11 Reservoir Geophysics

• Introduction • Elastic Waves and Rock Properties • Seismic Resolution • Vertical Resolution • Lateral
Resolution • Analysis of Amplitude Variation with Offset • Reflection and Refraction • Reflector Curvature
• AVO Equations • Processing Sequence for AVO Analysis • Derivation of AVO Attributes by Prestack Amplitude
Inversion • Interpretation of AVO Attributes • 3-D AVO Analysis • Acoustic Impedance Estimation • Synthetic
Sonic Logs • Processing Sequence for Acoustic Impedance Estimation • Derivation of Acoustic Impedance Attribute
• 3-D Acoustic Impedance Estimation • Instantaneous Attributes • Vertical Seismic Profiling • VSP Acquisition
Geometry • Processing of VSP Data • VSP-CDP Transform • 4-D Seismic Method • Processing of 4-D Seismic
Data • Seismic Reservoir Monitoring • 4-C Seismic Method • Recording of 4-C Seismic Data • Gaiser’s Coupling
Analysis of Geophone Data • Processing of P P Data • Rotation of Horizontal Geophone Components • Common-
Conversion-Point Binning • Velocity Analysis of P S Data • Dip-Moveout Correction of P S Data • Migration of P S
Data • Seismic Anisotropy • Anisotropic Velocity Analysis • Anisotropic Dip-Moveout Correction • Anisotropic
Migration • Effect of Anisotropy on AVO • Shear-Wave Splitting in Anisotropic Media • Exercises • Appendix L:
Mathematical Foundation of Elastic Wave Propagation • Stress-Strain Relation • Elastic Wave Equation •
Seismic Wave Types — Body Waves and Surface Waves • Wave Propagation Phenomena — Diffraction, Reflection,
and Refraction • The Zoeppritz Equations • Prestack Amplitude Inversion • References

11.0 INTRODUCTION

In Chapter 8, we reviewed the two-dimensional (2-D)
and three-dimensional (3-D), post- and prestack migra-
tion strategies for imaging the earth’s interior in depth.
In Chapter 9, we learned traveltime inversion techniques
for estimating a structural model of the earth that is
needed to obtain an accurate image in depth. In Chap-
ter 10, structural inversion case studies for earth model-
ing and imaging in depth were presented. By structural
inversion, we define the geometry of the reservoir unit,
and the overlying and underlying depositional units.
Traveltimes, however, are only one of the two compo-
nents of recorded seismic wavefields; amplitudes are the
other component.
In this chapter, we shall turn our attention to in-
version of reflection amplitudes to infer petrophysical
properties within the depositional unit associated with
the reservoir rocks. The petrophysical properties in-
clude porosity, permeability, pore pressure, and fluid
saturation. Specifically, we shall discuss prestack am-
plitude inversion to derive the amplitude variation with
offset (AVO) attributes (Section 11.2) and poststack
amplitude inversion to estimate an acoustic impedance
1794 Seismic Data Analysis
model of the earth (Section 11.3). The processes of es-
timating the acoustic impedance and AVO attributes
by way of inversion of amplitudes may be appropri-
ately referred to as stratigraphic inversion. Our goal
ultimately is reservoir characterization based on struc-
tural and stratigraphic inversion of seismic data with
calibration to well data.
We appropriately begin this chapter by investigat-
ing the resolution we can achieve from seismic data in
defining vertical and lateral variations in the geometry
of the reservoir unit. Resolution is the ability to sep-
arate two events that are very close together (Section
11.1). There are two aspects of seismic resolution: ver-
tical (or temporal) and lateral (or spatial). Seismic res-
olution becomes especially important in mapping small
structural features, such as subtle sealing faults, and in
delineating thin stratigraphic features that may have
limited areal extent.
Reservoir characterization involves calibration of
the results of analysis of surface seismic data — both
from structural and stratigraphic inversion, to well
data. One category of well data includes various types
of logs recorded in the borehole. Logs that are most
relevant to seismic data are sonic, shear, and density.
Another category of well data is a vertical seismic pro-
file (VSP) (Section 11.4).
Just as we can seismically characterize a reservoir,
we also can seismically monitor its depletion. This is
achieved by recording 3-D seismic data over the field
that is being developed and produced at appropriate
time intervals and detecting changes in the reservoir
conditions; specifically, changes in petrophysical prop-
erties of the reservoir rocks, such as fluid saturation and
pore pressure. Specifically, such changes may be related
to changes in the seismic amplitudes from one 3-D sur-
vey to the next. Time-lapse 3-D seismic monitoring of
reservoirs is referred to as the 4-D seismic method (Sec-
tion 11.5). The fourth dimension represents the calendar
time over which the reservoir is being monitored.
Some reservoirs can be better identified and mon-
itored by using shear-wave data. For instance, acoustic
impedance contrast at the top-reservoir boundary may
be too small to detect, whereas shear-wave impedance
contrast may be sufficiently large to detect. By record-
ing multicomponent data at the ocean bottom, P -wave
and S-wave images can be derived. Commonly, four
data components are recorded — the pressure wavefield,
and inline, crossline, and vertical components of particle
velocity. Thus, the multicomponent seismic data record-
ing and analysis is often referred to as the 4-C seismic
method (Section 11.6).
This chapter ends with a brief discussion on
anisotropy. While exploration seismology at large is
based on the assumption of an isotropic medium, the
earth in reality is anisotropic. This means that elastic
properties of the earth vary from one recording direc-
tion to another. Seismic anisotropy often is associated
with directional variations in velocities. For instance,
in a vertically fractured limestone reservoir, velocity in
the fracture direction is lower than velocity in the direc-
tion perpendicular to the plane of fracturing (azimuthal
anisotropy). Another directional variation of velocities
involves horizontal layering and fracturing of rocks par-
allel to the layering. In this case, velocity in the hor-
izontal direction is higher than the vertical direction
(transverse isotropy). In Section 11.7, we shall review
seismic anisotropy in relation to velocity analysis, mi-
gration, DMO correction, and AVO analysis.
Elastic Waves and Rock Properties
Seismic waves induce elastic deformation along the
propagation path in the subsurface. The term elastic
refers to the type of deformation that vanishes upon re-
moval of the stress which has caused it. To study seismic
amplitudes and thus investigate their use in exploration
seismology, it is imperative that we review wave prop-
agation in elastic solids. This gives us the opportunity
to appreciate the underlying assumptions in estimating
acoustic impedance and AVO attributes.
A summary of the elastic wave propagation theory
is provided in Appendix L. To facilitate the forthcoming
discussion on the link between elastic waves and rock
properties, first, we summarize the definitions of elastic
wave theory that should always be remembered.
(a) Stress is force per unit area. Imagine a parti-
cle represented by an infinitesimally small volume
around a point within a solid body with dimensions
(dx, dy, dz) as depicted in Figure L-1. The stress
acting upon one of the surfaces, say dy − dz, can
in general be at some arbitrary direction. It can,
however, be decomposed into three components —
one which is normal to the surface, and two which
are tangential to the surface. The normal compo-
nent of the stress is called the normal stress and the
tangential components are called the shear stress.
A normal stress component is tensional if it is posi-
tive and compressional if it is negative. Fluids can-
not support shear stress. In a fluid medium, only
one independent stress component exists — the hy-
drostatic pressure.
(b) Strain is deformation measured as the fractional
change in dimension or volume induced by stress.
Strain is a dimensionless quantity. The stress field
away from the typical seismic source is so small
 Reservoir Geophysics
that it does not cause any permanent deforma-
tion on rock particles along the propagation path.
Hence, the strain induced by seismic waves is very
small, usually around 10−6 . Consider two points, P
and Q, within a solid body as indicated in Figure
L-2. Subject to a stress field, the solid is deformed
in some manner and the particles at points P and
Q are displaced to new locations P and Q . Con-
sider deformations of specific types illustrated in
Figure L-3. The simplest deformation is the exten-
sion in one direction as a result of a tensional stress
(Figure L-3a). The fractional change in length in
a given direction is defined as the principal strain
component. A positive strain refers to an exten-
sion and a negative strain refers to a contraction.
Other types of deformation are caused by shearing
(Figure L-3b), rotation (Figure L-3c), and a com-
bination of the two (Figure L-3d). These angular
deformations are called shear strains since they re-
sult in a shearing of the volume around a point
within a solid body (Figure L-3b).
(c) Elastic deformation is a deformation in solid bodies
that vanishes once the stress is released.
(d) Hooke’s law for elastic deformations states that the
strain at any point is directly proportional to the
stresses applied at that point.
(e) Elastic moduli are material constants that describe
stress-strain relations:
(1) Bulk modulus is the ratio of hydrostatic stress
to volumetric strain; hence, it is a measure of in-
compressibility.
(2) Modulus of rigidity is the ratio of shear stress
to shear strain; hence, it is a measure of resistance
to shear stress.
(3) Young’s modulus is the ratio of the longitudinal
stress to the longitudinal strain associated with a
cylindrical rod that is subjected to a longitudinal
extension in the axial direction. Since strain is a
dimensionless quantity, Young’s modulus has the
dimensions of stress.
(4) Poisson’s ratio is the ratio of the lateral con-
traction to longitudinal extension associated with
a cylindrical rod that is subjected to a longitudi-
nal extension in the axial direction. Since strain is
a dimensionless quantity, Poisson’s ratio is a pure
number.
(f) Seismic waves are elastic waves that propagate in
the earth.
(g) P -waves (or equvalently, compressional waves, lon-
gitudinal waves, or diltatational waves) are waves
with particle motion in the direction of wave prop-
agation.
(h) S-waves (or equivalently, shear waves, transverse
waves, or rotational waves) are waves with particle
1795
motion in the direction perpendicular to the direc-
tion of wave propagation.
(i) Reflection is the wavefield phenomenon associated
with the fraction of incident wave energy that is
returned from an interface that separates two layers
with different elastic moduli.
(j) Refraction is the the wavefield phenomenon associ-
ated with the fraction of incident wave energy that
is transmitted into the next layer.
(k) Diffraction is the wavefield phenomenon associated
with energy that propagates outward from a sharp
discontinuity in the subsurface.
In exploration seismology, we are primarily inter-
ested in compressional and shear waves that travel
through the interior of solid layers, and thus are charac-
terized as body waves. Whereas in earthquake seismol-
ogy, we also make use of Love and Rayleigh waves which
travel along layer boundaries, and thus are character-
ized as surface waves.
Both body waves and surface waves are different
forms of elastic waves, each associated with a specific
type of particle motion. In the case of compressional
waves, the particle motion induced by a compressional
stress is in the direction of wave propagation. The com-
pressional stress causes a change in the particle dimen-
sion or volume. The more the rock resists to the com-
pressional stress, the higher the compressional wave ve-
locity. In the case of shear waves, the particle motion
induced by a shear stress is in the direction perpendic-
ular to the direction of wave propagation. The shear
stress does not cause a change in the particle dimension
or volume; instead, it changes particle shape. The more
the rock resists shear stress, the higher the shear wave
velocity. Under the assumption that both wave types
are elastic, whatever the change induced by the wave
motion — the elastic deformation in particle shape, di-
mension or volume, vanishes once the wave motion on
the particle vanishes and is propagated onto the neigh-
boring particle.
Figure 11.0-1 outlines the interrelationships be-
tween the various elastic parameters. Starting with
Young’s modulus — the ratio of principal stress to prin-
cipal strain, and Poisson’s ratio — the ratio of shear
strain to principal strain, Lamé’s constants — λ and µ
are defined. The Lamé constant µ is indeed the modulus
of rigidity and the Lamé constant λ = κ−(2/3)µ, where
κ is the bulk modulus (Section L.3). Then, the two
wave velocities — compressional (P -waves) and shear
(S-waves), are derived in terms of the Lamé constants,
or the bulk modulus and modulus of rigidity, and den-
sity.
From the definitions of the P - and S-wave velocities
in Figure 11.0-1, note that both are inversely propor-
tional to density ρ. At first thought, this means that
1796 Seismic Data Analysis

FIG. 11.0-1. The relationships between the various elastic parameters for isotropic solids.
 Reservoir Geophysics 1797

FIG. 11.0-2. Variations in P -wave velocity with various rock types with different densities (Gardner et al., 1974).
1798 Seismic Data Analysis
FIG. 11.0-3. Crossplot of P -wave slowness versus S-wave slowness based on laboratory measurements wtih various rock
types (Pickett, 1963).
the lower the rock density the higher the wave veloc-
ity. A good example is halite which has low density (1.8
gr/cm3 ) and high P -wave velocity (4500 m/s). In most
cases, however, the higher the density the higher the
velocity (Figure 11.0-2). This is because an increase in
density usually is accompanied by an increase in the
ability of the rock to resist compressional and shear
stresses. So an increase in density usually implies an
increase in bulk modulus and modulus of rigidity. Re-
turning to the expressions for the P - and S-wave ve-
locities in Figure 11.0-1, note that the greater the bulk
modulus or the modulus of rigidity, the higher the veloc-
ity. Based on field and laboratory measurements, Gard-
ner et al. (1974) established an empirical relationship
between density ρ and P -wave velocity α. Known as
Gardner’s formula for density, this relationship given
by ρ = cα0.25 , where c is a constant that depends on
the rock type, is useful to estimate density from veloc-
ity when the former is unknown. With the exception of
anhydrites, most rock types — sandstones, shales, and
carbonates, tend to obey Gardner’s equation for den-
sity.
In Section 3.0, a brief review of the results of some
of the key laboratory experiments on seismic veloci-
ties was made. For a given lithologic composition, seis-
mic velocities in rocks are influenced by porosity, pore
shape, pore pressure, pore fluid saturation, confining
pressure, and temperature. It is generally accepted that
confining pressure, and thus the depth of burial, has the
most profound effect on seismic velocities (Figure 3.0-
3). For instance, the P -wave velocities for clastics can
vary from 2 km/s at the surface up to 5 km/s and for
carbonates from 3 km/s at the surface up to 6 km/s at
depths greater than 5 km.
Because of the large variations in P -wave veloci-
ties caused by all these factors, P -wave velocity alone is
not adequate to infer the lithology, unambiguously. The
ambiguity in lithologic identification can be resolved to
some extent if we have the additional knowledge of S-
wave velocities. Here, we examine the ratio of the S-
wave velocity to the P -wave velocity, β/α, which only
depends on Poisson’s ratio σ (Figure 11.0-1). In some
instances, we refer to the inverse ratio α/β. The higher
the Poisson’s ratio, the higher the velocity ratio α/β.
 Reservoir Geophysics 1799

FIG. 11.0-4. (a) Crossplot of P -wave velocity versus S-wave velocity derived from full-waveform sonic logs using rock samples
with different lithologies — SS: sandstone, SH: shale and LS: limestone; (b) crossplot of the velocity ratio versus the P -wave
velocity using the same sample points as in (a) (Miller and Stewart, 1999).
1800 Seismic Data Analysis

FIG. 11.0-5. Variation of the velocity ratio with respect to (a) shale content and (b) clay content (Miller and Stewart, 1999).
 Reservoir Geophysics
This relationship is supported by the physical meaning
of Poisson’s ratio — the ratio of shear strain to principle
strain. A way to describe the physical meaning of Pois-
son’s ratio is to consider a metal rod that is subject to
an extensional strain. As the rod is stretched, its length
increases while its thickness decreases. Hence, the less
rigid the rock, the higher the Poisson’s ratio. This is ex-
actly what is implied by the expression in Figure 11.0-1
that relates the modulus of rigidity µ to Poisson’s ratio
σ. Unconsolidated sediments or fluid-saturated reservoir
rocks have low rigidity, hence high Poisson’s ratio and
high velocity ratio α/β. Here is the first encounter with
a direct hydrocarbon indicator — the P - to S-wave ve-
locity ratio. Ostrander (1984) was the first to publish
the link between a change in Poisson’s ratio and change
in reflection amplitude as a function of offset.
Aside from the direct measurement of S-wave ve-
locities down the borehole, there are three indirect ways
to estimate the S-wave velocities. The first approach
is to perform prestack amplitude inversion to estimate
the P - and S-wave reflectivities and thus compute the
corresponding acoustic impedances (Section 11.2). The
second approach is to record multicomponent seismic
data and estimate the S-wave velocities from the P -to-
S converted-wave component (Section 11.6). The third
approach is to generate and record S-waves themselves.
Figure 11.0-3 shows a plot of the S-wave slow-
ness (inverse of the S-wave velocity) versus the P -wave
slowness (inverse of the P -wave velocity) based on lob-
oratory measurements (Pickett, 1963). Figure 11.0-4a
shows a plot of the P -wave velocity to S-wave velocity
based on full-waveform sonic logs from a producing oil
field (Miller and Stewart, 1999). The key observation
made from these results is that a lithologic composition
may be associated with a reasonably distinctive veloc-
ity ratio α/β. The shale and limestone samples fall on
a linear trend that corresponds to a velocity ratio of
1.9, whereas the dolomite samples have a velocity ratio
of 1.8. The sandstone samples have a range of velocity
ratio of 1.6 to 1.7. Lithologic distinction sometimes is
more successful with a crossplot of P -wave to S-wave
velocity ratio versus the P -wave velocity itself (Miller
and Stewart, 1999). This is illustrated in Figure 11.0-
4b which shows the same sample points as in Figure
11.0-4a.
Effect of shale and clay content on the velocity ratio
α/β is an important factor in lithologic identification.
Field and laboratory data from sandstone cores indicate
that the velocity ratio α/β increases with increasing
shale and clay content as a result of a decrease in S-
wave velocity (Figure 11.0-5).
Finally, effect of porosity on the velocity ratio α/β
is generally dictated by the pore shape. For limestones
with their pores in the form of microcracks, the ve-
locity ratio increases as the percent porosity increases
1801
(Eastwood and Castagna, 1983). For sandstones with
their rounded pores, the velocity ratio does not increase
as much with increasing porosity (Miller and Stewart,
1999).The difference between the rounded pores and mi-
crocracks lies in the fact that it is easier to collapse a
rock with microcracks, hence lower modulus of rigidity.
11.1 SEISMIC RESOLUTION
Resolution relates to how close two points can be, yet
still be distinguished. Two types of resolution are con-
sidered — vertical and lateral, both of which are con-
trolled by signal bandwidth. The yardstick for vertical
resolution is the dominant wavelength, which is wave
velocity divided by dominant frequency. Deconvolution
tries to increase the vertical resolution by broadening
the spectrum, thereby compressing the seismic wavelet.
The yardstick for lateral resolution is the Fresnel zone,
a circular area on a reflector whose size depends on
the depth to the reflector, the velocity above the re-
flector and, again, the dominant frequency. Migration
improves the lateral resolution by decreasing the width
of the Fresnel zone, thus separating features that are
blurred in the lateral direction.
Vertical Resolution
For two reflections, one from the top and one from the
bottom of a thin layer, there is a limit on how close they
can be, yet still be separable. This limit depends on the
thickness of the layer and is the essence of the problem
of vertical resolution.
The dominant wavelength of seismic waves is given
by
v
λ= , (11 − 1)
f
where v is velocity and f is the dominant frequency.
Seismic wave velocities in the subsurface range between
2000 and 5000 m/s and generally increase in depth. On
the other hand, the dominant frequency of the seismic
signal typically varies between 50 and 20 Hz and de-
creases in depth. Therefore, typical seismic wavelengths
range from 40 to 250 m and generally increase with
depth. Since wavelength determines resolution, deep
features must be thicker than the shallow features to be
resolvable. A graph of wavelength as a function of veloc-
ity for various values of frequency is plotted in Figure
11.1-1. The wavelength is easily determined from this
graph, given the velocity and dominant frequency.
1802 Seismic Data Analysis
Table 11-1. Threshold for vertical resolution.
λ/4 = v/4f
v (m/s) f (Hz) λ/4 (m)
2000 50 10
3000 40 18
4000 30 33
5000 20 62
The acceptable threshold for vertical resolution
generally is a quarter of the dominant wavelength. This
is subjective and depends on the noise level in the
data. Sometimes the quarter-wavelength criterion is too
generous, particularly when the reflection coefficient is
small and no reflection event is discernable. Sometimes
the criterion may be too stringent, particularly when
events do exist and their amplitudes can be picked with
ease.
Table 11-1 contains the wavelength threshold val-
ues for vertical resolution, considering the realistic ve-
locity and frequency ranges. For example, a shallow fea-
ture with a 2000-m/s velocity and 50-Hz dominant fre-
quency potentially can be resolved if it is as thin as 10
m. A thinner feature cannot be resolved. Similarly, for
a deep feature with a velocity as high as 5000 m/s and
dominant frequency as low as 20 Hz, the thickness must
be at least 62 m for it to be resolvable.
It is now appropriate to ask whether a thin strati-
graphic unit must be resolved to be mapped. The an-
swer is no. Resolution as defined here and in the geo-
physical literature implies that reflections from the top
and bottom of a thin bed are seen as separate events
or wavelet lobes. Using this definition, resolution does
not consider amplitude effects. The thickness and areal
extent of beds below the resolution limit often can
be mapped on the basis of amplitude changes. This
amplitude-based analysis can be especially precise when
used for mapping gas-generated bright spots in tertiary
rocks. Thus, in many stratigraphic plays, resolution in
the strict sense is not an issue. For these plays, detec-
tion, not resolution, is the problem.
Vertical resolution is a concern when discontinu-
ities are inferred along a reflection horizon because of
faults. Figure 11.1-2 shows a series of faults with vertical
throws that are equal to 1, 1/2, 1/4, 1/8, and 1/16th
of the dominant wavelength. It is when the throw is
equal or greater then one-fourth of the dominant wave-
length that the presence of the fault can be inferred
easily. Perhaps a smaller throw can be inferred by us-
ing diffractions from faults along the reflection horizon,
provided the noise level is low in the data.
FIG. 11.1-1. The relationship between velocity, domi-
nant frequency, and wavelength. Here, wavelength = veloc-
ity/frequency. (Adapted from Sheriff, 1976; courtesy Amer-
ican Association of Petroleum Geologists.)
Clearly the ability to resolve or detect small tar-
gets can be increased by increasing the dominant fre-
quency of the stacked data. The dominant frequency of
a stacked section from a given area is governed by the
physical properties of the subsurface, processing quality,
and recording parameters. Since we cannot control the
subsurface properties, the high-frequency signal level
can only be influenced by the effort put into recording
and processing.
The emphasis in recording should be to preserve
high frequencies and suppress noise. The sampling rate
and antialiasing filters should be adequate to record
the desired frequencies. Receiver arrays should be small
enough to prevent the significant loss of high-frequency
signal because of intragroup moveout and statics. How-
ever, the arrays should not be too small, since small
arrays are not as effective at suppressing random, high-
frequency noise (wind noise) as large arrays. Finally, the
source effort should be high enough to provide adequate
signal level relative to noise level within the desired fre-
quency band. Unless the signal-to-noise ratio of the field
data is above some minimal level, say 0.25, processing
algorithms have difficulty in recovering the signal. The
signal has to be detectable before it can be enhanced.
The emphasis in processing should be to preserve
and display the high-frequency signal present in the
input data. Filters with good high-frequency response
should be used for interpolation processes such as NMO
 Reservoir Geophysics 1803

FIG. 11.1-2. Faults with different amounts of vertical throws expressed in fractions of the dominant wavelength.

removal, datum and statics corrections, and multiplex
skew corrections. Extra care should be taken to en-
sure that small-scale residual moveout or statics, which
might cause loss of high-frequency signal during stack-
ing, are removed before stack. Nonsurface-consistent
alignment programs (often called trim statics programs)
sometimes are used for this purpose. Finally, care must
be taken to ensure that all the high-frequency signal is
displayed on the final stack. Poststack deconvolution is
a useful tool for this purpose.
Since the Fresnel zone depends on wavelength, it
also depends on frequency. For example, if the seismic
signal riding along the wavefront is at a relatively high
frequency, then the Fresnel zone is relatively narrow.
The smaller the Fresnel zones, the easier it is to differen-
tiate between two reflecting points. Hence, the Fresnel-
zone width is a measure of lateral resolution. Besides
frequency, lateral resolution also depends on velocity
and the depth of the reflecting interface — the radius
of the wavefront is approximated by (Exercise 11-1)

z0 λ
Lateral Resolution r= . (11 − 2a)
2
In terms of dominant frequency f (equation 11-1), the
Lateral resolution refers to how close two reflecting
Fresnel-zone width is
points can be situated horizontally, yet be recognized
as two separate points rather than one. Consider the
spherical wavefront that impinges on the horizontal pla-
nar reflector AA’ in Figure 11.1-3. This reflector can
be visualized as a continuum of point diffractors. For
a coincident source and receiver at the earth’s surface
(location S), the energy from the subsurface point (0)
arrives at t0 = 2z0 /v. Now let the incident wavefront
advance in depth by the amount λ/4. Energy from sub-
surface location A, or A’, will reach the receiver at time
t1 = 2(z0 + λ/4)/v. The energy from all the points
within the reflecting disk with radius OA’ will arrive
sometime between t0 and t1 . The total energy arriving
within the time interval (t1 − t0 ), which equals half the
dominant period (T /2), interferes constructively. The
reflecting disk AA’ is called a half-wavelength Fresnel
zone (Hilterman, 1982) or the first Fresnel zone (Sheriff,
1991). Two reflecting points that fall within this zone
generally are considered indistinguishable as observed
from the earth’s surface. FIG. 11.1-3. Definition of the Fresnel zone AA .
1804 Seismic Data Analysis

FIG. 11.1-4. A constant-velocity zero-offset section from an earth model that consists of four reflectors, each with four
nonreflecting segments A, B, C, and D. Lateral resolution is governed by the size of the Fresnel zone. The lateral extent of
each gap is indicated by the solid bars on top. Note that A is hardly recognizable on any of the four horizons; B can be inferred
on the shallow horizon at 0.5 s; C is difficult to infer after 2 s, while D is recognizable at all depths. All of these observations
depend on noise level and how easily the diffractions can be recognized.
 Reservoir Geophysics
Table 11-2. Threshold for lateral resolution (first Fres-
nel zone).
r = (v/2) t0 /f
t0 (s) v (m/s) f (Hz) r (m)
1 2000 50 141
2 3000 40 335
3 4000 30 632
4 5000 20 1118
v t0
r= . (11 − 2b)
2 f
Table 11-2 shows the Fresnel zone radius, where
r = OA in Figure 11.1-3 for a range of frequency
and velocity combinations at various depths t0 = 2z/v.
From Table 11-2, note that the shallower the event
(and the higher the dominant frequency), the smaller
the Fresnel zone. Since the Fresnel zone generally in-
creases with depth, spatial resolution also deteriorates
with depth.
Figure 11.1-4 shows reflections from four interfaces,
each with four nonreflecting segments. The actual sizes
of these segments are indicated by the solid bars on
top. On the seismic section, the reflections appear to
be continuous across some of these segments. This is
because the size of some of the nonreflecting segments
is much less than the width of the Fresnel zone; they
are beyond the lateral resolution limit.
Spatial resolution is better understood in terms
of diffractions. Note that in Figure 11.1-4, the diffrac-
tion energy is smeared across the nonreflecting segments
on the deeper reflectors. Since migration is the process
that collapses diffractions, it is reasonable to think that
migration increases spatial resolution. Remember that
migration can be achieved by downward continuation
of receivers from the surface to the reflecting horizons.
As a result of downward continuation, the observation
points get closer and closer to the reflection points and,
therefore, the Fresnel zone gets smaller and smaller. A
smaller Fresnel zone means a higher spatial resolution
(equation 11-2).
Migration tends to collapse the Fresnel zone to ap-
proximately the dominant wavelength (equation 11-1)
(Stolt and Benson, 1986). Therefore, we anticipate that
migration will not resolve the horizontal limits of some
of the nonreflecting segments along the deeper reflectors
in Figure 11.1-4. Tables 11-1 and 11-2 can be used to es-
timate the potential resolution improvement that may
result from migration. Unless three-dimensional (3-D)
migration (Section 7.3) is performed, the actual resolu-
tion will be less than that indicated. Two-dimensional
1805
(2-D) migration only shortens the Fresnel zone in the
direction parallel to the line orientation. Resolution in
the perpendicular direction is not affected by 2-D mi-
gration.
Figure 11.1-5 indicates how vertical and lateral res-
olution problems are inter-related. We want to deter-
mine the edge of the pinchout. The basis of the pinchout
model is a wedge of material represented at a given mid-
point location by a two-term reflectivity sequence, one
term associated with the top and one with the bottom
of the wedge. The true thickness of the wedge at vari-
ous locations is indicated on top of Figure 11.1-5a. The
velocity within the wedge is 2500 m/s.
We first consider the reflectivity sequence with
two spikes of equal amplitude and identical polarity.
The vertical-incidence seismic response (Figure 11.1-
5a) is obtained by convolving the sequences with a
zero-phase wavelet with a 20-Hz dominant frequency.
(The zero-phase response simplifies event tracking from
the top and bottom of the wedge.) Based on this re-
sponse, the edge of the wedge can be inferred as left
of location B, where the waveform reduces to a single
wavelet (Figure 11.1-5a). From the resolution thresh-
old criterion, the smallest thickness that can be re-
solved is (2500 m/s)/(4Hz) = 31.25 m. Figures 11.1-
5a, b, and c show the same pinchout modeled us-
ing three different zero-phase wavelets with increas-
ing dominant frequency (20, 30, and 40 Hz). Sepa-
ration between the true location of pinchout A and
the position of the minimum resolvable wedge thick-
ness B decreases with increasing wavelet bandwidth.
While the resolution threshold criterion allows us
to say only that the thickness of the wedge is less than
31.25 m left of location B, an amplitude-based crite-
rion can provide a substantially more accurate loca-
tion for the edge of the wedge. Again, refer to Figure
11.1-5a and observe the sudden change in amplitude
at location A where the true edge of the pinchout is
located. Hence, the edge still can be reliably detected,
even though it may not be resolved, provided the signal-
to-noise (signal-to-noise) ratio is favorable. Assuming
that the relative size of the top and bottom reflection
coefficients is known, amplitudes also can be used to es-
timate the wedge thickness between locations B and A.
Figures 11.1-5a, b, and c show an apparent lat-
eral variation in layer thickness. To see the difference
between the true thickness and the apparent thickness
(peak-to-peak time), refer to Figure 11.1-5d. This figure
shows the data of Figure 11.1-5b with the actual geome-
try of the wedge superimposed on the seismic response.
Since the composite wavelet has only one positive peak,
the apparent thickness between locations A and B is
nearly zero. At location B, the composite wavelet has a
1806 Seismic Data Analysis

FIG. 11.1-5. (a) The result of convolving a zero-phase wavelet of 20-Hz dominant frequency with a wedge reflectivity model.
The reflection coefficients associated with the top and bottom of the wedge are of equal amplitude and identical polarity. The
true edge of the wedge is beneath location A and the true thickness of the wedge is indicated by the numbers on top; (b)
same as (a) except the dominant frequency of the wavelet is 30 Hz; (c) same as (a) except the dominant frequency of the
wavelet is 40 Hz; (d) same as (b) with the actual geometry of the wedge superimposed on the seismic response; (e) same as
(b) except the reflection coefficients from the top and bottom of the wedge have opposite polarity; (f) same as (e) with the
actual geometry of the wedge superimposed on the seismic response.

