scholarly journals Kinematic artifacts in prestack depth migration

Geophysics ◽  
2004 ◽  
Vol 69 (2) ◽  
pp. 562-575 ◽  
Author(s):  
Christiaan C. Stolk ◽  
William W. Symes
Keyword(s):  
Velocity Model ◽  
Migration Velocity ◽  
Common Source ◽  
Individual Data ◽  
Prestack Depth Migration ◽  
Scattering Angle ◽  
Depth Migration ◽  
Image Volume

Strong refraction of waves in the migration velocity model introduces kinematic artifacts—coherent events not corresponding to actual reflectors—into the image volumes produced by prestack depth migration applied to individual data bins. Because individual bins are migrated independently, the migration has no access to the bin component of slowness. This loss of slowness information permits events to migrate along multiple incident‐reflected ray pairs, thus introducing spurious coherent events into the image volume. This pathology occurs for all common binning strategies, including common‐source, common‐offset, and common‐scattering angle. Since the artifacts move out with bin parameter, their effect on the final stacked image is minimal, provided that the migration velocity model is kinematically correct. However, common‐image gathers may exhibit energetic primary events with substantial residual moveout, even with the kinematically accurate migration velocity model.

Nonlinear 3D tomographic least-squares inversion of residual moveout in Kirchhoff prestack-depth-migration common-image gathers

Geophysics ◽  
2008 ◽  
Vol 73 (5) ◽  
pp. VE13-VE23 ◽  
Author(s):  
Frank Adler ◽  
Reda Baina ◽  
Mohamed Amine Soudani ◽  
Pierre Cardon ◽  
Jean-Baptiste Richard
Keyword(s):  
Inverse Problem ◽  
Least Squares ◽  
Nonlinear Least Squares ◽  
Velocity Model ◽  
Migration Velocity ◽  
Prestack Depth Migration ◽  
Data Set ◽  
Depth Migration ◽  
Layer Velocity ◽  
Map Migration

Velocity-model estimation with seismic reflection tomography is a nonlinear inverse problem. We present a new method for solving the nonlinear tomographic inverse problem using 3D prestack-depth-migrated reflections as the input data, i.e., our method requires that prestack depth migration (PSDM) be performed before tomography. The method is applicable to any type of seismic data acquisition that permits seismic imaging with Kirchhoff PSDM. A fundamental concept of the method is that we dissociate the possibly incorrect initial migration velocity model from the tomographic velocity model. We take the initial migration velocity model and the residual moveout in the associated PSDM common-image gathers as the reference data. This allows us to consider the migrated depth of the initial PSDM as the invariant observation for the tomographic inverse problem. We can therefore formulate the inverse problem within the general framework of inverse theory as a nonlinear least-squares data fitting between observed and modeled migrated depth. The modeled migrated depth is calculated by ray tracing in the tomographic model, followed by a finite-offset map migration in the initial migration model. The inverse problem is solved iteratively with a Gauss-Newton algorithm. We applied the method to a North Sea data set to build an anisotropic layer velocity model.

3D common-reflection-point-based seismic migration velocity analysis

Geophysics ◽  
2006 ◽  
Vol 71 (5) ◽  
pp. S161-S167 ◽  
Author(s):  
Weihong Fei ◽  
George A. McMechan
Keyword(s):  
Synthetic Data ◽  
Computation Time ◽  
Velocity Model ◽  
Migration Velocity ◽  
Velocity Analysis ◽  
Reflection Point ◽  
Prestack Depth Migration ◽  
Depth Migration ◽  
Migration Velocity Analysis ◽  
Spatial Coordinates

Three-dimensional prestack depth migration and depth residual picking in common-image gathers (CIGs) are the most time-consuming parts of 3D migration velocity analysis. Most migration-based velocity analysis algorithms need spatial coordinates of reflection points and CIG depth residuals at different offsets (or angles) to provide updated velocity information. We propose a new algorithm that can analyze 3D velocity quickly and accurately. Spatial coordinates and orientations of reflection points are provided by a 3D prestack parsimonious depth migration; the migration involves only the time samples picked from the salient reflection events on one 3D common-offset volume. Ray tracing from the reflection points to the surface provides a common-reflection-point (CRP) gather for each reflection point. Predicted (nonhyperbolic) moveouts for local velocity perturbations, based on maximizing the stacked amplitude, give the estimated velocity updates for each CRP gather. Then the velocity update for each voxel in the velocity model is obtained by averaging over all predicted velocity updates for that voxel. Prior model constraints may be used to stabilize velocity updating. Compared with other migration velocity analyses, the traveltime picking is limited to only one common-offset volume (and needs to be done only once); there is no need for intensive 3D prestack depth migration. Hence, the computation time is orders of magnitude less than other migration-based velocity analyses. A 3D synthetic data test shows the algorithm works effectively and efficiently.

