GEOPHYSICS, VOL. 51, KO. 1 (JANUARY 1986): P. 67-84, 19 FIGS.
Reverse-time migration of offset vertical seismic profiling
data using the excitation-time imaging condition
Wen-Fong Chang* and George A. McMechan*
ABSTRACT
To apply reverse-time migration to prestack, finite-
offset data from variable-velocity media, the standard
(time zero) imaging condition must be generalized be-
cause each point in the image space has a different
image time (or times). This generalization is the
excitation-time imaging condition, in which each point
is imaged at the one-way traveltime from the source to
that point.
Reverse-time migration with the excitation-time
imaging condition consists of three elements: (1) compu-
tation of the imaging condition; (2) extrapolation of the
recorder wave field; and (3) application of the imaging
condition. Computation of the imaging condition for
each point in the image is done by ray tracing from the
source point; this is equivalent to extrapolation of the
source wave field through the medium. Extrapolation of
the recorded wave field is done by an acoustic finite-
INTRODUCTION
Reverse-time migration of normal-moveout (NMO) correct-
ed, stacked (or zero-offset) data has recently been presented by
a number of authors, including Whitmore (1983), McMechan
(1983) Baysal et al. (1983), Loewenthal and Mufti (1983), and
Levin (1984). The salient concept is that extrapolation of the
observed wave field is backward in time (reverse time) rather
than the usual downward continuation in depth. For zero-
offset surface data, extrapolation is performed back to time
zero, when the imaging condition is satisfied simultaneously at
all points in the image plane (McMechan, 1983). In that ap-
poach, the imaging condition is implicit rather than explicit;
the finite-difference wave field at time zero is simply displayed
as the imaged section. The elegant simplicity of this implicit
condition carries certain restrictions that limit its general ap-
plicability, the most serious of which is that the time-zero
imaging condition is strictly valid only for zero offset (or for
finite offset in a laterally homogeneous medium). Fortunately,
it is possible to redefine the imaging condition more generally,
Manuscriptrecervedby the Editor September13, 1984;revisedmanuscriptreceivedMarch 27, 1985.
*Center for LithosphericStudies,The Universityof Texasat Dallas, P.O. Box 688, Richardson,TX 75080.
(‘ 1986Societyof ExplorationGeophysicists. AI) rightsreserved.
67
difference algorithm. Imaging is performed at each step
of the finite-difference extrapolation by extracting, from
the propagating wave field, the amplitude at each mesh
point that is imaged at that time and adding these into
the image space at the same spatial locations. The locus
of all points imaged at one time step is a wavefront [a
constant time (or phase) trajectory].
This prestack migration algorithm is very general.
The excitation-time imaging condition is applicable to
all source-receiver geometries and variable-velocity
media and reduces exactly to the usual time-zero imag-
ing condition when used with zero-offset surface data.
The algorithm is illustrated by application to both syn-
thetic and real VSP data. The most interesting and po-
tentially useful result in the processing of the synthetic
data is imaging of the horizontal fluid interfaces within
a reservoir even when the surrounding reservoir bound-
aries are not well imaged.
for valid application to any source-receiver geometry through
use of the exploding-reflector model. The resulting excitation-
time imaging condition reduces to the time-zero imaging con-
dition for zero-offset surface data.
The key ideas that define this imaging condition are: that
source and recorder wave fields can be extrapolated, and that
a reflector exists where source and recorder wave fields are
in-phase (Claerbout 1971, 1976). For the zero-offset case, the
usual approach is to extrapolate both source and recorder
together since they follow the same paths and the upgoing and
downgoing times are identical. For the finite-offset case,
source and recorder extrapolations must be done separately.
In fact, different extrapolators may be used for each. Here,
finite-differences are used for extrapolation of the recorder
wave field, and ray tracing is used for extrapolation of the
source.
Very little has been published on the migration of vertical
seismic profiling (VSP) data. Balch and Lee (1984) presented
some results obtained by Dillon and Thomson (1983) using a
statistical Kirchhoff-style algorithm for constant-velocity
66 Chang and McMechan
media. Gazdag and Squazzero (1983) suggested an algorithm
similar to the one presented here, particularly in the imaging
condition, but they used the phase shift plus interpolation
method rather than reverse-time extrapolation for the record-
ed wavefield. Wiggins (1984) included an example of VSP pro-
cessing in his discussion of Kirchhoff migration. The purpose
of this paper is to detail the excitation-time imaging condition
and to illustrate its application to migration of both synthetic
and real VSP data as an alternative to the presently available
algorithms.
THE ALGORITHM: THEORY AND IMPLEMENTATION
Migration using the excitation-time imaging condition, as
implemented here, has three parts. The first is computation of
the imaging condition(s) for each point in the image space,
done by ray tracing from the source point. The second is
extrapolation of the recorded wave field backward in time
done by a two-way acoustic finite-difference code imple-
mented in the time domain. The third, which is performed at
each finite-difference step, is application of the precomputed
imaging conditions, done by extracting from the finite-
difference wave field the amplitude of each point imaged at
each time Below we detail each of these elements after a brief
description of the forward problem. Although the algorithm is
completely general with respect to recording geometry, the
only application considered is the imaging of VSP data.
The forward problem
Consider the medium as two-dimensional (2-D) and consist-
ing of a vertical slice through the Earth; the slice contains the
source and the drill hole in which the recorders are located.
The horizontal and vertical (depth) space coordinates are x
and z, respectively. This geometry is illustrated in Figure lb.
For computational purposes, a regular grid is superimposed
on the x-z slice. The same grid points are used for both the
finite-difference computations and the calculation and appli-
cation of the imaging conditions. Each grid point is treated as
a point diffractor (or secondary source). The strength of each
secondary source is proportional to the reflectivity at that
location. In the forward-modeling context, each secondary
source is excited by the arrival of a wavefront from the pri-
mary source. Initially, it is sufficient to deal with only the
response and imaging of a single point diffractor since arbi-
trarily complicated media can be represented by appropriately
chosen point diffractors. Most of the following development of
the algorithm (Figures 1 through 7) is in the context of a single
point diffractor without any loss of generality.
Figure 1 illustrates the recording geometry and the first-
order arrivals present in a VSP for a model consisting of a
single point diffractor in a homogeneous half-space. At each
recorder, there are three arrivals (Figure la): a direct arrival
(I), a diffraction (2) originating at (D), and the free surface
reflection (3) of (2). To synthesize the dynamic response of this
and all the other models used, the forward problem was
solved using an acoustic finite-difference algorithm. The algo-
rithm was described in McMechan (1985) and is based on
earlier work by Mitchell (1969), Claerbout (1976): and Alford
et al. (1974). A source with the directivity of a vertical impulse
is inserted into the finite-difference grid and the wave equation
is solved at successive time steps. The absorbing boundary
conditions of Clayton and Engquist (1977) are used along the
sides and bottom of the grid. The synthetic seismograms are
constructed by saving the amplitude at each grid point that
corresponds to a recorder at each time step and plotting these
as time functions. For clarity of the figures, all the synthetic
VSPs plotted contain only every fifth trace actually computed
and used for imaging. Embedded in each of the synthetic VSP
sections is the elementary response of each point diffractor in
the model. As noted, the time of excitation of each of these
secondary point sourcesis exactly the time taken by the direct
wave to travel from the primary source to the location of each.
This is the key observation for defining the excitation-time
imaging condition for the inverse (migration) problem.
The excitation-time imaging condition
The excitation-time imaging condition for reflected and dif-
fracted energy may be defined and implemented by consider-
ation of traveltimes; it is simply a generalization of the time-
concidence imaging condition of Claerbout (1971, 1976). In
Figure I b, the representative arrival from source S at recorder
R at time t has traveled along path SDR, being diffracted at
D. The total traveltime is composed of two contributions: the
source-to-diffractor time t,, , and the diffractor-to-recorder
a
FIG. 1. The VSP response of a point diffractor. The model (b)
consists of a source S and a point diffractor D in a homoge-
neous half-snace. Recorders are located in a drill hole coin-
cident with the z (depth) axis. The VSP arrival time sketch (a)
contains three main arrivals; the light solid line (1) is the
direct arrival, the heavy solid line (2) is the energy diffracted
by D, and the dotted line (3) is the continuation of (2) after
reflection from the free surface (z = 0). Corresponding ray-
paths are illustrated in (b) using the same line types. The
minimum diffraction traveltime occurs at z1 (the depth of the
diffractor). The direct arrival (1) and the diffraction (2) are
coincident at depth z2. In the forward (modeling) problem, a
secondary source at diffractor D will be excited at time tsDby
a wavefront generated by the primary source S. In the inverse
(migration) problem, energy extrapolated backward in time
from the recorders will be imaged at time = tSD, not at
time = 0.
 Migration of Offset VSP Data 69

