1887
  1. Home
  2. A-Z Publications
  3. Geophysical Prospecting
  4. Volume 52, Issue 6
  5. Article
Volume 52, Issue 6
  • E-ISSN: 1365-2478

Abstract

ABSTRACT

An integrated multiscale seismic imaging flow is applied to dense onshore wide‐aperture seismic data recorded in a complex geological setting (thrust belt).

An initial P‐wave velocity macromodel is first developed by first‐arrival traveltime tomography. This model is used as an initial guess for subsequent full‐waveform tomography, which leads to greatly improved spatial resolution of the P‐wave velocity model. However, the application of full‐waveform tomography to the high‐frequency part of the source bandwidth is difficult, due to the non‐linearity of this kind of method. Moreover, it is computationally expensive at high frequencies since a finite‐difference method is used to model the wave propagation. Hence, full‐waveform tomography was complemented by asymptotic prestack depth migration to process the full‐source bandwidth and develop a sharp image of the short wavelengths. The final traveltime tomography model and two smoothed versions of the final full‐waveform tomography model were used as a macromodel for the prestack depth migration.

In this study, wide‐aperture multifold seismic data are used. After specific preprocessing of the data, 16 frequency components ranging from 5.4 Hz to 20 Hz were inverted in cascade by the full‐waveform tomography algorithm. The full‐waveform tomography successfully imaged SW‐dipping structures previously identified as high‐resistivity bodies. The relevance of the full‐waveform tomography models is demonstrated locally by comparison with a coincident vertical seismic profiling (VSP) log available on the profile. The prestack depth‐migrated images, inferred from the traveltime, and the smoothed full‐waveform tomography macromodels are shown to be, on the whole, consistent with the final full‐waveform tomography model. A more detailed analysis, based on common‐image gather computations, and local comparison with the VSP log revealed that the most accurate migrated sections are those obtained from the full‐waveform tomography macromodels. A resolution analysis suggests that the asymptotic prestack depth migration successfully migrated the wide‐aperture components of the data, allowing medium wavelengths in addition to the short wavelengths of the structure to be imaged.

The processing flow that we applied to dense wide‐aperture seismic data is shown to provide a promising approach, complementary to more classical seismic reflection data processing, to quantitative imaging of complex geological structures.

Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.1111/j.1365-2478.2004.00452.x
2004-11-02
2024-04-19

  • From This Site

    /content/journals/10.1111/j.1365-2478.2004.00452.x
    dcterms_title,dcterms_subject,pub_keyword
    -contentType:Journal -contentType:Contributor -contentType:Concept -contentType:Institution
    10
    5
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

