Source-receiver Marchenko redatuming on field data using an adaptive double-focusing method

Staring, Myrna; Pereira, Roberto; Douma, Huub; Neut, Joost van der; Wapenaar, Kees

doi:10.1190/geo2017-0796.1

Cited by 76 publications

(89 citation statements)

References 29 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Defining the sub-salt area as the target zone that we aim to image as accurately as possible, internal multiples from the overburden, e.g. the WB-TOS or TOS-BOS multiples, will interfere with primary reflections from the target zone leading to blurred images due to interfering arrivals (Jia et al 2018;Staring et al 2018). Additionally, non-interfering internal multiples could be misinterpreted as primary reflections originating from the sub-salt region, leading to erroneous subsurface interpretation (Broggini et al 2014a,b) or velocity estimation (Dokter et al 2017;Mildner et al 2017c).…”

Section: Synthetic Examplementioning

confidence: 99%

“…In field-data applications of the Marchenko method, in particular the latter requirement can lead to reduced quality of images because the correctly scaled source wavelet is often not known. Deconvolving an incorrectly scaled source wavelet prior to Marchenko redatuming and imaging leads to artefacts in the redatumed Green's functions (van der Neut et al 2015b;da Costa Filho et al 2018b) and subsequent images (Jia et al 2018;Staring et al 2018). To date, several different approaches have been used to estimate the correct scale of the source wavelet or to overcome this requirement.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Source wavelet correction for practical Marchenko imaging: A sub‐salt field‐data example from the Gulf of Mexico

Mildner

Broggini

Filho

et al. 2019

Geophysical Prospecting

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Imaging a target zone below a salt body can be challenging because large velocity contrasts in the overburden between the salt and surrounding sediments generate internal multiples, which interfere with primary reflections from the target level in the imaging process. This can lead to an erroneous interpretation of reflections in the sub‐salt area if multiples are misinterpreted as primaries. The Marchenko redatuming method may enable imaging of the sub‐salt target area where the effect of the multiply‐scattering overburden is removed. This is achieved by creating a redatumed reflection response where virtual sources and receivers are located below the overburden using a macromodel of the velocity field and the surface reflection data. The accuracy of the redatumed data and the associated internal multiple removal, however, depends on the accurate knowledge of the source wavelet of the acquired reflection data. For the first time, we propose a method which can accurately and reliably correct the amplitudes of the reflection response in field data as required by the Marchenko method. Our method operates by iteratively and automatically updating the source function so as to cancel the most artefact energy in the focusing functions, which are also generated by the Marchenko method. We demonstrate the method on a synthetic dataset and successfully apply it to a field dataset acquired in a deep‐water salt environment in the Gulf of Mexico. After the successful source wavelet estimation for the field dataset, we create sub‐salt target‐oriented images with Marchenko redatumed data. Marchenko images using the proposed source wavelet estimation show clear improvements, such as increased continuity of reflectors, compared to surface‐based images and to conventional Marchenko images computed without the inverted source wavelet. Our improvements are corroborated by evidence in the literature and our own synthetic results.

show abstract

Section: Synthetic Examplementioning

confidence: 99%

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Source wavelet correction for practical Marchenko imaging: A sub‐salt field‐data example from the Gulf of Mexico

Mildner

Broggini

Filho

et al. 2019

Geophysical Prospecting

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…A macro model and adaptive subtraction are required because of the approximate nature of the predicted events. Staring et al (2018) propose an adaptive Marchenko double-focusing method for attenuating the first-order internal multiple reflections. Model information and adaptive subtraction are also required for the implementation.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

A field data example of Marchenko multiple elimination

Zhang

Slob

2020

GEOPHYSICS

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Internal multiple reflections have been widely considered as coherent noise in measured seismic data, and many approaches have been developed for their attenuation. The Marchenko multiple elimination (MME) scheme eliminates internal multiple reflections without model information or adaptive subtraction. This scheme was originally derived from coupled Marchenko equations, but it was modified to make it model independent. It filters primary reflections with their two-way traveltimes and physical amplitudes from measured seismic data. The MME scheme is applied to a deepwater field data set from the Norwegian North Sea to evaluate its success in removing internal multiple reflections. The result indicates that most internal multiple reflections are successfully removed and primary reflections masked by overlapping internal multiple reflections are recovered.

show abstract

“…Further developments have extended Marchenko methods to elastic media (da Costa Filho et al 2014Wapenaar 2014 and to seismic data containing free surface multiples (Singh et al 2015(Singh et al , 2016. More recently Marchenko methods have been applied to real, reservoir scale, seismic data sets (Ravasi et al 2016;Jia et al 2017;Staring et al 2018) and to real ultrasonic data (Cui et al 2018a;da Costa Filho et al 2018;Wapenaar et al 2018). However, given the novelty of these methods there are still aspects that are poorly understood.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Marchenko methods in a 3-D world

Lomas

Curtis

2019

Geophysical Journal International

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

SUMMARYMarchenko methods are a suite of geophysical techniques that convert seismograms of energy created by surface sources and measured by surface receivers into seismograms that would have been recorded by a virtual receiver at an arbitrary point inside the subsurface—an operation called redatuming. In principle these redatumed seismograms contain all contributions from direct, primary (singly-reflected) and multiply-reflected waves that would have been recorded by a real subsurface receiver, without requiring prior information about interfaces that generated the reflections. The potential of these methods for seismic imaging and redatuming has been demonstrated extensively in previous literature, but only using 1-D and 2-D Marchenko methods. There remain aspects of the methods that are poorly understood when applied in a 3-D world, so we investigate the application of Marchenko methods to 3-D data, subsurface structures and wavefields. We first show that for waves propagating in three dimensions, Marchenko methods can be applied to seismic data collected using both linear (so-called 2-D seismic) and areal (3-D seismic) acquisition arrays. However, for 2-D acquisition arrays the Marchenko workflow requires additional dimensionality correction factors to obtain accurate solutions, even in a subsurface that only varies with depth. Without these correction factors phase errors occur in redatumed Marchenko estimates; these errors propagate through the Marchenko algorithm and create depth errors in the Marchenko images. Furthermore, applying Marchenko methods to fully 3-D seismic wavefields recorded by linear (2-D seismic) arrays that contain out-of-plane reflections deteriorates surface-to-subsurface Green’s function estimates with spurious energy and resulting images are less accurate than those created using ‘conventional’ imaging methods. The application of fully 3-D Marchenko methods using data recorded on areal arrays solves both of the above problems, creating accurately redatumed wavefields and images with reduced artefact contamination. However, it appears that source–receiver spacing at most of $\lambda _A /4$ is required for accurate results using existing Marchenko methods, where λA is the dominant wavelength and in many real 3-D seismic acquisition scenarios this is impractical.

show abstract

Source-receiver Marchenko redatuming on field data using an adaptive double-focusing method

Cited by 76 publications

References 29 publications

Source wavelet correction for practical Marchenko imaging: A sub‐salt field‐data example from the Gulf of Mexico

Source wavelet correction for practical Marchenko imaging: A sub‐salt field‐data example from the Gulf of Mexico

A field data example of Marchenko multiple elimination

Marchenko methods in a 3-D world

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About