1887
Volume 71, Issue 8
  • E-ISSN: 1365-2478

Abstract

Abstract

Microseismic datasets typically have relatively low signal‐to‐noise ratio waveforms. To that end, several noise suppression techniques are often applied to improve the signal‐to‐noise ratio of the recorded waveforms. We apply a linear geometric mode decomposition approach to microseismic datasets for background noise suppression. The geometric mode decomposition method optimizes linear patterns within amplitude–frequency modulated modes and can efficiently distinguish microseismic events (signal) from the background noise. This method can also split linear and non‐linear dispersive seismic events into linear modes. The segmented events in different modes can then be added carefully to reconstruct the denoised signal. The application of geometric mode decomposition is well suited for microseismic acquisitions with smaller receiver spacing, where the signal may exhibit either (nearly) linear or non‐linear recording patterns, depending on the source location relative to the receiver array. Using synthetic and real microseismic data examples from limited‐aperture downhole recordings only, we show that geometric mode decomposition is robust in suppressing the background noise from the recorded waveforms. We also compare the filtering results from geometric mode decomposition with those obtained from FX‐Decon and one‐dimensional variational mode decomposition methods. For the examples used, geometric mode decomposition outperforms both FX‐Decon and one‐dimensional variational mode decomposition in background noise suppression.

© 2023 European Association of Geoscientists & Engineers. © 2023 European Association of Geoscientists & Engineers.
Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.1111/1365-2478.13379
2023-09-22
2026-02-10

  • From This Site

    /content/journals/10.1111/1365-2478.13379
    dcterms_title,dcterms_subject,pub_keyword
    -contentType:Journal -contentType:Contributor -contentType:Concept -contentType:Institution
    10
    5
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

