1887
  1. Home
  2. A-Z Publications
  3. Geophysical Prospecting
  4. Volume 67, Issue 2
  5. Article
Volume 67, Issue 2
  • E-ISSN: 1365-2478

Abstract

ABSTRACT

Analysing S‐wave splitting has become a routine step in processing multicomponent data. Typically, this analysis leads to determining the principal directions of a transversely isotropic medium with a horizontal symmetry axis, which is assumed to be responsible for azimuthal anisotropy, and to the time delays between the fast and slow S‐waves. These parameters are commonly estimated layer‐by‐layer from the top. Errors in layer stripping occurring in shallow layers might propagate to deeper layers.

We propose a method for S‐wave splitting analysis and compensation that consists of inverting interval values of splitting intensity to obtain a model of anisotropic parameters that vary with time and/or depth. Splitting intensity is a robust attribute with respect to structural variations and is commutative, which means that it can be summed along a ray (or throughout a sensitivity kernel volume) and can be linearly related to anisotropic perturbations at depth. Therefore, it is possible to estimate anisotropic properties within a geological formation (e.g. the reservoir) by analysing the differences of splitting intensity measured at the top and at the bottom of the layer. This allows us to avoid layer stripping, in particular, for shallow layers where anisotropic parameters are difficult to estimate due to poor coverage, and it makes S‐wave splitting analysis simpler to apply. We demonstrate this method on synthetic and real data.

Because the splitting intensity attribute shows usefulness in S‐wave splitting analysis in transversely isotropic media, we extend the splitting intensity theory to lower symmetry classes. It enables the characterization of tilted transversely isotropic and tilted orthorhombic media, opening new opportunities for anisotropic model building.

© 2019 European Association of Geoscientists & Engineers © 2018 European Association of Geoscientists & Engineers
Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.1111/1365-2478.12729
2019-01-08
2024-04-19

  • From This Site

    /content/journals/10.1111/1365-2478.12729
    dcterms_title,dcterms_subject,pub_keyword
    -contentType:Journal -contentType:Contributor -contentType:Concept -contentType:Institution
    10
    5
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

