An examination of tube wave noise in vertical seismic profiling data

Geophysics ◽  
1981 ◽  
Vol 46 (6) ◽  
pp. 892-903 ◽  
Author(s):  
B. A. Hardage

Tube waves act as noise that camouflages upgoing and downgoing body wave events which are the fundamental seismic data measured in vertical seismic profiling (VSP). In two onshore vertical seismic profiles, the principal source of tube waves is shown to be surface ground roll that sweeps across the well head. Secondary tube wave sources revealed in these VSP data are the downhole geophone tool itself and the bottom of the borehole. Body wave signals are also shown to create tube waves when they arrive at significant impedance contrasts in the borehole such as changes in casing diameter. Computer simulated vertical geophone arrays are used to reduce these tube waves, but such arrays attenuate and filter body wave events unless static time shifts are made so that the body wave signal occurs at the same two‐way time at each geophone station. Consequently, actual downhole vertical geophone arrays are not an effective means by which tube waves can be eliminated. Power spectra comparisons of tube wave and compressional body wave events demonstrate that band‐pass filters designed to eliminate tube waves also suppress body wave signals. A simple but effective field technique for reducing tube waves is shown to be proper source offset. Using velocity filters to retrieve upgoing compressional events from VSP data heavily contaminated with tube wave noise yields in one example an agreement with surface measured reflections that is superior to that obtained from synthetic seismograms calculated from log data recorded in the same well.

Geophysics ◽  
1988 ◽  
Vol 53 (3) ◽  
pp. 359-364 ◽  
Author(s):  
Paul C. Wuenschel

In a “controlled” experiment with the Gulf VSP tool, the detector‐ground coupling was measured and removed from the recorded signal using the Washburn‐Wiley algorithm. Repeat measurements were made at a common detector depth with two coupling configurations, the first to permit the true ground motion to be recorded and the second to ensure that a coupling resonance existed within the seismic frequency band. The algorithm removed the distortion of the body‐wave portion of the seismogram caused by the coupling resonance for the second configuration and recovered true ground motion. However, lowering the coupling resonance into the seismic band also caused the tool to become sensitive to tube waves. This observation is helpful in evaluating current VSP tools; it implies that any VSP tool that is sensitive to tube waves has a coupling resonance within the seismic frequency band, and that the signal recorded with such a tool does not measure true ground motion. This test also showed that a detector used to monitor source signature variations must have a bandwidth comparable to the VSP signal.


Geophysics ◽  
2000 ◽  
Vol 65 (3) ◽  
pp. 745-754 ◽  
Author(s):  
Gérard C. Herman ◽  
Paul A. Milligan ◽  
Qicheng Dong ◽  
James W. Rector

Because of irregularities in or near the borehole, vertical seismic profiling (VSP) or crosswell data can be contaminated with scattered tube waves. These can have a large amplitude and can interfere with weaker upcoming reflections, destroying their continuity. This type of organized noise cannot always be removed with filtering methods currently in use. We propose a method based on modeling the scattered tube‐wave field and then subtracting it from the total data set. We assume that the scattering occurs close to the borehole axis and therefore use a 1-D impedance function to characterize borehole irregularities. Estimation of this impedance function is one of the first steps. Our method also accounts for multiply scattered tube waves. We apply the method to an actual VSP data set and conclude that the continuity of reflected, upcoming events improves significantly in a washout zone.


Geophysics ◽  
1993 ◽  
Vol 58 (1) ◽  
pp. 134-140 ◽  
Author(s):  
Linda J. Zimmerman ◽  
Sen T. Chen

To study the imaging characteristics of various vertical seismic profiling techniques, two vertical seismic profiles (VSP) and a reversed vertical seismic profile (RVSP), where source and receiver positions are interchanged, were collected in the Loudon Oil Field in Illinois. Both VSPs were collected using a line of dynamite charges on the surface as sources. One was collected with geophones and the other with hydrophones as downhole receivers. The RVSP was collected by detonating 25 gram explosive charges in a well and detecting the seismic response with geophones at the surface. Three subsurface images (VSP with geophones, VSP with hydrophones, and RVSP) were produced using VSP-CDP transforms. For comparison, a surface seismic profile was collected along the same line with dynamite sources and vertical geophone receivers. The RVSP and hydrophone VSP stacked sections both produced higher frequency images at shallower depths than did the geophone VSP stacked section. However, the lower frequency geophone VSP stacked section produced an interpretable subsurface image at much greater depths than either the RVSP or the hydrophone VSP sections. The differences are due in part to the more powerful surface sources that were used for the VSPs than the downhole sources used for the RVSP. Furthermore, tube‐wave noise was a more severe problem for both the RVSP and the hydrophone VSP than for the geophone VSP. The results of this experiment demonstrate that if tube‐wave noise could be suppressed, hydrophone VSPs would provide attractive alternatives to geophone VSPs, because it is much easier and cheaper to deploy multilevel hydrophones downhole than geophones. Also, if a high‐powered, nondestructive source is developed, RVSP could be a practical alternative to VSP since one can easily lay out numerous receivers on the surface to record multioffset or three‐dimensional (3-D) VSP data.


