1887
  1. Home
  2. A-Z Publications
  3. Geophysical Prospecting
  4. Volume 67, Issue 6
  5. Article
Volume 67 Number 6
  • E-ISSN: 1365-2478

Abstract

ABSTRACT

The presence of geophysical receivers on the seafloor changes the local wave field due to the receiver seafloor interaction. The resulting PP‐ and PS‐wave distortion of the wave field is often referred to as receiver coupling to the seafloor and can make data processing challenging and sometimes impossible. This paper provides an overview of the mathematical approaches to describe receiver coupling, how to estimate receiver coupling and what the difficulties and possible solutions are. The first section shows how the mathematical approach developed from a simple model considering only the vertical receiver component to include all three receiver components and their interactions with the seafloor. In the second section, I show how receiver coupling can be measured and how it can be improved using mathematical and data‐driven approaches.

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

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.1111/1365-2478.12776
2019-03-15
2024-04-19

  • From This Site

    /content/journals/10.1111/1365-2478.12776
    dcterms_title,dcterms_subject,pub_keyword
    -contentType:Journal -contentType:Contributor -contentType:Concept -contentType:Institution
    10
    5
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

References

  1. BachmanR.T.1979. Acoustic anisotropy in marine sediments and sedimentary rocks. Journal of Geophysical Research: Solid Earth84, 7661–7663.
     [Google Scholar]
  2. BackusG.E.1962. Long‐wave elastic anisotropy produced by horizontal layering. Journal of Geophysical Research67, 4427–4440.
     [Google Scholar]
  3. BagainiC., BaleR., CaprioliP., MuyzertE. and RonenS.2000. Assessment and calibration of horizontal geophone fidelity in seabed‐4C using shear waves. EAGE 62nd meeting, Session L0002, Glasgow, Scotland, 29 May–2 June 2000.
  4. BagainiC. and MuyzertE.2004. Calibration of cross‐line components for sea‐bed 4C acquisition systems. Geophysical Prospecting52, 341–349.
     [Google Scholar]
  5. BarashT.W., DollC.G., CollinsJ.A., SuttonG.H. and SolomonS.C.1994. Quantitative evaluation of a passively leveled ocean bottom seismometer. Marine Geophysical Research16, 347–363.
     [Google Scholar]
  6. BergeP.A., MallickS., FryerG.J., Barstow, N., Carter, J.A., Sutton, G.H.et al. 1991. In Situ measurement of transverse isotropy in shallow‐water marine sediments. Geophysical Journal International104, 241–254.
     [Google Scholar]
  7. BergerJ. and AgnewD.1979. Seismic system calibration: 2. Cross‐spectral calibration using random binary signals. Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America69, 271–288.
     [Google Scholar]
  8. BycroftG.N.1978. The effect of soil‐structure interaction on seismometer readings. Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America68, 823–843.
     [Google Scholar]
  9. ByerleyG., ClausenC. and TessmanD.2003. Ekofisk VectorSeis® Test–Improvements in vector fidelity of 4C seismic data. 65th EAGE Conference 2–5, Stavanger, Norway, 2‐5 June 2003.
  10. DaiH. and MacBethC.1999. Converted wave phase stability in seabed seismic data. SEG Technical Program Expanded Abstracts, pp. 884–887.
  11. DellingerJ. and ClarkeR.2004. Same cable different vector fidelity: a case study of the Seneca lake and Valhall LoFS OBC datasets. 2004 SEG annual meeting, 10–15 October 2004, Denver, US.
  12. DellingerJ., ClarkeR. and GutowskiP.2001. Horizontal vector infidelity correction by general linear transform. SEG Technical Program Expanded Abstracts, pp. 865–868.
  13. DellingerJ., ClarkeR. and GutowskiP.2002. Three‐dimensional vector infidelity correction by general linear transform, 64th EAGE conference and exhibition, 27–30 May 2002, Florence, Italy.
  14. DoddsD.1995. DREA ocean bottom seismometer improvements, DREA report, DREA CR/95.
  15. DornG.A.1984. Radiation patterns of torsionally vibrating seismic sources. Geophysics49, 1213.
     [Google Scholar]
  16. DuennebierF.K. and SuttonG.H.1995. Fidelity of ocean bottom seismic observations. Marine Geophysical Research17, 535–555.
