1887
Volume 63 Number 1
  • E-ISSN: 1365-2478

Abstract

ABSTRACT

Scattered ground roll is a type of noise observed in land seismic data that can be particularly difficult to suppress. Typically, this type of noise cannot be removed using conventional velocity‐based filters. In this paper, we discuss a model‐driven form of seismic interferometry that allows suppression of scattered ground‐roll noise in land seismic data. The conventional cross‐correlate and stack interferometry approach results in scattered noise estimates between two receiver locations (i.e. as if one of the receivers had been replaced by a source). For noise suppression, this requires that each source we wish to attenuate the noise from is co‐located with a receiver. The model‐driven form differs, as the use of a simple model in place of one of the inputs for interferometry allows the scattered noise estimate to be made between a source and a receiver. This allows the method to be more flexible, as co‐location of sources and receivers is not required, and the method can be applied to data sets with a variety of different acquisition geometries. A simple plane‐wave model is used, allowing the method to remain relatively data driven, with weighting factors for the plane waves determined using a least‐squares solution. Using a number of both synthetic and real two‐dimensional (2D) and three‐dimensional (3D) land seismic data sets, we show that this model‐driven approach provides effective results, allowing suppression of scattered ground‐roll noise without having an adverse effect on the underlying signal.

Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.1111/1365-2478.12165
2014-10-21
2020-04-07
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

