1887
Volume 51, Issue 5
  • ISSN: 0812-3985
  • E-ISSN: 1834-7533

Abstract

ABSTRACT

The staggered grid finite difference (SGFD) method has been widely utilised in seismic forward modelling. The accuracy of forward modelling results has a great influence on the results of subsequent seismic imaging and seismic inversion. Numerical dispersion is one of the inherent problems in the SGFD method. To suppress dispersion, we here introduce the truncated window function method, which can get optimised finite difference operators after truncating spatial convolution series of the pseudo-spectral method. The empirical criteria of window functions are the main lobe width that should be as narrow as possible and the side lobe attenuation should be as large as possible. According to these criteria, we propose the combined window function method based on the Gaussian window and Hanning window. The result of the amplitude spectrum response shows that the new combined window has narrower main lobe and greater side lobe attenuation, which results in higher accuracy in numerical simulations with SGFD operators. Numerical tests also illustrate the effectiveness of this new method.

© 2020 Australian Society of Exploration Geophysicists
Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.1080/08123985.2020.1737519
2020-09-02
2026-01-12

  • From This Site

    /content/journals/10.1080/08123985.2020.1737519
    dcterms_title,dcterms_subject,pub_keyword
    -contentType:Journal -contentType:Contributor -contentType:Concept -contentType:Institution
    10
    5
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

