1887
  1. Home
  2. A-Z Publications
  3. Geophysical Prospecting
  4. Volume 58, Issue 6
  5. Article
Volume 58 Number 6
  • E-ISSN: 1365-2478

Abstract

ABSTRACT

In 2005, a multicomponent ocean bottom node data set was collected by BP and BHP Billiton in the Atlantis field in the Gulf of Mexico. Our results are based on data from a few sparse nodes with millions of shots that were analysed as common receiver azimuthal gathers. A first‐order look at P‐wave arrivals on a common receiver gather at a constant offset reveals variation of P‐wave arrival time as a function of azimuth indicating the presence of azimuthal anisotropy at the top few layers. This prompted us to investigate shear arrivals on the horizontal component data. After preliminary processing, including a static correction, the data were optimally rotated to radial (R) and transverse (T) components. The R component shows azimuthal variation of traveltime indicating variation of velocity with azimuth; the corresponding T component shows azimuthal variation of amplitude and phase (polarity reversal). The observed shear‐wave (S‐wave) splitting, previously observed azimuthal P‐wave velocity variation and azimuthal P‐wave amplitude variation, all indicate the occurrence of anisotropy in the shallow (just below the seafloor) subsea sediment in the area. From the radial component azimuthal gather, we analysed the PP‐ and PS‐wave amplitude variation for the first few layers and determined corresponding anisotropy parameter and V/V values. Since fracture at this depth is not likely to occur, we attribute the observed azimuthal anisotropy to the presence of microcracks and grain boundary orientation due to stress. The evidence of anisotropy is ubiquitous in this data set and thus it argues strongly in favour of considering anisotropy in depth imaging for obtaining realistic subsurface images, at the least.

© 2010 European Association of Geoscientists & Engineers
Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.1111/j.1365-2478.2010.00871.x
2010-03-30
2024-04-19

