1887
  1. Home
  2. A-Z Publications
  3. Near Surface Geophysics
  4. Volume 15, Issue 4
  5. Article
Volume 15 Number 4
  • ISSN: 1569-4445
  • E-ISSN: 1873-0604

Abstract

ABSTRACT

Traditionally, commercial ultra‐high‐resolution 3D multichannel seismic surveys have used sources with relatively low‐frequency content (up to 600 Hz) with corresponding relatively low resolution. The new generation of multi‐tip sparkers, however, utilising negative discharge technology, is able to produce repeatable high‐frequency signals (above 2.5 kHz) with the potential to image hundreds of metres of the shallow stratigraphy at < 50 cm vertical resolution. These sources would be especially suited to ultra‐high‐resolution 3D studies such as the foundations of wind turbines installations for offshore wind farms.

However, simple downsizing of conventional processing sequences, designed for sources of significantly lower frequency content, is not enough. To preserve the signal properties of the sparker source and produce accurately positioned seismic images, new strategies are needed. The implementation of processing solutions that accurately determine source and receiver depths for all shots is also paramount to correctly reduce the data to the desired vertical datum.

A basic methodology for deriving geometry and shot corrections for wave motion and tides from the 3D data themselves has already been demonstrated. With Differential Global Positioning System (DGPS) navigation available on both source and streamers and the correct integration of the seismic recording and positioning systems, this concept has been further developed and refined to be more precise. Being able to derive components of the streamer position and depth is of great importance for effective broadband processing from the slanting streamers that are deployed in acquisition. New procedures and processing techniques have been developed, and their efficacy is demonstrated on case studies of recently acquired 2D and 3D multichannel data.

© European Association of Geoscientists and Engineers © 2017 European Association of Geoscientists and Engineers
Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.3997/1873-0604.2017022
2017-05-01
2024-04-25

  • From This Site

    /content/journals/10.3997/1873-0604.2017022
    dcterms_title,dcterms_subject,pub_keyword
    -contentType:Journal -contentType:Contributor -contentType:Concept -contentType:Institution
    10
    5
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

References

  1. ArcherS., GikasV., PinelC., RidyardD. and CrossP.1999. Spatially and temporally correlated navigation errors: how do they manifest themselves in seismic data.First Break17, 355–362.
     [Google Scholar]
  2. BearnthR.E. and MooreN.A.1989. Air gun‐slant cable seismic results in the Gulf of Mexico.59th SEG annual international meeting, Expanded Abstracts, 649–652.
     [Google Scholar]
  3. BellefleurG., DuchesneM.J., HunterJ., LongB.F. and LavoieD.2006. Comparison of single‐ and multi‐channel high‐resolution seismic data for shallow stratigraphy mapping in St. Lawrence River estuary, Quebec.Current Research 2006‐D2, Geological Survey of Canada.
     [Google Scholar]
  4. BrookshireB.N., LandersF.P. and StainJ.A.2015. Applicability of ultra‐high‐resolution 3D seismic data for geohazard identification at mid‐slope depths in the Gulf of Mexico: initial results.Underwater Technology32, 271–278.
     [Google Scholar]
  5. DuchesneM.J., BellefleurG., GalbraithM., KolesarR. and KuzmiskiR.2007. Strategies for waveform processing in sparker data.Marine Geophysical Researches.
     [Google Scholar]
  6. GamesK.P. and WakefieldN.D.2014. The successful design, development and acquisition of UHRS 3D seismic dataset.First Applied Shallow Marine Geophysics Conference, Athens, Greece, Extended Abstracts.
     [Google Scholar]
  7. GutowskiM., BreitzkeM. and SpießV.2002. Fast static correction methods for high‐frequency multichannel marine seismic reflection data: a high‐resolution seismic study of channel‐levee systems on the Bengal Fan.Marine Geophysical Researches23, 57–75.
     [Google Scholar]
  8. HenrietJ. P., VerschurenM. and VersteegW.1992. Very high resolution 3D seismic reflection imaging of small‐scale structural deformation.First Break10(3), 81–88.
     [Google Scholar]
  9. JonesL.E.A.2013. High frequency enhancement of sparker sub bottom profiles with multichannel reflection processing.23rd International Geophysical Conference and Exhibition, 11–14 August 2013, Melbourne, Australia, Extended Abstracts.
     [Google Scholar]
  10. MarssetB., MissiaenT., NobleM., VersteegW. and HenrietJ. P.1998. Very high resolution 3D marine seismic data processing for geo‐technical applications.Geophysical Prospecting46(2), 105–120.
     [Google Scholar]
  11. MonrigalO., De JongI. and DuarteH.2017. An ultra high resolution 3D seismic system for detailed site investigation.Near Surface Geophysics: Special Issue on Applied Marine Geophysics14(4).
     [Google Scholar]
  12. MosherD. and SimpkinP.1999. Status and trends of marine high‐resolution seismic reflection profiling: data acquisition.Contribution 1999002, Geological Survey of Canada, 22pp.
     [Google Scholar]
  13. RayC.H. and MooreN.A. 1982. High resolution, marine‐seismic stratigraphic system. United States Patent 4,353 121 (abstract);Geophysics (1983) 48, 404.
     [Google Scholar]
  14. ReillyJ.M.2016. Marine broadband technology: history and remaining challenges from an end‐user perspective.The Leading Edge, Special Section: Offshore Geophysical Applications/OTC, 316–321.
     [Google Scholar]
  15. RutgersW.R. and De JongI.2003. Multi‐tip sparker for the generation of acoustic pulses.Sensor Review23(1), 55–59.
     [Google Scholar]
  16. SablonR., LafetY., LinD. and SoubarasR.2012. Challenges and benefits of variable‐depth streamer: from acquisition to interpretation.Istanbul International Geophysical Conference and Oil & Gas Exhibition, 17–19 September 2012, Istanbul, Turkey, Extended Abstracts.
     [Google Scholar]
  17. SoubarasR. and WhitingP.2011. Variable depth streamer – The new broadband acquisition system.SEG Technical Program Expanded Abstracts2011, 4349–4353.
     [Google Scholar]
  18. WardellN., DiviaccoP. and SinceriR.2002. 3D Pre‐processing techniques for marine VHR seismic data.First Break20(7), 457–466.
     [Google Scholar]
http://instance.metastore.ingenta.com/content/journals/10.3997/1873-0604.2017022
Loading
Advanced processing for UHR3D shallow marine seismic surveys
Near Surface Geophysics 15, 347 (2017); https://doi.org/10.3997/1873-0604.2017022
/content/journals/10.3997/1873-0604.2017022
/content/journals/10.3997/1873-0604.2017022
Loading

Data & Media loading...

  • Article Type: Research Article

Most Cited This Month Most Cited RSS feed

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