1887
  1. Home
  2. A-Z Publications
  3. Geophysical Prospecting
  4. Volume 63, Issue 5
  5. Article
Volume 63, Issue 5
  • E-ISSN: 1365-2478

Abstract

ABSTRACT

The previous finite‐difference numerical schemes designed for direct application to second‐order elastic wave equations in terms of displacement components are strongly dependent on Poisson's ratio. This fact makes theses schemes useless for modelling in offshore regions or even in onshore regions where there is a high Poisson's ratio material. As is well known, the use of staggered‐grid formulations solves this drawback. The most common staggered‐grid algorithms apply central‐difference operators to the first‐order velocity–stress wave equations. They have been one of the most successfully applied numerical algorithms for seismic modelling, although these schemes require more computational memory than those mentioned based on second‐order wave equations. The goal of the present paper is to develop a general theory that enables one to formulate equivalent staggered‐grid schemes for direct application to hyperbolic second‐order wave equations. All the theory necessary to formulate these schemes is presented in detail, including issues regarding source application, providing a general method to construct staggered‐grid formulations to a wide range of cases. Afterwards, the equivalent staggered‐grid theory is applied to anisotropic elastic wave equations in terms of only velocity components (or similar displacements) for two important cases: general anisotropic media and vertical transverse isotropy media using, respectively, the rotated and the standard staggered‐grid configurations. For sake of simplicity, we present the schemes in terms of velocities in the second‐ and fourth‐order spatial approximations, with second‐order approximation in time for 2D media. However, the theory developed is general and can be applied to any set of second‐order equations (in terms of only displacement, velocity, or even stress components), using any staggered‐grid configuration with any spatial approximation order in 2D or 3D cases. Some of these equivalent staggered‐grid schemes require less computer memory than the corresponding standard staggered‐grid formulation, although the programming is more evolved. As will be shown in theory and practice, with numerical examples, the equivalent staggered‐grid schemes produce results equivalent to corresponding standard staggered‐grid schemes with computational advantages. Finally, it is important to emphasize that the equivalent staggered‐grid theory is general and can be applied to other modelling contexts, e.g., in electrodynamical and poroelastic wave propagation problems in a systematic and simple way.

Copyright © 2015 European Association of Geoscientists & Engineers © 2015 European Association of Geoscientists & Engineers
Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.1111/1365-2478.12210
2015-03-04
2024-04-23

  • From This Site

    /content/journals/10.1111/1365-2478.12210
    dcterms_title,dcterms_subject,pub_keyword
    -contentType:Journal -contentType:Contributor -contentType:Concept -contentType:Institution
    10
    5
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

