1887
Volume 52, Issue 3
  • ISSN: 0812-3985
  • E-ISSN: 1834-7533

Abstract

The advantage of the finite element method (FEM) lies in its flexibility in addressing rugged interfaces in complex geological models. However, the efficiency of the FEM is relatively low for large-scale seismic wave modelling. Here, we introduce an order-corrected symplectic FEM (OCSFEM) with structure-preserving properties and parsimonious memory requirements for the elastic wave equation. In this method, the storage of the large sparse stiffness matrix is changed to the storage of the element Jacobian matrix. An efficient order-corrected symplectic method with third-order temporal accuracy is combined with a triangle-based FEM to construct the OCSFEM. The structure-preserving characteristics and high efficiency of the OCSFEM facilitate the high-fidelity modelling of large-scale and long-term wave phenomena. Complex and large-scale numerical examples show that the OCSFEM exhibits low numerical dispersion and high stability compared with conventional methods, such as the second-order symplectic FEM.

© 2020 Australian Society of Exploration Geophysicists
Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.1080/08123985.2020.1826889
2021-05-04
2026-01-12

  • From This Site

    /content/journals/10.1080/08123985.2020.1826889
    dcterms_title,dcterms_subject,pub_keyword
    -contentType:Journal -contentType:Contributor -contentType:Concept -contentType:Institution
    10
    5
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

