Common‐reflection‐point stacking in laterally inhomogeneous media

Perroud, H.; Hubral, Peter; Höcht, German; Bazelaire, Eric de

doi:10.1190/1.1826684

Cited by 8 publications

(11 citation statements)

References 1 publication

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Since CRP stacking is closely related to DMO as well as to the CRE method, the paper of French et al (1985) is very useful in understanding the relationship between both methods. A generalization of their method is presented by Perroud et al (1996).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The common reflecting element (CRE) method revisited

Cruz¹,

Hubral

Tygel

et al. 2000

GEOPHYSICS

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The common reflecting element (CRE) method is an interesting alternative to the familiar methods of common midpoint (CMP) stack or migration to zero offset (MZO). Like these two methods, the CRE method aims at constructing a stacked zero-offset section from a set of constant-offset sections. However, it requires no more knowledge about the generally laterally inhomogeneous subsurface model than the near-surface values of the velocity field. In addition to being a tool to construct a stacked zero-offset section, the CRE method simultaneously obtains information about the laterally inhomogeneous macrovelocity model. An important feature of the CRE method is that it does not suffer from pulse stretch. Moreover, it gives an alternative solution for conflicting dip problems. In the 1-D case, CRE is closely related to the optical stack. For the price of having to search for two data-derived parameters instead of one, the CRE method provides important advantages over the conventional CMP stack. Its results are similar to those of the MZO process, which is commonly implemented as an NMO correction followed by a dip moveout (DMO) correction applied to the original constant-offset section. The CRE method is based on 2-D kinematic considerations only and is not an amplitude-preserving process.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The common reflecting element (CRE) method revisited

Cruz¹,

Hubral

Tygel

et al. 2000

GEOPHYSICS

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…When dips are involved, the stacking velocity in the effective medium is dip‐dependent. This theory of effective, or auxiliary, medium was generalized in the view of common‐reflection‐point stacking (Perroud et al ), and is often invoked (see by example Gurevich and Landa ()) to generalize processes developed for homogeneous medium to the general case. Therefore, under a heterogeneous overburden, one could consider making the non‐hyperbolic CRS parameter search in the auxiliary medium for stacking or AVO analysis.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Parameter estimation from non‐hyperbolic reflection traveltimes for large aperture common midpoint gathers

Perroud

Krummenauer

Tygel

et al. 2014

Near Surface Geophysics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

As far as superficial seismic reflection events are concerned, the classical normal moveout (NMO) process, which leads to the construction of seismic zero‐offset (or stacked) sections, encounters several difficulties due to the large data aperture. One of these difficulties is that the hyperbolic approximation of the reflection traveltime in common midpoint (CMP) gathers is no longer valid when offset largely exceeds the target depth. Recently, Fomel and Kazinnik proposed a novel, multi‐parameter, non‐hyperbolic formula for the traveltime of such reflection events. This formula, which will be referred to here as the FK traveltime after the authors, is exact for reflectors whose shape can be described by a hyperbola, and shows promising accuracy for long offsets and/or curved reflectors. It also depends on the same set of parameters as the common reflection surface (CRS) traveltime. In this paper, we propose strategies for estimating these CRS parameters based on the FK traveltime using large aperture data. However, in contrast to traditional CRS processing, and due to their widespread use, only common midpoint (CMP) gathers will be considered for the parameter searches. We will begin with a sensitivity analysis, showing the impact of each parameter on the traveltime. Based on this analysis, we will propose a two‐step estimation strategy, that could lead to improved seismic images, especially for very shallow, high aperture events. We will then highlight, through synthetic examples and discussions, the strengths and limitations of this strategy.

show abstract

“…The NIP wavefront is formed by a point source placed at the point where the zero-offset ray, emitted from the central point, reaches the reflector. The double square root in equation 1can be understood using the concept of an auxiliary medium (Perroud et al, 1999;Cruz et al, 2000) which can be defined as a homogeneous medium with the velocity equal to the near-surface velocity V 0 . In the auxiliary medium both the central and paraxial rays are represented by combinations of straight line segments.…”

Section: Moveout Correction In Multifocusing Imagingmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…This effect is achieved by limiting the extent of the area of reflection points on a given reflector (subsurface aperture), rather than limiting the range of CMPs (surface aperture) as in the case of small supergathers. The analysis is performed for a homogeneous overburden, but may be extended to the inhomogeneous case using the concept of an auxiliary medium (Perroud et al, 1999;Jäger et al, 2001).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%