Volume 54, Issue 6
  • E-ISSN: 1365-2478



We present a seismic Test Line, provided by Saudi Aramco for various research teams, to highlight a few major challenges in land data processing due to near‐surface anomalies. We discuss state‐of‐the‐art methods used to compensate for shallow distortions, including single‐layer, multilayer, plus/minus, refraction and tomostatics methods. They are a starting point for the new technologies presented in other papers, all dealing with the same challenging data described here.

The difficulties on the Test Line are mostly due to the assumption of vertical raypaths, inherent in classical applications of near‐surface correction statics. Even the most detailed velocity/depth model presents difficulties, due to the compleX‐raypath. There is a need for methods which are based on more complex models andtheories.


Article metrics loading...

Loading full text...

Full text loading...


  1. BridleR.2005. Plus/minus method to solve large amplitude near‐surface static corrections. 67th EAGE Conference, Madrid , Spain , Extended Abstracts, G022.
  2. BridleR., LeyII.R., Al‐HomailiM., MaddisonB. and JanssenK.2003. Practical application of implementing a layer model with control from first breaks in Saudi Arabia. 73rd SEG Meeting, Dallas , USA , Expanded Abstracts, 1996–99.
  3. BuckA.V., Al‐DulaijanA.Y., Al YacoubT. and Al GhamdiS.1996. Near surface modeling in Saudi Arabia. 58th EAGE Conference, Amsterdam , The Netherlands , Extended Abstracts, B037.
  4. CoxM.1999. Static Correction for Seismic Reflection Surveys . Society Exploration Geophysicists , Tulsa , USA .
    [Google Scholar]
  5. CunninghamA.B.1974. Refraction data from single‐ended refraction profiles. Geophysics39, 292–301 (errata in. Geophysics39, 918).
    [Google Scholar]
  6. HagedoornJ.G.1959. The plus‐minus method of interpreting seismic refraction sections. Geophysical Prospecting7, 158–182.
    [Google Scholar]
  7. HampsonD. and RussellB.1984. First‐break interpretation using generalized linear inversion. Journal of the Canadian Society Exploration Geophysicists20, 40–54.
    [Google Scholar]
  8. HokeJ.H.1967. Refraction prospecting in the Rub Al Khali. In: Seismic Refraction Prospecting (ed. A. W.Musgrave ), pp. 493–504. Society Exploration Geophysicists , Tulsa , USA .
    [Google Scholar]
  9. KosloffD., PecholcsP.I., ZackhemU.I. and KorenZ.1997. Estimation of long‐wavelength near‐surface velocity and low‐relief structural anomalies – Part II: A new near‐surface reconstruction method. 67th SEG Meeting, Dallas , USA , Expanded Abstracts, 1063–1065.
  10. LawtonD.C.1989. Computation of refraction static corrections using first‐break traveltime differences. Geophysics54, 1289–1296.
    [Google Scholar]
  11. LeyII.R., BridleR., AmarasingheD., Al‐HomailiM., Al‐AliM., ZingerM. and RoweW.2003. Development of near‐surface models in Saudi Arabia for low relief structures and complex near‐surface geology. 73rd SEG Meeting, Dallas , USA , Expanded Abstracts, 1992–95.
  12. Van OvermeerenR.A.2001. Hagedoorn's plus‐minus method: the beauty of simplicity. Geophysical Prospecting49, 687–696.
    [Google Scholar]
  13. PecholcsP.I., NguyenS., KosloffD. and LitvinA.1997. Estimation of long‐wavelength near‐surface velocity and low‐relief structural anomalies – Part I: A case history in central Saudi Arabia. 67th SEG Meeting, Dallas , USA , Expanded Abstracts, 1059–1062.
  14. VesnaverA.2004. The near‐surface information gap. Geophysical Prospecting52, 653–661.
    [Google Scholar]
  15. VesnaverA., BridleR., GermanJ., HuL., KimJ.J., LeyII.R. and MakridesK.2002. Tomostatics for half a million traces. 72nd SEG Meeting, Salt Lake City , USA , Expanded Abstracts, 957–960.
  16. ZhangJ. and ToksözM.N.1998. Nonlinear refraction traveltime tomography. Geophysics63, 1726–1737.
    [Google Scholar]

Data & Media 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