1887
  1. Home
  2. A-Z Publications
  3. Geophysical Prospecting
  4. Volume 69, Issue 1
  5. Article
Volume 69 Number 1
  • E-ISSN: 1365-2478

Abstract

ABSTRACT

This paper is the second in a sequel of two papers and dedicated to the computation of paraxial rays and dynamic characteristics along the stationary rays obtained in the first paper. We start by formulating the linear, second‐order, Jacobi dynamic ray tracing equation. We then apply a similar finite‐element solver, as used for the kinematic ray tracing, to compute the dynamic characteristics between the source and any point along the ray. The dynamic characteristics in our study include the relative geometric spreading and the phase correction due to caustics (i.e. the amplitude and the phase of the asymptotic form of the Green's function for waves propagating in 3D heterogeneous general anisotropic elastic media). The basic solution of the Jacobi equation is a shift vector of a paraxial ray in the plane normal to the ray direction at each point along the central ray. A general paraxial ray is defined by a linear combination of up to four basic vector solutions, each corresponds to specific initial conditions related to the ray coordinates at the source. We define the four basic solutions with two pairs of initial condition sets: point–source and plane‐wave. For the proposed point–source ray coordinates and initial conditions, we derive the ray Jacobian and relate it to the relative geometric spreading for general anisotropy. Finally, we introduce a new dynamic parameter, similar to the complexity factor, presented in the first paper, used to define the measure of complexity of the propagated wave/ray phenomena. The new propagation complexity accounts for the normalized relative geometric spreading not only at the receiver point, but along the whole stationary ray path. We propose a criterion based on this parameter as a qualifying factor associated with the given ray solution. To demonstrate the implementation of the proposed method, we use several isotropic and anisotropic benchmark models. For all the examples, we first compute the stationary ray paths, and then compute the geometric spreading and analyse these trajectories for possible caustics. Our primary aim is to emphasize the advantages, transparency and simplicity of the proposed approach.

© 2021 European Association of Geoscientists & Engineers © 2020 European Association of Geoscientists & Engineers
Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.1111/1365-2478.13053
2020-12-12
2024-04-20

  • From This Site

    /content/journals/10.1111/1365-2478.13053
    dcterms_title,dcterms_subject,pub_keyword
    -contentType:Journal -contentType:Contributor -contentType:Concept -contentType:Institution
    10
    5
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

