1887
Volume 73, Issue 2
  • E-ISSN: 1365-2478

Abstract

Abstract

Seismic datasets acquired in onshore basins typically present a great challenge for seismic depth imaging due to the poor quality of the prestack data caused by inherent acquisition difficulties and, in particular, the distortion of the seismic signal caused by topography and heterogeneity of the weathering zone. In this seismic data, the standard static correction does not give satisfactory results in depth imaging. Wave‐equation‐based redatuming is an alternative solution to this problem, as it correctly moves the data measured on the terrain surface to a new flat datum. But most redatuming techniques require knowledge of an accurate near‐surface velocity model. A new workflow for depth imaging of land data is proposed by combining Kirchhoff single‐stack redatuming and prestack data enhancement by common‐reflection surface stack method. A major advantage of this redatuming method is that it only requires a good approximation of the near‐surface velocity model to properly remove distortions in the seismic signal caused by the rugged topography and weathering zone. A new algorithm is introduced to apply Kirchhoff single‐stack redatuming to multi‐coverage land seismic data. Common‐reflection surface‐based prestack data enhancement is applied after redatuming to attenuate radon noise and enhance coherent event. The proposed workflow has been successfully applied to land seismic data from the Parnaíba Basin in northeastern Brazil, transforming surface‐referenced prestack data to a new flat datum. By applying common‐reflection surface‐based enhancement to the redatumed prestack data, a significant improvement in signal‐to‐noise ratio and enhancement of reflections was achieved. The depth‐migrated image confirms the great improvement in quality, where the reflectors show strong enhancement and better continuity throughout the section, compared to the migrated image obtained from the only redatumed data. This improvement in quality was important for the interpretation of the main reflectors of the geological formations.

© 2025 European Association of Geoscientists & Engineers. © 2025 European Association of Geoscientists & Engineers.
Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.1111/1365-2478.13662
2025-01-26
2025-11-12

