1887
  1. Home
  2. Conferences
  3. Conference Proceedings
  4. EAGE 2020 Annual Conference & Exhibition Online
  5. Conference paper

Abstract

Summary

Images constructed from up-coming wavefields can be very effectively deconvolved using up/down deconvolution, however, they have geometry related drawbacks that reduce the quality of the shallower zones. In contrast, the down-going wavefield, which is imaged using mirror imaging, does not suffer from such geometry related disadvantages, however, it lacks a powerful deconvolution technique akin to up/down deconvolution. We use a modified Delft feedback model to describe the up- and down-going scattered wavefields. Using these results, we illustrate how up/down deconvolution works and then go on to introduce a new idea called down/down deconvolution. This new technique inverts the down-going wavefield for the Earth’s response in the absence of a free-surface. The free-surface multiples are removed and the 3D source wavefield is deconvolved to produce a result that is theoretically the same as up/down deconvolution. As a result we can combine the geometrical advantages of the down-going wavefield and the benefits of a powerful deconvolution technique. We illustrate this new idea using a synthetic dataset and a real 3D OBN dataset from the North Sea.

© EAGE Publications BV
Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/papers/10.3997/2214-4609.202010603
2020-12-08
2024-04-29

  • From This Site

    /content/papers/10.3997/2214-4609.202010603
    dcterms_title,dcterms_subject,pub_keyword
    -contentType:Journal -contentType:Contributor -contentType:Concept -contentType:Institution
    10
    5
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

References

  1. Amundsen, L.
    , 2001. Elimination of free-surface related multiples without need of the source wavelet, Geophysics, 66, 1.
     [Google Scholar]
  2. Berkhout, A.J.
    , 1982. Seismic Migration: Imaging of acoustic energy by wavefield extrapolation.A. Theoretical aspects: Elsevier Science Publishers.
     [Google Scholar]
  3. Hu, L., and McMechan, G.A.
    , 1986. Migration of VSP data by ray equation extrapolation in 2-D variable velocity media., Geophysical Prospecting, 34(5), 704–734.
     [Google Scholar]
  4. Kennett, B.L.N.
    , 1979. The Suppression of Surface Multiples on Seismic Records, Geophysical Prospecting27, 584–600.
     [Google Scholar]
  5. Orji, O.C., Sollner, W.C., and Gelius, L.J.
    , 2013. Sea Surface Reflection Coefficient Estimation, SEG Technical Program Expanded Abstracts : 51–55.
     [Google Scholar]
  6. Sonneland, L., and Berg, L.E.
    , 1987. Comparison of two approaches to water layer multiple attenuation by wave field extrapolation, SEG Technical Program Expanded Abstracts: 276–277.
     [Google Scholar]
  7. Soubaras, R.
    , 1986. Ocean bottom hydrophone and geophone processing, SEG Technical Program Expanded Abstracts 1996, 24–27
     [Google Scholar]
  8. Verschuur, D.J.
    , 1991. Surface-related multiple elimination, an inversion approach, PhD Thesis, Delft Univ. of technology.
     [Google Scholar]
  9. 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(10).
     [Google Scholar]
http://instance.metastore.ingenta.com/content/papers/10.3997/2214-4609.202010603
Loading
Down/down deconvolution
Conference Proceedings 2020, 1 (2020); https://doi.org/10.3997/2214-4609.202010603
/content/papers/10.3997/2214-4609.202010603
/content/papers/10.3997/2214-4609.202010603
Loading

Data & Media loading...

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