This action might not be possible to undo. Are you sure you want to continue?

to

Seismic Inversion Methods

Brian H. Russell

Hampson-Russell Software Services, Ltd. Calgary, Alberta

Course Notes Series, No. 2 S. N. Domenico, Series Editor

Society Exploration of Geophysicists

Thesecourse notes published are withoutthe normalSEGpeerreviews. They havenot beenexamined accuracy for and clarity.Questions or comments the reader by should referred be directly the author. to

ISBN 978-0-931830-48-8 ISBN 978-0-931830-65-5

(Series) (Volume)

**Library Congress of Catalog CardNumber 88-62743
**

Society Exploration of Geophysicists

P.O. Box 702740

Tulsa, Oklahoma 74170-2740

¸ 1988 by the Society Exploration of Geophysicists All rights reserved. bookor portions This hereof maynotbe reproduced anyformwithoutpermission in in writingfromthe publisher. Reprinted 1990, 1992, 1999, 2000, 2004, 2006, 2008, 2009

Printed in the United States of America

]:nl;roduct1 on •o Selsmic I nversion •thods

Bri an Russell

Table

of Contents

PAGE

Part

Part

I

Z

Introduction

The Convolution Model

1-2

2-1

2-2 2-6 2-12 2-18

3-1 3-2 3-4 3-8 4-1 4-2 4-4 4-6 4-12 4-14

**2.1 Tr•e Sei smic Model 2.2 The Reflection Coefficient
**

2.3 The Seismic Wavelet

Series

**2.4 The Noise Component
**

Part 3

Recursive

3.1 Discrete

Inversion

Inversion

- Theory

3.2

3.3

Part 4

Problems encountered

Continuous Inversion

with

real

data

**Seismic Processing Considerati ons
**

4. ! I ntroduc ti on

resolution

4.2 Ampl rude recovery i

4.3 Improvement vertical of

4.4 4.5

Part 5

Lateral resolution Noise attenuation

Recursive

5.1

Inversion

- Practice

inversion method

5-1 5-2 5-10 5-16

6-1

The recursive

5.2 Information in the low frequency component

**5.3 Seismically derived porosity
**

P art 6

**Sparse-spike Inversi on
**

6.1 I ntroduc ti on

6.2 Maximum-likelihood

6.3 6.4

P art 7

aleconvolution and inversion

The L I norm method Reef Problem

6-2 6-4 6-22 6-30

**I nversion applied to Thi n-beds
**

7.1 Thin bed analysis

7-1 7-2 7-4

8-1

**7.Z Inversion compari son of thin beds
**

Part 8

Model-based

Inversion

B. 1 I ntroducti

on .

8.2

Generalized

linear

inversion

8.3 Seismic1ithologic roodell ing (SLIM) Appendix 8-1 Matrix applications in geophysics

8-2 8-4 8-10 8-14

2 AVO inversion by GLI Part 11 Velocity Inversion 10-1 10-2 10-8 11-1 11-2 11-4 12-1 I ntroduc ti on Theory and Examples Part 12 Summary . I ntroducti Inversion on 9-1 9-2 9-4 9-10 9.1 AVO theory 10.2 Numerical examplesof traveltime 9.3 Seismic Tomography inversion Part 10 Amplitude versus offset (AVO) Inversion 10.Introduction to Seismic Inversion Methods Brian Russell Part 9 Travel-time g. 1.

INTRODUCTION Part 1 .Introduction Page 1 - 1 .Introduction to Seismic •nversion Methods Brian Russell PART I .

in the simplest case. which involves creating a synthetic seismic section based on a model of the earth (or. and noise. our discussion to those inversion which attempt to recover a broadband pseudo-acoustic impedance log from a Another way to look at inversion is to consider it as the technique for creating a model of the earth using the seismic data as input. Part I . . It would therefore seemappropriate to begin by defining what is meant by seismic inversion. using a sonic log as a one-dimensional model). To understandseismic inversion. .Introduction Page 1 - 2 .. seismic wavelet. . l_ . convolutional model look at the basic of the seismic trace time and frequencydomains. in this methods course we shall primarily 'restrict band-1 imi ted sei smic trace. Thus. . ! • _. _ Part i - Introduction _ .1. This course is intended as an overview of the current techniques used in the inversion of seismic data. we must first processes involved therefore understandthe physical Initially. The most general definition is as fol 1 ows' Geophysical inversion involves mapping the physical structure and properties of the subsurface of the earth using measurements madeon the surface of the earth.Introduction to Seismic Inversion Methods Brian Russell I NTRODUCT TO SEI SMIC INVERSION METHODS ION .. As such. The relationship between forward and inverse modelling is shownin Figure 1. The above definition is so broad that it encompasses virtually all the work that is done in seismic analysis and interpretation. we will in the in the creation of seismic data. it can be considered as the opposite of the forwar• modelling technique. i. __ _• i i _ . consideringthe three components this model: of reflectivity. . _ m i --.

Introduction Page I - 3 .1 Fo. Process: MODELLING INVERSION ALGORITHM ALGORITHM Output' SEISMIC RESPONSE i m mlm ii EARTH MODEL i ii Figure1. ß ß _ Input' EARTH MODEL .Introduction to Seismic InverSion Methods Brian Russell FORWARD MODELL NG I i m ß INVERSEMODELLING (INVERSION) _ .•ardandsInverse ' Model.ling Part I .

is a pseudo-impeaance We will start by looking at inversion the most contanon methods of poststack inversion. These methoUs. method is on the deconvolution scheme Chosen. we will aiscuss the geological aUvantages anU limitations of each seismic inversion roethoU. and and the L-1 norm metboa. it is To better unUerstand these recurslye important to look at the we will consider between aleconvolution anU inversion. After this. allow us to extract parameters other than impedance. and how Uependent each Specifically. Part 1 - Introduction Page i - . such as density and shear-wave velocity.Introduction.still fairly new. o primary emphasis of the course will section. where a geological moael is iteratively upUatedto finU the best fit with the seismic data. wavelet extraction methods. procedures. After the discussion on poststack inversion.t. or tomography. classical the deconvolution "whitening" aleconvolutionmethods. These methods are summarizedin Figure 1. the ultimate resul. be on poststack seismic inversion where as was previously Oiscussed.looking at examples of each.will be discussedalong with several illustrative examples. traveltime inversion. we are in a position to ß look at the methods which are currently The used to invert seismic data. relationship which are based on single trace recursion. newer sparse-spike deconvolution methods such as Maximum-likelihood Another important type of inversion methodwhich will be aiscussed is model-based inversion. to Seismic Inversion Methods Brian l•ussel 1 Once we have an understanding of these concepts and the problems which can occur.2. Finally. we shall move into the realm of pretstack.

INVERSION • ....INVE SION NVERSIOUMETHODS i I METHODS ] !TOMOGRAPHY) . POSTSTACK INVERSION PRESTACK INVERSION i i -- IEL MODEL-BASED WAV I RECURSIVE EFD TRAVELTIME INVERSION LINEAR .Introuuction Page 1 - .2 A summary current inversion techniques.MET•OS.Introduction to SelsmicInversion Methods Brian Russell SESMI I NV ON I C ERSI ."NARROW SPARSEBAND SPIKE Figure 1. of Part 1 .

THECONVOLUTIONAL 2 MODEL Part 2 .The Convolutional Model Page 2 - .Introduction to Seismic Inversion Methods Brtan Russell PART .

: a seismic wavelet.Introduction to Seismic Inversion Methods Brian Russell Part 2 - The Convolutional Mooel 2. s(t) : w(t) * r(t) + n(t)s where s (t) w(t) = the sei smic trace.Z for botha "sparse" a "dense" and set of reflection coefficients. That is. s(t) = w{t) * r(t).The Convolutional Model Page . In seismic processing deal exclusively with digital data. : additive noise.1 Th'e Sei smic Model The mostbasic and commonly used one-Oimensional moael for the seismic trace is referreU to as the convolutional moOel. data sampled a constant at time interval.1 and2. that we is. and the wavelet to be a smooth function in time. n(t) An even simpler assumption to consiUerthe noise component be zero. The result of this process illustrated the is in Figures 2. convolutioncan be thoughtof as "replacing"eachreflection. coefficient with a scaledversion of the waveletandsumming result. there is a total loss of resolution. Notice that convolution with the wavelet tends to "smear" the reflection coefficients. If weconsiUer relectivity to the consist of a reflection coefficient at each time sample(som• of which can be zero). which states that the seismic trace is simplythe convolutionof the earth's reflectivity with a seismic source function with the adUltion of a noise component. r (t) and : earth refl ecti vi ty. Part 2 . where * implies convolution.which is the ability to resolve closely spacedreflectors. In equation form. is to in which case the seismic tr•½e is simply the convolution of a seismic wavelet with t•e earth ' s refl ecti vi ty.

L_ ' (c) SeismicTrace Page 2 3 Par• 2 . 1 (a) . .. i . i : i i : i ! i '?t * c o o o o o Fi õure 2.y.1 Convolution a wavelet with a sparse"reflectivity.2 Convolution of a wavelet with a sonic-derived "dense" reflectivity. (c) Resuting Seismic Trace.. (b) Reflectivity.Introduction to Seismic Inversion WAVELET: Nethods Brian Russell (a) '*• • REFLECTIVITY : -' ':' TRACE: Figure 2. ! .The Convolutional Model . ! i : ! (b') ! ß : .. (b) Reflectivit. of (a) •avelet. ß . m i i (a) Wavelet.

the previous where S(f) = Fouriertransform s(t). w where I •ndicates spectrum. - 4 .3 illustrates the convolutional model and adding the phase spectra. . the Fourier transform is a complex function. way of looking at the seismic trace is in the frequency domain. ana f = frequency. ß but equivalent. equati on. we may write If we take the Fourier transform of S(f) = W(f) x R(f). In the above equation we see that and it convolution becomes multiplication in the frequency domain.The Convolutional Mooel Page ?. of W(f) = Fourier transform of w(t). R(f) = Fourier transform of r(t). amplitude and 0 indicates phase spectrum. frequency domain. have been severely Part 2 . However. In in the other words. The spectra of S(f) may then be simply expressed esCf)= e (f) + er(f). Both the high and low frequencies of the reflectivity of the seismic wavelet.Introduction to Seismic Inver'sion Methods Brian Russell An alternate. Notice that the time Oomainproblem of loss of resolution becomes one of loss of reOuceo by the effects frequency content in the frequency domain. is normal to consiUer the amplitude and phase spectra of the individual components. convolution involves multiplying the amplitude spectra Figure 2.

Part 2 .3 Convolution in the frequency domain for the time series shown in Figure 2.Introduction to Seismic Inversion Methods Brian Russell AMPLITUDE SPECTRA PHASE SPECTRA w (f) I I -tR (f) i i .The Convolutional Model Page 2 - . i.1. iit I ! |11 loo s (f) i i I i! I Figure 2.

Part 2 .g The Reflection l_ _ . Z -. and Layer i overlies Layer i+1.acoustic impeUance. converting from acoustic si involves dividing the difference in the acoustic i ropedanceto re flectivity impedances by the sum of the acoustic impeaances. where acoustic impedance is defined as the proUuct of compres onal velocity and Uensity. /o__density. Mathematically.$ shows the resultof converting thereflection to coefficient series integrating and It should be pointed out that this formula is true only for the normal incidence case. Figure 2.• .4 showsa schematicsonic log. Later in this course. Figure •. for a seismic wave striking the reflecting interface at right angles to the beds. density log.m i _ _ . Wemust also convert from depth to time by integrating the sonic log transit times. we shall consider the case of nonnormal inciaence. that is. earth moael. This gives t•e coefficient fo11 aws: at reflection the boundary between the two layers. _ _ Coefficient m_ _. _ _ Series ß _ el 'The reflection coefficient series (or reflectivity.compressional velocity. The equation is as •i+lVi+l.iVi i where Zi+l. as it is also called) described theprevious in section one thefundamental is of physical concepts in the seismic method.Z i i+1 • r = reflection coefficient. V -.The Convolutional Model Page 2 - 6 . each reflection coefficient maybe thought of as the res ponse of the seismic wavelet to an acoustic impeUance change within the ear th. anU resulting acoustic impedance for a simplifieU to time. Basically.Introduction to Seismic Inversion Methods Brian Russell 2.

Creation of Reflectivity Sequence.'• 1000m - 1000 m -- NO .WAY TIME O Q. I1 UMESTONE I 1 I I I II I i ! I 1 i I i SHALE •.25 I VS TWO..---. ! I !11 •--------'-[ . Borehole Measurements.The Convolutional Model Page 2 - 7 .. Log ACOUSTIC REFLECTWrrY V$ OEPTH IMPED. ... 3..20o0 m I SECOND Fig. . Part g .4._--.• •. DEPTH 3600 m/s _ I ß • SANOSTONE ß ./mette) 30O 200 loo 2.0 . .5. LIMESTONE 2000 m .--. 2.. OEPTH SANDSTONE ..M•CE (2• (Y•ocrrv mm mm rome m . ! ! ß ß ß 'I !_1 ! UMESTONE I I ! I ! I 1 I v--I V--3600 J LIMESTONE V= 6QO0 2000111 I Fig.. . .2S I -. 2..• .am x OEaSn• 20K -.25 v O ' + .. STRATIGRAPHIC SONICLOG SECTION 4OO •T (•usec.0 SHALE . ! ß ß .mm mm m ----- mm SHALE .Introduction to Seismic Inversion Methods OENSITY Brian Russell LOG...2S I ..

we maycreate an impedancecurve by multiplying together •he sonic and density logs from a well. Let us test this idea on a theoretical random sequence. 0 . all the components the of zero-lag value. from Figure •.cics and carbonates(not evaporltes. A ranUomsequencehas the property that autocorrelation is a spike at zero-lag.. To have a truly random sequence.7. Thus. to Figure 2.. as shownin the following t(Drt = ( 1 . shownin Figure 2. but that there is a significant noise component at nonzero lags. Often. Part 2 . . and 1s seems holdwell for clas. autocorrelation are zero except the equati on- That is. it must be infinite in extent. ß Notice that the autocorrelation of this sequence has a large spike at the zeroth lag. 0 . this its appears to be a good assumption.. the type of aleconvolution and inversion used is dependent on the statistical assumptions which are made about the seismic reflectivity and wavelet.6 showsthe sonic and reflectJv•ty traces from a typJcal Alberta well after they have been Jntegrated to two-way tlme. Wesee that it is even less "random" than the randomspike sequence.. Wewill discuss this in more detail on the next page.. however). Therefore.. Also on this figure is shown the autocorrelation of a well log •erived reflectivity. As we shall see later.The Convolutional Model Page 2 - 8 .6. Wemay•hen compute the reflectivlty by using •he formula shown earlier. ) t zero-lag. howcan we describe the reflectivity seen in a well? The traditional answer has always been that we consider the reflectivity to be a perfectly random sequence and.IntroductJ on 1:o Sei stoic Inversion Herhods Bri an Russell Our best method of observing seJsm•c impedance and reflectivity is •o derlye them from well log curves.. we do not have the density log available• to us and must makedo with only the sonJc.. The approxJmatJon of velocJty to •mpedance a reasonable approxjmation.

s=•c Inversion Methods Br•an Russell RFC F•g. RANDOM SPIKE SEQUENCE WELL LOG DERIVED REFLECT1vrrY AUTOCORRE•JATION RANDOM OF SEQUENCE AUTOCORRELATION OF REFLECTIVITY Fig.IntroductJon to Se•. Reflectivity sequence derived from sonJc .log.6.7. 2. Part 2 . 2. Autocorrelat4ons of random and well log der4ved spike sequences.The Convolutional Model Page 2- .

For a lambda 0 there are no spikes. and for a of lambda 1.there is a term.1 to Part 2 . lambda.The Convolutional Model Page 2 - 10 . Notice that a typical Alberta well log reflectivity 0. Figure 2. wouldhavea lambdavalue in the 0. Whenwe in generatesuch a sequence. the true earth reflectivity cannot be consideredas being truly random.Introductlon to Sei smic Inversion Methods Brian Russel 1 Therefore. For a typical Alberta well we see a number large spikes of (co•responding majorlithol ogic change) to sticking up above the crowd. which controls the sparsenessof the spikes. The Bernoulli part of this term implies a sparsenessin the positions of the spikes and the Gaussian implies a randomness their amplitudes.8 of is shows a number of such series for different values of lambda.5 range.A good way to describethis statistically is as a Bernoulli-Gaussian sequence. the sequence perfectly Gaussian in distribution.

'" "".8. 2.The Convolutional Model Page 2 - 11 .5 -• "(11 I TX#E (HS) LAMBDA-- 1.01 (VERY SPARSE) 11 311 I 4# I 511 I #1 I TZIIE (KS ! LAMBDA--O.'•'l•' •"• ' "••'r'• LAMBDAI0. Examplesof reflectivities factor to be discussed using lambda 6. . m i ß i Part 2 .0 (GAUSSIAN:] EXAMPLES REFLECTIVITIES OF Fig. •'•. in Part . 1 1.1 ::.I ntroducti on to Sei smic I nversi on Methods Brian Russell It tl I I I i I I •11 I 511 t •tl I LAMBD^•0.

is broadened. The 30 degree rotations are asymetric. but one that is aimedfor.the wavelet gets narrower in the of timedomain.11. the peak frequencyof its a•litude spectrum or the inverse of the dominantperiod in the time domain(the dominantperiod is found by measuring time from troughto trough). the assumption a simple wavelet is reasonable. Morerealistically.The Convolutional Model Page 2- •2 . whereas a Notice that the 90 180 degree shift simply inverts the wavelet.Methods Brian Russell 2.10 are also zero-phase. First. TwoRicker wave'lets are the shown Figures 2. Sucha wavelet is an unrealistic goal in seismic processing. which consists of a peak and two troughs. However.10 of frequencies 20 and 40 Hz. well-defined wavelet which is convolved with the reflectivity to produce the seismic trace is overly simplistic.9 and 2. or perfectly symmetrical.Ourultimate an of wavelet would be a spike. where a Ricker wavelet has been rotated by 90 degree increments. degree rotation displays perfect antis•nmnetry. This is a desirable character. Zero Phase and Constant Phase Wavelets m _ m _ m ß m u .12. consider Figure 2. The Ricker wavelet is dependentonly on its dominant frequency. The Rtcker wavelets of Figures 2. To get an idea of non-zero-phase wavelets. and in of this section we shall consider several types of wavelets and their characteristics.t there is a single.Introduction to Seismic Inversion . and Figure 2. the wavelet is both time-varying and complex in shape. with a flat amplitude spectrum. or side lobes. tstic of wavelets since the energy is then concentrated at a positive peak. indicating increase resolution. let us consider the Ricker wavelet. Notice that as the in anq•litude spectrum a wavelet . Part 2 . where the samewavelet has been shifted by 30 degree increments. L m _ J The assumption tha. and the convol'ution of the wavelet with a reflection coefficient will better resolve that reflection. that is.9 and 2.3 The Seismic -_ ß Wavelet • .

11. 2. Ricker wavelet rotated by 30 degree increments Part 2 . Fig.10. Ricker wavelet rotated by 90 degree increments Fig. Fig. •.12.Introduction to Seismic Inversion Methods Brian Russell Fig. 20 Hz Ricker Wavelet'. 2.9. 40 Hz Ricker wavelet. 2.The Convolutional Model Page 2 - 13 .