flat top. Immediately to the right of location B, the flat
top disappears and the composite wavelet splits. The
flat-top character can be identified as the limit of ver-
tical resolution (Ricker, 1953). A short distance to the
right of the point at which the composite wavelet first
splits into two peaks, the apparent thickness becomes
equal to the true thickness. This thickness is called the
tuning thickness and is equal to peak-to-trough separa-
tion (one half the dominant period) of the convolving
wavelet (Kallweit and Wood, 1982). Beyond the point
of tuning thickness, note the apparent thickening of the
layer between locations B and C. To the right of loca-
tion C, the apparent and true thicknesses become equal.
Besides apparent thickness, the maximum absolute
amplitude of the composite wavelet along the pinchout
also changes (Kallweit and Wood, 1982). To the left of
location A in Figure 11.1-5b, note the single isolated
zero-phase wavelet. Immediately to the right of loca-
tion A, the response of the two closely spaced spikes
with identical polarity results in the maximum abso-
lute amplitude. This amplitude gradually decreases to
a minimum exactly at the tuning thickness. It then in-
creases and reaches the amplitude value of the original
single wavelet to the right of location C.
Maximum amplitude and apparent thickness
change in reverse when the reflectivity model consists
 Reservoir Geophysics
FIG. 11.2-1. A moveout-corrected CMP gather with a re-
flection event at 1.25 s that exhibits amplitude variations
with offset. (Courtesy Western Geophysical.)
of reflection coefficients with equal amplitude and op-
posite polarity (Figure 11.1-5e). The composite wave-
form resulting from this reflectivity model is discussed
by Widess (1973). Two spikes of opposite polarity with
a small separation between them act as a derivative op-
erator. When applied to a zero-phase wavelet, this op-
erator causes a 90-degree phase shift. This phase shift
can be seen in Figure 11.1-5e on the wavelets between
locations A and B. Widess (1973) observed that the
composite wavelet within this zone basically retains its
shape while its amplitude changes.
Figure 11.1-5f shows data of Figure 11.1-5e with
the actual geometry of the wedge superimposed on the
seismic response. Note that the wedge appears thicker
than it actually is between locations A and B. Also note
the apparent thinning of the layer between locations
B and C. Beyond location C, the apparent and true
1807
thicknesses become equal. Immediately to the right of
location A in Figure 11.1-5e, the response of the two
closely spaced spikes with opposite polarity results in
the cancellation of the amplitudes. The largest absolute
amplitude of the composite wavelet gradually increases
to a maximum immediately to the right of location B.
It gradually decreases and reaches the amplitude value
of the original single wavelet to the right of location C.
From the above discussion, we see that peak-to-
peak time measurements and amplitude information
can aid in detecting pinchouts that may otherwise be
unresolvable. If the size of the reflection coefficients were
known, then the amplitudes could be used to map the
thickness below the resolution limit.
Nevertheless, the reliability of the analysis depends
to some extent on the signal-to-noise ratio. Finally, the
deceptive changes in amplitude and apparent thickness
must be noted during the mapping of the top and bot-
tom of the pinchout.
11.2 ANALYSIS OF AMPLITUDE
VARIATION WITH OFFSET
In Appendix L, we review the theory of seismic wave
propagation in an elastic continuum. The earth’s upper
crust that is of interest in seismic prospecting, how-
ever, is made up of rock layers with different elastic
moduli. When seismic waves travel down in the earth
and encounter layer boundaries with velocity and den-
sity contrast, the energy of the incident wave is par-
titioned at each boundary. Specifically, part of the in-
cident energy associated with a compressional source
is mode-converted to a shear wave; then, both the
compressional- and shear-wave energy are partly re-
flected from and partly transmitted through each of
these layer boundaries.
The fraction of the incident energy that is reflected
depends upon the angle of incidence. Analysis of reflec-
tion amplitudes as a function of incidence angle can
sometimes be used to detect lateral changes in elastic
properties of reservoir rocks, such as change in Poisson’s
ratio. This may then suggest a change in the ratio of P -
wave velocity to S-wave velocity, which in turn may
imply a change in fluid saturation within the reservoir
rocks.
By way of CMP recording geometry, reflection
amplitudes are not measured as a function of angle;
instead, they are measured as a function of source-
receiver offset. Nevertheless, a range of incidence an-
gles is spanned by a range of offsets. Amplitude-versus-
offset analysis, therefore, provides the information on
amplitude-versus-angle.
Figure 11.2-1 shows a moveout-corrected CMP
gather with a strong reflection at 1.25 s. Note the am-
1808 Seismic Data Analysis

plitude variations with offset — in this case, amplitudes frequency, α1 is the compressional-wave velocity in the
increasing with offset. By picking the peak amplitudes upper layer (equation 11-3b), and z-axis is downward
and plotting them against offset, an amplitude variation positive. Similar wave functions can be written for the
with offset (AVO) curve is derived for a target horizon at reflected plane wave:
each CMP location. Then, an AVO pattern may emerge, ω
which can then be used to infer reservoir parameters. w1 (z, t) = A1 exp −i z − iωt (11 − 4b)
α1
The pattern with which amplitudes vary with offset
depends on the combination of reservoir rock and fluid and for the transmitted plane wave:
properties. Detection of a pattern is dictated primarily ω
w2 (z, t) = A2 exp i z − iωt , (11 − 4c)
by the signal-to-noise ratio and the range of incidence α2
angle that is spanned by the offset range of the CMP where α2 is the compressional-wave velocity in the lower
gather for a target horizon. The shallower the reflec- layer.
tor, the wider the range of incidence angle; hence, AVO Given the incident wave amplitude A0 , we want to
indicators are best determined for shallow targets. compute the reflected and refracted wave amplitudes,
The following discussion on reflection and refrac- A1 and A2 , respectively. Equations (11-4a,b,c) must be
tion of seismic waves is based on flat layer boundaries. accompanied with boundary conditions at z = 0 that
Reflection amplitudes also depend upon the dip of the satisfy the continuity of displacement and stress. The
reflecting boundary and its curvature. We can remove continuity of displacement condition, w0 + w1 = w2 at
the dip and curvature effects by performing prestack the interface z = 0 gives the relation
time migration. The resulting CMP gathers are asso-
ciated with reflectors in their migrated positions and A0 + A1 = A2 . (11 − 5)
reflection amplitudes can then be associated with a lo- The stress component Pzz can be specialized from
cally flat earth model. Hooke’s law (equation L-18c) for the present case of
a normal-incident compressional plane wave
∂w
Pzz = (λ + 2µ) . (11 − 6)
Reflection and Refraction ∂z
The continuity of stress condition at the interface z = 0
For simplicity, consider a monochromatic compressional gives the relation
plane wave that impinges at normal incidence upon a Pzz + Pzz = Pzz 2 . (11 − 7)
0 1
flat layer boundary at z = 0. The incident energy is par-
titioned between a reflected and transmitted compres- Now, differentiate the wave functions of equations (11-
sional plane wave. For this special case, there is only 4a,b,c) with respect to z, substitute into equation (11-7)
one stress component, Pzz , and one displacement com- and set z = 0 to obtain the following expression:
ponent, w, which is only a function of z. The equation ρ1 α1 A0 − ρ1 α1 A1 = ρ2 α2 A2 , (11 − 8)
of wave motion (L-29c) for this special case takes the
form where ρ1 and ρ2 are the densities of the upper and lower
2 2 layers, respectively.
∂ w ∂ w We now have two equations, (11-5) and (11-8), and
ρ 2
= (λ + 2µ) 2 , (11 − 3a)
∂t ∂z two unknowns, A1 and A2 . By combining equations (11-
where ρ is density of the medium, and λ and µ are 5) and (11-8), we can derive the ratio of the reflected
Lamé’s constants (equations L-19a,b) associated with wave amplitude to the incident wave amplitude, which
an isotropic solid. They are directly related to the is called the reflection coefficient c, associated with the
compressional-wave velocity α by equation (L-35) which layer boundary as
is rewritten below as
A1 ρ2 α2 − ρ1 α1
c= = . (11 − 9)
λ + 2µ A0 ρ2 α2 + ρ1 α1
α= . (11 − 3b)
ρ Define the product of density and velocity as the
A solution to equation (11-3a) can be written as seismic impedance, I = ρα. If there is a difference be-
tween the seismic impedances of the two layers, then a
ω reflection occurs at the interface. If the upper layer has
w0 (z, t) = A0 exp i z − iωt , (11 − 4a)
α1 a higher impedance than the lower layer, the reflection
where w0 is the wave function for the incident com- coefficient becomes negative causing a phase reversal on
pressional wave, A0 is its amplitude, ω is the angular the reflected waveform.
 Reservoir Geophysics 1809

FIG. 11.2-2. A long, deep-water seismic section that shows internal reflections within the water layer caused by density
contrast associated with temperature and salinity changes in the water layer. (Data courtesy IFP.)

An impedance contrast at a layer boundary often is
largely caused by velocity contrast. Nevertheless, con-
ditions exist for which density contrast can be signifi-
cant in giving rise to reflections. Figure 11.2-2 illustrates
one such case. The internal reflections within the water
layer occur because of changes in water temperature
and salinity that causes variations in water density.
A typical reflection coefficient for a strong reflector
is about 0.2. The reflection coefficient associated with
a hard water bottom is about 0.3. Note that it is the
impedance contrast, and not the density or velocity con-
trasts, that gives rise to reflection energy.
In the foregoing discussion, a normal-incident com-
pressional plane wave was considered. If the same com-
pressional plane wave was incident at an oblique angle
to the interface, then derivation of the reflected and
transmitted wave functions gets complicated, and we
find that the reflection coefficient changes with angle of
incidence. Moreover, at non-normal incidence, the in-
cident compressional-wave energy is partitioned at the
interface into four components: reflected compressional,
reflected shear, transmitted compressional, and trans-
mitted shear waves.
For simplicity, consider a 2-D compressional plane
wave that impinges on a layer boundary with an angle of
incidence ϕ0 as depicted in Figure 11.2-3a. The incident
wavefront is denoted by AC. Point A at the layer bound-
ary acts as a Huygens’ secondary source and generates
its own spherical wavefronts associated with compres-
sional and shear waves propagating in both upper and
lower media with the corresponding velocities. In Fig-
ure 11.2-3a, only the reflected compressional wavefront
1810 Seismic Data Analysis

FIG. 11.2-3. Reflection and refraction of an incident P -wave at a layer boundary. Medium parameters: ρ is density, α is
P -wave velocity, β is S-wave velocity. (a) Reflected P -wave; (b) reflected S-wave; (c) refracted P -wave; (d) refracted S-wave;
(e) raypaths associated with the incident P wave, and reflected and refracted P - and S-waves. The radius of the circular
wavefront associated with Huygens’ secondary source at A on the layer boundary is CB for the reflected wave, (β1 /α1 ) for
the reflected S-wave, (α2 /α1 )CB for the refracted P -wave, and (β2 /α1 ) for the refracted S-wave. The relationship between
the angles in (e) is given by Snell’s law (equation 11-10).
 Reservoir Geophysics 1811

and raypath are shown. By the time the incident wave- along the interface and is refracted back to the upper
front at C reaches the reflecting interface at B, the layer with an angle equal to the angle of incidence. This
spherical wavefront associated with the reflected com- angle is called the critical angle of incidence for com-
pressional wave reaches D, so that AD = CB and the pressional waves and is given by
tangential line DB becomes the wavefront for the re- α1
flected compressional wave. Since the incident and the sin ϕc = . (11 − 11a)
α2
reflected compressional waves travel with the same ve-
locity, the angle of incidence ϕ0 is equal to the angle of The critically refracted wave is often called the head
reflection ϕ1 . wave and is the basis for refraction statics (Section 3.4).
Now consider the reflected shear wave as shown in If the compressional velocity α1 of the upper layer
Figure 11.2-3b. By the time the incident wavefront at C is less than the shear velocity β2 of the lower layer, then
reaches the reflecting interface at B, the spherical wave- there exists an angle of incidence such that no refracted
front associated with the reflected shear wave reaches shear energy is transmitted into the lower layer. Again,
D, so that AD = (β1 /α1 )CB, and the tangential line the refracted energy travels along the interface and is
DB becomes the wavefront for the reflected shear wave. refracted back to the upper layer with an angle which is
The angle for the reflected shear wave ψ1 is no longer called the critical angle of P -to-S conversion given by
equal to the angle of incidence ϕ0 . α1
sin ψc = . (11 − 11b)
Huygens’ principle can also be applied to describe β2
the refracted wave at the interface. Refer to Figures For the general case of non-normal incidence,
11.2-3c and 11.2-3d and note that the compressional boundary conditions at the interface involve not only
incident plane wave at A acts as a Huygens’ secondary principal stress and strain components but also the
source and generates its own compressional wavefront shear stress and strain components. Again, by using the
that travels into the lower medium with velocity α2 and requirement that the stress and displacement must be
shear wavefront that travels into the lower medium with continuous at the interface, a set of equations can be
velocity β2 . By the time the incident wavefront at C in derived to compute the amplitudes of the reflected and
Figure 11.2-3c reaches the layer boundary at B, the refracted P - and S-wave components associated with
spherical wavefront associated with the refracted com- an incident compressional source (Section L.5):
pressional wave reaches D, so that AD = (α2 /α1 )CB,
α1
and the tangential line DB becomes the wavefront for cos ϕ1 A1 + sin ψ1 B1
the refracted compressional wave. Similarly, by the time β1
α1 α1
the incident wavefront at C in Figure 11.2-3d reaches + cos ϕ2 A2 − sin ψ2 B2 = cos ϕ1 ,
the layer boundary at B, the spherical wavefront asso- α2 β2
ciated with the refracted shear wave reaches D, so that (11 − 12a)
AD = (β2 /α1 )CB, and the tangential line DB becomes α1
− sin ϕ1 A1 + cos ψ1 B1
the wavefront for the refracted shear wave. β1
From the geometry of reflected and refracted ray- α1 α1
+ sin ϕ2 A2 + cos ψ2 B2 = sin ϕ1 ,
paths shown in Figure 11.2-3e, Snell’s law of refraction α2 β2
can be deducted as (11 − 12b)
sin ϕ0 sin ϕ1 sin ϕ2 sin ψ1 sin ψ2 − cos 2ψ1 A1 − sin 2ψ1 B1
= = = = . ρ2 ρ2
α1 α1 α2 β1 β2 + cos 2ψ2 A2 − sin 2ψ2 B2 = cos 2ψ1 ,
(11 − 10) ρ1 ρ1
Note that for all four cases in Figure 11.2-3, the hori- (11 − 12c)
zontal distance AB at the interface is the same for the
and
incident and reflected or the refracted wave. If AC is set
to the wavenumber along the propagation path of the α12
sin 2ϕ1 A1 − cos 2ψ1 B1
incident wave, then AB is the horizontal wavenumber β12
which is invariant as a result of reflection or refraction. ρ2 β22 α12 ρ2 α12
Actually, Snell’s law given by equation (11-10) is a di- + sin 2ϕ2 A2 + cos 2ψ2 B2 = sin 2ϕ1 .
ρ1 β12 α22 ρ1 β12
rect consequence of this physical observation.
(11 − 12d)
If the compressional velocity α1 of the upper layer
is less than the compressional velocity α2 of the lower These are the Zoeppritz equations which can be solved
layer, then there exists an angle of incidence such that for the four unknowns, the reflected compressional-wave
no refracted compressional energy is transmitted into amplitude A1 , the reflected shear-wave amplitude B1 ,
the lower layer. Instead, the refracted energy travels the refracted compressional-wave amplitude A2 , and
1812 Seismic Data Analysis
FIG. 11.2-4. Framework for derivation of the Zoeppritz equations. For details see Section L.5.
the refracted shear-wave amplitude B2 . Equations (11-
12a,b,c,d) have been normalized by the incident-wave
amplitude A0 = 1 (Section L.5).
From Snell’s law (equation 11-10), given the inci-
dent angle for the compressional wave and specifying
the compressional- and shear-wave velocities, the an-
gles of reflection and refraction can be computed. Sub-
stitution into equation (11-12) yields the required wave
amplitudes. These wave amplitudes, of course, depend
on the angle of incidence (Figure 11.2-3e).
Figure 11.2-4 outlines the framework for deriving
the Zoeppritz equations based on an earth model that
comprises two layers separated by a horizontal interface.
Details are left to Section L.5. Starting with the equa-
tions of motion and Hooke’s law, derive the wave equa-
tion for elastic waves in isotropic media in which elastic
properties are invariant in any spatial direction at any
given location. Then, use the equations of continuity
which state that the vertical and tangential stress and
stress components coincide at layer boundary, plane-
wave solutions to the wave equation and Snell’s law that
relates propagation angles to wave velocities to derive
the equations for computing the amplitudes of the re-
flected and transmitted P - and S-waves.
Refer to Figure 11.2-5 for a specific case of the
partition of energy of an incident compressional-wave
amplitude into four components. Note the significant
changes at critical angles of refraction for the compres-
sional and shear wave. It is important to keep in mind
that the shape of these curves varies greatly with dif-
ferent situations of medium parameters. Also, note that
at normal incidence no P -to-S conversion takes place,
and equations (11-12a,b,c,d) reduce to the special case
described by equations (11-5) and (11-8).
From a practical standpoint, the angle-dependency
of reflection coefficients implies that the reflection am-
plitude associated with a reflecting boundary varies
with source-receiver separation as well as the depth of
the reflector. For sufficiently deep reflectors and the typ-
ical source-receiver separations used in practice, the am-
plitude for the reflected compressional wave is nearly
constant or slowly varying with offset (left of the crit-
ical angle on the curve corresponding to the reflected
compressional-wave energy in Figure 11.2-5). It is this
 Reservoir Geophysics 1813

FIG. 11.2-5. Partitioning of a unit-amplitude incident P -wave energy into four components — reflected and refracted P -
and S-waves (Richards, 1961.).

slowly varying portion of the P -to-P reflection curve
that we have to detect from CMP data with limited
offset range and in the presence of noise. Note also from
Figure 11.2-5 that the largest P -to-S conversion occurs
beyond the critical angle, corresponding to large source-
receiver separations.
Reflection amplitude variations with angle of in-
cidence, and therefore with offset, can be modeled us-
ing the Zoeppritz equations. For modeling the reflection
amplitudes, you need well-log curves for the P -wave ve-
locity, S-wave velocity, and density. Then, using equa-
tion (11-13a) compute the P -to-P reflection amplitudes
as a function offset. Figure 11.2-6 shows a modeled CMP
gather using well data. A sonic log was first converted
to a blocky form to simplify the modeled amplitudes on
the gather. Then, using the Gardner relation (equation
11-34a), a density profile was derived. Also, using a ra-
tio of P -wave to S-wave velocity, a shear-wave velocity
profile was generated. The objective in this modeling
exercise was to see the effect of a change in Poisson’s
ratio at some depth on the amplitude variation with
offset. The Poisson’s ratio profile shows a change at ap-
proximately 650 ms at which time we observe a marked
variation of amplitudes with offset on the CMP gather.
Reflector Curvature
Define the ratio CE of the reflection amplitude at nor-
mal incidence from a curved boundary to the reflec-
tion amplitude from a flat boundary at the same depth
1814 Seismic Data Analysis

FIG. 11.2-6. An example of modeling of a CMP gather based on Zoeppritz equations. (Courtesy Hampson-Russell.)

(Hilterman, 1975) as where θ is the angle of incidence. Note that equation

1 (11-13b) reduces to equation (11-13a) for the case of
CE = √ , (11 − 13a)
1 + A−1 z
where z is the depth to the reflector, and A is the re-
flector curvature — negative for synclines and positive
for anticlines. Note that for a flat reflector, whatever its
depth, CE = 1. But for a curved reflector, the reflection
amplitude at normal incidence to a synclinal interface
is greater than the case of a flat reflector, and the re-
flection amplitude at normal incidence to an anticlinal
interface is smaller than the case of a flat reflector. The
physical basis of equation (11-13a) is that a synclinal in-
terface focuses the energy associated with the reflecting
wave, whereas an anticlinal interface defocuses it.
The effect of reflector curvature on amplitude vari-
ation with offset is quantified as (Shuey et al., 1984)
1
CE(θ) = , (11 − 13b)
1+ A−1 z/ cos2 θ vature defined by the ratio z/x denoted in Figure 11.2-7,
normal incidence (θ = 0). Both equations are for the
case of a 2-D reflecting interface. Equation (11-13b) was
extended by Bernitsas (1990) to the case of a 3-D re-
flecting interface with curvature in both the inline and
crossline directions.
To understand the effect of reflector curvature on
amplitude variation with offset, it is convenient to study
the ratio CE(θ)/CE(θ = 0) as a function of angle of
incidence (Shuey et al., 1984; Castagna, 1993). Figure
11.2-7 shows the behavior of this ratio for the cases of a
syncline and an anticlne with varying degrees of curva-
ture. Note that, for an anticlinal interface, the curvature
effect defined by the ratio CE(θ)/CE(θ = 0) decreases
with angle of incidence or offset (Figure 11.2-7c). In
practice, this means that the reflection amplitudes from
an anticlinal interface at far offsets are lower than those
from a flat interface. Also, note that the larger the cur-
 Reservoir Geophysics 1815

FIG. 11.2-7. Effect of reflector curvature on angular dependence of reflected wave amplitudes. The incident wave is of
compressional type. (a) A synclinal reflector (x < 0), (b) an anticlinal reflector (x > 0), (c) effect of curvature on the angle-
dependent reflection amplitudes associated with the reflector as in (a), and (d) the same as in (c) for the reflector as in (b).
(Adapted from Shuey et al., 1984.)
1816 Seismic Data Analysis
the more prominent the curvature effect. For a synclinal
interface with a mild curvature (0 > z/x > −1), the
curvature effect on amplitudes increases with angle of
incidence, and it decreases with angle of incidence for a
tight syncline (z/x < −1). Again, note that the larger
the curvature, the more prominent the curvature effect.
It is clear from the model studies summarized
above that reflection amplitudes are influenced by the
reflector curvature. This is true for both normal in-
cidence (equation 11-13a) and non-normal incidence
(equation 11-13b). Reflection amplitudes must be cor-
rected for the reflector curvature by prestack time mi-
gration before prestack amplitude inversion to derive
the AVO attributes which are discussed in this section.
Similarly, reflection amplitudes must be corrected for
the reflector curvature by poststack time migration be-
fore poststack amplitude inversion to derive the acous-
tic impedance attribute which is discussed in the next
section.
AVO Equations
Consider the two elastic half-space layers in Figure 11.2-
3e. The Zoeppritz equations (11-14) can be solved for
the reflected and refracted P - and S-wave amplitudes,
A1 , B1 , A2 , and B2 . However, our interest in exploration
seismology is largely the angle-dependency of the P -to-
P reflections given by the coefficient A1 . Specifically,
we wish to infer or possibly estimate elastic parameters
of reservoir rocks from reflection amplitudes and relate
these parameters to reservoir fluids.
The exact expression for A1 derived from the solu-
tion of the Zoeppritz equations (11-13) is complicated
and not intuitive in terms of its practical use for in-
ferring petrophysical properties of reservoir rocks. The
first approximation to the Zoeppritz equation for P -to-
P reflection amplitude is given by Bortfeld (1961) as
1 α2 ρ2 cos θ2
R(θ1 ) = ln
2 α1 ρ1 cos θ1
ρ2
ln
ρ1 β12 − β22
+ 2+ sin2 θ1 .
α2 α2 β1 α12
ln −ln
α1 α1 β2
(11 − 14)
The arrangement of the two terms on the right-hand
side of equation (11-14) is based on separating the
acoustic (the first term) and the elastic (the second
term) effects on reflection amplitudes. As such, equa-
tion (11-14) does not explicitly indicate angle- or offset-
dependence of reflection amplitudes; therefore, its prac-
tical implementation for AVO analysis has not been con-
sidered.
Instead, we shall use the approximation provided
by Aki and Richards (1980) as the starting point for de-
riving a series of practical AVO equations. Now that we
only need to deal with the P -to-P reflection amplitude
A1 , we shall switch to the conventional notation by re-
placing A1 with R(θ) as the angle-dependent reflection
amplitude for AVO analysis.
By assuming that changes in elastic properties of
rocks across the layer boundary are small and propaga-
tion angles are within the subscritical range, the exact
expression for R(θ) given by the Zoeppritz equation can
be approximated by (Aki and Richards, 1980)
1 ∆α β2 ∆β
R(θ) = 1 + tan2 θ − 4 2 sin2 θ
2 α α β
1 β2 ∆ρ
+ 1 − 4 2 sin2 θ , (11 − 15)
2 α ρ
where α = (α1 + α2 )/2, average P -wave velocity and
∆α = (α2 − α1 ), β = (β1 + β2 )/2, average S-wave ve-
locity and ∆β = β2 − β1 , ρ = (ρ1 + ρ2 )/2, average
density and ∆ρ = ρ2 − ρ1 , and θ = (ϕ1 + ϕ2 )/2, average
of the incidence and transmission angles for the P -wave
(Figure 11.0-2e).
Figure 11.2-8 shows the angle-dependent reflection
amplitude associated with an interface with contrast in
P - and S-wave velocities and densities based on the ex-
act Zoeppritz equation, the Bortfeld approximation de-
scribed by equation (11-14), and the Aki-Richards ap-
proximation described by equation (11-15) (Smith and
Gidlow, 1987). Note that these approximations closely
follow the exact solution within the range of angles of in-
cidence that are achievable by the recording of seismic
data used in exploration. For very shallow reflectors,
however, the approximate solutions would deviate from
the exact solution significantly at very wide angles of
incidence.
Note that the Aki-Richards approximation to the
angle-dependent reflection amplitude R(θ) given by
equation (11-15) has three parts in terms of ∆α/α
which describes the fractional change in P -wave veloc-
ity across the layer boundary and hence may be referred
to as the P -wave reflectivity, ∆β/β which describes the
fractional change in the S-wave velocity across the layer
boundary and hence may be referred to as the S-wave
reflectivity, and ∆ρ/ρ which describes the fractional
change in density across the layer boundary.
In practice, we do not observe the separate effects
of P -wave reflectivity ∆α/α, S-wave reflectivity ∆β/β
and fractional change in density ∆ρ/ρ on the reflection
amplitudes R(θ). Instead, we observe changes in reflec-
tion amplitudes as a function of angle of incidence. In
fact, it is the elastic parameters such as the P -wave
 Reservoir Geophysics 1817

FIG. 11.2-8. P -to-P reflection amplitude as a function of angle of incidence computed by using the exact Zoeppritz equation,
and Bortfeld (equation 11-14) and Aki-Richards (equation 11-15) approximations (Smith and Gidlow, 1987).
1818 Seismic Data Analysis

reflectivity ∆α/α, S-wave reflectivity ∆β/β and frac- (11-3b) and the shear-wave velocity β is given by equa-
tional chnage in density ∆ρ/ρ that we wish to esti- tion (L-47) which is rewritten below as
mate from the observed angle-dependent reflection am-
µ
plitudes. To use the Aki-Richards equation (11-15) in β= , (11 − 17c)
the inversion of reflection amplitudes for these elas- ρ
tic parameters, we first need to recast it in successive where µ is Lamé’s constant.
ranges of angle of incidence. This change of philosophy We also define the P -wave reflection amplitude RP
in arranging the terms in the Aki-Richards equation at normal incidence as
(11-15) was first introduced by Shuey (1985) and led
1 ∆α ∆ρ
to practical developments in AVO analysis. The new RP = + . (11 − 18)
arrangement in terms of successive ranges of angle of 2 α ρ
incidence is given by Substitute equations (11-17a), (11-17b), and (11-18)
1 ∆α ∆ρ into the Aki-Richards equation (11-16) and perform
R(θ) = + some algebraic simplification to obtain
2 α ρ
R(θ) = RP
1 ∆α β 2 ∆β β 2 ∆ρ
+ −4 2 −2 2 sin2 θ 1 ∆α ∆α ∆ρ 1−2σ ∆σ
2 α α β α ρ + − 2 + + sin2 θ
2 α α ρ 1−σ (1−σ)2
1 ∆α
+ tan2 θ − sin2 θ . (11 − 16) 1 ∆α
2 α + tan2 θ − sin2 θ . (11 − 19)
2 α
Another practical matter of concern is that the
Aki-Richards equation (11-15) or any of its modifica- Define a new term H
tions that we shall derive in this section describe the ∆α/α
modeled reflection amplitudes as a function of angle of H= , (11 − 20)
∆α/α + ∆ρ/ρ
incidence. However, the observed reflection amplitudes
are available from CMP data as a function of offset. A and by way of equation (11-18) note that
need then arises either to transform the model equa- ∆α
tion for the reflection amplitudes from angle to offset = 2 RP H. (11 − 21a)
α
coordinates (Demirbag and Coruh, 1988) or to actually Next combine equations (11-20) and (11-21a) to obtain
transform the CMP data from offset to angle coordi-
nates. While the first approach is theoretically appeal- ∆ρ
= 2 RP (1 − H). (11 − 21b)
ing, the practical schemes are based on the latter ap- ρ
proach. We have already discussed such a transforma- Finally, substitute equations (11-21a) and (11-21b) into
tion in Section 6.4 — the Radon transform using the the second term on the right-hand side of equation (11-
linear moveout equation or its robust variation in the 19) to obtain
form of slant stacking. Figure 11.2-9 shows Zoeppritz
amplitude curves as a function of angle of incidence and ∆σ
offset (Demirbag and Coruh, 1988). R(θ) = RP + RP H0 + sin2 θ
(1 − σ)2
Based on the theoretical conjecture made earlier by
Koefoed (1955) that the elastic property that is most 1 ∆α
+ tan2 θ − sin2 θ , (11 − 22)
directly related to angular dependence of reflection co- 2 α
efficient R(θ) is Poisson’s ratio σ, Shuey (1985) intro-
duced a variable transformation from S-wave velocity where
β to σ. The relationship between the two variables is 1 − 2σ
H0 = H − 2(1 + H) . (11 − 23)
given by equation (L-49) which we rewrite below as 1−σ
Equation (11-22) is known as Shuey’s three-term
1 1 − 2σ
β2 = α2 (11 − 17a) AVO equation. The first term RP is the reflection am-
2 1−σ
plitude at normal incidence. At intermediate angles
to perform the necessary differentiation (0 < θ < 30 degrees), the third term may be dropped,
thus leading to a two-term approximation
∆β ∆α 1 ∆σ
= − . (11 − 17b)
β α 2 (1 − σ)(1 − 2σ) R(θ) = RP + G sin2 θ, (11 − 24)
The compressional-wave velocity α is given by equation where
Reservoir Geophysics 1819
1820 Seismic Data Analysis

