1887
Volume 9 Number 6
  • ISSN: 1569-4445
  • E-ISSN: 1873-0604

Abstract

ABSTRACT

While in other domains of applied geophysics the surface‐wave is considered a source of information for near‐surface characterization, in the seismic industry the so‐called ground roll has been traditionally regarded only as coherent noise to be filtered out as soon as possible. This difference of perspective is mainly due to the limitations of conventional land acquisition. The Rayleigh waves, which constitute a large part of the recorded energy, can be acquired properly, analysed and inverted to characterize the near‐surface with a surprisingly high resolution, even in large 3D surveys, with point receiver acquisition. Surface waves can play a new role: they contribute to a better near‐surface characterization for the perturbation correction and can be used for velocity modelling and geological modelling. Their proper identification enables alternative filtering strategies. Surface waves are not coherent noise but a signal that can be lifted from the seismic record and exploited in a variety of well‐established geophysical solutions. In this paper we discuss a workflow for the analysis, inversion and attenuation of surface waves with 3D land data, showing examples from a land 3D survey in Egypt.

Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.3997/1873-0604.2011022
2011-05-01
2024-04-25
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

References

  1. DziewonskiA., BlochS. and LandismanM.1969. A technique for the analysis of transient seismic signals. Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America59, 427–444.
    [Google Scholar]
  2. DziewonskiA.M. and HalesA.L.1972. Numerical analysis of dispersive seismic waves. In: Methods in Computational Physics, Vol. 11 (ed. B.A.Bolt ), pp. 271–295. Academic Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  3. GanjiV., GucunskiN. and NazarianS.1998. Automated inversion procedure for spectral analysis of surface waves. Journal of Geotechnical and Geoenvironmental Engineering124, 757–770.
    [Google Scholar]
  4. GrandjeanG. and BitriA.2006. 2M‐SASW: Multifold multichannel seismic inversion of local dispersion of Rayleigh waves in laterally heterogeneous subsurfaces: Application to the Super‐Sauze earthflow, France. Near Surface Geophysics4, 367–375.
    [Google Scholar]
  5. Keilis‐BorokV.I., LevshinA.L., YanovskayaT.B., LanderA.V., BukchinB.G., BarminM.P., RatnikovaL.I. and Its E.N. 1989. Seismic Surface Waves in Laterally Inhomogeneous Earth. Kluwer Academic Publishers.
    [Google Scholar]
  6. LaakeA., SheneshenM., StrobbiaC., VelascoL. and CuttsA.2010. Surface‐subsurface integration reveals faults in Gulf of Suez oilfields. 72nd EAGE meeting, Barcelona, Spain, Expanded Abstracts, F008.
    [Google Scholar]
  7. LaakeA., StrobbiaC. and CuttsA.2008. Integrated approach to 3D near‐surface characterization. First Break26, 109–112.
    [Google Scholar]
  8. McMechanG.A. and YedlinM.J.1981. Analysis of dispersive wave by wavefield transformation. Geophysics46, 869–874.
    [Google Scholar]
  9. NoletG. and PanzaG.F.1976. Array analysis of seismic surface waves: Limits and possibilities. Pure and Applied Geophysics114, 776–790.
    [Google Scholar]
  10. ParkC.B., MillerR.D. and XiaJ.1999. Multichannel analysis of surface waves. Geophysics64, 800–808.
    [Google Scholar]
  11. ReS., StrobbiaC., De StefanoM. and VirgilioM.2010. Simultaneous joint inversion of refracted and surface waves. 80th SEG meeting, Denver, Colorado, USA, Expanded Abstracts.
    [Google Scholar]
  12. RossW.S., LeeS., DialloM.S., JohnsonM.J., ShatiloA.P., AndersonJ.E. and MartinezA.2008. Characterization of spatially varying surface waves in a land seismic survey. 78th SEG meeting, Las Vegas, Nevada, USA, Expanded Abstracts, 2556–2560.
    [Google Scholar]
  13. Sanchez‐SalineroI.1987. Analytical investigation of seismic methods used for engineering applications. PhD thesis, University of Texas at Austin.
    [Google Scholar]
  14. SchmidtR.O.1986. Multiple emitter location and signal parameter estimation. IEEE Trans Antennas Propagation34, 276–280.
    [Google Scholar]
  15. SoccoL.V. and BoieroD.2008. Improved Monte Carlo inversion of surface wave data. Geophysical Prospecting56, 357–371.
    [Google Scholar]
  16. SoccoL.V., BoieroD., FotiS. and WisenR.2009. Laterally constrained inversion of ground roll from seismic reflection records. Geophysics74, G35. doi:10.1190/1.3223636
    [Google Scholar]
  17. SoccoL.V. and StrobbiaC.2004. Surface wave method for near surface characterization: A tutorial. Near Surface Geophyisics2, 165–185.
    [Google Scholar]
  18. StrobbiaC. and FotiS.2006. Multi‐Offset phase analysis of surface wave data (MOPA). Journal of Applied Geophysics59, 300–131.
    [Google Scholar]
  19. TokimatsuK.1995. Geotechnical site characterisation using surface waves. In: Proceedings of the 1st International Conference on Earth. Geotechnical Engineering (ed. K.Ishihara ), pp. 1333–1368. Balkema.
    [Google Scholar]
  20. VermeerG.2002. 3D Seismic Survey Design. SEG.
    [Google Scholar]
  21. VignoliG. and CassianiG.2010. Identification of lateral discontinuities via multi‐offset phase analysis of surface wave data. Geophysical Prospecting58, 389–413.
    [Google Scholar]
  22. VignoliG., StrobbiaC., CassianiG. and VermeerP.L.2010. Lateral discontinuity localization and characterization by means of enhanced statistical multioffset phase analysis of surface waves. 72nd EAGE meeting, Barcelona, Spain, Expanded Abstracts, M039.
    [Google Scholar]
  23. XiaJ., MillerR.D. and ParkC.B.1999. Estimation of near‐surface shear‐wave velocity by inversion of Rayleigh waves. Geophysics64, 691–700.
    [Google Scholar]
http://instance.metastore.ingenta.com/content/journals/10.3997/1873-0604.2011022
Loading
/content/journals/10.3997/1873-0604.2011022
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