References

  1. Bansal, R., and M.K.Sen. 2008. Finite-difference modelling of S-wave splitting in anisotropic media. Geophysical Prospecting56: 293–312. doi: 10.1111/j.1365‑2478.2007.00693.x
     https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2478.2007.00693.x [Google Scholar]
  2. Blackman, R.B., and J.W.Tukey. 1959. The measurement of power spectra from the point of view of communications engineering. New York: Dover Publications.
  3. Boris, J.P., and D.L.Book. 1973. Flux-corrected transport. I. SHASTA, a fluid transport algorithm that works. Journal of Computational Physics11: 38–69. doi: 10.1016/0021‑9991(73)90147‑2
     https://doi.org/10.1016/0021-9991(73)90147-2 [Google Scholar]
  4. Carcione, J.M., G.C.Herman, and A.P.E.ten Kroode. 2002. Seismic modelling. Geophysics67: 1304–1325. doi: 10.1190/1.1500393
     https://doi.org/10.1190/1.1500393 [Google Scholar]
  5. Chu, C.L., and P.L.Stoffa. 2012. Determination of finite-difference weights using scaled binomial windows. Geophysics77: W17–W26. doi: 10.1190/geo2011‑0336.1
     https://doi.org/10.1190/geo2011-0336.1 [Google Scholar]
  6. Diniz, P.S.R., E.A.B.Da Silva, and S.L.Netto. 2010. Digital signal processing system analysis and design. New York: Cambridge University Press.
  7. Dong, L., Z.Ma, and J.Cao. 2000. A study on stability of the staggered-grid high-order difference method of first-order elastic wave equation. Chinese Journal of Geophysics43: 856–864. (in Chinese).
     [Google Scholar]
  8. Fornberg, B.1987. The pseudospectral method: Comparisons with finite differences for the elastic wave equation. Geophysics52: 483–501. doi: 10.1190/1.1442319
     https://doi.org/10.1190/1.1442319 [Google Scholar]
  9. Graves, R.W.1996. Simulating seismic wave propagation in 3D elastic media using staggered-grid finite difference. Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America86: 1091–1106.
     [Google Scholar]
  10. He, Z., J.Zhang, and Z.Yao. 2019. Determining the optimal coefficients of the finite difference method using the Remez exchange algorithm. Geophysics84, no. 3: S137–S147. doi:10.1190/geo2018‑0446.1.
     https://doi.org/10.1190/geo2018-0446.1 [Google Scholar]
  11. Holberg, O.1987. Computational aspects of the choice of operator and sampling interval for numerical differentiation in large-scale simulation of wave phenomena. Geophysical Prospecting35: 629–655. doi: 10.1111/j.1365‑2478.1987.tb00841.x
     https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2478.1987.tb00841.x [Google Scholar]
  12. Hu, Z., W.Liu, Y.Wang, Z.Yang, and S.Wang. 2017. Time-space domain dispersion-relation-based mixed staggered-grid finite-difference methods. In Carbonate reservoir E&P workshop, Chengdu, 22–24 October 2017, SEG 2017 Workshop, Chengdu, China, 105–108.
  13. Igel, H., P.Mora, and B.Riollet. 1995. Anisotropic wave propagation through finite-difference grids. Geophysics60, no. 4: 1203–1216. doi:10.1190/1.1443849.
     https://doi.org/10.1190/1.1443849 [Google Scholar]
  14. Kelly, K.R., R.W.Ward, S.Treitel, and R.M.Alford. 1976. Synthetic seismograms: A finite difference approach. Geophysics41: 2–27. doi: 10.1190/1.1440605
     https://doi.org/10.1190/1.1440605 [Google Scholar]
  15. Kuzuoglu, M., and R.Mittra. 1996. Frequency dependence of the constitutive parameters of causal perfectly matched anisotropic absorbers. IEEE Microwave and Guided Wave Letters6: 447–449. doi: 10.1109/75.544545
     https://doi.org/10.1109/75.544545 [Google Scholar]
  16. Levander, A.R.1988. Fourth-order finite-difference P-SV seismograms. Geophysics53: 1425–1436. doi: 10.1190/1.1442422
     https://doi.org/10.1190/1.1442422 [Google Scholar]
  17. Liang, W., Y.Wang, and C.Yang. 2015. Comparison of numerical dispersion for finite-difference algorithms in transversely isotropic media with a vertical symmetry axis. Journal of Geophysics and Engineering12: 108–113. doi: 10.1088/1742‑2132/12/1/108
     https://doi.org/10.1088/1742-2132/12/1/108 [Google Scholar]
  18. Liu, Y.2013. Globally optimal finite-difference schemes based on least squares. Geophysics78: 113–132. doi: 10.1190/geo2012‑0480.1
     https://doi.org/10.1190/geo2012-0480.1 [Google Scholar]
  19. Liu, Y.2014. Optimal staggered-grid finite-difference schemes based on least squares for wave equation modelling. Geophysical Journal International197, no. 2: 1033–1047. doi: 10.1093/gji/ggu032
     https://doi.org/10.1093/gji/ggu032 [Google Scholar]
  20. Liu, Y., and M.K.Sen. 2009. A practical implicit finite-difference method: examples from seismic modelling. Journal of Geophysics and Engineering6: 231–249. doi: 10.1088/1742‑2132/6/3/003
     https://doi.org/10.1088/1742-2132/6/3/003 [Google Scholar]
  21. Liu, Y., and M.K.Sen. 2011. Scalar wave equation modeling with time-space domain dispersion-relation-based staggered-grid finite-difference schemes. Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America101: 141–159. doi: 10.1785/0120100041
