1887
Volume 14, Issue 3
  • ISSN: 1569-4445
  • E-ISSN: 1873-0604

Abstract

ABSTRACT

We present a procedure for enhancing the signal‐to‐noise ratio (S/N) of shallow seismic reflection data based on two different steps: 1) an acquisition step that requires the recording of closely spaced common source records with standard source and receiver equipment and 2) a processing step where weighted or un‐weighted source and receiver arrays are simulated on the basis of required needs for source related noise attenuation and depth penetration. The data acquisition can be carried out employing single source‐single geophone recordings, with a standard 24 or 48‐channel equipment. Simple energy sources such as weight drop or sledgehammer are considered. The design and application of the spatial filters in the processing phase is very flexible and can be tailored to the specific needs. In fact, the simulated source and/or receiver arrays can be time and/or space variant and can be weighted to provide the desired responses. Optimal weights can be determined by means of Chebyshev polynomials. Real data examples show the increase in the data quality in terms of better coherent noise attenuation and of enhanced depth penetration.

Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.3997/1873-0604.2016013
2015-12-01
2024-04-26
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

References

  1. CarliniA. and MazzottiA.1989. Optimized receiver array simulation based upon resolution constraints. Geophysical Prospecting37, 607–621.
    [Google Scholar]
  2. CarmignaniL., MeccheriM., ContiP., MassaG., PataccaE. and ScandoneP.2011. Note Illustrative della Carta Geologica d’Italia alla scala 1:50.000. Foglio 249 ‐ Massa Carrara. ISPRA.
    [Google Scholar]
  3. FerociM., OrlandoL., BaliaR., BosmanC., CardarelliE. and DeiddaG.2000. Some considerations on shallow seismic reflection surveys. Journal of Applied Geophysics45, 127–139.
    [Google Scholar]
  4. HolzmanM.1963. Chebyshev optimized geophone arrays. Geophysics28, 145–155.
    [Google Scholar]
  5. IngleV.K. and ProakisJ.G.2007. Digital Signal Processing Using Matlab. Thomson Learning.
    [Google Scholar]
  6. MillerR.D., PullanS.E., WaldnerJ.S. and HaeniF.P.1986. Field comparison of shallow seismic sources. Geophysics51, 2067–2092.
    [Google Scholar]
  7. SteeplesD.W. and MillerR.D.1998. Avoiding pitfalls in shallow seismic reflection surveys. Geophysics63(4), 1213–1224.
    [Google Scholar]
  8. StucchiE., RiboliniA. and AnfusoA.2014. High resolution reflection seismics at the Patigno landslide, Northern Apennines, Italy. Near Surface Geophysics12(4), 559–571.
    [Google Scholar]
  9. TognarelliA. and StucchiE.2013. Source and receiver array simulations for near surface seismic investigations. In: Near Surface Geoscience 2013, 19th EAGE European Meeting of Environmental and Engineering Geophysics.
    [Google Scholar]
http://instance.metastore.ingenta.com/content/journals/10.3997/1873-0604.2016013
Loading
/content/journals/10.3997/1873-0604.2016013
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