1887
  1. Home
  2. A-Z Publications
  3. Geophysical Prospecting
  4. Volume 68, Issue 7
  5. Article
Volume 68, Issue 7
  • E-ISSN: 1365-2478

Abstract

ABSTRACT

Geological interpretation based on gravity gradiometry data constitutes a very challenging problem. Rigorous 3D inversion is the main technique used in quantitative interpretation of the gravity gradiometry data. An alternative approach to the quantitative analysis of the gravity gradiometry data is based on 3D smooth potential field migration. This rapid imaging approach, however, has the shortcomings of providing smooth images since it is based on direct integral transformation of the observed gravity tensor data. Another limitation of migration transformation is related to the fact that, in a general case, the gravity data generated by the migration image do not fit the observed data well. In this paper, we describe a new approach to rapid imaging that allows us to produce the density distribution which adequately describes the observed data and, at the same time, images the structures with anomalous densities having sharp boundaries. This approach is based on the basic theory of potential field migration with a focusing stabilizer in the framework of regularized scheme, which iteratively transfers the observed gravity tensor field into an image of the density distribution in the subsurface formations. The results of gravity migration can also be considered as an model for conventional inversion subsequently. We demonstrate the practical application of migration imaging using both synthetic and real gravity gradiometry data sets acquired for the Nordkapp Basin in the Barents Sea.

© 2020 European Association of Geoscientists & Engineers © 2020 European Association of Geoscientists & Engineers
Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.1111/1365-2478.12990
2020-07-15
2024-04-18

  • From This Site

    /content/journals/10.1111/1365-2478.12990
    dcterms_title,dcterms_subject,pub_keyword
    -contentType:Journal -contentType:Contributor -contentType:Concept -contentType:Institution
    10
    5
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

