1887
Volume 56, Issue 2
  • E-ISSN: 1365-2478

Abstract

ABSTRACT

It has been shown on an ‘ideal’ synthetic dataset that PP/PS‐stereotomography can estimate an accurate velocity model without any pairing of PP‐ and PS‐events. The P‐wave velocity model is first estimated using PP data and then, fixing this velocity field, the S‐wave velocity is estimated using the PS data. This method needed to be evaluated further and we present here the first application of PP/PS‐stereotomography to a real dataset: the 2D East‐West Mahogany OBC line (Gulf of Mexico). We are here confronted with data which do not fit our working assumptions: coherent noise (due to an approximate separation of PP‐ and PS‐events and some remaining multiples), probably some anisotropy and 3D effects. With a careful selection of the stereotomographic picks, which allows one to decrease the effect of the picked coherent noise by the automatic picker, our application can demonstrate the relevance of our approach in the upper part of the profile, where anisotropy and 3D effects might be low. We can thus estimate, without any pairing of PP‐ and PS‐events, a velocity field which provides not only flat common image gathers, but also PP‐ and PS‐depth migrated images located at the same positions. For the deeper part of the profile, a significant shift in depth appears. In addition to possible anisotropy, 3D effects and a more complex velocity field (‘salt body’), this is due to the quality of the PZ‐ and X‐components profiles: The PZ‐component profile where the PP‐stereotomographic picking is performed, is polluted by conflicting converted or multiple events and the X‐component profile, where the PS‐stereotomographic picking is performed, is highly noisy. This study emphasizes the need to develop accurate selection criteria for the stereotomographic picks.

Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.1111/j.1365-2478.2008.00681.x
2008-02-13
2020-05-26
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