References

  1. Alkhalifah, T. (2003) An acoustic wave equation for orthorhombic anisotropy. Geophysics, 68(4), 1169–1172.
     [Google Scholar]
  2. Arnold, V. (1967) Characteristic classes entering in quantization conditions. Functional Analysis and Its Applications, 1, 1–13.
     [Google Scholar]
  3. Arnold, V. (1994) Topological Invariants of Plane Curves and Caustics. Providence, RI: American Mathematical Society.
     [Google Scholar]
  4. Aster, R. (2011) Fundamentals of Ray Tracing. 1–14. http://www.ees.nmt.edu/outside/courses/GEOP523/Docs/rays.pdf.
  5. Bakker, P. (1998) Phase shift at caustics along rays in anisotropic media. Geophysical Journal International, 134(2), 515–518.
     [Google Scholar]
  6. Bliss, G. (1916) Jacobi's condition for problems of the calculus of variations in parametric form. Transactions of the American Mathematical Society, 17, 195–206.
     [Google Scholar]
  7. Bott, M. (1982) The Interior of the Earth: Structure, Contribution and Processes. London: Arnold.
     [Google Scholar]
  8. Brandsberg‐Dahl, S., de Hoop, M. and Ursin, B. (2003) Focusing in dip and AVA compensation on scattering‐angle/azimuth common image gathers. Geophysics, 68(1), 232–254.
     [Google Scholar]
  9. Buchanan, J. and Yoon, Y. (1999) Generalized increasing returns, Euler's theorem, and competitive equilibrium. History of Political Economy, 31(3), 511–523.
     [Google Scholar]
  10. Červený, V. (1985) Gaussian beam synthetic seismograms. Journal of Geophysics, 58, 44–72.
     [Google Scholar]
  11. Červený, V. (2000) Seismic Ray Theory. Cambridge University Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  12. Červený, V. (2013) A note on two‐point paraxial travel times. Studia Geophysica et Geodaetica, 57(2), 267–275.
     [Google Scholar]
  13. Červený, V., Popov, M. and Pšenčík, I. (1982) Computation of wavefields in inhomogeneous media – Gaussian beam approach. Geophysical Journal International, 70(1), 109–128.
     [Google Scholar]
  14. Červený, V. and Pšenčík, I. (2017) Elementary Green function as an integral superposition of Gaussian beams in inhomogeneous anisotropic layered structures in Cartesian coordinates. Geophysical Journal International, 210, 561–569.
     [Google Scholar]
  15. Cygan, S. (2006) Modeling with seismic ray tracing in inhomogeneous geological formation. Geologia / Akademia Górniczo‐Hutnicza im. Stanisława Staszica w Krakowie, 32(4), 451–462.
     [Google Scholar]
  16. Gajewski, D. and Pšenčík, I. (1987) Computation of high‐frequency seismic wavefields in 3D laterally inhomogeneous anisotropic media. Geophysical Journal of Royal Astronomical Society, 91, 383–411.
     [Google Scholar]
  17. Galerkin, B. (1915) On electrical circuits for the approximate solution of the Laplace equation. Vestnik Inzheneroff, 19, 897–908 (in Russian).
     [Google Scholar]
  18. Garmany, J. (2000) Phase shifts at caustics in anisotropic media: Anisotropy 2000: Fractures, Converted Waves and Case Studies. Proceeding of the Ninth International Workshop on Seismic Anisotropy, 419–425. Tulsa, OK: SEG.
     [Google Scholar]
  19. Gelfand, M. and Fomin, S. (2000) Calculus of Variations. Reprinted by Dover, originally published by Prentice Hall, New Jersey, 1963.
     [Google Scholar]
  20. Gray, C. and Tailor, E. (2007) When action is not least. American Journal of Physics, 75(5), 434–458.
     [Google Scholar]
  21. Gutenberg, B. and Mieghem, J. (2016) Physics of the Earth's Interior. Academic Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  22. Hanyga, A. and Slawinski, M. (2001) Caustics and qSV rayfields of transversely isotropic and vertically inhomogeneous media: Anisotropy 2000: Fractures, Converted Waves, and Case Studies. Proceeding of the Ninth International Workshop on Seismic Anisotropy, 409–418. Tulsa, OK: SEG.
     [Google Scholar]
  23. Holm, D. (2012) Fermat's Principle and the Geometric Mechanics of Ray Optics, Summer School Lectures, Fields Institute, Toronto. https://www.fields.utoronto.ca/programs/scientific/12-13/Marsden/FieldsSS2-FinalSlidesJuly2012.pdf
     [Google Scholar]
  24. Hörmander, L. (1971) Fourier integral operators. Acta Mathematica, 127, 79–183.
     [Google Scholar]
  25. Hubral, P., Tygel, M. and Schleicher, J. (1995a) Geometrical spreading and ray‐caustic decomposition of elementary seismic waves. EAGE 57th Conference and Technical Exhibition, Expanded Abstract. https://doi.org/10.3997/2214-4609.201409247.
  26. Hubral, P., Tygel, M. and Schleicher, J. (1995b) Geometrical spreading and ray‐caustic decomposition of elementary seismic waves. Geophysics, 60(4), 1195–1202.
     [Google Scholar]
  27. Julian, B. and Gubbins, D. (1977) Three‐dimensional seismic ray tracing. Journal of Geophysics, 43, 95–113.
     [Google Scholar]
  28. Keller, J. (1958) Corrected Born–Sommerfeld quantum conditions for non‐separable systems. Annals of Physics, 4, 180–188.