References

  1. An, M. and Assumpção, M. (2006) Crustal and upper mantle structure in the intracratonic Paraná Basin, SE Brazil, from surface wave dispersion using genetic algorithms. Journal of South American Earth Sciences, 21, 173–184.
     [Google Scholar]
  2. Baniamerian, J., Fedi, M. and Oskooi, B. (2016) Research note: compact depth from extreme points: a tool for fast potential field imaging. Geophysical Prospecting, 64, 1386–1398.
     [Google Scholar]
  3. Berkhout, A.J. (2012) Seismic Migration: Imaging of Acoustic Energy by Wave Field Extrapolation: Imaging of Acoustic Energy by Wave Field Extrapolation. Elsevier, ISBN 0444602003.
     [Google Scholar]
  4. Bugge, T., Elvebakk, G., Fanavoll, S., Mangerud, G., Smelror, M., Weiss, H.M.et al. (2002) Shallow stratigraphic drilling applied in hydrocarbon exploration of the Nordkapp Basin, Barents Sea. Marine and Petroleum Geology, 19, 13–37.
     [Google Scholar]
  5. Claerbout, J.F. (1985) Imaging the Earth's Interior. Oxford: Blackwell Scientific Publications.
     [Google Scholar]
  6. Dransfield, M. (2010) Conforming falcon gravity and the global gravity anomaly. Geophysical Prospecting, 58, 469–483.
     [Google Scholar]
  7. Fedi, M. (2007) DEXP: a fast method to determine the depth and the structural index of potential fields sources. Geophysics, 72, I1–I11.
     [Google Scholar]
  8. Fedi, M. and Florio, G. (2006) SCALFUN: 3D analysis of potential field scaling function to determine independently or simultaneously structural index and depth to source. In: SEG Technical Program Expanded Abstracts 2006, pp. 963–967. Society of Exploration Geophysicists, ISBN 1052–3812.
  9. Fedi, M. and Pilkington, M. (2012) Understanding imaging methods for potential field data. Geophysics, 77, G13–G24.
     [Google Scholar]
  10. George, M., Olakunle, O.K., Emil, J.S. and Abrahamson, P. (2017) Seismic interpretation and characterization of anhydrite caprocks in the Tromso Basin, SW Barents Sea. Marine Geology, 390, 36–50.
     [Google Scholar]
  11. Gernigon, L., Bronner, M., Fichler, C., Lovas, L., Marello, L. and Olesen, O. (2011) Magnetic expression of salt diapir‐related structures in the Nordkapp Basin, western Barents Sea. Geology, 39, 135–138.
     [Google Scholar]
  12. Hautot, S., Single, R.T., Watson, J., Harrop, N., Jerram, D.A., Tarits, P.et al. (2007) 3‐D magnetotelluric inversion and model validation with gravity data for the investigation of flood basalts and associated volcanic rifted margins. Geophysical Journal International, 170, 1418–1430.
     [Google Scholar]
  13. Henriksen, S. and Vorren, T.O. (1996) Early Tertiary sedimentation and salt tectonics in the Nordkapp Basin, southern Barents Sea. Norsk Geologisk Tidsskrift, 76, 33–44.
     [Google Scholar]
  14. Hornby, P., Boschetti, F. and Horowitz, F.G. (1999) Analysis of potential field data in the wavelet domain. Geophysical Journal International, 137, 175–196.
     [Google Scholar]
  15. Işık, M. and Şenel, H. (2009) 3D gravity modeling of Büyük Menderes basin in Western Anatolia using parabolic density function. Journal of Asian Earth Sciences, 34, 317–325.
     [Google Scholar]
  16. Koehl, J.B.P., Bergh, S.G., Henningsen, T. and Faleide, J.I. (2018) Middle to Late Devonian‐Carboniferous collapse basins on the Finnmark Platform and in the southwesternmost Nordkapp basin, SW Barents Sea. Solid Earth, 9, 341–372.
     [Google Scholar]
  17. Koyi, H., Talbot, C.J. and Tørudbakken, B.O. (1993a) Salt diapirs of the southwest Nordkapp Basin: analogue modelling. Tectonophysics, 228, 167–187.
     [Google Scholar]
  18. Koyi, H., Jenyon, M. and Petersen, K. (1993b) The effect of basement faulting on diapirism. Journal of Petroleum Geology, 16, 285–312.
     [Google Scholar]
  19. Li, Y. (2001) 3‐D inversion of gravity gradiometer data. In: SEG Technical Program Expanded Abstracts 2001, pp. 1470–1473. Society of Exploration Geophysicists, ISBN 1052–3812.
     [Google Scholar]
  20. Li, Y. and Oldenburg, D.W. (1998) 3‐D inversion of gravity data. Geophysics, 63, 109–119.
     [Google Scholar]
  21. Liu, S., Baniamerian, J. and Fedi, M. (2019) Imaging methods versus inverse methods: an option or an alternative?IEEE Transactions on Geoscience and Remote Sensing, 58(5), 3484–3494.
     [Google Scholar]
  22. Mammo, T. (2013) Crustal structure of the flood basalt province of Ethiopia from constrained 3‐D gravity inversion. Pure and Applied Geophysics, 170, 2185–2206.
     [Google Scholar]
  23. Mattos, N.H., Alves, T.M. and Omosanya, K.O. (2016) Crestal fault geometries reveal late halokinesis and collapse of the Samson Dome, Northern Norway: implications for petroleum systems in the Barents Sea. Tectonophysics, 690, 76–96.
     [Google Scholar]
  24. Mehanee, S.A. and Zhdanov, M.S. (2002) 3‐D finite difference iterative migration of the electromagnetic field. In: SEG Technical Program Expanded Abstracts 2002, pp. 657–660. Society of Exploration Geophysicists, ISBN 1052–3812.
     [Google Scholar]
  25. Nagihara, S. and Hall, S.A. (2001) Three‐dimensional gravity inversion using simulated annealing: constraints on the diapiric roots of allochthonous salt structures. Geophysics, 66, 1438–1449.
     [Google Scholar]
  26. Nilsen, K.T., Vendeville, B.C. and Johansen, J.T. (1995) Influence of regional tectonics on halokinesis in the Nordkapp Basin, Barents Sea. Salt Tectonics: A Global Perspective, 65, 413–436.
     [Google Scholar]
  27. Portniaguine, O. and Zhdanov, M.S. (1999) Focusing geophysical inversion images. Geophysics, 64, 874–887.
