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

Abstract

ABSTRACT

A suite of three tests was performed to characterize the signal fidelity of OBC 4C acquisition systems. The test methodology was to evaluate individual sensor stations by acquiring source lines that were parallel to the in‐line and cross‐line horizontal sensors and source lines that were at 45° to the in‐line and cross‐line sensors. This technique provides constant azimuth gathers with a uniform offset range and removes issues associated with source array directivity.

Characterization of the test data identified the frequency content of the geophone signals and the correlation between the vertical and cross‐line geophones as the most sensitive indicators of signal infidelity. In the former case, stations with questionable signal fidelity exhibited a very reverberatory signal. This signal was most evident on the cross‐line sensor. In the latter case, when normalized cross‐correlation coefficients are computed in a moving window, the cross‐line sensor and the vertical sensor are highly correlated, beginning several hundred milliseconds after the first arrivals.

These characteristics can be exploited to allow stations with questionable signal fidelity to be programmatically identified. One means of identifying questionable stations is to compute the histogram of the instantaneous frequency. The frequency distributions from questionable stations are unambiguously distinguishable from stations that exhibit better signal fidelity. It was noted that signal fidelity appeared as a range, between acceptable and poor. To characterize the signal fidelity of an acquisition system adequately, the number of test samples must be statistically significant.

Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.1111/j.1365-2478.2006.00582.x
2006-11-02
2020-09-26
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

References

  1. BagainiC. and MuyzerrE.2004. Calibration of cross‐line components for sea‐bed 4C acquisition systems. Geophysical Prospecting52, 341–349.
    [Google Scholar]
  2. DellingerJ. and ClarkeR.2004. Same cable, different vector fidelity: a case study of the Seneca Lake and Valhall LoFS OBC datasets. 74th SEG Meeting, Denver , USA , Expanded Abstracts, paper MC 3.2.
  3. DellingerJ., ClarkeR. and GutowskiP.2001. Horizontal vector infidelity correction by general linear transform. 71st SEG Meeting, San Antonio , Texas , USA , Expanded Abstracts, 865–868.
  4. GaiserJ.1998. Compensating OBC data for variations in geophone coupling. 68th SEG Meeting, New Orleans , USA , Expanded Abstracts, 1429–1432.
  5. GaiserJ.2003. Vector‐fidelity differences between P‐wave first breaks and PS‐wave reflections – implications for compensation offull‐azimuth data. 65th EAGE Conference, Stavanger , Norway , Extended Abstracts, paper C‐33.
  6. GaiserJ., BarrF. and PaffenholzJ.2002. Vertical component coupling of OBC data. 64th EAGE Conference, Florence , Italy , Extended Abstracts, paper E‐07.
  7. KraghE., VignerA., HorneS., RobertssonJ. and CombeeL.2004. Quantifying the horizontal vector fidelity of a marine multicomponent acquisition system. 74th SEG Meeting, Denver , USA , Expanded Abstracts, paper MC 3.1.
  8. ThomsenL.2000. The issue of vector fidelity in multicomponent data. SEG/EAGE 2000 Summer Research Workshop, Session 1.
  9. TreeE.L.1999. The vector infidelity of the ocean bottom multicomponent seismic acquisition system. 61st EAGE Conference, Helsinki , Finland , Extended Abstracts, paper 6–19.
http://instance.metastore.ingenta.com/content/journals/10.1111/j.1365-2478.2006.00582.x
Loading
/content/journals/10.1111/j.1365-2478.2006.00582.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