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

Abstract

In seismic exploration, the dominant applications are still based on the acoustic wave assumption because of the simplicity and computational efficiency. Compared to the acoustic wave equation, the elastic wave simulation is more accurate, especially for land data, to characterise the elastic property of the real earth, but it is also far more expensive in terms of the computational cost. The traditional way to solve the first order velocity-stress elastic wave equation is based on a second order staggered grid time domain finite difference stencil, and this stencil is expensive because the time step is usually very small due to the limitation the stability condition and numerical dispersion relations. When the fourth order Lax-Wendroff stencil is applied, the time step could be larger but the computational cost triples that of the second order stencil for each time step. To improve the efficiency of the Lax-Wendroff stencil, we rewrite the first order velocity-stress equations into a combination of second order and zeroth order temporal derivative equations. When the second order stencil is applied to the new equation, there is no benefit compared to the original equation; when the fourth order Lax-Wendroff stencil is applied, the computational cost only doubles for each time step, which is 33% faster than the Lax-Wendroff stencil applied on the original equation. Both memory consumption and computational cost are compared among the four different numerical stencils, and a staggered grid Pseudo Spectral method is applied to prevent the numerical dispersion for computing the spatial derivatives. Numerical tests are performed on a 2D homogeneous media and a 2D line of the SEAM II Arid model. The results suggest that although the memory cost is increased, the Lax-Wendroff stencil applied to the second order temporal derivative equations is the optimal option in terms of the both accuracy and computational cost.

© 2020 Australian Society of Exploration Geophysicists
Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.1080/08123985.2020.1757997
2020-09-02
2026-01-18

  • From This Site

    /content/journals/10.1080/08123985.2020.1757997
    dcterms_title,dcterms_subject,pub_keyword
    -contentType:Journal -contentType:Contributor -contentType:Concept -contentType:Institution
    10
    5
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

