1887
Volume 68, Issue 5
  • E-ISSN: 1365-2478

Abstract

ABSTRACT

Deconvolution is an essential step for high‐resolution imaging in seismic data processing. The frequency and phase of the seismic wavelet change through time during wave propagation as a consequence of seismic absorption. Therefore, wavelet estimation is the most vital step of deconvolution, which plays the main role in seismic processing and inversion. Gabor deconvolution is an effective method to eliminate attenuation effects. Since Gabor transform does not prepare the information about the phase, minimum‐phase assumption is usually supposed to estimate the phase of the wavelet. This manner does not return the optimum response where the source wavelet would be dominantly a mixed phase. We used the kurtosis maximization algorithm to estimate the phase of the wavelet. First, we removed the attenuation effect in the Gabor domain and computed the amplitude spectrum of the source wavelet; then, we rotated the seismic trace with a constant phase to reach the maximum kurtosis. This procedure was repeated in moving windows to obtain the time‐varying phase changes. After that, the propagating wavelet was generated to solve the inversion problem of the convolutional model. We showed that the assumption of minimum phase does not reflect a suitable response in the case of mixed‐phase wavelets. Application of this algorithm on synthetic and real data shows that subtle reflectivity information could be recovered and vertical seismic resolution is significantly improved.

Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.1111/1365-2478.12913
2020-03-31
2024-04-26
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