Also. a typical seismic wavelet contains a larger range of banapass frequencies than that shownon the Ricker wavelet. used.qe 2 - 14 . Consider the fil•er shown Figure 2. that would be noticeable if the wavelet amplitude spectrum was a simple box-car. Part 2 . The minimum-phase As as equivalent of the 5/15-60/80 zero-phase wavelet is shownin Figure 2. and would be excellent as a stratigraphic wavelet. the wavelet seismic instruments minimum-phase. That is.14. in where we have passed a banaof frequencies has also had cosine tapers applied between 5 The taper reduces the "ringing" effect between15 and 60 Hz. concentrated as close to the origin in the aefinition possible. The reason that from the minimum-phase concept is important to us is is also that a typical wavelet in dynamite work is close to minimum-phase. and between60 and 80 Hz. only wavelets which have positive time values. but is also a concept that is poorly understood. notice that the minimum-phase wavelet has no component prior to time zero and has its energy The phase spectrum of the minimum-waveletis also shown. The filter and 15 Hz. The wavelet of Figure 2.Introduction to Seismic Inversion Methods Brian Russell Of course.13.The Convolutional Model Pa. the minimum-phase is the onewhich the sharpest wavelet has leading edge. Minimum Phase Wavelets The concept of minimum-phaseis one that is vital to aleconvolution.13 is zero-phase. all with the sameamplitude spectrum. understanding is that most discussions of the The reason for The this lack of we concept stress the mathematics at the expense of the physical interpretation. definition use of minimum-phase adapted from Treitel is and Robinson (1966): For a given set of wavelets. It is often referred to as an Ormsby wavelet.

l• wavelet •/15-68/88 hz 18. Minim•-phase equivalent of zero-phase wavelet shownin Fig. ql Re• R f1.6 iii ..13.. . Zero-phase bandpass wavelet. I 2.m...38 - Br•anRussell Zero Phase I•auel•t 5/15-68Y88 {• Trace 1 0..00 p Trace I RegE wayel Speetnm Fig.8 Trace1 2.e.88 • 0.14..3e 1 .. 188 _ ! m.. 2. • . ' Trace 2be Fig. Reg 1) min.13.I•troduct•on to Seistoic!nversionNethods.. '188. i m i Part 2 -Th 'e Convolutional Model Page 2- 15 .

minimum phase wavelet the worst.(Trace 5) .Resolution of reflections i s poor.Identification of onset of reflection is poor. zero-phase wavelet the best.Identification of onset of reflection is good.Resolution of reflections is good.5. (4) High freq. high frequency low frequency minimum phase (Trace 5). minimum phase (Trace 3).Resolution of reflections (Trace 4) is poor. (Trace 1) from the simple blocky model shown The following wavelets have been used.The Convolutional Model Page 2 - 16 . p•ase wavelet. min.Introduction to Seismic Inversion Methods Brian Russell Let us nowlook at the effect of different waveletson the reflectivity function itself. zero-phase wavelet: .high frequency zero-phase (Trace •). (3) Lowfreq. figure. .Identification of onset of reflection is good. we wouldhave to consider the high frequency.15 a anU b shows a numberof different wavelets conv6lved with the reflectivity in Figure Z. (Z) High freq. .Resolution of refl ec tions is good. zero-phase wavelet: (Trace Z) . . andthe low-frequency. . From the we can make the fol 1owing observations: (1) Low freq. Part 2 . phase wavelet: (Trace 3) . min. low frequency zero-phase (Trace ½). Based on the aboveobservations.Identification of onset of reflection is poor. Figure 2.

'1G-•1• 14z q2 Reg Zero C Phase 14aue16(' •'le-3•4B Hz ' e ..• ' ' ' •.e •/••/'•-•"v--.Introduction to Seismic Inversion Methods Brian Russell !ql RegR F Zer• Phase Ua•elet •.leJ3e/4e h• ' (a) e. -r .._. shown on traces 2 to 5 of (b).3 Recj miniilium B phue q• Reg 'minimum 1) phase " 8 •.•. Convolution of four different in (a) with trace I of (b)..m .The Convolutional Model Page 2 - 17 . 2.• ' "s•e ' '' Tr'oce [b) 700 Fig. wavelets shown The results are Part 2 .• [' 17 . e.15.

Such techniques aleconvolution. but often require a more include predictive powerful elimination technique.4 Th•N. Multiples. but are actually the result seismic noise. are caused by multiple "bounces" the seismic signal within the earth. That is. Figure 2.noise which is uncorrelated from trace to trace and is •ue mainly to environmental factors. An exampleis multiple reflection interference.Introduction to Seismic Inversion Methods Brian Russell g.as typified by interbed multiples. Correcting for this term is the primary reason for stackingour •ata. as shown Figure of in 2. se. They may be straightforward. and inverse velocity stacking. 5. important that be invert effectively removed. we have interpreted every reflection wavelet on a seismic trace as being an actual reflection from a lithological boundary. it is shows the theoretical the multiple multiples sequence which If we are would to be generatedby the simple blocky modelshown on Figure •. one of the major sources of coherent noise. Multiples cannot be thoughtof as additive noise andmustbe modeled a convolution as with the reflecti vi ty. f-k filter. wil 1 be consi alered in Part 4. Multiples maybe partially removed by stacking. Actually.17 this data. (ii) CoherentNoise . many of the "wiggles"on a trace are not true reflections. as in multiple seafloor bounces or "ringing". nt The situation . Seismic noise can be grouped under two categories- of (i) Random Noise . Stackingactually uoesan excellent job of removing ranUomnoise.The Convolutional Model Page 2 - 18 . Randomnoise can be thought of as the additive component n(t) which was seen in the equationon page 2-g.ing. that has been discussed so far is the ideal case. or extremely complex.C mp.o•ne oi o.noise which is predictable on the seismic trace but is unwanted. These techniques Part 2 .16.

17. 2.7 REFLECTION COEFFICIENT R.16.C.S.7 0. Reflectivi ty sequence Fig.5. of and without multipl es. with . 2. TIME TIME [sec) [sec) 0. Part 2 . Several multiple generating mechanisms.The ConvolutionalModel Page 2 - 19 . WITH ALL SERIES MULTIPLES Fig. 2.Introduction to Seismic Inversion Methods Brian Russell Fig.

PART 3 .Recurstve Inversion .THEORY m•mmm•---' .• .' •_ __ Part 3 .RECURS IVE INVERSION .Theory Page 3 - .

I Part 3 . First.•ntroduct•on to SeJsmic Znversion Methods Brian Russell PART 3 . Z -. V -.RECURSIVE INVERSION .Theory Page . • In section 2. . we saw that reflectivity was defined in terms of acoustic impedancechanges. notice that: I +ri.t Zi+lZi + 2 Zf[ Zi+l+Zi 2 Zi+ 1 ITher'efore ri-- Zi+l+ i Z Zi+l+ Zi l+r. ß . Normally.Zi+lZi + Zi+l2i + + Also Zi+l+Z i Zi+ Z 1.but here we will supply the missing steps for completness.+l Y•iVi +Z i where r -.THEORY 3.RecursiveInversion.refl ecti on coefficient.density. 1 Zi+ Z 1.acoustic impedance. ! ß Inversion .i Zi+l+Zi Zi+l Zi 1 ill.1 Discrete . it is possible to recover the a. The formula was written: Y•i+lV•+l ' •iV! 2i+ Z 1' i ri--yoi'+lVi+l+ ---Zi. the inverse' formulation is simply written down. If we have the true reflectivity available to us.2. and Layer i overlies Layer i+1.coustic impedance by inverting the above formula.compressional velocity. /0-..

Applying recursiveinversion the formula a to simple.7 REFLECTION COEFFICIENT SERIES RECOVERED ACOUSTIC IMPEDANCE Fig. ! ß Part 3 .Theory Page 3 - . 3.Recursive Inversion .Introduction to Seismic Invers-•onMethods Brian Russell pv-e- TIME (sec] 0. . reflectivity.1.and exact.

.....• ...Recursive Inversion . we simply write the formula as Figure reflection 3. Brian Russell .Theory Page 3 - 4 ...!ntroductt •9r• on to Se1 smJc ! nversi on Methods 9rgr•t-k'k9r9r• •-. The formula tells us that if we know the acoustic impedance a particular layer and the reflection coefficient at of the base of that layer.. Part 3 . As expected.. the final •esult- Zi+[=Z ß l+r i recursive ...• .....• • • •-•• Or. To find the nth impedancefrom the first.• • •. Then Z2: i r1 Zl l+rl . we may recover the acoustic impedance of the next layer.... the full acoustic impedance was recovered. encountered m i with i • real i ! data m When the recursive inversion formula is applied to real data. Of course we need an estimate of the first layer impedanceto start us off... These problems are as follows- (i) FrequencyBandl ti ng imi _ ß Referring back to Figure 2.. we find that two serious problems are encountered.....2 bandlimited when it we see that with the reflectivity wavelet.2..... is severely Both the is convolved the seismic low frequency components and the high frequency components are lost... inversion formula and is the basis This is called the discrete of many current inversion techniques... Z3= 112 Z +r 2 r and so on .. Problems • ß ....1 shows the application in of the recursive formula to the " coefficients derived section 2. Assumewe can estimate this value for layer one............

m (a) .1 -'+ ¾1 818m R =+0.2 R: -0.Introduction to SeismicInversion Methods Brian Russell 0.1 '•0. I __ ___ i _ where(a) shows I anU (b) shows bandlimited i m i m i Part 3 .1 Figure 3.1500 •ec'. single reflection coefficient.Theory Page 3 - .•= 1000 i-o.2 Where: {ASSUME l) j•: --• V.0. R•= -0. refl ecti on coefficient.• •R V 1000 o: m R = +0.2 R• R= V 1000m o= = ii•.2 Effect of banUlimitingon reflectivity.t .Recursire Inversion .2 0 V•) 'V.

but will always tend reflectivity.3 the model derived in section Z. consider Figure 3.2 has been convolved with a minimum-phase wavelet. The loss of the low frequency component is the most severe problem facing us in the inversion of seismic data.Introduction to Seismic Inversion Methods Brian Russell (ii) Noise The inclusion of coherent or random noise into the seismic 'trace will makethe estimate• reflectivity deviate from the true reflectivity. Notice that the inversion of the data again shows a loss of the low frequency component. to interfere This noise with our may be from many recovery of the true sources.Z. let us first on recursire effect of use simple models. At the ß it high end of the spectrum. In part 5 we will address the problem of recovering problem of noise.ity to recover the low frequency componentof the acoustic impedance. for is extremely Oifficult to directly recover it. we may recover muchof the low frequency component.2 (a)) anUthe inversion of this spike convolved with a Ricker wavelet (Figure 3.Recurslye Inversion . In Figure 3. but becomesincreasingly problemns introduced by the transmission losses. To illustrate bandlimiting. of the above limitations the To get a feeling for the severity inversion. Even with this very high frequency banUwidth wavelet. Next. This problemof accumulatingerror is compoundeU the amplitude by Part 3 .Theory Page 3 - 6 . the recovered acoustic impedancehas the basic shape as the true acoustic impedance. reflection train Figure 3.2 (b)). incorrect As we can see on the diagram.4 showsthe effect of adding the full (including multiple same transmission losses) to the model reflectivity. It shows the inversion of a single spike (Figure 3. we have totally lost our abil. consider the the original frequency content using deconvolution techniques. with depth.

C. WITH ALL MULTIPLES RECOVERED ACOUSTIC IMPEDANCE Fig. The effect of bandlimiting on recurslye inversion.S. 3.c) 0.4. The effect of noise on recursive inversion.ion Methods Brian Russell pv-•.3. TIME 0. Part 3 .Theory Page 3 - . TIME TIME (see) (re.Recursive Inversion . 3.Introduction to Seismic Invers.? REFLECTION COEFFICIENT SERIES RECOVERED ACOUSTIC IMPEDANCE SYNTHETIC (MWNUM-PHASE WAVELET) INVERSION OF SYNTHETIC Fig.7 REFLECTION COEFFICIENT SERIES RECOVERED ACOUSTIC IMPEDANCE R.

0.•' d Z(t) .1.Introduction to Seismic Inversion Methods Brian Russell 3.3 Continuous Inversion A logarithmic relationship is often used to approximate the above formulas.Theory Page 3 - 8 . an even simpler approximation be made dropp'ing logarithmic may by the relationship: t fr(t) r(t) 1dZ(t) Z(t) VO dt --•-dr •_==• --2'Z(O) Part 3 .Recursive Inversion .Z(t+dt) Z(•) _ 1 z'(t) ! d In Z(t) r(t) = • dt is The inverse formula thust Z(t) Z(O) 2y r(t)dt.Z(t+dt) + Z{t) . A paper by Berteussen and Ursin (1983).5 and +0. = exp 0 The precedingapproximation valid if is case.3• which is usually the on Figures 3. goes into muchmore detail paper showthat the accuracy of the continuous inversion algorithm is coefficients If our reflection coefficients are in the order of + or . This is derived by noting that we can write r(t) function in the following way: as a continuous ß Or r(t) . the continuous versus discrete approximation.5 and 3.3. 4% of the correct value between reflection r(t) <10.6 from their within of -0.

.0 0.2 -0.04 ' --0. (Berteussen and Ursin.0 0.25 0.01 -0.8187 1.0 1.0005 0. 3.4 0.09 -0. (Berteussenand Ursin.6 0.33 0.07 -0.008 0.02 --0.11 0.0 co 3. 1983) $000 (O ) r-niL } m ISCR.8 0.86 2.7 Difference -0.23 2.0 4.18 0.0 0.7 0.25 0.14 -0.6 C•parisonbetween impedance c•putatins based a on discrete and a continuous seismic •del.33 3.5 Numericalc•pari son of discrete and continuous i nversi on.43 0.6 -0.1 0.37 0.45 0.667 0.3 -0.0 5.• 0.1 0.12 -0.04 o.3 4.14 0.05 0.8182 1.3 0.0 19.9 -0. 1983) Part 3 .Recursire .5 -0.6 4.0 0..0 13.30 0.222 1. I? 0.Inversion .670 0. MPEDANCE O ${300 -•O IFFERENCE o SO0 OI FFERENCE( SCALEDUP) T •'•E t SECONOS Fig.Introduction to Seismic Inversion Methods Brian Russell m i .2 0.1 0. 3.0 •o Fig.20 0.221 1.003 --0.3 0.9 1.8 -0.7 9.0 6.Theory Page 3 - .82 2.5 ½xp (26•) 0.m I I IIIII I +gt -1.1 5.4 0.492 1.001 0.4 -0.0 -0.500 1.7 1.0 7.•5 0.05 -0.7 -0.0 1.

Seismic Processing Considerations Page 4 - 1 .Introduction'to Seismic Inversion Methods Brian Russell PART 4 .SEISMIC PROCESSING CONSIDERATIONS Part 4 .

Figure 4. Vertical resolution improvement will involve a discussion of aleconvolution and wavelet processing techniques. using a 3-D example. band-limited reflectivity function) we must carefully process our data with these considerations in minU. we will nowlook at the problem of processing real seismiceata in order to get the best results fromseismic inversion. 1 (i i) Vertical (iv) resolution improvement.1 Introduction Havinglookedat a simple model'of the seismic trace. to invert our seismic data we usually assume the And to arrive at an one-dimensional model given in the previous section. (i i i ) Horizontal resol uti on improvement. that each trace is a vertical. We may group the key processing problemsinto the following categories: ( i ) Ampi tu de recovery.Finally. especially the elimination to of multi pl es. In our discussion of horizontal resolution we will look at the resolution improvement obtained in migration. Part 4 . Noise elimination.Seismic Processing Considerations Page 4 - 2 . anu at the recursire inversion alogorithmin theory. ian Russell 4. Amplitudeproblemsare a majorconsideration the early processing at stages wewill look at both deterministicamplitude and recovery surface and consistent residual static time corrections.•ntroduction to Seismic •nvers•on Methods B.r. Simply stateu. wewill consider several approaches noiseelimination.1 showsa processing flow which could be useUto do preinversion processing. approximationof this model (that is.

NFOLLOWED i SURFACE-CONSISTENT STATI CS ANAIJY SIS VELOCITY ANAUYS IS APPbY STATICS AND VEUOCITY MULTIPLE ATTENUATION STACK ß • MI GRATI ON . Simpl i nversi processing i fied on flow.ON DECON i DECONVOLUTIO. m - -- m _ • • .Introduction to Seismic Inversion Methods Brian Russell INPUT RAW DATA DETERMINISTIC AMPLITUDE CORRECTIONS SURFACE-CONS STENT I AMPt:ITUDE ANAL'YSIS .1. 4. ß ' ß I . _•m mlm SURFACE-CONS ISTENT BY HI GH RESOIJUTI.Seismic Processing Considerations Page 4 - 3 . Fig.11 Part 4 . ll . _ i 11 ..

Inl. where A = Total amplitude factor. for there may still be subtle (or even not-so-subtle) amplitude problems associated with poorsurface conditions or other factors. formula. i.2 Am. S = Shot component.receiver pos. G = CDP component. M = Offset X = Offset component.. it is often advisable to compute and apply surface-consistent gain corrections. anU A = recorded t amplitude. R: Receiver component.j = shot. Thus. if data. However.and t•ansmJssion loss. distance.ecovery The most dJffJcult job in the p•ocessing of any seismic line ß is •econst•ucting amplJtudes the selsmJc the of t•aces as they would havebeen Jf the•e were no dJs[urbJnginf'luences present. and k = CDP position. To compensate for these effects.. P. Part 4 . we maywrJte aownan approximate functJonfor the total earth attenuation- At: AO* b ( / t) * exp(-at).roducl:ion 1:oSeJ smlc Invers1on Nethods BrJan Russell 4. we estimate the constants in the above equation from the seismic the true amplitudes the data coulUbe recoveredby using the inverse of The deterministic amplitude correction and trace to trace mean scaling will account the overall gross changesin amplitude. A = true ampl 0 i tude. Based on a consideration of these three factors.p'l de.. This correction involves computing total gain value for a each trace and then decomposing this single value in the four components Aij= Rj GxMkX Six x k •j.Seismic Processing Considerations Page 4 - .b = constants. absorptJon. i tu. a. We normally make the simplJfication that the distortionof the seJsmic amplJtudes be put into may three main categories'sphe•Jcal divergence. where t = time.

Part 4 .Seismic Processing Considerations Page 4 - 5 .Inversion Methods Brian Russell SURFACE SUEF'A• AND CONS Ib'TEh[O{ T |tV•E : .Introduction to Seismic . .Ri R ß L-rE Fig. (Mike Graul). 4. .2. Surface and sub-surface geometryand surface-consistent decomposition.

o. fromTaner anti Koehler (1981).i.3.the averaging can be •1oneby straight summation. Figure 4. In the frequency domain S(f) • W(f) x R(f) . ement_ rov. Notice that the surface-consistent statics anti aleconvolution problem are similar. * = convolution operation.Introduction to Seismic Inversion Methods Brian Russell Figure 4. Page 4 - 6 .. wt= the seismic wavelet. as in the fol 1owlng equati on- rt: st* o whereOr-operator inverse w .Resoluti on Deconvolution is a process by which an attempt is made to remove the seismic wavelet from the seismic trace. The deconvol ution process is simply the reverse of the convolution procedure reflection and consists coefficients.For the amplitude problemwemust transform the above equation into additive form using the logarithm: InAij= S +InRj InG+lnkMijX•.[_Ver. of "removing" the wavelet shape to reveal the We must design an operator to do this. 4. t. shows effect of doing the surface consistent amplitude and statics corrections.1. Let us first discussthe "convolution"part of "deconvolution" starting with st--wt* r t where st= the seismic trace. -of t Part 4 . rt= reflection coefficient series. In i + k The problem can then be treated exactly the same way as in the statics case.3 I•mp.g (from Mike Graul's unpublished course notes) shows the geometry usedfor this analysis.ca. the equation for the convolutional model leaving an estimate of reflectivity. For the statics problem.Seismic Processing Considerations .

" " " ß d..Introduction to Seismic Inversion Methods Brian Russell ii 11 i ß 1' ii '. ß Stockwith surface consistent static and amplitude corrections. 4. (TaneranuKoehler. Stacks with and without surface-consi stent corrections.Seismic Processing Considerations Page4 .3.•' •. ß . Fig.7 .. .1981). Part 4 . Preliminary bet'ore stack surface consistent and static omplilude corrections.

this becomes R(f) = W(f) x 1/W(f) . is The second problemis much more severe. Part 4 . and (4) Surface-consi stent deconvoluti on. In our discussionwe will assume that the time varying problem negligible within the zoneof interest. and. methods: those which make restrictive and those which do not phase assumptions and can be considered phase assumptions and can be true wavelet processingtechniquesonly whenthese phaseassumptions are met. To get around this problem. make restrictive consideredas true wavelet processingmethods. Is our convolutional model correct. (3) Zero phase deconvolution. There are two main problems. if the modelis correct.Introduction to Seismic Inversion Methods Brian Russell In the frequency domain. since it requires solving the ambiguous problem separatinga wavelet and reflectivity sequence of whenonly the seismic trace is known. (2) Predictive deconvolution. can we derive the true wavelet from the data? The answer to the first questionis that the convolutional model appears be the best modelwe have to come with so far. it may appear that the deconvolution problemshouldbe easy to solve. either about the wavelet or the reflectivity. There are two classes of deconvolution . The main problem is in assuming up that the wavelet does not vary with time. After this extremely simple introduction. This is not the case. In the first category are (1) Spiking deconvolution.Seismic Processing Considerations Page 4 - . all deconvolution or wavelet estimation programs makecertain restrictive assumptions. and the continuing research into the problem testifies to this.