References

  1. ChapmanC.H. and OrcuttJ.A.1985. Least‐square fitting of marine seismic refraction data. Geophysical Journal of the Royal Astronomical Society82, 339–374.
    [Google Scholar]
  2. Dell'AversanaP.2001. Integration of seismic, mt and gravity data in a thrust belt interpretation. First Break19, 335–341.DOI: 10.1046/j.1365-2397.2001.00158.x
     [Google Scholar]
  3. Dell'AversanaP., CeragioliE., MorandiS. and ZolloA.2000. A simultaneous acquisition test of high‐density ‘global offset’ seismic in complex geological settings. First Break18, 87–96.DOI: 10.1046/j.1365-2397.2000.00053.x
     [Google Scholar]
  4. GlangeaudJ.L.M.F. and CoppensF.1997. Traitement du signal pour géologues et géophysiciens . Éditions TECHNIP.
    [Google Scholar]
  5. GrayS.H., EtgenJ., DellingerJ. and WhitmoreD.2001. Seismic migration problems and solutions. Geophysics66, 1622–1640.
    [Google Scholar]
  6. HerreroA., ZolloA. and VirieuxJ.1999. Two‐dimensional non‐linear first‐arrival time inversion applied to Mt. Vesuvius active seismic data (TomoVes96). European Geophysical Society 24th General Assembly, The Hague , The Netherlands .
  7. HobroJ.W.D., SinghS.C. and MinshullT.A.2003. Three‐dimensional tomographic inversion of combined reflection and refraction seismic traveltime data. Geophysical Journal International152, 79–93.
    [Google Scholar]
  8. ImprotaL., ZolloA., HerreroA., FrattiniR., VirieuxJ. and Dell'AversanaP.2002. Seismic imaging of complex structures by non‐linear traveltime inversion of dense wide‐angle data: application to a thrust belt. Geophysical Journal International151, 264–278.
    [Google Scholar]
  9. JannaneM., BeydounW., CraseE., CaoD., KorenZ., LandaE.et al. 1989. Wavelengths of Earth structures that can be resolved from seismic reflection data. Geophysics54, 906–910.
    [Google Scholar]
  10. JinS., MadariagaR., VirieuxJ. and LambaréG.1992. Two‐dimensional asymptotic iterative elastic inversion. Geophysical Journal International108, 575–588.
    [Google Scholar]
  11. JoC.‐H., ShinC. and SuhJ.H.1996. An optimal 9‐point, finite‐difference, frequency‐space, 2‐D scalar wave extrapolator. Geophysics61, 529–537.
    [Google Scholar]
  12. KorenagaJ., HolbrookW.S., KentG.M., KelemenP.B., DetrickR.S., LarsenH.C.et al. 2000. Crustal structure of the southeast Greenland margin from joint refraction and reflection seismic tomography. Journal of Geophysical Research105, 21591–21614.
    [Google Scholar]
  13. LafondC.F. and LevanderA.R.1995. Migration of wide‐aperture onshore–offshore seismic data, central California: Seismic images of late stage subduction. Journal of Geophysical Research100(B11), 22231–22243.
    [Google Scholar]
  14. LambaréG.1991. Inversion linearisée de données de sismique réflexion par une méthode quasi‐Newtonienne . PhD thesis, Université de Paris VII .
  15. LambaréG., LucioP.S. and HanygaA.1996. Two‐dimensional multivalued traveltime and amplitude maps by uniform sampling of ray field. Geophysical Journal International125, 584–598.
    [Google Scholar]
  16. LambaréG., OpertoS., PodvinP., ThierryP. and NobleM.2003. 3‐D ray+born migration/inversion – part 1: theory. Geophysics68, 1348–1356.
    [Google Scholar]
  17. LutterW.J., NowackR.L. and BraileL.W.1990. Inversion of crustal structure using reflections from the PASSCAL Ouachita Experiment. Journal of Geophysical Research95, 4633–4646.
    [Google Scholar]
  18. McIntoshK., AkbarF., CalderonC., StoffaP., OpertoS., ChristesonG.et al. 2000. Large aperture seismic imaging at a convergent margin: Techniques and results from the Costa Rica seismogenic zone. Marine Geophysical Research21, 451–474.
    [Google Scholar]
  19. McMechanG.A. and FuisG.S.1987. Ray equation migration of wide‐angle reflections from southern Alaska. Journal of Geophysical Research92(1), 407–420.
    [Google Scholar]
  20. OpertoS., LambaréG., PodvinP., ThierryP. and NobleM.2003. 3‐D ray+born migration/inversion – part 2: Application to the SEG/EAGE overthrust experiment. Geophysics68, 1357–1370.
    [Google Scholar]
  21. OpertoS., XuS. and LambaréG.2000. Can we quantitatively image complex models with raysGeophysics65, 1223–1238.
    [Google Scholar]
  22. PodvinP. and LecomteI.1991. Finite difference computation of traveltimes in very contrasted velocity model: a massively parallel approach and its associated tools. Geophysical Journal International105, 271–284.
    [Google Scholar]
