Common-Reflection-Surface Stack with Global Simultaneous Multi-Parameter Velocity Analysis—A Fit for Shallow Seismics
<p>(<b>a</b>) A CMP gather with six different reflections and their hyperbolic approximations (red lines); (<b>b</b>) the semblance spectrum, where the coherence of the data along hyperbolas associated with a variety of NMO velocities is depicted over time and best fitting velocities were picked for the six reflections and extrapolated and interpolated to a continuous velocity model (black line); (<b>c</b>) the CMP gather after NMO correction using this model; (<b>d</b>) the stacked trace. Figure taken from [<a href="#B6-applsci-14-06748" class="html-bibr">6</a>].</p> "> Figure 2
<p>(<b>a</b>) CRS stacking surface in the midpoint-offset domain, displayed above the corresponding 2D velocity medium composed of two constant velocity layers, separated by a dome shaped reflector. The gray curves are the forward modeled common-offset traveltimes for this interface. The stacking surface is depicted in red and spans over an entire collection of CMP gathers, a so-called CRS super-gather. All amplitudes summed along the red surface are assigned to the point <span class="html-italic">P</span><sub>0</sub> = (<span class="html-italic">x</span><sub>0</sub>,<span class="html-italic">t</span><sub>0</sub>), where <span class="html-italic">x</span><sub>0</sub> is the coincident source and receiver coordinate and <span class="html-italic">t</span><sub>0</sub> is the traveltime of the central ZO ray, depicted as a straight blue line (Figure modified from [<a href="#B14-applsci-14-06748" class="html-bibr">14</a>]). (<b>b</b>) A collection of neighboring CMP gathers from near-surface seismic data, showing the continuation of reflection events in both midpoint and offset direction.</p> "> Figure 3
<p>Two eigenwaves described by the radii of curvature <math display="inline"><semantics> <mrow> <msub> <mrow> <mi>R</mi> </mrow> <mrow> <mi>N</mi> </mrow> </msub> </mrow> </semantics></math> and <math display="inline"><semantics> <mrow> <msub> <mrow> <mi>R</mi> </mrow> <mrow> <mi>N</mi> <mi>I</mi> <mi>P</mi> </mrow> </msub> </mrow> </semantics></math>. On the left, the NIP wave, related to a point source at the NIP, and, on the right, the N wave, related to an exploding reflector experiment around the NIP. Both wavefronts emerging at ZO location <math display="inline"><semantics> <mrow> <msub> <mrow> <mi>x</mi> </mrow> <mrow> <mn>0</mn> </mrow> </msub> </mrow> </semantics></math> are depicted as arc segments with perpendicular rays (Figure modified from [<a href="#B16-applsci-14-06748" class="html-bibr">16</a>]).</p> "> Figure 4
<p>Sensitivity analysis of the CRS traveltime with respect to reflector dip, reflector curvature and stacking velocity. Figure taken from [<a href="#B45-applsci-14-06748" class="html-bibr">45</a>].</p> "> Figure 5
<p>Raw field records from three locations along the seismic line (see arrows in Figure 13a), according to [<a href="#B46-applsci-14-06748" class="html-bibr">46</a>]. Automatic Gain Correction (AGC) with a 100 ms time window was applied to enhance the different seismic events for the display.</p> "> Figure 6
<p>Annotated stack section obtained by conventional NMO/DMO-Stack processing, published by [<a href="#B46-applsci-14-06748" class="html-bibr">46</a>].</p> "> Figure 7
<p>Automatic CMP stack result obtained in step one of the cascaded search strategy.</p> "> Figure 8
<p>CRS stack result obtained after the cascaded search strategy.</p> "> Figure 9
<p>CRS stack result after cascaded search strategy and local three-parameter optimization.</p> "> Figure 10
<p>CRS stack result after cascaded search plus three iterations of event-consistent smoothing, each followed by a local three-parameter optimization.</p> "> Figure 11
<p>CRS stack result after spatial hybrid diffraction/reflection parameter optimization.</p> "> Figure 12
<p>CRS stack result after global simultaneous three-parameter optimization.</p> "> Figure 13
<p>CMP stack after NMO/DMO processing (<b>a</b>) and the respective stacking velocities after DMO (<b>b</b>). Figure modified from [<a href="#B46-applsci-14-06748" class="html-bibr">46</a>].</p> "> Figure 14
