ARTICLE

Difference image of seismic reflection sections with highly dense spatial sampling in random heterogeneous media

JUN MATSUSHIMA1 OSAMU NISHIZAWA2
Show Less
1 School of Engineering, The University of Tokyo, Toyo, Japan. jun-matsushima@frcer.t.u-tokyo.ac.jp,
2 Geological Survey of Japan, AIST, Tokyo, Japan.,
JSE 2010, 19(3), 279–301;
Submitted: 10 January 2010 | Accepted: 7 May 2010 | Published: 1 July 2010
© 2010 by the Authors. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution -Noncommercial 4.0 International License (CC-by the license) ( https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/ )
Abstract

Matsushima, J. and Nishizawa, O., 2010. Difference image of seismic reflection sections with highly dense spatial sampling in random heterogeneous media. Journal of Seismic Exploration, 19: 279-301. According to the Nyquist sampling criterion, it is redundant to deploy a smaller sampling interval than the Nyquist sampling interval. However, we show the possibility of utilizing a highly dense deployment of source/receivers when applying seismic reflection methods in random heterogeneous media. We consider a seismic waveform consisting of scattered waves generated by random isotropic heterogeneity, which is a noise-like wave field caused by multiple scattering of seismic waves. The final section contains disturbance due to the multiple-scattering effects in small-scale heterogeneities that do not satisfy the assumption of migration theory based on single scattering. Our numerical experiments indicate that the highly dense spatial sampling does not improve resolution of the section when the subsurface structure contains random heterogeneity regardless of the relationship between the spatial sampling interval and the characteristic size of heterogeneities, even if the interval of spatial sampling becomes shorter than the Nyquist sampling interval. However, we found the existence of a small but significant difference between two sections generated with adequate sampling. This small but significant difference is attributed to both the truncation artifact and NMO-stretch effect which cannot be practically prevented during data acquisition and processing. We show that this small difference is dependent on the characteristic heterogeneity size, indicating that difference images have the possibility of estimating the characteristic size of heterogeneities by differentiating two sections with different adequate spatial sampling.