  23. PrattR.G.1999. Seismic waveform inversion in the frequency domain, part 1: theory and verification in a physical scale model. Geophysics64, 888–901.
    [Google Scholar]
  24. PrattR.G., ShinC. and HicksG.J.1998. Gauss‐Newton and full Newton methods in frequency‐space seismic waveform inversion. Geophysical Journal International133, 341–362.
    [Google Scholar]
  25. PrattR.G., SongZ., WilliamsonP. and WarnerM.1996. Two‐dimensional velocity models from wide‐angle seismic data by wavefield inversion. Geophysical Journal International124, 323–340.
    [Google Scholar]
  26. PrattR.G. and WorthingtonM.H.1990. Inverse theory applied to multi‐source cross‐hole tomography. Part 1: acoustic wave‐equation method. Geophysical Prospecting38, 287–310.
    [Google Scholar]
  27. RavautC., OpertoS., ImprotaL., VirieuxJ., HerreroA. and Dell'AversanaP.2004. Multi‐scale imaging of complex structures from multi‐fold wide‐aperture seismic data by frequency‐domain full waveform tomography: application to a thrust belt. Geophysical Journal International, in review.
    [Google Scholar]
  28. SheriffR.E. and GeldartL.P.1995. Exploration Seismology . Cambridge University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  29. ShinC., YoonK., MarfurtK.J., ParkK., YangD., LimH.Y.et al. 2001. Efficient calculation of a partial derivative wavefield using reciprocity for seismic imaging and inversion. Geophysics66, 1856–1863.
    [Google Scholar]
  30. ShippR.M. and SinghS.C.2002. Two‐dimensional full wavefield inversion of wide‐aperture marine seismic streamer data. Geophysical Journal International151, 325–344.
    [Google Scholar]
  31. SirgueL. and PrattR.G.2001. Frequency‐domain waveform inversion: a strategy for choosing frequencies. 63rd EAGE conference, Amsterdam , The Netherlands , Extended Abstracts, P014.
  32. SpudichP. and OrcuttJ.1980. Petrology and porosity of an oceanic crustal site: results from wave form modeling of seismic refraction data. Journal of Geophysical Research85(B3), 1409–1434.
    [Google Scholar]
  33. TarantolaA.1984. Inversion of seismic reflexion data in the acoustic approximation. Geophysics49, 1259–1266.
    [Google Scholar]
  34. TarantolaA.1987. Inverse Problem Theory: Methods for Data Fitting and Model Parameter Estimation . Elsevier Science Publishing Co.
    [Google Scholar]
  35. ThierryP., OpertoS. and LambaréG.1999. Fast 2D ray–born inversion/migration in complex media. Geophysics64, 162–181.
    [Google Scholar]
  36. ToomeyD.R., SolomonS.C. and PurdyG.M.1994. Tomographic imaging of the shallow crustal structure of the east Pacific rise at 9°30′ N. Journal of Geophysical Research99, 24135–24157.
    [Google Scholar]
  37. WhiteR.S., SmallwoodJ.R., FliednerM.M., BoslaughB., MareshJ. and FruehnJ.2003. Imaging and regional distribution of basalt flows in the Faeroe‐Shetland Basin. Geophysical Prospecting51, 215–231.
    [Google Scholar]
  38. WhiteR.S. and StephenR.A.1980. Compressional to shear wave conversion in oceanic crust. Geophysical Journal of the Royal Astronomical Society63, 547–565.
    [Google Scholar]
  39. WilliamsonP.R. and WorthingtonM.H.1993. Resolution limits in ray tomography due to wave behavior: Numerical experiments. Geophysics58, 727–735.
    [Google Scholar]
  40. XuS., ChaurisH., LambaréG. and NobleM.2001. Common‐angle migration: a strategy for imaging complex media. Geophysics66, 1877–1894.
    [Google Scholar]
  41. YilmazO.2001. Seismic Data Analysis: Processing, Inversion, and Interpretation of Seismic Data , Volume 1. Society of Exploration Geophysicists .
    [Google Scholar]
  42. ZeltC. and BartonP.J.1998. Three‐dimensional seismic refraction tomography: a comparison of two methods applied to data from the Faeroe basin. Journal of Geophysical Research103(B4), 7187–7210.
    [Google Scholar]
  43. ZeltC. and SmithR.B.1992. Seismic traveltime inversion for 2‐D crustal velocity structure. Geophysical Journal International108, 16–34.
    [Google Scholar]
http://instance.metastore.ingenta.com/content/journals/10.1111/j.1365-2478.2004.00452.x
Loading
Quantitative imaging of complex structures from dense wide‐aperture seismic data by multiscale traveltime and waveform inversions: a case study
Geophysical Prospecting 52, 625 (2004); https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2478.2004.00452.x
/content/journals/10.1111/j.1365-2478.2004.00452.x
/content/journals/10.1111/j.1365-2478.2004.00452.x
Loading

Data & Media loading...

  • Article Type: Research Article

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