1887
  1. Home
  2. A-Z Publications
  3. Geophysical Prospecting
  4. Volume 67, Issue 3
  5. Article
Volume 67, Issue 3
  • E-ISSN: 1365-2478

Abstract

ABSTRACT

Geophysical surveying of the Arctic will become increasingly important in future prospecting and monitoring of the terrestrial and adjacent areas in this hemisphere. Seismic data acquired on floating ice are hampered with extensive noise due to ice vibrations related to highly dispersive ice flexural waves generated by the seismic source. Several experiments have been conducted on floating ice in van Mijenfjorden in Svalbard in the Norwegian Arctic to specifically analyse the extent of flexural waves recorded with various seismic receivers and sources deployed both on top of ice and in the water below. The data show that flexural waves are severely damped at 5 m or deeper below the ice and hydrophone data suffer less from these vibrations compared with data recorded on the ice. Aliasing of single receiver hydrophone data can to some extent be suppressed using an in‐line line source of detonating cord. Experiments on ice on shallow water show prominent guided wave modes often referred to as Scholte waves propagating along the seabed. In this case, both flexural and Scholte waves interfere and make a complicated pattern of coherent noise. On shallow water, the positioning and type of the seismic source must be evaluated with respect to the coherent noise generated by these waves. Geophone strings of 25 m effectively suppress both flexural and Scholte waves due to their relative short wavelengths. An airgun generates relative more low‐frequency energy than a surface source of detonating cord. Accordingly, seismic mapping of deep seismic horizons seem to be best achieved using geophone strings of such length and an airgun source. For shallow targets, the use of hydrophones in combination with detonating cord is an appropriate solution. Seismic surveying in the Arctic always have to follow environmental restrictions of not disturbing or harming wildlife and not causing permanent footprints into the vulnerable tundra, which implies that the choice of seismic acquisition strategy might occur as a trade‐off between optimum data quality and environmental constraints.

© 2019 European Association of Geoscientists & Engineers © 2019 European Association of Geoscientists & Engineers
Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.1111/1365-2478.12756
2019-03-01
2024-04-20

  • From This Site

    /content/journals/10.1111/1365-2478.12756
    dcterms_title,dcterms_subject,pub_keyword
    -contentType:Journal -contentType:Contributor -contentType:Concept -contentType:Institution
    10
    5
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

