1887

Abstract

Summary

The characteristics of seismoelectric interface response measured at different interfaces on rock sample are studied by seismoelectric experiments. The rock sample is water-saturated sandstone with a cavity drilled on the left side. The receiving electrodes set at different position to acquire the seismoelectric signal. The signals received by electrodes are compared with each other. The analysis of the traveltime and the phase of the seismoelectric interface response shows that the receiving position has much influence on the signal to be obtained. The amplitude comparison of each arrival suggests that the seismoelectric signal which is generated by the wave reflected from lower interface and is received at the upper interface of cavity turns out to be stronger than the signal directly generated at the lower interface, which means that seismoelectric signal induced by the reflected wave is easier to be received by electrode than the seismoelectric signal directly from the lower interface. The difference of signal strength may cause misjudgment of interface position in seismoelectric record. This phenomenon may form a new viewpoint on the application of the interface response in providing the subsurface information. In addition, the interfical signals induced by multiple waves should be noted.

Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/papers/10.3997/2214-4609.201601310
2016-05-30
2024-04-23
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

References

  1. Kroeger, B. and Kemna, A.
    [2012] Seismoelectric interface response at dipping layer boundaries. 74th Annual International Meeting, EAGE, Expanded Abstracts, 4–7.
    [Google Scholar]
  2. Grobbe, N. and Slob, E.C.
    [2014] Seismoelectric interface response signal behaviour in thin-bed geological settings. 84th Annual International Meeting, SEG, Expanded Abstracts, 3428–3432.
    [Google Scholar]
  3. Liu, Z., Yuan, L., Zhang, X., Liu, Z. and Wu, H.
    [2008] A laboratory seismoelectric measurement for the permafrost model with a frozen–unfrozen interface. Geophysical Research Letters, 35(21), 184–189.
    [Google Scholar]
  4. Smeulders, D.M.J., Grobbe, N., Heller, H.K.J. and Schakel, M.D.
    [2014] Seismoelectric conversion for the detection of porous medium interfaces between wetting and nonwetting fluids. Vadose Zone Journal, 13(5).
    [Google Scholar]
  5. Zhu, Z., Toksöz, M.N. and Burns, D.R.
    [2008] Electroseismic and seismoelectric measurements of rock samples in a water tank. Geophysics, 73(5), 153.
    [Google Scholar]
http://instance.metastore.ingenta.com/content/papers/10.3997/2214-4609.201601310
Loading
/content/papers/10.3997/2214-4609.201601310
Loading

Data & Media loading...

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