1887
  1. Home
  2. A-Z Publications
  3. Geophysical Prospecting
  4. Volume 60, Issue 5
  5. Article
Volume 60, Issue 5
  • E-ISSN: 1365-2478

Abstract

ABSTRACT

We use numerically modelled data sets to investigate the sensitivity of electromagnetic interferometry by multidimensional deconvolution to spatial receiver sampling. Interferometry by multidimensional deconvolution retrieves the reflection response below the receivers after decomposition of the fields into upward and downward decaying fields and deconvolving the upward decaying field by the downward decaying field. Thereby the medium above the receiver level is replaced with a homogeneous half‐space, the sources are redatumed to the receiver level and the direct field is removed. Consequently, in a marine setting the retrieved reflection response is independent of any effect of the water layer and the air above. A drawback of interferometry by multidimensional deconvolution is a possibly unstable matrix inversion, which is necessary to retrieve the reflection response. Additionally, in order to correctly separate the upward and the downward decaying fields, the electromagnetic fields need to be sampled properly. We show that the largest possible receiver spacing depends on two parameters: the vertical distance between the source and the receivers and the length of the source. The receiver spacing should not exceed the larger of these two parameters. Besides these two parameters, the presence of inhomogeneities close to the receivers may also require a dense receiver sampling. We show that by using the synthetic aperture concept, an elongated source can be created from conventionally acquired data in order to overcome these strict sampling criteria. Finally, we show that interferometry may work under real‐world conditions with random noise and receiver orientation and positioning errors.

© 2011 European Association of Geoscientists & Engineers
Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.1111/j.1365-2478.2011.01019.x
2011-12-20
2024-04-24