References

  1. Alford, R., K.Kelly, and D.M.Boore. 1974. Accuracy of finite-difference modeling of the acoustic wave equation. Geophysics39: 834–42. doi:10.1190/1.1440470.
     [Google Scholar]
  2. Barsoum, R.S.1976. On the use of isoparametric finite elements in linear fracture mechanics. International Journal for Numerical Methods in Engineering10: 25–37. doi:10.1002/nme.1620100103.
     [Google Scholar]
  3. Basabe, J.D.D., and M.K.Sen. 2007. Grid dispersion and stability criteria of some common finite-element methods for acoustic and elastic wave equations. Geophysics72: T81–T95. doi:10.1190/1.2785046.
     [Google Scholar]
  4. Bohlen, T., and F.Wittkamp. 2016. Three-dimensional viscoelastic time-domain finite-difference seismic modelling using the staggered Adams–Bashforth time integrator. Geophysical Journal International204: 1781–88. doi:10.1093/gji/ggv546.
     [Google Scholar]
  5. Chen, J.B.2006. Modeling the scalar wave equation with Nystrom methods. Geophysics71: T151–T158. doi: 10.1190/1.2335505
     https://doi.org/10.1190/1.2335505 [Google Scholar]
  6. Chen, J.B.2007. High-order time discretizations in seismic modeling. Geophysics72: SM115–SM122. doi:10.1190/1.2750424.
     [Google Scholar]
  7. Chen, J.B.2009. Lax-Wendroff and Nyström methods for seismic modelling. Geophysical Prospecting57: 931–941. doi:10.1111/j.1365-2478.2009.00802.x.
     [Google Scholar]
  8. Chen, J.B.2013. A generalized optimal 9-point scheme for frequency-domain scalar wave equation. Journal of Applied Geophysics92: 1–7. doi:10.1016/j.jappgeo.2013.02.008.
     [Google Scholar]
  9. Cohen, G.C.2001. Higher-order numerical methods for transient wave equations. New York: Springer.
  10. Dablain, M.A.1986. The application of high-differencing to the scalar wave equation. Geophysics51: 54–66. doi:10.1190/1.1442040.
     [Google Scholar]
  11. De Basabe, J.D., and M.K.Sen. 2010. Stability of the high-order finite elements for acoustic or elastic wave propagation with high-order time stepping. Geophysical Journal International181: 577–90. doi:10.1111/j.1365-246x.2010.04536.x.
     [Google Scholar]
  12. De Hoop, A.1960. A modification of Cagniard’s method for solving seismic pulse problems. Applied Scientific Research, Section B8: 349–56. doi:10.1007/BF02920068.
     [Google Scholar]
  13. Dong, X.P., and D.Yang. 2017. Numerical modeling of the 3-D seismic wavefield with the spectral element method in spherical coordinates. Chinese Journal of Geophysics(in Chinese)60: 4671–80. doi:10.6038/cjg20171211.
     [Google Scholar]
  14. Dutto, L.C., C.Y.Lepage, and W.G.Habashi. 2000. Effect of the storage format of sparse linear systems on parallel CFD computations. Computer Methods in Applied Mechanics & Engineering188: 441–53. doi:10.1016/s0045-7825(99)00166-8.
     [Google Scholar]
  15. Feng, K., and M.Z.Qin. 2010. Symplectic geometric algorithms for Hamiltonian systems. Berlin: Springer.
  16. Ham, S., B.Lai, and K.J.Bathe. 2014. The method of finite spheres for wave propagation problems. Computers & Structures142: 1–14. doi:10.1016/j.compstruc.2014.05.012.
     [Google Scholar]
  17. Hestholm, S., and B.Ruud. 1994. 2D finite-difference elastic wave modeling including surface topography. Geophysical Prospecting42: 371–90. doi:10.1111/j.1365-2478.1994.tb00216.x.
     [Google Scholar]
  18. Hou, J., Y.Liu, H.Lan, T.Xu, and Z.Bai. 2018. Elastic reverse time migration using a topography flattening scheme. Chinese Journal of Geophysics (in Chinese)61: 1434–46.
     [Google Scholar]
  19. Hu, X., and X.Jia. 2016. A dynamic lattice method for elastic seismic modeling in anisotropic media. Geophysics81: T131–T143. doi:10.1190/geo2015-0511.1.
     [Google Scholar]
  20. Iwatsu, R.2009. Two new solutions to the third-order symplectic integration method. Physics Letters A373: 3056–3060. doi:10.1016/j.physleta.2009.06.048.
     [Google Scholar]
  21. Komatitsch, D., C.Barnes, and J.Tromp. 2000. Simulation of anisotropic wave propagation based upon a spectral element method. Geophysics65: 1251–60. doi: 10.1190/1.1444816
     https://doi.org/10.1190/1.1444816 [Google Scholar]
  22. Komatitsch, D., and J.Tromp. 2002a. The spectral-element method, Beowulf computing, and global seismology. Science298: 1737–42. doi:10.1126/science.1076024.
     [Google Scholar]
  23. Komatitsch, D., and J.Tromp. 2002b. Spectral-element simulations of global seismic wave propagation—I. Validation. Geophysical Journal International149: 390–412. doi:10.1046/j.1365-246X.2002.01653.x.
     [Google Scholar]
  24. Komatitsch, D., and J.Tromp. 2003. A perfectly matched layer absorbing boundary condition for the second-order seismic wave equation. Geophysical Journal International154: 146–53. doi:10.1046/j.1365-246X.2003.01950.x.
     [Google Scholar]