∆σ as described by equation (11-27), this attribute is the

G = RP H0 + . (11 − 25) scaled sum of the AVO intercept RP and AVO gradient
(1 − σ)2
G attributes.
Equation (11-24) is known as Shuey’s two-term By recasting the first-order approximation to the
AVO equation. In practice, amplitudes picked along Zoeppritz equation, Wiggins et al. (1984) and Spratt
a moveout-corrected event on a CMP gather plotted et al. (1984) derived a practical expression for S-wave
against sin2 θ can be fitted to a straight line. The slope reflectivity. First, drop the term with tan2 θ in equation
of the line gives the AVO gradient attribute and the or- (11-16) and rearrange the remaining terms to obtain
dinate at zero angle gives the AVO intercept attribute.
The AVO gradient given by equation (11-25) is directly 1 ∆α ∆ρ
R(θ) = +
related to change in Poisson’s ratio ∆σ, which in turn, 2 α ρ
is directly related to fluid saturation in reservoir rocks.
The AVO intercept attribute represents the reflectiv- 1 ∆α ∆ρ β 2 1 ∆β ∆ρ
+ + −8 2 + sin2 θ
ity RP at normal incidence. Therefore, the AVO in- 2 α ρ α 2 β ρ
tercept attribute, in lieu of conventional stack, can be
β 2 ∆ρ 1 ∆ρ
used as input to derive the acoustic impedance attribute + 2 − sin2 θ (11 − 28)
α2 ρ 2 ρ
(Section 11.3), which is indirectly related to porosity in
reservoir rocks. such that, much like the definition for the P -wave re-
Shown in Figure 11.2-10a is a portion of a sec- flectivity RP given by equation (11-18), an expression
tion derived from 2-D prestack time migration. The for the S-wave reflectivity RS
objective is to identify fluid-saturated reservoir zones
at the apex and the flanks of the structural closure. 1 ∆β ∆ρ
RS = + (11 − 29)
This image section is derived from the stacking of 2 β ρ
common-reflection-point (CRP) gathers associated with
can be explicitly inserted back into equation (11-28) to
the prestack time-migrated data. The CRP gather in
get
Figure 11.2-10b shows three events with amplitude vari-
ations with offset which are plotted in Figure 11.2-10c. β2
By using Shuey’s equation (11-24), the AVO gradient R(θ) = RP + RP − 8 RS sin2 θ
α2
and intercept sections are computed from the CRP
gathers as shown in Figures 11.2-11 and 11.2-12, respec- β2 1 ∆ρ
+ 2 − sin2 θ. (11 − 30)
tively. Note that the gradient section exhibits a group α 2 2 ρ
of AVO anomalies in the vicinity of the structural apex,
possibly indicating fluid-saturated reservoir rocks. Set β/α = 0.5 to make the last term on the right-
At large angles of incidence beyond 30 degrees, the hand side vanish and obtain (Spratt et al., 1984)
third term in equation (11-22) gradually becomes dom- R(θ) = RP + RP − 2 RS sin2 θ. (11 − 31)
inant. Note that this term is related directly to frac-
tional change in P -wave velocity, ∆α/α. So, not only This equation is of the form given by equation (11-24)
the reflection traveltimes at far offsets (Section 3.1) cor- where
responding to large angles of incidence, but also the re- G = RP − 2 R S , (11 − 32)
flection amplitudes at large angles of incidence make
the biggest contribution to the resolution needed to es- which can be rewritten explicitly in terms of the shear-
timate the changes in P -wave velocities. wave reflectivity RS
The two-term equation (11-24) can be specialized 1
RS = RP − G . (11 − 33)
for a specific value of Poisson’s ratio, σ = 1/3 and H0 = 2
−1 so that equation (11-25) takes the form This is the AVO attribute equation for estimating the
9 shear-wave reflectivity. Given the AVO intercept RP
G = −RP + ∆σ, (11 − 26) and AVO gradient G attributes, simply take half of
4
which can be solved for the change in Poisson’s ratio the difference between the two attributes to derive the
across a layer boundary shear-wave reflectivity RS as described by equation (11-
33).
4 Figure 11.2-13 shows the reflection amplitudes as
∆σ = RP + G . (11 − 27)
9 a function of angle as predicted by equation (11-31) for
This is the AVO attribute equation for estimating three combinations of RP and RS . Note that equation
changes in Poisson’s ratio (Hilterman, 1983). Actually, (11-31) is a good approximation to the P -to-P reflection
 Reservoir Geophysics 1821

FIG. 11.2-10. (a) A portion of a prestack time-migrated section; (b) portion of a common-reflection-point gather in the
vicinity of the structural apex in (a); (c) reflection amplitudes as a function of offset measured along three events indicted by
the red, horizontal trajectories in (b).
1822 Seismic Data Analysis

FIG. 11.2-11. The AVO gradient section defined by G in equation (11-24); (b) close-up of (a) in the vicinity of the structural
apex.
 Reservoir Geophysics 1823

FIG. 11.2-12. (a) The AVO intercept section defined by RP in equation (11-24); (b) close-up of (a) in the vicinity of the
structural apex.
1824 Seismic Data Analysis

FIG. 11.2-13. P -to-P reflection amplitude as a function of angle of incidence computed by using the exact Zoeppritz equation
(the three curves labeled as A) and the approximate form given by equation (11-31) (the three curves labeled as B) (Spratt
et al., 1984).

amplitudes as predicted by the exact Zoeppritz equation Simplify the algebra to obtain the desired two-par-
up to nearly 30 degrees of angles of incidence. ameter model equation for prestack amplitude inversion
Return to the Aki-Richards equation (11-15) and (Section L.6)
consider the case of N -fold CMP data represented in the
domain of angle of incidence. Note that the reflection 5 1 β2 2 1 ∆α β2 ∆β
R(θ)= − sin θ+ tan2
θ − 4 sin2 θ .
amplitude R(θ) is a linear combination of three elastic 8 2 α2 2 α α2 β
parameters — P -wave reflectivity ∆α/α, S-wave reflec- (11 − 36)
tivity ∆β/β and fractional change in density ∆ρ/ρ. Redefine the coefficients ai and bi and write the
Smith and Gidlow (1987) argue in favor of solving discrete form of equation (11-36)
for only two of the three parameters by making use of ∆α ∆β
the empirical relation between density ρ and P -wave Ri = ai + bi , (11 − 37)
α β
velocity α (Gardner et al., 1974):
where
ρ = kα1/4 , (11 − 34a)
5 1 β2 1
ai = − sin2 θi + tan2 θi (11 − 38a)
where k is a scalar. This relation holds for most water- 8 2α 2 2
saturated rocks. Differentiate to get and
∆ρ 1 ∆α β2
= . (11 − 34b) bi = −4 sin2 θi . (11 − 38b)
ρ 4 α α2
Now substitute equation (11-34b) into the original Consider the case of N -fold CMP data represented
Aki-Richards equation (11-15) and combine the terms in the domain of angle of incidence. We have, for each
with ∆α/α CMP location and for a specific reflection event asso-
ciated with a layer boundary, N equations of the form
1 1 β2 ∆α as equation (11-37) and two unknowns — ∆α/α and
R(θ) = 1 + tan2 θ + 1 − 4 2 sin2 θ
2 8 α α ∆β/β. We have more equations than unknowns; hence,
we encounter yet another example of a generalized lin-
β2 ∆β
− 4 sin2 θ . (11 − 35) ear inversion (GLI) problem (Section J.1). The objec-
α2 β tive is to determine the two parameters such that the
 Reservoir Geophysics 1825

FIG. 11.2-14. (a) P -wave and (b) S-wave reflectivity sections derived from the Smith-Gidlow inversion of prestack amplitudes
(equation 11-39).
1826 Seismic Data Analysis

FIG. 11.2-15. Laboratory measurements of (a) P -wave and (b) S-wave reflectivities at a gas-brine interface in sandstones
(Spratt et al., 1984). The horizontal axis in both plots denotes induration which is a measure of rock strength.

FIG. 11.2-16. Portions of (a) P -wave and (b) an S-wave stacked section that show anomalies associated with lithology (coal)
and fluid content (gas) (Spratt et al., 1984).
 Reservoir Geophysics 1827

FIG. 11.2-17. A sketch of crossplot of P - to S-wave velocity (Castagna et al., 1985; Fatti et al., 1994).

difference between the modeled reflection amplitudes Ri with the data shown in Figure 11.2-10a. Note the AVO
represented by equation (11-37) and the observed re- anomalies along the flanks of the structural closure. It is
flection amplitudes Xi is minimum in the least-squares apparent that some of the AVO anomalies in the P -wave
sense (Smith and Gidlow, 1987). reflectivity section stand out more distinctively as com-
The GLI solution in matrix form is given by (Sec- pared with those in the S-wave reflectivity section. This
tion L.6) may be related to the fact that changing from brine to
  gas causes a small change in S-wave reflectivity, while it
 N 2 N
 ∆α  N 
i ai i ai bi  α  i ai Xi causes a significant change in P -wave reflectivity. Such
    .
N N 2
 ∆β = N
inference is supported by the laboratory measurements
i ai bi i bi i bi X i of P - and S-wave reflectivities at a gas-brine interface
β
(11 − 39) in sandstones (Spratt et al., 1984). Figure 11.2-15 shows
This matrix equation is solved for the two parame- P -wave reflectivities for a group of reservoir sandstones
ters — P -wave reflectivity ∆α/α and S-wave reflectiv- in which the pore fluid changes from brine to gas. For
ity ∆β/β. Note from the definitions of the coefficients rocks with low induration (weak rocks), there is a large
ai and bi given by equations (11-38a,b) that you have change in P -wave reflectivity, while for rocks with high
to choose a value for the ratio β/α to compute the two induration the change becomes less significant (Figure
reflectivities. 11.2-15a). The change in S-wave reflectivity is negli-
Shown in Figure 11.2-14 are the P - and S-wave re- gible for rocks with low and high induration (Figure
flectivity sections that were derived from prestack am- 11.2-15b). A demonstrative field data example of P - and
plitude inversion applied to the CRP gathers associated S-wave reflectivity contrasts that arise from a change in
1828 Seismic Data Analysis

FIG. 11.2-18. Crossplot of P - to S-wave velocity measured down a borehole (Fatti et al., 1994).

lithology and fluid saturation is shown in Figure 11.2-
16.
Refer to equation (11-17b) and note that the dif-
ference between the P -wave and S-wave reflectivities is
related to change in Poisson’s ratio ∆σ — a direct hy-
drocarbon indicator. In fact, Smith and Gidlow (1987)
have coined the term pseudo-Poisson reflectivity to de-
scribe the difference between the P -wave and S-wave
reflectivities
∆σ̃ ∆α ∆β
= − . (11 − 40)
σ̃ α β
Note from equation (11-17b) that the pseudo-
Poisson reflectivity ∆σ̃/σ̃ is not exactly the same as
what may be referred to as the proper Poisson reflec-
tivity ∆σ/σ. If we define the ratio
α rock of interest is by defining a fluid factor attribute that
σ̃ = (11 − 41a)
β indicates the position of the rock property with respect
by differentiation, we can derive the difference relation
given by equation (11-40) and thus show that
and is represented by the equation
α = c0 + c1 β, (11 − 42)
where the scalar coefficients c0 and c1 are empirically
determined for various types of rocks. Suggested values
for these scalars are c0 = 1360 and c1 = 1.16 for water-
saturated clastics (Castagna et al., 1985). Gas-bearing
sandstones lie above the mudrock line, and carbonates
lie below the mudrock line as shown on a crossplot of P -
and S-wave velocities sketched in Figure 11.2-17. The
crossplot shown in Figure 11.2-18 is based on log mea-
surements at a gas-producing well (Fatti et al., 1994).
Note the separation of gas-sandstone cluster from the
water-sandstone and shale clusters in the manner as
sketched in Figure 11.2-17.
A way to quantify the prospectivity of the reservoir
to the mudrock line. First, apply differentiation to both
sides of equation (11-42) and note that

∆σ̃ ∆(α/β) ∆α β ∆β
= . (11 − 41b) = c1 . (11 − 43)
σ̃ α/β α α β
Then, define the fluid factor ∆F
Castagna et al. (1985) defined a straight line in
the plane of S-wave velocity versus P -wave velocity as ∆α β ∆β
∆F = − c1 . (11 − 44)
shown in Figure 11.2-17. This is called the mudrock line α α β
 Reservoir Geophysics 1829

FIG. 11.2-19. (a) Pseudo-Poisson and (b) fluid factor attribute sections derived by using equations (11-40) and (11-44),
respectively.
1830 Seismic Data Analysis

FIG. 11.2-20. (a) The µρ and (b) λρ attribute sections derived by using equations (11-52b) and (11-52c), respectively.
 Reservoir Geophysics 1831

FIG. 11.2-21. (a) Crossplot of P -wave impedance versus S-wave impedance, and (b) crossplot of λρ versus µρ AVO attributes.

If ∆F is close to zero, it means that you have water- and

saturated rock. If you have a gas-saturated sandstone, IS = βρ. (11 − 45b)
∆F will be negative at the top and positive at the base
of the reservoir unit (Smith and Gidlow, 1987). From Section L.6, the P - and S-wave reflectivities
Figure 11.2-19 shows the pseudo-Poisson and fluid- are given by
factor sections that were derived from prestack ampli- ∆IP ∆α ∆ρ
= + (11 − 46a)
tude inversion applied to the CRP gathers associated IP α ρ
with the data shown in Figure 11.2-10a. Note the dis- and
tinctive AVO anomalies along the flanks of the struc- ∆IS ∆β ∆ρ
tural closure. = + . (11 − 46b)
IS β ρ
The two parameters ∆α/α and ∆β/β, estimated
by using the least-squares solution given by equation Assuming that the density obeys Gardner’s relation
given by equation (11-34a), the P -wave reflectivity
(11-39), represent fractional changes in P - and S-wave
∆IP /IP is simply the fractional change of the P -wave
velocities. As such, they are related to P - and S-wave
velocity ∆α/α scaled by a constant, whereas the S-wave
reflectivities, ∆IP /IP and ∆IS /IS , respectively, where
reflectivity ∆IS /IS is a linear combination of the frac-
IP and IS are the P - and S-wave impedances given by
tional changes of the P - and S-wave velocities, ∆α/α
IP = αρ (11 − 45a) and ∆β/β, respectively.
1832 Seismic Data Analysis
 Reservoir Geophysics 1833

A direct estimation of the P - and S-wave reflectiv-
ities given by equations (L-46a,b) can be made by using
an alternative formulation of prestack amplitude inver-
sion which is based on transforming the Aki-Richards
equation (11-15) to the new variables ∆IP /IP and
∆IS /IS (Goodway et al., 1998). Solve equation (11-46a)
for ∆α/α and equation (11-46b) for ∆β/β, and substi-
tute into the Aki-Richards equation (11-15). Following
the algebraic simplification, we obtain (Section L.6)
impedance IP and the S-wave impedance IS can be
computed by integration.
By using the impedance attributes IP and IS ,
Goodway et al. (1998) compute two additional AVO at-
tributes in terms of Lamé’s constants scaled by density
— λρ and µρ. Substitute equation (11-3b) into (11-45a)
to get the relation
λ + 2µ ρ = IP2 , (11 − 52a)

1 ∆IP β2 ∆IS and substitute equation (11-17c) into equation (11-45b)

R(θ) = 1 + tan2 θ − 4 2 sin2 θ to get the relation
2 IP α IS

1 β2 ∆ρ µρ = IS2 . (11 − 52b)

− tan2 θ − 2 2 sin2 θ . (11 − 47)
2 α ρ Note from equations (11-52a,b) that
Goodway et al. (1998) have implemented a specific λρ = IP2 − 2 IS2 . (11 − 52c)
form of equation (11-47) to derive the AVO attributes
Figure 11.2-20 shows the µρ and λρ AVO attribute
∆IP /IP and ∆IS /IS . For a specific value of α/β = 2
and small angles of incidence for which tan θ ≈ sin θ, sections which were derived from prestack amplitude
the third term in equation (11-47) vanishes. Compare inversion applied to the CRP gathers associated with
equations (11-18) and (11-46a), and equations (11-29) the data shown in Figure 11.2-10a. As in the case of
and (11-46b), and note that equation (11-47) with the the pseudo-Poisson and fluid-factor AVO attribute sec-
remaining terms takes the form tions shown in Figure 11.2-19, note the distinctive AVO
anomalies along the flanks of the structural closure.
R(θ) = 1 + tan2 θ RP − 2 sin2 θ RS . (11 − 48)
Goodway et al. (1998) convincingly demonstrates that
The resulting equation then is solved for the P - and separation of gas-bearing sands from tight sands and
S-wave reflectivities, ∆IP /IP = 2RP and ∆IS /IS = carbonates is much better with the crossplot of the
2RS , respectively. Again, consider the case of N -fold Lamé attributes (µρ, λρ) in contrast with the crossplot
CMP data represented in the domain of angle of inci- of the P - and S-wave reflectivities or impedances (Fig-
dence. In discrete form, equation (11-48) can be rewrit- ure 11.2-21).
ten as Figure 11.2-22 outlines a summary of the AVO
Ri = ai RP + bi RS , (11 − 49) equations that are described in this section based on the
various approximations to the Aki-Richards equation
where i is the trace index and the coefficients ai and bi (11-15). Start with Shuey’s arrangement of the terms
are given by
in the Aki-Richards equation, which itself is an approx-
1 imation to the exact expression for the P -to-P reflection
ai = 1 + tan2 θi (11 − 50a)
2 amplitudes given by the Zoeppritz equations. Then, ap-
and ply a transformation from S-wave velocity to Poisson’s
ratio, and drop the third term to get a simple expres-
bi = −2 sin2 θi . (11 − 50b)
sion for the P -to-P reflection amplitude that is a linear
The reflection amplitude Ri in equation (11-49) is a lin- function of sin2 θ. This linear approximation yields the
ear combination of the two parameters, RP and RS . As AVO intercept and gradient attributes.
for the Smith-Gidlow equation (11-37), the two param- Alternatively, you may drop the third term in the
eters, RP and RS , can be estimated for a specific event original Shuey arrangement given by equation (11-16)
from CMP data using the least-squares solution given and apply Wiggins’ rearrangement of the terms. Then,
by assume the specific case of the P -wave velocity to be
 N 2 N
   N 
i ai i ai bi
RP i ai Xi
twice the S-wave velocity to obtain the equation that
  = . yields, once again, the AVO intercept and gradient at-
N N 2 N
i ai bi i bi
RS i bi X i
tributes. The Wiggins AVO intercept and gradient at-
(11 − 51) tributes, unlike the Shuey counterparts, directly lead to
Following the estimation of the P -wave reflectiv- deriving the P -wave and S-wave reflectivity attributes,
ity RP and the S-wave reflectivity RS using the least- albeit only under the assumption that the P -wave ve-
squares solution given by equation (11-51), the P -wave locity is twice the S-wave velocity.
1834 Seismic Data Analysis

FIG. 11.2-23. A raw shot record from the AVO line presented in Section 11.2. (Data courtesy Britannia Gas Ltd.)
 Reservoir Geophysics 1835

FIG. 11.2-24. The shot record in Figure 11.2-23 after muting for guided waves and t2 -scaling for geometric spreading
correction. (Data courtesy Britannia Gas Ltd.)
1836 Seismic Data Analysis

FIG. 11.2-25. The shot record in Figure 11.2-24 after spiking deconvolution. (Data courtesy Britannia Gas Ltd.)
Reservoir Geophysics 1837
1838 Seismic Data Analysis

FIG. 11.2-27. Autocorrelogram (a) of the shot record in Figure 11.2-23, (b) after muting for guided waves and t2 -scaling for
geometric spreading correction, and (c) after spiking deconvolution.
 Reservoir Geophysics
Returning to the three-term Aki-Richards equa-
tion (11-15), you may reduce it to the two-term Smith-
Gidlow equation (11-36) by using Gardner’s relation of
density and P -wave velocity. Then, for a specified ratio
of P - to S-wave velocity, perform inversion of prestack
amplitudes associated with target events on CMP or
CRP gathers to obtain the P - and S-wave reflectivity
attributes. In addition, using these attributes to derive
two more AVO attributes — psuedo-Poisson and fluid
factor.
Finally, you may recast the Aki-Richards equation
(11-15) in terms of P - and S-wave reflectivities (equa-
tions 11-46a,b) and assume that α/β = 2 to obtain the
two-term Goodway et al. equation (11-48). Again, per-
form inversion of prestack amplitudes associated with
target events on CMP or CRP gathers to obtain the P -
and S-wave impedance attributes. Subsequently, by us-
ing the relations between impedances and Lamé’s con-
stants, you can compute two additional AVO attributes
— λρ and µρ.
The AVO equations derived in this section are all
expressed in terms of angle of incidence (equations 11-
24, 11-31, and 11-36). In practice, the mapping of am-
plitudes associated with a reflection event on a CMP
gather from offset to angle of incidence needs to be per-
formed. Assume that the CMP gather is associated with
a horizontally layered earth model so that the event
moveout on the CMP gather is given by the hyperbolic
equation
x2
t2 = t20 + 2
, (11 − 53)
vrms
where t is the two-way traveltime from the source to
the flat reflecting interface back to the receiver, t0 is
the two-way zero-offset time, x is the offset, and vrms
is the rms velocity down to the reflector. The ray pa-
rameter p is given by the stepout dt/dx measured along
the hyperbolic moveout trajectory (Section 6.3). Apply
differentiation to equation (11-53) to get
dt 1 x
= 2 . (11 − 54)
dx vrms t
Since the ray parameter p is also expressed as the ratio
of sin θ/vint , where vint is the interval velocity above
the reflecting interface, it follows that
vint x
sin θ = 2 . (11 − 55)
vrms t
By using equation (11-55), reflection amplitudes on
a CMP gather can be transformed from offset to angle
domain, and subsequently used in the AVO equations
(11-24), (11-31), (11-36), and (11-48).
1839
Processing Sequence for AVO Analysis
There are three important aspects of a processing se-
quence tailored for AVO analysis.
(a) The relative amplitudes of the seismic data must be
preserved throughout the analysis so as to recog-
nize amplitude variation with offset. This require-
ment often leads to an application of a parsimo-
nious sequence of signal processing to avoid distor-
tion of amplitudes by undesirable effects of some
processing algorithms.
(b) The processing sequence must retain the broadest
possible signal band in the data with a flat spec-
trum within the passband.
(c) Prestack amplitude inversion to derive the AVO
attributes must be applied to common-reflection-
point (CRP) gathers (Section 5.4), not to common-
midpoint (CMP) gathers. This is because all the
AVO equations described in this section are based
on a locally flat earth model that can be related to
CRP raypaths but not to CMP raypaths. Specifi-
cally, the CRP gathers are associated with events in
their migrated positions, whereas the CMP gathers
are associated with events in their unmigrated posi-
tions. The AVO equations described in this section
are all based on a horizontally layered earth model
that can be related to CRP raypaths but not to
CMP raypaths. Prestack time migration compen-
sates for the effect of reflector curvature (equation
11-13b) on amplitude variation with offset so that
the reflection amplitudes in each of the resulting
CRP gathers can be associated with a locally flat
earth model.
We shall consider a marine 2-D seismic data set
from the North Sea recorded over a producing gas field.
Data specifications for the line are listed in Table 11-3.
The prestack signal processing that complies with
the above requirements includes the following steps:
(a) If a reliable source signature is available, perform
signature processing (Section 2.5) to convert the
source waveform to its minimum-phase equivalent.
In the present study, no source signature was avail-
able. Apply a mute to shot records to remove
the guided waves associated with the dispersive,
normal-mode propagation within the water layer
(Section F.1).
(b) Apply t2 -scaling to correct for geometric spreading.
A gain function for geometric spreading correction
that depends on primary velocities will overcorrect
(text continues on p. 1848)
1840 Seismic Data Analysis
 Reservoir Geophysics 1841

FIG. 11.2-29. The CRP gather at well location CRP 1134. The reservoir zone coincides with the time window indicated by
the area within the rectangle.
1842 Seismic Data Analysis

FIG. 11.2-30. The unmigrated stack associated with the prestack time-migrated data as in Figure 11.2-28.
 Reservoir Geophysics 1843

FIG. 11.2-31. The same stack as in Figure 11.2-30 after poststack deconvolution.
1844 Seismic Data Analysis

FIG. 11.2-32. Migration of the stack in Figure 11.2-31 using the rms velocity field derived from the velocity analysis of the
CRP gathers as in Figure 11.2-28. The area within the rectangle corresponds approximately to the sections in Figures 11.2-41
and 11.2-42.
Reservoir Geophysics 1845
1846 Seismic Data Analysis

FIG. 11.2-34. Autocorrelogram (a) of the stack in Figure 11.2-30, (b) of the stack in Figure 11.2-31, and (c) of the stack in
Figure 11.2-32.
Reservoir Geophysics 1847
1848 Seismic Data Analysis
Table 11-3. Data specifications for the line used in
AVO analysis.
Line Length 23.5 km
Shot Spacing 37.5 m gathers (Section 5.3).
Receiver Spacing 18.75 m
CMP Spacing 9.375 m (a) Sort the signal-processed shot records to CMP
Minimum Offset 150 m gathers and perform velocity analysis at sparse in-
Maximum Offset 3050 m tervals along the line. To increase the accuracy of
Number of Receivers 156
Fold of Coverage 78
Sampling interval 2 ms
the amplitudes of multiples. Figure 11.2-23 shows
a recorded shot record and 11.2-24 shows the same
record after guided-wave muting geometric spread-
ing correction.
(c) Apply time-invariant spiking deconvolution with
a sufficiently long operator length (Figure 11.2-
25). For land data, it may be necessary to ap-
ply surface-consistent amplitude corrections and
surface-consistent deconvolution to account for the
near-surface effects on amplitudes (Section B.8).
(d) When it is required, apply time-variant spectral
whitening to account for the nonstationarity of the
waveform.
Figure 11.2-26 shows the amplitude spectrum of the
shot record in Figure 11.2-25 computed after each of the
steps in the sequence prescribed above. To begin with,
note that much of the energy in the raw shot record is
confined to the shallow portion and is mostly associated
with the guided waves. The t2 -scaling restores the am-
plitudes in the deeper portion of the record. Spiking de-
convolution followed by a wide-bandpass filter gives the
desired shape to the spectrum with a flat, broadband
character. Figure 11.2-27 shows the autocorrelograms
of the shot record in Figure 11.2-25, again, computed
after each of the steps in the sequence prescribed above.
Note that the autocorrelogram of the raw shot record
is dominated by the guided-wave energy at far offsets
on the left and the energy associated with short period
multiples and reverberations at near offsets on the right.
The guided-wave muting followed by t2 -scaling exposes
the energy associated with multiples that range from
a short- to a moderate-period. Note that spiking de-
convolution with an operator length of 480 ms (about
one-tenth of the total length of the shot record) has
removed a significant amount of the multiple energy
from the record. Both the amplitude spectrum (Figure
11.2-26c) and the autocorrelogram (Figure 11.2-27c) of
the deconvolved shot record indicate that time-variant
spectral whitening does not have to be included in the
sequence.
The prestack data after signal processing are ready
now for prestack time migration to generate the CRP
prestack amplitude inversion and thus increase the
confidence level for the AVO attributes, the fold of
coverage and the offset range of the recorded data
must not be reduced during the processing for any
reason.
(b) Apply NMO correction using the flat-event veloci-
ties. In this case, only three velocity functions were
used in creating the velocity field for NMO correc-
tion.
(c) When required, attenuate those multiples that have
not been handled by deconvolution during the sig-
nal processing stage described above. Data suitable
for AVO analysis are often associated with near-
horizontal earth models or low-relief structures.
Hence, techniques based on the discrete Radon
transform (Section 6.4) often are best suited for
amplitude-preserving multiple attenuation.
(d) Sort the data to common-offset sections and apply
DMO correction.
(e) Perform zero-offset, frequency-wavenumber time-
migration on each of the common-offset sections
after NMO and DMO corections using a single, ver-
tically varying velocity function. Again, data suit-
able for AVO analysis are generally associated with
near-horizontal earth models or low-relief struc-
tures. Hence, use of a single, vertically varying ve-
locity function and a zero-offset phase-shift algo-
rithm for common-offset migration often is appro-
priate.
(f) Sort the data to CRP gathers and apply inverse
NMO correction using the velocity field from step
(b).
(g) Perform velocity analysis at frequent intervals
along the line, and create a velocity field associ-
ated with the migrated data.
(h) Apply NMO correction using the velocity field from
step (g) and, when required, as it was in the present
case study, perform residual moveout velocity anal-
ysis to remove any residual moveout errors that
may be present in the CRP gathers. The resid-
ual moveout analysis actually is a good practice
whatever the degree of residual moveout errors in
the data, since prestack amplitude inversion is ex-
tremely sensitive to how flat the events are in the
CRP gathers. Figure 11.2-28 shows selected CRP
 Reservoir Geophysics 1849

FIG. 11.2-36. Log data measured at well location CRP 1134: (a) the sonic log, (b) the density log, (c) synthetic seismogram
using a −90-degree phase-rotated band-limited wavelet (plotted at time 3.5 s), and (d) the reflectivity series computed from
(a) and (b) and used in creating (c).
1850 Seismic Data Analysis
 Reservoir Geophysics 1851

FIG. 11.2-38. (b) A close-up portion of the CRP gather 1134 as in Figure 11.2-37a at the well location and at reservoir
level, (b) the corresponding modeled CRP gather as in Figure 11.2-37b.

gathers that exhibit mostly flat events. A close-up view
of the CRP gather (Figure 11.2-29) at the well location
(CRP 1134) shows the reservoir zone highlighted by the
rectangle situated between 3.1-3.3 s.
(i) Stack the CRP gathers to obtain the image sec-
tion from prestack time migration. Multiples that
may have remained in the data will exhibit some
residual moveout that can be exploited to further
attenuate them during stacking.
(j) For completeness of the prestack time migration
sequence, unmigrate the CRP stack from step (i)
using the same vertically varying velocity function
as in step (e) and a phase-shift zero-offset wavefield
modeling algorithm (Figure 11.2-30).
(k) Next, apply poststack spiking deconvolution, often
using the same parameters as for prestack decon-
volution (Figure 11.2-31).
(l) Remigrate the modeled zero-offset section from
step (k) using the migration velocity field derived
from the CRP gathers in step (g) (Figure 11.2-32).
In this instance, any lateral velocity variations im-
plied by the migration velocity field need to be ac-
counted for by the migration algorithm of choice.
Poststack amplitude inversion to derive the acous-
tic impedance attribute (Section 11.3) may then be
applied to the final product from prestack time mi-
gration (Figure 11.2-32). Figure 11.2-33 shows the
amplitude spectrum of the CRP stack after each
step of the poststack processing. The amplitude
spectrum of the CRP stack from step (i) shows the
attenuation of high frequencies (Figure 11.2-33a),
which are restored by deconvolution (Figure 11.2-
33b), but are slightly shifted to lower frequencies by
migration (Figure 11.2-33c). The autocorrelogram
of the CRP stack from step (i) exhibits remnants
of the water-bottom multiples (Figure 11.2-34a),
which are largely attenuated by poststack decon-
volution (Figure 11.2-34b).
Derivation of AVO Attributes by
Prestack Amplitude Inversion
Following the prestack signal processing and prestack
time migration designed for AVO analysis, prestack am-
plitude inversion is applied to the CRP gathers from
prestack time migration. Whatever the basis for the
AVO equations (Figure 11.2-22), derivation of the AVO
attributes requires knowledge of the angle of incidence.
(text continues on p. 1859)
1852 Seismic Data Analysis

FIG. 11.2-39. Amplitude variation with offset extracted from the CRP gather as in Figure 11.2-38 at the well location and
transformed to amplitude variation with angle by using the angle of incidence information shown in Figure 11.2-37c. See text
for details.
 Reservoir Geophysics 1853

FIG. 11.2-40. The stacks of the CRP data from prestack time migration as in Figure 11.2-28. The solid triangle denotes the
well location at the surface, and the insertion below the well location is the synthetic equivalent of the sections shown. The
dotted near-vertical line to the right is the well trajectory within the time gate corresponding to the portion of the sections
shown.
1854 Seismic Data Analysis

FIG. 11.2-41. Part 1: AVO attributes derived from prestack amplitude inversion of the CRP data as in Figure 11.2-28. The
solid triangle denotes the well location at the surface, and the insertion below the well location is the corresponding synthetic
AVO attribute. The dotted near-vertical line to the right is the well trajectory within the time gate corresponding to the
portion of the sections shown.
 Reservoir Geophysics 1855

FIG. 11.2-41. Part 2: AVO attributes derived from prestack amplitude inversion of the CRP data as in Figure 11.2-28. The
solid triangle denotes the well location at the surface, and the insertion below the well location is the corresponding synthetic
AVO attribute. The dotted near-vertical line to the right is the well trajectory within the time gate corresponding to the
portion of the sections shown.
1856 Seismic Data Analysis

FIG. 11.2-41. Part 3: AVO attributes derived from prestack amplitude inversion of the CRP data as in Figure 11.2-28. The
solid triangle denotes the well location at the surface, and the insertion below the well location is the corresponding synthetic
AVO attribute. The dotted near-vertical line to the right is the well trajectory within the time gate corresponding to the
portion of the sections shown.
 Reservoir Geophysics 1857

FIG. 11.2-42. The postreservoir zone in the vicinity of the well location CRP 1134 (within the blue rectangle), the reservoir
zone (within the red rectangle), and the prereservoir zone (within the green rectangle) labeled on (a) the intercept and (b)
the gradient sections.
1858 Seismic Data Analysis