References

  1. AkiK. and RichardsP.G.2002. Quantitative Seismology. 2nd Edition, University Science Books.
  2. BakulinA. and CalvertR.2006. The virtual source method: Theory and case study. Geophysics71, SI139‐SI150.
    [Google Scholar]
  3. BlonkB. and HermanG.C.1996. Removal of scattered surface waves using multicomponent seismic data. Geophysics61, 1483–1488.
    [Google Scholar]
  4. BlonkB., HermanG.C. and DrijkoningenG.G.1995. An elastodynamic inverse scattering method for removing scattered surface waves from field data. Geophysics60, 1897–1905.
    [Google Scholar]
  5. CampmanX., van WijkK., RiyantiC.D., ScalesJ. and HermanG.2004. Imaging scattered seismic surface waves. Near Surface Geophysics2, 223–230.
    [Google Scholar]
  6. CurtisA. and HallidayD.2010. Source‐receiver wave field interferometry. Physical Review E, 81(4), 046601–1 – 046601–10.
    [Google Scholar]
  7. DongS., HeR. and SchusterG.2006. Interferometric prediction and least squares subtraction of surface waves. 76th SEG Annual International Meeting, Expanded Abstracts, 2783–2786.
  8. ErnstF., HermanG.C. and BlonkB.2002. Reduction of near‐surface scattering effects in seismic data. The Leading Edge17, 759.
    [Google Scholar]
  9. ErnstF., HermanG.C. and DitzelA.2002. Removal of scattered guided waves from seismic data. Geophysics67, 1240–1248.
    [Google Scholar]
  10. FoldyL. L.1945. The multiple scattering of waves: I: General theory of isotropic scattering by randomly distributed scatterers. Physical Review67(3), 107–119.
    [Google Scholar]
  11. ForghaniF. and SniederR.2010. Underestimation of body waves and feasibility of surface wave reconstruction by seismic interferometry. The Leading Edge29, 790–794.
    [Google Scholar]
  12. GaiserJ.E.1995. 3D prestack f‐x coherent noise suppression. 75th SEG Annual International Meeting, Expanded Abstracts, 14, 1354–1357.
  13. GalettiE., HallidayD. and CurtisA.2013, A simple and exact acoustic wavefield modelling code for data processing, imaging, and interferometry applications. Geophysics78(6), F17‐F27.
    [Google Scholar]
  14. GroenenboomJ. and SniederR.1995. Attenuation, dispersion, and anisotropy by multiple scattering of transmitted waves through distributions of scatterers. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America98, 3482–3492.
    [Google Scholar]
  15. HallidayD.2011. Adaptive interferometry for ground roll suppression. The Leading Edge30, 532–537.
    [Google Scholar]
  16. HallidayD. and CurtisA.2009. Seismic interferometry of scattered surface waves in attenuative media. Geophysical Journal International178, 419–446.
    [Google Scholar]
  17. HallidayD. and CurtisA.2010. An interferometric theory of source‐receiver scattering and imaging. Geophysics75(6), SA95–SA103.
    [Google Scholar]
  18. HallidayD., CurtisA., van‐ManenD.‐J. and RobertssonJ.O.A.2007. Interferometric surface wave isolation and removal. Geophysics72, A69‐A73.
    [Google Scholar]
  19. HallidayD., CurtisA., VermeerP., StrobbiaC., GlushchenkoA., van ManenD.‐J. and RobertssonJ.O.A.2010. Interferometric ground roll removal: attenuation of scattered surface waves from single‐sensor data. Geophysics75, 15–25.
    [Google Scholar]
  20. HaneyM. and DoumaH.2012. Rayleigh wave tomography at Coronation Field, Canada: The topography effect. The Leading Edge31, 54–61.
    [Google Scholar]
  21. HermanG.C. and PerkinsC.2006. Predictive removal of scattered noise. Geophysics71, V41‐V49.
    [Google Scholar]
  22. JiY., KraghE. and BagainiC.2010. Noise attenuation methods for point‐receiver land seismic data. 80thSEG Annual International Meeting, Expanded Abstracts, 29, 3545–3549.
  23. MorseP.F. and HildebrandtG.F.1989. Ground roll suppression by the stack array. Geophysics54, 290–301.
    [Google Scholar]
  24. ÖzbekA.2000a. Adaptive beamforming with generalized linear constraints. 70th SEG Annual International Meeting, Expanded Abstracts, 19, 2001–2084.
  25. ÖzbekA.2000b. Multichannel adaptive interference cancelling>. 70th SEG Annual International Meeting, Expanded Abstracts, 19, 2088–2091.
  26. RegoneC.J.1998. Suppression of coherent noise in 3‐D seismology. The Leading Edge17, 1584–1589.
    [Google Scholar]
  27. SambellR., Al‐MahrooqiA., MathenyC., Al‐AbriS. and Al‐YarubiS.2010. Land seismic super‐crew unlocks the Ara carbonate play of the Southern Oman Salt Basin with wide azimuth survey. First Break28(2).
    [Google Scholar]
  28. SniederR.2002. Scattering of surface waves. Scattering and Inverse Scattering in Pure and Applied Science, Academic Press, San Diego, 562–577.
  29. SniederR.2004. Extracting the Green's function from the correlation of coda waves: A derivation based on stationary phase. Physical Review E69, 046610.
    [Google Scholar]
  30. StrobbiaC., LaakeA., VermeerP. and GlushchenkoA.2011. Surface waves: use them then lose them. Surface‐wave analysis, inversion and attenuation in land reflection seismic surveying. Near Surface Geophysics9(6), 503–514.
    [Google Scholar]
  31. van ManenD.‐J., CurtisA. and RobertssonJ.O.A.2006. Interferometric modeling of wave propagation in inhomogeneous elastic media using time reversal and reciprocity. Geophysics71, SI47‐SI60.
    [Google Scholar]
  32. van ManenD.‐J., RobertssonJ.O.A. and CurtisA.2005. Modeling of wave propagation in inhomogeneous media. Physical Review Letters94, 164301–164304.
    [Google Scholar]
  33. VermeerG.J.O.2002. 3‐D Seismic Survey Design. Geophysical Reference Series12. Society of Exploration Geophysicists, Tulsa.
  34. WapenaarK.2003. Synthesis of an inhomogeneous medium from its acoustic transmission response. Geophysics68(5), 1756–1759.
  35. WapenaarK.2004. Retrieving the elastodynamic Green's function of an arbitrary inhomogeneous medium by cross correlation. Physical Review Letters93, 254301–254304.
    [Google Scholar]
  36. WapenaarK. and FokkemaJ.2006. Green's function representations for seismic interferometry. Geophysics71, SI33‐SI44.
    [Google Scholar]
  37. YilmazÖ.2001. Seismic Data Analysis. Investigations In Geophysics10. Society of Exploration Geophysicsts, Tulsa.
http://instance.metastore.ingenta.com/content/journals/10.1111/1365-2478.12165
Loading
/content/journals/10.1111/1365-2478.12165
Loading

Data & Media loading...

  • Article Type: Research Article
Keyword(s): Data processing , Noise and Seismics, scattered noise, seismic interferometry
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