time I,,. Migration for the example in Figure 1 consists of

imaged-
a b
FIG. 2. Comparison of the division of the image plane into
imaged and nonimaged regions for two algorithms. When
time-zero imaging is used with depth extrapolation for migra-
tion of zero-offset data (a), the boundary between imaged and
nonimaged regions at some depth step is a line of constant
depth. When excitation-time imaging is used with reverse-time
extrapolation for migration of finite (or zero) offset data (b),
the boundary between imaged and nonimaged regions at some
time step is a line of constant time (a wavefront). In (b), S is
the source position.
extrapolating the entire observed wave field backward
through time not tc time = 0, but tc time =tsn (the time of
excitation of the secondary source at D). At time t,,, all the
energy diffracted or reflected at D will be focused at D; the
amplitude at D can then be extracted and added to the migra-
non image plane at the same spatial Io~tion. SimilarlyY the
imaging condition for each point in the X-Z plane is defined by
the traveltime from the primary source to that point.
Computation of the excitation-time imaging condition for
each point in the image space is functionally equivalent to
extrapolation of the source. The method is implemented in
kinematic form in the current algorithm by ray tracing from
the primary source location using the algorithm presented in
Lee and Stewart (1981) as summarized in the Appendix. Using
the ray equation as an extrapolator is not common practice in
exploration seismology, but there are some precedents, such as
the image rays of Hubral (1977) and depth migration (Larner
et al., 1981) for incorporating rays into imaging systems.
Figure 3 contains an example of kinematic extrapolation in a
variable-velocity medium. Figure 3a shows the rays; Figure 3b

4 o. DI STfINCE
. . 3.00 CP
.-
g

.-
z

N
. -
0

O0
m
-cl

3’”. .
-z
x
3

e
.

