1887

Abstract

Summary

In this paper we use a conceptual model to investigate the diffraction response of sand injectites. Unlike conventional seismic attributes derived from a migrated image using a local averaging process, the diffraction image provides the full resolution of the wavefield. We model a dike representing a typical injectite wing. This is of particular interest due to the advantage in illumination provided by diffraction over reflection for the steep flanks of the dike. We show that the model produces three type of diffraction response. These are associated with the host rock reflector terminations, with discontinuities in reflectivity along the flanks of the dike due to layering of the host rock, and with the pinchout of the dike. In each case the diffraction response is the resultant of a pair of edge diffractors, and the interference of the imaged diffractors depends on the geometry of the injectite. These results illustrate the potential for diffraction imaging to provide additional resolution of injectite geometries.

Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/papers/10.3997/2214-4609.201800632
2018-06-11
2020-07-06
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

References

  1. BrethautD., HartstraB., JayaM. and MoserT.J.
    2017. Diffraction imaging and well planning — a case study in the Dutch North Sea, 79th EAGE Conference and Exhibition, Paris.
    [Google Scholar]
  2. GrasmueckM., MoserT.J., PelissierM.A., PajchelJ. and PomarK.
    2015. Diffraction signatures of fracture intersections, Interpretation, 3, SF55–SF68.
    [Google Scholar]
  3. HolteK.
    2011. A seismic modeling study of sand injectites, NTNU MSc Thesis.
    [Google Scholar]
  4. HurstA. and CartwrightJ.
    , 2007, Relevance of sand injectites to hydrocarbon exploration and production, in A.Hurst and J.Cartwright, eds., Sand injectites: Implications for hydrocarbon exploration and production: AAPG Memoir87, p. 1 – 19.
    [Google Scholar]
  5. KellerJ. B.
    , 1962. Geometrical theory of diffraction, J. Opt. Soc. Am., 52(2), 116–130.
    [Google Scholar]
  6. KhaidukovV., LandaE. and MoserT.J.
    2004. Diffraction imaging by focusing-defocusing: an outlook on seismic superresolution, Geophysics, 69, 1478–1490.
    [Google Scholar]
  7. Klem-MusatovK.D. and AizenbergA.M.
    , 1984. The ray method and the theory of edge waves, Geoph.. J. R. Astr. Soc., 79, 35–50.
    [Google Scholar]
  8. MoserT.J.
    2012. Review of ray-Born modeling for migration and diffraction modeling, Studia Geophysica et Geodætica, 56, 411–432.
    [Google Scholar]
  9. MoserT.J., PelissierM.A., BallA., SturzuI. and PopoviciA.M.
    2017. Diffraction modelling and imaging of fluid escape features, South China Sea, 79th EAGE Conference & Exhibition, Paris.
    [Google Scholar]
  10. PelissierM., MoserT.J., YuC., LangJ., SturzuI. and PopoviciA.M.
    , 2017. Interpretation Value of Diffractions and Sub-Specular Reflections — Applications on the Zhao Dong Field, First Break, 35(2), 61–68.
    [Google Scholar]
  11. SommerfeldA.
    1896. Mathematische Theorie der Diffraction, Mathematische Annalen, 47, 317–374.
    [Google Scholar]
  12. 2003. Mathematical Theory of Diffraction, translated by R. J.Nagem, M.Zampolli and G.Sandri, BirkhäuserBoston.
    [Google Scholar]
  13. SturzuI., PopoviciA.M., TanushevN., MusatI., PelissierM.A. and MoserT.J.
    2013. Specularity Gathers for Diffraction Imaging, EAGE Expanded Abstracts, London.
    [Google Scholar]
  14. ZavalishinB.
    1982. Diffractions over deposit edges, Stanford Exploration Project, SEP-32, 125–136.
    [Google Scholar]
http://instance.metastore.ingenta.com/content/papers/10.3997/2214-4609.201800632
Loading
/content/papers/10.3997/2214-4609.201800632
Loading

Data & Media loading...

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