Kinematic interpretation in the prestack depth‐migrated domain

Geophysics ◽  
1997 ◽  
Vol 62 (4) ◽  
pp. 1226-1237 ◽  
Author(s):  
Irina Apostoiu‐Marin ◽  
Andreas Ehinger
Keyword(s):  
Signal To Noise Ratio ◽  
Velocity Model ◽  
Point Of View ◽  
Prestack Depth Migration ◽  
Depth Migration ◽  
Velocity Models ◽  
Time Domain Data ◽  
And Migration ◽  
Point To Point ◽  
Homogeneous Media

Prestack depth migration can be used in the velocity model estimation process if one succeeds in interpreting depth events obtained with erroneous velocity models. The interpretational difficulty arises from the fact that migration with erroneous velocity does not yield the geologically correct reflector geometries and that individual migrated images suffer from poor signal‐to‐noise ratio. Moreover, migrated events may be of considerable complexity and thus hard to identify. In this paper, we examine the influence of wrong velocity models on the output of prestack depth migration in the case of straight reflector and point diffractor data in homogeneous media. To avoid obscuring migration results by artifacts (“smiles”), we use a geometrical technique for modeling and migration yielding a point‐to‐point map from time‐domain data to depth‐domain data. We discover that strong deformation of migrated events may occur even in situations of simple structures and small velocity errors. From a kinematical point of view, we compare the results of common‐shot and common‐offset migration. and we find that common‐offset migration with erroneous velocity models yields less severe image distortion than common‐shot migration. However, for any kind of migration, it is important to use the entire cube of migrated data to consistently interpret in the prestack depth‐migrated domain.

Efficient velocity model building for prestack depth migration

1996 ◽  
Vol 15 (6) ◽  
pp. 751-753 ◽  
Author(s):  
Y. C. Kim ◽  
C. M. Samuelsen ◽  
T. A. Hauge
Keyword(s):  
Model Building ◽  
Velocity Model ◽  
Prestack Depth Migration ◽  
Depth Migration ◽  
Velocity Model Building

Integrated prestack depth migration of vertical seismic profile and surface seismic data from the Rocky Mountain Foothills of southern Alberta, Canada

Geophysics ◽  
2003 ◽  
Vol 68 (6) ◽  
pp. 1782-1791 ◽  
Author(s):  
M. Graziella Kirtland Grech ◽  
Don C. Lawton ◽  
Scott Cheadle
Keyword(s):  
Seismic Data ◽  
Rocky Mountain ◽  
Velocity Model ◽  
Seismic Profile ◽  
Vertical Seismic Profile ◽  
Prestack Depth Migration ◽  
Data Set ◽  
Depth Migration ◽  
Southern Alberta ◽  
Vsp Data

We have developed an anisotropic prestack depth migration code that can migrate either vertical seismic profile (VSP) or surface seismic data. We use this migration code in a new method for integrated VSP and surface seismic depth imaging. Instead of splicing the VSP image into the section derived from surface seismic data, we use the same migration algorithm and a single velocity model to migrate both data sets to a common output grid. We then scale and sum the two images to yield one integrated depth‐migrated section. After testing this method on synthetic surface seismic and VSP data, we applied it to field data from a 2D surface seismic line and a multioffset VSP from the Rocky Mountain Foothills of southern Alberta, Canada. Our results show that the resulting integrated image exhibits significant improvement over that obtained from (a) the migration of either data set alone or (b) the conventional splicing approach. The integrated image uses the broader frequency bandwidth of the VSP data to provide higher vertical resolution than the migration of the surface seismic data. The integrated image also shows enhanced structural detail, since no part of the surface seismic section is eliminated, and good event continuity through the use of a single migration–velocity model, obtained by an integrated interpretation of borehole and surface seismic data. This enhanced migrated image enabled us to perform a more robust interpretation with good well ties.

The isochron ray in seismic modeling and imaging

Geophysics ◽  
2004 ◽  
Vol 69 (4) ◽  
pp. 1053-1070 ◽  
Author(s):  
Einar Iversen
Keyword(s):  
Seismic Imaging ◽  
Model Updating ◽  
Velocity Model ◽  
Seismic Modeling ◽  
Prestack Depth Migration ◽  
Depth Migration ◽  
Geometric Spreading ◽  
Model Independent ◽  
Map Migration ◽  
Upper Level