. Part 4 . . 4. . Fig. . . .5 '--'..Introduction to Seismic Inversion Methods Brian Russell (a) Fig. (b) Surface-consistent deconvol ution.4 A comparison of non surface-consistent and surface-consistent decon on pre-stack data._ . {a) Zero-phase deconvolution.Seismic Processing Consioerations Page 4 .t ß ß _ . {b) Surface-consistent soikinB d•convolution. (b). (a) Zero-phase aleconvolution. _ _ . ß . 4. .• Surface-consistent decon comparisonafter stack.

the methods. Two points to note when you are looking at the case study are the consistent definition of the waveform the surface-consistent in approachan• the subsequent improvementof the stratigraphic interpretability of the stack. Part 4 . Referring to Figure 4. The averaging must be performed iteratively are several different way' The example in Figures 4. (Hampson Galbraith 1981) and (2) Maximum-1 ikel ihood aleconvolution.ion Methods Brian Russell In the second category are found (1) Wavelet estimation using a well 1og (Strat Decon). (Chi et al.4 ana 4. Let surface-consi lg84) effectiveness of one of. and (•) iterate through this procedure to get an optimumresult. us illustrate stent the aleconvolution. ways to perform it.Seismic Processing Considerations Page 4 - 10 . common depth point (CDP). and and there con. of each trace. The two major facets of the techniques which will be comparedare the wavelet estimation procedure and the wavelet shaping procedure.Introduction to Seismic Invers. (b) average the autocorrelations in each geometry eirection to get four (c) derive and apply the minimum-phase inverse of each waveform. di recti ons- We common different source.•. notice that a surface-consi stent scheme involves must therefore the average convolutional over four proauct of four geometry components. commonreceiver. non offset (COS).5 shows an actual surface-consi stent case study which was aone in the following (a) Computethe autocorrelations average autocorrel ati OhS. We can compareall of the above techniques using Table 4-1 on the next page.

Random refl ectt vi ty assumption. However. Maximum- No phase assumption. Ideally shaped spike. Canshape desired output. Amplitude spectrumi$ whi tened. Phase is not altered. Does not whiten data well. Amp rude spectrumi s 1i whi tened. Amplitude spectrum not whi tened. well must match sei smi c. Ampl rude spectrum i s i whitened less than in single trace methods. Does not affect . Stratigraphic Deconvol ution No phase assumption. of et Zero Phase Deconvol utton Zero phaseassumption.higherfrequency output.imum phase assumption Random refl ecti vi ty assumptions. Phase of wavelet is zeroed• L ik el i hood Sparse-spike assumption. Deconvolution Minimum zero phase. shaped minimum to phase. to In practice.. Phase characteri s improved.Introduction to Seismic Inversion Methods Brian Russell Table 4-1 Comparison of Deconvolution MethoUs m m ß ß m METHOD WAVELET ESTIMATION WAVELETSHAPING Spiking Deconvol ution Min. to Surface-cons.1_. deconvol ution Part 4 .Seismic Processing Considerations Page 4 11' . or Random reflecti vi ty assumption. m phase wayel for long lags. Predi cti ve No assumptions about wavelet• Deconvol uti on Removes short andlong period multiples. Phase of wavelet is zeroed.

but rather of as a warning that structural (a) migration {preferably 3-D) mustbe performedon complex lines for the fol 1 owing reasons: To correctly position dipping events on the seismic section. and include the corners at the base of the reef structure sides of the fault and the sharp often called "side-swipe".Introduction to Seismic Inversion Methods Brian Russell 4. We et will look'at line 108. we must rememberthat this is analogous to the aleconvolution problem in that not all of the interfering effects may be removed. al (1982). diffractions. in The the plane of the section. which cuts obliquely across a fault and also cuts across a reef-like structure. we have correctly removed the 2-D diffraction patterns. is impossible to achieve.7 shows the result of processing the line. is most noticeable by the appearance of energy from the second reef booy which was not crossed. In the two-dimensional (2-D) migration. This secondtype are out-of-t•e-plane diffractions. free of any lateral interference. Part 4 . we must be aware that the true one-dimensional seismic trace. In the stacked section we maydistinguish two types of diffractions. The first type are due to point reflectors which was crossed by the line. Note that it misses the second reef structure. This brief summary has not been intended as a complete summary the migration procedure. but are still bothere• by the out-of-the-plane problems. (b) Although migration can compensatefor someof the lateral resolution problems. or lateral events which do not represent true geology.6 for a modelstudy taken fromHerman. Therefore.Seismic Processing Considerations Page 4 - 12 .4 Lateral Resol uti on The complete three-dimensional (3-D) diffraction problem is shownin Figure 4. The full 3-D migration corrects for these incorrectly The final migrated section has also accounted for positioned evehts such as the obliquely dipping fault. and To remove diffracted events. Figure 4.

..... et Page 4 13 Part 4 • Seismic Processing Considerations ... {hi 8•8•0 Fig........................................................... 3-D model experiment............................. i LAYOU• 4. ..... 1982).....Introduction to Seismic Inversion Methods 71 Brian Russell lol I 131 101 108 131 (a] 3- D MODEL ß ß ß ß ß ß .......... ...... LINE .................... mm _ ml j mm (Herman al...6.

9. Figure 4. i m _ i i _ L . Two of the major methodsused in the elimination of multiples are the FK filtering method. also fromHampson (1986). (2) Model the data as a linear sumof parabolic shapes. taken from Hampson (1986). i . m i i m . the Inverse Velocity Stacking methodworks best on the inside traces. would be to introduce spurious velocities It is obvious 'from this into the solution. In this case. which usually involves some type of trace mixing or FK filtering.Seismic Processing Consideration• Page ½ - 14 . (This involves transforming to the Velocity domain). The Inverse VeiocityStacking method involves following the steps: (1) Correct the data using the proper NMO velocity. One of the major sources of coherent noise is multiple interference. (3) Filter outthe parabolic components a moveout with greaterthansome pre-determined limit (in the order of 30 msec).=•m__ _ i m ß • Part 4 . explained in section 2.and (4) Perform the inverse transform. However. shows comparison a of final stacks with and without multiple attenuation.8. Figure4. The comparison that the result of inverting the section whichhas not had multiple attenuation importance multiple elimination to the preprocessing of flow cannot therefore be overemphasized. makingthe inversion result on a particular trace less reliable. seismic noise can be classified as either •andom 'or coherent. Notice that although both methods have performed well on the outside traces. a coherency enhancement program can be used. shows comparison a between the two methods a typical multiple problem northernAlberta.5 Notse Attenuation As we' discussed in an earlier section. the interpreter mustbe aware that any mixing of the data will "smear" trace amplitudes. Coherent noise is much more difficult to eliminate.4. The displays are for in all' co•on offset stacks.Introduction to Seismic Inversion Methods Brian Russell 4.and the newerInverse Velocity Stacking method. Random noise is reduced by the stacking process quite well unlessthe signal-to-noise ratio dropsclose to one.

7.Seismic ProcessingConsiderations ß F•g.2-D MIGRATION IIIIIIll!!1111111111111it I!1111111 I!11111111111illl illIIIIIIIIIil!111111tllilil!illlllll!111illlll Ii [1111111111111111111111111 III!!1111 IIIilllllllll!111111111111111111111 I!111111111111111 II II ?•111[•i••!1111111111111111 IIIIIIIII IIIIIIiill•illlllillllllllllliillllllllllllh I! •.Introduction to Seismic Inversion Methods Brian Russell. et Part 4 . 4. Migration model of data shown F•g. 1982).. in Page 4 15 .o "•fillllllllll!1111illi!111 IIIIIIIIIIIIlillilllllll!1111!1!111111111 IIIIIII1111111111 '• II Col LINE 108 . !lilt i)tt tttl• tiiti ilii/lit ll!1111iitt tli ill (b] LINEld8 . 4.6. }!l!iilll •lllllilllllll i!:illllllllllllilitiilillit!illllll iiJ .3-D MIGR•ATION 111lllllllllllllllllllll1111llllll Iilllllll!ll!llll I111 illllllllilllllllllllllllllllllllllii{lilllllllllllll .-(Herman al.

.....:. '•" ..... '1"' '. •. (Hampson.• .''.. •.. .•• ..• ....•J .."P.. • .': .•) •. .. •..... 1986) 888 Zone d Interest 1698 -4 Second real-data conventional without set stack multiple attenuation...!. •..... ' .•. • . ß -....... .... 4. Fig...•m.: .•...'•)'•"•'". • lee ---'._.•r•.'.......•)..•. Part 4 .. stack multiple attenuation.•'•t.. gt••' •. ß.• "•)r'" ./-•-•l.. • •t•.•. •. L...•.:u(•:'J..'•-•%. .'•"•'i•' '" "' .•r'"mm"•""•P"• ' '" •. •. after inverse velocity and after F-K multiple attenuation.•r'm-all " "'.....% '.9...' ...t ...•t......•l'... ..... ./•. •...•. .•.... .'. .l.nm..•.....t. •.' . I'.m.J•' ß' ß . ""::•"'•'•""""="'""•" '...Seismic Processing Considerations Page 4 - 16 ....m..•""•...•_ ••.•... •- Zone of . m#l Fig.. .Introduction to Seismic Inversion Methods AFTER Brian AFTER Russell INPUT INVERSE VELOCITY STACK MULTIPLE ATTENUATION J.•.•.....• . Second real data stack after inverse velocity multiple attenuation..•. .. .... 4..U..•p}•h•?.......'•.•• '•. •..'.•.•t(•' )"•...•m....... (Hampson.•.{.lliml.'..•..•-•' "" • "" • • ' "' "•'"t" 1•%'.. .•/:..•...l•.... •......8.. . . ".•' .ii%' .'•' .. ' F-K MULTIPLE ATTENUATION ' ')'%':!•!t!'!11!1'1 '. ..•<.r'• '. ... ). ..... -'"... Commonoffset stacks calculated from data before multiple attenuation..•'•.t•iill••)•... • I• •. 1986) stack Interest .''.. 2•> '..} ......%"'•1 ..:'!:'. . •..

..RECURSIVE INVERSION .Practice Page 5 - i .Recursive Inversion .PRACTICE _ _ _ _ _ .• . .• _ _ Part 5 .Introduction to Seismic Inverslon Methods Brian Russell PART 5 .

i x oci simply assumeato fit the forward model and is The seismic data are inverted usingthe inverse relationship. The basic equations used are given in part 2. Notice that it resembles a phase-shifteU version of the seismic•ata.Practice Page 5 - 2. where we get do the low-frequency component from.Introduction to Seismic Inversion Methods Brian Russell 5. Wemustremember that all these techniquesare baseUon the assumptionof a one-aimensional seismic trace model. band-limiteU reflectivity this section we will to as recursire series.1 The Recurslye Inversion Method We have nowreached a point where we may start aiscussing the various algorithms currently usedto invert seismicdata. second. The most popular techniquecurrently used to invert seismic Uata is . . T•at is. Z --/•Vi= density vel ty. leaving us with a seismic section in whic• each trace represents a vertical. referred inversion and goes under such trade names as SEISLOGana VERILOG. coefficient.Z Zi+l+ i where Zi+Z 1 i and <===__===> Zi+li =Z r i = ith reflection LIJ . The questionof introUuclng the low frequency component involvestwo separateissues. In look at someof the problems inherent in this assumption. Figure 5.how we incorporateit? ao Part 5 . as in one of t•e key problems the recursire inversion of seismic data is the loss in of the low-frequency component.1 shows an example an input of seismic section aria the resulting pseuao-acoustic impeaance without the incorporationof low frequency information. anU can be written ri-.Recurslye Inversion . However. ana. we assume that all the corrections which were aiscussed in section 4 have been correctly applied. First. wasshown section 3.

I...• .... • ' ••"'•I'i•I• ....•.... .... .. •' .J'•....... ___ • . •'• •1tlllttllltl Ill•l 1 1t 'ti I I •l.. .-••_ :: :: (a) OriœinalSeismic Data.•'•.. '• . ßß . • -::-= •..:•'•' .• •..•. ..'-...... ...(• x•{ ••' ...... ....... ..'....... •%--=: -........ •...8 0.3 i ! 1 4 1..:• •<• .. •m:'•' •'•:..•_. ._ .. • ..l•'*.. '.••-----m'•l• ... .! 1. •.%•.'••'•q• ... - ....•.•'. .... •q• 7' • '• • '.. •. .....•u •*•'•d•ti'.•... :..•..•.. •.•t•l....• • ....•....-.• .... ]• ••'•. •. ...'..• .• .....1 (Galbraith and Millington. 1979) Page 5 3 .5 1... ... ..•. • ..' •'•' /.... ... .. • •i• • ..Practice 5.. -(•-•( •.. :c• i• 7•* ..... • ..... Heavy lines indicatemajorreflectors......• .• •.. '_ ]..9 10 !l 'I 1.•. '... . '... ..•......7 I I 18 i I 19 (b) Recursiveinversion of data in (a). _•.... •.• . •. J...... '-•-•.•...• ............'•.•.. • .. •.•. ....•-.... ß .. •.•.....•'..I . :•. • • •.fm..... "• '1 '• ' ' ' • '..l•.'l•. ..... •'•:........ .• :'•l•.....•" i•q•'t•'•'•a •'•.....•.......•-.... •..•]....' :•'•'•"•m• . • • •• ..... .Introduction to Seismic Inversion Methods Brian Russell 1171121e9leS1ol 92 93 i••11•I Ittltl--'' I • =:::•:::::::-•--lll[l•1111t• l!IIit!! llltfltll!!l•!1!t•n•'i .... ...• .5 1...•....2 .'""W'... •. •q• • • •-•....' .... ...-...'• .. ....... •:•..n .. •'•''.•. ..7 1.. .........•..'•...•......: • : .... • .I . •l••J• •":•!• • f •• . ... ..•' ' . ' .. •'.7 0...• . .. l•l•l'i'/lt' i•"'...•-•-• .0 i I 1 I I 12 !..• • .....•"•r'u'" •$• ....•-•ii•... •'2 ..•i•21. /. --.ql ....'.•..• .7 0..•:b-''? ß" • . •] •.•... N N N '" " 0..... .... ... •?'. ... • •..•.. ..... . 2•Y•' ...Recursive Inversion .• .•...8 0...• ......•l•l.•. •..4 1..... ..• "... .........• ._ r ..%•..•..•l.....3 1.• • •.. .' :•..•h/•'•'}•"' c' •q (' ••'•' ((•'•'" ..• .. •'•'"•".. -' ' • ......'.---- • .. : .'. ...•. ß •?•'•'• ..• ß • ..•..• .. • •.......'• '•-<•.............• ..•..... ß•.... .• m•.... •'• •" ' ..... •• .... "•..••.•.6 1..•.. ' ..'"...•.'.-..•v•... ß Figure Part 5 .....•• ' ß ß•.'.•...• ••...'•'.'". •....• ..•..• •...........•..••(•'••'•"•:•"•'•7 •.•..... ' .i "•''• .. •" ß7•' ="....• •4• ...

Recursire Inversion . are in and solved by using a stretching algorithm which stretches the sonic log information to fit the seismic data at selected control points. Refer to rindseth (1979). for more de ta i 1 s. These problems.2(a).a lateral component. a 2-D polynomial has beendone to fit smooth out the function. interval velocities are derived from the stacking velocity functions along a seismic line usingDix' formula. suffers fromtwomainproblems' is it it usually stretched with respectto the seismic data andit lacks. Part 5 . (3) Froma geological model Using all incorporated. discussed Galbraith Millington(1979).Practice Page 5 - 4. This final set of traces represents the filtered interval velocity in the 0-10 Hz rangefor eachtrace and may be added directly to the invertedseismictraces. a blocky geological model can be built and This is a time-consuming method. In Figure 5. However.Introduction to Seismic Inversion Methods Brian Russell Thelow frequency component be foundin oneof three ways' can (1) From a filtered sonic log The sonic log is the best wayof derivinglow-frequency information in the vicinity of the well. available sources. (2) From seismic velocity analysis In this case. . The resulting function will be quite noisyandit is advisable to do some formof two-dimensional filtering on them.

2 VELocrrY SURFACE 2rid ORDERPOLYN• Frr s •mTZ•eH CUT FtT• tRussell and Lindseth. I0000 / --V.Recursive Inversion Practice - Page 5 5 . . 1982).308 (PV)* 3460 .Introduction to Seismic InversiOn Methods . .. Brian Russell 70000 GOOO0 $0000 (pvl 4oooo '/sgc ( b) $oooo ZOOO0 . (a) i Figure 5. ß Part 5 .

at due this should not affect the result too much. given by V = 0. shows that an approximate linear relationship exists between velocity and acoustic impedance.Practice Page 5 - 6 . The final pseudo-acoustic impedance log is shownin Figure5. Figure5. from Lindseth (lg79). In the SEISLOG at technique they are added the velocity stage. usinga similar relationship mayapproximately we extract velocity information from the recoveredacoustic impedance.308 Z + 3460 ft/sec. In section 2. Notice that this relationship is good for carbonates and clastics and poor for evaporitesand shouldtherefore be usedwith caution. Of course. are of Galbraith and Millington (1979) suggestthat the addition of the low-frequency component shouldbe made the reflectivity stage. we are really interested in the seismic velocity rather than the acoustic impedance.Recurslye Inversion .d 1dtZ(t) <::==> Z(t) t =Z(O)2•0 dt. Figure 5. However.3. the low-frequency component be addedto the high frequency can component either adding reflectivity stage or the impedance by stage. it wasshown that the continuous approximation the forwardand to inverse equations was given by Forward Equati on Inverse Equation 1 n r(t) =•. to other considerations.Introduction to Seismic Inversion Methods Brian Russell Second. However. A moreexact relationship may be found by doing crossplots from a well close to the prospect. exp r(t) Sincethe previous transforms nonlinear(because the logarithm). Notice that the geologicalmarkers are moreclearly visible on the final inverted section. Part 5 .2(b).3 shows frequency low information derived from filtered sonic logs.4 including the low-frequency component.

9 1. 1979) Part 5 .0 1.1 l.8 0.8 19 19 Figure 5.9 0.2 1.7 1.6 1.4 1.5 1.7 1.Introduction to Seismic Inversion Methods Brian Russell Figure 5.4 I$ 1. Lines indicate major reflectors.Recursive Inversion .1(b) and 5.2 1. 0. (Galbraith and Millington.4 Final inversioncombinin•Figures 5.O 1.3 1.reched:' sonic loœ.:) 1.Practice Page 5 - 7 .7 0.3 Low Frequency comDonent derived from"st.3.6 1.1 1.

i A commonmethod of display used for inverted sections is to convert to actual interval transit times. CONVERT TO I DEPTH Recursi ve Inversion . the recursive methodof seismic inversion may be given by the fol 1owing flowchart' i I i INTRODUCE LOW •) FREQUENCIES I•.Recursive Inversion . These transit times are then contoured and coloured according to a lithological normal seismic sections.. . _ ß Procedure .Introduction to Seismic Inversion Methods Brian Russell In sugary.v••o ••DO-•CO••c • . colour scheme.Practice Page 5 - 8 . . This is an effective way of presentingthe information• especially to those not totally familiar'with Part 5 . ICORRECT TO ' VELOCITIES PSEUDO ß .

(a) Frequency response of a theoretical differentiator.i m ml . !982 ) . (Russell and Lindseth. Part 5 -Recursire Inversion .Introduction to Seismic Inversion Methods Brian Russell (a) Frequency (e) 1 (b) Fig. .Practice Page 5 - 9 . (b) Frequency responseof a theoretical integrator.m .

Simpler still.1.marl I ?•_Th. In this section we will look at the interpretational advantages of introducing this component. we may derive the frequency response of this tel ationship. Part 5 .r.e. and a -90 degree phase shift. o.Practice Page 5 - 10 . Figure 5.jwe <===> . The information in this section is taken from a paper by Russell and Lindseth (1982).• dt- _1dZ(t) Z(t)2Z(O)j•at <=__==> 0r(t) ' = d jwt jwt -dte "-. If we consider a single harmonic component.the high end of the spectrumto the low. However..5 illustrates these relationships. which is where In words.2 I nfor.1). so t•at t r(t) .Introduction to Seismic Inver.si.equ. jwt dt= -j w eJWt w-21Tf.n Lo.ne. We start by assuming the extremely simple moael for the reflectivity-impedance relationship which was introduced in part 5. and a +90 degree phase shift.. nt The key factor which sets inverted data apart from normal seismic data is the inclusion of the low frequency component. .regardless of howthis component is introduced. differentiation removes low frequencies and integration puts them in.e. But how aoes all this effect our geology? In illustrated three basic geological models' (1) Abrupt 1i thol ogi c change.on Methods Brian Russell 5. an• (3) Cyclical change. we will neglect the logarithmic relationship of the more complete theory (this is justifiea for reflection coefficients less that 0.6 we have (2) Transitional lithologic change.Recursire Inversion .w ncycompo. ß Figure 5..differentiation introducesa -6 riB/octaveslope from. Integration introduces a -6 dB/octave slope from the low end to the high end.F.

