1887

Abstract

Summary

We introduce two methods for removing the scattering related to a single sub-horizontal reflector or a stack of layers. The first method combines full-waveform finite-difference (FD) solvers above and below the interface(s) of interest with one-way wavefield extrapolation across the interface(s). This removes the scattering associated with the interface(s), while preserving all other events with correct kinematics and dynamics. Furthermore, we show how scattering due to a single interface can be removed from surface reflection data using Marchenko redatuming. Reflection responses related to different depth intervals of the subsurface are isolated and combined such that scattering due to a certain depth interval is removed from the surface data. Both methods require the one-way transmission responses across the interface(s) of interest and we assume that we can intersect the medium above and below the reflector of interest. Potential applications include removing interbed multiples from surface data as well as the generation of FD reference data without interbed multiples.

Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/papers/10.3997/2214-4609.201801068
2018-06-11
2024-03-29
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

References

  1. Amundsen, L. and Robertsson, J.
    [2014] Wave equation processing using finite-difference propagators, Part 1: Wavefield dissection and imaging of marine multicomponent seismic data. Geophysics, 79(6), T287–T300.
    [Google Scholar]
  2. Kennett, B.
    [1983] Seismic wave propagation in stratified media. Cambridge University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  3. van Manen, D.J., Robertsson, J. and Curtis, A.
    [2007] Exact wave field simulation for finite-volume scattering problems. The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 122(4), EL115–L121.
    [Google Scholar]
  4. Meles, G., Löer, K., Ravasi, M., Curtis, A. and da Costa Filho, C.
    [2015] Internal multiple prediction and removal using Marchenko autofocusing and seismic interferometry. Geophysics, 80(1), A7–A11.
    [Google Scholar]
  5. Stork, C., Kapoor, J., Zhao, W., Dragoset, B. and Dingwall, K.
    [2006] Predicting and removing complex 3D surface multiples with WEM modelingâǍŤan alternative to 3D SRME for wide azimuth surveys? SEG Technical Program Expanded Abstracts, 2679–2683.
    [Google Scholar]
  6. Verschuur, D. and Berkhout, A.J.
    [2005] Removal of internal multiples with the common-focus-point (CFP) approach: Part 2 Application strategies and data examples. Geophysics, 70(3), V61–V72.
    [Google Scholar]
  7. Wapenaar, C., Thorbecke, J., van der Neut, J., Broggini, F., Slob, E. and Snieder, R.
    [2014] Marchenko imaging. Geophysics, 79(3), WA39–WA57.
    [Google Scholar]
  8. Wapenaar, K.
    [2017] Marchenko-based target replacement, accounting for all orders of multiple reflections. arXiv preprint.
    [Google Scholar]
  9. Weglein, A.B.
    [1997] An inverse-scattering series method for attenuating multiples in seismic reflection data. Geophysics, 62(6), 1975.
    [Google Scholar]
http://instance.metastore.ingenta.com/content/papers/10.3997/2214-4609.201801068
Loading
/content/papers/10.3997/2214-4609.201801068
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