics Congress Troia 1992, Kluwer Academic Publishers.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 1994 Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht
About this paper
Cite this paper
Galli, A., Beucher, H., Le Loc’h, G., Doligez, B., Group, H. (1994). The Pros and Cons of the Truncated Gaussian Method. In: Armstrong, M., Dowd, P.A. (eds) Geostatistical Simulations. Quantitative Geology and Geostatistics, vol 7. Springer, Dordrecht. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-015-8267-4_18
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-015-8267-4_18
Publisher Name: Springer, Dordrecht
Print ISBN: 978-90-481-4372-6
Online ISBN: 978-94-015-8267-4
eBook Packages: Springer Book Archive