1887
Volume 54, Issue 6
  • E-ISSN: 1365-2478

Abstract

ABSTRACT

In land surveys, the weathering layer can often distort the seismic signal due to it passing through rapid velocity and density changes, dispersion, scattering and inelastic absorption. In a simple spring‐dashpot model for the earth response, an equivalent medium groups these complex phenomena into two parameters only; these are called ground viscosity and ground stiffness. The most recent controllers for vibrators can estimate both parameters. To validate these measurements, Saudi Aramco conducted an experiment measuring ground viscosity and stiffness from two different vibrator control systems over an area of varying terrain conditions, including unconsolidated sand and limestone outcrop. The two systems measured different values, but detected similar trends that correlated well with weathering conditions and surface geology, e.g. lower viscosity values on the outcrop than on the sand.

The ratio of ground viscosity to ground stiffness can approximate the shallow S‐wave velocity, which we converted into P‐wave velocity through calibration with sparse uphole data. Static corrections incorporating this velocity information somewhat improved the focusing of seismic time sections. This new approach does not require additional acquisition efforts, and can model shallow complex formations in arid areas where classical static methods often fail.

Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.1111/j.1365-2478.2006.00574.x
2006-11-02
2020-07-16
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

References

  1. Al‐AliM., Hastings‐JamesR., MakkawiM. and KorvinG.2003. Vibrator attribute leading velocity estimation. The The Leading Edge22, 400–405.
    [Google Scholar]
  2. Al‐ChalabiM.1994. Seismic velocity – A critique. First Break12, 589–596.
    [Google Scholar]
  3. BakerG.S.1999. Processing Near‐Surface Seismic – Reflection Data: A Primer. Society Exploration Geophysicists, Tulsa , USA .
  4. BergG.V.1989. Elements of Structural Dynamics . Prentice–Hall,Inc.
    [Google Scholar]
  5. 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.
  6. CampmanX., Van WijkK., ScalesJ. and HermanG.2003. Measuring, imaging, and suppressing scattered surface waves. 73rd SEG Meeting, Dallas , USA , Expanded Abstracts, 1897–1900.
  7. CoxM.1999. Static Corrections for Seismic Reflection Surveys. Society Exploration Geophysicists, Tulsa , USA .
  8. DubruleO.2003. Geostatistics for Seismic Data Integration in Earth Models. SEG/EAGE, Distinguished Instructor Series, 6.
  9. ErnstF.E., HermanG.C. and DitzelA.2002. Removal of scattered guided waves from seismic data. Geophysics67, 1240–1248.
    [Google Scholar]
  10. GarottaR.1990. New development and perspectives in vibroseismic. 60th SEG Meeting, San Francisco , USA , Expanded Abstracts, 948–951.
  11. GarottaR. and MarinD.1992. Adaptation of vibroseismic to local recording conditions. 54th EAGE Meeting, Paris , France , Expanded Abstracts, 54–55.
  12. JefferyR.W., StewartI.C.F. and AlexanderD.W.1996. Geostatistical estimation of depth conversion velocity using well control and gravity data. First Break14, 313–320.
    [Google Scholar]
  13. JournelA.G. and HuijbregtsChJ. 1978. Mining Geostatistics . Academic Press, Inc.
    [Google Scholar]
  14. KelamisP., EricksonK.E., VerschuurD.J. and BerkhoutA.J.2002. Velocity‐independent redatuming: a new approach to the near‐surface problem in land seismic data processing. The Leading Edge21, 730–735.
    [Google Scholar]
  15. LebedevA.V. and BeresnevI.A.2004. Nonlinear distortion of signals radiated by vibroseis sources. Geophysics69, 968–977.
    [Google Scholar]
  16. LerwillW.E.1981. The amplitude and phase response of a seismic vibrator. Geophysical Prospecting29, 503–528.
    [Google Scholar]
  17. LerwillW.E.1982. Reply to comments by Sallas and Weber on ‘The amplitude and phase of a seismic vibrator’. Geophysical Prospecting30, 939–941.
    [Google Scholar]
  18. 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.
  19. MartinJ.E. and JackI.G.1990. The behaviour of a seismic vibrator using different phase control methods and drive levels. First Break8, 404–414.
    [Google Scholar]
  20. MillerG.F. and PurseyH.1954. The field and radiation impedance of mechanical radiators on the free surface of a semi‐infinite isotropic solid. Proceedings of the Royal Society, London, UKA223,539.
    [Google Scholar]
  21. PostelJ.J., DenisM., BaliguetP. and BurgerP.1996. Quality control on a 3D Vibroseis crew. 58th EAGE Conference, Amsterdam , The Netherlands , Extended Abstracts, B015.
  22. RichartF.E., WoodsR.D. and HallJ.R.1970. Vibrations of Soils and Foundations . Prentice–Hall, Inc.
    [Google Scholar]
  23. SallasJ.J.1984. Seismic vibrator control and the down‐going P‐wave. Geophysics49, 732–740.
    [Google Scholar]
  24. SallasJ.J. and WeberR.M.1982. Comments on ‘The amplitude and phase of a seismic vibrator’ by W. E. Lerwill. Geophysical Prospecting30, 935–938.
    [Google Scholar]
  25. SoccoL.V. and StrobbiaC.2004. Surface wave method for near‐surface characterization: a tutorial. Near Surface Geophysics2, 165–185.
    [Google Scholar]
  26. VermeerG.J.O.1990. Seismic Wavefield Sampling. Society Exploration Geophysicists, Tulsa , USA .
  27. VermeerG.J.O.2002. 3‐D Seismic Survey Design. Society Exploration Geophysicists, Tulsa , USA .
  28. VesnaverA.2004. The near‐surface information gap for time and depth imaging. Geophysical Prospecting52, 653–661.
    [Google Scholar]
  29. ZhangY. and HubralP.2002. 2D ZO CRS stack and redatuming for a complex top surface topography. 72nd SEG Meeting, Salt Lake City , USA , Expanded Abstracts, 2051–53.
http://instance.metastore.ingenta.com/content/journals/10.1111/j.1365-2478.2006.00574.x
Loading
/content/journals/10.1111/j.1365-2478.2006.00574.x
Loading

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