6.Practice Page 5- 11 . Threetypesof lithological models' (a) Major change. 1982).Introduction to Seismic Inversion Methods Brian Russell (A)MAJOR LITHOLOGIC CHANGE Vl V1 I i (B)TRANSITIONAL LITHOLOGIC CHANGE I. (c) Cyclical. I I I I i I V:V•+KZ i i (C)CYCLICAL CHANGE v• _ ! Fig.Recursire Inversion . Part 5 . (b) Transitional. (Russell andLindseth. 5.

whereas. the seismic dataand final Uepth inversion shown. . ! L . a simple filter introUuced. a major boundary shows as simply a large reflection up coefficient. the inversion.7. Figure5. I I ß [ I L (Russell and Lindset•. 5. is used. the are On seismic data.8.5- Fig. considera major1ithologic boundary exempl as i lieu by the Paleozoicunconformity Western Canada. Frequency components of a sonic log. In Figure 5.7 shows most the information that of about the largestepin velocityis containeU theD-10 component sonic in liz of the log.Introduction to SeismicInversion Methods Brian Russell We illustrate the effect of inversion thesethreecases looking may on by at both seismic anUsonic log Uata. Part 5 . on RAW SONIC VELOCITY FT/SEC FILTERED SONIC LOGS 10-90HZ O-IOHZ O-CJOHZ 0 TIME 10000 0. . the associated and phase shift is not To start with. To show the loss of high frequencyon the sonic log. change of a froma clastic sequence to a carbonate sequence. 1982).3- 0. the large velocity step is shown.Recursire Inversion .Practice Page 5 - 12 .

.... DEPTH SEISLOG DEPTH ß o . Inversion .8. (a) Sesimic s_ection.. ß""I:'ALEOZOIC -425' (b) Fig....pqse_th. Major litholgical'change. . Part _ .._•!98_2)___ . Saskatchewan example. _(R_q•selland Li. ß lOP OF "' ... ß (a) .Recursive Page 5 - 13 ..%.. (b) Inverted section.Introduction to Seismic Inversion Methods Brian Russell o'...Practice 5 ... 5....

but the cyclic sequence containedin is the 10-50 Hz component. If this informationcould be recovered incluUea and during the inversion process. illustrating the ramps whichshow a transitional velocity increase. large jumps in velocity. Noticethat the 0-10 Hzcomponent contains all the information about the ramps. Figure 5. (Russell Inversion .Practice and LinOseth.9 showsa soniclog from an offshore Tertiary basin.9. In summary.Introduction to Seismic Inversion Methods Brian Russell To illustrate transitional and cyclic change. Fig. and linear velocity ramps. 5. 5. Onlythe Oc component lost from the cyclic is component removal the low frequencies. Sonic showing log cyclic andtransitionalstrata. 1982) Page 5 14 Part 5 . it wouldintroducethis lost geological information.Recurslye . and the rapidly varyingcyclic sequences.lost in the seismic data. This includessuchgeological information as the dc velocity component. a single examplewill be used.10 illustrates the upon of same point usingthe original seismic data andthe final depthinversion. information the contained the low frequency in component of the soniclog is . Figure.

Introduction

to Seismic

Inversion

Methods

Brian

Russell

SEISMIC SECTION-CYCUC & TRANSITIONAL STRATA

(a)

(b)

i

ß

1-3500

Part

5 - Recursive

Inversion

- Practice

Page 5 -

15

Introduction

to Seismic Inversion Methods

Brian Russell

5.3

**Sei smical ly Derived Porosi ty
**

-ILI , ß I

We have shownthat

**seismic data may be quite
**

Thus,

adequately inverted to

the inverted data as

**pseudo-velocity (and hence pseudo-sonic)information i f our corrections and
**

assumptions are reasonable. we may try to treat

true

sonic log

information

and extract

petrophysical

data

from

it,

**specifically porosity values. Angeleri and Carpi (1982) have tried just this,
**

with mixed results. The flow chart for their procedure is shown in Figure 5.11. In their chart, the Wyllie formula and shale correction are given by:

where

At

--transit

time for fluid saturated rock,

**Zstf= pore fluid transittime, btma:rock matrix transittime,
**

Vsh fractional = volume shale,and of

**btsh: shale transittime.
**

The derivation

control.

porosity

information

of

porosity

**was tried on a line which had good well
**

plot of well log porosity versus seismic

is reasonable in

the most

**Figure 5.12 shows the
**

for

**each of three wells.
**

from the seismic

Notice that the fit

the

clean sands and very poor in the dirty

sands.

only

**Thus, we mayextract porosity
**

under favourable

section

conditions, notably excellent well control and clean sand content.

Part 5 - Recurslye Inversion - Practice

Page 5 -

16

Introduction to Seismic Inversion Methods

Brian Russell

**!•ILI61C '$[IS'MI• .AT& .AT&'
**

-[ ,gnu mill i' •ill. Utl..I

•%lOtOG

I-"'• ''' m.,,•, .111 lit _,ml ,l

F ']w[tt 'ill ]

i

I IIITEIPllETATII

l!

WlltK

:

t

' .

Fig.

5.11. Porosity eval uati on flow diagram.

(AngeleriandCarpi, 1982).

, ,

WELL

2

WELL

3

WELL

__

ClII

PNIIVI

o..- OPt

poeoItrv

.....

CPI

ß "

e e

,

I e . e e .

, ß

. e ß

ß

e e e e I i

'

e e

I

e ß i

,-

-e i ß ß ß e

1.4

1.7

1.8,

1.9

.

Fig.

5.12. Porosity profiles from seismic data and borehole data.

**Shalepercentage al so displayed. (Angel andCarpi, 1982). is eri
**

i ,

Part

5 - Recursire

Inversion

- Practice

Page 5 -

17

. • I ] m • m Part 6 .SPARSE-SPIKE INVERSION • { • ..Sparse-spike Inversion 6- 1 .Introduction to Sei stoic Inversion Methods Brian Russel 1 PART 6 ....

Introduction to Seismic Inversion Me.thods

Brian Russell

6.1

Introduction

Thebasic theoryof maximum-1 i hood ikel deconvol ution (MLD) developed was by Dr. Jerry Mendel and his associatesat USC hasbeen anU well publicised (Kormylo Mendel, and 1983;Chiet el, 1984). A paperby Hampson Russell and (1985) outlined a modification of maximum-likelihood Ueconvolution melthod

,

which allowed the method be moreeasily applied to real seismic •ata. One to of the conclusions that paper wasthat the method of could be extenoed use to

the sparse reflectivity as the first step of a broadband seismic inversion technique.This technique,which will be termed maximum-likelihood seismic

inversion, is discussed later in these notes.

You will

recall that our basic model of the seismic trace is

s(t) = w(t) * r(t) + n(t),

where

s(t)

: the seismic trace,

w(t) : a seismic wayelet,

r(t)

n(t)

: earth reflectivity,

= addi tire noise.

and

Notice that the solution to the

above equation

is indeterminate,

since

there

are three unknowns solve for. to

However, using certain

assumptions,

the aleconvolution problem can be solved. As we have seen, the recursire method of seismic inversion is basedon classical aleconvolution techniques,

which assume random a reflectivity and a minimum zero-phase wavelet. or They

**produce higherfrequency a wavelet output,but neverrecover reflection on the
**

coefficient series completely. More recent aleconvolution techniques be may

**grouped under the category sparse-spike of meth•s. That is, they assume a
**

certain modelof the reflectivity

assumption.

and make a wavelet estimate based on this

Part 6 - Sparse-spike

Inversion

6-

2

Introduction

to Seismic Inversion

Methods

Brian Russell

ACTUAL REFLECTIVITY

POISSON-GAUSSIAN

I,:, I ..

SERIES OF LARGE

EVENTS

--F

GAUSSIAN

BACKGROUND EVENTS

OF SMALL

SONIC-LOG

REFLECTIVITY

EXAMPLE

Figure 6.1 The fundamental assumption the maximum-likelihood of method.

Part 6-

Sparse-spike Inversion

6-

3

Intr6duction to Seismic Tnvetsion Methods

Brian Russell

These techniques include(1) btaximum-Likel ihood deconvolutton and inversion.

(2) L1 norm deconvolution and inversion.

**(3) Minimum entropy deconvol ution (MEO).
**

From the point of view of seismic inversion, sparse-spike methods have an

**advantage over classical methods deconvolution of because the sparse-spike
**

estimate, with extra constraints, the reflectivity. We will can be used as a full focus initially bandwidth estimate of on maximum-likelihood

deconvolution, and will

then move on to

the L1 normmethod of Dr.

Doug

**O1denburg. The MEDmethod will
**

6.2 Maximum-Likelihood

i i m !

**not be discussed in these notes.
**

and Inversion

I _ ß

Deconvolution

ß m m m m

**Maximum-Li kel i hood Deconvoluti
**

I ß ß ß m _ _ l! . . • am .. I

on

_

Figure 6.1 illustrates

the

fundamental assumption of Maximum-Likelihood

deconvolution, which is that the earth' s reflectivity

**is composed a series of
**

This

of large events superimposedon a Gaussian backgroundof smaller events.

**contrasts with spiking decon, which assumesa perfectly randomdistribution
**

reflection coefficients. The real sonic-log reflectivity

of

at the bottom of

Figure

6.1 shows that in fact this type of model is not at all

unreasonable.

Geologically,

the

large

events

correspond to

ß

unconformities

and major

1i thol ogic boundaries.

From our assumptions about the model, we can derive an objective

function

**whichmaybe minimized yield the "optimum" mostlikely reflectivity. and to or
**

wavelet combination consistent with the statistical

,,

assumption. Notice

that

this method gives us estimates of both the sparse reflectivity

and wavelet.

Part 6 - Sparse-spike Inversion

m

.38 REFLECTIVITY SPIKE DENSIq'•.2(b) Objective function a second for possible solutioninput to trace.00 NOISE' 39.ECTIVE' 98.85 NOISE: 81.• 5 NOISE OBJECTIVE :158.19 SPl• ••: REFLECTIVITY 50. 70.2(a). is than indicatingless a 1ikely solution. to INPUT WAVELET SPIKE S!7_F: 6. Part 6 .19 Figure6.00 NOISE OB.98 Figure 6. .2(a) Objective function onePoSsible for solution inputtrace.Introduction to Seismic Inversion Methods Brian Russell INPUT WAVELET SPIKE SIZE' 9..Sparse-spike Inversion 6- 5 . This value higher 6.. ! .

No assumptions are made aboutthe wavelet. lambda is a numbermuchsmaller than one. any glven deconvol ution sol ution can be examined to see.2mln(X)- 2(L-re)In(i-A) at kth r(k) = reflection coeff.R2 where k=l N 2 . n : noise at kth sample.2(b) show possiblesolutionsfor the sameinput synthetic two trace. spikes to the total number o of trace samples. the RMS size of t•e noise. the expected behavior of the objective function is expressed in terms of the parametersshown above. Part 6 . andN. N : sqare root of noise variance. the ratio of the expected numberof nonzer. In simpler terms. of Figures 6. With these parameters specified. For example. we are looking for the solution with the minimum number spikesin its reflectivity and t•e lowestnoisecomponent. the RMS•size of the large spi•es. ß L : total numberof samples. sample.2(a) and 6. Noticethat the obje6tive functionfor the one with the minimum spike structure is indeed the lowest value. Mathematically.Sparse-spike Inversion 6- 6 .Introduction to Seismic Inversion Methods Brian Russell The objective function j is given by ß k=l . m = numberof refl ecti OhS. then it is an unlikely result.whether it is likely to be the result of a statistical process with thoseparameters. meaning that the expected number spi•es is governed by the parameter of lambda. The reflectivity sequenceis postulatedto be "sparse". and • = likelihood that a given sample has a reflection. the reflectivity estimate has a number spikesmuch if of larger than the expectednumber. Normally. The other parametersneededto describe the expected behavior are R.

1.Sparse-spi ke Inversion 6- 7 .3.Introduction to Sei smic I nversi.on Methods Reflectivity Bri an Russel1 Synthetic Original Model I I.i.I .2. Part 6 . I terati on I I terati on 2 Iteration 3 I teration 4 Iteration S Iteration 6 Iterati on 7 Figure 6. ill. The Sinl•le Most Likely Addition (SMLA)algorithm illustrated for a simple reflectivity model. -. .

' improve wavelet and the iterate through this sequence of steps until an acceptably low objective function is reached. having the reflectivity estimate. In These procedures are illustrated on model data in Figures 6. there maybe an infinite number possible solutions. WAVELET ESTIMATE IMPROVE ES•TE WAVELET ESTIMATE REFLECTIVITY Fiõure 6. Thealgorithm usedfor updatingthe is callee the single-most-likely-addition after each step it tries to find the optimum spike to add. Therefore.3.3 an• 6. and ten iterations. It consists of adding reflection reflectivity coefficients oneby one until an optimum of set algorithm (SMLA)since "sparse" coefficients hasbeenfound.Sparse-spike Inversion 6- 8 . updatethe reflectivity. The input model is shownat the top of the figure. Figure 6.5.Introduction to Seismic Inversion Methods Brian Russel1 Of course. there in is a two step procedurehavingthe waveletestimate. update the wavelet. two. and it of would take too much computer time to look at eachone. The block component of solving both method for reflectivity and wavelet. Notice that the final result compares favourably with the model wavelet.5 shows the procedure for updating the wavelet phase. Essentially. This is shown block form in Figure 6. Thus.4. we start with an initial wavelet estimate.4. Part 6 . es'timate sparse the reflectivity. a simpler m method is used to arrive at the answer. the proceUure for upUating the reflectivity is shown. Figure 6. Iterate around the loop unti 1 converRence. five. and then. and the up•ated reflectivity and phaseis shown after one.

The procedure for updatinõ the wavelet in the maximum-likelihood method.ion Methods Brian Russell Wayel et Refl Vity ' ecti Synthetic INPUT MOD INITIAL CUESS Ill .I .5.3) Part 6 . TEN ITERATIONS Fi õure 6.Introduction to Seismic Invers. ation on reflectivity has been done. (see Fiõure 6.Sparse-spike Inversion 6- 9 . Between each iteration above. a separate iter.

a dramatic improvement seen is in the resolution of the infill of this channel on the deconvolved section.6 " Synthetic seismogram test. visible and is superimposed the on INPUT: V. The main things to note are the major increase in detail (frequency content) seen in the final stack. representing a channel scour within the lower Cretaceous.Introduction Seismic to InversionMethods Brian Russell Figure 6. Within the central portion of the channel.: -- ESTIMATED: ttl J':ll'j' ß "'" Figure 6. Notice that the major reflectors have been recovered fairly well and that the resultant trace matchesthe original trace quite accurately.7(a) and (b) shows the stack from the aleconvolution procedure. in Figure 6..8 is a comparison of input and output stacks for a typical Western Canada basin seismic line.Sparse-spi ke Inversion 6- 10 . a . course. the reflection Of smaller coefficient reflection series.8 seconds. Southern Alberta. . The area is an event of interest between 0. Part 6 .6 is an exampleof the algorithm applied to a synthetic seismogram. Also shown are the extracted and final wavelet shapes. coefficients are missing in the recovered Let us nowlook Cretaceous gas play comparison between the at in some real data. Although the scour is visible on both sections. input anU output The first example is a' basal Figure 6. and the improvement stratigraphic content.positive reflection with a lateral extent of five traces is clearly Uominant negative trough.7 anU 0.

0.5 LOG iZ.Introduction to Seismic Inversion Methods Brian Russell 'SONIC SYNTHETIC 0._ Part 6- Sparse-spike Inversion 11 .. .5 seismicwith extracted wavelet. Figure - -_ 6.7 0.8 EXTRACTED WAVELET (a) Initial 0..6 . 0.6 0.8 (b) Final deconvolved seismic with zero-please wavelet.7 __ ..i 0.

present.9.7. Part 6 . However.seconds)and the base of the postulated gas sand on top of the channel have been delineated. reflections This are is shown in are Figure 6. both in a Finally we have taken the deconvolved output and estimated the reflectivity. that all the main reflectors is interesting to note how clearly the base of the channel (at 0. and is muchmore sharply lateral and vertical sense.Introduction to Seismic Inversion Methods Brian Russell This is quite possibly a clean channel sand and may or may not be prospective.. It Although some of the subtle there is no doubt missing from this estimated reflectivity. this feature is entirely absent on the input stack. Overlying the channel is a linear anomalywhich could represent the 'base of a gas sand. defined on the output section.Sparse-spike Inversion 6- 12 .

9 The deconvolved result from Figure 6.8 0. ved DECONVOLVED STACK ESTIMATED REFLECTIVITY 0.Sparse-spike Inversion m 13 . Part 6 .6 0.8 An input stack over a channelscour and the resul ting deconvol sei smic.Introduction to Seismic Inversion Methods Brian Russell INPUT STACK DECONVOLVED STACK 0.7 0.6 0.8 and its estimated reflectivity.9 Figure 6.9 Figure 6.8 0.7 0.

Although the MLD algor it•m'extrapol ares outsi de the bandwidth of the wavelet to produce a broad-band reflectivity estimate. the overall trenu is poorly resolvea. estimates especially in the presence of additive noise. _ Part 6 . 1985).Sparse-spike Inversion 6• 14 . the reliability low frequency wavelength of this estimate The result is is degraaed by noi se at the that while the short end of the spectrum. independent knowleUge the impedancetrenU may be input as a constraint. and impedance Z(i) maybe written Given the reflectivity. r(i).Introduction to Seismic Inversion Methods Brian Russell Maximum-Likel ihood Inversion An obvious extension of the theory is to invert the es ti mated reflectivity to Uevise a broad-band or "blocky" impedancefrom the seismic data (Hampson Russell. the resul ting Z(i) )[1 =Z(i_l +r(i)] 1 . In Z(i) = 2H(i) * r(i) + n(i). where Z(i) = the known impedance trend. Since r(i) < l. This is equivalent to saying that the times of the spires on the reflectivity estimate are better resolved than their amplituaes. of In order to stabilize the reflectivity estimate.r(i) ' Unfortunately. • i <0 H(i) : • i >0 and n(i) : "errors" in the input trend. from MLD produces application unsatisfactory of thi s formula to the reflectivity res ults. features of the impedancemay be properly reconstructed. we can a convolutional written derive type equation between acoustic impeUance anU reflectivity.

11 ß Maximu•m-L i hood i nversi on result from Figure 6.Introduction to Seismic Inversion Methods Brian Russell Figure 6.Sparse-spike Inversion 6- lb .10 Input Model parameters.m __ Part 6 . Figure 6. i kel .10.

the zero-phase wavelet used to generate the synthetic. at one extreme only the seismicinformationis usedand at the ot•er extremeonly the impedance trend. own wavelet and noise parameters. shifts are due to slight amplitude problems on the extracted reflectivity.11 the maximum-likelihood inversion result is shown. It is doubtful that a perfect match could ever Part 6 . T•ese small. If both the seismic noise and the impedance trend noise are modelledas Gaussiansequences. Minimizing this function gives a solution for r(i) whichattemptsa compromise by simultaneously moUellingthe seismic trace while conformingto the knownimpedancetrend.e a "sparse" reflectivity) and therefore satisfies the basic assumptions of the method. In this casewe haveuseda smoothed version of the sonic velocities to provide the constraint. Figure is 6. That is.Sparse-spike Inversion 6- 16 . A moredetailed comparisonof the two figures shows that the original and extracted logs do not matchperfectly. each with its the seismic trace. T(i). We now have two measured time-series: and the log of impedanceIn Z(i). In our first example. be obtai neU. A visual comparisonwoulU indicate that the extracteU velocity profile corresponds very well to the input. and finally the synthetic itself.Introduction to Seismic Inversion 'Methods Brian Russell The error series n(i) reflects the fact that the trend information is approximate. The objective function is modified to contain two terms weighted by their relative noise variances. the derived reflectivity. This example was usedinitially becauseit truly represents a "blocky" impedance (and therefor. their respective variances become "tuning" parameterswhich the user can modify to shift the point at which the compromise occurs. In Figure 6.the method tested on a simple synthetic.10 showsthe sonic log.

