1 / 23

Tomostatic Waveform Tomography for Mapleton, Utah data

Tomostatic Waveform Tomography for Mapleton, Utah data. Jianming Sheng, and Maike Buddensiek. University of Utah. Feb. 5, 2004. Outline. Motivation. Data Preprocessings. Waveform Tomogram. Summary. First-break + First-peak. 0. 2500. Depth (m). 500. m/s. 45. 0. Distances (m). 80.

karina-webster
Download Presentation

Tomostatic Waveform Tomography for Mapleton, Utah data

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Tomostatic Waveform Tomography for Mapleton, Utah data Jianming Sheng, and Maike Buddensiek University of Utah Feb. 5, 2004

  2. Outline Motivation Data Preprocessings Waveform Tomogram Summary

  3. First-break + First-peak 0 2500 Depth (m) 500 m/s 45 0 Distances (m) 80

  4. Observed Predicted Motivations • Produce better seismic image by fitting waveforms

  5. Recorded CSG # 49 0 168 shots 168 receiver Interval: 5m Time (sec.) dt: 0.5 ms length: 1s 0.15 Geophone # 20 160

  6. Outline Motivation Data Preprocessings Waveform Tomogram Summary

  7. Data Preprocessings • Instrument caused amplitude anomalies

  8. Amplitude Vs. Traveltime 40 Dashed: Fitted Solid: Observed Log-Amplitude 20 0 0.09 Traveltime (sec.)

  9. Data Preprocessings • Instrument caused amplitude anomalies • Earth attenuation

  10. Frequency Spectrum Vs. Offset 0.0 Frequency (Hz) 100 0 60 Offset (m)

  11. Spectrum variance Attenuation factor Centroid frequency Attenuation Compensation Liao and McMechan (1997)

  12. Q=24.0013 Frequency vs. Traveltime 85 Frequency (Hz) 40 0 0.1 Traveltime (sec.)

  13. multiply to spectrum multiply for the geometrical spreading Data Preprocessings • Instrument caused amplitude anomalies • Earth attenuation • Transform data to 2D format

  14. Preprocessed CSG # 49 0 Time (sec.) 0.15 Geophone # 20 160

  15. Frequency Spectrum Vs. Offset 0.0 Frequency (Hz) 100 0 60 Offset (m)

  16. Frequency Spectrum Vs. Offset 0.0 Frequency (Hz) 100 0 60 Offset (m)

  17. Outline Motivation Data Preprocessings Waveform Tomogram Summary

  18. Selected receiver Convolution Misfit Function Frazer and Sun, 1998

  19. Waveform Tomogram 0 2500 Depth (m) 500 m/s 45 0 Distances (m) 80

  20. First-break + First-peak 0 2500 Depth (m) 500 m/s 45 0 Distances (m) 80

  21. Outline Motivation Data Preprocessings Waveform Tomogram Summary

  22. Summary • The waveform tomogram does not show • much improvement compared to the first- • break and first-peak tomogram. • Elastic modeling code is needed.

  23. Acknowledgment I thank the sponsors of the 2003 UTAM Consortium for their financial support .

More Related