<p>CRS NMO velocities obtained from cascaded search followed by local optimization.</p> "> Figure 15
<p>CRS NMO velocities obtained from cascaded search plus three iterations of event-consistent smoothing, each followed by a local three-parameter optimization.</p> "> Figure 16
<p>CRS NMO velocities obtained from hybrid diffraction/reflection parameter optimization.</p> "> Figure 17
<p>CRS NMO velocities obtained from full simultaneous three-parameter search.</p> ">
Abstract
:1. Introduction
2. Data-Driven Strategies for Stacking Parameter Estimation
2.1. Pragmatic Search Strategy Plus Event-Consistent Smoothing
2.2. Simultaneous Search Strategy
2.3. Hybrid Global Diffraction/Local Reflection Search
3. Shallow P-Wave Data Example
4. Discussion
5. Conclusions
Author Contributions
Funding
Data Availability Statement
Acknowledgments
Conflicts of Interest
References
- Kravtsov, Y.A.; Orlov, Y.L. Geometrical Optics of Inhomogeneous Media; Springer Verlag: New York, NY, USA, 1990; ISBN 9783642840333. [Google Scholar]
- Mayne, W.H. Common reflection point horizontal data stacking techniques. Geophysics 1962, 27, 927–938. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Dix, C.H. Seismic velocities from surface measurements. Geophysics 1955, 20, 68–86. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Neidell, N.S.; Taner, M.T. Semblance and other coherency measures for multichannel data. Geophysics 1971, 36, 482–497. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Deregowski, S.M. What is DMO? First Break 1986, 4, 7–24. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Perroud, H.; Tygel, M. Velocity estimation by the common-reflection-surface (CRS) method: Using ground-penetrating radar data. Geophysics 2005, 70, B43–B52. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Castle, R.J. A theory of normal moveout. Geophysics 1994, 59, 983–999. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Schwarz, B. Moveout and Geometry. Ph.D. Thesis, University of Hamburg, Hamburg, Germany, 2015. [Google Scholar]
- Walda, J.; Schwarz, B.; Gajewski, D. A competitive comparison of multi-parameter stacking approaches. In Proceedings of the 78th EAGE Conference and Exhibition 2016: Efficient Use of Technology–Unlocking Potential; EAGE (European Association of Geoscientists and Engineers): Vienna, Austria, 2016; Volume 2016, pp. 1–5. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Schwarz, B.; Gajewski, D. A generalized view on normal moveout. Geophysics 2017, 82, V335–V349. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Höcht, G.; De Bazelaire, E.; Majer, P.; Hubral, P. Seismics and optics: Hyperbolae and curvatures. J. Appl. Geophys. 1999, 42, 261–281. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Mann, J.; Jäger, R.; Müller, T.; Höcht, G.; Hubral, P. Common-reflection-surface stack—A real data example. J. Appl. Geophys. 1999, 42, 301–318. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Hertweck, T.; Schleicher, J.; Mann, J. Data stacking beyond CMP. Lead. Edge 2007, 26, 818–827. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Müller, T. The Common Reflection Surface Stack Method: Seismic Imaging without Explicit Knowledge of the Velocity Model. Ph.D. Thesis, University of Karlsruhe, Karlsruhe, Germany, 1999. [Google Scholar]
- Jäger, R.; Mann, J.; Höcht, G.; Hubral, P. Common-reflection-surface stack: Image and attributes. Geophysics 2001, 66, 97–109. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Duveneck, E. Velocity model estimation with data-derived wavefront attributes. Geophysics 2004, 69, 265–274. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Mann, J.; Höcht, G. Pulse Stretch Effects in the Context of Data-Driven Imaging Methods. In Proceedings of the 65th EAGE Conference & Exhibition; European Association of Geoscientists & Engineers: Stavanger, Norway, 2003; p. cp-6-00405. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Höcht, G. Traveltime Approximations for 2D and 3D Media and Kinematic Wavefield Attributes. Ph.D. Thesis, University of Karlsruhe, Karlsruhe, Germany, 2002. [Google Scholar]