13 •_ ! ..12.12 Creation of a seismic model from a sonic-log. i •_! mm i i i ß i i ! It_l I Part 6 .. ii__ Inversion result from Figure 6....Introduction to Seismic Inversion Methods Bri an Russel 1 Figure 6.Sparse-spi•e Inversion 17 . Figure 6.

and the extracted resull• is shownat the diagram.Sparse-spi ke Inversion 6- 18 . have assumedthat the we density is constant.) The reflectivity wascbnvolved with a zero-phase wavelet. (In this example. The fact that the two do not perfectly match due to slight errors in is the reflectivity sizes whichare amplified by the integration process. the input and output logs do not matchperfectly. At the' top of the figure we see a sonic log with 'its reflectivity sequencebelow. Figure 6.13 wascalculated applying a 200 ms smoother the actual log.bandlimited from10 to 60 Hz.and is partially the effect of the constaintused. andthe final syntheticis shown the bottom the figure. In by to practice. Again. nearby well this information could be derived from stacking velocities or from control. Part 6 . In this calculation. but this is not a necessary restriction.13. Theconstraintshownin Figure 6.Introduction to Seismic Inversion Methods Brian Russell Let us nowturn our attention to a slightly more realistic synthetic example. at of The results of the maximum-likelihood inversion method are sbown in Figure 6.12 shows applicationof this algorithmto a sonic-log the derivedsynthetic. the waveletwasassumed known. the constraint is shownin bottom of the the middle panel. The initial log is shownat the top. Notethe blocky nature of the estimated velocity profile compared the actual sonic log with profile.

Part 6 . : ß '.15 Maximum-Liklihood reflectivity estimate from seismic in Figure 6.14 An input seismic 1ine to be inverted.Sparse-spike Inversion 6- 19 . eel'? e4dl Figure 6.Introduction to Seismic Inversion Methods Brian Russell * ! Figure 6.14.

Finally.16 shows the recoveredacoustic impedance. Notice that the inverted section •isplays a "blocky" character. wherea linear ramphas beenusedas the constraint. In summary.inversion procedures. This blocky log impedance be contrasted can with the more traditional narrow-band . Figure 6. we show the results of the algorithm applied to real seismic data.17 shows a comparison between well itself the and the inverted section. whichestimate a "smoothed" frequency or limited version of the impedance.Sparse-spike Inversion 6- 20 . maximum-likelihood inversion is a procedurewhich extracts a broad-band estimate of the seismic reflectivity and.Introauction to Seismic Inversion Methods Brian Russell Finally. indicating that the major features of the impedance havebeen successfullyrecovered. Part 6 . Figure 6. Figure 6.14 shows portion of t•e input stack. al lows us to invert to an acoustic impedance section which retains the major geological features of boreholelog data. Figure 6. by the introduction of 1inear constraints.15 showsthe a •D extracted reflectivity.

15.17 A comparison of the inverted seismic data and the sonic log at well location.sion Methods Brian Russell Figure 6.. Part 6 . 21 .16 Inversion of reflectivity shown Figure 6.Sparse-spike Inversion . in SEISMIC INVERSION WELL + SONIC LOG Figure 6.Introduction to Seismic Inver.

Introduction to Seismic Inversion Methods Brian Russell 6. The first part of the paper discussesthe noi se-free convolutional model. Another method of.recursive. the two namesrefer to separate aspects the of method. This method of and is also often referred to as the linear programming method.3 The L 1 Norm Method -__LI _ _ _ i . single trace inversion which uses a "sparse-spike" assumption the L1 norm is method. et al (1983) show that we can reduce this nonuniqueness by supplying more information to the problem. Part 6- Sparse-spike Inversion 6- 22 . developed primarily Dr. where x(t) = the seismictrace. This averaged reflectivity is missing botht•e high andlow frequency range. The authors point out that if a high-resolution aleconvolution is performed the seismictrace. However. and this can lead to confusion.the methodusedto solve the of problem is linear programming. by DougOldenburg UBC. x(t) --w(t) * r(t). Inverse Theory andApplications (ITA). Actually. w(t) --the wavelet. The basic theory of this methodis found in a paper by Oldenburg. j--! =1 ift:• . such as the layered geological model •= r(t) rj6(t where 0 if t •l• --•. et el (1983). Although there are an infinite number ways in which the of missing frequencycomponents can be supplied. Oldenburg.andis accurate only in a band-limitea central range of frequencies. -l•). Themathematical model usedin the construction the algorithm is of the minimization the L1 norm.18. as shown at the top of Figure6. an• r(t) -. an• . the resulting estimateof the reflectivity can on be thought of as an averagedversion of the original reflectivity.the reflectivity.

moUified fro•. (c) Spectrum (b). (e) Deconvolutionof (•). (•) Estimated reflectivity.IJdE•(•J ..q Oldenburg al (1983). (f) Spectrum (U). (i) Spectrumof (•).O [HZJ joo j25 I I ! Figure 6.50 FR F. Part 6- Sparse-spike Inversion 6- 23 . of (d) Low frequencymodeltrace. et (b) Input reflectivity.18 Synthetic test of L1 NormInversion. (a) Input impedance. (g) Estimatedimpedance of from L1 Norm method.0 o T.Introduction to Seismic Inversion Methods Brian Russell b ß I ß m ß m • 1 m e f 0.

Sparse-spike Inversion 6- 24 . will extremely fine not be fully structure.-1. The two norms are shownbelow. Oldenburg's1085 CSEG to aleconvolution and Let f and g be two portions of seismic traces. Part 6 . Notice that the L1 norm of wavelet whereas the L2 norms are both the same. convention course' "Inverse theory with application seismograminversion"). TrueL2 norm. The above constraint will thus restrict our inverted result to a "sparse" structure so that reflection coefficients. which in turn equates to a "sparse-spiKe" reflectivity function.le. minimizing the L1 norm would reveal that g is a "preferred" seismic trace based on it's sparseness. Now. on the other hand. applied to the trace x: x1 : i--1 xi and x2: i:1 xi the The fact that the L1 norm favours a "sparse" structure is shown in following simple example. The other key difference in the linear programmingmethod is that the L1 norm is minimized rather than the L2 norm. where' f: (1.1 + 1 : 2 and gl = g is ' smaller than the L1 norm of f. the layered earth model equates to a "blocky" impedance function. (Taken from the notes to Dr. is defined as the square root of the sumof t•e squares of the seismic trace values. Hence. the previous equation is considered as the constraint to the inversion problem.thods Brian Russell Mathematically. The L1 norm is defined as the sum of the absolute values of the seismic trace.0) and g : (0.Introduction to Seismic Inversion •. such as very small inverted.0) .%•. The L2 norms are therefore' The L1 normsare given by' fl .

Introduction to Seismic Inversion Methods Brian Russell (a) Input sei smic data (b) Estimated refl ec ti vi ty (c) Final impedance Figure 6. 1983) Part 6 .Sparse-spike Inversion 625 .19 L1 14orm metboOapplied to real seismic data. (Walker and Ulrych.

i co.Oldenburg al. the reliable frequency band is honored whileat the same a sparsereflectivity is time created. The results of their. t • ). Part 6Sparse-spike Inversion 6- 26 . From I Con. andTayloretal.w I .19(b) The L1 Norm(Linear Programming. they considered problem the timedomain. 1979). The processingflow •or the linear programming inversion method shown is below.i i I. 1973..1985). (Oldenburg.' Pm'm. algorithm on synthetic data are shown the at bottom of Figure6. however.Introduction to Seismic Inversion MethoUs Brian Russell Several other authors had previously considered the L1 norm solution in deconvolution (Claerboutand Muir. Theactual implementation the L1 algorithmto real of seismicdata has been done by Inverse Theory andApplications(ITA).ect.)absolute reflection strengU•.18. series.'. That is..e (t) ß i i i i i I i i I Fourier of (t)> I Trans••<•r i Scale Data Const.straints I From Logs 'Well ii & i Unear Programing Invemion Assume n.o.w suggested the in et solving the problem using frequency domain constraints.Residu o. a reflection Minimize the sum of FulFBand Reflectivity Series r (t) Signal to Noise Enhancement and Display Preparation Integration to Obtain Impedance Sections Figure 6. $tackins•_V'elocitles mints.) Method. InterPreter'= Stacl<ed CMP section <r(t)>= r(t)©w(t) t ß . r()ß (t-•q is spame.

20 denburg.:8 . s.5 1.6 1.2. 1985' Inputseismic datasection L1Norm to inversion.2 tO0 90 80 70 60 50 40 30 20 tO 1.Sparse-spike Inversion 6- 27 .7 1.0 2ø2 Figure 6.Introduction to Seismic Inver.4 1.ion Methods Brian Russell TSN 1. (O1 Part 6 .3 1.

Introduction to Seismic Inversion Methods Brian Russell Figure 6.21.19 showsthe application of the above technique to an actual seismic line from Alberta. superimposed on the final reflectivity Part 6 . let us consider a dataset fromAlberta which has been processeU through the LP inversion method.Sparse-spike Inversion 6- 28 . In the final inversion notice that the impedance has been estimate using a grey level scale.2D and the final inversion in Figure 6. It should be pointed out that a three trace spatial smootherhas been applied to Finally. The input seismic is shownin Figure 6. The data consist of 49 traces with a sample rate of 4 msec and a 10-50 Hz bandwidth. seismic section. The figure shows linear programming the reflectivity the final and impedanceestimates below the input results in both cases. The constraints useU here were from well log data.

7 1. 1985 Part 6 -Sparse-spike Inversion 6- 2-9 .21 for Reflectivity and grey-level plot of impedance the L1 Norminversion of data in Figure 6.1 2.8 1.9 2.Introduction to SeismicInversion Methods Brian Russell 1.0 2. (O1 denburg.2 Figure 6.20.6 1.

The sequence ! of pages includes the following: .the porous Leduc reef. and . Use the a blocked off version of the sonic log.the Verilog inversion.4 Reef P roblee ß _ Onthe next fewpages 'is a comparison betweena recursiveinversion procedure (Verilog) anda sparse-spike inversionmethod (MLD). showing the well location. . (3) Compare reefal events on the seismic and the two inversions. at .the Calmar shale (which overlies the Nisku shaly carbonate). . and BaseUon the these data handouts.the MLD inversi on. (g) Identify and color the following events in the reef zone.Introduction to Seismic Inversion Methods Br•an Russell 6. . (Hint.the original seismic line.a sonic log and its derived reflecti vt ty..a synthetic seismogram both polarities.the 1retort shale. (4) Determine for parallelism which section tells you the most about the reef zone? Part 6- Sparse-spike Inversion 6- 30 . do the following interpretation exerc i se: ([) Tie the synthetic to the seismicline at SP76.use reverse polari ty syntheti c). .

Part 6- Sparse-spike Inversion 6- 31 ..-- .. tiC. . COEF. 26 Hz REFL..22 Sonic Log and synthetic at the reef well.-- . DEPTH lib VELOCI •¾ Eft....Introduction to Seismic Inversion Methods Brian Russell Rickel..•ri es onlg Figure 6. Ilql•./sec.. .Sonic Pei. g Phas• 3g Ns.m $11qPLE I HTI3tViILAliPLI •IIi)E I 2 Ns.

47 to Seismic Inversion Methods Brian Russell '49 5! 55 57 ?! '?• .Introduction .'5 ?? B5 $5 99 •41 ß i Part 6- Sparse-spike Inversion 32 .

la.:0 1. E) Part 6- Sparse-spike Inversion 6- 33 .2 1.7 0.8 .Introduction to Seismic Inversion Methods Brian Russell ***__******************************************************** 0.El 1 ..1 1.

G O..2 i i I • eet I i e 1.? IB. i•i ß .1 ß 1.G 1.Introduc%ion [o Seismic Inversion Meltotis Brian Russell 0..Sparse-spike Inversio• 34 .1 ?$ ß i i '111 113 119 123 127 131 I I .0 1. 137 IIIII ß I . I1•11•1111 ii ß lee- IIII . iii ß i iiiiiii iii .• I i eI ei ßl e ß e 1. Part 6 .4 I i i 1 25 27 31 •x $1 $? 67 ?.

Introduction to Seismic Inversion Methods Brian Russell PART 7 .Inversion applied to Thin Beds Page 7- I .INVERSION APPLIED TO THIN BEDS Part 7 .

but remain Clistinguishable down to about one period. Figure 7. Part 7 . A few important points can be noted from Figure 7. The thickness of the layer is given in terms of two-waytime through the layer and is then related to the dominantperiod of the wavelet. the wedge model. That is.1. As the time separation between reflection coefficients becomessmaller. First. The usual wavelet used is a Ricker becauseof the simpl i city of its shape.19 it was shownthat the effect is of reflection coefficients a differentiation one sampleapart and of opposite sign is to which alters the amplitude these simply apply a phaseshift of 90 degrees to the wavelet. the wavelets start interfering with eackotherat a thicknessjust below two dominant periods. Indeed. In this section we will look closer as at the effect thin bed s. spectrum wel1 as the phase spectrum.1 is taken from Widess' paper and shows the synthetic section as the thickness of the layer decreases from twice the dominant period of the wavelet to 1/ZOth of the dominant period. comprehensivel'ook at thin bed effects was done by Widess In this paper he used a model which has becomethe standard for discussing thin beds. the interference between overlapping wavelets becomes more severe. In fact.effectively we can invert The first (1973). in Figure 6. of wavelets on thin beds and how . and convolvewith a wavelet. Next create the reflectivity response from the impedance. consider a high velocity laye6 encased a low velocity layer (or vice versa) and allow the thickness in of the layer to pinch out to zero.1 Thin Bed Analysis One of the problemsthat we have identified in the inversion of seismic traces is the loss of resolution caused by the convolution of the seismic wavelet with the earth's reflectivity.Intro4uction to Seismic Inversion Methods Brian Russell 7. (Note that what is refertea to as a wavelength his plot i s actually twice the dominant in period). the effect more of of the wavelet.Inversion applied to Thin Beds Page 7- g .

1 Effect of bed thickness on PI•OPAGA! ION I NdC ACnOSS TK arO) .. reflection waveshape. 1986) . i _ -__ _ . .. \ ...2 A typical detection and resolution cha•t used to interpret bed thickness from zero phase seismic data. .8 1.z I (c) Synthetic seismic model. ('Hardage.Inversion applied to Thin Beds Page 7- 3 . 2. _ i i .Introduction to Seismic Inversion Methods Brian Russell Figure 7. anU (d) Tuning parameters as measured from resul ting waveshape. _ Part 7 ._1 •). .4 . (b) Wavelet shapesat top and bottom re fl ectors.4 / -0. .where (a) Thin-bed model. l. .0 THIN REGIME BED J PEAK-TO-TROUGH/ AMPLITUDE 0.0 < 0. .. -40 0 MS 20 40 TWO-WAY TRUE THICKNESS (MILLISECONDS) Figure 7.• i . --t (C) (D) 5O ... •'-----.

Since the dominant period (T) of a 20 Hz Ricker is 50 msec. A more quantitative way to measurethis information is to plot the peak to trough amplitude difference and i sochron across the thin bed. Notice that the wedge starts at trace 1 with a time thickness of 100 msec and thins down to a thickness of 2 msec..4. The impedance model is shown in Figure 7.. etc. and displays a velocity decrease in the thin bed rather than an increase. considered to be the thin bed threshhold. This simply inverts the polarity of Widess' diagram.3. A 20 Hz 'Ricker wavelet was usedto create the synthetic.. T/2 at trace 37. Parl•'7 . a thin bed model was set up and was inverted using both recursire inversion and maximum-likelihood aleconvolution. 7. This amplitude is a maximum 1/4 period. T at trace 25. This is done in Figure 7.2 In. 1/4 the dominant period is below which it is difficult obtain fully resolved reflection coefficients. versionCamparison T.. The resulting synthetic seismogram is shownin Figure 7.Introduction to Seismic Inversion Methods Brian Russell Below a thickness value of oneperiodthe wavelets Start merginginto a single wavelet. The at amplitude is appraoching zero at 1/•0 period.the wedge hasa thicknessof 2T at trace 1. Beds Page 7 --'4 '•- . That is that the amplitude is a maximum a thickness of 1/4 the wavelet dominant period. Thus. but note that the resulting waveform is a gO degree phase shifted version of the original wavelet. taken from Hardage (1986)..'inverslYn 'ap'pl 1•o led Thin'.one time sample. This diagram quantifies what has already been seen qualitatively the seimsic section.or ..hinBees of ß To test out this theory...•. increase and an amplitude increase is observe•. and decreases from this point down. at and to also that this is the lower isochron limit.

Inversion applied to Thin BeUs Page 7- 5 . o lOO 200 .3 True impedance wedge from model.Introduction to Seismic Inversion Methods Brian Russell 4 8 12 16 20 24 28 32 36 40 44 48 lOO 200 3OO 400 ß 500 Figure7. 300 ß 400 500 Figure 7. convol ved with Part 7 .4 Wedgemodel reflectivity 20 HZ Ricker wavelet.

ß every wiggle on the section has been interpreted as a velocity. is Uue to the banu-limited nature of the Ricker wavelet. has been resolved therefore we say that the bed thickness itself or 1/4 period. Notice that there'are two major problems with recursire inversion. resolution limit is the sameas that of Widess. nature to Next. to componentwould ado recursire phase of the inversion. ß In this case. let us consider the effect of performing a recursire inversion on the wedgemodel. Remember. due to the broad-band limit However.5. low frequency little information to this test. has estimate• ß A second problem is that. consider The the the constraint used was simply a wedge has been much better inversion.5. the in the vertical =irection. the top of the weUge appears "pulled-up" at the right side of the plot as the inversion has trouble with the interfering recursire inversion wavelets. the shape of the of has still been observeU.even though sparse-spike methods give an output section that is visually more appealing than recursively inverted sections. First.Inversion applied to Thin Beds Page 7- 6 . low resolution limit of 1/4 of the dominant _ i _ i mk Part 7 .. that this is a two-way time. notice that the resolution That is. the thickness of the beU has only been resolved downto about 25 msec. although we know velocity seven that there are actually This result only three distinct at least units in the section. there does not appear to be a way to break the sei smic peri od. In summary. More Uescriptively. Also. ramp. the maximum-likelihood inverted inversion method also failed resolve bed thickness below 1/4 dominant period. recursively The "pUll-up" observed the on section is also in evidence here. linear defined. This theoretical down to 12. a maximum-likelihood inversion of the weOge.Introduction to Seismic Inversion Methods Brian Russell First. show the effects that the Note that the It low frequency component was not added into better of the initial addition of was also felt the the solution of Figure 7. which is 1/2 of the dominantperiod.5 msec. The inversion result is shownin Figure 7.

Introduction to Seismic Inversi. 300 400 500 .... in 4 ' 8 12 16 ' • i ' 20 ' I i 24 28 32 36 40 44 48 100-.4......6 Maximum-likelihoodderived impedance wedge of moUel shown i n Figure 7..on Methods Brian Russell 4 o 8 12 16 20 24 28 32 36 40 44 48 300- 400.4... Figure 7....5 Recursive inversion of wedge modelshown Figure 7..Inversion applied to Thin Beds Page 7- 7 .. .. . Part 7 . Figure 7.

.MODEL-BASED INVERSION _ _ m m L ß ..[ntroductJon to Seismic Inversion Methods Br•an Russel• PART 8 ..Model-based Inversion Page 8 - . • Part 8 .

Notice that this method is intuitively itself. it may be possible to come up with a model that matchesthe data'very well. how do'we update the' model? We shall consider two approaches theseproblems. In first this chapter. (This can be seen easily by noting that there are infinitely manyvelocity/depth pairs that will result in the sametime value. The basic idea of data this approac• is shown in Figure 8. to the generalizedlinear inversion (GLI) approach outlined in CooRe and Schneider (1983}.Introduction to Seismic Inversion Methods Brian Russell 8. we have derived reflectivi-ty information directly from the seismic section and used recursire inversion to produce a final velocity versus depth model. First. any problems in the data itsel f result. band-limited nature of seismic data. very appealing since it avoids the airect inversion of the seismic On the other hand.1. and the Seismic Lithologic (SLIM) method which was developed in Gelland and Larner (1983). and the That is.1. Part 8 .) This is referred to as the problem of nonuniqueness.Model-based Inversion Page 8 - 2 .1 Introducti on In the past sections of the course. To implement the approach shown in fundamental questions. poor amplitude recovery. will be included in the final inversion We have also seen that these methods can be severely affected by noise. the model data and the seismic data? Figure 8. but is incorrect. we shall consider the case of builaing a geologic moUel our seismic data. we need to answer two between what is the mathematical relationship Second. We shall then use the update comparison between real and modeled data to iteratively and comparing the model to results of t•is the model in such a way as to better match the seismic data.

