SEG Technical Program Expanded Abstracts 2010 2010
DOI: 10.1190/1.3513545
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Diffraction imaging for fracture detection: synthetic case study

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
4

Citation Types

0
5
0
1

Year Published

2015
2015
2022
2022

Publication Types

Select...
10

Relationship

0
10

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 25 publications
(6 citation statements)
references
References 5 publications
0
5
0
1
Order By: Relevance
“…The differences between reflected waves and diffracted waves in kinematics are substantial in the common-shot gathers, which allows us to extract the diffraction from the shot records (Landa et al, 1987). Dip filtering (Bansal and Imhof, 2005), focusing and defocusing (Khaidukov et al, 2004) hybrid Radon transform (Klokov et al, 2010), and PWD filtering (Fomel, 2002;Taner et al, 2006) have been developed for separating diffraction. These methods utilized the fact that the travel time curve of the diffracted wave is quasi-parabolic in the common-shot gathers while the reflected wave is quasi-linear.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The differences between reflected waves and diffracted waves in kinematics are substantial in the common-shot gathers, which allows us to extract the diffraction from the shot records (Landa et al, 1987). Dip filtering (Bansal and Imhof, 2005), focusing and defocusing (Khaidukov et al, 2004) hybrid Radon transform (Klokov et al, 2010), and PWD filtering (Fomel, 2002;Taner et al, 2006) have been developed for separating diffraction. These methods utilized the fact that the travel time curve of the diffracted wave is quasi-parabolic in the common-shot gathers while the reflected wave is quasi-linear.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Moreover, because of rapid amplitude attenuation, diffracted wavefields recorded on the surface have much weaker energy in comparison with reflected wavefields. It is difficult to recognize weak diffracted wavefields in seismic records as they are easily masked by dominant strong reflected wavefields (Klem‐Musatov, 1994; Klokov et al ., 2010). Consequently, diffraction separation from specular reflected data are a great challenge and occupies a key position in diffraction implementation.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Imaging and monitoring of these structures can be essential for the geological interpretation. On the other hand, the energy of diffraction is one or even two orders of magnitude weaker than the reflection (Klokov, Baina, Landa, Thore, & Tarrass, 2010), hence diffractions are significantly lost during the conventional seismic processing or masked in convention stacked sections. Many diffraction separation and imaging methods have been proposed to resolve this dilemma.…”
Section: Chapter 1: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%