How to (sub)divide the current geological units/lithology of a model into more geological (sub)unit?
Hello Leapfrog users!
I hope someone can help me with this. I have been given a regional geological map that I have to reinterpret locally to be more accurate to new BH data.
This model has 5 main geological units, but I want to be more accurate and define different sub-units (with particular characteristics), resulting likely in 11 units.
This model has been built with 5 faults, and therefore 6 blocks. The information these blocks (and the model) are using to build the volumes are the topography, structural data, points and polylines, if I am not wrong - I attached a screenshot.
Considering all these, how is the best way to reinterpret this model/these block using the given data?
I appreciate all help and if you consider that setting a call to discuss this is better that text, I would very glad to set it!
Thank you very much in advance and best regards,
RG
Comments
-
Hey RG, what you are asking is quite broad, and could be interpreted in different ways. None of the answers are going to be a couple of paragraphs that you can take from an answer here and easily use to achieve your goals, but it is great you are reaching out for help. option 1, if you want subdivide your EXISTING solids (think about going from a stratigraphic formation to a unit or member), is to create a refined model and build inside them. Option 2, if you need to essentially throw out the existing solids and build different ones is just delete them and start over, and build a new model. Now, this is all assuming you don't need to to edit those fault blocks you mentioned. If you need to add or remove fault blocks (not just edit the fault locations) that becomes a potentially tricky change management process that needs to be handled carefully as bits of the model can delete themselves depending on what decisions you make.
2 -
Hello findlayfraser!
Thank you very much for your quick answer, I really appreciate it. Particularly because I know that is a big open question, but due to its complexity I needed to reach out for help.
Both answers and options sound really interesting. To try to be more consistent to the initial model, I think that I will go for Option 1 and I will keep the existing solid and subdivide them.
Trying not to take advantage of your courtesy, could you give me some tips about it? or any article/post from seequent that can help?
Thank you again and best regards!
RG
1 -
There is definitely some good materials in the help, but my biggest piece of advice is not to try and build the refined model from the same selection column as the main model, it will be difficult, and most likely end badly. Instead what I would do is regroup your codes into a new grouped column (and remember you can drop out some of the stuff already modelled, like faults or overburden, or any units you are not refining), and then make a new selection column from that, and use that as the input to the refined model. I usually label the selection columns going into the models something like Lith_Select_Level_1 for my main model, and lith_select_Level_2 for the refined model. From there, it's basically the same process as building a regular geology model.
1