     [Google Scholar]
  17. DuennebierF.K. and SuttonG.H.2007. Why bury ocean bottom seismometers?Geochemistry, Geophysics, Geosystems8, 1–13.
     [Google Scholar]
  18. DuennebierF.K., SuttonG.H., HarrisD. and ByrneD.A.1984. A simple shaker table for seismometer calibration. Marine Geophysical Research6, 311–328.
     [Google Scholar]
  19. FaberK., MaxwellP.W. and WieseF.1995. Further experiments in geophone coupling using the geo‐pinger technique. 65th annual international meeting, p. 769, Houston, US.
  20. FjellangerJ., AanensenO. and RuudB.2002. Geophone coupling and QC of vector fidelity. EAGE conference, 27–30 May 2002, Florence, Italy.
  21. GaiserJ.1998. Compensating OBC data for variations in geophone coupling. SEG Technical Program Expanded Abstracts, pp. 1–4.
  22. GaiserJ.2003. Vector‐fidelity differences between p‐wave first breaks and ps‐wave reflections–implications for compensation of full‐azimuth data. EAGE conference, 2–5 June 2003, Stavanger, Norway.
  23. GaiserJ.2004. Vector‐fidelity benefits of buried OBC detectors at Teal South. EAGE conference, pp. 20–23, Rhodes, Greece, 20‐23 September 2004.
  24. GaiserJ.E.2007. Detector coupling corrections for vector infidelity of multicomponent OBC data. Geophysics72, V67–V77.
     [Google Scholar]
  25. GaiserJ., MelbøA. and BarrF.2002. Vector fidelity of OBC data and seafloor coupling of the vertical component. Offshore Technol. … 1–7, 6–9 May 2002, Houston, US.
  26. GarmanyJ.D.1984. The recovery of true particle motion from three‐component ocean bottom seismometer data. Journal of Geophysical Research: Solid Earth89, 9245–9252.
     [Google Scholar]
  27. HsiehT.1962. Foundation vibrations. Proceedings of the Institution of Civil Engineers.
  28. HooverG.M.G. and O'BrienJ.J.T.1980. The influence of the planted geophone on seismic land data. Geophysics45, 1239–1253.
     [Google Scholar]
  29. JurkevicsA.1988. Polarization analysis of three‐component array data. Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America78, 1725–1743.
     [Google Scholar]
  30. KimuraM., WatanabeH. and KawashimaS.1997. Coupling characteristics between geophone and ground model. Japanese Journal of Applied Physics, Part 1: Regular Papers & Short Notes and Review Papers36, 3354–3357.
     [Google Scholar]
  31. KraghE., VignerA., HorneS., RobertssonJ. and CombeeL.2004. Quantifying the horizontal vector fidelity of a marine multicomponent acquisition system. SEG Technical Program Expanded Abstracts, pp. 905–908.
  32. KrohnC.E.1984. Geophone ground coupling. Geophysics49, 722.
     [Google Scholar]
  33. LamerA.1970. Couplage sol‐geophone. Geophysical Prospecting18, 300–319.
     [Google Scholar]
  34. LandschulzeM.2005. Ankopplungsuntersuchung durch, in situ“ Kalibrierung eines OBS‐Rahmens. DFG (German Res. Found.) Rep. DA478/10‐2.
  35. LandschulzeM.2010. Qualitative seismic sensor array estimation and seafloor coupling by using incoherent ambient signals for reservoir‐monitoring systems. SEG Technical Program Expanded Abstracts, pp. 71–75.
  36. LandschulzeM. and MjeldeR.2014. Azimuth‐dependent ocean bottom cable receiver coupling to the seafloor. Geophysics79, P21–P29.
     [Google Scholar]
  37. LandschulzeM., MjeldeR. and LandschulzeK.2014. Systematic simulation of multicomponent receiver coupling to the seafloor using rheological models. Geophysics79, P9–P19.
     [Google Scholar]
  38. LucoJ.1974. Impedance function for rigid foundation on layered medium. Nuclear Engineering and Design31, 204–217.
     [Google Scholar]
  39. LucoJ.1976. Vibrations of a rigid disc on a lyered viscoelastic medium.pdf. Nuclear Engineering and Design36, 325–340.
     [Google Scholar]
  40. LucoJ. and WestmannR.A.1971. Dynamic response of circular footings. Journal of the Engineering Mechanics Division97, 1381–1395.
     [Google Scholar]
  41. LysmerJ. and RichartF.E.1966. Dynamic response of footings to vertical loading. Journal of the Soil Mechanics and Foundations Division92, 65–91.
     [Google Scholar]
  42. MaaoF. and DongH.2002. Vector fidelity characterization of ocean bottom seismic data. EAGE conference, 27–30 May 2002, Florence, Italy.
