1887
Volume 62, Issue 5
  • E-ISSN: 1365-2478

Abstract

ABSTRACT

Wave field reconstruction – the estimation of a three‐dimensional (3D) wave field representing upgoing, downgoing or the combined total pressure at an arbitrary point within a marine streamer array – is enabled by simultaneous measurements of the crossline and vertical components of particle acceleration in addition to pressure in a multicomponent marine streamer. We examine a repeated sail line of North Sea data acquired by a prototype multicomponent towed‐streamer array for both wave field reconstruction fidelity (or accuracy) and reconstruction repeatability. Data from six cables, finely sampled in‐line but spaced at 75 m crossline, are reconstructed and placed on a rectangular data grid uniformly spaced at 6.25 m in‐line and crossline. Benchmarks are generated using recorded pressure data and compared with wave fields reconstructed from pressure alone, and from combinations of pressure, crossline acceleration and vertical acceleration. We find that reconstruction using pressure and both crossline and vertical acceleration has excellent fidelity, recapturing highly aliased diffractions that are lost by interpolation of pressure‐only data. We model wave field reconstruction error as a linear function of distance from the nearest physical sensor and find, for this data set with some mismatched shot positions, that the reconstructed wave field error sensitivity to sensor mispositioning is one‐third that of the recorded wave field sensitivity. Multicomponent reconstruction is also more repeatable, outperforming single‐component reconstruction in which wave field mismatch correlates with geometry mismatch. We find that adequate repeatability may mask poor reconstruction fidelity and that aliased reconstructions will repeat if the survey geometry repeats. Although the multicomponent 3D data have only 500 m in‐line aperture, limiting the attenuation of non‐repeating multiples, the level of repeatability achieved is extremely encouraging compared to full‐aperture, pressure‐only, time‐lapse data sets at an equivalent stage of processing.

Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.1111/1365-2478.12112
2014-02-27
2024-03-29
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

References

  1. BerniA.J.1984. Marine seismic system. United States of America Patent US4 437 175.
  2. BrownG. and PaulsenJ.O.2011. Improved marine 4D repeatability using an automated vessel, source and receiver positioning system. First Break29(11), 49–58.
    [Google Scholar]
  3. CalvertR.2005. 4D technology: where are we, and where are we going? Geophysical Prospecting53, 161–171.
    [Google Scholar]
  4. CarlsonD., SöllnerW., TabtiH., BroxE. and WidmaierM.2007. Increased resolution of seismic data from a dual sensor streamer cable. 77th SEG Annual International Meeting, San Antonio, 26, 994–998.
  5. EggenbergerK., ChristieP.A.F. and MuyzertE.2011. Evaluating the benefit of pressure‐plus‐gradient reconstruction of time‐lapse seismic wavefields. 73rd EAGE Conference and Exhibition, Vienna, Extended Abstract, H015.
  6. EggenbergerK., ChristieP., van ManenD.‐J., VassalloM., ÖzbekA. and ZerougS.2012a. The fidelity of 3D wavefield reconstruction from a four‐component marine streamer and its implications for time‐lapse seismic measurements. 82nd SEG Annual International Meeting, Las Vegas, Expanded Abstract.
  7. EggenbergerK., ChristieP., VassalloM. and van ManenD.‐J.2012b. Evaluating fidelity and repeatability of wavefields reconstructed from multicomponent streamer data. 74th EAGE Conference & Exhibition, Copenhagen, Extended Abstract, E016.
  8. GoujonN., TeigenØ., ÖzdemirK., KjellesvigB.A. and RentschS.2012. Signal Fidelity of Multicomponent (4C) Towed Streamer. 74th EAGE Conference & Exhibition, Copenhagen, Extended Abstract, Z012.
  9. HampsonG. and JakubowiczH.1995. The effects of source and receiver motion on seismic data. Geophysical Prospecting43, 221–244.
    [Google Scholar]
  10. KraghE. and ChristieP.2002. Seismic repeatability, normalized RMS, and predictability. The Leading Edge21(7), 640–647.
    [Google Scholar]
  11. LindenD.A.1959. A discussion of sampling theorems. Proceedings of the Institute of Radio Engineers, 47, 1219–1226.
  12. MallatS.G. and ZhangZ.1993. Matching pursuits with time‐frequency dictionaries. IEEE Transactions on Signal Processing41(12), 3397–3415.
    [Google Scholar]
  13. van ManenD. J. Vassallo, ÖzdemirA.K., ÖzbekA. and RobertssonJ.O.A.2013. Crossline Reconstruction Using Aliased 3D Deghosted Up and Downgoing Wavefields. 75th EAGE Conference Exhibition, London, Extended Abstract, TU0410.
  14. MisaghiA., LandrøM. and PetersenS.A.2007. Overburden complexity and repeatability of seismic data: Impacts of positioning errors at the Oseberg field, North Sea. Geophysical Prospecting55, 365–379.
    [Google Scholar]
  15. NæssO.2007. The Relationship between Geometrical Repeatability and Seismic Trace Repeatability in 4D. 69th EAGE Conference and Exhibition, London, Extended Abstract, PO66.
  16. ÖzbekA., ÖzdemirK. and VassalloM.2009. Interpolation by matching pursuit. 79th SEG Annual International Meeting, Houston, 28, 3254–3257.
  17. ÖzbekA., VassalloM., ÖzdemirK., van ManenD.‐J. and EggenbergerK.2010. Crossline wavefield reconstruction from multicomponent streamer data: Part 2 — Joint interpolation and 3D up/down separation by generalized matching pursuit. Geophysics75, WB69–WB85.
    [Google Scholar]
  18. ÖzbekA., VassalloM., ÖzdemirK., van ManenD.‐J., EggenbergerK. and RobertssonJ.O.A.2011. Parametric matching pursuit methods to reconstruct seismic data acquired with multichannel sampling. 73rd EAGE Conference and Exhibition, Vienna, Extended Abstract, A042.
  19. ÖzdemirK., KjellesvigB.A., ÖzbekA. and MartinJ.E.2012. Digital noise attenuation of particle motion data in a multicomponent (4C) towed streamer. 74th EAGE Conference & Exhibition, Copenhagen, Extended Abstract, I017.
  20. RobertssonJ.O.A., KraghE. and MartinJ.2004. Method and system for reducing effects of sea surface ghost contamination in seismic data. United States of America Patent US6 775 618.
  21. RobertssonJ.O.A., MooreI., VassalloM., ÖzdemirK., van ManenD.‐J. and ÖzbekA.2008. On the use of multicomponent streamer recordings for reconstruction of pressure wavefields in the crossline direction. Geophysics73(5), A45–A49.
    [Google Scholar]
  22. TeigenØ., ÖzdemirK., KjellesvigB.A., GoujonN. and PabonJ.2012. Characterization of noise modes in multicomponent (4C) towed‐streamer. 74th EAGE Conference & Exhibition, Copenhagen, Extended Abstract, Z013.
  23. VassalloM., ÖzbekA., ÖzdemirK. and EggenbergerK.2010. Crossline wavefield reconstruction from multicomponent streamer data, Part 1: Interpolation by matching pursuit using pressure and its crossline gradient. Geophysics75, WB53–WB67.
    [Google Scholar]
http://instance.metastore.ingenta.com/content/journals/10.1111/1365-2478.12112
Loading
/content/journals/10.1111/1365-2478.12112
Loading

Data & Media loading...

  • Article Type: Research Article
Keyword(s): Interpolation; Multicomponent recording; Time lapse

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