1887
  1. Home
  2. A-Z Publications
  3. Geophysical Prospecting
  4. Volume 67, Issue 5
  5. Article
Volume 67, Issue 5
  • E-ISSN: 1365-2478

Abstract

ABSTRACT

Part II of this paper is a direct continuation of Part I, where we consider the same types of orthorhombic layered media and the same types of pure‐mode and converted waves. Like in Part I, the approximations for the slowness‐domain kinematical characteristics are obtained by combining power series coefficients in the vicinity of both the normal‐incidence ray and an additional wide‐angle ray. In Part I, the wide‐angle ray was set to be the critical ray (‘critical slowness match’), whereas in Part II we consider a finite long offset associated with a given pre‐critical ray (‘pre‐critical slowness match’). Unlike the critical slowness match, the approximations in the pre‐critical slowness match are valid only within the bounded slowness range; however, the accuracy within the defined range is higher. Moreover, for the pre‐critical slowness match, there is no need to distinguish between the high‐velocity layer and the other, low‐velocity layers. The form of the approximations in both critical and pre‐critical slowness matches is the same, where only the wide‐angle power series coefficients are different. Comparing the approximated kinematical characteristics with those obtained by exact numerical ray tracing, we demonstrate high accuracy. Furthermore, we show that for all wave types, the accuracy of the pre‐critical slowness match is essentially higher than that of the critical slowness match, even for matching slowness values close to the critical slowness. Both approaches can be valuable for implementation, depending on the target offset range and the nature of the subsurface model. The pre‐critical slowness match is more accurate for simulating reflection data with conventional offsets. The critical slowness match can be attractive for models with a dominant high‐velocity layer, for simulating, for example, refraction events with very long offsets.

© 2019 European Association of Geoscientists & Engineers © 2019 European Association of Geoscientists & Engineers
Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.1111/1365-2478.12766
2019-03-26
2024-04-19

  • From This Site

    /content/journals/10.1111/1365-2478.12766
    dcterms_title,dcterms_subject,pub_keyword
    -contentType:Journal -contentType:Contributor -contentType:Concept -contentType:Institution
    10
    5
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

References

  1. AlkhalifahT.2003. Tau migration and velocity analysis: Theory and synthetic examples. Geophysics68, 1331–1339.
     [Google Scholar]
  2. AlkhalifahT., FomelS. and BiondiB.1997. Time‐domain anisotropic processing in arbitrary inhomogeneous media. Stanford Exploration Project Report SEP‐95.
  3. FomelS. and StovasA.2010. Generalized nonhyperbolic moveout approximation. Geophysics75, U9–U18.
     [Google Scholar]
  4. KorenZ. and RavveI.2011. Full‐azimuth subsurface angle domain wavefield decomposition and imaging: Part I – Directional and reflection image gathers. Geophysics76, S1–S13.
     [Google Scholar]
  5. KorenZ. and RavveI.2014. Azimuthally dependent anisotropic velocity model update. Geophysics79, C27–C53.
     [Google Scholar]
  6. KorenZ. and RavveI.2018. Slowness domain offset and traveltime approximations in layered vertical transversely isotropic media. Geophysical Prospecting65, 1559–1581.
     [Google Scholar]
  7. KosloffD., SherwoodJ., KorenZ., MachetE. and FalkowitzY.1996. Velocity and interface depth determination by tomography of depth migrated gathers. Geophysics61, 1511–1523.
     [Google Scholar]
  8. RavveI. and KorenZ.2011. Full‐azimuth subsurface angle domain wavefield decomposition and imaging: Part II – Local angle domain. Geophysics76, S51–S64.
     [Google Scholar]
  9. RavveI. and KorenZ.2017. Traveltime approximation in vertical transversely isotropic layered media. Geophysical Prospecting65, 1559–1581.
     [Google Scholar]
  10. StorkC.1992. Reflection tomography in the postmigrated domain. Geophysics57, 680–692.
     [Google Scholar]
  11. StovasA. and FomelS.2012. Generalized nonelliptic moveout approximation in τ−p domain. Geophysics77, U23–U30.
     [Google Scholar]
  12. SymesW.2008. Migration velocity analysis and waveform inversion. Geophysical Prospecting56, 765–790.
     [Google Scholar]
  13. TarantolaA.1984. Linearized inversion of seismic reflection data. Geophysical Prospecting32, 998–1015.
     [Google Scholar]
  14. TarantolaA., JobertG., TrezeguetD. and DenelleE.1988. The non‐linear inversion of seismic waveforms can be performed either by time extrapolation or by depth extrapolation. Geophysical Prospecting36, 383–416.
     [Google Scholar]
  15. ZhangZ. and AlkhalifahT.2017. Full waveform inversion using oriented time‐domain imaging method for VTI medium. Geophysical Prospecting65, 166–180.
     [Google Scholar]
http://instance.metastore.ingenta.com/content/journals/10.1111/1365-2478.12766
Loading
Slowness‐domain kinematical characteristics for horizontally layered orthorhombic media. Part II: Pre‐critical slowness match
Geophysical Prospecting 67, 1134 (2019); https://doi.org/10.1111/1365-2478.12766
/content/journals/10.1111/1365-2478.12766
/content/journals/10.1111/1365-2478.12766
Loading

Data & Media loading...

  • Article Type: Research Article
Keyword(s): Anisotropy; Modeling

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