FIG. 11.2-43. Crossplots of the attributes within (a) the postreservoir zones, (b) the reservoir zones, and (c) the prereservoir
zones labeled in the sections shown in Figure 11.2-42.
 Reservoir Geophysics
This in turn requires, strictly, an estimated earth model
in depth that can be used to trace rays associated with
the CRP geometry. Figure 11.2-35 shows a velocity-
depth model associated with the CRP stack shown in
Figure 11.2-32. Often, the following procedure is ad-
equate for a velocity-depth model estimation for the
purpose of AVO analysis (Section 9.1):
(a) Interpret a set of time horizons from the CRP stack
(Figure 11.2-32).
(b) Intersect the migration velocity field from step (g)
of the prestack time migration sequence described
above, which is equivalent to the rms velocity field
associated with the vertical raypaths, with the time
horizons from step (a) and create a set of horizon-
consistent rms velocity profiles.
(c) Perform Dix conversion of the rms velocity profiles
to derive a set of interval velocity profiles.
(d) Convert the time horizons from step (a) to depth
horizons by using the interval velocity profiles from
step (c) along image rays.
(e) Combine the depth horizons from step (d) with the
interval velocity profiles from step (c) and build a
velocity-depth model as shown in Figure 11.2-35.
Before we proceed with prestack amplitude inver-
sion to derive the AVO attributes, we first need to ver-
ify the existence of amplitude variation with offset on
recorded data by modeling the amplitudes on a CRP
gather coincident with a well location. Actually, we
model a moveout-corrected CMP gather at the well lo-
cation using a locally flat earth model, which is con-
sistent with the earth model associated with the CRP
gather. Figure 11.2-36 shows a sonic and a density log
at a well location that coincides with the CMP location
1134 (Figure 11.2-32). By using the log curves and the
S-wave velocity calculated from the mudrock relation
(equation 11-42), compute the synthetic CMP gather
associated with a horizontally layered earth model at
the well location. Figure 11.2-37 shows a portion of the
CRP gather from prestack time migration as in Fig-
ure 11.2-28 and the synthetic CMP gather computed
by using the Zoeppritz equation for P -to-P reflection
amplitudes associated with a horizontally layered earth
model (Section L.5). Shown also in this figure is the an-
gle of incidence within the same time window as for the
CRP gather derived from the velocity-depth model in
Figure 11.2-35. It is evident that given the offset range
of 150-3050 m, the maximum angle of incidence at the
target zone (3.1-3.3 s) is nearly 30 degrees. This means
that the AVO attributes based on the Shuey approxi-
mation (equation 11-24) can be considered accurate.
A close-up view of the real CRP gather and the syn-
thetic gather of Figure 11.2-37 at the reservoir zone is
1859
shown in Figure 11.2-38. Note that the amplitude vari-
ations in the two gathers are fairly consistent. In fact,
examine in Figure 11.2-39 the amplitude variation with
offset at three time levels that coincide with top-gas,
top-oil, and top-water boundaries. We may draw two
conclusions from the comparison of the real and mod-
eled amplitudes as a function of offset shown in Figure
11.2-39. First, note that the Zoeppritz-modeled (red)
and the best-fit actual (dotted green) amplitude varia-
tion with offset are in very good agreement — it appears
that if you scale one AVO curve by a constant, you will
get the other AVO curve. Second, the amplitudes do
indeed vary with offset — there is a decrease in ampli-
tude with increasing offset at the top-gas and top-water
boundaries, and there is an increase in amplitudes with
increasing offset at the top-oil boundary.
The top-gas AVO curve shown in Figure 11.2-39 ex-
tracted from the real CRP gather is consistent with the
observations made by Rutherford and Williams (1989)
who classified the AVO anomalies associated with a
shale formation over a gas-bearing sand formation. A
Class 1 AVO anomaly indicates a large positive P -to-
P normal-incidence amplitude (large positive AVO in-
tercept attribute value) and a marked decrease in am-
plitudes with increasing offset, with a possible phase
change at large offsets. According to the Rutherford-
Williams classification, the top-gas AVO curve in Fig-
ure 11.2-39 can be labeled as Class 1. A Class 2 AVO
anomaly indicates a small positive P -to-P normal-
incidence amplitude (small positive AVO intercept at-
tribute value) and a marked decrease in amplitudes with
increasing offset, with a possible phase change at small-
to-moderate offsets. Finally, a Class 3 AVO anomaly
indicates a large negative P -to-P normal-incidence am-
plitude (large negative AVO intercept attribute value)
and a marked decrease in amplitudes with increasing
offset, typically manifested as bright-spot anomalies.
Another AVO indicator is the difference between a
near-angle stack (say, up to 15 degrees of angle of in-
cidence as shown in Figure 11.2-37c) and a wide-angle
stack (say, between 15-30 degrees of angles of incidence
as shown in Figure 11.2-37c). If there were no amplitude
variation with offset, there would not be a difference be-
tween the two sections shown in Figure 11.2-40, except
for noise and residual moveout errors.
To calibrate the sections in Figure 11.2-40 to well
data, compute the reflectivity series using the two log
curves in Figure 11.2-36. Then, by using a zero-phase
band-limited wavelet with a passband that corresponds
to the signal band associated with the prestack time-
migrated data (Figure 11.2-32), compute the zero-offset
synthetic seismogram that contains primaries only. In-
sert the synthetic seismogram into the CRP stack at the
well location as shown in Figure 11.2-40. Apply constant
1860 Seismic Data Analysis

FIG. 11.2-44. (a) Opacity removal applied to the AVO gradient volume associated with the image volume as in Figure
7.5-31, (b) a magnified view of a portion of (a).
 Reservoir Geophysics 1861

FIG. 11.2-45. (a) Opacity removal applied to the AVO intercept volume associated with the image volume as in Figure
7.5-31, (b) a magnified view of a portion of (a).
1862 Seismic Data Analysis
FIG. 11.3-1. A portion of a CMP stack containing a bright spot.
time shift and constant phase shift until a good match
at the reservoir level is attained between the real and
the synthetic data. In the present case, a constant time
shift only, without a constant phase shift, was adequate
to achieve a good match at the reservoir level.
Interpretation of AVO Attributes
We are now ready to perform the actual prestack am-
plitude inversion to derive the AVO attributes. Figure
11.2-41 shows close-up portions of the AVO attribute
sections at the vicinity of the well location. In each of
the AVO attribute sections, the red represents the high
and the green represents the low attributes values. The
reservoir zone is between the two red horizons in the
CRP stack section shown in Figure 11.2-40. For refer-
ence, use Figure 11.2-22 to identify the equations asso-
ciated with the attributes shown in Figure 11.2-41.
Compare the intercept section (Figure 11.2-41) and
the CRP stack section (Figure 11.2-40), and note that
the former better matches the synthetic attribute de-
rived from the well data. In theory, the intercept at-
tribute is associated with zero-offset, normal-incidence
reflectivity. As such, amplitude inversion for acoustic
impedance estimation, whenever possible, should be
made from the intercept attribute derived from the am-
plitude inversion of CRP gathers.
Now compare each attribute section in Figure 11.2-
41 with the synthetic equivalent at the well location
and note that the match between the two within the
reservoir zone generally is very good. While the inter-
cept section shows the sandstone (green) with shale in-
terbeddings (pale orange) within the reservoir unit, the
gradient section indicates variations in fluid saturation
(indicated by the different tones of orange) within the
reservoir rocks. The fluid saturation can also be inferred
from the Poisson reflectivity (equation 11-27) or the
pseudo-Poisson (equation 11-40) section shown in Fig-
ure 11.2-41. The orange color in the fluid-factor section
represents the gas-saturated reservoir sandstone.
AVO attributes are usually interpreted by cross-
plotting one attribute against another. Figure 11.2-42
shows three different zones — postreservoir (blue rect-
angle), within reservoir (red rectangle) and prereservoir
(green rectangle), labeled on the intercept and gradient
sections. The crossplots of the intercept and gradient
attribute values within each of these zones are shown
in Figure 11.2-43. The slopes of the best-fit lines for
the postreservoir (-4.5) and the prereservoir (-5.5) zones
are comparable. Whereas, the slope from the crossplot
is significantly larger in the reservoir zone (-7.5). The
 Reservoir Geophysics
increase in slope within the reservoir zone indicates
an increase in the gradient attribute value, which in
turn, suggests an increase in the change in Poisson’s
ratio (equation 11-25), hence an indication of the gas-
saturated reservoir sands.
3-D AVO Analysis
The ultimate goal in seismic interpretation is to derive a
reservoir model. The geometry of the reservoir model is
provided by structural interpretation (Section 7.5), the
result of which is downscaled in the vertical direction
and upscaled in the lateral direction to build the struc-
tural framework of the reservoir model. This means that
the reservoir layer is sliced into layers as thin as 1 m in
the vertical direction, and each thin layer is compart-
mentalized into cells with lateral dimensions as big as
a few hundred meters.
The internal constitution of the reservoir layer it-
self is specified by using the result of a stratigraphic in-
terpretation (Section 7.5). The interior of the reservoir
layer eventually needs to be populated by the petro-
physical properties, such as porosity, permeability, and
fluid saturation. When derived from 3-D seismic data,
AVO attributes can be used to infer these properties
within the reservoir zone in inline, crossline, and verti-
cal directions.
The prestack signal processing sequence tailored
for AVO analysis described in this section is applica-
ble directly to 3-D seismic data. To generate the CRP
gathers used in prestack amplitude inversion to derive
the volume AVO attributes, however, you need to follow
the workflow for 3-D prestack time migration (Section
7.4). Figures 11.2-44 and 11.2-45 show the gradient and
intercept volumes, respectively, derived from the CRP
gathers as in Figure 7.4-21, following the application
of opacity removal. While the opacity test applied to
the image volume as shown in Figure 7.5-33 enabled
us to identify the presence of a channel system within
the reservoir zone, the opacity tests applied to the at-
tribute volumes shown in Figures 11.2-44 and 11.2-45
indicate characteristics of fluid distribution within and
away from the channel. This information is needed to
choose the most desirable drilling locations and thus
better manage the development of the reservoir. Note
from Figure 11.2-45b that the amplitudes labeled in red
that define the channel also are present along one of the
faults. This suggests that the fault may represent the
migration path for fluids. Also note the presence of a
red spot at the center of the channel between the two
faults. This may represent a thicker zone in the flood
plain.
1863
11.3 ACOUSTIC IMPEDANCE ESTIMATION
The goal in amplitude inversion is to obtain a broad-
band impedance model of a reservoir zone from a
band-limited time-migrated CMP-stacked data. Alter-
natively, amplitude inversion can be applied to the CRP
stack derived from prestack time migration or the in-
tercept AVO attribute section. The trace amplitudes
on a migrated CMP-stack, CRP stack, or the intercept
section represent the one-dimensional (1-D), primary,
P -wave reflectivity series associated with vertical inci-
dence. Care must be given in processing to preserve rela-
tive amplitudes and increase vertical and lateral resolu-
tion of the seismic data. Reflection amplitude variations
on any of these sections may indicate changes in some
rock parameters, such as porosity or fluid saturation,
within the reservoir unit.
By considering a sparse-spike reflectivity model of
the earth, we first obtain a broad-band reflectivity sec-
tion. Mathematically, the process involves minimizing
the quantity that is equal to the sum of the absolute
values of the trace amplitudes on the migrated CMP
stack. Computation of the impedance series at a CMP
location then involves simple integration of the broad-
band reflectivity series.
Recall from Section 11.2 that we assume a seis-
mic source that generates a compressional plane wave
propagating down into the earth at an angle from the
vertical. When this incident plane wave encounters a
layer boundary, which is assumed to be flat with no
curvature, it is partitioned into four components – re-
flected and refracted P - and S-waves. The Zoeppritz
equations (11-12a,b,c,d) describe the amplitudes of the
partitioned wave components. Aside from the layer pa-
rameters — density, P - and S-wave velocities, the wave
amplitudes depend upon the angle of incidence (Sec-
tion 11.2). Implicit to CMP stacking, we must assume
that the reflected P -wave amplitude variation with an-
gle of incidence measured along the normal-moveout
trajectory associated with the reflection event itself on
the CMP gather is negligible. This assumption becomes
critical for shallow targets at large source-receiver off-
sets. A test of the offset range used in stacking for the
time window of interest is crucial for the meaningful in-
terpretation of a poststack amplitude inversion result.
By making the vertical-incidence assumption, we also
assume that there is no P -to-S conversion within the
offset range used in CMP stacking.
The special case of the Zoeppritz equation for ver-
tically incident P -to-P reflection amplitude takes a sim-
ple form in which the amplitude depends only on the
1864 Seismic Data Analysis
FIG. 11.3-2. A synthetic sonic log section derived from the stacked section in Figure 11.3-1.
impedance values of the layer above and the layer be-
low the reflecting boundary (equation 11-9). Based on
this special case of the Zoeppritz equation, computing
the impedance series from a reflectivity series involves
a simple integration of the latter. The assumption of
vertical incidence also requires that the stacked section
input to inversion must be migrated.
Results of poststack amplitude inversion must be
viewed within the realm of the underlying critical as-
sumptions we make about seismic amplitudes. Ampli-
tude inversion of poststack time-migrated data should
be limited to earth models with low-relief structures
and stratigraphic targets. Many of the assumptions in-
dicated above are violated in the presence of reflectors
with dip and curvature. To account for the dip and cur-
vature effects, at least kinematically, amplitude inver-
sion must be applied to prestack time-migrated data.
Moreover, limitations in the removal of multiple reflec-
tions, linear and random noise must be taken into con-
sideration when interpreting anomalies observed on an
acoustic impedance section.
Synthetic Sonic Logs
From the discussion on the convolutional model of a
seismic trace in Section 2.1, recall that the starting
point was the sonic log (Figure 2.1-8a). The reflection
coefficient is defined as the ratio of the reflection ampli-
tude to the incident wave amplitude. In terms of acous-
tic impedance I = ρα, where ρ is rock density and α is
the P -wave velocity, the reflection coefficient c is given
by equation (11-9).
From equation (11-9), the reflection coefficient is
interpreted as the ratio of the change in acoustic
impedance to twice the average acoustic impedance. If
we assume that density is constant, then equation (11-
9) takes the form
αi+1 − αi
ci = , (11 − 56)
αi+1 + αi
where i is the sampling index. Therefore, reflection co-
efficients can be computed by differentiating the sonic
log. The inverse process of getting the interval veloci-
ties for synthetic sonic logs from the reflection coeffi-
cients, which are assumed proportional to the stacked
trace amplitudes, involves integration. In practice, only
the high-frequency component of the interval velocity
function can be obtained from this inversion. The low-
frequency trend must be obtained from other sources
of information such as conventional velocity analysis or
nearby sonic logs. In many practical situations, there
is insufficient well control and the bands of the low-
and high-frequency information derived from the seis-
mic data do not overlap. In these cases, problems arise
in merging the various types of information; hence, the
fidelity of the synthetic sonic logs is degraded.
 Reservoir Geophysics
Lindseth (1979) first introduced the concept of
synthetic sonic logs and used it in the interpretation
of stratigraphic prospects. Figure 11.3-1 illustrates a
stacked section with a bright-spot prospect. The cor-
responding synthetic sonic log section is shown in Fig-
ure 11.3-2 wherein the seismic data are superimposed
as wiggle traces.
Measured sonic logs generally contain much higher
frequencies than seismic data. Integration of seismic
traces to get synthetic sonic logs implies a further lower-
ing of the frequency content. A synthetic sonic log and
a measured log can only be compared when a high-cut
filter is applied to the measured log to make the two
appear to have equivalent bandwidths.
The inversion described here is based on the re-
cursive relation in equation (11-56). Specifically, given
values for ci and αi , αi+1 can be computed. Model-
based, iterative inversion schemes also exist (Cooke and
Schneider, 1983). These begin with an initial impedance
function (specified at a CMP location) from which a
synthetic seismogram is computed. This seismogram is
crosscorrelated with the actual stack trace at that CMP
location. The initial impedance model then is perturbed
until the best match is attained between the estimated
and actual seismic traces. Finally, inversion techniques,
which are based on a certain type of characterization of
the reflection coefficient series estimated from stacked
data, also exist. For example, the estimated reflection
coefficient series can be characterized by a sparse spike
series. The sparseness requirement can be satisfied by
the condition that the sum of the absolute values of the
estimated reflection coefficients is minimum (Oldenburg
et al., 1983).
Note that regardless of the method, any inversion
process suffers from the uncertainty (nonuniqueness)
associated with the frequency components outside the
dominant seismic signal bandwidth. Thus, the results of
the inversion may be questionable for the low-and high-
frequency ends of the spectrum at which noise domi-
nates the signal. Constraints (information other than
the seismic data being inverted, such as geologic or well
control) often are incorporated into inversion schemes
used to handle the low-and high-frequency ends of the
spectrum.
Processing Sequence for
Acoustic Impedance Estimation
The parsimonious signal processing sequence described
in Section 11.2 tailored for AVO analysis also should
be used for acoustic impedance estimation. Again, it is
important to preserve the signal bandwidth of there-
corded data during processing and attain a broad-
1865
Table 11-4. Data specifications for the line used in
acoustic impedance estimation.
Line Length 23.2 km
Shot Spacing 25 m
Receiver Spacing 16.67 m
CMP Spacing 8.33 m
Minimum Offset 80 m
Maximum Offset 3064 m
Number of Receivers 180
Fold of Coverage 60
Sampling interval 2 ms
band spectrum with a flat passband for the data input
to poststack amplitude inversion. Also, the processing
sequence must be designed to preserve relative ampli-
tudes in the data. We shall analyze a 2-D marine line
for acoustic impedance estimation. Data specifications
for the line are listed in Table 11-4. In addition to the
seismic data, sonic and density logs from a well located
on the line traverse were used in estimating and remov-
ing the constant and linear phase associated with the
residual wavelet in the poststack time-migrated CMP
stacked data prior to amplitude inversion.
The processing sequence included the following
steps:
(a) Design a Wiener shaping filter (Section 2.5) to con-
vert the recorded far-field source signature to its
minimum-phase equivalent. Then, perform signa-
ture deconvolution by applying the filter to the
recorded data.
(b) Mute guided waves since they are confined to the
shallow water layer and contain no information
about the subsurface reflectivity.
(c) Apply t2 -scaling to compensate for geometric
spreading. As mentioned in Section 11.2, a velocity-
dependent scaling function should be avoided to
prevent overcorrection of amplitudes of multiples.
(d) Perform predictive deconvolution with unit-
prediction lag to increase the vertical resolution,
and remove short-period multiples and reverbera-
tions. With increasing prediction lag, the ampli-
tude spectrum departs from a flat character (Sec-
tion 2.4). No data-dependent scaling should be ap-
plied to ensure preservation of relative amplitudes.
(e) Test CMP stacking for optimum fold (Figure 11.3-
3). The principle criterion is to ensure minimal de-
pendency of reflection amplitudes on the angle of
incidence within the time window of interest. By
1866 Seismic Data Analysis
using the NMO-corrected CMP gathers at velocity
analysis locations, derive a spatially varying mute
pattern such that much of the far-offset data are
excluded from stacking. The CMP stack with op-
timum mute (Figure 11.3-3a) appears to best pre-
serve the flatness character of the average ampli-
tude spectrum of the data. The amplitude spectra
and the autocorrelograms imply that there needs
to be further flattening of the spectrum within the
passband and removal of reverberations.
(f) Perform velocity analyses at frequent intervals, and
obtain an optimum CMP stack using a time- and
spatially varying mute function.
(g) Apply a frequency-space complex Wiener filter
with unit-prediction lag (f − x deconvolution) to
attenuate random noise uncorrelated from trace to
trace (Figure 11.3-4a).
(h) Apply minimum-phase deconvolution to restore
flat spectrum within the passband (Figure 11.3-
4b).
(i) Apply time-variant spectral whitening to account
for nonstationarity (Figure 11.3-4c).
(j) Design and apply a time-varying filter, while main-
taining the broadest possible signal band. Again,
any data-dependent scaling must not be applied to
preserve relative amplitudes.
(k) Migrate the optimum CMP stacked data using a
phase-shift algorithm. Migration compensates for
the effect of reflector curvature on reflection ampli-
tudes (equation 11-13a) so that the resulting ampli-
tudes can be related directly to acoustic impedance
variations. The reason for using the phase-shift al-
gorithm is that, compared to finite-difference or in-
tegral methods, it causes the least phase and ampli-
tude errors. Additionally, amplitude inversion often
is applied to data associated with a velocity field
that varies very mildly in the lateral direction.
Poststack time migration may precede the post-
stack signal processing, particularly deconvolution. As
a result of migration, we transform a 2-D or a 3-D
wavefield to a 1-D wavefield along the seismic traverse.
Hence, we map the normal-incident energy to vertical-
incident energy and obtain 1-D zero-offset seismograms
at each CMP location. This satisfies the underlying as-
sumption for poststack deconvolution.
Figure 11.3-5 shows the test panel for poststack
processing in which migration precedes the signal pro-
cessing. The sequence includes f − x deconvolution,
phase-shift migration (Figure 11.3-5a), spiking decon-
volution (Figure 11.3-5b), time-variant spectral whiten-
ing (Figure 11.3-5c), and time-variant filtering (Figure
11.3-5d). Finally, a mild (3-trace) Karhunen-Loeve fil-
ter was applied to the data to attenuate coherent lin-
ear noise and any remaining random noise uncorrelated
from trace to trace (Figure 11.3-5e). The unmigrated
CMP stack with the poststack processing as in Figure
11.3-4 is shown in Figure 11.3-6 and the migrated CMP
stack with the poststack processing as in Figure 11.3-5
is shown in Figure 11.3-7.
Below is a summary of key issues regarding the
processing sequence appropriate for amplitude inversion
applied to poststack time-migrated CMP data.
(a) Avoid f − k filtering. This type of filtering invari-
ably causes amplitude distortions. For multiple at-
tenuation, use predictive deconvolution with a long
operator length; the process will be effective at near
offsets where periodicity of multiples are nearly
preserved.
(b) Do not apply a velocity-dependent scaling function
to compensate for geometric spreading. The am-
plitudes of multiples will be overcorrected with a
velocity-dependent scaling function. A t2 -scaling is
favored for data to be used in amplitude inversion.
(c) Use the phase-shift method for migration. Dif-
ferencing approximations to differential operators
used in finite-difference migration induce phase er-
rors and cause amplitude distortions. The usual im-
plementation of the Kirchhoff migration (equation
H-17, Section H.1) does not include all the terms of
the integral solution (equation H-16) to the scalar
wave equation. As such, the missing terms can in-
fluence the amplitude and phase accuracy of the
resulting migrated data.
(d) You may be required to apply a harsh mute in
stacking. Design a mute function at each veloc-
ity analysis location and apply a spatially varying
mute pattern to the data for stacking. The design
criterion is such that reflection amplitudes should
be uniform within the offset range included in the
stacking for an event.
(e) You may want to migrate before, and not after,
poststack deconvolution. This is to conform with
the fundamental assumption that deconvolution
acts upon a 1-D zero-offset reflection seismogram
recorded over a horizontally layered earth model.
Amplitudes associated with any phantom diffrac-
tions should not be present on the traces input to
deconvolution.
Derivation of Acoustic Impedance Attribute
As input to poststack amplitude inversion, you may use
one of the following data types:
(text continues on p. 1872)
 Reservoir Geophysics 1867

FIG. 11.3-3. A portion of a CMP stack for a test for optimum stacking fold using different cable lengths: (a) using an
optimum mute pattern that minimzes angle dependency of seismic amplitudes, (b) using a mute pattern that provides a
full-offset stack, (c) 75 percent near-offset stack, (d) 50 percent near-offset stack, (e) 25 percent near-offset stack, and (f) 17
percent near-offset stack. On top of each panel is the amplitude spectrum averaged over the shot record, and at the bottom
is the autocorrelogram.
1868 Seismic Data Analysis

FIG. 11.3-4. A portion of the CMP stack as in Figure 11.3-3a after: (a) poststack f − x deconvolution to attenuate random
noise, (b) spiking deconvolution, and (c) time-variant spectral whitening. On top of each panel is the amplitude spectrum
averaged over the shot record, and at the bottom is the autocorrelogram.
 Reservoir Geophysics 1869

FIG. 11.3-5. A portion of the time-migrated CMP stack after: (a) f − x deconvolution, (b) spiking deconvolution, (c) time-
variant spectral whitening, (d) time-variant filtering, and (e) Karhunen-Loeve filtering. On top of each panel is the amplitude
spectrum averaged over the shot record, and at the bottom is the autocorrelogram.
1870 Seismic Data Analysis
Reservoir Geophysics 1871
1872 Seismic Data Analysis
(a) A time-migrated CMP-stacked section or volume
of data,
(b) A CRP-stacked section or volume of data derived
from prestack time migration,
(c) The intercept AVO attribute section or volume of
data (equation 11-24), or
(d) The P -wave reflectivity section or volume of data
(equation 11-37) derived from prestack amplitude
inversion.
Poststack deconvolution and time-variant spec-
tral whitening (Figures 11.3-5b,c) flatten the spectrum
within the passband under the minimum-phase assump-
tion. Nevertheless, there may be residual phase remain-
ing in the stacked data; this residual phase typically is
considered to have a constant and a linear phase com-
ponent. Use of well data makes it possible to estimate
the residual phase. After the completion of the con-
ventional processing phase, the residual wavelet in the
data input to amplitude inversion needs to be estimated
and removed. This requires computing synthetic seismo-
grams at well locations and comparing them with the
stacked traces to determine constant-phase and linear-
phase components associated with the residual phase
left in the migrated data input to amplitude inversion.
(a) To start with, inspect and edit available sonic and
density logs, and use check-shot information for
depth-to-time conversion of the sonic logs (Figure
11.3-8a).
(b) Compute the acoustic impedance curve and obtain
synthetic seismograms (Figure 11.3-9a) using zero-
phase wavelets with a range of bandwidths that
cover the passband of the time-migrated stacked
data.
(c) Apply a range of constant phase rotations (Fig-
ure 11.3-9b) to the traces from the time-migrated
CMP stacked section at the vicinity of the well
and compare the results with the synthetic seis-
mograms. In the present case study, we observed
that the time-migrated stack did not require any
phase correction within the upper portion of the
zone of interest (2.5-3.5 s). Nevertheless, a better
match was observed between the well data and the
surface seismic data with a constant phase rotation
of −90 degrees within the lower portion of the zone
of interest (3.5-4.5 s). Figures 11.3-10 and 11.3-11
show portions of the time-migrated stacked section
as in Figure 11.3-7 with the application of a con-
stant phase rotation of −90 degrees.
(d) Compute a sparse-spike reflectivity model of the
earth by a constrained L1 -norm minimization ap-
plied to the time-migrated sections in Figures 11.3-
10b and 11.3-11b.
(e) Apply a mild (3-trace) Karhunen-Loeve filter to
the reflectivity sections to remove any spurious, ge-
ologically implausable variations in the reflectivity
model (Figures 11.3-12a and 11.3-13a).
(f) Construct the acoustic impedance model from the
broad-band sparse-spike reflectivity model by inte-
grating the reflectivity series at each CMP location
(Figures 11.3-12b and 11.3-13b) within the zone of
interest (2.5 - 4.5 s).
(g) Repeat steps (d), (e), and (f) for the phase-rotated
sections in Figures 11.3-10c and 11.3-11c. Results
are shown in Figures 11.3-14 and 11.3-15.
We applied a range of constant phase rotations
to a group of traces at two different locations on
the migrated CMP stack and computed the acoustic
impedance panels shown in Figures 11.3-16 and 11.3-
17. Comparing these panels with the actual impedance
curve at the well location (Figure 11.3-8b), we observed
that the match between the two impedances in the up-
per portion of the zone of interest (2.5-3.5 s) is satisfac-
tory without phase rotation applied to the data, while
a better match is attained with a 90-degree phase rota-
tion in the lower portion of the zone of interest (3.5-4.5
s). Any discrepancies may be attributed primarily to
inaccuracies in the check-shot survey information.
It is important to evaluate the results of ampli-
tude inversion with a cautious perspective. Specifically,
one cannot and should not infer individual reservoir
properties — pore pressure, confining pressure, poros-
ity, permeability, and fluid saturation, from amplitude
inversion. One can only hope to infer a composite ef-
fect associated with these properties. Given additional
borehole information, however, one may be able to infer
that a high impedance value may correspond to, for ex-
ample, low porosity. In brief, results of amplitude inver-
sion should be used as auxiliary information in support
of other tools used in exploration and development of
hydrocarbons.
3-D Acoustic Impedance Estimation
As for the AVO attributes, when derived from 3-D seis-
mic data, an acoustic impedance attribute volume can
be used to infer lithology or porosity within a reservoir
zone. We shall analyze a land 3-D data set for acous-
tic impedance estimation. Data specifications for the
3-D seismic data are listed in Table 11-5. The fold of
coverage over the survey area is fairly uniform (Figure
11.3-18). In addition to the seismic data, sonic and den-
sity logs from a well from within the survey area were
used in estimating and removing the constant and lin-
ear phase associated with the residual wavelet in the
(text continues on p. 1885)
 Reservoir Geophysics 1873

FIG. 11.3-8. (a) A portion of the sonic log that spans the time window of interest at one well location on the line shown in
Figure 11.3-7 after check-shot correction and depth-to-time conversion; (b) acoustic impedance curves derived from the log in
(a), assuming that density is constant, with a range of constant phase rotations.
1874 Seismic Data Analysis

FIG. 11.3-9. (a) Synthetic seismograms derived from the impedance curve in Figure 11.3-8 and using a range of pass-bands,
with normal (n) and reverse (r) polarity displays; (b) traces from the migrated CMP stacked section in Figure 11.3-7 in the
neighborhood of the well location with the sonic log shown in Figure 11.3-8a with a range of constant phase rotations.
 Reservoir Geophysics 1875

FIG. 11.3-10. First portion of: (a) unmigrated CMP stack as in Figure 11.3-6; (b) migrated CMP stack as in Figure 11.3-7;
(c) migrated CMP stack with a constant phase rotation of −90 degrees. A display gain has been applied to all three sections.
1876 Seismic Data Analysis

FIG. 11.3-11. Second portion of: (a) unmigrated CMP stack as in Figure 11.3-6; (b) migrated CMP stack as in Figure 11.3-7;
(c) migrated CMP stack with a constant phase rotation of −90 degrees. A display gain has been applied to all three sections.
 Reservoir Geophysics 1877

FIG. 11.3-12. (a) Broad-band sparse-spike reflectivity section derived from the wide-band time-migrated section shown in
Figure 11.3-10b; (b) acoustic impedance section derived from (a).
1878 Seismic Data Analysis

FIG. 11.3-13. (a) Broad-band sparse-spike reflectivity section derived from the wide-band time-migrated section shown in
Figure 11.3-11b; (b) acoustic impedance section derived from (a).
 Reservoir Geophysics 1879

FIG. 11.3-14. (a) Broad-band sparse-spike reflectivity section derived from the wide-band time-migrated section shown in
Figure 11.3-10c; (b) acoustic impedance section derived from (a).
1880 Seismic Data Analysis

FIG. 11.3-15. (a) Broad-band sparse-spike reflectivity section derived from the wide-band time-migrated section shown in
Figure 11.3-11c; (b) acoustic impedance section derived from (a).
 Reservoir Geophysics 1881

FIG. 11.3-16. Part 1: Portion of the acoustic impedance section in Figure 11.3-12b around CMP 370 with constant phase
rotations applied.
1882 Seismic Data Analysis

FIG. 11.3-16. Part 2: Portion of the acoustic impedance section in Figure 11.3-13b around CMP 370 with constant phase
rotations applied.
 Reservoir Geophysics 1883

FIG. 11.3-17. Part 1: Portion of the acoustic impedance section in Figure 11.3-12b around CMP 450 with constant phase
rotations applied.
1884 Seismic Data Analysis

FIG. 11.3-17. Part 2: Portion of the acoustic impedance section in Figure 11.3-13b around CMP 450 with constant phase
rotations applied.
 Reservoir Geophysics 1885

FIG. 11.3-18. Fold of coverage map of the land 3-D survey data used in the acoustic impedance case study presented in
Section 11.3.

