True-amplitude Imaging and Dip Moveout
49
The major part of this calibration is the 3-D derivation of amplitude-preserving DMO, this time stated as an integralDMO rather than an
F-K
DMO. At the end of this section,we show that the entire calibrated standard sequence istrue-amplitude, and we derive an explicit expression for thewavelet-stretch factor. In the section entitled “Summary of DMO Methods,”we use the connection between integraland
F-K
DMO in Appendix C to conclude that our
F-K
andintegral techniques are equivalent to each other. This leadsto Table 2, which summarizes four DMO algorithms: asdescribed in this paper,Hale’s, a generic form of Deregowski and Rocca’s integral method, and the Bleistein-Liner method (Liner, 1989; Bleistein, 1990). In the finalsections, we examine the outputs produced by three of thesefour DMO algorithms acting on model and field data. Weshow that our amplitude-preserving DMO maintains thepeak amplitudes of both horizontal and dipping data, anecessary condition for the entire standard sequence to betrue-amplitude.Much of the development of this paper is contained in fourappendices. Appendix A establishes the kinematic identitiesrelating the DMO times and midpoints. Appendix B containsthe mathematics required to evaluate the stationary-phaseintegral that defines our amplitude-preserving integral DMO.Appendix C details the asymptotic relationship between
F-K
DMO and integral DMO. Finally Appendix D gives themathematical details necessary to perform Stolt zero-offsetmigration for a 3-D dipping reflector.
NOTATIONAL CONVENTIONS
For the sake of continuity with the existing DMO litera-ture, we have followed Hale’s (1984) notation as much aspossible. For example, we use to denote time on thezero-offset section, However, our focus onamplitude preservation, on three dimensions, and on theentire standard sequence has made it necessary to extendHale’s notation. Thus the midpoint position on the zero-offset section is called rather than y, where we useboldface to indicate a vector quantity. Table 1 summarizesour conventions, listing each processing step, the outputsection from each step, and the planar event time after eachstep. For completeness,the table begins with the step“wave-equation generation’’whose output is the seismicsection that is input to the standard sequence. Note that“Latin” times such as are independent variables servingas arguments, whereas“Greek” times such as aredependent variables expressing the traveltimes of a dippingevent as a function of midpoint. For example, the section
Table 1. Notational conventions, showing the output sectionand the event time following each stage in the standardsequence.
contains an event whose peak amplitude occursat= For the sake of conciseness, we havesuppressed the half-offset argument
h
in all variables.
HOW TO MAKE AMPLITUDE GLOBALLY PROPORTIONALTO REFLECTIVITY
Before going further, we need to clearly define what wemean by“amplitude proportional to reflectivity” in thepresence of band-limited wavelets. This phrase is a littletricky because the zero-phase image wavelet on the finalmigrated section
must vary
from event to event. This varia-tion is illustrated in Figure 2, which shows correct process-ing of two events that have the same reflectivity and thesame deconvolved zero-phase source wavelet but whichhave different image wavelets. The convolved withreflector 1 has a higher bandwidth than the convolvedwith reflector 2. Why? The answer is that nonverticalraypaths cause some of the vertical resolution in the decon-volved source wavelet
w(t)
to be traded for lateral resolution(Wu and Toksöz, 1987). This means that the vertical resolu-tion in the image wavelet is generally lower than in thesource wavelet. It also means that the image wavelet de-pends upon whatever factors influence the raypaths, such asdip, velocity, depth, and offset. It turns out that the best
IMAGE OF TWO EVENTS
WITH SAME REFLECTIVITY
F
IG
.
2. Effect of raypath obliquity on the wavelet. Thedipping event with sloping raypath has a more stretched(lower frequency) image wavelet than the event with avertical raypath. Lower part of figure shows same result inthe frequency domain.
Leave a Comment