References

  1. AlaeiN., RoshandelA.K., RouhaniA.K. and SoleimaniM.2018. Seismic resolution enhancement using scale transform in time‐frequency domain. Geophysics83, V305–V314.
    [Google Scholar]
  2. ChenZ., WangY. and ChenX.2012. Gabor deconvolution using regularized smoothing. SEG, Las Vegas, Expanded Abstracts, 1–5.
  3. DjeffalA., AskariR. and WayneD.2016. Enhancement of Margrave deconvolution of seismic signals in highly attenuating media using the modified S‐transform. 86th Annual Meeting, Dallas, SEG, Expanded Abstracts, 5198–5202.
  4. EdgarJ.A.2008. A comparison of seismic wavelets derived using statistical wavelet estimation techniques and deterministic seismic‐to‐well ties. Master's thesis, University of Leeds.
  5. GholamiA.2016. Projected Gabor deconvolution. Geophysics81, 151–157.
    [Google Scholar]
  6. HalmosP.R.1944. The foundations of probability. The American Mathematical Monthly51, 493–510.
    [Google Scholar]
  7. HaoY., HuangH., LuoY., GaoJ. and YuanS.2018. Nonstationary acoustic impedance inversion algorithm via a novel equivalent Qe value estimation scheme and sparse regularizations. Geophysics83, 681–698.
    [Google Scholar]
  8. IliescuV. and MargraveG.F.2002. Reflectivity amplitude restoration in Gabor deconvolution. CSEG Annual Convention, Expanded Abstracts.
  9. KjartanssonE.1979. Constant Q‐wave propagation and attenuation. Journal of Geophysical Research84, 4737–4748.
    [Google Scholar]
  10. LazearG.D.1993. Mixed‐phase wavelet estimation using fourth‐order cumulants. Geophysics58, 1042–1051.
    [Google Scholar]
  11. LevyS. and OldenburgD. W.1987. Automatic phase correction of common‐midpoint stacked data. Geophysics52, 51–59.
    [Google Scholar]
  12. LiF., ZhouH., JiangN., BiJ. and MarfurtK.2015. Q estimation from reflection seismic data for hydrocarbon detection using a modified frequency shift method. Journal of Geophysics and Engineering12, 577–586.
    [Google Scholar]
  13. LiuX., GaoF., ZhangY., RaoY. and WangY.2018. seismic resolution enhancement in shale‐oil reservoirs. Geophysics83, 281–287.
    [Google Scholar]
  14. MargraveG.F. and LamoureuxM.P.2001. Gabor deconvolution. CREWES Research Report 13, 241–276.
  15. MargraveG.F., LamoureuxM.P., GrossmanJ.P. and IliescuV.2002. Gabor deconvolution of seismic data for source waveform and Q correction. 72nd Annual International Meeting, SEG. Expanded Abstracts, 2190–2193.
  16. MargraveG.F., LamoureuxM.P. and HenleyD.C.2011. Gabor deconvolution: estimating reflectivity by nonstationary deconvolution of seismic data. Geophysics76, 15–30.
    [Google Scholar]
  17. MendelJ.M.1991. Tutorial on higher‐order statistics (spectra) in signal processing and system theory. Theoretical results and some applications. Proceedings of the IEEE79, 278–305.
    [Google Scholar]
  18. MontanaC.A. and MargraveG.F.2006. Surface‐consistent Gabor deconvolution. 76th Annual International Meeting, SEG. Expanded Abstracts, 2812–2816.
  19. PengT., YanJ., SunS.Z. and DongD.2015. Improved Gabor deconvolution by using shaping regulartizon and its application. SEG, New Orleans, Expanded Abstracts, 3848–3852.
  20. RobinsonE.A. and TreitelS.1967. Principles of digital Wiener filtering. Geophysical Prospecting15, 311–332.
    [Google Scholar]
  21. SuiY. and MaJ.2018. A nonstationary sparse‐spike deconvolution with anelastic attenuation. Geophysics84, 1–87.
    [Google Scholar]
  22. TuN. and LuW.‐K.2009. Inverse Q filtering to enhance seismic resolution. IEEE International Geoscience and Remote Sensing Symposium, 2, 345–348.
  23. Van der BaanM.2008. Time‐varying wavelet estimation and deconvolution by kurtosis maximization. Geophysics73, 11–18.
    [Google Scholar]
  24. Van der BaanM. and FomelS.2009. Nonstationary phase estimation using regularized local kurtosis maximization. Geophysics74, 75–80.
    [Google Scholar]
  25. VosoughiE. and JavaherianA.2018. Parameters effective on estimating a nonstationary mixed‐phase wavelet using cumulant matching approach. Journal of Applied Geophysics148, 83–97.
    [Google Scholar]
  26. WangL., ZhaoQ., GaoJ., XuZ., FehleM. and JiangX.2016. Seismic sparse‐spike deconvolution via Toeplitz‐sparse matrix factorization. Geophysics81,169‐182.
    [Google Scholar]
  27. WangS., YuanS., MaM., ZhangR. and LuoC.2015. Wavelet phase estimation using ant colony optimization algorithm. Journal of Applied Geophysics122, 159–166.
    [Google Scholar]
  28. WangY.2002. A stable and efficient approach of inverse Q‐filtering. Geophysics67, 657–663.
    [Google Scholar]
  29. WangY.2004. Q analysis on reflection seismic data. Geophysical Research Letters31, L17606.
    [Google Scholar]
  30. WangY.2006. Inverse Q‐filter for seismic resolution enhancement. Geophysics71, 51–60.
    [Google Scholar]
  31. WangY.2008. Seismic Inverse Q Filtering. Blackwell.
    [Google Scholar]
  32. WangY.2015a. Frequencies of the Ricker wavelet. Geophysics80, 31–37.
    [Google Scholar]
  33. WangY.2015b. Generalized seismic wavelets. Geophysical Journal International203, 1172–1178.
    [Google Scholar]
  34. YuanS.Y., WangS.X., MaM., JiY.Z. and DengL.2017. Sparse Bayesian learning‐based time‐variant deconvolution. IEEE Transactions on Geoscience and Remote Sensing55, 6182–6194.
    [Google Scholar]
http://instance.metastore.ingenta.com/content/journals/10.1111/1365-2478.12913
Loading
/content/journals/10.1111/1365-2478.12913
Loading

Data & Media loading...

  • Article Type: Research Article
Keyword(s): Attenuation; Nonstationary deconvolution

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