  • From This Site

    /content/journals/10.1111/1365-2478.13662
    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. & Bagaini, C. (2006) Straight‐rays redatuming: a fast and robust alternative to wave‐equation‐based datuming. Geophysics, 71(3), U37–U46.
     [Google Scholar]
  2. Amorim, W.N., Hubral, P. & Tygel, M. (1987) Computing field statics with the help of seismic tomography. Geophysical Prospecting, 35, 907–919.
     [Google Scholar]
  3. Baykulov, M. & Gajewski, D. (2009) Prestack seismic data enhancement with partial common‐reflection‐surface (CRS) stack. Geophysics, 74(3), V49–V58.
     [Google Scholar]
  4. Berryhill, J.R. (1979) Wave‐equation datuming. Geophysics, 44, 1329–1344.
     [Google Scholar]
  5. Berryhill, J.R. (1984) Wave‐equation datuming before stack. Geophysics, 49(11), 2064–2066.
     [Google Scholar]
  6. Červený, V. & Pšenčík, I. (1988) 2D ray tracing program Seis88. Prague: Charles University. Available from: http://sw3d.cz/
  7. Cox, M. (1999) Static Correction for Seismic Reflection Surveys. Society of Exploration Geophysicists, Tulsa, Oklahoma, US.
  8. Gonçalves, B.F. & Garabito, G. (2022) Assessment of two refraction traveltime tomography methods applied for statics corrections of land data. Brazilian Journal of Geophysics, 39, 565–583.
     [Google Scholar]
  9. Garabito, G., Stoffa, P.L., Lucena, L.S. & Cruz, J.C. (2012) Part I—CRS stack: global optimization of the 2D CRS‐attributes. Journal of Applied Geophysics, 85, 92–101.
     [Google Scholar]
  10. Garabito, G. (2018) A comparative study of common‐reflection‐surface prestack time migration and data regularization: application in crooked‐line data. Geophysics, 83, S355–S364.
     [Google Scholar]
  11. Garabito, G. (2021) Prestack seismic data interpolation and enhancement with common‐reflection‐surface based migration and demigration. Geophysical Prospecting, 69, 913–925.
     [Google Scholar]
  12. Garabito, G., Stoffa, P.L., Bezerra, Y.S.F. & Caldeira, J.L. (2021) Combination of the common reflection surface‐based prestack data regularization and reverse time migration: application to real land data. Geophysics, 86, S155–S164.
     [Google Scholar]
  13. Hubral, P., Schleicher, J. & Tygel, M. (1996) A unified approach to 3‐D seismic reflection imaging, part I: basic concepts. Geophysics, 61, 742–758.
     [Google Scholar]
  14. Jäger, R., Mann, J., Höcht, G. & Hubral, P. (2001) Common‐reflection‐surface stack: image and attributes. Geophysics, 66, 97–109.
     [Google Scholar]
  15. Marsden, D. (1993b) Static corrections—a review, part II. Leading Edge, 12, 115–120.
     [Google Scholar]
  16. Oliveira, S., Figueiredo, J.J.S. & Freitas, L. (2015) Redatuming operators analysis in homogeneous media. Acta Geophysica, 63(2), 414–431.
     [Google Scholar]
  17. Pila, F.M., Schleicher, J., Novais, A. & Coimbra, T.A. (2014) True‐amplitude single‐stack redatuming. Journal of Applied Geophysics, 105, 95–111.
     [Google Scholar]
  18. Schneider, W.A.Jr., Phillip, L.D. & Paal, E.F. (1995) Wave‐equation velocity replacement of the low‐velocity layer for overthrust‐belt data. Geophysics, 60, 573–579.
     [Google Scholar]
  19. Schleicher, J., Tygel, M. & Hubral, P. (1993) Parabolic and hyperbolic paraxial two‐point traveltimes in 3D media. Geophysical Prospecting, 41, 495–513.
     [Google Scholar]
  20. Stockwell, J.J. (1999) Retrieved from The CWP/SU: seismic Un*x Package. Computers & Geosciences, 25, 415–419.
     [Google Scholar]
  21. Rocha, T.C., Garabito, G., Hubral, P., Shahsavani, H. & Gonçalves, B.F. (2022) Sensitivity analysis to near‐surface velocity errors of the Kirchhoff single‐stack redatuming of multi‐coverage seismic data. Journal of Applied Geophysics, 206, 1–14.
     [Google Scholar]
  22. Tegtmeier, S., Gisolf, A. & Verschuur, D.J., (2004) 3D sparse‐data Kirchhoff redatuming. Geophysical Prospecting, 52, 509–521.
     [Google Scholar]
  23. Tygel, M., Schleicher, J. & Hubral, P. (1996) A unified approach to 3‐D seismic reflection imaging, part II: theory. Geophysics, 61, 759–775.
     [Google Scholar]
  24. Tygel, M., Müller, T., Hubral, P. & Schleicher, J. (1997) Eigenwave based multiparameter traveltime expansions. In: 67th Annual International Meeting, SEG, Expended Abstracts. Houston, SEG. pp. 1770–1773.
  25. Wiggins, J.W. (1984) Kirchhoff integral extrapolation and migration of nonplanar data. Geophysics, 49, 1239–1248.
     [Google Scholar]
  26. Yilmaz, O., Gao, K., Delic, M., Xia, J., Huang, L., Jodeiri, H. & Pugin, A., (2022) A reality check on full‐wave inversion applied to land seismic data for near‐surface modeling. The Leading Edge, 41, 40–46.
     [Google Scholar]
  27. Zelt, C.A. & Ellis, R.M. (1988) Practical and efficient ray tracing in two‐dimensional media for rapid traveltime and amplitude forward modeling. Canadian Journal of Exploration Geophysics, 24, 16–31.
     [Google Scholar]
/content/journals/10.1111/1365-2478.13662
Loading
A workflow combining Kirchhoff single‐stack redatuming and common‐reflection surface‐based enhancement for depth imaging: A case study
Geophysical Prospecting 73, 507 (2025); https://doi.org/10.1111/1365-2478.13662
/content/journals/10.1111/1365-2478.13662
/content/journals/10.1111/1365-2478.13662
Loading

Data & Media loading...

  • Article Type: Research Article
Keyword(s): data denoising; demigration; migration; redatuming; wavefront attributes

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