1887
Volume 24 Number 3
  • E-ISSN: 1365-2478

Abstract

A

Mis‐ties are all‐too‐common results of seismic surveys made at the same place but at different times with different equipment or by different organizations. Even after removal of positioning or polarity errors, reflection times often appear to differ by several tens of milliseconds. Zero time appears to fluctuate.

How can zero time differ on surveys with only minor differences in acquisition or processing? What can be done to identify the true zero time for each survey?

The first step toward establishing zero time is to record the source pulse. It is well‐known that the different sources currently used in reflection seismic prospecting (propane‐oxygen explosions, compressed‐air discharges, explosives, steam bubbles, mechanical implosions, vibrations, etc.) yield different pressure wavefronts as the input to the seismic reflection system. By recording this wavefront we capture the basic pulse shape and we establish the initial time delay.

The second step is to process the recorded source pulse as if it were reflection data to establish the additional time and shape changes introduced by data processing. Then, display the recorded and processed source pulse as an auxiliary variable at the ends of the seismic section. From this display the interpreter can systematically establish the time shifts appropriate to each picked event. He can determine also whether the pick should be a peak or a trough. He can see why surveys which appear to tie for shallow reflections appear to mis‐tie for deep reflections.

The display of the processed source pulse constitutes a major interpretation aid which, in a readily useable form, increases the information content of the basic seismic section.

Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.1111/j.1365-2478.1976.tb00951.x
2006-04-27
2024-04-26
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

References

  1. Barry, K. M., and Shugart, T., 1975, Zero‐Phase Seismic Sections, 45th SEG meeting in Denver .
    [Google Scholar]
  2. Giles, B. F., and Johnston, R. C., 1973, System Approach to Air‐Gun Array Design, Geophysical Prospecting21, 77–101.
    [Google Scholar]
  3. Kramer, F. S., Peterson, R. A., and Walter, W. C., 1968, Seismic Energy Sources 1968Handbook, UGC.
    [Google Scholar]
  4. Mayne, W. H., and Quay, R. G., 1971, Seismic Signatures of Large Air Guns, Geophysics36, 1162–1173.
    [Google Scholar]
  5. O'Doherty, R., Gearing, J. S., and Reynolds, K. J., 1975, Source Signature Correction, 37th EAEG meeting in Bergen .
    [Google Scholar]
  6. Schoenberger, M., 1974, Resolution Comparison of Minimum‐Phase and Zero‐Phase Signals, Geophysics39, 826–833.
    [Google Scholar]
http://instance.metastore.ingenta.com/content/journals/10.1111/j.1365-2478.1976.tb00951.x
Loading
  • Article Type: Research Article

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