1887
Volume 69, Issue 6
  • E-ISSN: 1365-2478

Abstract

ABSTRACT

Obtaining accurate velocity models plays a crucial role in many routine seismic imaging algorithms. Seismic velocity models are normally made through seismic velocity analysis workflows. The routine workflows are not capable of dealing with polarity variations across moveout curves. We address this limitation by proposing a straight‐forward and robust semblance‐based workflow, which is a modified version of the conventional semblance function. The coherency function applies semblance analysis on separate clusters of receivers followed by averaging the corresponding coherency measures from all the clusters. The proposed approach is suitable for any case of amplitude variations including attenuation and any class of amplitude‐versus‐offset effects. The ability of the proposed workflow is demonstrated to two synthetic data as well as two field‐recorded common‐midpoint gathers. We perform accuracy analysis by comparing the results from the proposed approach with the results achieved from conventional velocity analysis, and another semblance‐based algorithm that is developed to address the polarity variation task. We also studied noise sensitivity analysis by computing and comparing mathematical expectations between theory and practice.

Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.1111/1365-2478.13118
2021-06-14
2024-04-19
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

References

  1. Billette, F.J. and Brandsberg‐Dahl, S. (2005) The 2004 BP velocity benchmark. EAGE Extended Abstracts, cp–c1. https://doi.org/10.3997/2214‐4609‐pdb.1.B035
    [Google Scholar]
  2. Bóna, A. (2011) Shot‐gather time migration of planar reflectors without velocity model. Geophysics, 76(2), S93–S101, https://doi.org/10.1190/1.3549641
    [Google Scholar]
  3. Chen, Y., Liu, T. and Chen, X. (2015) Velocity analysis using similarity weighted semblance. Geophysics, 80(4), A75–A82. https://doi.org/10.1190/geo2014‐0618.1
    [Google Scholar]
  4. Cukur, D., Krastel, S., Tomonaga, Y., Çağatay, M.N., Meydan, A.F. and Team, T.P.S. (2013) Seismic evidence of shallow gas from Lake Van, eastern Turkey. Marine and Petroleum Geology, 48, 341–353. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.marpetgeo.2013.08.017
    [Google Scholar]
  5. Ebrahimi, S., Roshandel Kahoo, A., Chen, Y. and Porsani, M. (2017) A high‐resolution weighted AB semblance for dealing with amplitude‐variation‐with‐offset phenomenon. Geophysics, 82(2), 1MA–Z12. https://doi.org/10.1190/GEO2016‐0047.1
    [Google Scholar]
  6. Fomel, S. (2007a) Velocity‐independent time‐domain seismic imaging using local event slopes. Geophysics, 72(3), S139–S147. https://doi.org/10.1190/1.2714047
    [Google Scholar]
  7. Fomel, S. (2007b) Local seismic attributes. Geophysics, 72(3), A29–A33. https://doi.org/10.1190/1.2437573
    [Google Scholar]
  8. Fomel, S. (2009) Velocity analysis using AB semblance. Geophysical Prospecting, 57, 311–321. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365‐2478.2008.00741.x
    [Google Scholar]
  9. Khoshnavaz, M.J., Bόna, A., Chambers, K., Siahkoohi, H. and Khoshnavaz, A. (2019) Surface passive seismic monitoring by the local use of semblance. ASEG Extended Abstracts, 1–4. https://doi.org/10.1080/22020586.2019.12073042
    [Google Scholar]
  10. Khoshnavaz, M.J., Bóna, A., Dzunic, A., Ung, K. and Urosevic, M. (2016) Oriented prestack time migration using local slopes and predictive painting in the common‐source domain for planar reflectors. Geophysics, 81(6), S409–S418. https://doi.org/10.1190/geo2016‐0127.1
    [Google Scholar]
  11. Khoshnavaz, M.J., Chambers, K., Bóna, A. and Urosevic, M. (2017) Oriented surface passive seismic location using local slopes. Geophysics, 82(2), KS13–KS25. https://doi.org/10.1190/GEO2016‐0017.1.
    [Google Scholar]
  12. Luo, S. and Hale, D. (2012) Velocity analysis using weighted semblance. Geophysics, 77(2), U15–U22. https://doi.org/10.1190/geo2011‐0034.1
    [Google Scholar]
  13. Rutherford, S.R. and Williams, R.H. (1989) Amplitude‐versus‐offset variations in gas sands. Geophysics, 54(6), 680–688. https://doi.org/10.1190/1.1442696
    [Google Scholar]
  14. Sarkar, D., Baumel, R.T. and Larner, K.L. (2002) Velocity analysis in the presence of amplitude variation. Geophysics, 67, 1664–1672. https://doi.org/10.1190/1.1512814
    [Google Scholar]
  15. Sarkar, D., Castagna, J. and Lamb, W. (2001) AVO and velocity analysis. Geophysics, 66, 1284–1293. https://doi.org/10.1190/1.1487076
    [Google Scholar]
  16. Swan, H.W. (2001) Velocities from amplitude variations with offset. Geophysics, 66(6), 1735–1743. https://doi.org/10.1190/1.1487115
    [Google Scholar]
  17. Taner, M.T. and Koehler, F. (1969) Velocity spectra‐digital computer derivation applications of velocity functions. Geophysics, 34, 859–881. https://doi.org/10.1190/1.1440058
    [Google Scholar]
  18. Ursin, B., da Silva, M.G. and Porsani, M.J. (2014) Signal and traveltime parameter estimation using singular value decomposition. Geophysics, 79(5), U1–U14. https://doi.org/10.1190/geo2013‐0260.1
    [Google Scholar]
http://instance.metastore.ingenta.com/content/journals/10.1111/1365-2478.13118
Loading
/content/journals/10.1111/1365-2478.13118
Loading

Data & Media loading...

  • Article Type: Research Article
Keyword(s): Amplitude variations; AVO; Local semblance; Velocity analysis

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