Geophysics ◽  
1988 ◽  
Vol 53 (11) ◽  
pp. 1437-1444 ◽  
Author(s):  
Thomas L. Marzetta ◽  
Marion Orton ◽  
Alfred Krampe ◽  
Lucian K. Johnston ◽  
Paul C. Wuenschel

To reduce the cost of VSP data acquisition, it is necessary to record the VSP signal from a vertical array of geophones for a single operation of the source. Until a vertical array of clamped three‐component geophones is available, it seems logical to evaluate the capabilities of a vertical array of hydrophones, which is much easier to fabricate. It is well known that elastic waves in the solid couple to pressure waves in the borehole fluid. It is also well known that this coupling excites in the borehole fluid energy known as tube‐wave noise that dominates the borehole pressure signal after the first arrival. (The borehole acts as a waveguide.) In this paper we test the effectiveness of velocity filtering of the borehole pressure signal to attenuate the slowly propagating tube‐wave noise and enhance the faster propagating body‐wave signals. Our initial test satisfactorily extracted from the hydrophone array data a strong reflected event that was also observed in the conventional clamped geophone VSP taken in the same borehole. We were not as successful in recovering subsequent weaker reflected signals from the hydrophone data, because of the strong incoherent ambient tube‐wave noise. This incoherency resulted from instrumental limitations that allowed us to record, for each shot, only three of the twelve hydrophone channels available in the vertical array.


Author(s):  
Zhi Hu ◽  
Jinghuai Gao ◽  
Yanbin He ◽  
Guowei Zhang

Abstract The dispersion curve describes the relationship between velocities and frequencies. The group velocity is a kind of dispersion, which presents the velocities of the energy with different frequencies. Although many studies have shown methods for estimating group velocity from a surface wave, the estimation of group velocity from body-wave data is still hard. In this paper, we propose a method to calculate the group velocity from vertical seismic profiling (VSP) data that is a kind of body-wave data. The generalised S-transform (GST) is used to map the seismic signal to the time-frequency (TF) domain and then the group delay (GD) can be extracted from the TF domain. The GD shows the travelling time of different frequency components. The group velocity can be calculated by the GD and the distance between receivers. Unfortunately, the GD is hard to measure accurately because of the noise. Inaccurate GD introduces errors in estimating the velocity. To reduce the errors, we make use of the multiple traces and the iterative least-squares fitting to extract the relationship line between GD and depths. The slope of the line is the reciprocal of the group velocity. Two numerical examples prove the effectiveness of the method. We also derive the formula of group velocity in diffusive-viscous media. In the field data example, the dispersion intensity at different depths and the geological layers can be well matched. These examples illustrate the proposed method is an alternative method for dispersion estimation from VSP.


2012 ◽  
Vol 2012 (1) ◽  
pp. 1-4
Author(s):  
Dariush Nadri ◽  
Milovan Urosevic ◽  
Paul Wilkes ◽  
Mehdi Asgharzadeh

2014 ◽  
Vol 599-601 ◽  
pp. 639-642
Author(s):  
Jun Zhou ◽  
Chun Hui Xie ◽  
Peng Yang

Extracting interval velocity is one of important applications of VSP data. Also, imaging of VSP data requires accurate velocity information. Two kinds of algorithms on the assumption of straight-ray and curve-ray are employed to calculate interval velocity respectively. Comparison of the extracted velocity from the two methods above with real velocity shows that both methods are suitable for VSP data recorded in the vicinity of well, while the algorithm derived from straight-ray fails in the long-offset. Moreover, the curve-ray is more reliable when there are some random errors due to the first arrivals picking.


Geophysics ◽  
1986 ◽  
Vol 51 (5) ◽  
pp. 1148-1149
Author(s):  
S. D. Stainsby ◽  
M. H. Worthington

Seeman and Horowicz devised an elegant procedure for the separation of upgoing and downgoing waves in VSP data. Their method is based upon a least‐squares solution of the frequency‐domain equations which relate the upgoing and downgoing signals at a reference level to the observed signals at other levels in the Earth. The coefficients of these equations are time‐shift operations. Unfortunately, for frequencies [Formula: see text] where δt is the vertical time sampling interval, the denominator of the solution equations is zero. For this reason the authors only applied the method over a passband: [Formula: see text] where the cutoff frequencies [Formula: see text] and [Formula: see text] are chosen to reflect the useful frequency band of the signal.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document