OSDU — The Open Subsurface Data Universe

The open standard data platform unifying subsurface and well data in energy.

0/2 done

Theory

A common platform for subsurface data

The OSDU (Open Subsurface Data Universe) Forum, hosted by The Open Group, is the energy industry's answer to decades of siloed, vendor-locked subsurface data. It is open, and it is as much a data platform standard as an ontology — a standard data model plus reference architecture so operators and software vendors interoperate.

  • Standardised entities — OSDU defines Well Known Schemas (WKS) for the core nouns of the subsurface: Well, Wellbore, WellLog, Seismic surveys, production data, and more, plus governed reference data (units, coordinate reference systems, classifications).
  • Master data vs work-product — OSDU separates durable master data (the well that exists in the real world) from work-product components (the files, logs and datasets produced about it) — a clean modelling split that keeps identity stable while artefacts proliferate.
  • Cloud-agnostic — OSDU is designed to run on any major cloud, so the schema and APIs are the standard, not a single vendor's platform.
  • Why now — the energy transition multiplies data sources (subsurface, wells, increasingly renewables and carbon storage); a shared model is what lets that data be found and trusted across companies.

Use Case Example: An operator licenses seismic from one vendor and logging software from another. Because both speak OSDU's Well / Wellbore / WellLog schemas and reference data, a new analytics tool queries all of it through one standard API — instead of a bespoke connector per data silo.

Analogy

OSDU is the USB standard for subsurface data. Before USB, every device had its own port and cable; connecting anything was an adapter hunt. USB agreed one plug, so any device works in any port. OSDU agrees one data model and API for wells, logs and seismic — so any vendor's tool plugs into any operator's data without a custom adapter per silo.

Stable identity, proliferating artefacts

Click a node to focus its neighbourhood · drag to pan · scroll to zoom

Master data vs work-product components

Stable real-world entities (master data) anchor the artefacts (work-product components) produced about them.

Field guide — industrial standards & licences

Industrial and energy standards field guide

OSDU and ISO 15926 both serve asset-heavy industries, but their texture is different:

QuestionOSDUISO 15926
Delivery stylecloud-agnostic data platform, APIs, JSON schemas, reference dataISO lifecycle data model, RDL, RDF/OWL/IDO alignment
Primary objectwells, wellbores, logs, seismic, subsurface recordsprocess-plant equipment, specs, states, lifecycle handover
Time horizonexploration/production data discovery and analyticsmulti-decade plant design/build/operate history
Licence postureopen standard/forum artefacts, but implementations may include cloud/vendor termsISO documents are paywalled; public examples should stay illustrative
Common mistaketreating kind as a label instead of a versioned schema contracttreating 4D state as normal overwritten asset attributes

OSDU is usually the operational data-platform conversation: 'can tools find and link subsurface records through one API?' ISO 15926 is the lifecycle handover conversation: 'will a pump's meaning and history survive 40 years and three contractors?'

Reflect

OSDU shows that 'standard ontology' on the job often means 'standard data model + platform'. The semantic discipline — stable identity, governed reference data, clean master/artefact separation — is the same, even when the delivery is schemas and APIs rather than an OWL file.

  • Where would separating 'the real-world thing' from 'the files about it' clean up a system you know?
  • What does the energy transition imply for how many data sources a subsurface standard must absorb?

Reading in progress · 0 of 2 activities done