  • From This Site

    /content/journals/10.1111/j.1365-2478.2011.01019.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. AmundsenL., LøsethL., MittetR., EllingsrudS. and UrsinB.2006. Decomposition of electromagnetic fields into upgoing and downgoing components, Geophysics, 71, G211–G223.
    [Google Scholar]
  2. AndréisD. and MacGregorL.2007. Time domain versus frequency domain CSEM in shallow water, 77th Annual International Meeting, SEG , Expanded Abstracts .
  3. BakulinA. and CalvertR.2006. The virtual source method: Theory and case study, Geophysics, 71, SI139–SI150.
    [Google Scholar]
  4. BannisterP. R.1984. New simplified formulas for ELF subsurface‐to‐subsurface propagation, IEEE Journal of Oceanic Engineering, OE‐9, 154–163.
    [Google Scholar]
  5. BerkhoutA. J.1982. Seismic Migration. Imaging of Acoustic Energy by Wave Field Extrapolation , Elsevier.
    [Google Scholar]
  6. ChenJ. and AlumbaughD.2009. Three methods for mitigating airwaves in shallow water marine CSEM data, 79th Annual International Meeting, SEG , Expanded Abstracts .
  7. ConstableS.2010. Ten years of marine CSEM for hydrocarbon exploration, Geophysics, 75, 75A67–75A81.
    [Google Scholar]
  8. ConstableS. and SrnkaL. J.2007. An introduction to marine controlled‐source electromagnetic methods for hydrocarbon exploration, Geophysics, 72, WA3–WA12.
    [Google Scholar]
  9. DraganovD., WapenaarK. and ThorbeckeJ.2006. Seismic interferometry: Reconstructing the earth’s reflection response, Geophysics, 71, SI61–SI70.
    [Google Scholar]
  10. FanY., SniederR., SlobE., HunzikerJ., SingerJ., SheimanJ. and RosenquistM.2010. Synthetic aperture controlled source electromagnetics, Geophys. Res. Lett., 37, L13305.
    [Google Scholar]
  11. FrijlinkM. and WapenaarK.2010. Reciprocity theorems for one‐way wave fields in curvilinear coordinate systems, SIAM J. Imaging Sciences, 3, 390–415.
    [Google Scholar]
  12. GrimbergenJ. L. T., DessingF. J. and WapenaarK.1998. Modal expansion of one‐way operators in laterally varying media, Geophysics, 63, 995–1005.
    [Google Scholar]
  13. HolvikE. and AmundsenL.2005. Elimination of the overburden response from multicomponent source and receiver seismic data, with source designature and decomposition into PP‐, PS‐, SP‐, and SS‐wave responses, Geophysics, 70, S43–S59.
    [Google Scholar]
  14. HunzikerJ., SlobE. and WapenaarK.2009. Controlled source electromagnetic interferometry by multidimensional deconvolution: spatial sampling aspects in sea bed logging, 71st EAGE Conference and Exhibition , Expanded Abstracts .
  15. KingR. W., OwensM. and WuT.1992. Lateral electromagnetic waves, Theory and applications to communications, geophysical exploration, and remote Sensing , Springer‐Verlag New York , Inc.
    [Google Scholar]
  16. LøsethL. O., AmundsenL. and JenssenA. J. K.2010. A solution to the airwave‐removal problem in shallow‐water marine EM, Geophysics, 75, A37–A42.
    [Google Scholar]
  17. MaaøF. A. and NguyenA. K.2010. Enhanced subsurface response for marine CSEM surveying, Geophysics, 75, A7–A10.
    [Google Scholar]
  18. NordskagJ. I. and AmundsenL.2007. Asymptotic airwave modeling for marine controlled‐source electromagnetic surveying, Geophysics, 72, F249–F255.
    [Google Scholar]
  19. NordskagJ. I., AmundsenL., LøsethL. and HolvikE.2009. Elimination of the water‐layer response from multi‐component source and receiver marine electromagnetic data, Geophysical Prospecting, 57, 897–918.
    [Google Scholar]
  20. SchusterG.2009. Seismic Interferometry , Cambridge University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  21. SchusterG. T., YuJ., ShengJ. and RickettJ.2004. Interferometric/daylight seismic imaging, Geophysical Journal International, 157, 838–852.
    [Google Scholar]
  22. SlobE.2009. Interferometry by deconvolution of multicomponent multioffset GPR data, IEEE Transactions on Geoscience and Remote Sensing, 47, 828–838.
    [Google Scholar]
  23. SlobE., DraganovD. and WapenaarK.2007a. Interferometric electromagnetic Green’s functions representations using propagation invariants, Geophysical Journal International, 169, 60–80.
    [Google Scholar]
  24. SlobE., SniederR. and WapenaarK.2007b. Interferometry in dissipative media: Addressing the shallow sea problem for seabed logging applications, 77th Annual International Meeting, SEG , Expanded Abstracts .
  25. SlobE., HunzikerJ. and MulderW.2010. Green’s tensors for the diffusive electric field in a VTI half‐space, Progress in Electromagnetics Research, 107, 1–20.
    [Google Scholar]
  26. SniederR.2006. Extracting the Green’s function of attenuating heterogeneous acoustic media from uncorrelated waves, Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 121, 2637–2643.
    [Google Scholar]
  27. UmE. S. and AlumbaughD. L.2007. On the physics of the marine controlled‐source electromagnetic method, Geophysics, 72, WA13–WA26.
    [Google Scholar]
  28. van den BergP. M., AbubakarA. and HabashyT. M.2008. Removal of sea‐surface‐related wavefields and source replacement in CSEM data processing, 78th Annual International Meeting, SEG , Expanded Abstracts .
  29. van den NeutJ., HunzikerJ., WapenaarK. and SlobE.2008. Controlled‐source seismic interferometry by multi‐dimensional deconvolution: stability aspects with various numbers of sources and receivers, 78th Annual International Meeting, SEG , Expanded Abstracts .
  30. WaitJ. R.1959. Propagation of electromagnetic pulses in a homogeneous conducting earth, Appl. Sci. Res., 8, 213–253.
    [Google Scholar]
  31. WapenaarC. P. A. and GrimbergenJ. L. T.1996. Reciprocity theorems for one‐way wavefields, Geophysical Journal International, 127, 169–177.
    [Google Scholar]
  32. WapenaarK.2004. Retrieving the elastodynamic Green’s function of an arbitrary inhomogeneous medium by cross correlation, Physical Review Letters, 93, 254301–1–254301–4.
    [Google Scholar]
  33. WapenaarK., SlobE. and SniederR.2008a. Seismic and electromagnetic controlled‐source interferometry in dissipative media, Geophysical Prospecting, 56, 419–434.
    [Google Scholar]
  34. WapenaarK., van den NeutJ. and RuigrokE.2008b. Passive seismic interferometry by multidimensional deconvolution, Geophysics, 73, A51–A56.
    [Google Scholar]
  35. WapenaarK., DraganovD., SniederR., CampmanX. and VerdelA.2010a. Tutorial on seismic interferometry: Part 1 ‐ basic principles and applications, Geophysics, 75, 75A195–75A209.
    [Google Scholar]
  36. WapenaarK., SlobE., SniederR. and CurtisA.2010b. Tutorial on seismic interferometry: Part 2 ‐ underlying theory and new advances, Geophysics, 75, 75A211–75A227.
    [Google Scholar]
  37. WeissC. J.2007. The fallacy of the “shallow‐water problem” in marine CSEM exploration, Geophysics, 72, A93–A97.
    [Google Scholar]
  38. WiriantoM., MulderW. A. and SlobE. C.2011. Exploiting the airwave for time‐lapse reservoir monitoring with CSEM on land, Geophysics, 76, A15–A19.
    [Google Scholar]
http://instance.metastore.ingenta.com/content/journals/10.1111/j.1365-2478.2011.01019.x
Loading
Two‐dimensional controlled‐source electromagnetic interferometry by multidimensional deconvolution: spatial sampling aspects
Geophysical Prospecting 60, 974 (2012); https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2478.2011.01019.x
/content/journals/10.1111/j.1365-2478.2011.01019.x
/content/journals/10.1111/j.1365-2478.2011.01019.x
Loading

Data & Media loading...

  • Article Type: Research Article
Keyword(s): Electromagnetics; Numerical study

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