  25. Komatitsch, D., and J.P.Vilotte. 1998. The spectral element method. An efficient tool to simulate the seismic response of 2D and 3D geological structures. Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America88: 368–92.
     [Google Scholar]
  26. Kosloff, D.D., and E.Baysal. 1982. Forward modeling by a Fourier method. Geophysics47: 1402–12. doi:10.1190/1.1441288.
     [Google Scholar]
  27. Li, B.F., X.P.Dong, X.F.Li, and J.G. Si. 2019, Structure-preserving modeling of teleseismic wavefield using symplectic SEM-FK hybrid method. Chinese Journal of Geophysics(in Chinese), 62, 4339-52. doi: 10.6038/cjg2019M0688
     https://doi.org/10.6038/cjg2019M0688 [Google Scholar]
  28. Li, X.F., W.S.Wang, M.W.Lu, M.G.Zhang, and Y.Q.Li. 2012. Structure-preserving modelling of elastic waves: A symplectic discrete singular convolution differentiator method. Geophysical Journal International188: 1382–92. doi:10.1111/j.1365-246x.2011.05344.x.
     [Google Scholar]
  29. Liu, S.L., C.Lang, H.Yang, and W.Wang. 2018. A developed nearly analytic discrete method for forward modeling in the frequency domain. Journal of Applied Geophysics149: 25–34. doi: 10.1016/j.jappgeo.2017.12.007
     https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jappgeo.2017.12.007 [Google Scholar]
  30. Liu, S.L., X.F.Li, W.S.Wang, and Y.S.Liu. 2014a. A mixed-grid finite element method with PML absorbing boundary conditions for seismic wave modelling. Journal of Geophysics and Engineering11: 055009. doi:10.1088/1742-2132/11/5/055009.
     [Google Scholar]
  31. Liu, S.L., X.F.Li, W.S.Wang, Y.S.Liu, M.G.Zhang, and H.Zhang. 2014b. A new kind of optimal second-order symplectic scheme for seismic wave simulations. Science China Earth Sciences57: 751–58. doi: 10.1007/s11430‑013‑4805‑0
     https://doi.org/10.1007/s11430-013-4805-0 [Google Scholar]
  32. Liu, S.L., X.F.Li, W.S.Wang, and T.Zhu. 2015. Source wavefield reconstruction using a linear combination of the boundary wavefield in reverse time migration. Geophysics80: S203–S212. doi: 10.1190/geo2015‑0109.1
     https://doi.org/10.1190/geo2015-0109.1 [Google Scholar]
  33. Liu, S.L., D.H.Yang, C.Lang, W.S.Wang, and Z.D.Pan. 2017a. Modified symplectic nearly-analytic discrete methods for acoustic wave simulations. Computer Physics Communications213: 52–63. doi:10.1016/j.cpc.2016.12.002.
     [Google Scholar]
  34. Liu, S.L., D.H.Yang, and J.Ma. 2017b. A modified symplectic PRK scheme for seismic wave modeling. Computers & Geosciences99: 28–36. doi:10.1016/j.cageo.2016.11.001.
     [Google Scholar]
  35. Liu, Y.S., J.W.Teng, H.Q.Lan, X.Si, and X.Y.Ma. 2014. A comparative study of finite element and spectral element methods in seismic wavefield modeling. Geophysics79: T91–T104. doi: 10.1190/geo2013‑0018.1
     https://doi.org/10.1190/geo2013-0018.1 [Google Scholar]
  36. Liu, Y.S., J.W.Teng, T.Xu, and J.Badal. 2017. Higher-order triangular spectral element method with optimized cubature points for seismic wavefield modeling. Journal of Computational Physics336: 458–480. doi: 10.1016/j.jcp.2017.01.069
     https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcp.2017.01.069 [Google Scholar]
  37. Marfurt, K.J.1984. Accuracy of finite-difference and finite-element modeling of the scalar and elastic wave equations. Geophysics49: 533–49. doi:10.1190/1.1441689.
     [Google Scholar]
  38. Meng, W., and L.Y.Fu. 2017. Seismic wavefield simulation by a modified finite element method with a perfectly matched layer absorbing boundary. Journal of Geophysics & Engineering14: 852–64. doi:10.1088/1742-2140/aa6b31.
     [Google Scholar]
  39. Moczo, P.1989. Finite-difference technique for SH-waves in 2-D media using irregular grids-application to the seismic response problem. Geophysical Journal International99: 321–29. doi:10.1111/j.1365-246X.1989.tb01691.x.
     [Google Scholar]
  40. Moczo, P., J.Kristek, and L.Halada. 2000. 3D fourth-order staggered-grid finite-difference schemes. Stability and grid dispersion. Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America90: 587–603. doi:10.1785/0119990119.
     [Google Scholar]
  41. Mullen, R., and T.Belytschko. 1982. Dispersion analysis of finite element semidiscretizations of the two-dimensional wave equation. International Journal for Numerical Methods in Engineering18: 11–29. doi: 10.1002/nme.1620180103
     https://doi.org/10.1002/nme.1620180103 [Google Scholar]
  42. Okunbor, D., and R.D.Skeel. 1992. Explicit canonical methods for Hamiltonian systems. Mathematics of Computation59: 439–55. doi:10.2307/2153066. doi: 10.1090/S0025‑5718‑1992‑1136225‑3
     https://doi.org/10.1090/S0025-5718-1992-1136225-3 [Google Scholar]
  43. Padovani, E., E.Priolo, and G.Seriani. 1994. Low and high order finite element method. Experience in seismic modeling. Journal of Computational Acoustics2: 371–422. doi:10.1142/S0218396X94000233.
     [Google Scholar]