Keywords
Nyquist sampling theorem
difference image
spatial sampling
random heterogeneous media
scattering
NMO-stretch effect
truncation artifact
aliasing
time-lapse
References
  1. Abma, R., Sun, J. and Bernitsas, N., 1999. Antialiasing methods in Kirchhoff migration.Geophysics, 64: 1783-1792.
  2. Aki, K. and Richards, P.G., 1980. Quantitative Seismology. W.H. Freeman and Company, SanFrancisco.
  3. Barnes, A.E., 1992. Another look at NMO stretch. Geophysics, 57: 749-751.
  4. Biondi, B., 1998. Kirchhoff imaging beyond aliasing. Stanford Exploration Project, Report 97:13-35.
  5. Biondi, B., 2001. Kirchhoff imaging beyond imaging. Geophysics, 66: 654-666.
  6. Brouwer, J.H., 2002. Improved NMO correction with a specific application to shallow-seismic data.Geophys. Prosp., 50: 225-237.
  7. Brown, L., Serpa, L., Setzer, T., Oliver, J., Kaufman, S., Lillie, R., Steiner, D. and Steeples,W.D., 1983. Geology, 11: 25-30.
  8. Buchholtz, H., 1972. A note on signal distortion due to dynamic NMO corrections. Geophys.Prosp., 20: 395-402.
  9. Dunkin, J.W. and Levin, F.K., 1973. Effect of normal moveout on a seismic pulse. Geophysics,28: 635-642.
  10. Emmerich, H., Zwielich, J. and Muller, G., 1993. Migration of synthetic seismograms for crustalstructures with random heterogeneities. Geophys. J. Internat., 113: 225-238.
  11. Frankel, A. and Clayton, R., 1986. Finite difference simulations of seismic scattering. Implicationsfor the propagation of short-period seismic waves in the crust and models of crustalheterogeneity. J. Geophys. Res., 91: 6465-6489.
  12. Gibson, S.B. and Levander, R.A., 1988. Modeling and processing of scattered waves in seismicreflection surveys. Geophysics, 53: 466-478.
  13. Gibson, S.B. and Levander, R.A., 1990. Apparent layering in common-midpoint stacked images oftwo-dimensionally heterogeneous targets. Geophysics, 53: 466-478.
  14. Goff, J.A. and Holliger, K., 2000. Nature and origin of upper crustal seismic velocity fluctuationsand associated scaling properties: Combined stochastic analyses of KTB velocity andlithology logs. J. Geophys. Res., 104: 13169-13182.DIFFERENCE IMAGE 301
  15. Grasmueck, M., Weger, R. and Horstmeyer, H., 2005. Full-resolution 3D GPR imaging.Geophysics, 70: K12-K19.
  16. Hoshiba, M., 2000. Large fluctuation of wave amplitude produced by small fluctuation of velocitystructure. Phys. Earth Planet. Inter., 120: 201-217.
  17. Karson, J.A., Collins, J.A. and Casey, J.F., 1984. Geologic and seismic velocity structure of thecrust/mantle transition in the Bay of Island ophiolite complex. J. Geophys. Res., 89:3153-3171.
  18. Maresh, J., White, R.S., Hobbs, R.W. and Smallwood, J.R., 2006. Seismic attenuation of Atlanticmargin basalts: Observations and modeling. Geophysics, 71: B211-B221.
  19. Matsushima, J., Rokugawa, S., Yokota, T., Miyazaki, T. and Kato, Y., 1998. On the relationbetween the stacking process and the resolution of a stacked section in a crosswell seismicsurvey. Explor. Geophys., 29: 499-505.
  20. Matsushima, J., Okubo, Y., Rokugawa, S., Yokota, T., Tanaka, K., Tsuchiya, T. and Narita, N.,
  21. Seismic reflector imaging by prestack time migration in the Kakkonda geothermalfield, Japan. Geothermics, 32: 79-99.
  22. Matsushima, J. and Nishizawa, O., 2010. Effect of spatial sampling on time-lapse seismicmonitoring in random heterogeneous media. In: Kasahara, J., Korneev, V. and Zhdanov,
  23. M. (Eds.), Active Geophysical Monitoring, Vol 40, Handbook of Geophysical Exploration:
  24. Seismic Exploration. Elsevier Science Publishers, Amsterdam: 397-420.
  25. Miiller, T.M., Shapiro, S.A. and Sick, C.M.A., 2002. Most probable ballistic waves in randommedia: a weak-fluctuation approximation and numerical results. Waves Random Media, 12:223-245.
  26. Nishizawa, O., Satoh, T., Lei, X. and Kuwahara, Y., 1997. Laboratory studies of seismic wavepropagation in inhomogeneous media using a laser Doppler vibrometer. Bull. Seismol. Soc.Am., 87: 809-823.
  27. Perroud, H. and Tygel, M., 2004. Nonstretch NMO. Geophysics, 69: 599-607.
  28. Ross, C.P. and Altan, M.S., 1997. Time-lapse seismic monitoring: Some shortcomings innonuniform processing. The Leading Edge, 16: 931-937.
  29. Rupert, G.B. and Chun, J.H., 1975. The block move sum normal moveout correction. Geophysics,40: 17-24.
  30. Safar, M.H., 1985. On the lateral resolution achieved by Kirchhoff migration. Geophysics, 50:1091-1099.
  31. Saito, T., Sato, H., Fehler, M. and Ohtake, M., 2003. Simulating the envelope of scalar waves in2D random media having power-law spectra of velocity fluctuation. Bull. Seismol. Soc.Am., 93: 240-252.
  32. Sato, H. and Fehler, M., 1998. Seismic Wave Propagation and Scattering in the HeterogeneousEarth. Springer-Verlag, New York.
  33. Shapiro, S.A. and Kneib, G., 1993. Seismic attenuation by scattering: theory and numerical results.Geophys. J. Internat., 114: 373-391.
  34. Shiomi, K., Sato, H. and Ohtake, M., 1997. Broad-band power-law spectra of well-log data inJapan. Geophys. J. Internat., 130: 57-64.
  35. Sick, C.M.A., Miiller, T.M., Shapiro, S.A. and Buske, S., 2003. Amplitude corrections forrandomly distributed heterogeneities above a target reflector. Geophysics, 68: 1497-1502.
  36. Sivaji, C., Nishizawa, O. and Fukushima, Y., 2001. Relationship between fluctuations of arrivaltime and energy of seismic waves and scale length of heterogeneity: an inference fromexperimental study. Bull. Seismol. Soc. Am., 91: 292-303.
  37. Spitz, S., 1991. Seismic trace interpolation in the F-X domain. Geophysics, 56: 785-794.
  38. Stolt, R., 1978. Migration by Fourier transform. Geophysics, 43: 23-48.
  39. Vermeer, G.J.O., 1990. Seismic Wavefield Sampling. Geophysical Reference Series, Vol. 4. SEG,Tulsa, OK.
  40. Vermeer, G.J.O., 1999. Factors affecting spatial resolution. Geophysics, 64: 942-953.
  41. Vesnaver, A.L., Accaino, F., Bohm, G., Madrussani, G., Pajchel, J., Rossi, G. and Moro, G.D.,Time-lapse tomography. Geophysics, 68: 815-823.
Share
Back to top
Journal of Seismic Exploration, Electronic ISSN: 0963-0651 Print ISSN: 0963-0651, Published by AccScience Publishing