1887
  • ISSN: 1443-2471
  • E-ISSN: 1836-084X

There is no abstract available.

Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.1080/14432471.2024.2395647
2024-05-03
2026-01-15
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

/deliver/fulltext/texp20/2024/230/14432471.2024.2395647.html?itemId=/content/journals/10.1080/14432471.2024.2395647&mimeType=html&fmt=ahah

References

  1. Bertram, M. B., and G. F.Margrave. 2011. Recovery of Low Frequency Data from 10Hz Geophones. Paper read at CSPG CSEG CWLS Convention.
    [Google Scholar]
  2. Chiu, S. K., P.Eick, M.Davidson, J.Malloy, and J.Howell. 2012. The feasibility and value of low-frequency data collected using co-located 2 Hz and 10 Hz geophones. In SEG Technical Program Expanded Abstracts 2012.
    [Google Scholar]
  3. Dean, T., P.Claasen, and B.McCarthy. 2014. Field Measurements of the Distortion Resulting from the Use of Tilted Geophones. In Proceedings 76th EAGE Conference and Exhibition 2014.
    [Google Scholar]
  4. Dean, T., M.Grant, R.Barnwell, and D.Barry. 2021. A large-scale study of the reliability of land nodal seismic recording systems. First Break:39 (1), 69-74. doi: 10.3997/1365‑2397.fb2021004
    https://doi.org/10.3997/1365-2397.fb2021004 [Google Scholar]
  5. Dean, T., M.Grant, and H.Nguyen. 2020. Quality control of land nodal seismic recording systems. First Break:38 (1), 53-58. doi: 10.3997/1365‑2397.fb2020002
    https://doi.org/10.3997/1365-2397.fb2020002 [Google Scholar]
  6. Dean, T., A.Shem, and M.Al Hasani. 2018. Methods for reducing unwanted noise (and increasing signal) in passive seismic surveys. In Australasian Exploration Geoscience Conference.
    [Google Scholar]
  7. Dean, T., and D.Sweeney. 2019. The use of nodal seismic acquisition systems to acquire limited-scale surveys. First Break: 37 (1), 55-60. doi: 10.3997/1365‑2397.n0007
    https://doi.org/10.3997/1365-2397.n0007 [Google Scholar]
  8. Dean, T., J. C.Dupuis, and R.Hassan. 2015. The coherency of ambient seismic noise recorded during land surveys and the resulting implications for the effectiveness of geophone arrays. Geophysics: 80, 1-10. doi: 10.1190/geo2014‑0280.1
    https://doi.org/10.1190/geo2014-0280.1 [Google Scholar]
  9. Faber, K., and P. W.Maxwell. 1996. Geophone spurious frequency: What is it and how does it affect seismic data?In SEG Technical Program Expanded Abstracts.
    [Google Scholar]
  10. Krohn, C.E., 1984. Geophone ground coupling. Geophysics: 49 (6), 722-731. doi: 10.1190/1.1441700
    https://doi.org/10.1190/1.1441700 [Google Scholar]
  11. Manning, T., D.Ablyazina, and J.Quigley. 2019. The nimble node — Million–channel land recording systems have arrived. The Leading Edge: 38 (9),706-714. doi: 10.1190/tle38090706.1
    https://doi.org/10.1190/tle38090706.1 [Google Scholar]
  12. Margrave, G.F., M.B.Bertram, K.L.Bertram, K.W.Hall, K.A.H.Innanen, D.C.Lawton, L.E.Mewhort, T.M.Phillips, and M.Hall. 2012. A field experiment recording low seismic frequencies. Paper read at GeoConvention.
    [Google Scholar]
  13. Pap, A.1984. Criteria for the selection of geophone parameters, hookups, phone spacing, and low-Cut instrument filters. Paper read at SEG Technical Program Expanded Abstracts.
    [Google Scholar]
  14. Regone, C. J.1998. Suppression of coherent noise in 3-D seismology. The Leading Edge: 17, 1584-1589. doi: 10.1190/1.1437900
    https://doi.org/10.1190/1.1437900 [Google Scholar]
  15. Tessman, J., B.Reichert, J.Marsh, J.Gannon, and H.Goldberg. 2001. MEMS for geophysicists. Paper read at SEG Technical Program Expanded Abstract.
    [Google Scholar]
/content/journals/10.1080/14432471.2024.2395647
Loading
/content/journals/10.1080/14432471.2024.2395647
Loading

Data & Media loading...

  • Article Type: Other
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