time-migrated CMP stacked data prior to amplitude
inversion.
Note the high level of ground-roll energy on the
selected shot records with the display gain shown in
Figure 11.3-19. The noise characteristics vary from shot
to shot. The processing sequence included the following
steps:
(a) Apply t2 -scaling to compensate for geometric
spreading. Figure 11.3-20a shows a raw shot record
and Figure 11.3-20b shows the same record after
the application of t2 -scaling.
(b) Perform spiking deconvolution (Figure 11.3-21a).
(c) Note from the spectral estimate shown in Figure
11.3-22 that deconvolution alone does not flatten

(text continues on p. 1896)

1886 Seismic Data Analysis

FIG. 11.3-19. Part 1: Selected shot records from the 3-D survey data associated with the case study presented in Section
11.3. (Data courtesy Talisman Energy.)
 Reservoir Geophysics 1887

FIG. 11.3-19. Part 2: Selected shot records from the 3-D survey data associated with the case study presented in Section
11.3. (Data courtesy Talisman Energy.)
1888 Seismic Data Analysis

FIG. 11.3-20. (a) A raw shot record from the 3-D seismic data associated with the case study presented in Section 11.3, (b)
after geometric spreading correction. (Data courtesy Talisman Energy.)
 Reservoir Geophysics 1889

FIG. 11.3-21. (a) The same shot record as in Figure 11.3-20b after deconvolution, and (b) time-variant spectral whitening.
(Data courtesy Talisman Energy.)
1890 Seismic Data Analysis

FIG. 11.3-22. Amplitude spectrum of the shot record in (a) Figure 11.3-20a, (b) Figure 11.3-20b, (c) Figure 11.3-21a, and
(d) Figure 11.3-21b.
 Reservoir Geophysics 1891

FIG. 11.3-23. (a) An inline section from the image volume derived from 3-D poststack time migration, (b) amplitude
spectrum of (a).
1892 Seismic Data Analysis

FIG. 11.3-24. Part 1: Selected inline sections from the image volume derived from 3-D poststack time migration.
 Reservoir Geophysics 1893

FIG. 11.3-24. Part 2: Selected inline sections from the image volume derived from 3-D poststack time migration.
1894 Seismic Data Analysis

FIG. 11.3-24. Part 3: Selected inline sections from the image volume derived from 3-D poststack time migration.
 Reservoir Geophysics 1895

FIG. 11.3-24. Part 4: Selected inline sections from the image volume derived from 3-D poststack time migration.
1896 Seismic Data Analysis

Table 11-5. Data specifications for the 3-D seismic
data used in acoustic impedance estimation.
Survey size 27.3 km2
Inline dimension 7.35 km
Crossline dimension 3.75 km
Receiver line spacing 60 m well location exhibits a very good match with the time-
Bin size 30 × 30 m migrated data within the reservoir level indicated by
Number of inlines 124
Number of crosslines 245
Number of bins 30,380
Fold of coverage 16
Sampling interval 2 ms
the spectrum. Apply time-variant spectral whiten-
ing (Figure 11.3-21b) to attain a flat spectrum
within the signal passband (Figure 11.3-22d) and
attenuate the ground-roll energy.
(d) Sort the data into common-cell gathers and per-
form velocity analysis at coarse grid spacing.
(e) Create a 3-D stacking velocity field and apply NMO
correction to the cell gathers.
(f) Apply residual statics corrections (Section 7.2) and
inverse NMO correction using the velocity field
from step (e).
(g) Perform velocity analysis at tight grid spacing and
create a new 3-D velocity field.
(h) Apply NMO correction to the cell gathers from step
(f), mute and stack.
(i) Perform poststack deconvolution and a wide band-
pass filter.
(j) Apply f − x deconvolution (Section 6.5) to attenu-
ate random noise uncorrelated from trace to trace.
(k) Finally, perform 3-D poststack phase-shift migra-
tion. Note from Figure 11.3-23 that the processing
sequence described above yields the spectral shape
of the data that we wish to input to poststack am-
plitude inversion — a broadband spectrum with
nearly a flat passband.
Figure 11.3-24 shows selected inlines from the im-
age volume derived from 3-D poststack time migration.
Following the principle of parsimony in processing for
AVO analysis and acoustic impedance estimation, no
DMO correction was deemed necessary in the present
case study since the subsurface geology can be described
by a horizontally layered earth model with no significant
faulting or structural distortions.
The next phase in the analysis involves the estima-
tion and removal of the residual phase contained in the
time-migrated volume of data. Figure 11.3-25 shows a
sonic and a density log measured at a well located at
the intersection of inline 76 and crossline 79. Compute
the acoustic impedance and the reflectivity series; then,
use a zero-phase wavelet with a passband comparable to
the signal bandwidth of the seismic data to compute the
zero-offset, vertical-incidence synthetic seismogram also
shown in Figure 11.3-25. Note from Figure 11.3-26 that
the sonic log inserted into a portion of inline 76 at the
the arrow. To achieve this match, a constant time shift,
which is equivalent to a linear phase shift, was applied
to the sonic log. A similarly good match is observed in
Figure 11.3-27 between the synthetic seismogram and
the time-migrated data. To achieve this match, in ad-
dition to the constant time shift, a −90-degree phase
rotation was applied to the synthetic seismogram. To
remove the residual phase in the migrated data set and
match it to the zero-phase synthetic seismogram, you
therefore need to apply a 90-degree phase rotation to
the former.
Figure 11.3-28a shows inline 76 of the image vol-
ume from 3-D poststack time migration, and Figure
11.3-28b shows the same section after the 90-degree
phase rotation. The phase-rotated image volume is then
used in amplitude inversion to create a sparse-spike
reflectivity volume. Figure 11.3-28c shows inline 76
from the sparse-spike reflectivity volume. Finally, each
sparse-spike reflectivity trace is integrated to estimate
the acoustic impedance attribute (Figure 11.3-28d). Se-
lected inlines from the acoustic impedance volume are
shown in Figure 11.3-29. These inline traverses coincide
with those shown in Figure 11.3-24 from the image vol-
ume derived from 3-D poststack time migration before
the application of phase rotation.
The acoustic impedance volume is then interpreted
to identify the spatial distribution of high-impedance
and low-impedance areas at the reservoir level. First,
pick the time horizon at the reservoir level from the im-
age volume and isolate a horizon-consistent thin slab of
subvolume. Then, apply transparency to the subvolume
to obtain the interpretation result shown in Figure 11.3-
30. The red represents the areas of high-amplitude re-
flections at the reservoir level. Apply the same interpre-
tation strategy to the acoustic impedance volume and
obtain a consistent result as shown in Figure 11.3-31.
The orange tones represent the zones of high acoustic
impedance contrast.
Instantaneous Attributes
Aside from the AVO attributes, the instantaneous at-
tributes can be helpful in inferring reservoir parameters.
When considered as an analytic signal (in the mathe-
matical sense), a seismic trace can be expressed as a
(text continues on p. 1906)
 Reservoir Geophysics 1897

FIG. 11.3-25. Log data measured at well location Inline 76 - Crossline 79: (a) the sonic log, (b) the density log, (c) acoustic
impedance, (d) the reflectivity series computed from (c) and used in creating (e), and (e) synthetic seismogram using a
band-limited wavelet.
1898 Seismic Data Analysis

FIG. 11.3-26. A portion of Inline 76 from the image volume derived from 3-D poststack time migration with the sonic log
as in Figure 11.3-25a inserted at well location, Crossline 79.
 Reservoir Geophysics 1899

FIG. 11.3-27. A portion of Inline 76 as in Figure 11.3-26 from the image volume derived from 3-D poststack time migration
with the synthetic seismogram as in Figure 11.3-25e inserted at well location, Crossline 79.
1900 Seismic Data Analysis

FIG. 11.3-28. Cross-sections along inline 76 from (a) the image volume derived from 3-D poststack time migration, (b) the
image volume after 90-degree phase rotation, (c) the sparse-spike reflectivity volume, and (d) the acoustic impedance volume.
 Reservoir Geophysics 1901

FIG. 11.3-29. Part 1: Selected inline sections from the acoustic impedance volume.
1902 Seismic Data Analysis

FIG. 11.3-29. Part 2: Selected inline sections from the acoustic impedance volume.
 Reservoir Geophysics 1903

FIG. 11.3-30. A 3-D view of the detrital sand level at approximately 850 ms from within the image volume derived from
3-D poststack time migration as in Figure 11.3-24. Red represents high amplitudes.
1904 Seismic Data Analysis

FIG. 11.3-31. A 3-D view of the detrital sand level at approximately 850 ms from within the acoustic impedance volume
derived from sparse-spike inversion as in Figure 11.3-29. Red represents high impedance values.
 Reservoir Geophysics 1905

FIG. 11.3-32. Instantaneous attributes derived from the stacked section in Figure 11.3-1: (a) reflectivity strength, (b) phase,
(c) frequency, and (d) smoothed frequency.
1906 Seismic Data Analysis

FIG. 11.4-1. Vertical seismic profiling geometry. (a) Raypaths and (b) associated traveltimes (see text for details). Static
correction amounts to mapping traveltime associated with raypath ABC to traveltime associated with raypath ABC + CD;
the NMO correction amounts to mapping traveltime associated with raypath ABCD to traveltime associated with raypath
2DE.

complex function (Taner, 1978). An analytic signal is fore, the complex trace u(t) does not contain negative
expressed by a time-dependent complex variable u(t) frequency components.
Once u(t) is computed, it can be expressed in polar
u(t) = x(t) + iy(t), (11 − 57)
form as
where x(t) is the recorded trace itself and y(t) is its
u(t) = R(t) exp iφ(t) , (11 − 60)
quadrature. The quadrature is a 90-degree phase-shifted
version of the recorded trace. It is obtained by taking where
the Hilbert transform of x(t) (Bracewell, 1965)
R(t) = x2 (t) + y 2 (t) (11 − 61a)
1
y(t) = ∗ x(t). (11 − 58) and
πt
When substituted into equation (11-57), we have y(t)
φ(t) = arctan . (11 − 61b)
x(t)
1
u(t) = x(t) δ(t) + i ∗ x(t). (11 − 59) R(t) represents instantaneous amplitude and φ(t) repre-
πt
sents instantaneous phase at time t. In practice, instan-
Thus, to get the analytic signal u(t) for a seismic trace taneous phase is computed by first taking the logarithm
x(t), the complex operator [δ(t) + i/πt] is applied to the of both sides of equation (11-60)
trace. When analyzed in the Fourier transform domain,
this operator is zero for negative frequencies. There- ln u(t) = ln R(t) + iφ(t) (11 − 62)
 Reservoir Geophysics
and extracting the imaginary part
φ(t) = Im ln u(t) , (11 − 63)
where Im denotes imaginary.
The instantaneous frequency ω(t) is the temporal
rate of change of the instantaneous phase function
dφ(t)
ω(t) = . (11 − 64a)
dt
When the derivative of equation (11-63) is taken with
respect to time,
dφ(t) 1 du(t)
= Im . (11 − 64b)
dt u(t) dt
For practical implementation, equation (11-64b) is writ-
ten as the difference equation
2 ut − ut−∆t
ωt = Im . (11 − 65)
∆t ut + ut−∆t
The instantaneous amplitude measures the reflec-
tivity strength, which is proportional to the square root
of the total energy of the seismic signal at an instant
of time. The instantaneous phase is used to emphasize
the continuity of events on a seismic section. The tem-
poral rate of change of the instantaneous phase is the
instantaneous frequency. The instantaneous frequency
may have a high degree of variation, which may be re-
lated to stratigraphy. However, it also may be difficult
to interpret all this variation. Therefore, the instanta-
neous frequency values often are smoothed in time.
The instantaneous measurements that are related
to an analytic signal are associated with an instant of
time, rather than an average over a time interval. These
measurements are reliable when the seismic signal is
recorded and processed so that the CMP stack closely
represents the subsurface. In other words, to deduce any
stratigraphic meaning from the seismic data before es-
timating the instantaneous parameters, the amplitude
and frequency content of the seismic signal must be
preserved in each processing step. Any variation in the
shape of the basic waveform that is not attributable to
the subsurface geology must be eliminated. Multiples
and all types of random noise limit the reliability of the
results.
Reflectivity strength is an effective tool to iden-
tify bright and dim spots. Phase information is use-
ful in delineating such interesting features as pinchouts,
faults, onlaps, and prograding reflections. Instantaneous
frequency information can help to identify condensate
reservoirs and gas reservoirs, which tend to attenuate
high frequencies.
Instantaneous attributes often are displayed in
color for interpretation. Figure 11.3-32 shows the in-
stantaneous attributes that correspond to the seismic
section in Figure 11.3-1. The seismic data are displayed
1907
on top of the attributes as wiggle traces. Note the dis-
tinctive anomaly on the instantaneous amplitude sec-
tion and enhancement of the continuity of reflections
on the instantaneous phase section.
11.4 VERTICAL SEISMIC PROFILING
Vertical seismic profiling data often provide more re-
liable correlation of well control to seismic data than
synthetic seismograms derived from sonic logs. There
are two reasons for this. First, the VSP data have a sig-
nal bandwidth closer to the seismic data than the sonic
logs. More importantly, VSP data usually are not as
sensitive to borehole conditions such as washouts.
VSP Acquisition Geometry
Acquisition of VSP data involves a surface source that
is located either close to the well head (zero-offset case)
or away from the well head (offset VSP) and a geophone
in the well bore. Several traces are recorded at the same
geophone depth, then edited and summed. (Repeatable
sources such as vibrators or air guns are used.) The
geophone then is moved to a new depth location and
recording is repeated. The resulting section is a profile
displayed in depth and time. A comprehensive reference
on VSP is the book by Hardage (1983).
Figure 11.4-1a shows VSP acquisition geometry.
Consider a few of the raypaths that are intercepted by
the receivers down the borehole: the direct arrivals from
shot to receivers AC and AE, reflection ABC, and re-
fraction ABF. Each receiver location yields a trace on
the VSP that is in the depth-time domain (Figure 11.4-
1b). Note that trace C has both the direct arrival (1)
and the reflection from the first interface (3). The direct
arrival (1 on trace C) and the refraction (4 on trace F)
have only downgoing paths; therefore, they are called
downgoing waves. On the other hand, reflection path
ABC has a final upcoming segment BC (Figure 11.4-
1a) and therefore constitutes an upcoming wave (Figure
11.4-1b). Note that direct arrival 2 on trace E coincides
with a reflection arrival, provided the receiver is situ-
ated on the interface that causes the reflection. At this
location, the upcoming and downgoing waves coincide
(arrival 2 on trace E in Figure 11.4-1b).
Processing of VSP Data
We now discuss the basic steps in VSP processing. Af-
ter some trace editing, VSP processing starts with the
1908 Seismic Data Analysis
separation of the downgoing waves from the upcoming
waves (reflections). One separation technique is based
on f − k filtering. Examine the zero-offset VSP in Fig-
ure 11.4-2a and note that the upcoming and downgoing
waves have opposite dips. Because of this, each wave
type should map in a different half plane in the f −k do-
main. Hence, downgoing waves can be suppressed with
an f − k dip filter, thereby leaving only the reflection
and associated multiples that constitute the upcoming
waves (Figure 11.4-2b).
A VSP data set may not always have uniform re-
ceiver sampling in depth – a prerequisite for f − k filter-
ing. The problems of edge effects and amplitude smear-
ing often are observed on data after f − k filtering (Sec-
tion 6.2).
An alternate approach to extracting upcoming
waves is to use median filtering (Hardage, 1983). To
start, apply first-arrival time shifts to traces in a VSP
data set VSP(z,t) to flatten the downgoing waves. (First
arrivals now are at t = 0.) Then apply a median filter to
each horizontal array of samples, V SP (z, t = constant).
Median filtering is best explained by an example. Con-
sider the following array of numbers: (-1,2,1,2.5,1.5).
Reorder its elements from small to large values: (-
1,1,1.5,2,2.5). The median of the series then is the mid-
dle sample, 1.5. Median filtering rejects noise bursts
and any event that is not flat. Apply the median filter
to the VSP data set with flattened downgoing waves
to yield the downgoing waves. This result can be sub-
tracted from the input to obtain the upcoming waves.
The last step involves unflattening the data.
The next VSP processing step involves datuming
all receivers to the well head (D in Figure 11.4-1a).
From Figure 11.4-1, this static correction is the same
as correcting each trace by an amount that is equal to
the one-way traveltime down to the corresponding re-
ceiver location. For example, trace C is corrected by an
amount equal to the traveltime associated with raypath
DC.
The static corrections are followed by deconvolu-
tion and filtering (Figure 11.4-2c). In principle, the de-
convolution operators can be designed from downgoing
or upcoming waves. These deconvolution operators then
are applied to traces of the upcoming wave profile. The
common practice is to use the downgoing waves to de-
sign the deconvolution operators. This is because down-
going waves on a VSP record are much stronger than
upcoming waves. Hence, designing deconvolution oper-
ators from downgoing waves has an advantage in that
the operators are based on stronger signal, with more
emphatically represented multiples (Hardage, 1983).
The last step involves stacking the traces in Figure
11.4-2c. Stacking normally includes a narrow corridor
along the region in which upcoming and downgoing
waves coincide. The resulting trace, repeated a few
times, is shown in Figure 11.4-2d. To a large degree, cor-
ridor stacking prevents the multiples that do not merge
with the downgoing wave path from being stacked in.
The trace in Figure 11.4-2d can be considered an al-
ternative to a zero-offset synthetic seismogram derived
from the sonic log; thus, it can be compared to the CMP
stack (not shown here) at the well location.
Figure 11.4-3a shows raw data from an offset VSP
data set. By using the median filtering scheme described
earlier, downgoing waves are extracted from the raw
data (Figure 11.4-3b). The subtraction of downgoing
waves from original data (followed by another median
filtering for suppression of noise bursts) yields upcoming
waves (Figure 11.4-3c). The upcoming waves then are
deconvolved (Figure 11.4-3d) using operators designed
from the downgoing waves of Figure 11.4-3b. This step
normally is followed by static corrections. For nonzero-
offset data, we also must correct for moveout resulting
from the offset separation between the well head and the
shot location. From Figure 11.4-1, this dynamic correc-
tion involves mapping the traveltime associated with
raypath ABCD to 2DE. An NMO-corrected upcoming-
wave profile can be compared with the surface seismic
at the well location, provided the subsurface consists of
horizontal layers with no lateral velocity variations.
VSP-CDP Transform
When there are dipping interfaces, the upcoming-wave
profile needs to be migrated; that is, the energy must
be mapped to the actual subsurface reflection points.
This is true even for zero-offset VSP data. A ray-tracing
procedure for reflector mapping is illustrated in Figure
11.4-4. Note that reflection points D, E, and F have dif-
ferent lateral displacements OA, OB, and OC, respec-
tively, from borehole Oz (Figure 11.4-4a). However, up-
coming wave energy from all three reflection points is
recorded on the same VSP trace at the receiver location
R. The reflection times RG, RH, and RK (Figure 11.4-
4b) are associated with raypaths SDR, SER, and SFR,
respectively. Mapping this energy to reflection points
involves a coordinate transformation (Wyatt and Wy-
att, 1981; Cassell et al., 1984). In this transformation,
the amplitudes on a single VSP trace are mapped onto
several traces on the x − t plane, where x is the lateral
distance of reflection points from the borehole (Figure
 Reservoir Geophysics 1909

FIG. 11.4-2. Zero-offset VSP data at various stages of the processing sequence from left to right: (a) raw data, (b) upcoming
waves, (c) after statics corrections followed by deconvolution and band-pass filtering, (d) corridor stack. Here, TT’ is a tube
wave traveling through the borehole. (Data courtesy Amoco Europe and West Africa, Inc.)
1910 Seismic Data Analysis

FIG. 11.4-3. (a) Unprocessed offset VSP data, (b) downgoing waves, (c) upcoming waves, (d) upcoming waves after de-
convolution, (e) VSP-CDP transform of the upcoming wave profile in (d) inlaid to the migrated surface seismic section for
comparison. (Adapted from Alam and Millahn, 1986; data courtesy Shell, U.K.)

11.4-4b). The event times RG, RH, and RK are mapped
onto two-way vertical times AL, BM, and CN, respec-
tively. These vertical times are associated with ray-
paths AD, BE, and CF in Figure 11.4-4a. The resulting
(x,t) section consists of traces similar to the traces of a
migrated zero-offset section. Hence, the described ray-
tracing procedure often is called VSP-CDP transforma-
tion.
The VSP-CDP transform of the data in Figure
11.4-3d is shown in Figure 11.4-3e (Alam and Millahn,
1986). Comparison with the migrated surface seismic
section at the well location indicates a good correlation
of events. The difference in frequency content is partly
attributed to differences in processing these two sections
and is partly attributed to less high-frequency attenua-
tion effects because of the shorter traveltimes associated
with VSP recording.
The VSP-CDP transformation requires knowledge
of the velocity-depth model around the borehole, since
we must determine the location of the reflection points
in the subsurface to perform mapping. The velocity-
depth model can be derived using an iterative approach
 Reservoir Geophysics 1911

FIG. 11.4-4. (a) Source-receiver geometry for offset VSP; (b) VSP-CDP transformation: Traveltimes RG, RH, and RK,
associated with raypaths SDR, SER, and SFR are mapped to traveltimes AL, BM, and CN, associated with the two-way
vertical raypaths 2AD, 2BE, and 2CF . Also note that the amplitudes on the VSP trace are positioned on traces after
transformation with x-coordinate values the same as those of the reflection points OA, OB, and OC.

(Cassell et al., 1984). Starting with an initial velocity-
depth model and the recording geometry for the VSP
data, traveltimes for upcoming waves are computed.
When these estimated traveltimes are compared with
the observed traveltimes, discrepancies are noted and
the velocity-depth model is modified accordingly. The
process is repeated until a good match is attained be-
tween the estimated and observed traveltimes.
Finally, note that the VSP-CDP transform is not
exactly a migration process. It handles neither diffrac-
tions nor curved interfaces. To handle these features,
VSP data must be migrated (Dillon and Thomson,
1983). The VSP geometry is like the geometry of a
common-shot gather, except the shot axis is perpen-
dicular to the receiver axis. Migration of VSP data can
be viewed as mapping amplitudes along semielliptical
trajectories with their focal points being the source and
receiver locations. Superposition of all these trajecto-
ries yields the migrated section. The aperture width for
VSP data often is inadequate to obtain a migrated sec-
tion without much smearing.
11.5 4-D SEISMIC METHOD
There is a strong resemblence between the techniques
used in clinical medicine and geophysical prospecting.
Here, I will refer to this resemblence within the context
of the 4-D seismic method. A heart patient is monitored
from year to year by the patient’s cardiologist to observe
and detect changes in the parameters that describe the
heart itself and its condition to sustain the patient’s life,
and the composition of the patient’s blood. By using
an echocardiogram derived from ultrasound waves, the
cardiologist measures the size of the heart and observes
whether the valves have any leakage. By recording an
electrocardiogram, the cardiologist observes the systolic
pressure associated with the rythmical contraction of
the heart during which the blood is pumped out and
the diastolic pressure associated with the rythmical di-
latation of the heart during which the blood is pumped
in. It is not just the heart’s parameters themselves that
are important to the cardiologist, but also the critical
changes in those parameters from year to year during
the patient’s life span. Eventually, the cardiologist uses
the data associated with the patient’s medical history
to judge whether or not a surgical intervention is re-
quired, at which time an angiogram is taken to make
direct observations of the heart to provide the necessary
instantaneous information to the surgeon. When eval-
uating the historical data, the cardiologist is cognizant
of the fact that the heart’s paramaters are directly in-
fluenced by the evolving technologies used in taking the
1912 Seismic Data Analysis
measurements, and the interpretation of the measure-
ments is influenced by the changing medical knowledge
and experience of the cardiologist.
Similarly, the reservoir geophysicist uses the 3-D
seismic method combined with the direct observations
made at well locations to monitor the reservoir condi-
tions that are crucial for optimum development of the
field. The objective in optimum field development is to
lengthen the life span of the field, prevent water inva-
sion, and recover as much hydrocarbon as possible. By
recording 3-D seismic data over the field at various time
intervals, which may be from months to years, we intro-
duce the fourth dimension to the the analysis of the data
— calendar time, thus the term 4-D seismic method to
describe the time-lapse 3-D seismic exploration.
What type of reservoir parameters can we monitor
using the 4-D seismic method? Known applications of
the 4-D seismic method are summarized below ( Lumley
et al., 1994; Lumley, 1995a,b; Ecker, 1999; MacLeod et
al., 1999).
(a) Monitoring the spatial extent of the steam front fol-
lowing in-situ combustion or steam injection used
for thermal recovery,
(b) Monitoring the spatial extent of the injected water
front used for secondary recovery,
(c) Imaging bypassed oil,
(d) Determining flow properties of sealing or leaking
faults, and
(e) Detecting changes in oil-water contact.
A demonstrative example of the 4-D seismic
method is shown in Figure 11.5-1 (MacLeod et al.,
1999). The two seismic sections along the same inline
traverse have been extracted from the image volumes
derived from 3-D poststack time migrations of two time-
lapse 3-D seismic data. One survey was conducted in
1989 before the production commenced in the field and
the other survey was conducted in 1998 sometime af-
ter the production was started. The oil-water contact
(OWC) is distinctly visible in the 1989 section, while
it is not apparent in the 1998-section. Additionally, the
top-sand reflector is stronger in the 1998 section. This
may be attributed to the increased impedance contrast
between the overlying shales and the reservoir sands
which have higher water saturation as a result of con-
tinuing production.
Figure 11.5-2 shows another application of the 4-D
seismic method to steam flooding of a reservoir for ther-
mal recovery. In this field study, six time-lapse 3-D seis-
mic surveys were conducted (Lumley, 1995b). The first
survey at time T 1 was conducted prior to steam injec-
tion, while the subsequent surveys were conducted after
the steam injection was started. The red, near-circular
feature on the time slices correspond to the spatial ex-
tent of the injected steam; note how the steam front
expands further in the northwesterly direction with in-
creasing calendar time.
Processing of 4-D Seismic Data
Just as in the case of the medical example given above,
processing, inversion, and interpretation of 4-D seismic
data are influenced by the evolving technologies in 3-D
seismic exploration. The different vintages of 3-D seis-
mic data that are used in a 4-D seismic project are
often recorded with different vessels, source and cable
geometries, and source and receiver types and arrays.
In fact, some 4-D seismic projects may involve, say, two
time-lapse 3-D surveys — one conducted using the con-
ventional streamer cable and the other conducted using
the ocean-bottom 4-C technique (next section). The 3-D
surveys most likely would be conducted using different
recording directions and bin sizes. Figure 11.5-3 shows
the base maps for two time-lapse 3-D surveys with dif-
ferent recording directions and bin sizes (Rickett and
Lumley, 1998). The data associated with the 1979 sur-
vey and the 1991 survey were recorded with a 34-degree
difference in grid orientation. Also, the bin size for the
1979-survey was 80 × 27.5 m, whereas the bin size for
the 1991 survey was 12.5 × 12.5 m. Additionally, these
3-D seismic data sets most likely would be processed
differently — not only the processing sequences would
be different but also the processing parameters. Figure
11.5-4 (Rickett and Lumley, 1998) shows a section and
a time slice from each of the two time-lapse 3-D surveys
which are referred to in Figure 11.5-3. The 1991 survey
data have produced a more accurate image of the salt
flank.
Hence, the time-lapse 3-D data sets used in a 4-D
seismic project need to be cross-equalized prior to the
interpretation of the results. Cross-equalization involves
the following steps (Rickett and Lumley, 1998).
(a) Align the grids of the time-lapse data to a com-
mon grid orientation. In many cases of 4-D seismic
projects, grid alignment and subsequent steps in
cross-equalization are applied to poststack data. As
such, grid alignment may be achieved by remigrat-
ing the poststack data to a specified common grid
orientation. If you have access to prestack data,
one way to align the grids of the time-lapse data is
by crossline migration (Section 7.4), the output of
which would be common-azimuth gathers.
 Reservoir Geophysics 1913

FIG. 11.5-1. Time-lapse seismic data: (a) preproduction (1989), and (b) postproduction (1998). (MacLeod et al., 1999; figure
courtesy MacLeod et al., Chevron and Schlumerger Geco-Prakla; data courtesy Chevron.)

(b) Apply spectral balancing to the time-lapse 3-D data
to account for the differences in the spectral band-
width and shape. Figure 11.5-5 shows the ampli-
tude spectra computed from the 1979 and 1991
survey data shown in Figure 11.5-4. Note the signf-
icant differences in the shape and bandwidth of the
spectra before cross-equalization. These differences
have been minimized by cross-equalization.
(c) Derive amplitude gain curves from the time-lapse
3-D data based on trace envelopes, and apply the
gain curves for amplitude balancing.
(d) Estimate static shifts between the time-lapse data
traces and apply them to eliminate vertical time
diffferences.
(e) Examine and determine differences in event posi-
tioning in the migrated data volumes associated
with the time-lapse 3-D surveys. Eliminate the dif-
ferences in event positioning by residual migration.
Seismic Reservoir Monitoring
Figure 11.5-6 shows a difference section from the
time-lapse data as in Figure 11.5-4 following cross-
equalization. This difference section exhibits a strong
amplitude anomaly at the reservoir level situated at
the salt flank. Such an amplitude difference may be at-
tributed to changes in the reservoir conditions as a re-
sult of production (Rickett and Lumley, 1998). Because
of a wide range of factors associated with acquisition
and analysis of the 4-D data, in addtion to the differ-
ence data volume, the individual data volumes them-
selves are also visualized and interpereted.
The example of cross-equalization shown in Fig-
ure 11.5-7 relate to a steam injection project. Note the
differences in the time slices from the image volumes
associated with the 1996 survey and 1997 survey before
1914 Seismic Data Analysis

FIG. 11.5-2. Time lapse-seismic data: six generations of data displayed side by side. (Lumley, 1995b; figure courtesy Lumley,
4th Wave Imaging and Chevron; data courtesy Chevron.)
 Reservoir Geophysics 1915

FIG. 11.5-3. Survey geometries of two time-lapse 3-D seismic data as in Figure 11.5-4: (a) the grid orientations, and (b) grid
sizes. See text for details. (Rickett and Lumley, 1998; figure courtesy Rickett, Stanford Exploration Project, and 4th Wave
Imaging; data courtesy Chevron.)

and after cross-equalization. The bubbles correspond to
the location of the injection wells.
The 4-D seismic anomalies are characterized as dif-
ferences between time-lapse 3-D data that are present
after cross-equalization as exemplified by Figure 11.5-
5. Calibration of these anomalies often is ambiguous,
in that, they may be attributable to changes in one or
more of the reservoir conditions, such as change in fluid
saturation caused by water displacing oil, pore pressure
change caused by injection, or a temperature change
caused by steam injection (Tura and Lumley, 1999).
Although significant progress has been made in the
4-D seismic method, its value in determining dynamic
reservoir properties is just beginning to be demon-
strated. The information regarding the dynamic reser-
voir properties much sought after by the production en-
gineer includes changes in oil saturation, water satura-
tion, and pore pressure. Future developments in seismi-
cally driven reservoir characterization and monitoring
should contribute significantly to optimum management
of oil and gas fields.
11.6 4-C SEISMIC METHOD
Throughout this textbook, we discussed processing, in-
version, and interpretation of compressional or P -wave
seismic data. Specifically, we had in mind a compres-
sional seismic source and the reflected signal recorded
by each receiver being a compressional seismic wave-
field. Recall from Section 11.2 that for non-normal in-
cidence at a layer boundary, an incident compressional
plane wave is partitioned into not just reflected and
transmitted compressional-wave components, but also
reflected and transmitted shear-wave, or S-wave com-
ponents. Hence, a fraction of the incident P -wave is
converted into a reflected S-wave. The amplitudes of the
individual components are described by the Zoeppritz
equations (11-12). By way of prestack amplitude inver-
sion of nonzero-offset P -wave data described in Section
11.2, we are then able to make an estimate of the S-
wave reflectivity as an AVO attribute (equations 11-37
and 11-49).
1916 Seismic Data Analysis

FIG. 11.5-4. Time-lapse 3-D seismic data: (a) an inline section and (b) a time slice from the time image volume associated
with the 1979 survey; (c) an inline section and (d) a time slice from the time image volume associated with the 1991 survey.
The interior of the broken yellow line defines the overlapping area between the two surveys. See text for details. (Rickett and
Lumley, 1998; figure courtesy Rickett, Stanford Exploration Project, and 4th Wave Imaging; data courtesy Chevron.)
 Reservoir Geophysics 1917

FIG. 11.5-5. Amplitude spectra of the two time-lapse 3-D seismic data as in Figure 11.5-4 (a) before and (b) after cross-
equalization; (c) a difference section following cross-equalization. (Rickett and Lumley, 1998; figure courtesy Rickett, Stanford
Exploration Project, and 4th Wave Imaging; data courtesy Chevron.)