Introduction to Seismic Inversion Methods' Brian Russell CALCULATE ERROR UPDATE IMPEDANCE ERROR SMALL ENOUGH NO YES SOLUTION = ESTIMATE Model Based Invemion Figure 8.Model-based Inversion Page 8 - .1 Flowchart for the model based inversion technique. Part 8 .

.. we may iterate towards a solution. m 2. But what model? eliminatesthe needfor trial GLI and error by analyzing the error between the model output and the observations.m .. .. if we express the model and observations as vectors M:(m m . any set of model parameters will produce an output. applied to virtually any set of geophysical measurements determine the to geologicalsituation whichproduced these results. Part 8 . Mathematically. between the model and observations can be expressed t i = F(ml.. In this way. tn : )T Then the relationship in the functional form vector of n observations.. . true earth model. model. . ..Model-based Inversion Page 8 - 4 .2 Generalized Linear Inversion The generalized linear inversion(GLI) method is a method w•ich can be. MO-Initial•odel. F(Mo): calculated values from initial ... That is.t2. and then perturbing the model parameters in such a way as to produce an output which will produceless error.. . 2.Introduction %o Seismic Inversion Methods Brian Russell 8.2 • •)F(M O) = changecalculated in values. T= ofk parameters. the GLI method will derive the geological model which best fits t•ese observations in a least squares sense...... given a set of geophysicalobservations. Mathematically' F(M) where = F(Mo) aT + M: )F(M O) •M. and T: (t1. AM: changein model parameters. n. mk) vector model 1.. and F(M) : observations. k) Once the ß i : 1. functional relationship ß has been derived between the observations and the model.

(Cooke and Schneider. (d) Recurslye inversion of (b)convolved with wavelet.6 i i 41. i :.i i. (e) GLI inversion of (b). __ b c d e Figure 8. (c) Recurslye inversion of (b).6 41. 1983) Part 8 . - ii .2 A synthetic inversion.5 AMPLITUDE ml 41. i i ii .6 41.Introduction to Seismic Inversion Flethods Brian Russell IMPEDANCE IMPEDANCE (GM/CM3)(FT/SEC) X1000 ß 4. (b) Reflectivity derived from (a) with added multiples.5 I ß . ß ß .5 4. .Model-based I nversi on Page 8 - .5 4. test of the GLI approach to model based (a) Input impedance.

Model-based Inversion Page 8 - 6 . the above equation can be re expressed as a matrix equation •F = A AM.2 is a composite from their paper showingthe results of an inversion applied to single synthetic impedance trace. n is usually greater therefore does not have than k) a true usually not square and referred to as an overdeterminedcase. where A matrix -l: inverse A. a Part 8 .F(MO). This is However. The soluti on to the above equation would appear to be -1 •M = A •F. Figure 8. we use a least squares solution often referred to as the Marquart-Levenburg method(see Lines •M: (AT'A)-IA TZ•F. we still must derive the functional model relationship necessary to relate the model to the observations.1 can be thought of as a flowchart of the GLI methodif we make the impedance update using the methodjust described. The solution is given by case. Therefore. However. of the matrix A is inverse. Figure 8.Introduction to Seismic Inversion Methods Brian Russell But note that the error between the observations and the computed values i s simply •F = F(M). To solve the equation in that and Treitel (1984)). convol utional The simplest solution which presents itself is the standarO s(t) = w(t) * r(t). since there are usually more observations than parameters (that is. Cooke and Schneider (1983) use a modi lied version of the previous formula in which multiples and transmission losses are modelled. where r(t) = primaries only. where A: matrix with of deri vatives n rows anU k columns.

... ß ß ..':... 1983) IMPEDANCE AMPLITUDE (GM/CM3! (FT/SEC)X1000 10 38 10 38 . ... ...:-: ...Model-based •nversion . {Cooke and Sc)•neider.!i!i.3. 1983) Figure 8..:. 1983) Page 8 7 Part 8 .•/-.:.. ? "e'.....o ....4 Model traces derived from m)del in Figure 8..... ß .. Figure 8.'.:.EDANCE x1OOO (GM/CM3)(FT/$EC) . ... Compare with sonic log on right side of Fi•iure 8. :" .• .'..'-'-:..:... :.....-.. :.. -. lO . :.::. ..._ .:.. a (Cooke and Schneider...:.. The well on the right encounters gas sand while the well on the left does not...•::. .' ... '.-_- • 4': :. .3.•.. ...•. .}::! :. .. ..:.... ' .':i•i.. : :. -':::.'....5 GLI inversion of model traces...Introduction to Seismic Inversion Methods Brian Russell • ß .-. • IMP... . .3 2-D model to test GLI algorithm...l A B Figure 8... (Cooke and Schneider. ' 300M$ .

Finally. in which a noise component been has added. there is enough flexibility in this modellingapproach to derive a fairly detailed geological inversion. Another important feature of this particular method is the the parameterizationused.4 shows synthetic traces over the two wells. since those methods incorporate multiples into the solution if they are not removed from the section. Notice that although the solution is not perfect.Model-based Inversion Page 8 - 8 . Wewill now look at both a syntheticandreal example fromCooke Schneider and (1983).2. which consisted of two gas sands encased in shale. A 2-0 synthetic example was next considered by Cooke and Schneider (1983).However. and a thickness in simplified the reduceU the numberof parameters and therefore computation. sJon Methods Brian Russell In Figure 8. notice that the advantage of incorporating multiples in the solution is that. Figure 8. impedancegradient.5 showsthe initial guess and the final solution. Figure 8. The impedance profile of the discovery well is shown the right. on Figure 8. large time. although they are modelled in co•uting the seismic response. Part 8 . Instead of assigninga different value of velocity at each time sample. they are not included in the model parameters.3 showsthe model. Each block was assigneda starting impedance value. for which the gradients have been set to zero.Introduction to Seismic Inver. the gas sand has been delineated. This is a big advantage over recursire methods. One well encountered the sand and the other missed. This geological blocks were defined.

Figure 8.. r -• •.'•. . -cx-r. (Western GeophysicalBrochure) Part 8 ..•. • .• .. .6 I11 ustrated flow chart for the SLIM method..Introduction to Seismic Inversion Methods Brian Russell I I YES ' ' ___•__•J FINALMObE L . ._ ._ x•.• -. t .-'%•. .'•_.. ß -..•.:.-.Model-based Inversion Page 8 - 9 . ..

7 is taken from their paper and shows an layers derived from the major data to be Beside this is the actual stacked Denver basin model which has 73 flat of a sonic log. an initial velocity. initial inverted.! ntroducti on to Sei stoic !nver si on Methods Brian Russel 1 8.t•hesolution is nonunique. it has not. one method that commercially available is the Seismic Lithologic the Modeling (SLIM) method of of a model rather Western Geophysical. of layers Notice that. as The best examples of applying this method to real data are given in Gelland and Larner (1983). been implemented very similar However. The the seismic data and the least-squared error sum is computed.3 Sei_smic L_ithologic Modelling(. The major advantage of this method methods is that noise in the seismic section is not incorporated. geological model is various control created and comparedwith a seismic section. of variable as in the GLI method.SLIM) Although the n•thod outlined in Cookeand Schneider (1983) promise. boundaries Part 8 . points along the line. the The model is defined as a series and thickness at seismic wavelet is either supplied (from a previous wavelet extraction procedure) or is estimated from the data. released. in the GLI method. commercially. density.6 shows a flowchart of the SLIM method taken from a Western brochure.Model-based I nversi on Page 8 - 10 . the direct the method does involve inversion Figure 8. synthetic model is then comparedwith error. The model is perturbed in such a way as to reduce the and the process is repeated until convergence. Also. However. The user has total geological information over classical recurslye control over the constraints and may incorporate from any source. fully than Although the details of the algorithm have not been perturbation of a seismic section. showed much and is as far as this author is appears aware. Figure 8.

Right: Stacked section from DenverBasin. (Gelfand andLarner..Introduction to Seismic Inversion Methods Brian Russell 1kit 1.._• -....Model -based Inversion Figure 8. inversion..1. Page 8 - 2.6 2.0 Initial Figure 8.7 Stack Left' Init)al Denver Basin model seismic.6 1.8 1.0 2.8 2..Final reflectivity from ' -. 1983).4 1.4 .m: 11 F•na• SLIM JnversJon of Figure 8.0 • Field data Synthetic Left: Reflectivity data shown 1n field data.0 .7 spl iceU into Right.8 . 1983).. Part 8 . lkft ..4 1.__ ii m --__ ' -' (Gelfand and Larner. • .

Since is this reflectivity is "spi•y".Model-based Inversion Page 8 - 12 . Finally. Note the 'blocky' nature of the parameter basedinversion when comparedwith the In summary. On the right hand si•e of Figure 8-. or broad band. extracted. it already contains the low frequencycomponent necessary full inversion. propagated throughthe final result Part 8 . Notice the excellent agreement. Figure 8.10 shows for the final inversion compared with a traditional recursire inversion.8 the stack is again shown in its most complexregion. with the final synthetic data is shown after 7 iterations through the program.Introduction to Seismic Inversion Methods Brian Russell In Figure 8. recurs i ve i nvers i on. parameter based inversion i s an iterative I• has the advantage that model1ing scheme errors are not which can reflectivity be thought is of as a geology-based deconvolution since the full as in recursire inversion.9 is the final reflectivity section from which the pseudoimpedance derived.

10 Traditional recursire inversion of Denver Basin line from Fi gur. 1983) W lkft 50011 N ß 114 S mile ß 114 S mile . {GelfanUand Larner.9 Figure 8.7 1.• E 1. 1983) Part 8 .Model-based Inversion Page 8 - 13 .7 19 Fi gure 8.Introduction to Seismic Inversion Methods Brian Russell w 1 lkft 500-ft N • - 114 S mile 114 S E mile .5 l m ß . 8.7.9 Impedance section derived from SLIM inversion of Denver Basln 1 ine showni n Figure 8.7. e (Gelfana anU Larner.

therefore x = A -1 y.ics Matrix theory shows in every aspect of geophysicalproocessing.Before up looking at generalized matrix theory. we see that the solution is However.appljc. let us considerthe application of matrices to the solution of a linear equation. 3 or 2 x1 x2 ß 1 -1 The sol ution is. -2 -1/5 1 3 1 1 x2 Part 8 .Model-based Inversion Page 8 - 14 .we Could . x1 or 1 . By inspection.•at.s.Introduction to Seismic Inversion Methods Brian Russell Appendix 8-! Mat_r_ix .x2 = 2. For example. let 3x1+ 2 : 1. probably the most important application.haveexpressed the equations in the matrix form A X = y. ions_inGe•ophy. and 2x x1.

s In this case we have more equations than unknowns. underdetermined) or more equations than unknowns which case the situation (in is is calleU overdetermined). In matrix terms. 2x x1.i Overd. we either have vector fewer of dimension N.Model-based Inversion Page 8 - 15 . reducingthe prø•lem the to square matrix case.thods Brian Russell In the above equations we had the and the problem t•erefore that the problem can be set up as a same numberof equations as unknowns means had a unique answer. 1 The overdetermined system of categoriesconsistent an• extending our earlier example.etermined s••t Lin. In this case. 1.the underUetermined case of little interest to us since there is no unique solution. These are best described by (a) Con•s. ion.. this square matrix of dimension N x N times a Generally. equations • can be split into two separate inconsistent. the reUunUant equations may simply be eliminated. consider adding a third equation to our earl ier example. In geophysical problems.earEqua. The overde termi neU case is (!) of muchinterest since it occurs in Surface consi stent resi dual statics.le. equations than However. in geophysical problemswe are Uealing with unknowns (in which case the situation is called the real earth anU the equations are never as nice. but the extra equations are simply scaled versions of t•e others.2 Part 8 .x2 : 2. anU 5x 5x : 10. the following problems: (2) Lithological modelling. For examp.Introduction to Seismic Inversion Me.and (3) Refracti on modeli ng. so that 3x1+ 2 : 1.t.

but conveyconflicting information. We may thus reduce the system of equations back to the original form.Z.Introduction to Seismic Inversion Methods Brian Russell This may be written in matrix form as 2 x1 x $ o But notice that the third equation is simply five times the second. 1.x2 -.near d Equa•i. (b) Inco. there is no solution to the problem which will solve all the equations. so that 3x1+2x -. is.i. ten•tO•verd.Model-based Inversion Page 8 - 16 . ns.L.on? In this case the extra equations are not scalea versions of other This is equations-in the set.2 This may be written in matrix form as 3 2 -I -5 xI x2 1 2 8 Part 8 . As an example. Z x1. and therefore conveys no new information. usually the case in our seismic wor• and indicates the presence of measurement noise and errors.1. consider a modification to the preceding equations. e•ermine. In this case. ana 5x $x = 8.

Introduction

to Seismic

Inversion

He.thods

Brian

Russell

**'Now the third equationis not reducible to either of the other two, ana
**

an alternate solution must be found. The most popular aproach is the method

of

least

**squares, which minimizes the sumof the squared error
**

and the observed results. That is,

e=Ax-y,

between the

to

solution

if

we set the error

**then we si reply mini mize
**

n

eTe--I , ez, ....... (e

, en)

2

=

ei ß

Le.

Re expressing the 'preceding equation in terms of the values x, y, and A,

we have

ß

E = eTe (y - Ax)T(y Ax) = -

**= yTy xTATy _ _ yTAx xTATAx. +
**

We then solve the equation

bE_

bxi

The final

equati OhS

solution to

the

least-squares

problem is given by the normal

AT x = A y A T

or x = (ATA)-lATy .

Part

8 - Model-based

Inversion

Page 8 -

17

Introduction

to Seismic Inversion Methods

Br•an Russell

PART g - TRAVELTIME INVERSION

ml ß

i

ii

Part

g - Traveltime

Inversion

Page 9 -

I

Introduction

to Seismic

Inversion

Methods

Brian Russell

Sei smi c Travel

time

Inversion

9,1

Introduction

_ _• L_ , _. _

In

this

section we will

The last term

**look at a type of inversion
**

inversion,

that

goes under

ana seismic

is

**several names, incluUing traveltime
**

tomography.

raypath inversion,

tenUs to be overuseU at the moment, so it

important to use the term correctly. In section 9.3 we shall showan example whic• may be considerea as seismic tomography. As all of t•e other names

suggest, however, seismic traveltime depths, inversion uses a set of traveltime The parameters which are a gross model of earth measurements to infer extracteU are velocities the structure and of the earth.

aria [herefore

structure

can be derived.

Initial)y,

this

**this was considered the ultimate
**

accurate set of velocity

to constrain other types of

goal,

but Jr'has becomeobvious that

versus depth

inversion.

measurements can be used effectively

For example, the'velocities could be used as the low frequency component in recursire inversion, or as the velocity control for a depth migration.

The way in which traveltime

set of times from a dataset.

types of seismic datasetsSurface seismic measurements

inversion is carried out is to first

pick

a

These picks

m•y come from any of three basic

**- shots and geophones on the surface,
**

VSP measurements

- shots. on surface,

geop•ones in well,

and

Cross-hol e measurements

**- s•ots anU geophonesboth in well.
**

Once the times have been picked, they must be made to fit subsurface.

structure.

a model of the examples

In the next section,

we will

look at some straighforwara

of using traveltime picks in order to resolve the earth's velocity and depth

Part

9 - Travel

time

I nversi on

Page 9 -

2

(a) Surface recording. constant velocity block. (c)Cross-hole recording $ R (b) s• (c) Figure 9.2 Travel paths through two blocks of slightly differing veloc-ity.Introduction to Seismic Inversion Methods Brian Russell (a) (b) Figure 9.1 Travel paths through a single.Travel time Inversion Page 9 - . (c) Cross-hole recording Part 9 . (b) VSP recording. (a.) Surface recording. (b) VSP recording.

if p) neitheronecanbe determined a singletimemeasurement.. the velocity(or slowness andthe depth are both unknown. a constant velocityearth.. The objective is thus to in compute the seismic travel path through each box using the traveltime measurements.g this situation is shown. t --•L p (3) Cross-hol e' or p -. velocity the of box the may vary from box to box. ana or p=t/L.! / V. However.keyproblem is how allowthe rays to travel through A here to the boxes.1 shows the travel paths that wouldresult from the three geometry configurationsgiven a square area of dimension L by L.. • ersion Consider simplest the possiblecase. the problem i becomes moredifficult to sol ve.1 would simply be: (1) Surface sei smic' t--Z (z) vsP- L p or p-. t=Lp where p -.t /i•L. f Snell's law is use4.t/Z L.3. The earth is represented a number boxes constantsize and as of of velocity..Travelti In•v. Notice that the equations now would involve three unknowns and only one measurement.• Numerical_Exa•mples of . Figure 9. The first order approximation would be straight rays with no bending. all three sets of measurements contain the sameinformation. This is shown Figure 9. i Pag• g' '- 4' . Althoughvelocity each is a constant. Part-g Travel i'i me'-'i n'ver's on . evengreater from An ambiguity comes into play if we havea single measurement morethan one but box.Introductfon Sef c Inversf Methods to smJ on Brjan Russell 9. In Figureg. However. A more generalmodel proposed Bishop al (lg85) an• Bor•inget al is in et (1986). Note that the traveltimes in Figure 9. Obviously.

Traveltime Inversion Page 9 - 5 .Introduction to Seismic Inversion Methods Brian Russell Source Receiver Figure 9. 1986) Part g . (Bording et al.3 Separation of the earth into small constant vel oci ty blocks for sei stoic travel time inversion.

That is. we have coupled together both surface and VSP measurements. there is no refraction at the velocity discontinuity. this is telling us that the two travel paths spene equal proportions of their paths in eac• box. Let us start with the situation illustrated by Figure 9. this approximation is reasonable. Unfortunately.4 and 9. which means that the inverse is nonrealizable. raypath from S to R wherePl: 1/velocityin box1 P2: 1/velocityin box2 (Z) Fortheraypath S to R2: from t2= Pl • P2. and the reflection point is directly at the center of the two boxes.4.Introduction to Seismic Inversion Methods Brian Russell Let us apply the straight ray approximationin the simplecaseof having simply two blocks of different velocity. t•ere is a single shot with geophonesboth on the surface and in a borehole at the base of the layer. the travel time equations are m (1) For the.).Travel time Inversion Page 9 - 6 . In this case.5. The situations illustrated are obviously oversimplified since we have assumed straight ray approximation in a both boxes. a quick try at solving the above equation will show that O. The solution to the previous equation is then p = A-lt. the total problem can be expressed in matrix form as: • • • 2 Pl P2 tl : t2 •r• •]• or Ap: t . If we assume that the sides of the boxes are unity in length (1 cm or m or km. In this case. However. the Ueterminant of A is Physically. Part 9 . if we assume that the velocities vary only slightly. q• + 2 2 Thus. Two possible recorUing arrangementsare shownin Figures 9.

4 Surface and VSP raypaths for a single shot.5 Surface and VSP raypaths for two separate shots.Introduction to Seismic Inversion Methods Brian Russell P..Travel time Inversion Page 9 - 7 . Part 9 . % Figure 9.'v. R! $• St Figure 9. S x P•" P.

6 -1. we have moveUthe In this shot one-half a box length to t•e left for the recorUing in t•e hole.832) = 0. work out the traveltimes and plug them into the last matrix equati on.Introduction to Seismic Inversion Methods Brian Russell A simple way to remedy this situation is to move the shot for the second.832) = 1. raypath.5. Part 9 . T•at is.6 P2 ' Thus. or B : 33 69 o Thus cos 0 = 0.Travel time Inversion Page 9 - 8 . This is shownin Figure 9. the total problem can be expressed in matrix form as' •[• 1.2 0.6 y = 3/(• x 0.2 Pl P2 Pl tl t2 0.6 with sol ution 1 .85 P2 Problem' Try to solve the above equation when the two velocities and 1.2 2 t1 t2 are 1. the traveltime (1) Forthe raypath S to R from 1 1: tl: 1•Pl+•P2 (2) Forthe raypath S to R from2 2In this case notice from the diagramthat tan 0 : 1/1 $ : 2/3 = 0 6667.8320 and (see figure) x = 1/(2 x 0.2 Therefore t2:1.1 kin/sec.8 y-x=l.0 o. equations are In this situation.2 Pl + 0. case.

