event consistent smoothing in generalized

play

Event-consistent smoothing in generalized Introduction Conventional - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

Nov 15, 2022 •545 likes •1.48k views

74 th Annual Meeting SEG, Denver 2004 Mann & Duveneck Event-consistent smoothing in generalized Introduction Conventional CRS stack high-density velocity analysis Why smoothing? Pulse stretch Smoothing algorithm E. Duveneck 1 J. Mann

74 th Annual Meeting SEG, Denver 2004 Mann & Duveneck Event-consistent smoothing in generalized Introduction Conventional CRS stack high-density velocity analysis Why smoothing? Pulse stretch Smoothing algorithm E. Duveneck 1 J. Mann Requirements The algorithm Schematic example 1 now: SINTEF Petroleum Research, Trondheim, Norway Data examples Parameters Stack sections Wave Inversion Technology (WIT) Consortium Geophysical Institute, University of Karlsruhe (TH) Conclusions Acknowledgments Related talks October 12, 2004 W I T
74 th Annual Meeting Overview SEG, Denver 2004 Mann & Duveneck Introduction Conventional CRS stack Introduction Why smoothing? Pulse stretch Smoothing algorithm Requirements Smoothing algorithm The algorithm Schematic example Data examples Parameters Data examples Stack sections Conclusions Acknowledgments Conclusions Related talks Acknowledgments W I T
74 th Annual Meeting Introduction SEG, Denver 2004 Mann & Duveneck Introduction Conventional stacking velocity analysis: Conventional CRS stack ◮ (semi-)interactive, interpretative velocity picking Why smoothing? Pulse stretch ◮ coarse picks on selected key events, only Smoothing algorithm Requirements The algorithm ☞ human interaction required Schematic example ☞ low temporal and spatial resolution Data examples Parameters Stack sections ☞ pulse stretch deteriorates stack result Conclusions Thus desirable: Acknowledgments Related talks ◮ automated approach ◮ more appropriate parameterization ◮ maximum resolution W I T
74 th Annual Meeting Introduction SEG, Denver 2004 Mann & Duveneck Introduction Conventional stacking velocity analysis: Conventional CRS stack ◮ (semi-)interactive, interpretative velocity picking Why smoothing? Pulse stretch ◮ coarse picks on selected key events, only Smoothing algorithm Requirements The algorithm ☞ human interaction required Schematic example ☞ low temporal and spatial resolution Data examples Parameters Stack sections ☞ pulse stretch deteriorates stack result Conclusions Thus desirable: Acknowledgments Related talks ◮ automated approach ◮ more appropriate parameterization ◮ maximum resolution W I T
74 th Annual Meeting Introduction SEG, Denver 2004 Mann & Duveneck Introduction Conventional stacking velocity analysis: Conventional CRS stack ◮ (semi-)interactive, interpretative velocity picking Why smoothing? Pulse stretch ◮ coarse picks on selected key events, only Smoothing algorithm Requirements The algorithm ☞ human interaction required Schematic example ☞ low temporal and spatial resolution Data examples Parameters Stack sections ☞ pulse stretch deteriorates stack result Conclusions Thus desirable: Acknowledgments Related talks ◮ automated approach ◮ more appropriate parameterization ◮ maximum resolution W I T
74 th Annual Meeting Introduction SEG, Denver 2004 Mann & Duveneck Introduction Conventional stacking velocity analysis: Conventional CRS stack ◮ (semi-)interactive, interpretative velocity picking Why smoothing? Pulse stretch ◮ coarse picks on selected key events, only Smoothing algorithm Requirements The algorithm ☞ human interaction required Schematic example ☞ low temporal and spatial resolution Data examples Parameters Stack sections ☞ pulse stretch deteriorates stack result Conclusions Thus desirable: Acknowledgments Related talks ◮ automated approach ◮ more appropriate parameterization ◮ maximum resolution W I T
74 th Annual Meeting Introduction SEG, Denver 2004 Mann & Duveneck Introduction Conventional stacking velocity analysis: Conventional CRS stack ◮ (semi-)interactive, interpretative velocity picking Why smoothing? Pulse stretch ◮ coarse picks on selected key events, only Smoothing algorithm Requirements The algorithm ☞ human interaction required Schematic example ☞ low temporal and spatial resolution Data examples Parameters Stack sections ☞ pulse stretch deteriorates stack result Conclusions Thus desirable: Acknowledgments Related talks ◮ automated approach ◮ more appropriate parameterization ◮ maximum resolution W I T
74 th Annual Meeting Introduction SEG, Denver 2004 Mann & Duveneck Introduction Conventional stacking velocity analysis: Conventional CRS stack ◮ (semi-)interactive, interpretative velocity picking Why smoothing? Pulse stretch ◮ coarse picks on selected key events, only Smoothing algorithm Requirements The algorithm ☞ human interaction required Schematic example ☞ low temporal and spatial resolution Data examples Parameters Stack sections ☞ pulse stretch deteriorates stack result Conclusions Thus desirable: Acknowledgments Related talks ◮ automated approach ◮ more appropriate parameterization ◮ maximum resolution W I T
