Difference between revisions of "Interpretation of seismic data"

From SEG Wiki
Jump to: navigation, search
(Prepared the page for translation)
(Marked this version for translation)
 
Line 18: Line 18:
 
}}
 
}}
 
<translate>
 
<translate>
 +
<!--T:1-->
 
[[File:int_figI-19.png|thumb|left|{{figure number|I-19}}Reflector geometry delineation: (top) depth horizon strands created by interpreting selected cross-sections (displayed is one such section) from the depth-migrated volume of data, and (bottom) the surface that represents the reflector boundary created by spatial interpolation of the strands.]]
 
[[File:int_figI-19.png|thumb|left|{{figure number|I-19}}Reflector geometry delineation: (top) depth horizon strands created by interpreting selected cross-sections (displayed is one such section) from the depth-migrated volume of data, and (bottom) the surface that represents the reflector boundary created by spatial interpolation of the strands.]]
  
 +
<!--T:2-->
 
When you pick semblance peaks from a velocity spectrum ([[Special:MyLanguage/velocity analysis|velocity analysis]]) to determine the moveout velocity function, you implicitly make a judgment as to what is primary and what is multiple. When you pick a coherency semblance spectrum ([[Special:MyLanguage/model with low-relief structure|model with low-relief structure]]) to determine the interval velocity profile, you make a judgment as to what degree of lateral velocity variations needs to be honored. These are but two examples of interpretive work involved in processing and inversion of seismic data, respectively.
 
When you pick semblance peaks from a velocity spectrum ([[Special:MyLanguage/velocity analysis|velocity analysis]]) to determine the moveout velocity function, you implicitly make a judgment as to what is primary and what is multiple. When you pick a coherency semblance spectrum ([[Special:MyLanguage/model with low-relief structure|model with low-relief structure]]) to determine the interval velocity profile, you make a judgment as to what degree of lateral velocity variations needs to be honored. These are but two examples of interpretive work involved in processing and inversion of seismic data, respectively.
  
 +
<!--T:3-->
 
What is known as traditional seismic interpretation, however, involves picking a reflection time surface associated with a layer boundary from a time-migrated volume of data or a reflector from a depth-migrated volume of data to determine the structure map for that layer boundary (Figure I-19). The power of 3-D visualization of image volumes, velocity volumes, and attribute volumes, such as those associated with AVO analysis and acoustic impedance estimation, have dramatically changed the way seismic interpretation is done now. Interpretation no longer is picking travel-times to determine the structural geology of the area of interest, but also involves manipulation of amplitudes contained in the data volumes to derive information about the depositional environment, depositional sequence boundaries, and the internal constitution of the sequence units themselves. [[Special:MyLanguage/Interpretation of 3-D seismic data|Interpretation of 3-D seismic data]] has further examples, with case studies, in [[Special:MyLanguage/3-D structural inversion applied to seismic data from offshore Indonesia|3-D structural inversion applied to seismic data from offshore Indonesia]] and [[Special:MyLanguage/3-D structural inversion applied to seismic data from the Northeast China|3-D structural inversion applied to seismic data from the Northeast China]].
 
What is known as traditional seismic interpretation, however, involves picking a reflection time surface associated with a layer boundary from a time-migrated volume of data or a reflector from a depth-migrated volume of data to determine the structure map for that layer boundary (Figure I-19). The power of 3-D visualization of image volumes, velocity volumes, and attribute volumes, such as those associated with AVO analysis and acoustic impedance estimation, have dramatically changed the way seismic interpretation is done now. Interpretation no longer is picking travel-times to determine the structural geology of the area of interest, but also involves manipulation of amplitudes contained in the data volumes to derive information about the depositional environment, depositional sequence boundaries, and the internal constitution of the sequence units themselves. [[Special:MyLanguage/Interpretation of 3-D seismic data|Interpretation of 3-D seismic data]] has further examples, with case studies, in [[Special:MyLanguage/3-D structural inversion applied to seismic data from offshore Indonesia|3-D structural inversion applied to seismic data from offshore Indonesia]] and [[Special:MyLanguage/3-D structural inversion applied to seismic data from the Northeast China|3-D structural inversion applied to seismic data from the Northeast China]].
  
  
==See also==
+
==See also== <!--T:4-->
  
 +
<!--T:5-->
 
* [[Special:MyLanguage/Introduction to Seismic Data Analysis|Introduction to Seismic Data Analysis]]
 
* [[Special:MyLanguage/Introduction to Seismic Data Analysis|Introduction to Seismic Data Analysis]]
 
* [[Special:MyLanguage/Processing of seismic data|Processing of seismic data]]
 
* [[Special:MyLanguage/Processing of seismic data|Processing of seismic data]]
Line 33: Line 37:
  
  
==External links==
+
==External links== <!--T:6-->
  
 
</translate>
 
</translate>
Line 39: Line 43:
 
<translate>
 
<translate>
  
 +
<!--T:7-->
 
[[Category:Introduction to Seismic Data Analysis]]
 
[[Category:Introduction to Seismic Data Analysis]]
 
</translate>
 
</translate>

Latest revision as of 14:06, 29 July 2020

Other languages:
English
Seismic Data Analysis
Seismic-data-analysis.jpg
Series Investigations in Geophysics
Author Öz Yilmaz
DOI http://dx.doi.org/10.1190/1.9781560801580
ISBN ISBN 978-1-56080-094-1
Store SEG Online Store
Figure I-19 Reflector geometry delineation: (top) depth horizon strands created by interpreting selected cross-sections (displayed is one such section) from the depth-migrated volume of data, and (bottom) the surface that represents the reflector boundary created by spatial interpolation of the strands.

When you pick semblance peaks from a velocity spectrum (velocity analysis) to determine the moveout velocity function, you implicitly make a judgment as to what is primary and what is multiple. When you pick a coherency semblance spectrum (model with low-relief structure) to determine the interval velocity profile, you make a judgment as to what degree of lateral velocity variations needs to be honored. These are but two examples of interpretive work involved in processing and inversion of seismic data, respectively.

What is known as traditional seismic interpretation, however, involves picking a reflection time surface associated with a layer boundary from a time-migrated volume of data or a reflector from a depth-migrated volume of data to determine the structure map for that layer boundary (Figure I-19). The power of 3-D visualization of image volumes, velocity volumes, and attribute volumes, such as those associated with AVO analysis and acoustic impedance estimation, have dramatically changed the way seismic interpretation is done now. Interpretation no longer is picking travel-times to determine the structural geology of the area of interest, but also involves manipulation of amplitudes contained in the data volumes to derive information about the depositional environment, depositional sequence boundaries, and the internal constitution of the sequence units themselves. Interpretation of 3-D seismic data has further examples, with case studies, in 3-D structural inversion applied to seismic data from offshore Indonesia and 3-D structural inversion applied to seismic data from the Northeast China.


See also


External links

find literature about
Interpretation of seismic data
SEG button search.png Datapages button.png GeoScienceWorld button.png OnePetro button.png Schlumberger button.png Google button.png AGI button.png