  44. Patera, A.T.1984. A spectral element method for fluid dynamics. Laminar flow in a channel expansion. Journal of Computational Physics54: 468–88. doi:10.1016/0021-9991(84)90128-1.
     [Google Scholar]
  45. Qin, M.Z., and M.Q.Zhang. 1990. Multistage symplectic schemes of two kinds of Hamiltonian systems for wave equations. Computers & Mathematics with Applications19: 51–62.
     [Google Scholar]
  46. Qu, Y., J.Huang, Z.Li, and J.Li. 2017. A hybrid grid method in an auxiliary coordinate system for irregular fluid-solid interface modelling. Geophysical Journal International208: 1540–56. doi:10.1093/gji/ggw429.
     [Google Scholar]
  47. Ruth, R.D.1983. A canonical integration technique. IEEE Transactions on Nuclear Science30: 2669–71. doi: 10.1109/TNS.1983.4332919
     https://doi.org/10.1109/TNS.1983.4332919 [Google Scholar]
  48. Seriani, G.2007. Optimal blended spectral-element operators for acoustic wave modeling. Geophysics72: 95. doi:10.1190/1.2750715.
     [Google Scholar]
  49. Su, B., X.Tuo, and L.Xu. 2017. Two modified symplectic partitioned Runge-Kutta methods for solving the elastic wave equation. Journal of Geophysics & Engineering14: 811–21. doi:10.1088/1742-2140/aa6e7a.
     [Google Scholar]
  50. Takekawa, J., R.Madariaga, H.Mikada, and T.N.Goto. 2012. Numerical simulation of seismic wave propagation produced by earthquake by using a particle method. Geophysical Journal International191: 1305–16. doi:10.1111/j.1365-246X.2012.05676.x.
     [Google Scholar]
  51. Takekawa, J., H.Mikada, and T.-N.Goto. 2014. A Hamiltonian particle method with a staggered particle technique for simulating seismic wave propagation. Pure and Applied Geophysics171: 1747–57. doi:10.1007/s00024-013-0763-x.
     [Google Scholar]
  52. Takougang, E.M.T., and A.J.Calvert. 2011. Application of waveform tomography to marine seismic reflection data from the Queen Charlotte Basin of western Canada. Geophysics76: B55–B70. doi:10.1190/1.3553478.
     [Google Scholar]
  53. Tong, P., C.Chen, D.Komatitsch, P.Basini, and Q.Liu. 2014. High-resolution seismic array imaging based on a SEM-FK hybrid method. Geophysical Journal International197: 368–95. doi: 10.1093/gji/ggt508
     https://doi.org/10.1093/gji/ggt508 [Google Scholar]
  54. 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]
  55. Virieux, J., H.Calandra, and R.E.Plessix. 2011. A review of the spectral, pseudo-spectral, finite-difference and finite-element modelling techniques for geophysical imaging. Geophysical Prospecting59: 794–813. doi:10.1111/j.1365-2478.2011.00967.x.
     [Google Scholar]
  56. Virieux, J., and S.Operto. 2009. An overview of full-waveform inversion in exploration geophysics. Geophysics74: WCC1–WCC26. doi: 10.1190/1.3238367
     https://doi.org/10.1190/1.3238367 [Google Scholar]
  57. Wei, Z., and X.Chen. 2006. Traction image method for irregular free surface boundaries in finite difference seismic wave simulation. Geophysical Journal International167: 337–53. doi:10.1111/j.1365-246X.2006.03113.x.
     [Google Scholar]
  58. Whitmore, N., and L.R.Lines. 1986. Vertical seismic profiling depth migration of a salt dome flank. Geophysics51: 1087–09. doi: 10.1190/1.1442164
     https://doi.org/10.1190/1.1442164 [Google Scholar]
  59. Wu, S.R.2006. Lumped mass matrix in explicit finite element method for transient dynamics of elasticity. Computer Methods in Applied Mechanics & Engineering195: 5983–94. doi:10.1016/j.cma.2005.10.008.
     [Google Scholar]
  60. Yang, D.H., J.W.Teng, Z.J.Zhang, and E.R.Liu. 2003. A nearly analytic discrete method for acoustic and elastic wave equations in anisotropic media. Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America93: 882–90. doi:10.1785/0120020125.
     [Google Scholar]
  61. Yang, D.H., L.Wang, and X.Y.Deng. 2010. An explicit split-step algorithm of the implicit Adams method for solving 2-D acoustic and elastic wave equations. Geophysical Journal International180: 291–310. doi:10.1111/j.1365-246x.2009.04407.x.
     [Google Scholar]
  62. Yoshida, H.1990. Construction of higher order symplectic integrators. Physics Letters A150: 262–8. doi:10.1016/0375-9601(90)90092-3.
     [Google Scholar]
  63. Zhang, Y., and G.Zhang. 2009. One-step extrapolation method for reverse time migration. Geophysics74: A29–A33. doi: 10.1190/1.3123476
     https://doi.org/10.1190/1.3123476 [Google Scholar]
/content/journals/10.1080/08123985.2020.1826889
Loading
Order-corrected symplectic finite element method for elastic wave modelling
Exploration Geophysics 52, 321 (2021); https://doi.org/10.1080/08123985.2020.1826889
/content/journals/10.1080/08123985.2020.1826889
/content/journals/10.1080/08123985.2020.1826889
Loading

Data & Media loading...

  • Article Type: Research Article
Keyword(s): elastic wave equation; Finite element method; numerical dispersion; order-corrected symplectic method; stability condition

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