In a conventional marine seismic survey, we can-
not record P -to-S converted-wave energy even if we de-
ploy sensors that can register the shear-wave energy.
This is because the upcoming converted-wave energy
is not transmitted through the water column to reach
the recording cable since fluids cannot support shear
strain. Thus, to capture the converted-wave energy, we
need to record it at the water bottom using an ocean-
bottom cable (OBC). And to record it, we need to use
geophones that register velocity of the particle motion
that is perpendicular to the direction of the wave propa-
gation. Since the upcoming wave is primarily in the ver-
tical direction, we need to use a geophone that records
the particle motion in the horizontal direction. In fact,
for a good reason that will be obvious later in the sec-
tion, we need to deploy not one, but two horizontal geo-
phones that are oriented perpendicular to one another.
To complement the recording of the pressure wave by
a hydrophone, again for a reason that will be obvious
later in the section, we might also wish to record the
vertical component of the particle motion using a ver-
tical geophone. Hence, an OBC recording is done using
three geophones and one hydrophone for each receiver
unit along the cable, making it a four-component (4-C)
seismic survey. The final product from the analysis of a
4-C survey data is a pair of P -wave and S-wave image
sections (in the case of a 2-D survey) or volumes (in
the case of a 3-D survey). Strictly the P -wave data are
associated with P -to-P reflections and S-wave data are
associated with P -to-S converted waves. Heretofore, we
shall refer to these two wave types as P P and P S, re-
spectively, so as to explicitly indicate that they both
are generated by a P -wave source. (An S-wave source
would have generated SS and SP data.)
1918 Seismic Data Analysis

Much of the P -to-S conversion takes place, not at
the water bottom, but at reflectors that correspond
to layer boundaries with significant contrast in elas-
tic properties (Thomsen, 1998). This fortuitous phe-
nomenon is caused by the very low speeds of shear waves
in seabed sediments (Theilen et al., 1997; Li and Yuan,
1999).
In this section, we shall briefly review acquisition
and analysis techniques specific to 4-C seismic data. Be-
fore we proceed, however, we need to ask the question
why we would want to go through the expense of con-
ducting a 4-C OBC survey. Is there any exploration
or development objective that we cannot achieve us-
ing conventional P -wave data, but we can with S-wave
data? To answer this crucial question, first, we make
reference to one of the AVO interpretation strategies
discussed in Section 11.2. Specifically, by AVO inversion
of prestack amplitudes, we wish to estimate P -wave and
S-wave reflectivities and do a crossplot analysis to infer
fluid types and saturation in reservoir rocks. If, instead
of indirectly extracting these AVO attributes from con-
ventional P -wave data, we record both P P and P S data
by a 4-C survey, we may be able to broaden our under-
standing of properties of reservoir fluids and rocks.
Known potential applications of converted-wave
data are summarized below (Caldwell, 1999; Zhu et al.,
1999; Gaiser, 1999b).
contact, on the other hand, corresponds to a signifi-
cant contrast on the P -wave velocity curve. While the
position and geometry of the oil-water contact are im-
portant in terms of the production history of the field,
this is not the only strategic information that is needed
for the development. Specifically, for production, it is
the top-reservoir boundary that needs to be delineated
accurately so as to place the horizontal well trajectory
close to the top and avoid missing a significant vertical
oil column.
Compare the P P section derived from the conven-
tional streamer 3-D survey and the P S section derived
from the 4-C OBC survey, both of the same vintage,
shown in Figures 11.6-1b and 11.6-1c. The P P sec-
tion shows a strong event at 2 s that corresponds to
the strong contrast on the P velocity curve associated
with the oil-water contact (Figure 11.6-1a). Neverthe-

(a) Imaging beneath gas plumes,

(b) Imaging beneath salt domes,
(c) Imaging beneath basalts,
(d) Delineating reservoir boundaries with a higher S-
wave impedance contrast than P -wave impedance
contrast,
(e) Differentiating sand from shale,
(f) Detection of fluid phase change from oil-bearing to
water-bearing sands,
(g) Detection of vertical fracture orientation,
(h) Mapping hydrocarbon saturation, and
(i) Mapping oil-water contact.

We now refer to a few examples illustrating the use

of P S data. Figure 11.6-1a shows portions of a dipole
sonic log measured at a well from a producing field.
The S-wave velocity curve shows a marked contrast at
the top- (A) and base- (B) reservoir unit. It, however,
does not show a significant contrast at oil-water contact
(OWC). The P -wave velocity curve shows a difference
in the gradients within the postreservoir and reservoir
units, but it does not show a marked contrast at the top-
reservoir boundary as does the S-wave velocity curve FIG. 11.5-6. Difference section after cross-equalization of
(A). This is because of a lack of acoustic impedance the time-lapse data as in Figure 11.5-4. (Rickett and Lumley,
contrast between the shales of the postreservoir unit 1998; figure courtesy Rickett, Stanford Exploration Project,
and the oil sands of the reservoir unit. The oil-water and 4th Wave Imaging; data courtesy Chevron.)
 Reservoir Geophysics
less, the top reservoir is nearly impossible to identify on
this section. The P S section, on the other hand, shows
two strong events with irregular geometry at about 3.6
s and 3.8 s. These events correspond to the strong con-
trasts on the S velocity curve associated with the top-
and base-reservoir boundaries labeled A and B in Figure
11.6-1a, respectively.
It is important to note that the P S section is not a
replacement for the P P section; instead, they are com-
plementary. The P P section provides the information
about the oil-water contact while the P S section pro-
vides the information about the top-reservoir boundary.
Both are needed for optimum development of the field.
Another case for converted-wave data is shown
in Figure 11.6-2. The P P section shows a zone of
gas plume associated with the underlying leaky reser-
voir. The gas-saturated formations cause amplitude and
traveltime distortions of the P -wave that passes through
the anomalous zone. This can make the geometry of the
underlying reservoir unit difficult to delineate. The gas
plume actually represents a complex overburden that
gives rise to strong lateral velocity variations. As such,
the complexity of the overburden can be resolved by
earth modeling in depth and the underlying reservoir
zone can, in some cases, be imaged by prestack depth
migration with an acceptable accuracy. The S-wave, on
the other hand, is relatively unscathed by the presence
of gas within the overburden; hence, the P S data pro-
vide a more accurate time image of the reservoir zone as
compared to the time image derived from the P P data.
Note also from both the sections in Figure 11.6-2 and
the 3-D image volumes shown in Figure 11.6-3 that the
reflectors within the overburden above the gas plume
zone are stronger in the P P data compared to the P S
data. This is because only a fraction of the incident
P -wave energy is converted to S-wave energy at layer
boundaries. Once again, the P P and P S data comple-
ment each other, and it certainly is not one or the other.
While the P S section provides a better image of the
reservoir structure, the P P section clearly indicates the
presence of a gas plume above. This anomalous pressure
zone has to be taken seriously during well planning.
Recording of 4-C Seismic Data
Marine 4-C data are recorded by using ocean-bottom
cables with receiver units, each containing one hy-
drophone to detect the pressure wavefield and three geo-
phones to detect particle motions in a Cartesian system.
The receivers used in marine multicomponent surveys
are usually of gimballed type; as such, the vertical geo-
phone is guaranteed to measure the vertical component
1919
of the particle motion. The two horizontal components
measure the particle motions in two orthogonal direc-
tions, and they are intended to be oriented in such posi-
tions that one of them is aligned in the direction of the
receiver cable. Shown in Figure 11.6-4 is a diagram of
an ideal three-component geophone layout that would
be possible to achieve in land surveys. The orientations
of the three components coincide with a right-handed
Cartesian coordinate system. This means that the verti-
cal z-component is positive downward, while the inline
x-component is defined to have positive direction when
the crossline y-component is clockwise with respect to
the x-component.
The geophone orientation of the layout shown in
Figure 11.6-4 is not achievable in an ocean-bottom sur-
vey. Although the vertical geophone is indeed oriented
in the vertical direction and it measures the particle mo-
tion as positive downward, the two horizontal geophones
are not guaranteed to be in the inline and crossline di-
rections. Instead, these two geophones position them-
selves at various different, still orthogonal, directions.
As a result, the horizontal geophones associated with a
common-shot record measure particle motions in arbi-
trary directions, rather than the desired common inline
and crossline directions (Figure 11.6-5). This arbitrary
horizontal geophone orientation is primarily caused by
the seabed conditions such as currents, unconsolidated
sediments, and the roughness of the seabed surface.
The sensor systems used in OBC surveys are of two
types — the node systems and cable systems. A node is
an individual unit that houses a single hydrophone and
three geophones in the Cartesian orientation. The nodes
are pressed into the seabed sediments by a remotely op-
erated vehicle. Most nodal systems are derivatives of the
SUMIC system pioneered by Statoil. The more widely
used cable systems deploy different designs for housing
the hydrophones and geophones. The cable usually is
dragged a certain distance and then draped down to
the seabed along the desired traverse.
The recording geometry for a 4-C OBC survey is
an adaptation of a typical land 3-D survey geometry
(Section 7.1). As illustrated in Figure 11.6-5, two or
more cables are laid down on the seabed parallel to each
other, and data are recorded using a conventional seis-
mic vessel with source locations aligned in the direction
perpendicular to the receiver lines.
Shown in Figure 11.6-6 is a composite common-
shot gather from a 4-C OBC survey made up of four
records. The individual components are the hydrophone
record, and the inline, crossline and vertical geophone
records. This survey was conducted using two receiver
cables laid in parallel, 300-m apart on the seabed. While
the total cable length is 6000 m, maximum offset for
1920 Seismic Data Analysis

FIG. 11.5-7. Amplitude extractions along a time slice from two time-lapse 3-D seismic data recorded in 1996 and 1997, (a)
before and (b) after cross-equalization. (Ecker et al., 1999; figure courtesy Ecker et al. and Chevron, and 4th Wave Imaging;
data courtesy Chevron.)

some shots was up to 9000 m. Each cable carried 240
receiver units at 25-m interval; hence, each of the four
records shown in Figure 11.6-6 contains 240 traces. The
same common-shot gather is displayed in Figure 11.6-7
with AGC applied in order to better examine the signal
and noise character in each record. Note that the hy-
drophone and vertical geophone records exhibit events
with similar moveout since they both contain P -waves.
The records associated with the two horizontal com-
ponents exhibit events with much larger moveout since
these records contain S-waves which travel with a slower
velocity than P -waves, almost twice as slow in many
rock types. Therefore, when identifying the same event
on both a P -wave record and an S-wave record, keep in
mind that the event time in the latter can be twice the
event time in the former. This means that if you plan
a 5-s record length for conventional P -wave data, you
would need to record the 4-C data using a 10-s dura-
tion. The slower S-wave velocities would also result in
a much larger moveout on the S-wave record compared
to the moveout on the P -wave record. This means that
spatial aliasing would be more serious when applying
 Reservoir Geophysics 1921

FIG. 11.6-1. (a) Portions of a dipole sonic log that shows the S-wave (left) and the P -wave (right) velocity curves; (b) a
portion of a migrated P P streamer section, and (c) a portion of a migrated P S OBC section. (Courtesy MacLeod et al., 1999;
data courtesy Chevron and Schlumberger Geco-Prakla.)
1922 Seismic Data Analysis
FIG. 11.6-2. (a) A migrated P P section, and (b) a migrated P S section. (Figure courtesy Probert et al., 1999, and Schlum-
berger Geco-Prakla; data courtesy BP-Amoco.)
multichannel processing applications, such as f − k fil-
tering or migration, to S-wave data than P -wave data.
Figure 11.6-8 shows a common-receiver gather
which was created by sorting the common-shot gather
data as in Figure 11.6-6. The same receiver gather with
AGC applied is shown in Figure 11.6-9. The horizontal
geophone records from both the common-shot gather
(Figure 11.6-7) and the common-receiver gather (Fig-
ure 11.6-9) exhibit events with relatively more complex
moveout than those observed on the hydrophone or ver-
tical geophone records. You should not expect a one-to-
one correspondence between the events on the two sets
of records. Because layer boundaries give rise to differ-
ences in P -wave and S-wave impedance contrasts, there
may be some events that appear on both records with
different strengths, or some events may be present in
one record set and absent in the other.
Figure 11.6-10 shows a close-up portion of the com-
posite shot gather shown in Figure 11.6-7 and the spec-
tra of the individual components. Note the polarity re-
versal from one side of the cable to the other on the in-
line record as a consequence of the right-handed record-
ing convention (Figure 11.6-5). The frequency content
of the hydrophone data appears to be broader than
the vertical geophone component; this is because of the
imperfect coupling of the geophones with the seabed
sediments. This difference in bandwidth because of the
coupling issue is observed also in the common-receiver
gather shown in Figure 11.6-11.
Acquisition of 4-C OBC data is different from con-
ventional streamer recording in respect of the receivers.
In fact, it is like land acquisition at the seabed. When
the seabed has irregular geometry, it gives rise to both
long- and short-wavelength statics. Therefore, in pro-
cessing 4-C data, receiver statics need to be calculated
and applied to both P P and P S data.
Gaiser’s Coupling Analysis of Geophone Data
Variations in geophone coupling contaminate signal am-
plitudes registered by the geophone components, and
 Reservoir Geophysics 1923

FIG. 11.6-3. 3-D image volumes associated with (a) P P data and (b) P S data as in Figure 11.6-2. (Figure courtesy Probert
et al., 1999, and Schlumberger Geco-Prakla; data courtesy BP-Amoco.)

need to be compensated for in a surface-consistent man- leads to vertical and crossline geophone signals mutu-
ner. Because of coupling problems, what is recorded ally contaminating each other in a manner that can be
by each one of the three geophones is not exactly the modeled by equation (11-66).
same as the ground motion at the seabed. A frequency- We wish to estimate the ground motion vector
domain model equation that relates the recorded sig- {X(ω), Y (ω), Z(ω)}; this requires inverting equation
nal components {X (ω), Y (ω), Z (ω)} by the three geo- (11-66) as given by Gaiser (1998)
phones in the inline, crossline, and vertical directions     
(x, y, z), respectively, and the actual ground motions in X(ω) D 0 0 X (ω)
 Y (ω)  = 1 0
the three orthogonal directions {X(ω), Y (ω), Z(ω)} is Vz −Cz   Y (ω)  ,
D
given by (Gaiser, 1998) Z(ω) 0 −Vy Cy Z (ω)
     (11 − 67)
X (ω) I 0 0 X(ω)
 Y (ω)  =  0 Cy Cz   Y (ω)  , (11 − 66) where D = Vz Cy − Vy Cz and is the determinant of the
coupling matrix in equation (11-66).
Z (ω) 0 Vy Vz Z(ω)
From the matrix equation (11-67), write explicitly
where ω is the angular frequency, I is unity, and the the recovered ground motions
nonzero elements Cy , Cz , Vy , and Vz describe the cou-
pling response of the geophones. Vz Cz
Y (ω) = Y (ω) − Z (ω) (11 − 68a)
Note from equation (11-66) that X (ω) = X(ω); D D
this means that we assume that the inline geophone is and
Vy Cy
perfectly coupled. Since the inline geophone is guided by Z(ω) = − Y (ω) + Z (ω). (11 − 68b)
the cable itself, this is considered a valid assumption in D D
practice. Whereas the vertical and crossline geophones The coupling compensation operators are esti-
are not coupled completely — hence the nonzero ele- mated in a surface-consistent manner (Taner and
ments of the coupling matrix. The imperfect coupling Koehler, 1981) with the constraint that, following the
1924 Seismic Data Analysis
Reservoir Geophysics 1925
1926 Seismic Data Analysis
rotation, the energy of the transverse component is min-
imum.
Gaiser (1998) reported a coupling experiment to
verify the validity of the coupling theory described
above. Figure 11.6-12a,b,c show the inline, crossline,
and vertical geophone records obtained from an OBC
survey. In the same figure, the record associated with
the crossline geophone is shown after compenating for
coupling (Figure 11.6-12d). To study the validity of
the compensation based on equation (11-68), a diver
firmly planted the receiver unit into the seabed and the
recording was repeated. The resulting crossline record is
shown in Figure 11.6-12e. If the coupling theory holds,
then the records in Figures 11.6-12d,e should look very
similar. Differences may be attributed to poor coupling
of the planted receiver unit.
Figure 11.6-13 shows the result of surface-
consistent coupling analysis. To apply the coupling
corrections, scale the amplitudes in a given geophone
record by the product of the source scalar and the as-
sociated component scalar. Figure 11.6-14 shows the
common-shot gather as in Figure 11.6-6 after the appli-
cation of surface-consistent amplitude corrections (Fig-
ure 11.6-12). The same shot gather with AGC is shown
in Figure 11.6-15. The common-receiver gather as in
Figure 11.6-8 after the application of surface-consistent
amplitude corrections (Figure 11.6-12) is shown in Fig-
ure 11.6-16. The same receiver gather with AGC is
shown in Figure 11.6-17. To examine the degree of com-
pensation for differences in geophone coupling, refer to
the close-up displays shown in Figures 11.6-18 and 11.6-
19.
Processing of P P Data
The next step in processing of the 4-C seismic data
is to calibrate the vertical geophone component Z(t)
and sum it with the hydrophone component P (t) to
obtain the total P P data. This dual-sensor summation
is done to remove water-column reverberations (Barr
and Sanders, 1989). Calibration may involve just a sin-
gle scalar applied to the entire geophone data prior to
summation with the hydrophone data. More sophisti-
cated calibration techniques include the application of
surface-consistent scalars computed for each receiver lo-
cation or application of surface-consistent scalars com-
puted for each receiver location and for each frequency
component (Dragoset and Barr, 1994; Paffenholz and
Barr, 1995; Soubaras, 1996).
The merged P P data are now ready for conven-
tional processing. First, apply a vertical time shift that
is equal to the water depth divided by water velocity to
bring the receivers from the seabed to the same datum
as the shots. If the water depth is greater than 100 m,
the vertical shift may not be valid; instead, the datum-
ing may have to be done by wave-equation datuming
(Section 8.1).
The remaining prestack processing sequence for the
P P data is no different from the land data processing se-
quence and includes geometric spreading correction, de-
convolution, refraction and residual statics corrections
to account for the variations in the seabed geometry, ve-
locity analysis, NMO and DMO corrections. The post-
stack processing sequence typically includes deconvo-
lution, time-variant filtering, and migration. Shown in
Figure 11.6-20 is a CMP gather associated with the P P
data as in Figure 11.6-14. The CMP stack is shown in
Figure 11.6-21. The average fold of coverage is 150.
Rotation of Horizontal Geophone Components
Return to the OBC geometry shown in Figure 11.6-5. As
discussed earlier in the section, by using gimballed geo-
phones, the vertical geophone orientation can be main-
tained in a true vertical direction. The two horizontal
geophones, however, cannot be oriented along the de-
sired inline and crossline directions. Instead, they align
themselves in arbitrary orientations from one receiver
station to the next. We need to realign the horizontal
geophones associated with one common-shot gather to
a common orientation. One common orientation that
is the source-centered Cartesian coordinates is shown
in Figure 11.6-22. This means that the horizontal geo-
phones of all receivers that contribute traces to the shot
station with a circle around it are rotated from inline-
crossline (x, y) coordinates (the acquisition coordinate
system) to radial-transverse (r, t) coordinates relative to
the source location (the processing coordinate system).
As a result, the radial geophone response will represent
the horizontal particle motion in the source-receiver
plane and the transverse geophone response will repre-
sent the horizontal particle motion perpendicular to the
radial response. Following the rotation, a common-shot
or a common-receiver gather associated with the radial
component will comprise traces with radial responses in
the source-receiver azimuthal directions.
Figure 11.6-23 shows a common-receiver gather as-
sociated with the inline and crossline geophone compo-
nents before and after rotation. The equations for co-
ordinate transformation of the particle motions from
inline-crossline (x, y) ccordinates to radial-transverse
(r, t) coordinates are (Li and Yuan, 1999)
    
R(t) cos θ sin θ X(t)
 =   , (11 − 69)
T (t) − sin θ cos θ Y (t)
(text continues on p. 1933)
 Reservoir Geophysics 1927

FIG. 11.6-6. Individual components of a common-shot gather from a 4-C survey, (a) the hydrophone, (b) inline, (c) crossline,
and (d) vertical geophone components. (Field data related to Figures 11.6-6 through 11.6-29 are courtesy Chevron.)
1928 Seismic Data Analysis

FIG. 11.6-7. Individual components of a common-shot gather as in Figure 11.6-6, but displayed with AGC, (a) the hy-
drophone, (b) inline, (c) crossline, and (d) vertical geophone components.
 Reservoir Geophysics 1929

FIG. 11.6-8. Individual components of a common-receiver gather from a 4-C survey, (a) the hydrophone, (b) inline, (c)
crossline, and (d) vertical geophone components.
1930 Seismic Data Analysis

FIG. 11.6-9. Individual components of a common-receiver gather as in Figure 11.6-8, but displayed with AGC, (a) the
hydrophone, (b) inline, (c) crossline, and (d) vertical geophone components.
 Reservoir Geophysics 1931

FIG. 11.6-10. A close-up portion of the composite common-shot gather shown in Figure 11.6-6 and the spectra of the
individual components, (a) the hydrophone, (b) inline, (c) crossline, and (d) vertical geophone components.
1932 Seismic Data Analysis

FIG. 11.6-11. A close-up portion of the composite common-receiver gather shown in Figure 11.6-8 and the spectra of the
individual components, (a) the hydrophone, (b) inline, (c) crossline, and (d) vertical geophone components.
 Reservoir Geophysics
where the rotation angle θ is as labeled in Figure 11.6-
23c, Y (t) and X(t) are the inline and crossline compo-
nents as recorded in the field following the compensa-
tion for variations in coupling, and R(t) and T (t) are the
rotational and transverse components after rotation.
It is generally assumed that most significant sig-
nal components — reflections, diffractions, and con-
verted waves, are polarized in the source-receiver direc-
tion (Gaiser, 1998). This means that, following the rota-
tion of the horizontal geophone components, the radial
component would contain most of the P S energy while
the transverse component would contain negligible P S
energy (Figure 11.6-23). If the transverse component
does contain anomalously high level of signal energy,
it may be attributable to anisotropy that causes shear-
wave splitting in fractured rocks. We shall review this
pheonomenon briefly in Section 11.7.
Figure 11.6-24 shows the common-shot gather as
in Figure 11.6-14 after rotation of the horizontal com-
ponents. The hydrophone record (first record from left)
and the vertical geophone record (fourth record from
left) are the same in both figures. The second and third
record from the left in Figure 11.6-14 represent the in-
line and crossline geophone components of the particle
motion; whereas, the second and third record from the
left in Figure 11.6-24 represent the radial and transverse
geophone components of the particle motion. Note from
the AGC applied version of the same shot gather in
Figure 11.6-25 that the radial component, unlike the
inline component shown in Figure 11.6-15, does not
exhibit the polarity reversal at zero offset. Also, the
transverse component in Figure 11.6-25 contains rela-
tively weak signal energy when compared to the radial
component. These observations are also verified in the
common-receiver gather shown in Figure 11.6-26. Com-
pare the AGC applied version of the receiver gather be-
fore (Figure 11.6-16) and after (Figure 11.6-27) rotation
and note the switch in polarity and low signal level in
the transverse component. The spectral analysis of the
shot and receiver gathers are shown in Figures 11.6-28
and 11.6-29; compare these results with Figures 11.6-18
and 11.6-19.
Common-Conversion-Point Binning
We learned in Section 11.2 that an incident P -wave
is partitioned at a layer boundary into reflected and
transmitted P - and S-wave components. Consider the
raypath geometry in Figure 11.6-30a for an incident P -
wave generated by the source S1 and a flat reflector.
The reflection angle for the P P -wave is equal to the
angle of incidence; however, the reflection angle for the
1933
P S-wave is smaller than the angle of incidence. As a
result, the P P reflection will follow a symmetric ray-
path and be recorded at receiver location R2 , while the
P S reflection will follow an asymmetric raypath and be
recorded at receiver location R1 .
Now consider the common-midoint (CMP) raypath
geometry for a source-receiver pair S1 − R1 shown in
Figure 11.6-30b. There are two reflection arrivals at the
receiver location R1 associated with the P P and P S
raypaths. The reflection point B at which the incident
P -wave is converted to the S-wave is displaced in the
lateral direction by some distance d away from the re-
flection point A at which the incident P -wave is re-
flected and recorded at the same receiver location R1
as the converted S-wave. This means that, for an earth
model with flat layers, the P P -wave reflection points
coincide with the midpoint location (Figure 11.6-31a);
whereas, the P S conversion points do not (Figure 11.6-
31b). As a direct consequence of this observation, the
notion of a CMP gather based on sorting P P data from
acquisition coordinates — source and receiver, to pro-
cessing coordinates — midpoint and offset, such that
traces in the gather have the same midpoint coordinate,
is not applicable to P S data. Instead P S data need to
be sorted into common-conversion-point (CCP) gathers
such that traces in this gather have the same conversion
point coordinate.
An important aspect of CCP sorting is that the
asymmetric raypath associated with the P S reflection
gives rise to a periodic variation in fold of the CCP gath-
ers. As for the conventional P -wave data with variations
in fold caused by irregular recording geometry, ampli-
tudes of the stacked P S data are adversely affected by
the variation in the CCP fold (Eaton and Lawton, 1992;
Li and Yuan, 1999). Just as one resorts to flexible bin
size in the processing of 3-D seismic data to accom-
modate variations in fold, the same strategy may be
applied for the P S data processing.
Binning the P S data into CCP gathers requires
knowledge of the conversion-point coordinate xP . Refer-
ring to Figure 11.6-31b, note that the conversion-point
coordinate follows a trajectory indicated by the broken
curve that, in general, depends on the reflector depth
(Tessmer and Behle, 1988).
To derive an expression for xP , refer to the geom-
etry of the P S-raypath shown in Figure 11.6-32. By
Snell’s law, we know that
sin ϕ0 sin ψ1
= , (11 − 70)
α β
where α and β are the P -wave and S-wave velocities,
respectively, and ϕ0 is the P -wave angle of incidence
and ψ1 is the reflection angle for the converted S-wave.
(text continues on p. 1946)
1934 Seismic Data Analysis
Reservoir Geophysics 1935
1936 Seismic Data Analysis

FIG. 11.6-14. The composite common-shot gather as in Figure 11.6-6 after coupling corrections of Figure 11.6-13, (a) the
hydrophone, (b) inline, (c) crossline and (d) vertical geophone components (Data courtesy Chevron.)
 Reservoir Geophysics 1937

FIG. 11.6-15. The composite common-shot gather as in Figure 11.6-14, but displayed with with AGC, (a) the hydrophone,
(b) inline, (c) crossline, and (d) vertical geophone components.
1938 Seismic Data Analysis

FIG. 11.6-16. The composite common-receiver gather as in Figure 11.6-8 after coupling corrections of Figure 11.6-13, (a)
the hydrophone, (b) inline, (c) crossline, and (d) vertical geophone components.
 Reservoir Geophysics 1939

FIG. 11.6-17. The composite common-receiver gather as in Figure 11.6-16, but displayed with with AGC, (a) the hydrophone,
(b) inline, (c) crossline, and (d) vertical geophone components.
1940 Seismic Data Analysis

FIG. 11.6-18. A close-up view of the composite common-shot gather after coupling corrections as in Figure 11.6-14, and the
spectra of the individual components, (a) the hydrophone, (b) inline, (c) crossline, and (d) vertical geophone components.
 Reservoir Geophysics 1941

FIG. 11.6-19. A close-up view of the composite of the common-receiver gather after coupling corrections as in Figure 11.6-
16, and the spectra of the individual components, (a) the hydrophone, (b) inline, (c) crossline, and (d) vertical geophone
components.
1942 Seismic Data Analysis
 Reservoir Geophysics 1943

FIG. 11.6-21. The CMP stack derived from the P P -data as in Figure 11.6-14. (Processing by Orhan Yilmaz, 1999).
1944 Seismic Data Analysis
Reservoir Geophysics 1945
1946 Seismic Data Analysis

From the geometry of Figure 11.6-32, note that 1992; Zhang, 1996; Yuan and Li, 1997). The iteration
xP may be started by substituting the asymptotic form of
sin ϕ0 = 2
(11 − 71a) xP given by equation (11-73a) into the right-hand side
xP + z 2
of equation (11-72c). The new value of xP may then
and be back substituted into equation (11-72c) to continue
xS
sin ψ1 = , (11 − 71b) with the iteration.
x2S + z 2 Whatever the estimation procedure, note from
where xP and xS are the lateral distances from the equation (11-72c) that xP depends both on depth to
CCP to the source and receiver locations, respectively. the reflector and the velocity ratio γ = α/β. Unless a
Substitute equations (11-71a,b) into equation (11-70), value for the velocity ratio is assumed, it follows that
square and rearrange the terms to get CCP binning requires velocity analysis of P S data to
x2S β 2 x2 + z 2 determine the velocity ratio γ. Additionally, an accurate
2 = 2 2S . (11 − 72a) CCP binning strictly requires the knowledge of reflector
xP α xP + z 2
depths; thus, the advocation of an implicit requirement
Apply some algebraic manipulation to solve equation that 4-C seismic data analysis should be done in the
(11-72a) for xS depth domain. This requirement may be waivered if we
only consider a horizontally layered earth model as in
xP
xS = , (11 − 72b) the next subsection.
x2
γ 2 + γ 2 − 1 P2
z
where γ = α/β. Finally, substitute the relation xS = Velocity Analysis of PS Data
x − xP , where x is the source-receiver offset, into equa-
tion (11-72b) to get the desired expression From the raypath geometry of Figure 11.6-32, it follows
x2 that
γ 2 + γ 2 − 1 P2
z 1 1 2
xP = x. (11 − 72c) t= x2P + z 2 + x − xP + z 2 , (11 − 74)
x2P α β
2
1+ γ + γ −1 2 2
z where t is the two-way P S reflection traveltime from
From Figure 11.6-31b, note that the CCP location the source to the conversion point to the receiver, and
moves closer to CMP location as the depth of the re- z is the reflector depth.
flector increases. At infinite depth, the CCP location Set x = xP = 0 in equation (11-74) to see that the
reaches an asymptotic conversion point (ACP) (Fromm two-way zero-offset P S traveltime is given by
et al., 1985). In the limit z → ∞, equation (11-72c)
gives the ACP coordinate xP with respect to the source 1 1
t0 = + z. (11 − 75)
location α β
γ
xP = x. (11 − 73a) Substitute equation (11-75) into equation (11-74) for
1+γ
the depth variable z to get
Since β < α, the conversion point is closer to the re-
ceiver location than the source location (Figure 11.6- 1 α2 2
31b). The displacement d = xP − x/2 of the asymptotic t= x2P + 2 t0
α γ+1
conversion point from the midpoint is, by way of equa-
tion (11-73a), γ 2 α2 2
+ x − xP + 2 t0 , (11 − 76)
α γ+1
1 γ−1
d= x. (11 − 73b)
2 γ+1 where γ = α/β.
While CCP binning may be performed using the Equation (11-76) describes the P S-wave moveout
ACP coordinate given by equation (11-73a), more observed on a CCP gather. Although it is derived for
accurate binning techniques account for the depth- a single flat layer in a constant-velocity medium, this
dependence of the CCP coordinate xP based on a so- equation also is applicable to a horizontally layered
lution to equation (11-72c) (Tessmer and Behle, 1988; earth model. In that case, α and β refer to the P - and
Zhang and Robinson, 1992). Because of the quartic form S-wave rms velocities.
of equation (11-72c) in terms of xP , an iterative solu- Note from equation (11-76) that the asymmetric
tion may be preferred in practice (Zhang and Robinson, raypath associated with the P S reflection shown in
(text continues on p. 1955)
 Reservoir Geophysics 1947