     [Google Scholar]
  29. Klimeš, L. (2010) Phase shift of the Green tensor due to caustics in anisotropic media. Studia Geophysica et Geodaetica, 54(2), 259–289.
     [Google Scholar]
  30. Klimeš, L. (2014) Phase shift of a general wavefield due to caustics in anisotropic media. Seismic Waves in Complex 3‐D Structures, 24, 95–109.
     [Google Scholar]
  31. Koren, Z. and Ravve, I. (2020a) Eigenrays in 3D heterogeneous anisotropic media: Part I – Kinematics, variational formulation. arXiv, 2003, 09406.
  32. Koren, Z. and Ravve, I. (2020b) Eigenrays in 3D heterogeneous anisotropic media: Part II – Kinematics, validation of the Lagrangian. arXiv, 2003, 09407.
  33. Koren, Z. and Ravve, I. (2020c) Eigenrays in 3D heterogeneous anisotropic media: Part III – Kinematics, finite‐element implementation. arXiv, 2003, 09408.
  34. Koren, Z. and Ravve, I. (2021) Eigenrays in 3D heterogeneous anisotropic media, Part I: Kinematics. Geophysical Prospecting, 69, 3–27.
     [Google Scholar]
  35. Maslov, V. (1965) Theory of perturbations and asymptotic methods (in Russian). Moscow State University Publication.
     [Google Scholar]
  36. Mitrofanov, G. and Priimenko, V. (2018) KMAH index and separation of PSP‐waves from streamer data. Marine Geophysical Research, 39(3), 349–362.
     [Google Scholar]
  37. Murphy, D. (1961) Calculations of caustic lines in an ocean of constant velocity gradient layers. The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 33(6), 840–841.
     [Google Scholar]
  38. Nowack, R. (2003) Calculation of synthetic seismograms with Gaussian beams. Pure and Applied Geophysics, 160(3–4), 487–507.
     [Google Scholar]
  39. Nye, J. (1985) Caustics in seismology. Geophysical Journal International, 83(2), 477–485.
     [Google Scholar]
  40. O’Brien, M., Whitmore, D., Brandsberg‐Dahl, S., Etgen, J. and Murphy, G. (1999) Multicomponent modeling of the Valhall field: EAGE 61st Conference and Technical Exhibition. Expanded Abstract, (paper 4‐27), 1–4.
     [Google Scholar]
  41. Pereyra, V. (1996) Modeling, inversion and block nonlinear traveltime inversion in 3D. Pure and Applied Geophysics, 148(3–4), 345–386.
     [Google Scholar]
  42. Popov, M. (1982) A new method of computation of wavefields using Gaussian beams. Wave Motion, 4(1), 85–97.
     [Google Scholar]
  43. Ravve, I. and Koren, Z. (2007) Conic velocity model. Geophysics, 72(3), U31–U46.
     [Google Scholar]
  44. Ravve, I. and Koren, Z. (2019) Directional derivatives of ray velocity in anisotropic elastic media. Geophysical Journal International, 216(2), 59–895.
     [Google Scholar]
  45. Ravve, I. and Koren, Z. (2020a) Eigenrays in 3D heterogeneous anisotropic media: Part IV – Geometric spreading from traveltime Hessian. arXiv, 2003, 10242.
  46. Ravve, I. and Koren, Z. (2020b) Eigenrays in 3D heterogeneous anisotropic media: Part V – Dynamics, variational formulation. arXiv, 2003, 10243.
  47. Ravve, I. and Koren, Z. (2020c) Eigenrays in 3D heterogeneous anisotropic media: Part VI – Dynamics, Lagrangian vs. Hamiltonian approaches. arXiv, 2003, 10244.
  48. Ravve, I. and Koren, Z. (2020d) Eigenrays in 3D heterogeneous anisotropic media: Part VII – Dynamics, finite‐element implementation. arXiv, 2003, 11418.
  49. Schleicher, J., Tygel, M. and Hubral, P. (2007) Seismic True‐Amplitude Imaging. Tulsa, OK: Society of Exploration Geophysicists.
     [Google Scholar]
  50. Snieder, R. and Spencer, C. (1993) A unified approach to ray bending, ray perturbation and paraxial ray theories. Geophysical Journal International, 115, 456–470.
     [Google Scholar]
  51. Thomson, C. and Gubbins, D. (1982) Three‐dimensional atmospheric modeling at NORSAR: linearity of the method and amplitude variations from the anomalies. Geophysical Journal International, 71(1), 1–36.
     [Google Scholar]
  52. Tsvankin, I. and Grechka, V. (2011) Seismology of Azimuthally Anisotropic Media and Seismic Fracture Characterization. Oklahoma: SEG, ISBN 978‐1‐56080‐228‐0.
     [Google Scholar]
  53. Waheed, U. and Alkhalifah, T. (2016) Effective ellipsoidal models for wavefield extrapolation in tilted orthorhombic media. Studia Geophysica et Geodaetica, 60(3), 349–369.
     [Google Scholar]
  54. White, B., Nair, B. and Bayliss, A. (1988) Random rays and seismic amplitude anomalies. Geophysics, 53(7), 903–907.
     [Google Scholar]
http://instance.metastore.ingenta.com/content/journals/10.1111/1365-2478.13053
Loading
Eigenrays in 3D heterogeneous anisotropic media, Part II: Dynamics
Geophysical Prospecting 69, 28 (2021); https://doi.org/10.1111/1365-2478.13053
/content/journals/10.1111/1365-2478.13053
/content/journals/10.1111/1365-2478.13053
Loading

Data & Media loading...

  • Article Type: Research Article
Keyword(s): Anisotropy; Computing aspects; Rays

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