In

::

cn

b
0
0

FIG. 3. Computation of the excitation-time imaging condition. The imaging condition at any point in the x-z plane is
the one-way traveltime from the primary source to that point. Times can be computed by ray tracing as shown in (a).
Some representative wavefronts (constant excitation time loci) corresponding to the rays in (a) are shown in (b). These
wavefronts are 0.12 s apart. In migration, all points lying on a wavefront are imaged at the same time just as they were
all simultaneously excited by energy from the primary source. The ray density is reduced for clarity; approximately
three times this density was used for imaging.
70 Chang and McMechan

shows the same information in the form of constant excitation
time loci (wavefronts).
Since the migrated image is made visible through construc-
tive interference of adjacent wavelets, the accuracy required in
ray tracing is explicitly defined; times must be more accurate
than one-haif the period of the highest reliable frequency in
the data. In the following examples, 10 to 20 times this mini-
mum is maintained. Accuracy is adjustable by changing the
size of the steps taken along the rays and by changing the
accuracy of the migration velocity distribution.
After tracing a large number of densely spaced rays, image
times are computed by interpolating between rays for as many
grid points as possible. For a specific source location, it is not
always possible to obtain image times for all grid points be-
cause the velocity distribution may produce shadow zones or
rays may have turning points.
Note in Figure 3 that some rays cross, thus causing some
points to have more than one excitation time (usually an odd
number). Multiple excitation times present no problem for
migration; at each point in the image, the single amplitude
contribution at minimum time is chosen because it should be
the most reliable (least affected by multipath wavelet distor-
tions).
After the image times are computed, they are sorted and
stored in a disk file in reverse time order. Each entry in the file
contains three integers: the x and z position indices of a point
and the corresponding image time (expressedas the number of
finite-difference time steps from the primary source). Thus, as
reverse time steps are taken, this file can be read sequentially
to obtain the indices (used as array subscripts) of all points
imaged at each time step.
Reverse-time extrapolation of the recorded
wave field
The second important part of excitation-time imaging is the
extrapolation of the recorded wave field, done by using any
time (S)
20
desired extrapolator. The same explicit, second-order acoustic
finite-difference algorithm is used as described above. Extrap-
olation of the recorded wave field can be considered the in-
verse of modeling with the same finite-difference algorithm.
Reverse-time extrapolation is a boundary-value problem in
which the finite-difference mesh is driven with the time reverse
of the trace observed at each recorder (McMechan 1982,
1983). One time step in this process is illustrated in Figure 4.
At each finite-difference time step, new boundary values are
extracted along a constant time slice through the data and
inserted at the corresponding recorder positions in the mesh.
Because the wave equation is completely reversible, it propa-
gates the observations through the mesh. As time moves back-
ward, the energy originating at a diffractor will focus to that
diffractor, pass through, and then defocus. Figure 5 illustrates
the reverse-time extrapolation of a synthetic VSP wave field
for a single point diffractor in a homogeneous half-space. The
data being extrapolated are those in Figure 4a.
Application of the imaging condition
The third main element in reverse-time migration using the
excitation-time imaging condition is application of the pre-
computed imaging conditions. In Figures 5e and Sf, the
dashed curve superimposed on the X-Z images is the !oci of
points that are imaged at the times corresponding to those
plots; the image locus is out of the plotted area for Figures 5a
to 5d. The migrated image is constructed by extracting the
amplitudes along such image loci and adding them to the
identical x-z locations in a separate array that contains the
partially completed migrated image (see Figure 2).
At all time steps, the imaged energy is coincident with the
position of a direct wavefront from the primary source. Thus
the first arrival (the direct wave) in a VSP will satisfy the
imaging condition everywhere and must be removed from the
recorded data before extrapolation. Figure 6 illustrates the
D I STR\yfe (KM! 6B
9..28 . _. 0..88

a b
FIG. 4. Insertion of data into the finite-difference mesh. The VSP data being extrapolated are shown in (a); for clarity,
only every tifth trace is plotted. The finite-difference response in the x-z plane at the representative time ti = 0.594 s is
in (b). At this time all the energy at t P ti has been transferred from the x-t plane (a) to the x-z plane (b) and is on its
way to the excitation point. At r,, the driving values to be inserted at the recording points in the drill hole [dotted line
in(b)] are extracted from the VSP at time lj.
 Migration of offset VSP Data

DEPTH (KM)