References

  1. Aki, K., and P.Richards. 2002. Quantitative seismology. 2nd ed.Mill Valley, CA: University Science Books.
  2. Chu, C., P.Stoffa, and R.Seif. 2009. 3D elastic wave modeling using modified high-order time stepping schemes with improved stability conditions. SEG Technical Program Expanded Abstracts, 2662–6. doi:10.1190/1.3255400.
     https://doi.org/10.1190/1.3255400 [Google Scholar]
  3. Crase, E.1990. High-order (space and time) finite-difference modeling of the elastic wave equation. 60th Annual International Meeting, SEG Expanded Abstracts, 987–91. doi:10.1190/1.1890407.
     https://doi.org/10.1190/1.1890407 [Google Scholar]
  4. Dablain, M.A.1986. The application of high-order differencing to the scalar wave equation. Geophysics51: 54–66. doi:10.1190/1.1442040.
     https://doi.org/10.1190/1.1442040 [Google Scholar]
  5. Du, Q., C.Guo, Q.Zhao, X.Gong, C.Wang, and X.-Y.Li. 2017. Vector-based elastic reverse time migration based on scalar imaging condition. Geophysics82: S111–27. doi:10.1190/geo2016‑0146.1.
     https://doi.org/10.1190/geo2016-0146.1 [Google Scholar]
  6. Kelly, K., R.Ward, S.Treitel, and R.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]
  7. Lax, P.D., and B.Wendroff. 1964. Difference schemes for hyperbolic equations with high order of accuracy. Communications on Pure and Applied Mathematics17: 381–98. doi: 10.1002/cpa.3160170311
     https://doi.org/10.1002/cpa.3160170311 [Google Scholar]
  8. Li, Y., Y.Du, J.Yang, A.Cheng, and X.Fang. 2018. Elastic reverse time migration using acoustic propagators. Geophysics83: S399–S408. doi:10.1190/geo2017‑0687.1.
     https://doi.org/10.1190/geo2017-0687.1 [Google Scholar]
  9. Liu, H., B.Li, H.Liu, X.Tong, and Q.Liu. 2010. The algorithm of high order finite difference pre-stack reverse time migration and GPU implementation. Chinese Journal of Geophysics53: 1725–33. doi:10.1002/cjg2.1530.
     https://doi.org/10.1002/cjg2.1530 [Google Scholar]
  10. Liu, H., B.Li, H.Liu, X.Tong, and Q.Liu. 2012a. The issues of pre-stack reverse time migration and solutions with GPU implementation. Geophysical Prospecting60: 906–18. doi:10.1111/j.1365‑2478.2011.01032.x.
     https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2478.2011.01032.x [Google Scholar]
  11. Liu, H., H.Liu, X.Tong, and Q.Liu. 2012b. A Fourier integral algorithm and its GPU/CPU collaborative implementation for one-way wave equation migration. Computers & Geosciences45: 139–48. doi:10.1016/j.cageo.2011.10.029.
     https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cageo.2011.10.029 [Google Scholar]
  12. Liu, H., and H.Zhang. 2019. Reducing computation cost by Lax-Wendroff methods with fourth-order temporal accuracy. Geophysics84. doi:10.1190/geo2018‑0196.1.
     https://doi.org/10.1190/geo2018-0196.1 [Google Scholar]
  13. Liu, H., R.Ding, L.Liu, and H.Liu. 2013. Wavefield reconstruction methods for reverse time migration. Journal of Geophysics and Engineering10: 015004. doi:10.1088/1742‑2132/10/1/015004.
     https://doi.org/10.1088/1742-2132/10/1/015004 [Google Scholar]
  14. Luo, Y., and G.Schuster. 1990. Parsimonious staggered grid finite-differencing of the wave equation. Geophysical Research Letters17: 155–8. doi: 10.1029/GL017i002p00155.
     https://doi.org/10.1029/GL017i002p00155 [Google Scholar]
  15. Oristaglio, M.2015. SEAM update: The arid model – seismic exploration in desert terrains. The Leading Edge34: 466–8. doi:10.1190/tle34040466.1.
     https://doi.org/10.1190/tle34040466.1 [Google Scholar]
  16. Pitarka, A.1999. 3D elastic finite-difference modeling of seismic motion using staggered grids with non-uniform spacing. Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America89: 54–68.
     [Google Scholar]
  17. Sun, R., G.A.McMechan, C.-S.Lee, J.Chow, and C.-H.Chen. 2006. Prestack scalar reverse-time depth migration of 3D elastic seismic data. Geophysics71: S199–S207. doi:10.1190/1.2227519.
     https://doi.org/10.1190/1.2227519 [Google Scholar]
  18. Tang, C., and G.A.McMechan. 2017. Multidirectional-vector-based elastic reverse time migration and angle-domain common-image gathers with approximate wavefield decomposition of P-and S-waves. Geophysics83: S57–S79. doi:10.1190/segam2017‑17790704.1.
     https://doi.org/10.1190/segam2017-17790704.1 [Google Scholar]
  19. Virieux, J.1984. SH-wave propagation in heterogeneous media: Velocity stress finite-difference method. Geophysics49: 1933–42. doi:10.1190/1.1441605.
     https://doi.org/10.1190/1.1441605 [Google Scholar]
  20. 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]
  21. Wang, W., and G.A.McMechan. 2015. Vector-based elastic reverse time migration vector-based elastic RTM. Geophysics80: S245–S258. doi:10.1190/segam2017177‑75910.1.
     https://doi.org/10.1190/segam2017177-75910.1 [Google Scholar]
  22. Wapenaar, C., and G.Haimé. 1990. Elastic extrapolation of primary seismic p-and s-waves. Geophysical Prospecting38: 23–60. doi:10.1111/j.1365‑2478.1990.tb01833.x.
     https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2478.1990.tb01833.x [Google Scholar]
  23. Yan, J., and P.Sava. 2008. Isotropic angle-domain elastic reverse-time migration. Geophysics73: S229–39. doi:10.1190/1.2981241.
     https://doi.org/10.1190/1.2981241 [Google Scholar]
  24. Zhu, H.2017. Elastic wavefield separation based on the Helmholtz decomposition. Geophysics82: S173–83. doi:10.1190/geo2016‑0419.1.
     https://doi.org/10.1190/geo2016-0419.1 [Google Scholar]
/content/journals/10.1080/08123985.2020.1757997
Loading
An optimal numerical solver for elastic wave simulation
Exploration Geophysics 51, 591 (2020); https://doi.org/10.1080/08123985.2020.1757997
/content/journals/10.1080/08123985.2020.1757997
/content/journals/10.1080/08123985.2020.1757997
Loading

Data & Media loading...

  • Article Type: Research Article
Keyword(s): dispersion; Elastic; modelling; seismology; wave propagation

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