     https://doi.org/10.1785/0120100041 [Google Scholar]
  22. Reshef, M., D.Kosloff, M.Edwards, and C.Hsiung. 1988. Three-dimensional elastic modelling by the Fourier method. Geophysics53: 1184–1193. doi: 10.1190/1.1442558
     https://doi.org/10.1190/1.1442558 [Google Scholar]
  23. Robertsson, J.O.A., J.O.Blanch, W.W.Symes, and C.S.Burrus. 1994. Galerkin-wavelet modeling of wave propagation: Optimal finite difference stencil design. Mathematical and Computer Modelling: An International Journal19: 31–38. doi: 10.1016/0895‑7177(94)90113‑9
     https://doi.org/10.1016/0895-7177(94)90113-9 [Google Scholar]
  24. Ren, Z., Y.Liu, and Q.Zhang. 2014. Multiscale viscoacoustic waveform inversion with the second generation wavelet transform and adaptive time-space domain finite-difference method. Geophysical Journal International197: 948–974. doi: 10.1093/gji/ggu024
     https://doi.org/10.1093/gji/ggu024 [Google Scholar]
  25. Sun, W., B.Zhou, and L.Y.Fu. 2015. A staggered-grid convolutional differentiator for elastic wave modelling. Journal of Computational Physics301: 59–76. doi: 10.1016/j.jcp.2015.08.017
     https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcp.2015.08.017 [Google Scholar]
  26. Virieux, J.1984. SH-wave propagation in heterogeneous media: velocity-stress finite difference method. Geophysics49: 1933–1957. doi: 10.1190/1.1441605
     https://doi.org/10.1190/1.1441605 [Google Scholar]
  27. Virieux, J.1986. P-SV wave propagation in heterogeneous media: velocity-stress finite difference method. Geophysics51: 889–901. doi: 10.1190/1.1442147
     https://doi.org/10.1190/1.1442147 [Google Scholar]
  28. Wang, W., T.Hu, J.Song, Y.Li, J.Li, and Y.Zhang. 2017. An optimized scheme of dispersion suppression for elastic-wave variable-order rotated staggered-grid forward modeling. Journal of Geophysics and Engineering14: 1624–1638. doi: 10.1088/1742‑2140/aa83a2
     https://doi.org/10.1088/1742-2140/aa83a2 [Google Scholar]
  29. Wang, Z., H.Liu, X.Tang, and Y.Wang. 2015. Optimized finite-difference operators based on Chebyshev auto-convolution combined window function. Chinese Journal of Geophysics58: 628–642. (in Chinese). doi: 10.1002/cjg2.20200
     https://doi.org/10.1002/cjg2.20200 [Google Scholar]
  30. Wang, J., X.Meng, H.Liu, W.Zheng, Y.Liu, S.Gui, and Z.Wang. 2017. Optimization of finite difference forward modeling for elastic waves based on optimum combined window functions. Journal of Applied Geophysics138: 62–71. doi: 10.1016/j.jappgeo.2017.01.028
     https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jappgeo.2017.01.028 [Google Scholar]
  31. Yang, D., and J.Teng. 1997. FCT finite difference modelling of three-component seismic records in anisotropic medium. OGP32, no. 2: 181–190. (in Chinese).
     [Google Scholar]
  32. Yang, L., H.Yan, and H.Liu. 2017. Optimal staggered-grid finite difference schemes based on the minimax approximation method with the Remez algorithm. Geophysics82, no. 1: T27–T42. doi:10.1190/geo2016‑0171.1.
     https://doi.org/10.1190/geo2016-0171.1 [Google Scholar]
  33. Yong, P., J.Huang, Z.Li, W.Liao, L.Qu, Q.Li, and P.Liu. 2017. Optimized equivalent staggered-grid FD method for elastic wave modelling based on plane wave solutions. Geophysical Journal International208: 1157–1172. doi: 10.1093/gji/ggw447
     https://doi.org/10.1093/gji/ggw447 [Google Scholar]
  34. Zhang, J., and Z.Yao. 2013a. Optimized explicit finite-difference schemes for spatial derivatives using maximum norm. Journal of Computational Physics250: 511–526. doi: 10.1016/j.jcp.2013.04.029
     https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcp.2013.04.029 [Google Scholar]
  35. Zhang, J., and Z.Yao. 2013b. Optimized finite-difference operator for broadband seismic wave modeling. Geophysics78: A13–A18. doi: 10.1190/geo2012‑0277.1
     https://doi.org/10.1190/geo2012-0277.1 [Google Scholar]
  36. Zheng, W., X.Meng, J.Liu, and J.Wang. 2016. High precision elastic wave equation forward modeling based on cosine modulated chebyshev window function. Chinese Journal of Geophysics59: 2650–2662. (in Chinese).
     [Google Scholar]
  37. Zhou, B., and S. A.Greenhalgh. 1992. Seismic scalar wave equation modeling by a convolutional differentiator. Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America82: 289–303.
     [Google Scholar]
/content/journals/10.1080/08123985.2020.1737519
Loading
Optimised staggered grid finite difference operators based on the combined window function
Exploration Geophysics 51, 523 (2020); https://doi.org/10.1080/08123985.2020.1737519
/content/journals/10.1080/08123985.2020.1737519
/content/journals/10.1080/08123985.2020.1737519
Loading

Data & Media loading...

  • Article Type: Research Article
Keyword(s): dispersion; finite difference; Modelling

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