  • From This Site

    /content/journals/10.1111/j.1365-2478.2010.00871.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. AlfordR.M.1986. Shear data in the presence of azimuthal anisotropy. 56th SEG meeting, Dilley , Texas , USA , Expanded Abstracts, 476–479.
  2. BackusM., MurrayP.E., HardageB.A. and GraebnerR.J.2006. High resolution multicomponent seismic imaging of deepwater gas‐hydrate systems. The Leading Edge25, 578–596.
    [Google Scholar]
  3. BakulinA., GrechkaV. and TsvankinI.2000. Estimation of the fractured parameters from reflection seismic data – Part I: HTI model due to a single fracture set. Geophysics65, 1788–1802.
    [Google Scholar]
  4. BallG.1995. Estimation of anisotropy and anisotropic 3‐D prestack depth migration, offshore Zaire. Geophysics60, 1495–1513.
    [Google Scholar]
  5. BeaudoinG. and RossA.A.2007. Field design and operation of a novel deepwater, wide‐azimuth node seismic survey. The Leading Edge26, 494–503.
    [Google Scholar]
  6. ClarkeR., XiaG., KabirN., SirgueL. and MichellS.2007. Processing of a novel deepwater, wide‐azimuth node seismic survey. The Leading Edge26, 504–509.
    [Google Scholar]
  7. CrampinS.1978. Seismic wave propagation through a cracked solid: Polarization as a possible source of dilatancy diagnostic. Geophysical Journal of Royal Astronomy Society53, 467–496.
    [Google Scholar]
  8. CrampinS.1981. A review of wave motion in anisotropic and cracked elastic media. Wave Motion3, 343–391.
    [Google Scholar]
  9. CrampinS.1985. Evaluation of anisotropy by shear‐wave splitting. Geophysics50, 142–152.
    [Google Scholar]
  10. CrampinS. and LovellJ.1991. A decade of shear‐wave splitting in the Earth's crust: What does it mean? What use we can make of it? And what should we do next?Geophysical Journal International107, 387–407.
    [Google Scholar]
  11. GaiserJ.E.1999. Applications for vector coordinate systems of 3‐D converted‐wave data. The Leading Edge18, 1290.
    [Google Scholar]
  12. HaackeR.R. and WestbrookG.K.2006. A fast, robust method for detecting and characterizing azimuthal anisotropy with marine PS converted waves, and its application to the west Svalbard continental slope. Geophysical Journal International167, 1402–1412.
    [Google Scholar]
  13. HaackeR.R., WestbrookG.K. and PeacockS.2009. Layer stripping of shear‐wave splitting in marine PS waves. Geophysical Journal International176, 782–804.
    [Google Scholar]
  14. HardageB.A., MurrayP., SavaD., BackusM.M., RemingtonR., GraebnerR. and RobertsH.H.2006. Evaluation of deepwater gas‐hydrate systems. The Leading Edge25, 572–576.
    [Google Scholar]
  15. IkelleL.T. and AmundsenL.2001. AVO‐A response of an anisotropic half space bounded by a dipping surface for P‐P, P‐SV and P‐SH data. Journal of Applied Geophysics46, 1–29.
    [Google Scholar]
  16. KaoJ.2009. Deep water Gulf of Mexico pore pressure estimation utilizing P‐SV waves from multicomponent seismic in Atlantis field . MS thesis, University of Texas at Austin .
  17. LewisC., DavisT.L. and VuillermozC.1991. Three‐dimensional multicomponent imaging of reservoir heterogeneity, Silo field, Wyoming. Geophysics56, 2048–2056.
    [Google Scholar]
  18. LiX‐Y.1997. Fractured reservoir delineation using multicomponent seismic data. Geophysical Prospecting45, 39–64.
    [Google Scholar]
  19. LiuE., CrampinS. and QueenJ.H.1991. Fracture detection using crosshole surveys and reverse vertical seismic profiles at the Conoco borehole test facility, Oklahoma. Geophysical Journal International107, 449–463.
    [Google Scholar]
  20. LynnH.B. and ThomsenL.A.1990. Reflection shear‐wave data collected near the principal axes of azimuthal anisotropy. Geophysics55, 147–156.
    [Google Scholar]
  21. MaultzschS., NawabR., YuhS., IdreesM. and FrignetB.2009. An integrated multi‐azimuth VSP study for fracture characterization in the vicinity of a well. Geophysical Prospecting57, 263–274.
    [Google Scholar]
  22. MuellerM.C.1991. Prediction of lateral variability in fracture intensity using multicomponent shear‐wave surface seismic as a precursor to horizontal drilling in the Austin Chalk. Geophysical Journal International107, 409–415.
    [Google Scholar]
  23. OlofssonB., ProbertT., KommedalJ.H. and BarkvedO.I.2003. Azimuthal anisotropy from the Valhall 4C 3D survey. The Leading Edge22, 1228–1235.
    [Google Scholar]
  24. PottersJ.H.H.M., GroenendaalH.J.J., OatesS.J., HakeJ.H. and KaldenA.B.1999. The 3D shear experiment over Atih field in Oman. Reservoir geology, data acquisition and anisotropy analysis. Geophysical Prospecting47, 637–662.
    [Google Scholar]
  25. RegoneC.J.2007. Using 3D finite‐difference modeling to design wide‐azimuth surveys for improved subsalt imaging. Geophysics72, SM231–SM239.
    [Google Scholar]
  26. RossA.A. and BeaudoinG.2006. Field design and operation of deep water, wide azimuth node seismic survey. 76th SEG meeting, New Orleans , Louisiana , USA , Expanded Abstracts, 2920–2924.
  27. RügerA.1997. P‐wave reflection coefficients for transversely isotropic models with vertical and horizontal axis of symmetry. Geophysics62, 713–722.
    [Google Scholar]
  28. SayersC.2002. Stress dependent anisotropy of sandstones. Geophysical Prospecting50, 85–95.
    [Google Scholar]
  29. SayersC.2005. Sensitivity of elastic wave velocities to stress changes in sandstones. The Leading Edge24, 1262–1266.
    [Google Scholar]
  30. SayersC. and DeanS.2001. Azimuth dependent AVO in reservoir containing non‐orthogonal fracture sets. Geophysical Prospecting49, 100–106.
    [Google Scholar]
  31. SayersC. and KachanovM.1995. Microcrack induced elastic wave anisotropy of brittle rock. Journal of Geophysical Research100, 4149–4156.
    [Google Scholar]
  32. SilS., SrivastavaR.P. and SenM.K.2009. Observation of azimuthal anisotropy on multicomponent Atlantis node seismic data. 79th SEG meeting, Houston , Texas , USA , Expanded Abstracts, 260–263.
  33. SimmonsJ.L.2009. Converted‐wave splitting estimation and compensation. Geophysics74, D37–D48.
    [Google Scholar]
  34. TathamR.H., MatthewsM.D., SekharanK.K., WadeC.J. and LiroL.M.1992. A physical model study of shear‐wave splitting and fracture intensity. Geophysics57, 647–652.
    [Google Scholar]
  35. VerwestB.J.1989. Seismic migration in elliptically anisotropic media. Geophysical Prospecting37, 149–166.
    [Google Scholar]
http://instance.metastore.ingenta.com/content/journals/10.1111/j.1365-2478.2010.00871.x
Loading
Observation of shear‐wave splitting in the multicomponent node data from Atlantis field, Gulf of Mexico
Geophysical Prospecting 58, 953 (2010); https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2478.2010.00871.x
/content/journals/10.1111/j.1365-2478.2010.00871.x
/content/journals/10.1111/j.1365-2478.2010.00871.x
Loading

Data & Media loading...

  • Article Type: Research Article
Keyword(s): Anisotropy; Atlantis; Converted‐wave; Multicomponent; OBS node; S‐wave splitting

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