References

  1. Abbasi, S., & Ismail, A. (2021) Elimination of multiples from marine seismic data using the primary‐multiple intermediate velocities in the τ‐Q domain. Journal of seismic exploration30, 85‐100.
     [Google Scholar]
  2. Abbasi, S., & Jaiswal, P. (2013) Attenuating long‐period multiples in short‐offset 2D streamer data: Gulf of California. In SEG Technical Program Expanded Abstracts, pp. 4201‐4205. Society of Exploration Geophysicists.
     [Google Scholar]
  3. Akram, J. (2018) An application of waveform denoising for microseismic data using polarization–linearity and time–frequency thresholding. Geophysical Prospecting, 66(5), 872–893.
     [Google Scholar]
  4. Akram, J. (2020) Understanding downhole microseismic data analysis. New York, NY: Springer International Publishing.
     [Google Scholar]
  5. Amoroso, O., Maercklin, N. & Zollo, A. (2012) S‐wave identification by polarization filtering and waveform coherence analyses. Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America, 102, 854–861.
     [Google Scholar]
  6. Bekara, M. & Van der Baan, M. (2009) Random and coherent noise attenuation by empirical mode decomposition. Geophysics, 74(5), V89–V98.
     [Google Scholar]
  7. Banjade, T.P., Liu, J., Li, H. & Ma, J. (2021) Enhancing earthquake signal based on variational mode decomposition and S‐G filter. Journal of Seismology, 25, 41–54.
     [Google Scholar]
  8. Banjade, T.P., Yu, S. & Ma, J. (2019) Earthquake accelerogram denoising by wavelet‐based variational mode decomposition. Journal of Seismology, 23(4), 649–663.
     [Google Scholar]
  9. Chen, S., Cao, S., Sun, Y., Huang, F. & Cao, G. (2022) Seismic denoising based on time‐varying filtering and empirical mode decomposition in the fx domain. IEEE Geoscience and Remote Sensing Letters, 19, 1–5.
     [Google Scholar]
  10. Chen, Z., Wang, P., Gui, Z. & Mao, Q. (2021) Three‐component microseismic data denoising based on re‐constrain variational mode decomposition. Applied Sciences, 11, 1–15.
     [Google Scholar]
  11. Chen, Y., Gan, S., Liu, T., Yuan, J., Zhang, Y. & Jin, Z. (2015) Random noise attenuation by a selective hybrid approach using f − x empirical mode decomposition. Journal of Geophysics and Engineering, 12, 12–25.
     [Google Scholar]
  12. Dragomiretskiy, K. & Zosso, D. (2015) Two‐dimensional variational mode decomposition. In Energy minimization methods in computer vision and pattern recognition, Vol. 8932, Cham: Springer, pp. 197–208.
     [Google Scholar]
  13. Dragomiretskiy, K. & Zosso, D. (2014) Variational mode decomposition. IEEE Transactions on Signal Processing, 62(3), 531–544.
     [Google Scholar]
  14. Eaton, D.W., Caffagni, E., Rafiq, A., van der Baan, M. & Roche, V. (2014) Passive seismic monitoring and integrated geomechanical analysis of a tight‐sand reservoir during hydraulic‐fracture treatment, flowback and production. Presented at the Unconventional Resources Technology Conference, August 2014. doi.org/10.15530/urtec‐2014‐1929223
  15. Forghani, F., Willis, M., Haines, S., Batzle, M., Behura, J. & Davidson, M. (2012) Noise suppression in surfacemicroseismic data. The Leading Edge, 31, 1496–1501.
     [Google Scholar]
  16. Górszczyk, A., Milanowski, M. & Bellefleur, G. (2015) Enhancing 3D post‐stack seismic data acquired in hardrock environment using 2D curvelet transform. Geophysical Prospecting, 63, 903–918.
     [Google Scholar]
  17. Górszczyk, A., Adamczyk, A. & Milanowski, M. (2014) Application of curvelet denoising to 2D and 3D seismic data – practical considerations. Journal of Applied Geophysics, 105, 78–94.
     [Google Scholar]
  18. Goudarzi, A. & Riahi, M.A. (2012) Seismic coherent and random noise attenuation using the undecimated discrete wavelet transform method with WDGA technique. Journal of Geophysics and Engineering, 9, 619–631.
     [Google Scholar]
  19. Han, J. & van der Baan, M. (2015) Microseismic and seismic denoising via ensemble empirical mode decomposition and adaptive thresholding. Geophysics, 80(6), KS69–KS80.
     [Google Scholar]
  20. Hennenfent, G. & Herrmann, F.J. (2006) Seismic denoising with nonuniformly sampled curvelets. Computing in Science & Engineering, 8, 16–25.
     [Google Scholar]
  21. Huang, N.E., Shen, Z., Long, S.R., Wu, M.C., Shih, H.H., Zheng, Q., Yen, N.C., Tung, C.C. & Liu, H.H. (1998) The empirical mode decomposition and the Hilbert spectrum for nonlinear and non‐stationary time series analysis. In: Proceedings of the Royal Society of London. Series A: Mathematical, physical and engineering sciences, Vol. 454(1971), pp. 903–995.
     [Google Scholar]
  22. Jayaram, V., Copeland, D., Ellinger, C.I., Sicking, C., Nelan, S., Gilberg, J. & Carter, C. (2015) Receiver deghosting method to mitigate F‐K transform artifacts: A non‐windowing approach. SEG Technical Program Expanded Abstracts, 4530–4534, https://doi.org/10.1190/segam2015‐5874390.1