References

  1. AndrewsD.1973. A numerical study of tectonic stress release by underground explosions. Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America63(4), 1375–1391.
     [Google Scholar]
  2. BécacheE., FauqueuxS. and JolyP., 2003. Stability of perfectly matched layers, group velocities and anisotropic waves. Journal of Computational Physics188(2), 399–433.
     [Google Scholar]
  3. BerengerJ.1994. A perfectly matched layer for the absorption of electromagnetic waves. Journal of computational physics114(2), 185–200.
     [Google Scholar]
  4. BohlenT. and SaengerE.H.2006. Accuracy of heterogeneous staggered‐grid finite‐difference modeling of rayleigh waves. Geophysics71(4), T109–T115.
     [Google Scholar]
  5. CerjanC., KosloffD., KosloffR. and ReshefM.1985. A nonreflecting boundary condition for discrete acoustic and elastic wave equations. Geophysics50(4), 705–708.
     [Google Scholar]
  6. DayS.1982. Three‐dimensional simulation of spontaneous rupture: the effect of nonuniform prestress. Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America72(6A), 1881.
     [Google Scholar]
  7. DiBartolo L., DorsC., and MansurW.J., 2012a. A new family of finite difference schemes to solve the heterogeneous acoustic wave equation. Geophysics77(5), T187–T199.
     [Google Scholar]
  8. Di BartoloL., DorsC. and MansurW.J.2012b. An efficient and simple acoustic–elastic FD coupling for offshore seismic simulations. SEG Technical Program, Expanded Abstracts.
  9. FariaE.L. and StoffaP.L.1994. Finite‐difference modeling in transversely isotropic media. Geophysics59(2), 282–289.
     [Google Scholar]
  10. GaoJ. and ZhangY.2013. Staggered‐grid finite difference method with variable‐order accuracy for porous media.Mathematical Problems in Engineering.
  11. GravesR.1996. Simulating seismic wave propagation in 3d elastic media using staggered‐grid finite differences. Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America86(4), 1091.
     [Google Scholar]
  12. HarlowF. and WelchJ.1965. Numerical calculation of time‐dependent viscous incompressible flow of fluid with free surface. The physics of Fluids8(12), 2182–2189.
     [Google Scholar]
  13. JianfengZ.1997. Quadrangle‐grid velocity–stress finite‐difference method for elastic‐wave‐propagation simulation. Geophysical Journal International131(1), 127–134.
     [Google Scholar]
  14. KellyK.R., WardR.W., TreitelS. and AlfordR.M.1976. Synthetic seismograms: a finite‐difference approach. Geophysics41(1), 2–27.
     [Google Scholar]
  15. LevanderA.R.1988. Fourth‐order finite‐difference P‐SV seismograms. Geophysics53(11), 1425–1436.
     [Google Scholar]
  16. LiZ.‐S., BaiC.‐Y. and SunY.‐C. 2013. Seismic wavefield simulation in 2D elastic and viscoelastic tilted transversely isotropic media: comparisons between four different kinds of finite‐difference grid schemes. Journal of Geophysics and Engineering. 10(4), 045005.
     [Google Scholar]
  17. LisitsaV., TcheverdaV. and VishnevskyD.2012. Numerical simulation of seismic waves in models with anisotropic formations: coupling virieux and lebedev finite‐difference schemes. Computational Geosciences16(4), 1135–1152.
     [Google Scholar]
  18. LiuY.2014. Optimal staggered‐grid finite‐difference schemes based on least‐squares for wave equation modelling. Geophysical Journal International197(2), 1033–1047.
     [Google Scholar]
  19. LiuY. and SenM.K.2009. Advanced finite‐difference methods for seismic modeling. Geohorizons14(2), 5–16.
     [Google Scholar]
  20. LongG., ZhaoY. and ZouJ.2013. A temporal fourth‐order scheme for the first‐order acoustic wave equations. Geophysical Journal International194(3), 1473–1485.
     [Google Scholar]
  21. LuoY. and SchusterG.1990. Parsimonious staggered grid finite‐differencing of the wave equation. Geophysical Research Letters17(2), 155–158.
     [Google Scholar]
  22. MadariagaR.1976. Dynamics of an expanding circular fault. Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America66(3), 639–666.
     [Google Scholar]
  23. MagnierS., MoraP. and TarantolaA.1994. Finite differences on minimal grids. Geophysics59(9), 1435–1443.
     [Google Scholar]