References

  1. AlfordR.M.1986. Shear data in the presence of azimuthal anisotropy: Dilley, Texas. 56th SEG Annual International Meeting, Houston, USA, Expanded Abstracts, 476–479.
  2. AngererE., CrampinS., LiX.Y. and DavisT.L.2002a. Processing, modelling and predicting time‐lapse effects of overpressured fluid‐injection in a fractured reservoir. Geophysical Journal International149, 267–280.
     [Google Scholar]
  3. AngererE., HoldenJ., JonesN., FreudenreichY., MailiE. and LoT.‐W.2006. Getting the whole picture: wide‐azimuth multicomponent seismic. The Leading Edge25, 1052–1058.
     [Google Scholar]
  4. AngererE., HorneS.A., GaiserJ.E., WaltersR., BagalaS. and VetriL.2002b. Characterization of dipping fractures using Ps mode‐converted data. 72nd SEG Annual International Meeting, Salt Lake City, Utah, Expanded Abstracts, 1010–1013.
  5. BaleR., DumitruG. and ProbertT.2000. Analysis and stacking of 3D converted wave data in the presence of azimuthal anisotropy. 70th SEG Annual International Meeting, Calgary, Canada, Expanded Abstracts, 1189–1192.
  6. BaleR.A., LiJ. and MattocksB.2005. Robust estimation of fracture directions from 3‐D converted‐waves. 75th SEG Annual International Meeting, Houston, Texas, Expanded Abstracts, 889–892.
  7. BaleR., GratacosB., MattocksB., RocheS., PoplavskiiK. and LiX.2009. Shear wave splitting applications for fracture analysis and improved imaging: some onshore examples. First Break27, 73–83.
     [Google Scholar]
  8. BaleR., MarchandT., WilkinsonK., WikelK. and KendallR.2013. The signature of shear‐wave splitting: theory and observations on heavy oil data. The Leading Edge32, 14–24.
     [Google Scholar]
  9. BarkvedO.I. and KristiansenT.2005. Seismic time‐lapse effects and stress changes: examples from a compacting reservoir. The Leading Edge24, 1244–1248.
     [Google Scholar]
  10. BoieroD. and BagainiC.2016. Horizon‐based splitting intensity analysis and inversion for anisotropic characterization. 78th EAGE Conference & Exhibition, Vienna, Austria, Expanded Abstracts.
  11. ChevrotS.2000. Multichannel analysis of shear wave splitting. Journal of Geophysical Research105, 21579–21590.
     [Google Scholar]
  12. ChevrotS., FavierN. and KomatitschD.2004. Shear wave splitting in three‐dimensional anisotropic media. Geophysical Journal International159, 711–720.
     [Google Scholar]
  13. CrampinS.1981. A review of wave motion in anisotropic and cracked elastic media. Wave Motion3, 343–391.
     [Google Scholar]
  14. CrampinS.1985. Evaluation of anisotropy by shear‐wave splitting. Geophysics50, 142–152.
     [Google Scholar]
  15. CrampinS. and PeacockS.2005. A review of shear‐wave splitting in the compliant crack‐critical anisotropic Earth. Wave Motion41, 59–77.
     [Google Scholar]
  16. FavierN. and ChevrotS.2003. Sensitivity kernels for shear wave splitting in transverse isotropic media. Geophysical Journal International153, 213–228.
     [Google Scholar]
  17. GaiserJ.E.1999. Applications for vector coordinate systems of 3‐D converted wave data. The Leading Edge18, 1290–1300.
     [Google Scholar]
  18. GaiserJ.2016. 3C Seismic and VSP: Converted Waves and Vector Wavefield Applications. Society of Exploration Geophysicists.
     [Google Scholar]
  19. GrangerP., BonnotJ., GresillaudA. and RolletA.2001. C‐wave resolution enhancement through birefringence compensation at the Valhall Field. 71st SEG Annual International Meeting, San Antonio, Texas, Expanded Abstracts, 772–775.
  20. GratacosB.2006. A Robust Algorithm and Associated QC for Finding the Anisotropy Directions for Converted Wave Data. 68th EAGE Conference & Exhibition, Vienna, Austria, Expanded Abstracts, P188.
  21. HaackeR.R., WestbrookG.K. and PeacockS.2009. Layer stripping of shear‐wave splitting in marine PS waves. Geophysical Journal International176, 782–804.
     [Google Scholar]
  22. HaackeR.R.2013. High‐precision estimation of split PS‐wave time delays and polarization directions. Geophysics78, V63–V77.
     [Google Scholar]
  23. LisitsaV. and VishnevskiyD.2010. Lebedev scheme for the numerical simulation of wave propagation in 3D anisotropic elasticity. Geophysical Prospecting58, 619–635.
     [Google Scholar]
  24. LongM.D. and SilverP.G.2009. Shear wave splitting and mantle anisotropy: measurements, interpretations, and new directions. Survey in Geophysics30, 407–461.
     [Google Scholar]
  25. MallickS. and FrazerL.N.1990. Computation of synthetic seismograms for stratified azimuthally anisotropic media. Journal of Geophysical Research: Solid Earth95, 8513–8526.
     [Google Scholar]
  26. MilneR., KommedalJ., KjosE. and PorterM.2018. The Evolution of 4D Monitoring at the Valhall Field, from Permanent Cables to Retrievable Nodes. 80th EAGE Conference & Exhibition, Copenhagen, Denmark, Expanded Abstracts.
  27. OlofssonB., KommedalJ., BarkvedO., AlexandreR., BrunelliereJ.E. and MuyzertE.2002. Continuous progress in processing multicomponent data—A case study. 64th EAGE Conference & Exhibition, Florence, Italy, Expanded Abstracts, F022.
  28. OristaglioM.2014. SEAM update. The Leading Edge33, 380–382.
     [Google Scholar]
  29. RomanowiczB. and YuanH.2012. On the interpretation of SKS splitting measurements in the presence of several layers of anisotropy. Geophysical Journal International188, 1129–1140.
     [Google Scholar]
  30. SieminskiA., PaulssenH., TrampertJ. and TrompJ.2008. Finite‐frequency SKS splitting: measurement and sensitivity kernels. Bulletin of Seismological Society of America98, 1797–1810.
     [Google Scholar]
  31. SilverP.G. and ChanW.W.1991. Shear wave splitting and subcontinental mantle deformation. Journal of Geophysical Research96, 16,429–16,454.
     [Google Scholar]
  32. SilverP.G. and LongM.D.2011. The non‐commutivity of shear wave splitting operators at low frequencies and implications for anisotropy tomography. Geophysical Journal International184, 1415–1427.
     [Google Scholar]
  33. SimmonsJ.L.Jr.2009. Converted‐wave splitting estimation and compensation. Geophysics74, D37–D48.
     [Google Scholar]
  34. ThomsenL.1986. Weak elastic anisotropy. Geophysics51, 1954–1966.
     [Google Scholar]
  35. WintersteinD.F. and MeadowsM.A.1991. Changes in shear‐wave polarization azimuth with depth in Cymric and railroad gap oil fields. Geophysics56, 1349–1364.
     [Google Scholar]
http://instance.metastore.ingenta.com/content/journals/10.1111/1365-2478.12729
Loading
S‐wave splitting intensity analysis and inversion
Geophysical Prospecting 67, 362 (2019); https://doi.org/10.1111/1365-2478.12729
/content/journals/10.1111/1365-2478.12729
/content/journals/10.1111/1365-2478.12729
Loading

Data & Media loading...

  • Article Type: Research Article
Keyword(s): Azimuthal anisotropy; Multicomponent seismic Measurements; S‐wave splitting

Most Cited This Month Most Cited RSS feed

This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address
Approval was a Success
Invalid data
An Error Occurred
Approval was partially successful, following selected items could not be processed due to error