Depth focusing reflection tomography with application to prestack depth migration

2000 ◽  
Author(s):  
Chong D. Chung ◽  
Christopher Liner ◽  
Duryodhan Epili ◽  
William Underwood ◽  
Ralph Gobeli
Keyword(s):  
Prestack Depth Migration ◽  
Depth Migration ◽  
Reflection Tomography

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.

Walkaway VSP Reflection Tomography Modeling and Prestack Depth Migration Imaging

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jianguo Li ◽  
Jianhua Huang ◽  
Yanpeng Li ◽  
Yuanzhong Chenand Junjun Wu
Keyword(s):  
Prestack Depth Migration ◽  
Depth Migration ◽  
Migration Imaging ◽  
Walkaway Vsp ◽  
Reflection Tomography

Incorporating geologic information into reflection tomography

Geophysics ◽  
2004 ◽  
Vol 69 (2) ◽  
pp. 533-546 ◽  
Author(s):  
Robert G. Clapp ◽  
Biondo L. Biondi ◽  
Jon F. Claerbout
Keyword(s):  
Velocity Structure ◽  
Null Space ◽  
Velocity Model ◽  
Prestack Depth Migration ◽  
Depth Migration ◽  
Interval Velocity ◽  
Velocity Models ◽  
Regularized Inversion ◽  
Symmetric Operators ◽  
Reflection Tomography

In areas of complex geology, prestack depth migration is often necessary if we are to produce an accurate image of the subsurface. Prestack depth migration requires an accurate interval velocity model. With few exceptions, the subsurface velocities are not known beforehand and should be estimated. When the velocity structure is complex, with significant lateral variations, reflection‐tomography methods are often an effective tool for improving the velocity estimate. Unfortunately, reflection tomography often converges slowly, to a model that is geologically unreasonable, or it does not converge at all. The large null space of reflection‐tomography problems often forces us to add a sparse parameterization of the model and/or regularization criteria to the estimation. Standard tomography schemes tend to create isotropic features in velocity models that are inconsistent with geology. These isotropic features result, in large part, from using symmetric regularization operators or from choosing a poor model parameterization. If we replace the symmetric operators with nonstationary operators that tend to spread information along structural dips, the tomography will produce velocity models that are geologically more reasonable. In addition, by forming the operators in helical 1D space and performing polynomial division, we apply the inverse of these space‐varying anisotropic operators. The inverse operators can be used as a preconditioner to a standard tomography problem, thereby significantly improving the speed of convergence compared with the typical regularized inversion problem. Results from 2D synthetic and 2D field data are shown. In each case, the velocity obtained improves the focusing of the migrated image.

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.

Simulation of a seismic survey with combined surface and in-mine data acquisition for imaging steeply dipping ore veins

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Olaf Hellwig ◽  
Stefan Buske
Keyword(s):  
Finite Difference ◽  
Message Passing Interface ◽  
Seismic Survey ◽  
Difference Operators ◽  
Mining District ◽  
Prestack Depth Migration ◽  
Data Set ◽  
Depth Migration ◽  
Difference Grid ◽  
Triangulated Surfaces

<p>The polymetallic, hydrothermal deposit of the Freiberg mining district in the southeastern part of Germany is characterised by ore veins that are framed by Proterozoic orthogneiss. The ore veins consist mainly of quarz, sulfides, carbonates, barite and flourite, which are associated with silver, lead and tin. Today the Freiberg University of Mining and Technology is operating the shafts Reiche Zeche and Alte Elisabeth for research and teaching purposes with altogether 14 km of accessible underground galleries. The mine together with the most prominent geological structures of the central mining district are included in a 3D digital model, which is used in this study to study seismic acquisition geometries that can help to image the shallow as well as the deeper parts of the ore-bearing veins. These veins with dip angles between 40° and 85° are represented by triangulated surfaces in the digital geological model. In order to import these surfaces into our seismic finite-difference simulation code, they have to be converted into bodies with a certain thickness and specific elastic properties in a first step. In a second step, these bodies with their properties have to be discretized on a hexahedral finite-difference grid with dimensions of 1000 m by 1000 m in the horizontal direction and 500 m in the vertical direction. Sources and receiver lines are placed on the surface along roads near the mine. A Ricker wavelet with a central frequency of 50 Hz is used as the source signature at all excitation points. Beside the surface receivers, additional receivers are situated in accessible galleries of the mine at three different depth levels of 100 m, 150 m and 220 m below the surface. Since previous mining activities followed primarily the ore veins, there are only few pilot-headings that cut through longer gneiss sections. Only these positions surrounded by gneiss are suitable for imaging the ore veins. Based on this geometry, a synthetic seismic data set is generated with our explicit finite-difference time-stepping scheme, which solves the acoustic wave equation with second order accurate finite-difference operators in space and time. The scheme is parallelised using a decomposition of the spatial finite-difference grid into subdomains and Message Passing Interface for the exchange of the wavefields between neighbouring subdomains. The resulting synthetic seismic shot gathers are used as input for Kirchhoff prestack depth migration as well as Fresnel volume migration in order to image the ore veins. Only a top mute to remove the direct waves and a time-dependent gain to correct the amplitude decay due to the geometrical spreading are applied to the data before the migration. The combination of surface and in-mine acquisition helps to improve the image of the deeper parts of the dipping ore veins. Considering the limitations for placing receivers in the mine, Fresnel volume migration as a focusing version of Kirchhoff prestack depth migration helps to avoid migration artefacts caused by this sparse and limited acquisition geometry.</p>

Calibrating prestack depth migration volumes with well control

2006 ◽  
Author(s):  
Scott MacKay ◽  
Héctor Ramírez Jiménez ◽  
Jorge San Martín Romero ◽  
Mark Morford
Keyword(s):  
Prestack Depth Migration ◽  
Well Control ◽  
Depth Migration

Fast acquisition aperture correction in prestack depth migration using beamlet decomposition

Geophysics ◽  
2009 ◽  
Vol 74 (4) ◽  
pp. S67-S74 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jun Cao ◽  
Ru-Shan Wu
Keyword(s):  
Wave Equation ◽  
Correction Factor ◽  
Computing Time ◽  
Computation Time ◽  
Prestack Depth Migration ◽  
Depth Migration ◽  
Wavenumber Domain ◽  
Amplitude Correction ◽  
Local Wavenumber ◽  
Local Angle

Wave-equation-based acquisition aperture correction in the local angle domain can improve image amplitude significantly in prestack depth migration. However, its original implementation is inefficient because the wavefield decomposition uses the local slant stack (LSS), which is demanding computationally. We propose a faster method to obtain the image and amplitude correction factor in the local angle domain using beamlet decomposition in the local wavenumber domain. For a given frequency, the image matrix in the local wavenumber domain for all shots can be calculated efficiently. We then transform the shot-summed image matrix from the local wavenumber domain to the local angle domain (LAD). The LAD amplitude correction factor can be obtained with a similar strategy. Having a calculated image and correction factor, one can apply similar acquisition aperture corrections to the original LSS-based method. For the new implementation, we compare the accuracy and efficiency of two beamlet decompositions: Gabor-Daubechies frame (GDF) and local exponential frame (LEF). With both decompositions, our method produces results similar to the original LSS-based method. However, our method can be more than twice as fast as LSS and cost only twice the computation time of traditional one-way wave-equation-based migrations. The results from GDF decomposition are superior to those from LEF decomposition in terms of artifacts, although GDF requires a little more computing time.

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
Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document