: _____.
I
3,
0.50 1.00
DEPTH (KM) “50 2.00

DEPTH (KM) 2.00

72 Chang and McMechan
effect of migration of the point diffractor data in Figure 4a
with the direct arrival left in. The part of the image corre-
sponding to direct raypaths is unusable; this region is near the
hole and so masks the structure that should be the most reli-
able part of the image. The entire image space is not black in
Figure 6 because the recording aperture is finite, so only part
of the direct wavefield is available in the VSP for extrapola-
tion. In removing the first arrival, some of the reflected and
diffracted energy is also removed since they overlap to some
extent (Figure 1). Thus, after preprocessing, the data do not
contain information about the medium up to the drill hole
(Figure 17a).
Also affecting the quality of migrated image are artifacts
related to the finite extent of the data in both time and space.
These artifacts can be significantly reduced by tapering the
data at the edges before extrapolation (McMechan et al.,1
1985).
Figure 7 contains a summary of reverse-time migration
using the excitation-time imaging condition applied to a syn-
thetic VSP for a point diffractor. The raw VSP (Figure 7a) is
prepared for extrapolation by removing the first arrival and
tapering the edges of the data as shown in Figure 7b. Through
migration, the entire diffraction response in Figure 7b focuses
to the point image in Figure 7d. Figure 7c shows the recording
geometry and the correct position of the point diffractor D. In
this and all following figures, the source is labeled S, the posi-
tion of the hole containing the recorders is plotted as a dotted
line, and the numbers on each part of the model are velocities
in kilometers/second.
This completes the development of the algorithm. The next
section contains examples of processing synthetic VSP data.
88
FIG. 6. Migration of the VSP response of a point diffractor
including the direct arrival branch. The large amplitudes at
the left are due to the direct arrival. Compare with Figure 7d,
which is the result of imaging the same data with the direct
arrivals removed. The amplitudes are clipped at x = 0.
APPLICATION: SYNTHETIC EXAMPLES
The process just established is applied to the imaging of
VSPs from a sequence of five progressively more complicated
structures. The synthetic data sets are for models containing
two layers over a half-space, a point diffractor underlying a
dipping reflector, two layers of varying thickness overlying a
half-space, a hydrocarbon trap at the edge of a salt dome, and
a thrust fault.
Figure 8 shows the migration of a synthetic VSP for two
constant-veiocity layers over a constant-veiocity haif-space. in
the migrated image (Figure 8d) the positions of the reflectors
are accurately recovered. In addition, the signs of the reflec-
tion coefficients are clearly evident; the wavelets at the two
reflectors are of opposite polarity. From the migrated image it
is evident that a single offset VSP adequately samples only a
part of the medium; in the case of flat layers the well-sampled
region lies at offsets between the hole and about half the
source offset (this corresponds to the geometrical reflections).
There is some backscattered (diffracted) energy from parts of
the model outside this region, but the corresponding parts of
the image are of relatively low amplitude. The image ampli-
tude also decreases at the hole because of the inevitable loss of
some reflected (or diffracted) energy when the first arrival is
removed in preprocessing. There are some minor artifacts, but
considering the image is obtained only from a single source,
their presence is quite acceptable. For complicated structures
(see Figures 10 through 15), the parts of the structure that are
potentially imagable are determined by the relative positions
of the sources and recorders with respect to the reflectors.
The example in Figure 9 provides the test of positioning a
point diffractor beneath a dipping interface. If a constant mi-
gration velocity had been used, the point would have been
incorrectiy imaged to the left of its actuai position. Here, be-
cause the algorithm allows variable velocity, and the correct
velocities were used, the point is correctly migrated.
Figures 10 and 11 illustrate the importance of multiple off-
sets for delineation of complicated structures. Figure 1Oa
shows the model and recording geometry; there are four
source locations (Sl to S4). Figure lob contains the composite
image obtained by superposition of the results of separate
migration of each of the four VSPs. The individual contri-
butions of each source are displayed in Figure 11. Figures 1la
to 1Id show the four preprocessed VSPs for sources Sl to S4,
respectively. Figure 1le is the partial image obtained by mi-
gration of the data in 1la; similarly, Figure 1If is from Figure
11b, Figure 1lg is from Figure 1lc, and Figure llh is from
Figure 1Id. Note that the various source positions differ-
entially illuminate different parts of the structure; in particu-
lar, the steeply dipping region BC of Figure 10a is well-imaged
only from Sl. Migration successfully recovers the flat reflector
EF beneath the variable upper layer ABCD, but that part of
EF below BC is faint because of the deflection of energy by
BC. Thus, even though the migration alorithm itself has no
dip restrictions, steeply dipping structures will not produce
good images unless the source-recorder geometry is such that
the response of these structures is well-recorded. In some
cases, this property can be used to advantage. In a very com-
plicated structure, the only reflectors that are well-recorded
may be the horizontal interfaces between fluids such as water,
oil, and gas (see Figures 12 to 15). Also note there is some
variation of image amplitude due to the angle dependence of
 73
Migration of Offset VSP Data