- Mann, J. Extensions and Applications of the Common-Reflection-Surface Stack Method. Ph.D. Thesis, University of Karlsruhe, Karlsruhe, Germany, 2002. [Google Scholar]
- Duveneck, E.; Hubral, P. Tomographic velocity model inversion using kinematic wave field attributes. In Proceedings of the 72nd SEG Annual Meeting; Society of Exploration Geophysicists: Salt Lake City, UH, USA, 2002; Volume 21, pp. 862–865. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Zhang, Y. Common-Reflection-Surface Stack and the Handling of top Surface Topography; Logos-Verl: Berlin, Germany, 2003; ISBN 978-3-8325-0298-0. [Google Scholar]
- Koglin, I.; Mann, J.; Heilmann, Z. CRS-stack-based residual static correction. Geophys. Prospect. 2006, 54, 697–707. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Baykulov, M.; Gajewski, D. Prestack seismic data enhancement with partial common-reflection-surface (CRS) stack. Geophysics 2009, 74, V49–V58. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Coimbra, T.A.; Faccipieri, J.H.; Rueda, D.S.; Tygel, M. Common-reflection-point time migration. Stud. Geophys. Geod. 2016, 60, 500–530. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Bergler, S.; Hubral, P.; Marchetti, P.; Cristini, A.; Cardone, G. 3D common-reflection-surface stack and kinematic wavefield attributes. Lead. Edge 2002, 21, 1010–1015. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Xie, Y. Determination and Application of 3-D Wavefront Attributes. Ph.D. Thesis, University of Hamburg, Hamburg, Germany, 2017. [Google Scholar]
- Nelder, J.A.; Mead, R. A Simplex Method for Function Minimization. Comput. J. 1965, 7, 308–313. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Mann, J.; Duveneck, E. Event-consistent smoothing in generalized high-density velocity analysis. In Proceedings of the 73rd Annual SEG Meeting; Society of Exploration Geophysicists: Dallas, TX, USA, 2004; Volume 23, pp. 2176–2179. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Heilmann, Z.; Mann, J.; Duveneck, E.; Hertweck, T. CRS-Stack-Based Seismic Reflection Imaging–A Real Data Example. In Proceedings of the 66th EAGE Conference & Exhibition; European Association of Geoscientists & Engineers: Paris, France, 2004; p. cp-3-00429. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Klüver, T.; Mann, J. Event-consistent smoothing and automated picking in CRS-based seismic imaging. In Proceedings of the 75th SEG International Exposition and Annual Meeting; Society of Exploration Geophysicists: Houston, TX, USA, 2005; pp. 1894–1897. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Deidda, G.P.; Battaglia, E.; Heilmann, Z. Common-reflection-surface imaging of shallow and ultrashallow reflectors. Geophysics 2012, 77, B177–B185. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Heilmann, Z.; Mann, J.; Koglin, I. CRS-stack-based seismic imaging considering top-surface topography. Geophys. Prospect. 2006, 54, 681–695. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Garabito, G.; Ao, J.; Cruz, C.R.; Hubral, P. 2-D CRS Stack: One-step versus multi-step strategies. In Proceedings of the 10th International Congress of the Brazilian Geophysical Society & EXPOGEF; Society of Exploration Geophysicists: Rio de Janeiro, Brazil, 2007; pp. 1497–1500. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Garabito, G.; Stoffa, P.L.; Ferreira, C.A.S.; Cruz, J.C.R. Part II—CRS-beam PSDM: Kirchhoff-beam prestack depth migration using the 2D CRS stacking operator. J. Appl. Geophys. 2012, 85, 102–110. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Minato, S.; Tsuji, T.; Matsuoka, T.; Nishizaka, N.; Ikeda, M. Global optimisation by simulated annealing for common reflection surface stacking and its application to low-fold marine data in southwest Japan. Explor. Geophys. 2012, 43, 59–69. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Barros, T.; Ferrari, R.; Krummenauer, R.; Lopes, R.; Tygel, M. The Impact of the Parameter Estimation Strategy in the CRS Method. In Proceedings of the 13th International Congress of the Brazilian Geophysical Society & EXPOGEF; Society of Exploration Geophysicists: Rio de Janeiro, Brazil, 2013; pp. 1534–1539. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Heilmann, Z.; Müller, H.-P.; Satta, G.; Deidda, G.P. Real-time or Full-precision CRS Imaging Using a Cloud Computing Portal—Multi-offset GPR and Shear-wave Reflection Data. In Proceedings of Near Surface Geoscience 2014—20th European Meeting of Environmental and Engineering Geophysics; European Association of Geoscientists & Engineers: Athens, Greece, 2014; pp. 1–5. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Barros, T.; Ferrari, R.; Krummenauer, R.; Lopes, R. Differential evolution-based optimization procedure for automatic estimation of the common-reflection surface traveltime parameters. Geophysics 2015, 80, WD189–WD200. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Walda, J.; Gajewski, D. Common-reflection-surface stack improvement by differential evolution and conflicting dip processing. In Proceedings of the SEG Technical Program Expanded Abstracts; Society of Exploration Geophysicists: Salt Lake City, UH, USA, 2015; Volume 34, pp. 3842–3847. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Santos, L.T.; Schleicher, J.; Costa, J.C.; Novais, A. Fast estimation of CRS parameters using local slopes. In Proceedings of the SEG Technical Program Expanded Abstracts; Society of Exploration Geophysicists: Houston, TX, USA, 2009; pp. 3735–3739. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Hellman, K. Simultaneous estimation of CRS parameters with multi-dimensional local slopes. In Proceedings of the 84th Annual SEG Meeting; Society of Exploration Geophysicists: Salt Lake City, UH, USA, 2014; pp. 4686–4690. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Soleimani, M.; Piruz, I.; Mann, J.; Hubral, P. Common reflection surface stack; accounting for conflicting dip situations by considering all possible dips. J. Explor. Geophys. 2009, 18, 271–288. [Google Scholar]
- Garabito, G.; Cruz, J.C.; Hubral, P.; Costa, J. Common reflection surface stack: A new parameter search strategy by global optimization. In Proceedings of the 70th SEG Annual Meeting; Society of Exploration Geophysicists: Calgary, AB, Canada, 2001; Volume 20, pp. 2009–2012. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Hubral, P. Computing true amplitude reflections in a laterally inhomogeneous earth. Geophysics 1983, 48, 1051–1062. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Perroud, H.; Krummenauer, R.; Tygel, M.; Lopes, R.R. Parameter estimation from non-hyperbolic reflection traveltimes for large aperture common midpoint gathers. Near Surf. Geophys. 2014, 12, 679–687. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Deidda, G.P.; Ranieri, G.; Uras, G.; Cosentino, P.; Martorana, R. Geophysical investigations in the Flumendosa River Delta, Sardinia (Italy)–Seismic reflection imaging. Geophysics 2006, 71, B121–B128. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Heilmann, Z.; Deidda, G.P.; Satta, G.; Bonomi, E. Real-time imaging and data analysis for shallow seismic data using a cloud-computing portal. Near Surf. Geophys. 2013, 11, 407–422. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
3 × 1 Pragmatic | 1 × 3 One Step | 1 × 2 One Step | Computational Effort |
---|---|---|---|
10 + 10 + 10 | 10 × 10 × 10 | 10 × 10 | Coherence calculations |
1 | 5 | 5 | CMPs per coherence |
30 | 5000 | 500 | Total effort |
1 | 166 | 16.6 | Relative effort |
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content. |
© 2024 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
Share and Cite
Heilmann, Z.; Deidda, G.P. Common-Reflection-Surface Stack with Global Simultaneous Multi-Parameter Velocity Analysis—A Fit for Shallow Seismics. Appl. Sci. 2024, 14, 6748. https://doi.org/10.3390/app14156748
Heilmann Z, Deidda GP. Common-Reflection-Surface Stack with Global Simultaneous Multi-Parameter Velocity Analysis—A Fit for Shallow Seismics. Applied Sciences. 2024; 14(15):6748. https://doi.org/10.3390/app14156748
Chicago/Turabian StyleHeilmann, Zeno, and Gian Piero Deidda. 2024. "Common-Reflection-Surface Stack with Global Simultaneous Multi-Parameter Velocity Analysis—A Fit for Shallow Seismics" Applied Sciences 14, no. 15: 6748. https://doi.org/10.3390/app14156748