1887
Volume 72, Issue 5
  • E-ISSN: 1365-2478
PDF

Abstract

Abstract

Marine vibrators represent an alternative seismic source technology that could come to market in the near future. A key challenge related to marine vibrator seismic data is the effect that phase dispersion from source motion has on the signal during transmission. As such, the recorded moving vibrator data will benefit from being phase corrected, so that the data appear as if they had been shot with a stationary source. This transformation is called the source motion correction. Previous source motion corrections used either specific dephasing operators for specific sweep types or pre‐correlation methods for any sweep type. A source motion correction dephasing operator has been derived, demonstrated and applied to real seismic data collected during a Marine Vibrator Joint Industry Project field trial of an array of marine vibrators. This dephasing operator has been made more general so that any strictly monotonic sweep through time may be used for this correction regardless of sweep type (e.g. linear or exponential). Moreover, the correction uses the pilot sweep as a direct input, measuring from it, the instantaneous frequency which can then be used to build the dephasing operator. This new more general form brings two key advantages over previous dephasing operator corrections: (1) Non‐analytically defined sweeps can now be source motion corrected, and (2) even when an analytically defined sweep (e.g. linear) is used, the transmitted sweep from the marine vibrator can vary from the theoretical input sweep; this correction can account for these changes. Furthermore, given that this source motion correction is a dephasing operator, it can be applied pre‐ or post‐correlation of the raw data with the pilot sweep, thus allowing greater flexibility in the processing. Lastly, some previously derived source motion corrections based on dephasing operators contained errors in their derivation; this new derivation addresses these errors resulting in an improved correction.

© 2024 European Association of Geoscientists & Engineers. © 2024 TotalEnergies OneTech. Geophysical Prospecting published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of European Association of Geoscientists & Engineers.
Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.1111/1365-2478.13479
2024-05-21
2025-12-09

  • From This Site

    /content/journals/10.1111/1365-2478.13479
    dcterms_title,dcterms_subject,pub_keyword
    -contentType:Journal -contentType:Contributor -contentType:Concept -contentType:Institution
    10
    5
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

/deliver/fulltext/gpr/72/5/gpr13479.html?itemId=/content/journals/10.1111/1365-2478.13479&mimeType=html&fmt=ahah