reflectivity (in strongly laterally varying media, all reflections
cannot be assumed to be precritical). This has implications for
interpretation of migrated reflectivity sections because the re-
cording geometry must be known to evaluate the significance
of any apparent change of reflectivity.
The next two examples illustrate the potential use of migra-
ted VSP data in direct detection of hydrocarbons. As men-
tioned, flat reflectors associated with fluid hydrocarbons may
be well-imaged even when the more steeply dipping sur-
rounding reservoir boundaries are not. Figure 12 contains two
preprocessed synthetic VSPs computed for source S2 (see lo-
cation in Figure 13). The difference between the two VSPs is
that the left one (a) was computed for the salt-dome model
(Figure 13e) without the (shaded) reservoir and the right one
(b) was computed with it. These responses differ greatly, which
indicates the potential for detection, location, and interpreta-
tion of the reservoirs. A set of similar synthetic VSPs for a
wide variety of structural traps was presented in McMechan
(1985). One way to extract the relevant information from the
VSPs is by reverse-time migration. Figure 13 shows the migra-

TIM: 6($d
20 -0.00 0.30 0.90 1.20

DISTANCE ( KM )
0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 (KM; 60
-8.00 _. 0,80
. a . I
4
. w
. s
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
. n
.
. D
.
.
.
. 5.0
.
. h
.
.
l

:C

FIG. 7. Migration of the (synthetic) response of a point diffractor. The preprocessed VSP (b) is obtained from the raw
data (a). Reverse-time migration with the excitation-time imaging condition produces the migrated image (d), which is
to be compared with the correct solution (c), In (a) and (b) only every fifth trace is plotted for clarity. In (c) S is the
source position, D is the point diffractor, and the dotted line at the left is the location of the hole.
74 Chang and McMechan

ted images for VSPs from sources Sl and S2 with and without
the reservoirs. (In the model, the reservoir was simulated by a
10 percent decrease in velocity.) The images obtained from
both sources without the reservoir (Figures 13a and 13b)
reveal clear reflections from the top of the salt dome, but very
little else. This lack of response is due to factors such as non-
optimum source-recorder geometry for the reflectors present
and low reflectivity of the deeper parts of the structure. With
the reservoir present. the images corresponding to both source
locations (Figures 13c and 13d) contain reflectivity associated
with the reservoir. In the image from Sl (Figure 13~) there is a
faint, correctly located reflection from the bottom of the reser-
voir, but no evidence of its other boundaries. In the image
from S2 (Figure 13d) the bottom, and part of the upper surface
of the reservoir, are well-imaged because of sufficient reflec-
tivity and their position from S2. The amplitudes in the
images from Sl and S2 are very different (although the fea-
tures are similar) because the reservoir, when perceived from
Sl. is masked by the high reflectivity of the top of the salt
dome, whereas the energy from S2 penetrates beneath the

20 *0.. 80 0 . 30 TI”:.6? 0.90 1.20

DISTANCE ( KM)
0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.6 0 $JSTF1\CEIO (KM: 60
A.00 .. .. .. 0,. 60
.
. 3
.
.
.

FIG. 8. Migration of the response of two homogeneous layers over a homogeneous half-space. The format is the same
as Figure 7.
 Migration of Offset VSP Data 75

overhanging edge of the dome to reveal the structure clearly.
The top of the dome is better imaged from Sl than from S2
since much of the response from Sl is reflections, whereas
from S2 it is backscattered diffractions.
Figures 14 and 15 contain another example of the imaging
of hydrocarbon traps in a complicated (thrust fault) model.
Figures 14a and 14b contain the synthetic VSPs generated for
source Sl without, and with, the two traps shown in Figure
15e. As in the model of Figure 13e, the reservoirs here are
modeled by a 10 percent decrease in velocity. The difference in
response due to the presence of the reservoirs is clear.
The results of imaging four VSPs from Sl and S2 without,
and with the reservoirs. are presented in Figures 15a to 15d.
As in the previous example, the reservoirs are correctly lo-
cated in the images. The horizontal interfaces are better
imaged than the steep ones, and source Sl produces a better
image than source S2 because of the geometry of the sources
and recorders relative to the structure. The masking of the
reservoir image beneath the thrust, by the thrust, is evident in
Figure 15~; the main part of the image corresponds to diffrac-
tion from the leftmost corner of the reservoir where it is ex-
posed to direct energy from source Sl. In real data, the effect

-0.00 0 . 30 T1Mk _- 6(8’) e, 90. 1 20 -0,. 00 0.. 30 TIMk _. &S) 0..90 1..