     [Google Scholar]
  23. Jia, R., Liang, Y., Hua, Y., Sun, H. & Xia, F. (2016) Suppressing non‐stationary random noise in microseismic data by using ensemble empirical mode decomposition and permutation entropy. Journal of Applied Geophysics, 133, 132–140.
     [Google Scholar]
  24. Kennett, B.L.N. (2000) Stacking three‐component seismograms. Geophysical Journal International, 141, 263–269.
     [Google Scholar]
  25. Li, L., Jin, H., Chen, Y., Cheng, S., Hu, H. & Wang, S. (2021) Noise reduction method of microseismic signal of water inrush in tunnel based on variational mode method. Bulletin of Engineering Geology and the Environment, 80, 6497–6512.
     [Google Scholar]
  26. Li, F., Zhang, B., Verma, S. & Marfurt, K.J. (2018a) Seismic signal denoising using thresholded variational mode decomposition. Exploration Geophysics, 49, 450–461.
     [Google Scholar]
  27. Li, J., Li, Y., Li, Y. & Qian, Z. (2018b) Downhole microseismic signal denoising via empirical wavelet transform and adaptive thresholding. Journal of Geophysics and Engineering, 15, 2469–2480.
     [Google Scholar]
  28. Lin, P., Peng, S., Cui, X., Du, W. & Li, C., October. (2021) Imaging diffractors using geometric mode decomposition and Gaussian distribution fitting. In: SEG/AAPG/SEPM First International Meeting for Applied Geoscience & Energy.
  29. Liu, W., Cao, S. & Chen, Y. (2016) Applications of variational mode decomposition in seismic time‐frequency analysis. Geophysics, 81(5), V365–V378.
     [Google Scholar]
  30. Liu, W., Cao, S. & Wang, Z. (2020) Application of variational mode decomposition to seismic random noise reduction. Journal of Geophysics and Engineering, 14, 888–898.
     [Google Scholar]
  31. Mousavi, S.M. & Langston, C.A. (2016) Hybrid seismic denoising using higher‐order statistics and improved wavelet block thresholding. Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America, 106(4), 1380–1393.
     [Google Scholar]
  32. Oliveira, M.S., Henriques, M.V.C., Leite, F.E.A., Corso, G. & Lucena, L.S. (2012) Seismic denoising using curvelet analysis. Physica A, 391, 2106–2110.
     [Google Scholar]
  33. Parolai, S. (2009) Denoising of seismograms using the S transform. Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America, 99(1), 226–234.
     [Google Scholar]
  34. Pinnegar, C.R. (2006) Polarization analysis and polarization filtering of three‐component signals with the time‐frequency S transform. Geophysical Journal International, 165(2), 596–606.
     [Google Scholar]
  35. Sabbione, J.I., Sacchi, M.D. & Velis, D.R. (2015) Radon transform‐based microseismic event detection and signal‐to‐noise ratio enhancement. Journal of Applied Geophysics, 113, 51–63.
     [Google Scholar]
  36. Sabbione, J.I., Sacchi, M.D. & Velis, D.R. (2013) Microseismic data denoising via an apex‐shifted hyperbolic Radon transform. In: SEG Annual Conference, Houston, Texas, pp. 2155–2161.
  37. van der Baan, M., Eaton, D.W. & Dusseault, M. (2013) Microseismic monitoring developments in hydraulic fracture stimulation, in effective and sustainable hydraulic fracturing. In: Bunger, A.P., McLennan, J. & Jeffrey, R. (Eds.) Effective and Sustainable Hydraulic Fracturing (eds.), pp. 439–456. ISBN 978953511137
     [Google Scholar]
  38. Yao, X., Zhou, Q., Wang, C., Hu, J. & Liu, P. (2021) An adaptive seismic signal denoising method based on variational mode decomposition. Measurement, 177, 1–12.
     [Google Scholar]
  39. Yoon, B.J. & Vaidyanathan, P.P. (2004) Wavelet‐based denoising by customized thresholding. In: IEEE International Conference on Acoustic Speech and Signal Processing (ICASSP), pp. 925–928.
  40. Yu, S., Ma, J. & Osher, S. (2018) Geometric mode decomposition. Inverse Problems & Imaging, 12(4), 831.
     [Google Scholar]
  41. Zhang, J., Dong, L. & Xu, N. (2020) Noise suppression of microseismic signals via adaptive variational mode decomposition and Akaike information criterion. Applied Sciences, 10, 1–16.
     [Google Scholar]
  42. Zhang, Q., Jiang, J., Zhai, J., Zhang, X., Yuan, Y. & Huang, X. (2016) Seismic random noise attenuation using modified wavelet thresholding. Annals of Geophysics, 59(6), 1–10.
     [Google Scholar]
/content/journals/10.1111/1365-2478.13379
Loading
Using geometric mode decomposition for the background noise suppression on microseismic data
Geophysical Prospecting 71, 1420 (2023); https://doi.org/10.1111/1365-2478.13379
/content/journals/10.1111/1365-2478.13379
/content/journals/10.1111/1365-2478.13379
Loading

Data & Media loading...

  • Article Type: Research Article
Keyword(s): borehole seismics; microearthquake; microseismic monitoring; seismic; signal processing

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