References

  1. Aldridge, D.F. (1992) Mathematics of linear sweeps. Canadian Journal of Exploration Geophysics, 28(1), 62–68.
     [Google Scholar]
  2. Alfaro, R., Secker, S., Cozzens, A., Henderson, N., Mike, J., Nechayuk, V. et al. (2022) Development of the MVJIP Marine Vibrator: what's Next?Third EAGE Marine Acquisition Workshop, 2022, 1–3. Available from: https://doi.org/10.3997/2214‐4609.202242004
     [Google Scholar]
  3. Alfaro, R., Secker, S., Zamboni, E., Cozzens, A., Henderson, N., Nechayuk, V. et al. (2023) Validation of an alternative seismic source: the integrated projector node marine vibrator pilot seismic survey. 84th EAGE Annual Conference & Exhibition, Jun 2023. Utrecht, the Netherlands, European Association of Geoscientists & Engineers. pp. 1–5. Available from: https://doi.org/10.3997/2214‐4609.202310554
  4. Amar, S., Gerez, D., Supawala, M., Aune, H., Brice, T., Hanssen, P. et al. (2020) A practical approach to addressing environmental challenges with marine vibrators. Second EAGE Marine Acquisition Workshop, Aug 2020. Utrecht, the Netherlands, European Association of Geoscientists & Engineers. pp. 1–3. Available from: https://doi.org/10.3997/2214‐4609.202034015
  5. Bloomfield, P. (2000) Fourier analysis of time series: an introduction, 2nd edition. Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons.
     [Google Scholar]
  6. Claerbout, J. (1978) Snell waves: Stanford Exploration Project Report No. 15. Stanford, CA: Stanford University.
  7. Dragoset, W.H. (1988) Marine vibrators and the Doppler effect. Geophysics, 19(8), 898–902. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1190/1.1442418
     [Google Scholar]
  8. Duquet, B., Guitton, A., Secker, S., Feltham, A. & Mascomere, J.‐P. (2021) Impact of nonimpulsive moving source correction for structural and 4D imaging [Expanded abstracts]. First International Meeting for Applied Geoscience & Energy. Houston, TX, SEG. pp. 31–35. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1190/segam2021‐3594448.1
  9. Feltham, A., Girard, M., Jenkerson, M., Nechayuk, V., Henderson, N. & Johnson, G. (2017) The Marine Vibrator Joint Industry Project: four years on. Exploration Geophysics, 49(5), 675–687. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1071/EG17093
     [Google Scholar]
  10. Guitton, A., Duquet, B., Secker, S., Mascomere, J.‐P. & Feltham, A. (2021) A deconvolution‐interpolation approach with sparse inversion to mitigate the Doppler effect in marine vibrators data [Expanded abstracts]. First International Meeting for Applied Geoscience & Energy. Houston, TX, SEG. pp. 2555–2559. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1190/segam2021‐3593897.1
  11. Hampson, G. & Jakubowicz, H. (1995) The effects of source and receiver motion on seismic data. Geophysical Prospecting, 43(2), 221–244. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365‐2478.1995.tb00133.x
     [Google Scholar]
  12. Hanssen, P. (2022) An environmental friendlier offshore seismic source using artificially produced natural sounds. Questel, 1–8. Available from: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/362633907_An_Environmental_Friendlier_Offshore_Seismic_Source_Using_Artificially_Produced_Natural_Sounds
     [Google Scholar]
  13. Huang, N., Shen, Z., Long, S.R., Wu, M.C., Shih, H.H., Zheng, Q. et al. (1998) The empirical mode decomposition and the Hilbert spectrum for nonlinear and non‐stationary time series analysis. Proceedings of the Royal Society of London. Series A: Mathematical, Physical and Engineering Sciences, 454(1971), 903–995. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1098/rspa.1998.0193
     [Google Scholar]
  14. Jenkerson, M., Feltham, A., Henderson, N., Nechayuk, V., Girard, M. & Cozzens, A. (2018) Geophysical characterization and reliability testing of the APS marine vibrator. SEG Technical Program Expanded Abstracts. Houston, TX, SEG. pp. 116–120. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1190/segam2018‐2998020.1
  15. Laws, R. (2012) Cetacean hearing‐damage zones around a seismic source. The effects of noise on aquatic life. Advances in experimental medicine and biology, vol. 730. New York, NY: Springer, pp. 473–476. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1007/978‐1‐4419‐7311‐5_107
     [Google Scholar]
  16. Laws, R.M., Hopperstad, J.F., Gerez, D., Supawala, M., Özbek, A., Murray, T. et al. (2018) Marine vibrators: the new phase of seismic exploration. Geophysical Prospecting, 67(6), 1443–1470. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1111/1365‐2478.12708
     [Google Scholar]
  17. Liu, G., Fomel, S. & Chen, X. (2011) Time‐frequency analysis of seismic data using local attributes. Geophysics, 76(6), 23–34. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1190/geo2010‐0185.1
     [Google Scholar]
  18. Matthews, M.N.R., Ireland, D.S., Zeddies, D.G., Brune, R.H., & Pyć, C.D. (2020) A modeling comparison of the potential effects on marine mammals from sounds produced by marine vibroseis and air gun seismic sources. Journal of Marine Science and Engineering, 9(1), 12. Available from: https://doi.org/10.3390/jmse9010012
     [Google Scholar]
  19. Qi, C. & Hilterman, F. (2016) Removal of Doppler effects from marine vibrator OBN seismic. SEG Technical Program Expanded Abstracts. Houston, TX, SEG. pp. 183–187. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1190/segam2016‐13873434.1
  20. Rosenfeld, A. & Kak, A.C. (1982) Digital picture processing. Burlington, MA: Morgan Kaufmann. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1016/C2009‐0‐21955‐6
     [Google Scholar]
  21. Roy, D., Fasano, J., Nichols, B., Rekos, R. & Sutton, Z. (2023) Marine vibrator seismic survey pilot: source signature comparisons and operational success. 84th EAGE Annual Conference & Exhibition, Jun 2023. Utrecht, the Netherlands, European Association of Geoscientist & Engineers. pp. 1–5. Available from: https://doi.org/10.3997/2214‐4609.202310620
  22. Roy, D., Rekos, R., Brideau, C., Lawry, T. & Corrado, C. (2018) A marine vibrator to meet the Joint Industry Project specification. SEG Technical Program Expanded Abstracts. Houston, TX, SEG. pp. 97–101. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1190/segam2018‐2997347.1
  23. Schulze‐Gattermann, R. (1972) Physical aspects of the “airpulser” as a seismic energy source. Geophysical Prospecting, 20(1), 155–192. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365‐2478.1972.tb00628.x
     [Google Scholar]
  24. Schultz, P.S., Pieprzak, A.W., Johnson, G.R. & Walker, L. (1989) Simple theory for correction of marine vibroseis phase dispersion. Annual International Meeting Expanded Abstracts. Houston, TX, SEG. pp. 660–662. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1190/1.1889560
  25. Secker, S. (2022) An analytical approach to the Doppler shift correction for exponential sweeps. 83rd EAGE Annual Conference & Exhibition, Jun 2022. Utrecht, the Netherlands, European Association of Geoscientists & Engineers. pp. 1–5. Available from: https://doi.org/10.3997/2214‐4609.202210084
  26. Sheriff, R. & Geldart, L. (1995) Exploration seismology. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781139168359
     [Google Scholar]
  27. Southall, B.L., Finneran, J.J., Reichmuth, C., Nachtigall, P.E., Ketten, D.R., Bowles, A.E. et al. (2019) Marine mammal noise exposure criteria: updated scientific recommendations for residual hearing effects. Aquatic Mammals, 45(2), 125–232. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1578/AM.45.2.2019.125
     [Google Scholar]
  28. Yilmaz, O. (2001) Seismic data analysis. Houston, TX, Society of Exploration Geophysics. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1190/1.9781560801580
     [Google Scholar]
/content/journals/10.1111/1365-2478.13479
Loading
Marine vibrator source motion correction for strictly monotonic sweeps
Geophysical Prospecting 72, 1710 (2024); https://doi.org/10.1111/1365-2478.13479
/content/journals/10.1111/1365-2478.13479
/content/journals/10.1111/1365-2478.13479
Loading

Data & Media loading...

  • Article Type: Research Article
Keyword(s): acquisition; mathematical formulation; rays; seismics; 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