1887
Volume 65, Issue 5
  • E-ISSN: 1365-2478

Abstract

ABSTRACT

Certain degree of smoothness of velocity models is required for most ray‐based migration and tomography. Applying conventional smoothing in model parameters results in offset‐dependent travel‐time errors for reflected events, which can be large even for small contrasts in model parameters between the layers. This causes the shift in both the depth and residual moveout of the migrated images. To overcome this problem in transversely isotropic medium with a vertical symmetry axis, the preserved travel‐time smoothing method was proposed earlier. We extend this method for orthorhombic media with and without azimuthal variation between the layers. We illustrate this method for a single interface between two orthorhombic layers and show that the smoothing‐driven errors in travel time are very small for practical application.

Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.1111/1365-2478.12481
2016-11-29
2024-04-27
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

References

  1. AlkhalifahT.1998. Acoustic approximations for processing in transversely isotropic media. Geophysics63, 623–631.
    [Google Scholar]
  2. AlkhalifahT.2003. An acoustic wave equation for orthorhombic anisotropy. Geophysics68, 1169–1172.
    [Google Scholar]
  3. BainaR., ZamboniE. and LambaréG.2006. How to cope with smoothing effect in ray based PSDM. 68th EAGE Conference & Exhibition, Extended Abstracts.
    [Google Scholar]
  4. ČervenýV.2001. Seismic Ray Theory. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  5. FomelS. and StovasA.2010. Generalized nonhyperbolic moveout approximation. Geophysics75, U9–U18.
    [Google Scholar]
  6. GonzalezR. and WoodsR.2008. Digital Image Processing, 3rd edn. Prentice Hall.
    [Google Scholar]
  7. GrechkaV. and TsvankinI.1999a. 3‐D moveout velocity analysis and parameter estimation for orthorhombic media. Geophysics64, 820–837.
    [Google Scholar]
  8. GrechkaV. and TsvankinI.1999b. 3‐D moveout inversion in azimuthally anisotropic media with lateral velocity variation: theory and case study. Geophysics64, 1202–1218.
    [Google Scholar]
  9. SchoenbergM. and HelbigK.1997. Orthorhombic media: modeling elastic wave behavior in a vertically fractured earth. Geophysics62, 1954–1974.
    [Google Scholar]
  10. StovasA.2008. Kinematically equivalent velocity distributions. Geophysics73, VE369–VE375.
    [Google Scholar]
  11. StovasA.2015. Azimuthally dependent kinematic properties of orthorhombic media. Geophysics80, C107–C122.
    [Google Scholar]
  12. ThomsenL.1986. Weak elastic anisotropy. Geophysics51, 1954–1966.
    [Google Scholar]
  13. TsvankinI.1997. Anisotropic parameters and P‐wave velocity for orthorhombic media. Geophysics62, 1292–1309.
    [Google Scholar]
  14. TsvankinI.2012. Seismic signatures and analysis of reflection data in anisotropic media: SEG.
  15. VasconcelosI. and TsvankinI.2006. Non‐hyperbolic moveout inversion of wide‐azimuth P‐wave data for orthorhombic media. Geophysical Prospecting54, 535–552.
    [Google Scholar]
  16. VinjeV., IversenE., ÅstebølK. and GjøystdalH.1996. Estimation of multivalued arrivals in 3D models using wavefront construction, Part I. Geophysical Prospecting44, 819–842.
    [Google Scholar]
  17. VinjeV., StovasA. and ReynaudD.2012. Preserved‐traveltime smoothing. Geophysical Prospecting61, 380–390.
    [Google Scholar]
http://instance.metastore.ingenta.com/content/journals/10.1111/1365-2478.12481
Loading
/content/journals/10.1111/1365-2478.12481
Loading

Data & Media loading...

  • Article Type: Research Article
Keyword(s): Orthorhombic medium; Smoothing; Velocity model

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