1887

Abstract

Summary

Near-field hydrophones (NFH) record both airgun signatures in a source array and reflections from the sub-surface. Previous work has found such data suitable for imaging to 1,000 ms or more. Using flip-flop NFH data from a Chevron seabed node survey, we characterise noise in data recorded in both passive mode (flop source NFH sensors listen while flip source fires) and in active mode (flip sensors listen while flip source fires). We find passive NFH data are good quality, though low-frequency, direct bubble arrivals from the active source require attenuation to retain low-frequency signal needed for penetration. Ambient noise increases aftwards in passive sub-arrays with the tail sensor strongly affected by noise and signal loss, probably due to water aerated by the previous shot.

Only leading NFH sensors record good reflection signal on active data. Bubble arrivals dominate and following sensors show significant signal loss. We suggest that trailing NFH sensors enter water aerated by the preceding cluster, reducing signal sensitivity.

Our analysis finds that the compact isotropic source generates a localized, cavitational, secondary source that is relatively low amplitude and high frequency but is likely to be visible in direct-arrival signatures at seabed nodes.

Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/papers/10.3997/2214-4609.201901407
2019-06-03
2024-03-29
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

References

  1. Davies, K. J.
    [2017]. System and method for Earth Imaging using Near Field Hydrophone data. US Patent Application 20180259663A1.
    [Google Scholar]
  2. Khodabandeloo, B. and Landrø, M.
    [2018]. Acoustically induced cavity cloud generated by air-gun arrays-Comparing video recordings and acoustic data to modeling. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 143, 3383–3393.
    [Google Scholar]
  3. Kragh, E., Laws, R. M. and Özbek, A.
    [2000]. Source signal estimation - attenuation of the sea-bottom reflection error from near-field measurements. First Break, 18, 260–264.
    [Google Scholar]
  4. Kragh, J. E., Robertsson, J. O. A., Muyzert, E. and Kostov, C.
    [2009]. Zero-offset seismic trace construction and its use. UK Patent, GB2441344B.
    [Google Scholar]
  5. Landrø, M., Amundsen, L. and Barker, D.
    [2011]. High-frequency signals from air-gun arrays. Geophysics, 76(4), Q19–Q27.
    [Google Scholar]
  6. Nevill, P., Davies, K., Mohammed, S., Ubik, K., Jupp, R., Christie, P. and Kragh, E.
    [2019]. Imaging with near-field hydrophones. The Leading Edge (in review).
    [Google Scholar]
  7. Ziolkowski, A., Parkes, G., Hatton, L. and Haugland, T.
    [1982]. The signature of an air gun array: Computation from near-field measurements including interactions. Geophysics, 47, 1413–1421.
    [Google Scholar]
  8. Ziolkowski, A. M. and Johnston, R. G. K.
    [1997]. Marine seismic sources: QC of wavefield computation from near-field pressure measurements. Geophysical Prospecting, 45, 611–639.
    [Google Scholar]
http://instance.metastore.ingenta.com/content/papers/10.3997/2214-4609.201901407
Loading
/content/papers/10.3997/2214-4609.201901407
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