  24. MartinG., WileyR. and MarfurtK.2006. Marmousi2: An elastic upgrade for Marmousi. The Leading Edge25(2), 156–166.
     [Google Scholar]
  25. MoczoP., KristekJ., and HaladaL.2000. 3D fourth‐order staggered‐grid finite‐difference schemes: Stability and grid dispersion. Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America90(3), 587–603.
     [Google Scholar]
  26. MoczoP., KristekJ., VavryčukV., ArchuletaR.J. and HaladaL.2002. 3D heterogeneous staggered‐grid finite‐difference modeling of seismic motion with volume harmonic and arithmetic averaging of elastic moduli and densities. Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America92(8), 3042–3066.
     [Google Scholar]
  27. MoczoP., Kristek J., GalisM. and PazakP.2010. On accuracy of the finite‐difference and finite‐element schemes with respect to P‐wave to S‐wave speed ratio. Geophysical Journal International182(1), 493–510.
     [Google Scholar]
  28. ÖzdenvarT. and McMechanG.A.1997. Algorithms for staggered‐grid computations for poroelastic, elastic, acoustic, and scalar wave equations. Geophysical Prospecting45(3), 403–420.
     [Google Scholar]
  29. QianJ., WuS. and CuiR.2013. Accuracy of the staggered‐grid finite‐difference method of the acoustic wave equation for marine seismic reflection modeling. Chinese Journal of Oceanology and Limnology31(1), 169–177.
     [Google Scholar]
  30. ReynoldsA.C.1978. Boundary conditions for the numerical solution of wave propagation problems. Geophysics43(6), 1099–1110.
     [Google Scholar]
  31. SaengerE. and BohlenT., 2004. Finite‐difference modeling of viscoelastic and anisotropic wave propagation using the rotated staggered grid. Geophysics69(2), 583–591.
     [Google Scholar]
  32. SaengerE.H. and ShapiroS.A.2002. Effective velocities in fractured media: a numerical study using the rotated staggered finite‐difference grid. Geophysical Prospecting50(2), 183–194.
     [Google Scholar]
  33. SaengerE.H., GoldN. and ShapiroS.A.2000. Modeling the propagation of elastic waves using a modified finite‐difference grid. Wave Motion31(1), 77–92.
     [Google Scholar]
  34. StephenR.1988. A review of finite difference methods for seismo‐acoustics problems at the seafloor. Reviews of Geophysics26(3), 445–458.
     [Google Scholar]
  35. ThomsenL.1986. Weak elastic anisotropy. Geophysics51(10), 1954–1966.
     [Google Scholar]
  36. VirieuxJ.1986. P‐SV wave propagation in heterogeneous media: velocity–stress finite‐difference method. Geophysics51(4), 889–901.
     [Google Scholar]
  37. VirieuxJ., CalandraH. and PlessixR.‐E.2011. A review of the spectral, pseudo‐spectral, finite‐difference and finite‐element modelling techniques for geophysical imaging. Geophysical Prospecting 59(4), 794–813.
  38. WangX., ZhangH. and WangD.2003. Modelling of seismic wave propagation in heterogeneous poroelastic media using a high‐order staggered finite‐difference method. Chinese Journal of Geophysics ‐ Chinese Edition46(6), 1206–1217.
     [Google Scholar]
  39. WapenaarC.P.A., and BerkhoutA.J.1989. Elastic Wave Field Extrapolation: Redatuming of Single‐ and Multi‐Component Seismic Data . In: Advances in Exploration Geophysics, Vol. 2. Elsevier Science Ltd, New York.
     [Google Scholar]
  40. YasuiT., HasegawaK. and HirayamaK.2013. Implementation of free‐surface condition for finite‐difference time‐domain method using a staggered grid with the collocated grid points of velocities. Japanese Journal of Applied Physics52(7), 07HD07.
     [Google Scholar]
  41. YeeK.1966. Numerical solution of inital boundary value problems involving Maxwell's equations in isotropic media. IEEE Transactions on Antennas and Propagation14(3), 302–307.
     [Google Scholar]
http://instance.metastore.ingenta.com/content/journals/10.1111/1365-2478.12210
Loading
Theory of equivalent staggered‐grid schemes: application to rotated and standard grids in anisotropic media
Geophysical Prospecting 63, 1097 (2015); https://doi.org/10.1111/1365-2478.12210
/content/journals/10.1111/1365-2478.12210
/content/journals/10.1111/1365-2478.12210
Loading

Data & Media loading...

  • Article Type: Research Article
Keyword(s): Anisotropy; FD modelling; Staggered grids

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