FIG. 11.6-24. The composite common-shot gather as in Figure 11.6-14 after rotation of inline and crossline components to
radial and transverse components, (a) the hydrophone, (b) radial, (c) transverse, and (d) vertical geophone components.
1948 Seismic Data Analysis

FIG. 11.6-25. The composite common-shot gather as in Figure 11.6-24, but displayed with AGC, (a) the hydrophone, (b)
radial, (c) transverse, and (d) vertical geophone components.
 Reservoir Geophysics 1949

FIG. 11.6-26. The composite common-receiver gather as in Figure 11.6-16 after rotation of inline and crossline components
to radial and transverse components, (a) the hydrophone, (b) radial, (c) transverse, and (d) vertical geophone components.
1950 Seismic Data Analysis

FIG. 11.6-27. The composite common-receiver gather as in Figure 11.6-26, but displayed with AGC, (a) the hydrophone,
(b) radial, (c) transverse, and (d) vertical geophone components.
 Reservoir Geophysics 1951

FIG. 11.6-28. A close-up view of the composite common-shot gather after rotation as in Figure 11.6-24, and the spectra of
the individual components, (a) the hydrophone, (b) radial, (c) transverse, and (d) vertical geophone components.
1952 Seismic Data Analysis

FIG. 11.6-29. A close-up view of the composite common-shot gather after rotation as in Figure 11.6-26, and the spectra of
the individual components, (a) the hydrophone, (b) radial, (c) transverse, and (d) vertical geophone components.
 Reservoir Geophysics 1953

FIG. 11.6-30. (a) Conversion of an incident P -wave to a reflecting S-wave; (b) P -to-P and P -to-S reflection at a flat
reflecting interface. The arrows along the raypaths represent the direction of particle motion. See text for details.
1954 Seismic Data Analysis

FIG. 11.6-31. Geometry of (a) common-midpoint (CMP) raypaths, and (b) common-conversion-point (CCP) and raypaths.
At infinite depth, the CCP location reaches an asymptotic conversion point (ACP). See text for details.
 Reservoir Geophysics
FIG. 11.6-32. Geometry of a common-conversion-point (CCP) raypath used to derive the reflection traveltime equation
(11-74) for the P S-wave.
Figure 11.6-32 gives rise to a nonhyperbolic moveout
even in the case of a flat reflector in a constant-velocity
medium. A way to avoid dealing with nonhyperbolic
moveout would be to make the small-spread approxi-
mation and consider the best-fit hyperbola
x2
t = t20 + 2 (11 − 77)
vN MO
to the traveltime trajectory associated with a P S re-
flection on a CCP gather (Tessmer and Behle, 1988). In
equation (11-77), t and t0 mean the same traveltimes
as in equation (11-76), and vN M O is the moveout veloc-
ity for P S-wave derived from the best-fit hyperbola; as
such, it is neither the P -wave velocity α nor the S-wave
velocity β. In fact, the Taylor expansion of equation
√ the P P data set itself.
(11-74) yields the relation vN M O = αβ (Fromm et
al., 1985). By assuming a hyperbolic moveout described
by equation (11-77), the P S data can be corrected for
moveout and stacked in the same manner as for the P P
data.
Practical experience, however, points to the un-
avoidable fact that the P S data exhibit strong nonhy-
perbolic moveout behavior. Shown in Figure 11.6-33 is a
CCP gather after hyperbolic moveout correction using
equation (11-77) and nonhyperbolic moveout correction
using equation (11-76). Note the overcorrection at far
offsets within 0-2.5 s.
1955
The need for nonhyperbolic moveout correction for
the P S data makes it compelling to conduct a multi-
parameter velocity analysis. Unlike velocity analysis us-
ing the hyperbolic moveout equation (11-77), where we
only need to scan for one parameter, vN M O , velocity
analysis using the nonhyperbolic moveout equation (11-
76) suggests scanning for three parameters — the P P -
wave velocity α, the velocity ratio γ = α/β, and the
CCP displacement xP . But, in practice, we do not have
to scan for all three parameters. Instead, the iterative
procedure described below may be followed.
(a) To begin with, note that the P P -wave velocity α
can be estimated directly by velocity analysis of
(b) We may assume an initial value for the velocity
ratio γ = α/β and estimate an intial value for xP
using equation (11-73a).
(c) Knowing α and xP , use the nonhyperbolic moveout
equation (11-76) to scan for γ as a function of t0 .
Figure 11.6-34 shows a γ-spectrum computed from
the CCP gather in Figure 11.6-33a.
(d) Pick a function γ(t0 ) at each CCP analysis location
along the line over the survey area and derive a
γ(x, t0 )-section as shown in Figure 11.6-35.
(e) Use the γ(x, t0 )-section and the P P -wave velocity
1956 Seismic Data Analysis

FIG. 11.6-33. (a) A common-conversion-point (CCP) gather, (b) after hyperbolic moveout correction using equation (11-77),
and (c) after nonhyperbolic movoeut correction using equation (11-76). (Figure courtesy Li and Yuan, 1999.)

α to calculate an updated value for xP (t0 ) from
equation (11-72c).
(f) Substitute the updated xP (t0 ) and the estimated
γ and α into equation (11-76) to perform the non-
hyperbolic moveout correction (Figure 11.6-33c).
Another strategy for velocity analysis of the P S-
wave data is the direct estimation of the P S-wave ve-
locity β, rather than estimating the velocity ratio γ.
Return to equation (11-76) and rewrite it explicitly in
terms of α and β as
 Reservoir Geophysics 1957

FIG. 11.6-34. Analysis of CCP gather in Figure 11.6-33a for the velocity ratio, γ = α/β. (Figure courtesy Li and Yuan,
1999.)
1958 Seismic Data Analysis

FIG. 11.6-35. The velocity-ratio section derived from the analysis as in Figure 11.6-34. (Figure courtesy Li and Yuan, 1999.)

1 α2 β 2
2
t= x2P + 2 t0
α α+β
1 2 α2 β 2
+ x − xP + 2 t0 .
β α+β
By using the nonhyperbolic equation (11-78), fol-
low the alternative procedure for P S-wave velocity
analysis outlined below.
(a) Again, estimate the P P -wave velocity α as before
using the P P data set itself.
(b) Also, assume an initial value for γ = α/β and es-
timate an initial value for xP using equation (11-
73a).
(c) Knowing α and xP , use the nonhyperbolic moveout
equation (11-78) to scan for β as a function of t0 .
Figure 11.6-36 shows a CCP gather and the com-
puted β-spectrum. Compare with the α-spectrum
in Figure 11.6-20 and note the difference in the ve-
locity ranges in the two spectra.
(d) Pick a function β(t0 ) at each CCP analysis location
along the line over the survey area and derive a
β(x, t0 )-section.
(e) Use the β(x, t0 )-section and the P P -wave velocity
α to calculate an updated value for xP (t0 ) from
equation (11-72c).
(f) Substitute the updated xP (t0 ) and the estimated
β and α into equation (11-78) to perform the non-
hyperbolic moveout correction.
Figure 11.6-37 shows the P S-wave stack based on
the alternative procedure described above. Note the dif-
ferences between this section and the P P -wave stack
shown in Figure 11.6-21. Specifically, the P S-wave stack
shows some interesting reflector geometry between 4-5
s; this behavior is absent within the equivalent time
window (2-2.5 s) in the P P -wave stack.
One subtle issue is related to the time at which α is
specified in equations (11-76) and (11-78). The two-way
zero-offset time t0 in these equations is associated with
the P S-wave; whereas, α is estimated at two-way zero-
offset time associated with the P P -wave. To distinguish
the two zero-offset times, first, rewrite equation (11-75)
(P S)
for the P S two-way time t0
(P S) 1 1
t0 = + z.
α β
For the same depth z, the P P two-way time t0
given by
(P P ) 2
t0 = z.
α
Reservoir Geophysics 1959
Now eliminate z between the two equations to get the
relation between the P P and P S zero-offset times
(P P ) 2β (P S)
t0 = t , (11 − 80a)
2 α+β 0
(11 − 78)
or in terms of γ = α/β
(P P ) 2 (P S)
t0 = t . (11 − 80b)
γ+1 0
(P P )
So, α in equation (11-78) is specified at time t0 given
by equation (11-80a), and α in equation (11-76) is spec-
(P P )
ified at time t0 given by equation (11-80b).
Dip-Moveout Correction of P S Data
In Section 5.1 we learned that the DMO impulse re-
sponse is in the form of an ellipse (Figure 5.1-12).
We also learned that the aperture of the DMO oper-
ator depends on the reflector dip, the source-receiver
separation, the reflection time of moveout-corrected
common-offset data, and the velocity above the reflec-
tor. Since shear-wave velocities are generally lower than
compressional-wave velocities, given that all other fac-
tors are the same, the DMO impulse response associated
with the P S data will be different in shape as compared
to the DMO impulse response associated with the con-
ventional P P data shown in Figure 5.1-12. Specifically,
the slower the velocity the more the action of the DMO
operator (Section 5.1). This means that the symmetric
form of the DMO ellipse associated with the P P data
is replaced with an asymmetric form as shown in Fig-
ure 11.6-38 (Alfaraj, 1993; Alfaraj and Larner, 1993;
den Rooijen, 1991). Additionally, the resulting curve is
shifted laterally to the CCP location indicated by the
dotted trajectory in Figure 11.6-38b (Alfaraj, 1993).
The P P DMO impulse response for variable veloc-
ity v(z) increasing with depth can be formed by squeez-
ing the P P DMO impulse response for constant veloc-
ity (Hale and Artley, 1992). Similarly, the asymmetric
shape of the P S DMO impulse response shown in Fig-
ure 11.6-38b may be formed by squeezing the P P DMO
impulse response on the source side and stretching it on
the receiver side (Alfaraj, 1993).
Another important difference between the DMO
corrections of the P P and P S data is in respect to
the reflection-point dispersal (Section E.1). We learned,
again in Section 5.1, that the DMO correction removes
(11 − 79a) the reflection-point dispersal along a dipping reflector.
With the P P data, reflection-point dispersal is an is-
(P P ) sue only in the case of a dipping reflector. However,
is
with the P S data, reflection-point dispersal takes place
even for the case of a flat reflector. This is illustrated
(11 − 79b) in Figure 11.6-39 where the raypaths of Figure 11.6-32
1960 Seismic Data Analysis
 Reservoir Geophysics
have been adapted to the CMP geometry. Note that you
need to apply DMO correction to the P S data even in
the absence of dip to remove the reflection-point dis-
persal (Alfaraj, 1993). Expressed differently, implicit to
the P S DMO correction is CCP binning that involves
mapping of amplitudes along the dotted trajectory in
Figure 11.6-38b.
Migration of PS Data
We learned in Section 4.1 that migration of the stacked
P P data can be performed by summation of amplitudes
(equation 4-5) along a hyperbolic traveltime trajec-
tory (equation 4-4) associated with a coincident source-
receiver pair at the surface and a point diffractor at the
subsurface. The amplitude from the resulting summa-
tion is placed at the apex time of the diffraction hyper-
bola. Prior to summation (equation 4-5), amplitude and
phase factors inferred by the Kirchhoff integral solution
to the scalar wave equation are applied to the stacked
data (Section 4.1).
Similarly, migration of the stacked P S data can
be conceptualized as a summation along a traveltime
trajectory associated with a coincident source-receiver
pair at the surface and a point diffractor at the subsur-
face. The difference between the zero-offset P P and the
P S diffraction summation trajectories is in the veloci-
ties. Set x = 0 in equation (11-76) to get the traveltime
equation for the zero-offset P S diffraction summation
trajectory as
γ+1 2 2
t2 = t20 + xP , (11 − 81)
α
where t is the time associated with the unmigrated P S-
stack, and t0 is the time associated with the migrated
P S-stack given by equation (11-75).
Equation (11-81) is of the same form as equation
(4-4) that describes the zero-offset P P diffraction sum-
mation trajectory. In fact, setting γ = 1 in equation
(11-81) yields equation (4-4) for the case of constant
velocity. Note from equation (11-81) that the migration
velocity for the P S data is given by α/(γ + 1), which is
neither the P -wave velocity α nor the S-wave velocity
β. The P S-velocity α/(γ + 1) can be obtained from the
P P -velocity α and the velocity ratio γ, both estimated
from the velocity analysis described earlier in this sec-
tion. Once the velocity field is estimated, the P S-stack
can, in principle, be migrated using any of the algo-
rithms described in Chapter 4.
11.7 SEISMIC ANISOTROPY
A medium is anisotropic if its intrinsic elastic proper-
ties, measured at the same location, change with direc-
tion, and it is isotropic if its properties do not change
1961
with direction (Winterstein, 1990). Most of seismic data
analysis is based on the assumption that the subsurface
behaves seismically isotropic. A case of anisotropy that
is of interest in exploration seismology is the change in
velocity with direction.
A medium is tranversely isotropic if its elastic prop-
erties do not change in any direction perpendicular to
an axis of symmetry. The usual meaning of seismic
anisotropy is variation of seismic velocity, which itself
depends on the elastic properties of the medium, with
the direction in which it is measured (Sheriff, 1991).
Anisotropic variation of seismic velocity must not be
confused with the source-receiver azimuthal variation of
moveout velocity for a dipping reflector in an isotropic
medium (equation 7-3).
There are two cases of seismic anisotropy that we
shall review in this section, both of which are special
cases of transverse isotropy. For convenience, consider
a horizontally layered earth model. First, is the ver-
tical transverse isotropy, otherwise simply referred to
as transverse isotropy, for which velocities do not vary
from one lateral direction to another, but vary from one
direction to another on a vertical plane that coincides
with a given lateral direction. Horizontal bedding and
fracturing parallel to the bedding produce transverse
isotropy. Second, is the horizontal transverse isotropy,
otherwise known as azimuthal anisotropy, for which ve-
locities vary from one lateral direction to another. Frac-
turing in a direction other than the bedding direction
gives rise to azimuthal aniostropy.
Transverse isotropy stems from the fact that, as a
result of a depositional process, velocities in a layer are
different in the direction of bedding and the direction
perpendicular to the bedding. Specifically, fine layering
of isotropic beds that constitute the depositional unit
give rise to an anisotropy with its axis of symmetry per-
pendicular to the bedding plane. Azimuthal anisotropy
can stem from the fact that, as a result of a tectonic pro-
cess, rock material associated with a layer may have dif-
ferent rigidity in different azimuthal directions. A spe-
cific example is secondary fracturing in rocks whereby
the velocity in the fracture direction is higher than the
velocity in the orthogonal direction, again, giving rise
to an anisotropy with its axis of symmetry parallel to
the bedding plane.
Refer to Figure 11.7-1 to review the physical as-
pects of wave propagation in an anisotropic medium.
The directional change of the velocity is illustrated by
the skewed ellipse in Figure 11.7-1a, with the fast ve-
locity in the direction of the major axis and the slow
velocity in the direction of the minor axis. Now consider
1962 Seismic Data Analysis

FIG. 11.6-37. The CCP stack derived from the P S data as in Figure 11.6-14. Compare with the CMP stack derived from
the P P data shown in Figure 11.6-21. (Processing by Orhan Yilmaz, 1999).
 Reservoir Geophysics 1963

FIG. 11.6-38. Impulse responses of a DMO operator for (a) P P data, and (b) P S data (adapted from Alfaraj, 1993) for a
given source (S) and receiver (R) separation. The horizontal axis is the midpoint axis and the vertical axis is the event time
after NMO correction. The dotted curve represents the common-conversion-point (CCP) trajectory as in Figure 11.6-31b.

Huygens’ secondary sources situated along the wave-
front A, say at time t. This wavefront actually coin-
cides with an exploding reflector dipping at an angle φ.
Because of the anisotropic behavior of the propagation
medium, the Huygens’ sources do not emanate semicir-
cular wavefronts; instead, the wavefronts are skewed in
the direction of the fast velocity. These skewed wave-
fronts will form the plane wavefront B at a later time
t + ∆t. While the energy was transmitted along the ray-
path SP at group velocity, the wavefront that represents
a constant phase actually traveled from position A to
B along T P normal to the wavefront at phase veloc-
ity. Because the group velocity is associated with the
raypath, it is sometimes referred to as the ray veloc-
ity. Similarly, because the phase velocity is associated
with the wavefront, it is sometimes referred to as the
wavefront velocity. Note that the wavefront angle θ as-
sociated with the phase velocity is different from the
ray angle φ associated with the group velocity. Only if
the medium were isotropic, Huygens’ secondary sources
would produce semicircular wavefronts and the phase
angle θ would coincide with the ray angle φ.
Note from Figure 11.7-1 that the zero-offset ray-
path SP does not make a right angle with the reflector;
thus, in the case of anisotropy, the zero-offset ray is not a
normal-incident ray as would be in the case of isotropy.
This behavior can be better explained by sketching the
isotropic and anisotropic wavefronts as shown in Figure
11.7-1b. Specifically, in the case of isotropic medium,
the wavefront emanating from a point P is circular and
the zero-offset ray is normal-incident to the reflector.
Whereas, in the case of an anisotropic medium, the
wavefront is skewed and the zero-offset ray impinges
on the reflector at a non-normal incidence angle.
An example of how velocity changes with direc-
tion in an anisotropic medium is shown in Figure 11.7-2
(Uren et al., 1990a). Based on velocity characterisitcs of
the Green River shale (Thomsen, 1986), this polar plot
of group velocities shows that, as for most rock types,
the P -wave velocity is nonelliptical, whereas the SH-
wave velocity behaves elliptically anisotropic. Also note
that the horizontal P -wave velocity is greater than the
vertical P -wave velocity.
We shall associate seismic aniostropy primar-
ily with seismic velocities. Aside from anisotropic
1964 Seismic Data Analysis

FIG. 11.6-39. (a) Common-midpoint (CMP) raypath geometry for P P -data, and (b) common-conversion-point (CCP)
raypath geometry for P S-data. (Adapted from den Rooijen, 1991.)
 Reservoir Geophysics
velocity analysis, this means that we will need to re-
view those processes that are intimately influenced by
velocity anisotropy, such as dip-moveout correction, mi-
gration and AVO analysis.
The generalized form of Hooke’s law, which is the
foundation of linear elastic theory, states that each
stress component can be expressed as a linear com-
bination of all the strain components (Officer, 1958).
Hooke’s law is based on the assumption that elastic de-
formations in solids are infinitesimally small. The stiff-
ness matrix, otherwise known as the elastic modulus
matrix (Thomsen, 1986), that relates the stress compo-
nents to the strain components is (Section L.1)
 
c11 c12 c13 c14 c15 c16
 c21 c22 c23 c24 c25 c26 
 
c c c c c c 
{cij } =  31 32 33 34 35 36  .
 c41 c42 c43 c44 c45 c46 
 
c51 c52 c53 c54 c55 c56
c61 c62 c63 c64 c65 c66
(11 − 82a)
The elements of the stiffness matrix are the elastic con-
stants of an elastic solid. Since this matrix is symmet-
ric, cij = cji , there are 21 independent constants for an
elastic medium.
For an isotropic solid, the elastic behavior of which
is independent of direction at a point within the solid,
the number of independent elastic constants is only two,
known as Lamé’s constants, λ and µ. Consequently, the
stiffness matrix given by equation (11-82a) reduces to
the special form
 
λ+2µ λ λ 0 0 0 useful to describe the general case of transverse isotropy.
 λ λ+2µ λ 0 0 0 
 
 λ λ λ+2µ 0 0 0 
{cij }= .
 0 0 0 2µ 0 0 
 
0 0 0 0 2µ 0 from a point source. Albeit its underlying theory is sim-
0 0 0 0 0 2µ
(11 − 82b)
To describe the P - and S-wave propagation in
isotropic solids, only two elastic parameters are needed
— Lamé’s constants, λ and µ. Other elastic parame-
ters — Young’s modulus E, Poisson’s ratio σ and bulk
modulus κ, and the P - and S-wave velocities can all
be expressed in terms of λ and µ (Figure 11.0-1 and
Appendix L.1).
For a transversely isotropic solid, the elastic behav-
ior of which is the same in two orthogonal directions but
different in the third direction, the number of indepen-
dent constants is five (Officer, 1958; Thomsen, 1986;
Sheriff, 1991). For the more specific case of vertically
transverse isotropy (VTI), which has a vertical symme-
try axis, the five independent elastic constants are c11 ,
c13 , c33 , c44 , and c66 (Thomsen, 1986).
1965
To explicitly describe the effect of anisotropy in
wave propagation, Thomsen (1986) has elegantly rede-
fined the five elastic constants for the VTI media —
the vertical P - and S-wave velocities, α0 and β0 , in the
vertical direction,
c33
α0 = , (11 − 83a)
ρ
c44
β0 = , (11 − 83b)
ρ
and three constants that describe the degree of
anisotropy, ε, γ, and δ, in terms of the five constants
c11 , c13 , c33 , c44 , and c66
c11 − c33
ε= , (11 − 83c)
2c33
(c13 + c44 )2 − (c33 − c44 )2
δ= , (11 − 83d)
2c33 (c33 − c44 )
and
c66 − c44
γ= . (11 − 83e)
2c44
For most sedimentary rocks, the parameters ε, δ,
and γ are of the same order of magnitude and usually
much less than 0.2 (Thomsen, 1986). In fact, the Thom-
sen parameters given by equations (11-83c,d,e) relate to
the case of weak anisotropy described by small values
( 1) of ε, γ, and δ. While applications of anisotropy
in seismic data analysis are primarily based on the as-
sumption of weak anisotropy, these parameters still are
The special case of δ = ε is known as elliptical
anisotropy (Daley and Hron, 1979). The ellipticity is
associated with the shape of the wavefront expanding
pler than the general theory of anisotropy, elliptical
anisotropy occurs in nature only rarely. Figure 11.7-3
shows a crossplot of the two Thomsen parameters, ε
and δ, for various types of sedimentary and crystalline
rocks based on field and laboratory studies (Thomsen,
1986). Note that a few of the rock samples closely sat-
isfy the ellipticity condition, ε = δ. Also, for most rock
types, the Thomsen parameters, ε and δ, are positive
constants less than 0.2; thus, the supporting evidence
for weak anisotropy theory.
Anisotropic Velocity Analysis
We shall confine the discussion on anisotropy primarily
to the practical case of P -wave propagation in weakly
anisotropic rocks. Consider the wavefront geometry
1966 Seismic Data Analysis

shown in Figure 11.7-1. The P -wave phase velocity is Just for comparison, we write the traveltime equa-
given by (Thomsen, 1986) tion (3-11) for a flat reflector in an isotropic medium
α(θ) = α0 1 + δ sin2 θ cos2 θ + ε sin4 θ . (11 − 84) using the current notation

Note that the P -wave velocity depends on the x2

t2 = t20 + 2 . (11 − 90)
anisotropy parameters δ and ε, but not on the param- vN MO
eter γ. In fact, the SV -wave velocity also depends only For isotropic velocity analysis using equation (11-
on δ and ε, while the SH-wave velocity depends only 90), we only need to scan one parameter — the velocity
on γ.
vN M O (Section 3.2). For anisotropic velocity analysis
In the special case of vertical incidence, θ = 0,
using equation (11-88), note that we have to do a multi-
equation (11-84) gives the vertical P -wave velocity, α0 .
In the special case of horizontal incidence, θ = 90 de- parameter scan involving α0 , αh , β0 , δ, and ε — an
grees, equation (11-84) gives impractical and unacceptable proposal.
As a way to circumvent this insurmountable prob-
αh = α0 (1 + ε). (11 − 85) lem of a multiparameter scan in velocity analysis,
Solving for ε, we obtain Alkhalifah and Tsvankin (1995) define a new effective
αh − α0 anisotropy parameter
ε= . (11 − 86)
α0 ε−δ
η= . (11 − 91)
This equation provides a physical meaning for the 1 + 2δ
Thomsen parameter ε. Specifically, the parameter ε in- By way of equations (11-85), (11-87), (11-91), and (11-
dicates the degree of aniostropic behavior of the rock, 89a,b,c), and neglecting the effect of β0 , equation (11-
measured as the fractional difference between vertical 88) takes a form that is suitable for practical implemen-
P -wave velocity α0 and the horizontal P -wave velocity tation (Alkhalifah and Tsvankin, 1995)
αh . Since for most rocks ε > 0, note that the horizon-
tal P -wave velocity is greater than the vertical P -wave x2 2ηx4
t2 = t20 + − ,
velocity. 2
vN MO
2
vN MO t20 vN
2
M O + 1 + 2η x
2
The normal-moveout velocity vN M O (φ = 0), where (11 − 92)
φ is the dip angle, for a flat reflector in an anisotropic
medium is given by Thomsen (1986) where vN M O is the flat-reflector moveout velocity.
√ Equation (11-92) indicates that the traveltime for
vN M O (0) = α0 1 + 2δ. (11 − 87)
a reflector in an anisotropic medium follows a nonhy-
In the special case of δ = 0, the moveout velocity is the perbolic trajectory. By setting η = 0, equation (11-
same as the velocity of an isotropic medium represented 92) reduces to the isotropic case of equation (11-90).
by α0 (Section 3.1). Note that the effect of anisotropy on reflection travel-
The P -wave traveltime equation for a flat reflec- times is most significant at far offsets. The derivation
tor in an anisotropic medium is given by Tsvankin and of the anisotropic moveout equation (11-92) is based on
Thomsen (1994) a single flat layer. Nevertheless, in practice, it also is
A4 x4 applicable to the case of a horizontally layered earth
t2 = t20 + A2 x2 + , (11 − 88) model with vertical transverse isotropy (Grechka and
1 + Ax2
Tsvankin, 1997).
where t is the two-way time from source to reflector
to receiver, t0 is the two-way zero-offset time, x is the Figure 11.7-4a shows CMP raypaths associated
source-receiver offset, and A2 and A4 are coefficients with a flat reflector in a transversely isotropic medium
which are written below to acknowledge their complex- with a velocity behavior as shown in Figure 11.7-
ity 2. Transverse isotropy causes fundamental departures
from the CMP raypath geometry associated with an
1
A2 = , (11-89a) isotropic medium:
α02 (1 + 2δ)
2(ε − δ) 1 + 2δ 1 − β02 /α02 )−1 (a) The zero-offset raypath is non-normal incident.
A4 = − 4 , (11-89b)
t20 α04 1 + 2δ (b) A single common reflection point does not exist;
instead, anisotropy has given rise to reflection point
and dispersal even for a flat reflector.
A4 (c) The anisotropic moveout given by equation (11-92)
A= . (11 − 89c)
αh−2− A2 in general is nonhyperbolic.
 Reservoir Geophysics
FIG. 11.7-1. (a) Application of Huygens’ principle to
anisotropic plane-wave propagation from an exploding re-
flector (after Uren et al., 1990a). (b) The isotropic and
anisotropic wavefront associated with an expanding P -wave
(after Sheriff, 1991.) See text for details.
(d) The NMO velocity measured from the slope of the
t2 − x2 curve indicates that anisotropy makes the
velocity offset dependent (Figure 11.7-4b).
Figure 11.7-5 shows a CMP gather and its veloc-
ity spectrum computed using the isotropic traveltime
equation (11-90). Note that there are some overcor-
1967
rected events between the two-way zero-offset times
of 1.5-2 s and some undercorrected events above the
two-way zero-offset time of 1.5 s. The undercorrected
events are clearly multiples which produce distinct sem-
blance peaks on the velocity spectrum. The overcor-
rected events result from one of the three possibilities
— that the overcorrection is caused by the dip effect
on moveout velocities, anisotropy, or a combination of
the two phenomena. In Figure 11.7-5, a close-up display
of the zone of interest between 1.5-2 s shows the over-
corrected events with a distinct moveout behavior that
is not quite the same as what a typical overcorrected
event with hyperbolic moveout looks like. Specifically,
we see that the events are nearly flat with no moveout
within the near-offset range, while the moveout is like
the end of a hockey stick within the far-offset range.
Try flattening the events by experimenting with
various velocity picks as shown in Figure 11.-7.6. Note
that, whatever the pick you make on the velocity spec-
trum, the hockey-stick events do not quite flatten;
there is always some curvature left along the moveout-
corrected event.
Equation (11-92) indicates that, for anisotropic ve-
locity analysis, we need to scan two parameters, vN M O
and η. Note that the parameter η is only present in
the fourth-order moveout term that is significant at far
offsets. This suggests a two-stage parameter scan as de-
scribed below.
(a) Perform hyperbolic velocity analysis using only the
first two terms on the right-hand side of equa-
tion (11-92) and the near offsets where there is no
hockey-stick effect. Figure 11.7-7 shows the same
CMP gather as in Figure 11.7-5, but with far-offset
traces muted, and the associated velocity spec-
trum. This first-stage analysis would give an esti-
mate of the moveout velocity vN M O as in equation
(11-92).
(b) Next, insert the estimated vN M O function into
equation (11-92) and compute the η spectrum as
shown in Figure 11.7-8. After picking an η function
in time, apply the fourth-order moveout correction
given by equation 11-92 to the CMP gather.
Figures 11.7-9 and 11.7-10 show portions of a
CMP stacked section with and without accounting for
anisotropy in velocity analysis and moveout correction.
The portion shown in Figure 11.7-9 is abundantly rich
in diffractions and the portion shown in Figure 11.7-10
contains steeply dipping fault-plane reflections conflict-
ing with gently dipping reflections. Panel (a) in both
figures shows the full-fold stack and panel (b) shows
the near-offset stack based on isotropic velocity analy-
sis and moveout correction using the first two terms of
equation (11-92). Note that the full-fold stack has been
1968 Seismic Data Analysis
FIG. 11.7-2. Group velocity functions for P - and SH-
waves in Green River shale (After Uren et al., 1990b; Thom-
sen, 1986).
adversely affected by the hockey-stick effect on moveout
at far offsets, while the near-offset stack has better pre-
served the diffractions and dipping events. Panel (c) of
both Figures 11.7-9 and 11.7-10 shows the full-fold stack
derived from anisotropic velocity analysis and moveout
correction using both the second-order and fourth-order
terms in equation (11-92). Note that the full-fold stack-
ing based on anisotropic moveout correction has better
preserved the diffractions and dipping events compared
to the full-fold stacking based on isotropic moveout cor-
rection. These observations are more evident on the mi-
grated sections shown in Figures 11.7-11 and 11.7-12.
Anisotropic Dip-Moveout Correction
Since anisotropy directly influences propagation ve-
locity, it certainly should have an impact on dip-
moveout correction. Recall from Section 5.1 that 2-D
dip-moveout (DMO) correction removes the dip effect
on moveout velocities, and from Section 7.2 that 3-
D dip-moveout correction removes both the dip and
source-receiver azimuth effects on moveout velocities.
Rewrite the normalized moveout velocity relation for
the 2-D case (Levin, 1971) using the current notation
vN M O (φ) 1 1 d2 α(θ)
= , (11 − 93)
vN M O (0) cos φ
vN M O (φ) =
and note that, from the standpoint of velocities,
isotropic DMO correction maps the moveout velocity
vN M O (φ) for a dipping reflector to the moveout veloc-
ity vN M O (0) = α0 for a flat reflector.
While the DMO process corrects for the dip ef-
fect on moveout velocities as described by equation
(11-93), it also maps common-offset data, which have
been moveout-corrected using the flat-event velocities
vN M O (0), to zero offset. Recall from Section 5.1 that
this mapping is achieved by an integral transform given
by equation (5-14a) where the factor A of equation (5-5)
in the current notation is given by
2
h2 2 sin φ
A= 1+ . (11 − 94)
t2n vN M O (0)
Here, tn is the event time after NMO correction using
the flat-event velocity vN M O , h is the half-offset and φ
is the reflector dip.
As discussed in Section 5.1, the integral transform
factor A given by equation (11-94) requires knowledge
of the reflector dip φ to perform the DMO correction. To
circumvent this requirement, we use the relation (Sec-
tion D.1)
vN M O (0)ky
sin φ = , (11 − 95)
2ω0
which states that the reflector dip φ can be expressed
in terms of midpoint wavenumber ky and frequency
ω0 — the Fourier duals of midpoint y0 and zero-offset
event time τ0 associated with the DMO-corrected data,
respectively. Substitute equation (11-95) into equation
(11-94) to get
h2 ky2
A= 1+ . (11 − 96)
t2n ω02
The frequency-wavenumber domain dip-moveout
correction that transforms the normal-moveout-correct-
ed prestack data with a specific offset 2h from yn − tn
domain to y0 − τ0 domain is achieved by the integral of
equation (5-14a) where A is given by equation (11-96).
We now examine the DMO mapping, specifically
the transform factor A of equation (11-94) for the case
of an anisotropic medium. Consider a dipping reflector
situated in an anisotropic medium with its symmetry
axis not coincident with the normal to the reflector. For
this general case, the normal-moveout velocity is given
by (Tsvankin, 1995)
1+
α(φ) α(φ) dθ2 θ=φ
, (11 − 97)
cos φ tan φ dα(θ)
1−
α(φ) dθ θ=φ
 Reservoir Geophysics 1969