DISTANCE (KM)
0.0 0.2 DISTFI\E@ (KM)
0.4 0.6 0.8 0,. 20 ,. 0,. 60
I I I a 0.. 80
. w ’
. S
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.

nD

FIG. 9. Migration of the response of a point diffractor beneath a dipping reflector. The format is the same as Figure 7.
76 Chang and McMechan

of masking is probably not as important as it is in the models
considered here because the reflectivities are not as extreme.
APPLICATION: A REAL EXAMPLE
To provide a realistic test of the reverse-time migration al-
gorithm, a real VSP was obtained from ARC0 Exploration
Company. The data are from a deviated hole in a marine
environment, and the source is an air gun array. Specific de-
tails of the well location and recording parameters are pro-
prietary to ARCO. The raw data are shown in Figure 16a and
the same data, after preprocessing, are shown in Figure 16b.
Preprocessing included filtering, deconvolution, removal of the
downgoing waves, interpolation to a depth increment of 20 ft,
and tapering of the edges of the recording aperture. All
downgoing waves except the first arrival would normally be
kept for reverse-time migration, but here, since the marine
source wavelet is so extended in time we thought the results
would be more reliable if only the upgoing waves were re-
tained. The main consequence of this decision is that only
structures to the right and beneath the well (see Figure 17) are
correctly imaged.
Interpolation was done using the frequency-domain algo-
rithm described in McMechan et al. (1985); the depth in-
crement was chosen to minimize grid dispersion in the finite-
difference extrapolation and corresponds to approximately 20
grid points per wavelength.
Figure 17a contains the image produced by migration of the
data in Figure 16b. The velocity function used for migration is
a smoothed version of the velocity-depth profile estimated
from first breaks; both are shown in Figure 17b. For extrapo-
lation of the data to depths below the deepest recorder, a
linear velocity profile is assumed to continue the observed
velocity trend. In general, migration has flattened the events as
anticipated and there is a reassuring correlation of many of
the reflectors with velocity changes in the first-break velocity
profile in Figure 17b. For comparison, Figure 18 contains an
unmigrated surface survey time section upon which the well
position is superimposed. Comparing Figures 17a and 18
shows that individual reflectors, as well as general character-
istics such as dip changes, are apparently correctly recovered
by reverse-time migration of the VSP data.
DISCUSSION AND SYNOPSIS
To this point, the excitation-time imaging condition has
been described and illustrated in the context of reverse-time
migration of finite-offset VSP data. Here we attempt to put
this approach in perspective by evaluating its strengths, weak-
nesses,and possible extensions.
One drawback of reverse-time migration (common to all
migrations) is that of specifying, a priori, the velocity distri-
bution through which extrapolation is to be done. On the
other hand, this algorithm can utilize all available velocity
information (including lateral as well as vertical variations).
All the synthetic examples presented previously use the correct
(known) velocity distribution for migration. Figure 19 illus-
trates the effect of migration with an incorrect velocity distri-
bution. Figure 19a is the same as Figure 13a except the cor-
rect position of the top of the salt dome has been added as a
dashed line; the image position is correct because the velocity
model in Figure 13e was used for migration. Figure 19b con-
tains the result of migrating the same data, but using the
velocity distribution shown in Figure 15e. Here the image is
significantly displaced.

DISTANCE (KM)
0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8

.
.
.
.
-.
.
.
.
.
. 5.0
.
. .
.
. C
. D
.
.iA 4.0
.
B
;E F
.~
.
. 5.0
fu
W.

a b
FIG. 10. Imaging of multiple offset VSP data. Superposition of the images obtained by migration of the VSPs from
each of the four sources [Sl to S4 in (a)] produces the image (b). The four individual contributions are shown in Figure
11.
 Migration of Offset VSP Data

-0.00 0.50 :.00 I .ia 2.00 “0.00 0.50 1.00 1.50 2.6?@
DEPTH (KM) DEPTH (KM)
: g

%.a0 3.ia 1.00 1 .i0 2.00 %.a0 a.50 1.00 i.56 2.00
CEFTH (KM) DEPTH (KM)
c
-u :

Qb.00 0.50 1.00 2.80

DEPTH (KM) “”
0

DEPTH (KY) DEPTH (KM)

