70th EAGE Conference and Exhibition Incorporating SPE EUROPEC 2008 2008
DOI: 10.3997/2214-4609.20147859
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Anisotropic 2.5D - 3C Finite-difference Modeling

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
3
0

Year Published

2009
2009
2019
2019

Publication Types

Select...
3
1

Relationship

0
4

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 4 publications
(3 citation statements)
references
References 6 publications
0
3
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Thus, to understand the time‐lapse seismic response of both travel‐time and amplitude changes, we perform a 2.5D elastic, finite‐difference modelling study that refers to a 3D wave propagation over a 2D model of the subsurface (Costa, Neto, and Novais ; Kostyukevych et al . ). This will aid the quantitative interpretation of the field measurements and later in the VSR.…”
Section: Vertical Seismic Profile Data Analysis and Resultsmentioning
confidence: 97%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…Thus, to understand the time‐lapse seismic response of both travel‐time and amplitude changes, we perform a 2.5D elastic, finite‐difference modelling study that refers to a 3D wave propagation over a 2D model of the subsurface (Costa, Neto, and Novais ; Kostyukevych et al . ). This will aid the quantitative interpretation of the field measurements and later in the VSR.…”
Section: Vertical Seismic Profile Data Analysis and Resultsmentioning
confidence: 97%
“…Second, we implement a forward modelling exercise using 2.5D elastic, finite‐difference modelling (Kostyukevych et al . ) to predict the time‐lapse VSP response and compare with the real data response. Third, we perform a quality check of the input parameters for the rock physics model, assessing the uncertainties and their effect on the drained frame properties' estimation.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The second problem is the synthesis of 3D-seismograms from the geological model of the medium by the 2.5D method of finite-difference elastic anisotropic modeling (M2.5D) [3]. Unlike alternative methods of obtaining synthetic 3D-seismograms (radiation modeling and finite-difference acoustic modeling), the M2.5D can take into account the thin layering, spatial anisotropy of characteristics (TTI) and a combination of several spatial fracturing systems.…”
Section: Seismic Data Processingmentioning
confidence: 99%