References

  1. AleriniM., LambaréG., BainaR., PodvinP. and Le BégatS.2007. 2D PP/PS‐stereotomography: P‐waves and S‐waves velocities estimation from OBC data. Geophysical Journal International170, 725–736.
    [Google Scholar]
  2. BarbosaB., CostaJ., GomesE. and Schleicher. 2006. Sensitivity analysis for stereotomography in elliptic and annelliptic media. 76th SEG meeting, New Orleans, Louisiana, USA, Expanded Abstracts.
  3. BilletteF. and LambaréG.1998. Velocity macro‐model estimation from seismic reflection data by stereotomography. Geophysical Jouranl International135, 671–680.
    [Google Scholar]
  4. BilletteF., Le BégatS., PodvinP. and LambaréG. 2003. Practical aspects and applications of 2D stereotomography. Geophysics68, 1008–1021.
    [Google Scholar]
  5. BoëlleJ.‐L. and RicarteP.2003. Deep target prestack time migration and migration velocity analysis using converted PS data. 73rd SEG meeting, Dallas, Texas, USA, Expanded Abstracts.
  6. BrotoK., EhingerA., KommedalJ. and FolstadP., 2003. Anisotropic traveltime tomography for depth consistent imaging of PP and PS data. The Leading Edge22, 114–119.
    [Google Scholar]
  7. CaldwellJ.1999. Marine multicomponent seismology. The Leading Edge18, 1274–1282.
    [Google Scholar]
  8. CaldwellJ., KristiansenP., BeaudoinG., TollestrupK., SiddiquiS., WyattK., CampW. and RaneyG.1998. Marine 4‐component seismic test, Gulf of Mexico: subsalt imaging at Mahogany field. 68th SEG meeting, New Orleans, Louisiana, USA, Expanded Abstracts.
  9. EdmeP., SoudaniM.T.A., BoëlleJ. and SinghS.2005. Data‐driven P‐S separation in OBC data. 67th EAGE meeting, Madrid, Spain, Expanded Abstracts.
  10. FossS.‐K., UrsinB. and De HoopM.2005. Depth consistent reflection tomography using PP and PS seismic data. Geophysics70, U51–U65.
    [Google Scholar]
  11. GaiserJ., MoldoveanuN., MacBethC., MichilenaR. and SpitzS.2001. Multicomponent technology: the players, problems, applications, and trends ‐ summary of the workshop sessions. The Leading Edge20, 974–977.
    [Google Scholar]
  12. GarottaR. and GrangerP.1987. Comparison of responses of compressional and converted waves on a gas sand. 57th SEG meeting, New Orleans, Louisiana, USA, Expanded Abstracts.
  13. GarottaR., GrangerP.‐Y. and DariuH.2000. High resolution Vp/Vs derivation: a bridge between multicomponent AVA and elastic parameters. 70th SEG meeting, Calgary, Canada, Expanded Abstracts.
  14. GereaC., NicoletisL. and RakotoarisoaH.2001. New methodology for anisotropic migration velocity analysis: 2D‐4C Mahogany field, Gulf of Mexico. 71st SEG meeting, San Antonio, Texas, USA, Expanded Abstracts.
  15. GrangerP.‐Y., BonnotJ. M., GresillaudA. and RolletA.2001. C‐wave resolution enhancement through birefringence compensation at Valhall field. 71st SEG meeting, San Antonio, Texas, USA, Expanded Abstracts.
  16. GranliJ., ArntsenB., SollidA. and HildeE.1999. Imaging through gas‐filled sediments using marine shear‐wave data. Geophysics64, 668–677.
    [Google Scholar]
  17. HanD.‐H., NurA. and MorganD.1986. Effects of porosity and clay content on wave velocities in sandstones. Geophysics51, 2093–2107.
    [Google Scholar]
  18. HerrenschmidtA., GrangerP.‐Y., AudebertF., ÉtienneG., StopinA., AleriniM., BégatS.L., LambaréG., BerthetP., NebieridzeS. and BoelleJ.‐L.2001. Comparison of different strategies for velocity model building and imaging of PP and PS real data. The Leading Edge20, 984–995.
    [Google Scholar]
  19. JinS., MadariagaR., VirieuxJ. and LambaréG.1992. Two‐dimensional asymptotic iterative elastic inversion. Geophysical Journal International108, 575–588.
    [Google Scholar]
  20. JinS., ZhangP., HarrisP. and PicaA.2002. 3D multi‐pathing and true amplitude Kirchhoff prestack depth migration. 64th EAGE meeting, Florence, Italy, Expanded Abstracts.
  21. KendallR. and KendallJ.1996. Shear‐wave amplitude anomalies in south‐central Wyoming. The Leading Edge15, 913–920.
    [Google Scholar]
  22. KendallR., GrayS. and MurphyG.1998a. Subsalt imaging using prestack depth migration of converted waves: Mahogany field, Gulf of Mexico. 68th SEG meeting, New Orleans, Louisiana, USA, Expanded Abstracts.
  23. KendallR.R., HallS.A., KendallJ.‐M. and SondergeldC.1998b. Anisotropic velocity analysis of a fractured and vuggy carbonate. 68th SEG meeting, New Orleans, Louisiana, USA, Expanded Abstracts.
  24. LambaréG., AleriniM. and PodvinP.2004. Stereotomography in practice. 66th EAGE meeting, Paris, France, Expanded Abstracts.
  25. LambaréG., BoëlleJ.‐L. and AleriniM.2004. Semi automatic PP‐PS Stereotomography? Application to a real dataset. 66th EAGE meeting, Paris, France, Expanded Abstracts.
  26. LavaudB., BainaR. and LandaE.2004. Poststack Stereotomography: a robust strategy for velocity model estimation. 66th EAGE meeting, Paris, France, Expanded Abstracts.
  27. NagS., AleriniM., DuveneckE. and UrsinB.2006. Anisotropic stereotomography. 76th SEG meeting, New Orleans, Louisiana, USA, Expanded Abstracts.
  28. NguyenS., NobleM., ThierryP. and BainaR.2002. Tomography picking in the depth migrated domain using migration of attributs. 72nd SEG meeting, Salt Lake City, Utah, USA, Expanded Abstracts.
  29. NicolétisL., Svay‐LucasJ., ClochardV. and CompteP.1997. 3‐D true‐amplitude migration of 3‐C compressional and converted shear waves. Journal of Seismic Exploration6, 127–142.
    [Google Scholar]
  30. OgilvieJ.S. and PurnellG.W.1996. Effects of salt‐related mode conversions on subsalt prospecting. Geophysics48, 331–348.
    [Google Scholar]
  31. PolskovM. K., BrodovL. J., MirovonaL. V., MichonD., GarottaR. J., LayotteP. C. and CoppensF.1980. Utilisation combinée des ondes longitudinales et transversales en sismique réflexion (presented at EAEG, 1976, Prague). Geophysical Prospecting28, 185–207.
    [Google Scholar]
  32. RonenS., ProbertT. and BagainiC.2000. Acquisition of multi‐component seismic data on the sea bed. In: Abstracts, SEG Research Workshop “Recent adcances in shear wave technology for reservoir characterization: A new beginning?”, Boise, Idaho. SEG.
    [Google Scholar]
  33. SoubarasR.1996. Ocean‐bottom hydrophone and geophone processing. 66th SEG meeting, Denver, Colorado, USA, Expanded Abstracts.
  34. StewartR.R., GaiserJ., BrownR. and LawtonD.2002. Converted‐wave seismic exploration: Methods. Geophysics67, 1348–1363.
    [Google Scholar]
  35. StewartR.R., GaiserJ., BrownR. and LawtonD.2003. Converted‐wave seismic exploration: Applications. Geophysics68, 40–57.
    [Google Scholar]
  36. StopinA.2001. Détermination de modèle de vitesse anisotrope par tomography de réflexion des modes de compression et de cisaillement , PhD thesis, Université Louis Pasteur – Strasbourg I.
    [Google Scholar]
  37. TarantolaA.1986. A strategy for non linear inversion of seismic reflection data. Geophysics51, 1893–1903.
    [Google Scholar]
  38. ThierryP., LambaréG., PodvinP. and NobleM.1999. 3‐D preserved amplitude prestack depth migration on a workstation. Geophysics64, 222–229.
    [Google Scholar]
  39. ThomsenL., BarkvedO., HaggardB., KommedalJ. and RoslandB.1997. Converted‐wave imaging of the Valhall reservoir. 67th EAGE meeting, Madrid, Spain, Expanded Abstracts.
  40. XuS., ChaurisH., LambaréG. and NobleM.2001. Common angle image gather: a strategy for imaging complex media. Geophysics66, 1877–1894.
    [Google Scholar]
http://instance.metastore.ingenta.com/content/journals/10.1111/j.1365-2478.2008.00681.x
Loading
/content/journals/10.1111/j.1365-2478.2008.00681.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