78 Chang and McMechan

The most serious limitation of reverse-time migration for
practical application to real VSP data is that these data are
typically undersampled (in depth). Ideally, recordings would
be made at equal intervals in depth at an increment equal to
the finite-difference grid spacing (typically, 15 to 20 points per
wavelength). If the data approximately satisfy this format, in-
terpolation to the desired spacing and/or filtering to remove
aliased frequencies can be included in data preprocessing (see,
e.g.. McMechan et al., 1985, and Figure 16 above).
If zero offset is thought of in terms of the exploding reflector
model, it is clear that time zero is, by definition, the excitation
time Thus, the excitation-time imaging condition includes
time zero as a special case.
Extrapolation of VSP data is as much lateral as upward or
downward and, for all realistic models, extrapolation involves
propagating simultaneously in diverse directions. Thus a two-
way extrapolator is required. In the present implementation,
the full two-way acoustic wave equation is used so there are
no dip restrictions. Because the entire recorded wave field is
extrapolated, there is no need to make specific identifications
of arrivals or to separate upgoing and downgoing waves.
These features of the algorithm, and the separate extrapola-
tion of source and recorded wave fields, are conceptually simi-
lar to those of Tarantola’s (1984) algorithm.
In the synthetic examples, only structures beside the well
were considered. This is not a necessary restriction; structure
below the well can be imaged in the same way, and the algo-
rithm has obvious application in predicting ahead of a drill
bit. Imaging below the well is demonstrated in the real data
example (Figures 17 and 18).
In evaluating the migrated images, keep in mind that the
processing is generally of prestack data from a single source.
Thus, although the entire region of interest is typically not
imagable from a single source, the algorithm obtains partial
images remarkably well from this minimal amount of data. As
in surface surveys, multiple sources are required to obtain the
redundancy necessary for image clarity. Two related topics
not considered here are how to weight, in some optimal sense,
contributions from different sources in a composite image, and
the interpretation of artifacts associated with finite aperture.
The latter effect was illustrated in Miller et al. (1984) and
probably explains the apparent dip of the lower reflector in
Figure 10.
If the velocity distribution is sufficiently well-known, inter-
nal multiples will propagate back and contribute correctly to
the image at the point at which they were first diffracted.
Converted shear energy can be imaged with the same
excitation-time imaging condition used for the compressional
waves if it is assumed that propagation from the primary
source to all diffractors is purely compressional energy and
that excitation of each secondary source produces both shear
and compressional energy. Implementation of this elastic
imaging algorithm requires estimation of shear as well as com-
pressional wave velocities and extrapolation with an elastic
code.
The concept of excitation-time imaging can be used with
any desired extrapolators. One obvious choice for additional
research is use of ray-equation extrapolation for the recorded
wave field as well as for the source. Preliminary computations
indicate lower execution times for the present algorithm. The
extention to three-dimensional media is also conceptually
straightforward, requiring only a three-dimensional extrapol-
ator. Another potential use is for concurrent migration of dif-
ferent data types; for example, VSP and surface data can be

time (S)

b
FIG. 12. Sensitivity of VSP data to the presence of a reservoir. These two synthetic preprocessed VSPs were computed
for the salt-dome structure in Figure 13e. (a) is for the structure alone, and (b) is for the structure with the reservoir
under the overhang of the dome. The migrated image of (a) is shown in Figure 13b, and the migrated image of(b) is
shown in Figure 13d.
 Migration of Offset VSP Data 79

DISTANCE (KM1
0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8
x

.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
5.0 4.5 :
> .

FIG. 13. Migration of synthetic VSP data. Four synthetic VSPs were computed for sources Sl and S2 with and without
the (shaded) reservoir and then migrated using the correct velocity distribution. (e) shows the model! the locations of
sources Sl and S2, and the hole (the dotted line) in which the recorders were located. The result of imaging the data
from Sl for the model without the reservoir is (a); (b) is from S2 without the reservoir; (c) is from Sl with the reservoir;
and, (d) is from S2 with the reservoir. (a) through (d) are to be compared with (e), and all sections have the same
amplitude scaling for direct comparison.
80 Chang and McMechan
extrapolated simultaneously to produce a single, composite
image.
In summary, the excitation-time imaging condition has been
illustrated and applied in the context of reverse-time migra-
tion of both synthetic and real VSP data. This algorithm oper-
ates on any prestack or stacked, finite-offset or zero-offset,
data in any source-recorder geometry and it has no dip re-
strictions.
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
The authors gratefully acknowledge critical reviews by Dr.
C. Thomson and Dr. J. Ferguson. This work was funded by
the National Science Foundation under grant EAR-83 13089.
The real data in Figures 16, 17, and 18 were kindly provided
by ARC0 Exploration Company with the help of K. Wall, J.
Beitzel, A. Liaw, and J. Wise. K. Wall provided expert assist-
ance in data processing.
Contribution 481 of the Programs in Geoscience of the Uni-
versity of Texas at Dallas.
REFERENCES
Alford, R. M., Kelly, K. R., and Boore, D. M., 1974, Accuracy of
finite-difference modeling of the acoustic wave equation: Geophys-
ics, 39, 834842.
Balch, A. Al, and Lee, W. W., 1984, Vertical seismic profiling tech-
nique, applications and case histories: Internat. Human Res. Dev.
Corp.
Baysal, E., KoslotT, D. D., and Sherwood, J. W. C., 1983, Reverse time
migration: Geophysics, 48, 15141524.
Claerbout, J. F., 1971, Toward a unified theory of reflector mapping:
Geophysics, 36,467-48 1.
___ 1976, Fundamentals of geophysical data processing;
McGraw-Hill Book Co.
FIG. 14. Sensitivity of VSP data to the presence of hydrocarbon reservoirs. These two synthetic preprocessed VSPs
were computed for the thrust-fault structure in Figure 15e. (a) is for the structure alone, and (b) is for the structure with
two reservoirs. The migrated image of (a) is shown in Figure 15a, and the migrated image of(b) is shown in Figure 15~.
Clayton, R. W., and Engquist, B., 1977, Absorbing boundary con-
ditions for acoustic and elastic wave equations: Bull., Seis. Sot.
Am., 67, 1529-1540.
Dillon, P. B., and Thomson, R. C., 1983, Image reconstruction for
offset VSP surveys (abstract): Presented at the 45th Meeting, Eur.
Assn. Expl. Geophys., Oslo.
Gazdag, J., and Squazzero, P., 1983, Migration of vertical seismic
profiles by phase shift plus interpolation: Presented at the 45th
Meeting, Eur. Assn. Expl. Geophys., Oslo.
Hubral, P., 1977, time migration-Some ray-theoretical aspects:
Geophys. Prosp., 25,7388745.
Larner, K. L., Hatton, L., Gibson, B. S., and Hsu, I. C., 1981, Depth
migration of imaged time sections: Geophysics, 46, 734750.
Lee, W. H. K., and Stewart, S. W., 1981, Principles and applications
of microearthquake networks: Academic Press Inc.
Levin, S. A., 1984, Principles of reverse time migration: Geophysics,
49,581-583.
Loewenthal. D., and Mufti, I. R., 1983, Reverse time migration in
spatial frequency domain: Geophysics, 48, 6277635.
McMechan, G. A:, 1982, Determination of source parameters by wave
held extrapolatton: Geophys. J., 71, 613-628.
~ 1983, Migration by extrapolation of time-dependent boundary
values: Geophys. Prosp., 31,413-420.
-- 1985, Synthetic finite-offset vertical seismic profiles for lat-
erally varying media: Geophysics, 50,627-636.
McMechan, G. A., Luetgert, J. H., and Mooney, W. D., 1985, Imaging
of earthquake sources in Long Valley Caldera, California, 1983:
Bull., Seis. Sot. Am.. 75, 100551020.
Miller, D., Oristaglio, M., and Beylkin, G., 1984, A new formalism
and an old heuristic for seismic migration: Presented at the 54th
Ann. Internat. Mtg. and Expos., Sot. Explor. Geophys., Atlanta.
Mitchell, A. R., 1969, Computational methods in partial differential
equations: John Wiley and Sons, Inc.
Tarantola, A., 1984, Inversion of seismic reflection data in the acous-
tic approximation: Geophysics, 49, 1259-1266.
Whitmore, N. D., 1983, Iterative depth migration by backward time
propagation: Presented at the 53rd Ann. Internat. Mtg. and Expos.,
Sot. Explor. Geophys., Las Vegas.
Wiggins, J. W., 1984, Kirchhoff integral extrapolation and migration
of nonplanar data: Geophysics, 49, 1239-1248.
b
 Migration of Offset VSP Data