  43. NorrisM.W., JohnsonM.L. and WalshM.2006. Section II – Rhodes Workshop 2004 OBC signal fidelity, pp. 793–815.
  44. OlofssonB. and MassacandC.2007. Polarisation analysis of ocean bottom 3C sensor data. EAGE conference, 11–14 June 2007, London, UK.
  45. OslerJ.C. and ChapmanD.M.F.1998. Quantifying the interaction of an ocean bottom seismometer with the seabed. Journal of Geophysical Research103, 9879.
     [Google Scholar]
  46. PaffenholzJ. and BarrF.J.1995. An improved method for deriving water‐bottom reflectivities for processing dual‐sensor ocean‐bottom cable data. SEG Technical Program Expanded Abstracts, pp. 987–990.
  47. PavlisG. and VernonF.1994. Calibration of seismometers using ground noise. Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America84, 1243–1255.
     [Google Scholar]
  48. ReissnerE.1936. Stationäre, axialsymmetrische, durch eine schüttelnde Masse erregte Schwingungen eines homogenen elastischen Halbraumes. Ingenieur‐Archiv7, 381–396.
     [Google Scholar]
  49. RobertsonI.A.1966. Forced vertical vibration of a rigid circular disc on a semi‐infinite elastic solid. Mathematical Proceedings of the Cambridge Philosophical Society62, 547.
     [Google Scholar]
  50. RobinsonS.P.1999. Review of methods for low frequency transducer calibration in reverberant tanks. NPL Rep. CMAM 034.
  51. RosetX., CarbonellM., MànuelA. and GomárizS.2009. Sea seismometer coupling on the sediment. 19th IMEKO World Congress, pp. 324–327, 6–11 September 2009, Lisbon, Portugal.
  52. SafarM.H.1978. On the minimization of the distortion caused by the geophone‐ground coupling. Geophysical Prospecting26, 538–549.
     [Google Scholar]
  53. SchalkwijkK.M., WapenaarC.P.A. and VerschuurD.J.1999. Application of two‐step decomposition to multicomponent ocean‐bottom data: theory and case study. Journal of Seismic Exploration8, 261–278
     [Google Scholar]
  54. SuttonG.H., DuennebierF.K. and IwatakeB.1981. Coupling of ocean bottom seismometers to soft bottom. Marine Geophysical Research5, 35–51.
     [Google Scholar]
  55. SuttonG.H. and DuennebierF.K.1987. Optimum design of ocean bottom seismometers. Marine Geophysical Research9, 47–65.
     [Google Scholar]
  56. TreeE.1999. The vector infidelity of the ocean bottom multicomponent seismic acquisition system. 61st EAGE Conference and Exhibition, Extended abstract, pp. 6–19.
  57. TrehuA.M.1985. Coupling to ocean bottom seismometers to sediment: Results of tests with the U.S. Geological Survey ocean bottom seismometer. Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America75, 271–289.
     [Google Scholar]
  58. TrehuA.M. and SuttonG.H.1994. A note on the seafloor coupling characteristics of the new ONR ocean‐bottom seismometer. Marine Geophysical Research16, 91–103.
     [Google Scholar]
  59. TreitelS.1970. Principles of digital multichannel filtering. Geophysics35, 785–811.
     [Google Scholar]
  60. VertiL.M., AngererE., GaiserJ.E., GrandiA. and LynnH.2002. Emilio field – anisotropy analysis from PP and PS data. EAGE 64th meeting, F046, 27–30 May 2002, Florence, Italy.
  61. WashburnH. and WileyH.1941. The effect of the placement of a seismometer on its response characteristics. Geophysics6, 116.
     [Google Scholar]
  62. WattH., GibsonJ., BurnettR. and ShukiR.2005. Evaluation of 3C sensor coupling using ambient noise measurements. SEG Technical Program Expanded Abstracts, pp. 916–919.
  63. WojeG., BergE. and RykkelidJ.2002. Vector fidelity analyses of seabed seismic data. EAGE conference, 27–30 May 2002. Florence, Italy.
  64. WolfA.1944. The equation of motion of a geophone on the surface of an elastic earth. Geophysics9, 29–35.
     [Google Scholar]
  65. ZelikovitzS.J. and ProtheroW.A.1981. The vertical response of an ocean bottom seismometer: analysis of the Lopez Island vertical transient tests. Marine Geophysical Research5, 53–67.
     [Google Scholar]
http://instance.metastore.ingenta.com/content/journals/10.1111/1365-2478.12776
Loading
  • Article Type: Research Article
Keyword(s): Instrumentation; OBC; OBN; PRM; Receiver coupling; Seafloor; Signal processing

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