1887

Abstract

Summary

At present, when carrying out offshore seismic operations using the HR/VHR/UHR (high-resolution, very-high-resolution and ultra-high-resolution) techniques, various types of sources of elastic waves are used, such as electric sparker sources (“sparkers”), electrodynamic sources (“boomers”) and small volume air guns. The signature of these sources differs significantly from each other and depends on the parameters of their operation in each case. In addition, the streamer towing depth affects the resulting waveform. Typically, such a signature includes a primary source pulse, ghost waves reflected from the water-air surface from the source and from the receiver, secondary bubble pulsations, and possibly other oscillations associated with the characteristics of the source. The resulting complex signature, if it cannot be suppressed by processing, significantly reduces the resolution of the seismic images. Even now, during g high-resolution seismic data processing, it is usually not possible to completely effectively suppress the signature, which leads to the loss of the potential advantages of high-resolution seismic surveys and a decrease the quality of the resulting images. In this article we will go through some examples of data acquired with different types of sources and discuss approaches to suppressing noise waves contained in the resulting signature.

Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/papers/10.3997/2214-4609.202152017
2021-04-26
2024-04-25
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

References

  1. Claerbout, J., Guitton, A.
    , 2015. Ricker-Compliant Deconvolution:Geophysical Prospecting, Volume 63, Issue 3, pages 615–625
    [Google Scholar]
  2. DuchesneMJ, BellefleurG, GalbraithM et al
    (2007) Strategies for waveform processing in sparker data. Marine Geophysical Research28:153–164
    [Google Scholar]
  3. Kluesner, J., Brothers, D., Hart, P., Miller, N., Hatcher, G.
    , 2018Practical approaches to maximizing the resolution of sparker seismic reflection data, Marine Geophysical Research40: 279–301
    [Google Scholar]
  4. Peacock, K.L., Treitel, S.
    , 1969. Predictive deconvolution: theory and practice, Geophysics, vol. 34, issue 2, pp 155–169
    [Google Scholar]
  5. VakulenkoS.A., BuryakS.V., GofmanP.A. and FinikovD.B.
    , 2014. Deghosting of High Resolution Marine Seismic Data by Adaptive Filtering Algorithm, Near Surface Geoscience 2014 - 20th European Meeting of Environmental and Engineering Geophysics pp 1
    [Google Scholar]
  6. VakulenkoS.A., PoluboyarinovM.A. and BuryakS.V.
    , 2016. Implementation and Application of Debbubling Algorithm, Based on Kolmogorov Spectral Factorization, Near Surface Geoscience 2016 - Second Applied Shallow Marine Geophysics Conference pp 1
    [Google Scholar]
http://instance.metastore.ingenta.com/content/papers/10.3997/2214-4609.202152017
Loading
/content/papers/10.3997/2214-4609.202152017
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