1887
Volume 38 Number 8
  • E-ISSN: 1365-2478

Abstract

A

The determination of the vertical and lateral extent of discontinuities is an important aspect of interpreting seismic reflection data. The Common Fault Point (CFP) stacking method appears to be promising in imaging discontinuities in acoustic impedance by making use of diffracted energy from a spatial array of receivers. The problems of vertical and lateral resolution in the method are most important when carrying out an interpretation.

Source signature, subsurface velocities and the depth of the discontinuity are the most important parameters affecting the resolution. We use, for a perfectly coherent source, the first derivative of the Gaussian function which is an antisymmetric band‐limited wavelet. Rayleigh's, Ricker's and Widess' criteria are also applicable to this wavelet. The limits of vertical and lateral resolution are illustrated by using a step fault and a dike model respectively. The vertical resolution of the CFP method is found to be of the order of λ/16 which is half the theoretically predicted value for a single receiver. The lateral resolution is still limited by the size of the Fresnel zone which depends upon the velocity, two‐way time and the dominant frequency of the wavelet. The resolution limits of the CFP method are compared with that of the CDP method, prestack migration and post‐stack migration. Obtaining high resolution with real data is limited by the extent to which it is possible to generate a coherent source or to simulate one during computer processing with before stack seismic data. The CFP method is an artificial intelligence approach to imaging diffracting points as it localizes parts of the structure that scatter acoustic waves.

Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.1111/j.1365-2478.1990.tb01882.x
2006-04-27
2020-07-04
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

References

  1. Berkhout, A.J.1984. Seismic Resolution: A quantitative analysis of resolving power of acoustical echo techniques. Geophysical Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  2. Kallweit, R.S. and Wood, L.C.1982. The limits of resolution of zero‐phase wavelets. Geophysics47, 1035–1046.
    [Google Scholar]
  3. Kanasewich, E.R. and Phadke, S.1986, Location of fault edges on seismic sections. Abstract, Canadian Society of Exploration Geophysics National Convention, Calgary , Alberta , Canada .
    [Google Scholar]
  4. Kanasewich, E.R. and Phadke, S.M.1988. Imaging discontinuities on seismic sections. Geophysics53, 334–345.
    [Google Scholar]
  5. Koefoed, O.1981. Aspects of vertical seismic resolution. Geophysical Prospecting29, 21–30.
    [Google Scholar]
  6. Krey, T.1952. The significance of diffraction in the investigation of faults. Geophysics17, 843–858.
    [Google Scholar]
  7. Kunz, B.F.J.1960. Diffraction problems in fault interpretation. Geophysical Prospecting8, 381–388.
    [Google Scholar]
  8. Lindsey, J.P.1989. The Fresnel zone and its interpretive significance. The Leading Edge8, (10), 33–39.
    [Google Scholar]
  9. Longhurst, R.S.1967. Geometrical and Physical Optics, 2nd edn. Longman Green and Co., London .
    [Google Scholar]
  10. Phadke, S.1988. Imaging crustal diffraction zones and seismic tomography. Ph.D. thesis, University of Alberta, Edmonton , Canada .
  11. Rayleigh, J.W.S.1879. Investigations in optics, with special reference to the spectroscope. Philosophical Magazine and Journal of Science S. 5, 8, 261.
    [Google Scholar]
  12. Ricker, N.1953. Wavelet contraction, wavelet expansion and the control of seismic resolution. Geophysics18, 769–792.
    [Google Scholar]
  13. Schoenberger, M.1974. Resolution comparison of minimum‐phase and zero‐phase signals. Geophysics39, 826–833.
    [Google Scholar]
  14. Sheriff, R.E.1977. Limitations on resolution of seismic reflections and geologic detail derivable from them. AAPG Special Memoir26, 477–502.
    [Google Scholar]
  15. Sheriff, R.E.1980. Nomograms for Fresnel‐zone calculation. Geophysics45, 968–972.
    [Google Scholar]
  16. Widess, M.B.1973. How thin is a thin bed. Geophysics38, 1176–1180.
    [Google Scholar]
http://instance.metastore.ingenta.com/content/journals/10.1111/j.1365-2478.1990.tb01882.x
Loading
  • Article Type: Research Article
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