1988) Part 9 .Travel time Inversion Page 9 - .Inversion Perturb V(x.Introduction to Seismic Inversion Methods Brian Russell Estimate velocity well at using sonic andVSP log Pick seismic reflection times. by normal tracing ray Stripping . f.6 A possible flowchart for seismic traveltim inversion.fll' Add another layer layers been Final Seismic Model ii Model I is complete.z)byusing V(xo.z).z) byleast squares or manually It. (Lines et al. Figure 9.t Initial Model Estimate V(x. the reflection traveltimes and the theassumptionvertical of rays Start with top layer Layer Computer forward modeltraveltimes..

T. model is complete. •c graphy The term tomography first used in the medicalfield for the imaging was of humantissue using Nuclear MagneticResonance (NMR) and other physical measurements.Travel time Inversion Page 9 - 10 . procedure shownin Figure 9. the process starts with an estimate of the model which. next stage of raytraced. flow traveltime inversion. of it This method can are used in the even though many variations industry. Basically. picks are made from the seismic data.6. measurements are of the earth to Rob Stewart (personal communication) points out that to be analagous with where physical the medical field. stacked CDPdata is usecl. This technique in Chapter 7 of these notes. a new model is computeU. but that much of the technique used by the authors can be consi alered sei smic tomography. but the shot profiles (or CDPprofiles) also be used. Dr. You will find t•at the latter paper introduces the term "cooperative inversion" since both seismic and gravity measurements used are in the inversion. In travel time the is picks can be made from VSP data and the process.3 Seism•i.iven in Bording et al (1986).6. a true seismic tomography experiment would involve aata on more than one side of the portion seismic and VSP.. In this case. shows the chart that they propose for performing be considered quite general.6. traveltime . Part 9 . Figure 9.omo. taken from the paper'by Lines et al (1988). and an error done using the GLI computed between the described Based on the error computed.Introduction to Seismic Inversion Methods Brian Russell 9. In the seismic field it has come to mean the reconstruction of the velocity field of the earth by the analysis of traveltime measurements. the model is is the computed and observea In the arrivals. the inversion is done layer by layer until Although any traveltime inversion can be considered tomography. taken completely around t'he be imaged. and Lines et al (1988}. could As well. refraction traveltimes. Excellent overviews of tomographyare g. Next. is deriveU from the sonic log and VSP measurements. in the flowchart shownin Figure 9. such as surface imaged object.

0 .1 ---': .. • ...2 x I• vsP SOURCE Figure 9... •::•=•'•:"•..-:'::. (b) (a) Fi gue 9........ (Stewart and Chui. ...7 • 3-D SOURCE • GEOPHONE Surface geometry for tomographicimaging example.5 ß -" '•'•":'": fi'•L .:• • ß mo•w.4 o..'•.8 (a) Picked events on 3-D seismic.. oJ 0.• --'-.o..i•r..• . •..". (b) Picked events on VSP.• :•(. 1986) Part 9 .• . . .Z•!.....::"--'::':.•h..Introduction to Seismic Inversion Methods Brian Russell •0 _ m m ß i WlC roll i -1Z 0 .' • . 1987) CDP Une898921 8960 8980CDP 8901 89 D•B 89 89Une 0...Traveltime Inversion Page 9 - 11 .:iE)•". (Chiu and Stewart.. 185 9O7 Well C VSP Depth (m) 205 0 460 730 895 •1o ?6o 895 0..

a lot of measurements were available to imagethe subsurface. Glauconitic channel sand which containeU heavy oil.7 shows the •ensity of information along a portion of one seismic line.8{b) showsthe picked VSP from well C. g Wel1 log curves and synthetic showing Glauconitic channel. including well log data. The tomographic technique involved picking events from both the VSP first arrivals and the prestack 3-D seismic data. Chiu and Stewart created a synthetic model. ZERO PHASE BANDPASS 10/15 .8 shows the various datasets used in the tomographicimaging.10(a) and (b) show raytrace plots for the VSP and surface Uata. respectively. clearly indicating the Glauconitic channel. Figures g. Finally. Figure 9. To test the method. The method involves starting with a simple modelof the subsurface and perturbing this modelusing the errors between the picked traveltimes and the raypath times through the model. Figure 9. DENSITY (kg/m 3 ) VE-OCITY(m/sec) SOIl 030O lime (sec) till ß IO# ß Figure g. Traveltime inversion wasdone by the technique described in Chiu and Stewart (1987).8(a) showsthe stacked seismic data with the key events indicated and Figure 9. and Chiu and Stewart (1987). This raytracing method differs from the method shown in offset. The objective was a Since this was a development survey. (Stewart and Chiu 1987) Part 9 . and 3-D seismic.6 since is done a nonzero source to receiver and also the VSP data.9 showsthe well l'ogs and synthetic from a different well.80/110 Hz NORMAL RFC through this model. Figure 9. Figure 9. Figure 9. VSP.Introduction to Seismic Inversion Methods Brian Russell An example of using multiple datasets for seismic tomography is found in Stewart and Chiu (1986).Travel time I nversi on Page 9 - 12 .

Travel time Inversion (Chiu and Stewart. ii Voity 2.0 2. (b) VSP raypaths through model.Introduction to Seismic Inversion Methods Brian Russell offset (krn) 0. 1987) Page 9 - 13 .0 . (Chiu and Stewart.10 {•) (a) Surface raypaths through model used to test inversion.0 4.0 1. Part 9 .O --- 1.0 0.o 2.11 Results of tomographicinversion of model data using VSPand surface data. 1987) Offset (km) 0.0 # $Oul•CE i i A •OPHONE' i i i i (a) Figure 9.0 ! ! i 1! - a Figure 9.

can the result is an improvedproduct. To make the test morerealistic. Notice that the velocities fit quite well with the averaged sonic log velocities.13. Notice that thecorrect resulthasbeen obtained Let us now return to the case study described initially. The final velocity/depth model is shown in Figure 9. the Glauconitic channels have been well delineated. The final inversion is not shown due to colour reproduction limitations.Travel time Inversion Page 9 - 14 .Introduction Seismic to Inversion Methods Brian Russell Figure9. in four iterations.12. in and a full seismicinversionbased the maximum-likelihood on technique. This velocity model was usedto produce both a depthmigrated seismic section. The depth tie is also excellent. As can be seen in Figure 9. shown Figure 9. Each set of data acts as a constraint the others. The conclusion that the authors on make that if severaltypesof geophysical is measurements be intergrated.11 shows results of the inversion the process usingboththe VSP and surface seismicdata. Part 9 . random noise was added travel'time to picks.13.

:..12 Results of tomographic inversion of G1 auconitic channel. .0 6. I.....0 TC)iliO6RAPmC (C) INVERSION . Tomographic velocities of Figure9..:.' l.. ß .1987) and .? .Introduction to Seismic Inversi on Methods Brian Russell -1.._:_......8(a). Part 9 .a•... •..12 have been used.. ' 't ''•"'... . : 900 ...Travel time 1986) Page 9 - 15 ...0 Offset (km) 0. Inversion (Stewart an• Chiu. J• 800 . 13 Depth migration seismic shown of aata in-Figure 9...0 LO Velocity Oan/s) 0.--:' Depth (m) 1000 11oo 1200 1300 1400 Fi gure g....•.4sl•l . i!' ? :'": ""' ""' .i. ' ß -. (ChiU Stewart.0 3.SONCL06 (1:2) Figure 9.t.. ß : •m.._....

Introduction to Seismic Inversion Methods Brian Russell PART 10 .Amplitude versus Offset Inversion Page 10 - 1 .AMPLITUDE VERSUS OFFSET INVERSION Part 10 .

/ 2 vary between 0 and 0. we have considered each reflection coefficient to be the result of a seismic ray striking the interface between two layers at zero degrees. there is P.Z . seen many times.5. Indeed. Layer i+1. is simply The formula. density of each of the layers. V = P-wave vel oci ty. Z: and When we allow the seismic ray to strike acoustic impedance.•y. The variation of offset also involves another physical parameter Poisson's ratio. which is related to P-and S-wave velocity by the formula •' =- (Vp VS•.to and the reflection coefficient becomes a function of the P-wave velocity. transmitteU P-wave amplitude. we have discusseO only the inversion of zero-incidence seismic traces. ß reflected called S-waveamplitude. That is.Introduction to Seismic Inversion Methods Brian Russell 10. In this case.and transmittedS-wave amplitude.1 AV.O Theo. as in a common shot recording. a much .ivi zi+. the 'reflection coefficient is a simple function of the P-wave velocity and density in each of the layers.zi ri= Yoi+iVi+l+ yOi iV where r: •Zi+l Z + i reflection coefficient yo: density. there are now four curves that can be derived: amplitude reflected with P-wave amplitude.Amplitude versus Offset Inversion Page 10 - 2 .more complicated S-wave conversion situation and In this case. Layer i overlies the boundary at nonzero incidence angles._ Until now.. which we have i+lvi+ . results. S-wave velocity. Poisson's ratio can theoretically Part 10 .

' 'cos2•.•x.1 Reflectedandtransmittedrays createdwhen P-wave a strikes the boundary between layers.Introduction to Seismic Inversion Methods Brian Russell $i Sr at. -•sin2•..n-•:/ •-cos2+. 1981). •t BOUNDARY (X2' •2 t $• Figure 10. .•D./ 2+.2 Zoeppritz equations which describe amplitudes the of the rays shown Figure 10.Ampl rude versus Offset i Inversion Page 10- 3 . in (Waters. Part 10 . •o. 1981). ./ Figure 10.1. two (Waters.

several effects.5(a) shows stackeOseismic section witl• three apparent "bright a spot" anomalies.2 gives the final form of the equations. in in the gas sand itself. and B actually Uisplay an AVOeffect. Figure 10. Ostrander (1984) showed that for a significant changein Poisson's ratio. observeU Figure 10. and of they are fixed in the diagram).they can be rearranged in the form of a ½ x 4 matrix equation Ax--y with soluti on x = A-ly . Unfortunately.Introduction to Seismic Inversion Methods Brian Russell The equations from which the ampl'itude variations can be derived are callea the Zoeppritz equations.Amplitude versus Offset Inversion Page 10 - 4 . The three common offset stacks. Ostrander showed can go from in such extreme cases.5(a) and (b). this effect can Figures 10.1 that. can change from 0. shownin Figure 10. coefficient positive to negative for increase a decrease in Poisson's ratio or from negative to positive coupled with an for an increase Poisson's ratio coupled with a decrease in P-wave velocity. This Poisson's ratio change is most noticeable in a gas sand. also taken from Ostrander.4 in the encasing shales to as low as 0. Figure 10. a major changein the P-waveamplitude coefficient can be seenas a function of offset. some the signs were wrong. They are taken from • textbook by Waters (however.3(b) shows the result of amplitude inUeed be versus offset modelling of the P-wave on a common offset stack. authors have discussed amplitude versus offset However. where the ratio . Over the years. these authors concluded that the effect would be negligible on seismic data. Since we have four equations with four unknowns.1 showsthe seismic rays across a boundary.3(a) showsthe gas sand model that Ostrander used and Figure 10.5(b). the P-wave reflection in P-wave velocity. Part 10 . reflection shows that coefficients. and Figure 10. They are derived from the continuity of displacement and stress in both the normal and tangential directions across an interface between two layers. In a landmark paper. only wells A anU B were productive. indicate that only locations A .

.3 (b) Computed for reflections from top and bottom interfaces of model s•own in Figure 10..41 IN SAND 0..o o*o ...40 3 (•'3 =0.3 1984) 0. NO GAS .2 t.o.. ..-'.Introduction to Seismic Inversion Methods Brian Russell GAS t•t *':*"*•* .. • . IlL _ -_.-'-e' OF I0 o 20 o 30 ø 40 ø 0 . 0.3 (a) Synthetic gas sand model. $=10....•::..14 ß :o....•.. m m im .3 (a).. oø ....3 -0. i (Ostrander.. ...ooo.o ... .. SHALE •---' Vl• =8.Amplitudeversus Offset Inversion Page 10 - . ..4 reflection coefficients as a function of offset Figure 10. o -0. 0..o... .. (Ostrander.. ßo.2 -0.000 /4) =2.1 0 ANGLE INCIDENCE •.000 Z /32 -"2. 11 i .. ..... ß 1984) Part 10 .ooo.4 Figure 10..

.Introduction to Seismic Inversion Methods Brian Russell The method useU to identify this effect is only partly qualitative. im m VISUAL .Amplitude versus Offset Inversion Page 10- 6 .m NO MODEL MATCHES REALITY . and can be diagrammedas shownbelowINPUT SEISMIC BUI L D MODEL SHOT PROFILES COFFSTACK COMPUTE SYNTHETIC .4 Flow Chart for Manual AVO Inversion Obviously. previously in normal-incidence Part 10 .. both of ß inversion of AVO the context of which have been looked at inversion. . • MANUALLY COMPARISON - CHANGE PARAMETERS . Figure 10. this visual meth'od comparison of leavesmuch be Oesired. to We will therefore look at several methods for the qualitative data.

il ' ' ß .. .5(a) S•acked seismic line showing"brigh• spot" anomalies.. Fiõure 10...... I• ' ....:--. _ 1...-. ß . titIll..'...•.. . '....o....... .-•~.. . .•..-.. ß ß -....•.....•:. .....• ' --?.• ...• ':'.:...-.• . !984) Figure 10..0 ..::... ........... .•.:...' • ! • • ' " -• ß..""':"' '-' ' .--..... .-.•...... ' t'-' • " : "• :....d ! :lit I•ll""' ....... '!.-.acks over locations A. 6952' 1012 ß .leeile*e...•..•... • ...:: ...•.i:-.. ß .•.-•" ":'.."•':......•.. 't . 2.. !: ß l._... I i-• m I..•. Notice the AVO increase on A and B. .•.:•: '..1.....::= .._: ..:":" .d..' re.....-. m * .. ..5 .........'•. .. .-': • . . ...... .. ' 0.'. andC from stackedsection in Figure 10. 2. . •. .."-'•1..l:... ol..-...... ..... ø..5 •'. i •. 0...-....•...: : •_•_•. .•..•e.•r. .1•.. ..-.:•:.... _-'_'_-•..""-•.. 120 ii I I 110 100 ß IIII II 90 i •0 ß 70 0..:. Illl•lll. m ß ..•:?.*.e*'11:..:...5 ..111tl• 6•$•' 1012' ........ .-....... '' -' ' : • I •....'•1•-..... (Os!..=i......."•i '......'.•...•... --. ._ .:.le ßß •. .:•:-1:.'.I.....•:.-..:-r-'_..0 ' • •...".•._..". .'_'•"' .... eellie ...•.. ß•-...'..:...•..'""'.0 -:........ SP 80 ":l:1111il• ...i...... • • ... .......•pli[ude versus Offset Inversion Page 10 - 7 ...•. ..'..5(D) Common offset sl.. • '.?:•-•=.... ..'-'?'?'?'?'?'•L--•.. .......'*' .I.. .-.... •... ........ ..•=..... .._•. ...... :" '}i:...:. B...... '.. (Osl:rander.• .----?'" '1 "' ' '.. •.ß ' ß ß I..l_'. Loca%ions A an• B are known gas........=•......c• .'.:.=:......•'•......:.-...':: 'i: .. '.... ... •.. .....4...1111el'•-.0 ... ""1'.. •..... ....5/a)..•.•_-•". _•:_..:....=0.::.... "1.I..:: ß I.'t IIt•'•l'..='.' ß ß ß .i•... "_...' ..•..-.... <?--r.._.. t. I•l.... : ' • -':.5 "•"":": ... :. • ... 12. ...-•. ' ' I'*O....' "=-" il •.....-.".•:..":'. ... 1984) Par[ 10 .•...•.. .•'.. ........'.'-'-... :....A..........Introduction to Seismic Inversion Methods Brian Russell 1•0 170 160 1•50 140 ' 130 i i i.. ...."':.. ß '.•. ß ...ranOer. ......

Part 10 .GLI) there were three important components' geological a relationship anU 9. This or common offset stack. Our physical relationship between this model ana seismic CDPprofiles And. Ourmodel of the earth is a series of layers with t•e el astic 'parameters of P-and S-wave vel oci ty. wil 1 be cal led Now. The result respectively. let us apply the AVO inversi In secti on 10. AM: change in model parameters.anU a to stacked data on. : D) where aF(Mo•) Mo:initial earthmodel. density. finally.AVOobservations. was derived using the Zoeppritz equations. inversion.re described. a physical between the earth and a set of geophysical measurements. M: true earth model. and Poi sson'S ratio. and •)F(M O) i)--••: change calculated in values. F(M) -. This method discussea both chapters8 Was in applied inversion method to an• traveltime unstacked data. it is possible to set up a to t•e AVO problem similar solution is to the solution found for zero-offset FIM) F(M + •)M bM. set of geophysical observations. of the manualmethod.Introduction to Sei stoic Inversi on Methods Bri an Russell 10.1. anO is The implementation is simply a variation sinownon the next page. ß modelof the earth.Amplitude versus Offset Inversion Page 10 - 8 . F(MO): Zoeppritz values from initial model. the three components needed to perform GLI inversion on AVO Uatawe.2 AVO Inversion by GLI Recall that in the theory of generalized linear inversion (. the observations are the picked amplitudes and times of events on a CDPprofile GLI solution data. By computingderivatives from the Zoeppritz matrix.

Amplitude versus Offset Inversion Page 10 - .6 AVO inversion by the GLI method Part 10 .Introduction to Seismic Inversion Methods Brian Russell INPUT SEISMIC SHOT PROFILES COFFSTACK J i COMPUTE SYNTHETIC PICK AMPLITUDES STORE COMPUTED AMPLI TUDES i COMPUTE ERROR t • COMPUTE MODEL PARAMETER CHANGE USI NG GLI NO ERROR YES MODEL MATCHES REAbITY . Figure 10.

. This synthetic was of produced simply' by replacingthe zero-incidence amplitudes with the amplitudes derived from the Zoeppritz calculations. three layers have been blocked at depth and a significant Poisson's ratio change has been introduced in the middle block. Transmitted S-Wave .8) • 2• 2. Actually. i Reflected P-Wave .. for layer 3 on right...•: m. consider the integrated well logs shown the left hand on panel of Figure 10.8 m ... mm i Figure 10...nt: 3 Ti. with computed Zoeppritz curves _ _ Part 10 -^mplJtude versus Offset Inve•sJon Page 10- 10 . On the logs.... only the sonic log or P-wave log wasrecorded in the field. ..Introduction to Seismic Inversion Methods Brian Russell Wewill nowlook at an example of GLI inversion of offset data. Ref'l ected S-Wave ..... the P-wave reflection coefficient displays a strong increase of amplitude with offset.......... ZOEPPRII'Z $IHI:LE INTERFFJCE TESTLO TESTLO TESi'DE lE•-S t•... On the right hand side of Figure 10.. The events between 600 and 700 msec display a pronounced amplitude changewit h offset...7.7. $7• Depth: 795 589 1998 Of*f's•:c' . the Potsson ratio wasfixed at 0. The density log was derived from the sonic using Gardner's equation.$TPO Eq.......8 shows same of blockedlogs on the left. amplitude versus First. but shows the set the seismic response the amplitude change on the right...7 Blockedwell logs on left..25. Transmitted P-Wave(-9.. ß . notice that the amplitudeversusoffset curves have been displayed for the third layer.... and the S-wave wasderived from the P-wave and Potsson ratio logs. Figure 10..5 4.... As predicted earlier.

........... ....5 468 . of in A synthetic commonoffset stack and the AVO curves shown on the right of Figure 10.. ... ...Amplitude versus Offset Inversion Page 10- 11 . .) 1 909 727 545 363 181 ... " 268 268 2.....'.. :: .... .... .....o.. •......... .....-. •...... .. •.....IFIUE! POISSOH1 EU usam MODEL (meters................• ........•" ..•............... •ee-.......7......$ Figure 10.... -.....Introducti on to Sei smi c Inversi on Methods Brian Russel 1 20EPPRITZ •EFLECTIUITY tlODEL TESTLOG TESTLOG IEH$ITY1 u•Ym u•/m 9/½½ S-I..7...8 LeftRight: A "blowup" the blockedlogs shown Figure 10..L - ß ..... ..... Part 10 ...