References

  1. AkiK. and RichardsP.G.1980. Quantitative Seismology, Theory and Methods,Vol. I. W. H. Freeman, San Francisco.
     [Google Scholar]
  2. BarrF.J., NylandD.L. and SittonG.A.1993. Attenuation of flexural ice waves and random noise using both geophones and hydrophones. 63rd SEG annual international meeting, Expanded Abstracts, P558–P561.
  3. Beresford‐SmithG. and RangoR.N.1988. Dispersive noise removal in T‐X space: application to arctic data. Geophysics53, 346–358.
     [Google Scholar]
  4. BoieroD., WiardaE. and VermeerP.2013. Surface‐ and guided‐wave inversion for near‐surface modeling in land and shallow marine seismic data. The Leading Edge6, 638–646.
     [Google Scholar]
  5. CremerL., HecklM. and PeterssonB.A.T.2005. Survey of wave types and characteristics. In: Structure‐Borne Sound, pp. 27–148. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg.
     [Google Scholar]
  6. CrightonD.G.1979. The free and forced waves on a fluid‐loaded elastic plate. Journal of Sound and Vibration63, 225–235.
     [Google Scholar]
  7. DavidsonM.E, JorgensenP.R., RosenbladtR.L., SandroniS., Del MolinoG. and BaudoS.2008. 2007 Arctic on‐ice seismic experiment: operations and results from a 2D/3D seismic program to investigate mitigation of the ice flexural wave. 78th SEG annual international meeting, Expanded Abstracts, P21–P24.
  8. Del MolinoG., RovettaD., MazzucchelliP., SandroniS., RizzoF. and AndreolettiC.2008. Seismic exploration on ice: the flexural wave noise challenge. 78th SEG annual international meeting, Expanded Abstracts, P2571–P2575.
  9. EwingM. and CraryA.P.1934. Propagation of elastic waves in ice. Part II. Physics5, 181–184.
     [Google Scholar]
  10. EwingM., CraryA.P. and ThorneA.M.1934. Propagation of elastic waves in ice. Part I. Physics5, 165–168.
     [Google Scholar]
  11. HallK.W., NietoC.E., GallantE.V. and StewartR.R.2001. Multicomponent seismic survey over ground‐fast and floating ice, MacKenzie Delta North West Territories. CREWES Research Report13, 29–45.
     [Google Scholar]
  12. HenleyD.C.2006. Attenuating the ice flexural wave on arctic seismic data. 76th SEG annual international meeting, Expanded Abstracts, P2757–P2761.
  13. HunkinsK.1960. Seismic studies of sea ice. Journal of Geophysical Research65, 3459–3472.
     [Google Scholar]
  14. JohansenT.A., DigranesP., Van SchaackM. and LønneI.2003. Seismic mapping and modeling of near‐surface sediments in polar areas. Geophysics68, 566–573.
     [Google Scholar]
  15. JohansenT.A., RuudB.O., BakkeN.E., RisteP., JohannessenE.P. and HenningsenT.2011. Seismic profiling on arctic glaciers. First Break29, 65–71.
     [Google Scholar]
  16. KhaidukovV.G., NeklyudovD.A., SilvestrovI.Y., ProtasovM.I., TcheverdaV.A., ReshetovaG.V.et al. 2016. Enhancement of seismic data gathered by floating ice acquisition: application of local kinematic attributes. 86th SEG Annual International Meeting, Expanded Abstracts, P4654–P4658.
  17. KhaidukovV.G.2007. Study of seismic wave fields in transit zones. 69th EAGE Conference and Exhibition, Expanded Abstracts.
  18. KristoffersenY., TholfsenA., HallJ. and SteinR.2016. Scientists spend arctic winter adrift on sea ice. Earth & Space Science News 97.
  19. KuglerS., BohlenT., BussatS. and KleinG.2005. Variability of Scholte‐wave dispersion in shallow‐water marine sediments. Journal of Environmental and Engineering Geophysics10, 203–218.
     [Google Scholar]
  20. LambH.1889. On the flexure of an elastic plate. Proceedings of the London Mathematical Societys1–s21, 70–91.
     [Google Scholar]
  21. LambH.1917. On waves in an elastic plate. Proceedings of the Royal Society A: Mathematical, Physical and Engineering Sciences93, 114–128.
     [Google Scholar]
  22. LansleyR.M., EilertP.L. and NylandD.L.1984. Surface sources on floating ice: the flexural ice wave. 52nd SEG annual international meeting, Expanded Abstracts, P828–P831.
  23. ParrishJ., PalmN. and BellM.2015. Equalizing sensitivity of transformer coupled hydrophones. 85th SEG annual international meeting, Expanded Abstracts, P140–P144.
  24. PressF. and EwingM.1951a. Propagation of elastic waves in a floating ice sheet. Transactions, American Geophysical Union32, 673–678.
     [Google Scholar]
  25. PressF. and EwingM.1951b. Theory of air‐coupled flexural waves. Journal of Applied Physics22, 892–899.
     [Google Scholar]
  26. ProubastaD.1985. Ice saw – an incisive solution to seismic noise. The Leading Edge4, 18–23.
     [Google Scholar]
  27. RendlemanC.A. and LevinF.K.1990. Seismic exploration on a floating ice sheet. Geophysics55, 402–409.
     [Google Scholar]
  28. RomanovI.P., KonstantinovY.B. and KornilovN.A.1997. Ice Drift Stations 'North Pole' (1937‐1991). Condensed English Version. Gidrometeoizdat.
     [Google Scholar]
  29. RovettaD., MazzucchelliP., Del MolinoG. and SandroniS.2009a. Parsimonious flexural ice wave modelling in complex media. 71st EAGE Conference and Exhibition, Expanded Abstracts.
  30. RovettaD., MazzucchelliP., Del MolinoG. and SandroniS.2009b. Flexural ice wave: modelling by analytical approach. 79th SEG Annual International Meeting, Expanded Abstracts, P2562–P2566.
     [Google Scholar]
  31. ShtivelmanV.2004. Estimating shear wave velocities below the sea bed using surface waves. Near Surface Geophysics22, 241–247.
     [Google Scholar]
  32. SunwallD.A., SpeeceM.A. and PekarS.F.2012. Advances in on‐sea‐ice seismic reflection methods using an air gun: McMurdo Sound, Antarctica. Geophysics77, S19–S30.
     [Google Scholar]
  33. TruppR., HastingsJ., CheadleS. and VeselyR.2009. Seismic in arctic environs: meeting the challenge. The Leading Edge28, 936–942.
     [Google Scholar]
  34. ViktorovI.A.1967. Rayleigh and Lamb Waves. Plenum Press, New York.
     [Google Scholar]
  35. YangT.C. and YatesT.W.1995. Flexural waves in a floating ice sheet: modeling and comparison with data. The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America97, 971–977.
     [Google Scholar]
http://instance.metastore.ingenta.com/content/journals/10.1111/1365-2478.12756
Loading
Seismic on floating ice: data acquisition versus flexural wave noise
Geophysical Prospecting 67, 532 (2019); https://doi.org/10.1111/1365-2478.12756
/content/journals/10.1111/1365-2478.12756
/content/journals/10.1111/1365-2478.12756
Loading

Data & Media loading...

  • Article Type: Research Article
Keyword(s): Flexural wave; Noise; Seismic acquisition

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