74 th Annual Meeting Introduction SEG, Denver 2004 Mann & Duveneck Introduction Conventional stacking velocity analysis: Conventional CRS stack ◮ (semi-)interactive, interpretative velocity picking Why smoothing? Pulse stretch ◮ coarse picks on selected key events, only Smoothing algorithm Requirements The algorithm ☞ human interaction required Schematic example ☞ low temporal and spatial resolution Data examples Parameters Stack sections ☞ pulse stretch deteriorates stack result Conclusions Thus desirable: Acknowledgments Related talks ◮ automated approach ◮ more appropriate parameterization ◮ maximum resolution W I T
74 th Annual Meeting Introduction SEG, Denver 2004 Mann & Duveneck Introduction Conventional stacking velocity analysis: Conventional CRS stack ◮ (semi-)interactive, interpretative velocity picking Why smoothing? Pulse stretch ◮ coarse picks on selected key events, only Smoothing algorithm Requirements The algorithm ☞ human interaction required Schematic example ☞ low temporal and spatial resolution Data examples Parameters Stack sections ☞ pulse stretch deteriorates stack result Conclusions Thus desirable: Acknowledgments Related talks ◮ automated approach ◮ more appropriate parameterization ◮ maximum resolution W I T
74 th Annual Meeting Introduction SEG, Denver 2004 Mann & Duveneck Introduction Conventional stacking velocity analysis: Conventional CRS stack ◮ (semi-)interactive, interpretative velocity picking Why smoothing? Pulse stretch ◮ coarse picks on selected key events, only Smoothing algorithm Requirements The algorithm ☞ human interaction required Schematic example ☞ low temporal and spatial resolution Data examples Parameters Stack sections ☞ pulse stretch deteriorates stack result Conclusions Thus desirable: Acknowledgments Related talks ◮ automated approach ◮ more appropriate parameterization ◮ maximum resolution W I T
74 th Annual Meeting Introduction SEG, Denver 2004 Mann & Duveneck Introduction Conventional stacking velocity analysis: Conventional CRS stack ◮ (semi-)interactive, interpretative velocity picking Why smoothing? Pulse stretch ◮ coarse picks on selected key events, only Smoothing algorithm Requirements The algorithm ☞ human interaction required Schematic example ☞ low temporal and spatial resolution Data examples Parameters Stack sections ☞ pulse stretch deteriorates stack result Conclusions Thus desirable: Acknowledgments Related talks ◮ automated approach ◮ more appropriate parameterization ◮ maximum resolution W I T
74 th Annual Meeting Common-Reflection-Surface (CRS) SEG, Denver 2004 Mann & Duveneck stack Introduction Conventional CRS stack Generalization of conventional approach: Why smoothing? Pulse stretch ◮ second-order approximation of traveltime Smoothing algorithm Requirements The algorithm ◮ fully automated coherence-based application Schematic example ◮ high-density analysis Data examples Parameters Stack sections ◮ spatial stacking operator Conclusions ☞ much more prestack traces used Acknowledgments ☞ enhanced signal/noise ratio Related talks ◮ additional stacking parameters related to 1. and 2. traveltime derivatives ☞ geometrical interpretation W I T
74 th Annual Meeting Common-Reflection-Surface (CRS) SEG, Denver 2004 Mann & Duveneck stack Introduction Conventional CRS stack Generalization of conventional approach: Why smoothing? Pulse stretch ◮ second-order approximation of traveltime Smoothing algorithm Requirements The algorithm ◮ fully automated coherence-based application Schematic example ◮ high-density analysis Data examples Parameters Stack sections ◮ spatial stacking operator Conclusions ☞ much more prestack traces used Acknowledgments ☞ enhanced signal/noise ratio Related talks ◮ additional stacking parameters related to 1. and 2. traveltime derivatives ☞ geometrical interpretation W I T
74 th Annual Meeting Common-Reflection-Surface (CRS) SEG, Denver 2004 Mann & Duveneck stack Introduction Conventional CRS stack Generalization of conventional approach: Why smoothing? Pulse stretch ◮ second-order approximation of traveltime Smoothing algorithm Requirements The algorithm ◮ fully automated coherence-based application Schematic example ◮ high-density analysis Data examples Parameters Stack sections ◮ spatial stacking operator Conclusions ☞ much more prestack traces used Acknowledgments ☞ enhanced signal/noise ratio Related talks ◮ additional stacking parameters related to 1. and 2. traveltime derivatives ☞ geometrical interpretation W I T

Download Presentation

Download Policy: The content available on the website is offered to you 'AS IS' for your personal information and use only. It cannot be commercialized, licensed, or distributed on other websites without prior consent from the author. To download a presentation, simply click this link. If you encounter any difficulties during the download process, it's possible that the publisher has removed the file from their server.

Recommend

More recommend