     [Google Scholar]
  28. Ren, Z., Zhong, Y., Chen, C., Tang, J., Kalscheuer, T., Maurer, H.et al. (2018) Gravity gradient tensor of arbitrary 3D polyhedral bodies with up to third‐order polynomial horizontal and vertical mass contrasts. Surveys in Geophysics, 39, 901–935.
     [Google Scholar]
  29. Rojo, L.A. and Escalona, A. (2018) Controls on minibasin infill in the Nordkapp Basin: evidence of complex Triassic synsedimentary deposition influenced by salt tectonics. Aapg Bulletin, 102, 1239–1272.
     [Google Scholar]
  30. Rojo, L.A., Cardozo, N., Escalona, A. and Koyi, H. (2019) Structural style and evolution of the Nordkapp Basin, Norwegian Barents Sea. Aapg Bulletin, 103, 2177–2217.
     [Google Scholar]
  31. Sailhac, P. and Gibert, D. (2003) Identification of sources of potential fields with the continuous wavelet transform: two‐dimensional wavelets and multipolar approximations. Journal of Geophysical Research‐Solid Earth, 108, B15. https://doi.org/10.1029/2002JB002021
     [Google Scholar]
  32. Salem, A. and Ravat, D. (2003) A combined analytic signal and Euler method (AN‐EUL) for automatic interpretation of magnetic data. Geophysics, 68, 1952–1961.
     [Google Scholar]
  33. Schneider, W.A. (1978) Integral formulation for migration in 2 and 3 dimensions. Geophysics, 43, 49–76.
     [Google Scholar]
  34. Silva Dias, F.J.S., Barbosa, V.C.F. and Silva, J.B.C. (2011) Adaptive learning 3D gravity inversion for salt‐body imaging. Geophysics, 76, I49–I57.
     [Google Scholar]
  35. Smith, R.S. and Salem, A. (2005) Imaging depth, structure, and susceptibility from magnetic data: the advanced source‐parameter imaging method. Geophysics, 70, L31–L38.
     [Google Scholar]
  36. Stadtler, C., Fichler, C., Hokstad, K., Myrlund, E.A., Wienecke, S. and Fotland, B. (2014) Improved salt imaging in a basin context by high resolution potential field data: Nordkapp Basin, Barents Sea. Geophysical Prospecting, 62, 615–630.
     [Google Scholar]
  37. Stavrev, P. (2006) Inversion of elongated magnetic anomalies using magnitude transforms. Geophysical Prospecting, 54, 153–166.
     [Google Scholar]
  38. Stavrev, P.Y. (1997) Euler deconvolution using differential similarity transformations of gravity or magnetic anomalies. Geophysical Prospecting, 45, 207–246.
     [Google Scholar]
  39. Thompson, D.T. (1982) Euldph ‐ a new technique for making computer‐assisted depth estimates from magnetic data. Geophysics, 47, 31–37.
     [Google Scholar]
  40. Ueda, T. and Zhdanov, M.S. (2008) Fast numerical methods for marine controlled‐source electromagnetic (EM) survey data based on multigrid quasi‐linear approximation and iterative EM migration. Exploration Geophysics, 39, 60–67.
     [Google Scholar]
  41. Wan, L. and Zhdanov, M.S. (2008) Focusing inversion of marine full‐tensor gradiometry data in offshore geophysical exploration. In: SEG Technical Program Expanded Abstracts 2008, pp. 751–755. Society of Exploration Geophysicists, ISBN 1052–3812.
     [Google Scholar]
  42. Wan, L. and Zhdanov, M.S. (2013) Iterative migration of gravity and gravity gradiometry data. In: SEG Technical Program Expanded Abstracts 2013, pp. 1211–1215. Society of Exploration Geophysicists, ISBN 1052–3812.
  43. Yang, G.Y., Wang, J.H. and Yan, H.Z. (2019) Application of modeling inversion of Bouguer gravity anomalies to oil and gas exploration in the Erlian Basin. Chinese Journal of Geophysics‐Chinese Edition, 62, 316–330.
     [Google Scholar]
  44. Yegorova, T.P., Stephenson, R.A., Kozlenko, V.G., Starostenko, V.I. and Legostaeva, O.V. (1999) 3‐D gravity analysis of the Dniepr–Donets basin and Donbas Foldbelt, Ukraine. Tectonophysics, 313, 41–58.
     [Google Scholar]
  45. Zhdanov, M.S. (2002) Geophysical Inverse Theory and Regularization Problems. Elsevier, ISBN 0080532500.
     [Google Scholar]
  46. Zhdanov, M.S. (2009) Geophysical Electromagnetic Theory and Methods. Elsevier, ISBN 0080931766.
     [Google Scholar]
  47. Zhdanov, M.S. (2012) Integral Transforms in Geophysics. Springer Science & Business Media, ISBN 3642726283.
     [Google Scholar]
  48. Zhdanov, M.S. (2015) Inverse Theory and Applications in Geophysics. Elsevier, ISBN 044462712X.
     [Google Scholar]
  49. Zhdanov, M.S., Ellis, R. and Mukherjee, S. (2004) Three‐dimensional regularized focusing inversion of gravity gradient tensor component data. Geophysics, 69, 925–937.
     [Google Scholar]
  50. Zhdanov, M.S., Liu, X. and Wilson, G. (2010) Potential field migration for rapid 3D imaging of entire gravity gradiometry surveys. First Break, 28, 47–51.
     [Google Scholar]
  51. Zhdanov, M.S., Han, M. and Wan, L. (2020) Joint iterative migration of surface and borehole gravity gradiometry data. Active Geophysical Monitoring, pp. 97–121. Elsevier.
     [Google Scholar]
  52. Zhdanov, M.S., Liu, X.J., Wilson, G.A. and Wan, L. (2011) Potential field migration for rapid imaging of gravity gradiometry data. Geophysical Prospecting, 59, 1052–1071.
     [Google Scholar]
http://instance.metastore.ingenta.com/content/journals/10.1111/1365-2478.12990
Loading
Focusing iterative migration of gravity gradiometry data acquired in the Nordkapp Basin, Barents Sea
Geophysical Prospecting 68, 2292 (2020); https://doi.org/10.1111/1365-2478.12990
/content/journals/10.1111/1365-2478.12990
/content/journals/10.1111/1365-2478.12990
Loading

Data & Media loading...

  • Article Type: Research Article
Keyword(s): Focusing; Gravity gradiometry; Iterative migration

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