Sl s2
(KM)
-0.00 DISTRN$&
0.20 0.60 0.80 -0.00 (KM; 60 0.80

b
O,$JSTRiC;O (KM) DIST!Wi~O (KM)
0.00 0.60 0 .80 0.20 0.60 0.5

0.0 0.2
DISTANCE
0.4
(KM)
0.6 0.6
d
.
.
.
4.0 .
.

FIG. 1.5.Migration of synthetic VSP data. Four synthetic VSPs were computed for sources Sl and S2 with and without
the (shaded) reservoirs and then migrated using the correct velocity distribution. (e) shows the model, the locations of
sources Sl and S2, and the hole (the dotted line) in which the recorders were located. (a) is the result of imaging the
data from Sl for the model without the reservoir; (b) from S2 without the reservoir; (c) from Sl with the reservoir. and,
(d) from S2 with the reservoir. (a) through (d) are to be compared with (e), and all sections have the same amplitude
scaling factor for direct comparison.
82 Chang and McMechan

aa
.I
E
c

depth (km) depth (km)

a b
FIG. 16. Real VSP data. (a) contains the raw VSP; these traces are not equally spaced in depth. (b) contains the same
data after preprocessing and interpolation to a constant 20 ft depth increment. (b) is input to migration to produce the
depth section in Figure 17a.
depth (ft x 103)

depth (ft x 103

 Chang and McMechan

FIG. 18. Surface data on a line through the well in Figure 17.
Compare this section with the migrated VSP section in Figure
17.

0 D$TRN,C5 (KM;.80
8.00 . 0.

a
Fro. 19. Effect of migration velocity on position in a migrated image. The correct position of the reflector is shown as
the dashed line in both (a) and (b). The image in (a) was obtained by migrating data with the correct velocity and the
reflector is correctly located. The image in (b) was obtained by migrating data with incorrect velocity distribution and
the image is not correctly located.

APPENDIX
This appendix contains a summary of the ray-tracing algo- i, = wq,
rithm used to compute the excitation-time imaging condition
in ?wo-dimensicnal media; Details of the derivation carr bee and
found in Lee and Stewart (198 1). G, = u(u, - GwJ,
At any point on a raypath there exist the four quantities x,
Ji-,z, and i, where x and z are spatial position coordinates, the wherew,=x,w,=1,w,=z,w,=i,andG=u,w,+u,w,.
dot denotes djds, and ds is along the ray. These four quantities These four equations are solved simultaneously for wr, wa,
are the initial conditions required to extend the ray by one wj, and w4 by a fourth-order Runge-Kutta algorithm. The
additional step. Let u = 0-r = slowness [u is the velocity at (x. traveltime for a ray is evaluated as
z)] and define u, = duldx and u, = dujdz. Then, the ray equa-
tion can be written
723
Wl = w2,
where I& is the average velocity on the ith segment and the
$, = U(U, - Gw,), summation is over all segments.