The isochron, the name given to a surface of equal two‐way time, has a profound position in seismic imaging. In this paper, I introduce a framework for construction of isochrons for a given velocity model. The basic idea is to let trajectories called isochron rays be associated with iso chrons in an way analogous to the association of conventional rays with wavefronts. In the context of prestack depth migration, an isochron ray based on conventional ray theory represents a simultaneous downward continuation from both source and receiver. The isochron ray is a generalization of the normal ray for poststack map migration. I have organized the process with systems of ordinary differential equations appearing on two levels. The upper level is model‐independent, and the lower level consists of conventional one‐way ray tracing. An advantage of the new method is that interpolation in a ray domain using isochron rays is able to treat triplications (multiarrivals) accurately, as opposed to interpolation in the depth domain based on one‐way traveltime tables. Another nice property is that the Beylkin determinant, an important correction factor in amplitude‐preserving seismic imaging, is closely related to the geometric spreading of isochron rays. For these reasons, the isochron ray has the potential to become a core part of future implementations of prestack depth migration. In addition, isochron rays can be applied in many contexts of forward and inverse seismic modeling, e.g., generation of Fresnel volumes, map migration of prestack traveltime events, and generation of a depth‐domain–based cost function for velocity model updating.

Prestack 2D parsimonious Kirchhoff depth migration of elastic seismic data

Geophysics ◽  
2011 ◽  
Vol 76 (4) ◽  
pp. S157-S164 ◽  
Author(s):  
Robert Sun ◽  
George A. McMechan
Keyword(s):  
Seismic Data ◽  
Velocity Model ◽  
P Wave ◽  
P Value ◽  
Common Source ◽  
S Wave ◽  
P Values ◽  
Depth Migration ◽  
Reflector Surface ◽  
Kirchhoff Depth Migration

We have extended prestack parsimonious Kirchhoff depth migration for 2D, two-component, reflected elastic seismic data for a P-wave source recorded at the earth’s surface. First, we separated the P-to-P reflected (PP-) waves and P-to-S converted (PS-) waves in an elastic common-source gather into P-wave and S-wave seismograms. Next, we estimated source-ray parameters (source p values) and receiver-ray parameters (receiver p values) for the peaks and troughs above a threshold amplitude in separated P- and S-wavefields. For each PP and PS reflection, we traced (1) a source ray in the P-velocity model in the direction of the emitted ray angle (determined by the source p value) and (2) a receiver ray in the P- or S-velocity model back in the direction of the emergent PP- or PS-wave ray angle (determined by the PP- or PS-wave receiver p value), respectively. The image-point position was adjusted from the intersection of the source and receiver rays to the point where the sum of the source time and receiver-ray time equaled the two-way traveltime. The orientation of the reflector surface was determined to satisfy Snell’s law at the intersection point. The amplitude of a P-wave (or an S-wave) was distributed over the first Fresnel zone along the reflector surface in the P- (or S-) image. Stacking over all P-images of the PP-wave common-source gathers gave the stacked P-image, and stacking over all S-images of the PS-wave common-source gathers gave the stacked S-image. Synthetic examples showed acceptable migration quality; however, the images were less complete than those produced by scalar reverse-time migration (RTM). The computing time for the 2D examples used was about 1/30 of that for scalar RTM of the same data.

Manual seismic reflection tomography

Geophysics ◽  
1999 ◽  
Vol 64 (5) ◽  
pp. 1546-1552 ◽  
Author(s):  
Gary E. Murphy ◽  
Samuel H. Gray
Keyword(s):  
Current Velocity ◽  
Velocity Model ◽  
Prestack Depth Migration ◽  
Velocity Change ◽  
Depth Migration ◽  
Migration Velocity Analysis ◽  
Automatic Methods ◽  
Fact Finding ◽  
Reflection Tomography ◽  
User Intervention

Prestack depth migration needs a good velocity model to produce a good image; in fact, finding the velocity model is one of the goals of prestack depth migration. Migration velocity analysis uses information produced by the migration to update the current velocity model for use in the next migration iteration. Several techniques are currently used to estimate migration velocities, ranging from trial and error to automatic methods like reflection tomography. Here, we present a method that combines aspects of some of the more accurate methods into an interactive procedure for viewing the effects of residual normal moveout corrections on migrated common reflection point (CRP) gathers. The residual corrections are performed by computing traveltimes along raypaths through both the current velocity model and the velocity model plus suggested model perturbations. The differences between those sets of traveltimes are related to differences in depth, allowing the user to preview the approximate effects of a velocity change on the CRP gathers without remigrating the data. As with automatic tomography, the computed depth differences are essentially backprojected along raypaths through the model, yielding a velocity update that flattens the gathers. Unlike automatic tomography, in which an algebraic inverse problem is solved by the computer for all geologic layers simultaneously, our method estimates shallow velocities before proceeding deeper and requires substantial user intervention, both in flattening individual CRP gathers and in deciding the appropriateness of the suggested velocity updates in individual geologic units.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document