2014
DOI: 10.1016/j.marpetgeo.2014.05.015
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Estimation of seismic attenuation of gas hydrate bearing sediments from multi-channel seismic data: A case study from Krishna–Godavari offshore basin

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
4
1

Citation Types

4
13
0

Year Published

2016
2016
2020
2020

Publication Types

Select...
7

Relationship

1
6

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 29 publications
(17 citation statements)
references
References 33 publications
4
13
0
Order By: Relevance
“…The Q estimates in the first layer (L1) do not correspond well. Noisy amplitude spectrum near the seafloor (Dewangan et al 2014) and fluctuating SR (Figure 8c) can be the possible reason for the unstable Q estimates from the SR method in the first layer. However, in the context of this analysis, it is important to study relative changes in Q particularly along Q slices throughout the whole volume because these might be related to the type of pore fluid and saturation in a given area or structure.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 3 more Smart Citations
“…The Q estimates in the first layer (L1) do not correspond well. Noisy amplitude spectrum near the seafloor (Dewangan et al 2014) and fluctuating SR (Figure 8c) can be the possible reason for the unstable Q estimates from the SR method in the first layer. However, in the context of this analysis, it is important to study relative changes in Q particularly along Q slices throughout the whole volume because these might be related to the type of pore fluid and saturation in a given area or structure.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…For example, studies on well-log data Goldberg, 2002, 2005;Matsushima, 2005), vertical seismic profile (VSP) data Bellefleur et al, 2007), and on crosshole seismic data (Pratt et al, 2003;Bauer et al, 2005) indicated an increase in attenuation. Other studies, mainly on surface seismic data (Matsushima, 2006;Rossi et al, 2007;Dewangan et al, 2014) indicated a decrease in attenuation. The increase (Guerin and Goldberg, 2002;Gei and Carcione, 2003;Chand and Minshull, 2004;Lee and Collett, 2006) and decrease (Sain and Singh, 2011;Dewangan et al, 2014) in attenuation have been explained by using different rockphysics models depending on the assumed microstructure of the hydrate and also sediment-hydrate mixtures.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 93%
See 2 more Smart Citations
“…In other words, the bulk and shear moduli increase due to the GH matrix-supporting effect within the sedimentary frame (Ecker et al, 1998). Additionally, the presence of GH causes higher attenuation of the seismic waves (Bellefleur et al, 2007;Dewangan et al, 2014) which was in particularly observed for sediments containing dispersed GH in the pore space (Guerin and Goldberg, 2002;Dvorkin and Uden, 2004). This anomalous seismic behavior in terms of increased attenuation and velocities (Guerin and Goldberg, 2002;Dvorkin and Uden, 2004) cannot be fully explained, although wave-induced fluid flow at the microscopic and mesoscopic scales has been speculated to cause them (Priest et al, 2006;Gerner et al, 2007).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%