8. two parameters were allowed to vary.9 showsa set of CDP gathers which correspond to the model. The gathers are a realistic modelled dataset and were generatedwith no changein Poisson's ratio. ß ß Next. Since the gathers are noisy and contain fewer tracesthanthe synthetic profile shown Figure CDP in 10. In the inversion.10 shows display a of the logs. and a scalar which relates the magnitude of the seismic picksto themagnitudetheactual of 'amplitudes. Traces within a CDP/offset window were gathered and stacked. and the resulting gathersare often referred as to' Ostrander gathers. and common offset stack.Introduction to Seismic Inversion Methods Brian Russell However. above the the amplitudes of the event on the contanon offset stack corresponding the event displayed in Figure 10.the Poisson's ratio in the layer of interest. Part 10 -Amplituae versus Offset Inversion Page 10 - 12 .ack is described in Ostrander's paper. Figure 10. The mismatch in amplitudes is now obvious. Figure 10. synthetic model. The geometry of this st.7 were picked. The event to anomalous layer was also picked.8 reflect the reality of the situation? Figure 10.9 CDPgathers from a seismic dataset corresponding to synthetic shownin Figure 10. resulting in increased signal to noise. does the change seen in Figure 10.8. The picks were then used along with the computedamplitude versus offset curve to invert the data by the GLI method. theywere used to create a common offset stack.

I ntroducti to Sei on stoic nversi Methods I on

B an Russel ri 1

I NVER$]ON FULL HOIIEL

**TESTL TESTL I)EN$I $-WI:IU POI$$
**

_ us/m u•/• g/cc us/•

EU

rIO]]EL (meters) 1

909

727

545

353

181

0

COFFSTK1 n,elers ) (

838

6•4

498 :)32

li•E;

0

ItßII ß I

50

I

2•0 2•0 2.5 4•0 ,5

Figure 10.10

A comparison of the synthetic coneon offset stack from Figure 10.8 {middle panel) with a con,nonoffset stack created from the CDPgathers of Figure 10.9 (right panel). T•e left panel showsthe blocked well logs from which

the synthetic was created.

Part 10 - Amplitude versus Offset Inversion

Page l(J-

13

Introduction to Seismic Inversion Methods

Brian Russell

The results of this inversion are shown in Figure 10.11. The figure

**shows change Poisson's the in ratio before after inversion and (dashed line
**

before, solid line = after) on the left hand side. Onthe upper right is shown match the between observed the picksin the upper layer (shown small as

**squares) thefinal theoretical and curve{s•own a solidline). The as lower
**

right shows same the thing for the lower layer.

Finally, Figure10.1Zshows the comparison between the coanon offset stackandthe syntheticmodel after the model been has recomputed the new with amplitude changes theupdated from Poisson's ratio. Noticethe improvement in

the match.

.

!

ß

II•'RSIOH

SIN•E

LI•ER:

I101•ELI

e .e•

Ewnt (2) P. bove Laver

0.042

6.666

.

.

..

O•'•'r• 0.048

Event (3) Belo4a Laver

OO

6.624

0

70O

i

i

i

i

6,8

Poi•s•s

Ratio

e.•

6.606

e

O('•set

S5e

( m)

Figure 10.11

Theresultsof a GLI inversion between computed, the amplitudes

of Figure 10.7and picked the amplitudes theconmon from

offset stackof Figure10.10. Thedashed onthe plot line onthe left is the Poisson's ratio beforeinversion,andthe solid line is after inversion. Theplots on the right show the new computed curves withthe picks(squares) superimposed.

Page 1014

Part 10 - Amplitude versus Offset Inversion

Introduction

to Seismic

Inversion

Methods

Brian

Russell

IHUER$IOH FULL MODœL

MOIlEL2(me•er$)

COFFSTKI ( meters )

EU

909

727

545

363

lB1

B

838

664

498

332

166

Figure 10.12

A replot of Figure 10.10, where the synthetic has been

recomputed using the newPoisson's ratio value.

Part 10 - Amplitude versus Offset

Inversion

Page 10 -

15

[nt•oduct• on t• $e• sm•c [nve•sJ on Methods B• an Russe• ] PART 11 .Velocity Inversion Page 11 - .VEI:OCITY INVERSION Part 11 .

Velocity Inversion Page 11 - . the theory of the method is reviewed also an extensive literature summary. and then look at a few examples. seismic dataset and inverting to a velocity depth section.Veloci. and still As such this technique is closer of depth migration. it does not in to the narrower category of inversion techniques that we have inversion. In this section.v. Our discussion here will Part 11 .n.ty ersi on I.. These techniques haveall involved inputting a stacked. The output of the velocity inversion versus described here is the seismic section properly positioneU in depth. __ 11. and there is An excellent review article this subject is given in Bleistein and Cohen(1982).1 ! ntroduc ti on The last Alth topic to be discussed these notes is the topic of velocity in ough this technique is referred to as inversion. acutally fit been dtscussing in this course. but still band-limiteU. or unstacked.Introduction to Seismic Inversion Methods Brian Russell Part 11 . follow that article. we will look briefly at the theory of velocity on inversion. plotted as seismic to that amplitudes. In this article.

.1 (b) The effect of the velocity inversion methodon synthetic data. (a) Figure 11. (Bleistein and Cohen 1982 ) KILOFEET o 1 -1 KILOFEET o 1 C) ß ii'1 uJ LL m o . (b) The output from the velocity inversion method... (a) A "buried focus"effect.Velocity Inversion Page 11 - . A second example of the effect inversion on and Cohen synthetic data.OFEœT KILOFEET -2 -1 0 I 2 -2 -I 0 I 2 ..2 (b) of velocity (Bleistein .Introduction to Seismic Inversion Methods Brian Russell KII.. (a) Input section with diffraction.. inversion.. 1982 ) (b) Output from velocity Part 11 .. (a) Figure 11.

The difference between this technique and classical migration is that perturbation techniques and integral transforms are used rather than downwardcontinuation The initial of the wave equation.2 Theory and . (This is a long way of saying that the seismic section is inverted!) Thus.1. a moreaccurate transmission losses to as the was proposed which al. For example. this technique involves using a constant velocity in the wave equation. This methodsolves for only the reflection strength of In their morerecent paper. fromBleistein andCohen (1982). Part 11 . (1981) Their have applied a similar methodto the Born-WKBJ method is referred method. and Jack Cohen work in this area was done by NormanBleistein at the University of Denver. perturbing this constant velocity by a small amount.so solves for and refraction. as in migration. solving for the perturbed velocity. the results look very similar to those of migration.Introduction to Seismic Inversion Methods Brian Russell 11. and then. Cohenand Bleistein (197g). the mappedinterfaces. In their initial paper. shows the input an• inverted result for a g-D buried focus.Examples The velocity inversion procedure is referred to as an inverse scattering problem. in which the interior of the earth is mapped by inver. inversion of Clayton and Stolt seismic data. Figure 11. they employed only a perturbation technique in the inversion of seismic data. Despite the differences in the mathematicsbetweenthe velocity inversion methodsand migration methods. Note that. by observing the backscattered wavefield. ting the observations from multiple acoustic sources. In simple terms. Bleistein solution and Cohen(1982). the "bow-tie" has been imagedto a synclinal feature. and thus this approach to inversion is often cal led Born inversion.Velocity Inversion Page 11 - 4 . the starting point for this method is the acoustic wave equation.

I I. (Bleistein and Cohen 1982) Part 11 . IJ. 18b•G ß (b) Figure 11. l.(11).r. fl ß ½J ß (a) qlOO ..11]ll. [] ß I.Introduction •o Seismic Inversion Methods Brian Russell q ! ()f!. c) 6500 ! 8900 ! I 1 300 - 1 37.)[11J..'!. (•) Output section.3 The effect of velocity inversion on real data..i'llroll.[] .. iJ ß ll. • I . () .. II I I11. (a) Input section (MarathonOil).P t 16' .-. I I 3l)!]..Velocity Inversion Page11 - 5 .•I O0.

Notice that the diffraction tail has been "collapsea". Figure 11. In summary. research in'this area is continuing at a steady pace. again as in migration. Again. However.2. this technique cannotbe classed with the other methods which have been discussed in this'course due to its similarity with depth migration. The fact that this section is plotted as wiggle trace only makes the plot di fficul t to evaluate.Velocity I nversi on Page11 - 6 . Part 11 .3 shows example of applying the velocity inversion an techniqueto a real dataset. Finally. note the similarity with classical depth migration. and the technique promises much for the future.Introduction to Seismic Inversion Methods Brian Russell Figure 11. also from Bleistein and Cohen (1982). shows velocity tl•e inversion of a diffraction tail from a geological discontinuity.

Summary Page 12 - i .SUMMARY Part 12 .Introduction to Seismic Inversion Nethods Brian Russell PART 12 .

impedanceprofile. is included mathematically in the Part 12 . as in recursi ve (ii) (iii) A geological looking inversion is produced. and 12. Flowcharts for these methoUs are Let us initially summarizethe shownin Figures which advantages and disadvantages of the three methodsof single trace have been discussed: inversion (1) Recursire _ ! . The basic used in most of these methods is the one-dimensional model. Di sadvantages: (i) Errors are propagated through the recurslye solution if there are phase. 12.Summary Page 12 .Invers.2. or noise problems. which states that the seismic trace is simply the convolution of a zero phase wavelet with a reflectivity sequence derived from the earth's acoustic 12. (i i) The low frequency component must be derived from a separate source. The low frequency information solution. ion Advantages- (i) The data i nver si on. (2) Spar.• Inversion _ - • Advantage s: (i) Utilizes the complete seismic trace in its calculation.1.Introduction to Seismic Inversion Methods Brian Russell lZ.1 Sgmmary In inversion these notes.3. we have reviewed the current model methods used in the of seismic data. (iii) Output is in wiggle trace format similar to seismic data. (l i ) A robust procedure when used on clean seismic data. amplitude.i kg_. itself is used in the calculation. se-SP.

Summary Page 12- 3 .1 Band-Limited Inversion (Recursive) ß ß . Part 12 . I INVERT I IMPEDANCE TOIMPEDANCE SCALE TO VELOCITY AND DEPTH DISPLAY Fiõure 12.Introduction to Seismic Inversion Methods Brian Russell BAND-LIMITED SEISMIC TRACE INTRODUCE LOW FREQUENCY COMPONENT REFL COEFF.

Summary Page 12 - 4 . and amplitude versus offset inversion.e. the solution maynot converge). . other methods which were considered were traveltime the The inversion. The traveltime inversion method was an excellent method for finding an make an excellent accurate velocity constraint for either versus depth model. Di sadvantages' (i) A completesolution is arrived at iteratively andmay neverbe reached ( i. (ii) Errors are distributed through the solution. is (3) Model-Base• I nver si on Advantages' (i) A complete solution. Part 12 . Methods Brian Russell Dôsadvantages' (i) Statistical nature of the sparse-spike methodsused are subject to probl eros i n noisy Uata.Introduction to Seismic Inversion . velocity inversion. Only the "blocky" component inverted. Final output lacks muchof the fine detail seen on recursively inverted data. is possible to ob rain. (ii) It is possible that more than one forward modelcorrectly fits data (nonuniqueness). All are important methods. (iii) Multiple and attenuation effects can be modelled. including low frequencyinformation. These velocities one of the classical inversion methodsor for a depth migration. but cannot be compared directly with the three previous methods (comparing apples with oranges?).

Introduction Seismic to Inversion Methods BrianRussell EXTRACT SPARSE REFLECTIVITY INTRODUCE LINEAR CONSTRAINTS INVERT TO IMPEDANCE I vELøcmTY! DL_•.2 Broad-BandInversion (Sparse-Spike) Part 12 .Sugary Page 12- . AND m i i m i Fiõure 12.••_•.

This author's humble opinion is that once the interpreter is able to do a complete lithological inversion on their seismic datasets. etc. The other conclusion from this course is that the more separate datasets (surface seismic. amplitude versus offset inversion adds an extra dimension to the inversion problem since it inversion but still is truly This a lithologic inversion the rather than a method of the method.. well log.Introduction to Seismic Inversion Methods Brian Russell The velocity inversion method was shown be very similar to depth to migration. the better the final product will be. VSP. The output from this method could therefore be used as input to one of the other three classical methods of inversion. method is definitely hurdles has a number of to overcome. velocity future. Part 12 . the other methodswill be replaced.) the interpreter can use in an inversion.Sumnary Page 12- 6 . Finally. gravity.

Introduction to Seismic Inversion Methods Brian Russell ß MODEL TRACE IMPEDANCE ESTIMATE CALCULATE ERROR UPDATE IMPEDANCE ERROR SMALL ENOUGH NO YES =ESTIMATE ON Fiõure 12.3 Mode 1-Based Inversion Part 1'•. Summary Page 12- ...•'" ..

v.. Cutler.. L.. 1351-1358. F.Geophysics.D. p. Principles of travel time tomography' SEGContinuing EUucation notes. Present status..P..P. N. J. K. A computationally fast approach to maximum-likelihood aleconvolution: p. Resnick. R. RT. 550-565. p. 38.. R. p. Lines. 8Z6-844.M..Summary Page 12 - . Chi.R.Prosp. Geophysics. and surface seismic data: Geophysics.. Love.52. 1085-1098.. B.. Scales.T. 903Bleistein. and Stewart. 1982.A.R. and Wyld. J. 1973. 1986. G. Shuey. and Ursin. K..$80-607.L. 1983. v.. vertical seismic profiles..Introduction to Sei stoic Inversion Herhods Brian Russell REFERENCES Angeleri. v.. 48. Porosity prediction from seismic data' Geophys. 1984.F. R. Bube. Berteussen. 50.30. Claerbout. v... R.W. ana Treitel. S. SpinUler. J.... v. Robust Modeling with erratic data: Geophysics.. D. Tomographic determination of three- Geophysics. Geophysical inversion and applications. and Hampson.R. Langan. T. dimensional seismic velocity structure using well logs..P. R. Approximate computation of the acoustic impedancefrom seismic datap.K. 1987. new directions: Bording. 923. v. H. and Cohen.K.N. J.A... p. 49. 198•.A. Bishop. v. p. J. and Carpi..T... Chiu. Part 12 . Mendel. The velocity inversion problemGeophysics. S. 1985. P..1497-1511. C. and Muir.47. Tomographic determination of velocity and depth in laterally varying media.

Hampson. M. and Stolt.!gary. D. J.. Seismic Stratigraphy: London . 44.F..Summary Page 12 - 9 . 1979. Low frequency recovery in the inversion of seismograms: Journal of the CSEG.W. Geophysical Press.K. Part 12 . 22. 46.. 1983. Cohen.. Gelland. p. 1559-1568. SP-16). Velocity inversion procedure for acoustic waves: Geophysics. 48. D. D. Geophysics. 30-39. 17. v. and Russell.. 665-676. 1986.. 1981. Ca. D. 1077-1087. V. 1986.A. N. R. J...H. and Schneider. and Larner.Las Vegas. p. R. Alberta.Amsterdam. 1981. G. seismic data: and Millington. M. 1983. Inverse velocity Journal of the CSEG. Graul. A born WKBJinversion method for acoustic reflection data: Geophysics. Hampson. 2442.. Wavelet extraction by sonic-log correltation: Journal of the CSEG. p.A. Seismic litholic modeling: presented at the 1983 convention of the CSEG. Unpubished SEG course Hardage..Introduction to Seismic Inversion Methods Brian Russell Clayton. v. Cooke. W.M. v. 1979.Hampson. .. and Galbraith.. Deconvolution and wavelet processing: notes... v. p. p.. K. and Bleistein.National Canauian CSEG meeting. 1985. 15. stacking for multiple 44-55. Maximum-Likelihood seismic inversion (abstract no.. V. elimination: B. V. Generalized linear inversion of reflection Galbraith. R.

S. L. A review of least-squares Geophysical anU its application to geophysical problems' Prospecting. D. Synthetic sonic logs . 1985. Schultz.. Oldenburg. 1983. and Levy. Signal=to-noise ratio enhancementin 12-32.Introducti on to Sei stoic Inversi on Methods .. 159-186. 48. Jacewitz. 8- Lines.. Scheuer. Plane wave reflection for gas sands at non-normal angles of incidence: Geophysics. 1979.J. seismograms:Geophysics. 1988.O. 47.. and Pepper. R. 35. Cooperative inversion 20.488. IT . 53. R.J. J.K.F.. T...... Inverse theory with applica. Anania.a process for stratigraphic interpretation: Geophysics. A. I. and Tritel. p.. IEEE Trans... J. A. R. S. p. Oldenburg. multi channel seismic data via the Karhunen-Loeve transform.28. v. Bri an Russell Herman.. 49. and Levy.M.. 1637-1648. p.W. Part 12 . 482 . p. v. 32.F..E. S. p. A fast three-dimensionalmodeling technique and fundamentals of three-dimensional frequency-Uomainmigration: Geophysics.Summary Page 12 - 10 . Lindseth... p.. W.M. 1982. inversion of geophysical data: Geophysics. v.H. Jones. coefficients 1984.tion to aleconvolution and seismogram inversion. Recovery of the acoustic impedancefrom reflection Ostrander. v. v. Unpublished course notes.R. p.R.. Chun. v. Kormyl o. and Treitel. D. 1983. 1318-1337. L. J. v. S. anu Mendel. 44. 1984. 1627-1644. 326. 1987. p. Geophysical Propecting.A.. v.W. Maximum-likelihood seismic deconvolution- on Geoscience and Remote Sensing. Lines. C.

M. S. F. v. Surface consistent corrections- Taner. 46. 1176- 1180. 609-614. and McCoy. 1979. and Lindseth.. GE-4. 73-86.J.T. 1981. 1. Sei smi Li thol ogic MoUel ng: Brochure. K.F. How thin is a thin bed?. an• Koehler. Part 12 .. C.R. 1986. andChiu. p. v. Technical exploration c i Western Geophysical Co. 1966.Introduction %oSeismic Inversion Methods Brian Russell Russell. Walker. p.S.. VSPand3-D SeismicdataJournal of the CSEG. 1983. Shuey. France. No.Summary Page 12 - 11 . The information content of synthetic sonic logs . and Ulrych. Trei tel. R. 1982..H.presentedat the 1982 convention of the EAEG. 38. v.R. Banks...L. 1338. H. 50.. 44. The design of hi gh-resolution digital filters ß IEEE Transactions Geo•cience on Electronics. Tomography-based imagingof a heavyoil reservoir usingwell-logs.1350.Geophysics. 22.H. a tool for energy resource (second edition)Wiley. v.. R. 48.L. 25-38.T. p. v. 39-52. T..K. 1983. B. E. NewYork. Cannes. Taylor. J. M. 1985... p. Geophysics. Stewart. 17-22. p..v.. 1981.A. Deconvolution with the L1 norm: Geophysics. A simplification of the Zoeppritz equations: Geophysics. 1973. Waters. and Robinson... Autoregressive recovery of the acoustic impedanceGeophysics. p..O.A frequencydomain approach. Widess.B.v. p. S. Reflecti on seismology.C..

ISBN: 978-0-931830-65-5 90000 306 ISBN 978-0-931830-48-8 ISBN 978-0-931830-65-5 (Series) (Volume) .

Sign up to vote on this title

UsefulNot useful- 48417087 Seismic Inversion
- Reservoir Characterization Using Seismic Inversion Data
- Avo
- Introduction to Seismic Interpretation
- Russell 2010
- Seismic Inversion
- Seismic Inversion
- Calibration of Seismic and Well Data
- Seismic Inversion by Mrinal K. Sen
- Quantitative Seismic Interpretation
- Understanding Avo
- Seismic Inversion
- Basic AVO Theory
- seismic interpretation
- Seismic Interpretation MNA
- Seismic Interpretation
- Avo pdf
- AVO Principles, Processing and Inversion
- 2005 Chopra Seismic Attributes Geophysics
- 2D and 3D Land Seismic Data Acquisition
- Simm & Bacon (2014) - Seismic Amplitude. an Interpreters Handbook
- Advanced Practical Seismic Interpretation
- Introduction to Seismic Interpretation El Amal[1]
- Jan01 Seismic Inversion
- Seismic Inversion
- Opendtect v4 Tutorial Exercises f3 Demo
- 581 AVO Fluid Inversion
- AVO Analysis
- 2d and 3d Seismic Interpret a Ion
- Russell - Introduction to Seismic Inversion Methods