FIG. 11.7-3. Crossplot of P -wave anisotropy parameters, ε and δ, associated with various rock samples (after Thomsen,
1986).
1970 Seismic Data Analysis
FIG. 11.7-4. (a) CMP raypaths associated with a flat re-
flector in a transversely isotropic medium; (b) the t2 − x2
plot that shows the offset-dependent behavior of the NMO
velocity (After Uren et al., 1990c).
where θ is the phase angle measured from the vertical,
φ is the reflector dip (Figure 11.7-2), and α is the phase
velocity evaluated in the direction coincident with the
reflector dip, θ = φ.
By using equation (11-84) for the phase velocity,
Tsvankin (1995) computes the derivatives in equation
(11-97) and derives an expression for the moveout veloc-
ity associated with the case of weak anisotropy. Below,
we write his equation in normalized and compact form
vN M O (φ) 1 gral of equation (5-14a) where A is given by equation
= 1 + (ε − δ) B , (11 − 98)
vN M O (0) cos φ
where
sin3 φ
B= 4sin4 φ − 9 sin2 φ + 6 . (11 − 99)
1 − sin2 φ
Equation (11-98) states that anisotropic DMO cor-
rection maps the moveout velocity vN M O (φ) for a dip-
ping reflector to the moveout velocity vN M O (0) for a
flat reflector. By setting the anisotropy parameters ε =
δ = 0, or making the assumption that the anisotropy is
elliptical (ε − δ = 0), note that equation (11-98) reduces
to the isotropic case given by equation (11-93).
Compare equations (11-93) and (11-98) and note
that, for the case of ε−δ > 0, the isotropic DMO correc-
tion factor is smaller than the anisotropic DMO correc-
tion factor. This means that an anisotropic DMO cor-
rection would have a larger aperture than the isotropic
DMO correction. However, depending on the magnitude
of the anisotropy parameters, ε and δ, and their signs,
the opposite could also be true. In fact, setting ε = δ in
equation (11-98), the case of elliptical anisotropy, the
effect of anisotropy on dip-moveout cancels out alto-
gether.
We are now ready to redefine the transform factor
A of equation (11-94) for anisotropic DMO correction
(Anderson and Tsvankin, 1997). To use the anisotropic
moveout velocity of equation (11-98), first, rewrite equa-
tion (11-94) as
4h2 1 − cos2 φ
A= 1+ 2 . (11 − 100a)
t2n vN M O (0)
Then substitute equation (11-93) to get the desired ex-
pression
4h2 1 1
A= 1+ 2 2 − 2 . (11 − 100b)
tn vN M O (0) vN M O (φ)
By substituting equations (11-98) and (11-95) into
equation (11-100b), and making the weak anisotropy
assumption, we obtain the transform factor given by
Anderson and Tsvankin (1997), which we write below
in compact form,
h2 ky2
A= 1+ 1+ ε−δ C , (11 − 101)
t2n ω02
where
C = 8 sin4 φ − 18 sin2 φ + 12, (11 − 102)
and sin φ is given by equation (11-95) in terms of
vN M O (0), ky , and ω0 .
To implement the frequency-wavenumber domain
anisotropic dip-moveout correction, again, use the inte-
(11-101).
By setting the anisotropy parameters ε = δ = 0,
or making the assumption that the anisotropy is ellip-
tical (ε − δ = 0), note that equation (11-101) reduces
to the isotropic case given by equation (11-96). The im-
plementation of anisotropic DMO correction requires
a simple modification to the isotropic implementation,
given by the factor [1 + (ε − δ)C]. Note that both for
the moveout velocity given by equation (11-98) and the
DMO transform factor given by equation (11-101), it is
the difference ε − δ, and not the individual anisotropy
 Reservoir Geophysics
parameters, that dictates the anisotropic effect. What
remains to be determined is the difference ε − δ. Com-
bine equations (11-87) and (11-91) to get the relation
2 ure 11.7-14. Following isotropic DMO correction, the
vN M O (0)
ε−δ = η. (11 − 103)
α0
The effective anisotropy parameter η and the
flat-reflector moveout velocity vN M O (0) are estimated
by anisotropic velocity analysis described earlier in
this section (equation 11-92). The scaling velocity α0
is associated with a vertically incident P -wave in
an isotropic, horizontally layered earth. Finally, note
that isotropic DMO correction (equation 11-96) is
velocity-independent, whereas anisotropic DMO correc-
tion (equation 11-101) is velocity-dependent by way of
equation (11-102).
The anisotropic DMO impulse response can vary
in shape and depart from the familiar elliptical shape
associated with the isotropic DMO impulse response.
Figure 11.7-13 shows some of the anisotropic impulse
responses created by Anderson and Tsvankin (1997) us-
ing a frequency-wavenumber domain DMO correction
based on the above formulation. For ε − δ = 0, the
case of elliptical anisotropy, the impulse response kine-
matically is identical to the isotropic impulse response.
For ε − δ > 0, the aperture of the anisotropic impulse
response broadens while maintaining the upward cur-
vature, and for ε − δ < 0, the curvature is reversed
downward.
An interesting theoretical conjecture can be drawn
from the behavior of isotropic and anisotropic DMO
impulse responses shown in Figures 11.7-13a,b. While
anisotropy causes the DMO aperture to be broadened,
vertically increasing velocity causes the DMO aperture
to be narrowed (Section 5.1). As a result of these two
counteracting effects, we may conclude that anisotropic
DMO coorection that accounts for vertically varying ve-
locity may be equivalent to constant-velocity isotropic
DMO correction. Does this mean that, for most field
data cases where velocities vary vertically, it suffices
to perform constant-velocity isotropic DMO corection
even in the presence of anisotropy? This would implic-
itly account for any anisotropic behavior that might be
present in the data. In fact, Levin (1990) conducted nu-
merical studies of reflection times from a dipping plane
in a transversely isotropic media using elastic parame-
ters associated with four different sandstone, shale, and
limestone samples, and concluded that, when the sym-
metry axis of transverse anisotropy is perpendicular to
the reflector, the isotropic moveout velocity given by
equation (11-93) is largely valid. Larner (1993) extended
this work to the case of a medium with vertically vary-
ing velocity and reached a similar conclusion that, for
1971
most cases of weak anisotropy, isotropic DMO correc-
tion is largely valid.
We refer to the field data example shown in Fig-
CMP gather as in Figure 11.7-5 exhibits the hockey-
stick behavior of the anisotropic moveout more dis-
tinctly. Whatever the velocity pick, the isotropic move-
out correction using equation (11-90) fails to flatten the
events within the time gate 1.5-2 s (Figure 11.7-15).
By first applying isotropic moveout correction using the
near-offset traces in the gather, we derive an estimate of
the normal-moveout velocity vN M O (0) as shown in Fig-
ure 11.7-16. This then is followed by the analysis of the
anisotropy parameter η and applying the fourth-order
moveout correction using equation (11-92) (Figure 11.7-
17). Note that, despite the DMO correction that did
not account for anisotropy, the subsequent anisotropic
moveout correction has been successful in flattening the
events almost completely.
Scan the anisotropic velocity analyses shown in
Figures 11.7-18 through 11.7-23 to examine the extent
of anisotropy manifested by these DMO-corrected gath-
ers and how well the anisotropy has been accounted for
by the post-DMO velocity analysis. The failure in flat-
tening the events completely in some gathers may stem
from various sources of error associated with the as-
sumptions made about anisotropy, and it may even be
caused by not correcting for anisotropy during DMO
correction that preceded the velocity analysis.
Figures 11.7-24 and 11.7-25 show portions of a
stacked section with isotropic DMO correction which
was followed by velocity analysis with and without
anisotropy accounted for. Compare with the corre-
sponding panels in Figures 11.7-9 and 11.7-10 and note
that the steep fault-plane reflections and diffraction
flanks have been preserved by DMO correction. In fact,
much of the task of preserving steep dips with con-
flicting dips already has been achieved by isotropic
dip-moveout processing as seen in panel (a) in both
Figures 11.7-24 and 11.7-25 that shows the full-fold
stack based on isotropic velocity analysis and moveout
correction using the first two terms of equation (11-
92). For comparison, panel (b) in both Figures 11.7-
24 and 11.7-25 shows the near-offset stack based on
isotropic processing. Panel (c) of both Figures 11.7-
24 and 11.7-25 shows the full-fold DMO stack de-
rived from post-DMO anisotropic velocity analysis and
moveout correction using both the second-order and
fourth-order terms in equation (11-92). Compared with
panel (a) in the same figures, the difference between
the isotropic and anisotropic processing may be viewed
at best as marginal. Again, this inconclusive result
is attributable to the fact that DMO correction was
done without accounting for anisotropy. The marginal
(text continues on p. 1976)
1972 Seismic Data Analysis

FIG. 11.7-5. (a) An NMO-corrected CMP gather and (b) its velocity spectrum based on isotropic moveout equation (11-90);
(c) and (d) are enlargements of (a) and (b), respectively.
 Reservoir Geophysics 1973

FIG. 11.7-6. (a) The CMP gather and (b) its velocity spectrum as in Figure (11.7-5c,d), except that the NMO correction
has been applied using a different velocity function.
1974 Seismic Data Analysis

FIG. 11.7-7. (a) The NMO-corrected CMP gather as in Figure 11.7-5a but with a different mute, and (b) its velocity
spectrum; (c) and (d) are enlargements of (a) and (b), respectively.
 Reservoir Geophysics 1975

FIG. 11.7-8. (a) The NMO-corrected CMP gather as in Figure 11.7-5c and (b) its η-spectrum computed from the anisotropic
moveout equation (11-92); (c) the same gather as in (a) after anisotropic moveout correction using the η function picked from
the spectrum in (d).
1976 Seismic Data Analysis
Reservoir Geophysics 1977
1978 Seismic Data Analysis
Reservoir Geophysics 1979
1980 Seismic Data Analysis
FIG. 11.7-13. DMO impulse responses for three different
cases of the η parameter: (a) η = 0, the case of elliptical
anisotropy which is kinematically identical to the isotropic
DMO impulse response, (b) η > 0, and (c) η < 0. (after
Anderson and Tsvankin, 1997.)
differences are also evident on the migrated sections
shown in Figures 11.7-26 and 11.7-27. By accounting
for anisotropy in DMO correction, however, the subse-
quent imaging of the steeply dipping fault-plane reflec-
tions can be improved (Alkhalifah et al., 1996).
Throughout the various stages in data analysis, we
encounter different moveout types:
(a) Normal moveout associated with flat events,
(b) Dip moveout associated with dipping events,
(c) Azimuthal moveout associated with 3-D recording
geometry of varying source-receiver directions, and
(d) Anisotropic moveout caused by directional changes
in velocity.
In practice, the moveout associated with an event ob-
served in a CMP gather actually is a combination of all
the contributions of the moveout effects listed above. It
makes sense in practice to attempt to break up the to-
tal moveout into individual components and correct for
them one at a time. A pragmatic workflow for moveout
correction is NMO correction (moveout type (a)), fol-
lowed by DMO correction (combined moveout types (b)
and (c)), and anisotropic moveout correction (moveout
type (d)). The 2-D field data example shown in Figures
11.7-26 and 11.7-27 is based on this moveout correction
sequence with the exclusion of moveout type (c) related
to 3-D data.
Anisotropic Migration
A convenient way to understand the effect of anisotropy
on migration is to refer to the zero-offset dispersion rela-
tion of the one-way scalar wave equation that describes
wave propagation associated with exploding reflectors
(Section 4.1), using the present notation,
2
2ω α0 ky
kz = 1− , (11 − 104)
α0 2ω
where kz and ky are the wavenumbers associated with
the depth z and midpoint y axes, ω is the temporal
frequency and α is the medium velocity used to mi-
grate a zero-offset compressional wavefield. The disper-
sion relation given by equation (11-104) is the basis from
which all zero-offset finite-difference and frequency-
wavenumber migration algorithms are developed (Sec-
tions D.1, D.4, and D.7). Hence, it makes good sense to
examine what form this dispersion relation takes in the
case of an anisotropic medium.
Accompanying the dispersion relation is the equa-
tion for wave extrapolation used in finite-difference and
frequency-wavenumber algorithms (Section 4.1). Given
a zero-offset upcoming wavefield P (y, z = 0, t) at the
surface z = 0, for which a stacked section is a good
approximation, the objective is to extrapolate it down-
ward at depth steps of ∆z using the extrapolation equa-
tion
P (ky , z + ∆z, ω) = P (ky , z, ω) exp (−ikz ∆z).
(11 − 105)
This is then followed by invoking the imaging principle
which states that the migrated section P (x, z, t = 0) at
each depth z corresponds to the summation over the
frequency components of the extrapolated wavefield, or
equivalently collecting the extrpolated wavefield at time
t = 0.
(text continues on p. 1995)
 Reservoir Geophysics 1981

FIG. 11.7-14. (a) The NMO-corrected CMP gather as in Figure 11.7-5a after DMO correction and (b) its velocity spectrum
based on isotropic moveout equation (11-90); (c) and (d) are enlargements of (a) and (b), respectively.
1982 Seismic Data Analysis

FIG. 11.7-15. (a) The DMO-corrected CMP gather and (b) its velocity spectrum as in Figure (11.7-14c,d), except that the
NMO correction has been applied using a different velocity function.
 Reservoir Geophysics 1983

FIG. 11.7-16. (a) The NMO-corrected CMP gather as in Figure 11.7-14a after DMO correction but with a different mute,
and (b) its velocity spectrum; (c) and (d) are enlargements of (a) and (b), respectively.
1984 Seismic Data Analysis

FIG. 11.7-17. (a) The NMO-corrected CMP gather as in Figure 11.7-14c after DMO correction and (b) its η-spectrum
computed from the anisotropic moveout equation (11-92); (c) the same gather as in (a) after anisotropic moveout correction
using the η function picked from the spectrum in (d).
 Reservoir Geophysics 1985

FIG. 11.7-18. (a) A portion of an NMO-corrected CMP gather after DMO correction and (b) its η-spectrum computed
from the anisotropic moveout equation (11-92); (c) the same gather as in (a) after anisotropic moveout correction using the
η function picked from the spectrum in (d).
1986 Seismic Data Analysis

FIG. 11.7-19. (a) A portion of an NMO-corrected CMP gather after DMO correction and (b) its η-spectrum computed
from the anisotropic moveout equation (11-92); (c) the same gather as in (a) after anisotropic moveout correction using the
η function picked from the spectrum in (d).
 Reservoir Geophysics 1987

FIG. 11.7-20. (a) A portion of an NMO-corrected CMP gather after DMO correction and (b) its η-spectrum computed
from the anisotropic moveout equation (11-92); (c) the same gather as in (a) after anisotropic moveout correction using the
η function picked from the spectrum in (d).
1988 Seismic Data Analysis

FIG. 11.7-21. (a) A portion of an NMO-corrected CMP gather after DMO correction and (b) its η-spectrum computed
from the anisotropic moveout equation (11-92); (c) the same gather as in (a) after anisotropic moveout correction using the
η function picked from the spectrum in (d).
 Reservoir Geophysics 1989

FIG. 11.7-22. (a) A portion of an NMO-corrected CMP gather after DMO correction and (b) its η-spectrum computed
from the anisotropic moveout equation (11-92); (c) the same gather as in (a) after anisotropic moveout correction using the
η function picked from the spectrum in (d).
1990 Seismic Data Analysis

FIG. 11.7-23. (a) A portion of an NMO-corrected CMP gather after DMO correction and (b) its η-spectrum computed
from the anisotropic moveout equation (11-92); (c) the same gather as in (a) after anisotropic moveout correction using the
η function picked from the spectrum in (d).
Reservoir Geophysics 1991
1992 Seismic Data Analysis
Reservoir Geophysics 1993
1994 Seismic Data Analysis
 Reservoir Geophysics 1995

for substitution into equation (11-106b) to get

2
4ω 2 2
ky2 δkz2 + εky2
= α0 1 + 2 . (11 − 109)
ky2 + kz2 ky2 + kz2
By setting the anisotropy parameters ε = δ = 0, note
that the anisotropic dispersion relation given by equa-
tion (11-109) reduces to the isotropic case given by
equation (11-106).
A straightforward practical implementation of the
anisotropic dispersion relation of equation (11-109) is
within the framework of a frequency-wavenumber algo-
rithm such as Stolt or phase-shift migration. By using
an anisotropic dispersion relation defined for time mi-
gration, Anderson et al. (1996) have modified Fowler
DMO and prestack time migration (Section 5.3) to
account for anisotropy. Nevertheless, various practi-
cal forms of the dispersion relation can also be used
to include the effect of anisotropy in frequency-space
finite-difference explicit or implicit schemes (Kitchen-
side, 1993; Ristow and Ruehl, 1997). Although it is
only a theoretically interesting conjecture, elliptical
FIG. 11.7-28. Wavefronts for an expanding P -wave in an
anisotropy may be accounted for by a vertical stretch-
anisotropic medium for two different combinations of Thom- ing in depth that follows an isotropic time migration
sen parameters ε and δ: (a) ε − δ = 0 and (b) ε − δ > 0 (after (Verwest, 1989).
Thomsen, 1986). The effect of anisotropy on an expanding wavefront
is seen in Figure 11.7-28. Depending on the values of the
Thomsen parameters, the wavefront can take various
To account for the effect of anisotropy in migra-
tion, the medium velocity α0 in the dispersion relation shapes, sometimes quite warped. These wavefronts can
given by equation (11-104) needs to be replaced with the be considered as the kinematic aspect of an anisotropic
P -wave phase velocity given by equation (11-84). This migration impulse response. Note that, at certain dips,
means that velocity used in anisotropic migration is de- more migration takes place if anisotropy is accounted
pendent on the phase angle of the propagating wave- for as compared to isotropic migration. On the other
front (Figure 11.7-1). We shall first rewrite the disper- hand, at some other dips, less migration may take place,
sion relation of equation (11-104) explicitly in terms of depending on the anisotropy parameters.
the velocity A widely recognized case of anisotropy is from off-
4ω 2 shore West Africa. Figure 11.7-29 shows a popular ex-
= α02 , (11 − 106) ample of anisotropic processing (Alkhalifah et al., 1996).
ky2+ kz2
The data were processed by applying both isotropic and
and replace α0 with the phase velocity of equation (11- anisotropic DMO correction and migration. Note the
84) specified for the reflector dip φ better imaging of the steep fault planes by accounting
4ω 2 2
for anisotropy in processing.
= α02 1 + δ sin2 φ cos2 φ + ε sin4 φ . Note from the anisotropic dispersion relation given
ky2 + kz2
(11 − 107) by equation (11-109) that it is important to supply
an anisotropic migration algorithm with accurate es-
Next, we shall use the relations (Section D.1) timates of the anisotropy parameters ε and δ. It is most
ky likely safer to do isotropic migration than anisotropic
sin φ = (11 − 108a)
migration with incorrect values for ε and δ. Alkhalifah
ky2 + kz2
and Larner (1994) conducted some numerical studies
and for migration error in transversely isotropic media and
kz concluded that, fortuitously, isotropic migration in the
cos φ = , (11 − 108b) presence of anisotropy yields fairly accurate results for
ky2 + kz2 dips up to 50 degrees. For steeper dips, the isotropic
1996 Seismic Data Analysis

FIG. 11.7-29. A portion of a 2-D seismic section based on the application of DMO correction and phase-shift time migration
(a) without and (b) with anisotropy accounted for (Alkhalifah et al., 1996).
 Reservoir Geophysics 1997

FIG. 11.7-30. P -to-P reflection amplitudes as a function of angle of incidence at two different interfaces associated with a
horizontally layered earth model with transverse isotropy (Haase, 1998). See text for details.
1998 Seismic Data Analysis

FIG. 11.7-31. Shear-wave splitting in an azimuthally anisotropic medium.

assumption no longer is valid. Nevertheless, Alkhalifah 1 ∆α β 2 ∆β β 2 ∆ρ 1

+ −4 2 −2 2 + ∆δ sin2 θ
and Larner (1994) also caution the practitioner of the 2 α α β α ρ 2
undesirable consequences of anisotropic migration using
poorly estimated ε and δ parameters. 1 ∆α 1
+ + ∆ε tan2 θ − sin2 θ , (11 − 110)
2 α 2

Effect of Anisotropy on AVO where ∆ε and ∆δ are changes in anisotropy across

the flat interface that separates the upper and lower
The P -to-P reflection amplitude as a function of angle anisotropic media. By setting ∆ε = ∆δ = 0, equation
of incidence given by equation (11-16) can be modi- (11-110) reduces to the isotropic form given by equa-
fied to accommodate for transverse isotropy as follows tion (11-16). Since the origin of equation (11-16) is the
(Tsvankin, 1996; Rueger, 1997) Aki-Richards equation (11-15), equation (11-110) also is
based on the assumption that, in addition to the small
1 ∆α ∆ρ changes in elastic parameters, the changes in anisotropy
R(θ) = +
2 α ρ parameters ε and δ are also small across the interface.
 Reservoir Geophysics 1999

FIG. 11.7-32. Shear-wave splitting from a North Sea 3-D survey: (a) radial and (b) transverse components as a func-
tion of source receiver-azimuth in degrees. See text for details. (Figure courtesy Gaiser, 1999a, and Baker-Hughes Western
Geophysical.)

The terms of equation (11-110) can be split into
two parts, R(θ) = Ri (θ) + Ra (θ) — the isotropic com-
ponent Ri (θ) identical to the terms of equation (11-16),
and the anisotropic component Ra (θ) given by (Rueger,
1997; Haase, 1998)
1 1
Ra (θ) = ∆δ sin2 θ+ ∆ε tan2 θ−sin2 θ . (11 − 111)
2 2
Figure 11.7-30 shows P -to-P reflection amplitudes as
a function of angle of incidence at two different inter-
faces associated with a horizontally layered earth model
with transverse isotropy (Haase, 1998). The curves la-
beled as Ri correspond to the isotropic component
given by equation (11-16) for three different values of
β/α ratios and the curves labeled as Ra correspond to
the anisotropic component of the reflection amplitudes
given by equation (11-111) for a specific combination of
∆ε and ∆δ values. Since Ra (θ) does not depend on β/α,
the Ra (θ) curve is common to each of the three cases
of the Ri (θ) curves. To get the total response given by
equation (11-110), add the curves associated with the
two components.
There are two important effects of anisotropy on
AVO:
(a) The polarity of P -to-P reflection amplitudes can
reverse for some combination of the anisotropy pa-
rameters.
(b) The anisotropic effect on reflection amplitudes is
most significant at large angles of incidence.
Shear-Wave Splitting in Anisotropic Media
In Section 11.6, we reviewed the 4-C seismic method
based on the conversion of P -waves to S-waves at layer
boundaries. The converted S-wave propagating in an
anisotropic medium exhibits a unique behavior. Con-
sider a rock layer that contains vertical fractures ori-
ented in, say the north-south direction, as sketched in
Figure 11.7-31 — a case of a horizontally transverse
isotropy, or equivalently, a case of azimuthal anisotropy.
The S-wave that enters this transversely isotropic layer
from below emerges from above as split and polarized
2000 Seismic Data Analysis
FIG. 11.E-1. The moveout-corrected CMP gather referred
to in Exercise 11-6.
in two orthogonal directions — the shear-wave compo-
nent that is polarized parallel to the fracture orientation
and the shear-wave component that is polarized perpen-
dicular to the fracture orientation. Shear-wave splitting
in azimuthally anisotropic media is sometimes referred
to as shear-wave birefringence.
The shear-wave component polarized parallel to
the fracture orientation travels with a speed faster than
the shear-wave component in the perpendicular direc-
tion. In practice, we have the radial and transverse com-
ponents; but not the slow and fast shear-wave compo-
nents. The fast and slow shear-wave components, how-
ever, can be extracted from the radial and transverse
geophone components (Section 11.6) by a special rota-
tion developed by Alford (1986). The Alford rotational
analysis of the shear-wave data provides an estimate
of fracture orientation. This is strategically important
in developing reservoirs within fractured rocks (Martin
and Davis, 1987; Ata and Michelena, 1995); specifically,
in planning trajectories for production wells.
The split shear waves interfere with one another
in a way that depends on the source-receiver azimuth.
Figure 11.7-32 shows radial and transverse components
sorted with respect to source-receiver azimuth. Each
trace in these gathers is associated with a radial or
transverse component in a specific azimuthal direction.
Note that the radial component is fairly consistent from
one azimuthal direction to the next. The transverse
component, on the other hand, shows polarity change
every 90 degrees. From these gathers, the Alford rota-
tion produces the fast and slow shear-wave components
while minimizing the energy in the transverse compo-
nent.
EXERCISES
Exercise 11-1. Derive equation (11-2a) for the
Fresnel zone using the geometry of Figure 11.1-3.
Exercise 11-2. Refer to Figure 11.4-1a. Consider a
surface multiple from the first reflecting interface. Trace
the traveltime on the VSP diagram in Figure 11.4-1b.
Multiples do not reach the downgoing wave path; thus,
they can be eliminated by corridor stacking.
Exercise 11-3. Refer to Figure 11.4-1b. Should
the slopes of the downgoing and upcoming waves asso-
ciated with a layer be the same in magnitude?
Exercise 11-4. What procedure does CMP stack-
ing correspond to in the f − k domain?
Exercise 11-5. Sketch the traveltime response for
a point scatterer on a zero-offset VSP record.
Exercise 11-6. Consider a CMP gather with a
single reflection event. Suppose you have applied hy-
perbolic moveout correction using equation (11-90) and
discovered that the event is not flat for all offsets. In-
stead, the moveout-corrected event may have one of the
three shapes shown in Figure 11.E-1. Match each of the
curves A, B, and C with the following three possibili-
ties:
(a) You have applied hyperbolic moveout correction
using an erroneously low velocity in equation (11-
90).
(b) You have applied a second-order moveout correc-
tion (equation 3-4b) to an event that has a fourth-
order moveout behavior described by equation (3-
5a).
(c) You have ignored anisotropy in moveout correction
described by equation (11-92).
 Appendix L
MATHEMATICAL FOUNDATION OF ELASTIC WAVE PROPAGATION

L.1 Stress-Strain Relation

Seismic waves induce elastic deformation along the propagation path in the subsurface. The
equation of wave propagation in elastic solids are derived by using Hooke’s law and Newton’s
second law of motion. We shall begin with the stress-strain relation for elastic solids.
Solid bodies, such as rocks are capable of propagating forces that act upon them. Imagine
an infinitesimally small volume around a point within a solid body with dimensions (dx, dy, dz)
as depicted in Figure L-1. Stress is defined as force per unit area. The stress acting upon one
of the surfaces, say dy − dz, can in general be at some arbitrary direction. It can, however,
be decomposed into three components: Pxx which is normal to the surface, and Pxy and Pxz
which are tangential to the surface. The first subscript refers to the direction of the normal to the
surface, and the second subscript refers to the direction of the stress component. The components
of the stress that are normal to the surfaces associated with the infinitesimal volume shown in
Figure L-1 are called the normal stress components and the components of the stress that are
tangential to the surfaces are called the shear stress components. A normal stress component is
tensional if it is positive, and compressional if it is negative. To retain the solid volume depicted
in Figure L-1 in equilibrium requires nine stress components that make up the stress tensor
 
Pxx Pxy Pxz
{Pij } =  Pyx Pyy Pyz  . (L − 1)
Pzx Pzy Pzz
The diagonal elements are the normal stress components and the off-diagonal elements are the
shear stress components.
As the dimensions of the volume surrounding a point inside a solid body are made in-
finitesimally smaller, the sum of the moments of all surface forces about any axis must vanish.
This requirement causes Pxy = Pyx , Pxz = Pzx , and Pyz = Pzy , making the stress tensor (L-1)
symmetrical.
Fluids cannot support shear stress. In a fluid medium, only one independent stress compo-
nent remains, since Pxx = Pyy = Pzz = −p, the hydrostatic pressure (the negative sign signifies
the compressive nature of the hydrostatic pressure), and Pxy = Pxz = Pyz = 0.
Stress induces deformation of solid bodies. Consider two points, P and Q, within a solid
body as indicated in Figure L-2. Subject to a stress field, the solid is deformed in some manner
and the particles at points P and Q are displaced to new locations P and Q . The displacement
components δu, δv, and δw can be expressed by the relation
    
δu ∂u/∂x ∂u/∂y ∂u/∂z δx
 δv  =  ∂v/∂x ∂v/∂y ∂v/∂z   δy  . (L − 2)
δw ∂w/∂x ∂w/∂y ∂w/∂z δz
To understand the physical meaning of the elements of the tensor containing the partial
derivatives in equation (L-2), instead of arbitrary displacement as shown in Figure L-2, consider
deformations of specific types. The simplest deformation is an extension in one direction as a
result of a tensional stress as illustrated in Figure L-3a. (For simplicity, only one surface of the
volume in Figure L-1 is considered.) The fractional change in length in the x-direction is δu/δx,
2002 Seismic Data Analysis

FIG. L-1. Stress components acting on an infinitesimally small volume surrounding a point within an
elastic solid.

FIG. L-2. Two points, P and Q, within a solid body subject to a stress field. The solid is deformed in
some manner and the particles at points P and Q are displaced to new locations P and Q . Here, δu,
δv, and δw are the displacement components.

which, in the limit as the volume becomes infinitesimally small, is defined as the normal strain
component.
Strain is a dimensionless quantity. There are three normal strain components, exx , eyy , and
ezz :
∂u
exx = , (L − 3a)
∂x
∂v
eyy = , (L − 3b)
∂y

∂w
ezz = . (L − 3c)
∂z
The stress field away from the typical seismic source is so small that it does not cause any
permanent deformation on rock particles along the propagation path. Hence, the strain induced
 Mathematical Foundation of Elastic Wave Propagation 2003

FIG. L-3. Deformations caused by stress acting on one surface of the volume in Figure L-1: (a) linear
deformation that results in extension of the side AB in the x direction by an amount BB ; (b) shearing
only; (c) rotation only; (d) combined angular deformation (α) and rotation (β). See text for details.

by seismic waves is very small, usually around 10−6 . A positive strain refers to an extension and
a negative strain refers to a contraction.
Other types of deformation are caused by shearing (Figure L-3b), rotation (Figure L-3c),
and a combination of the two (Figure L-3d). The angular deformations ξ and ζ, in the limit as
the volume becomes infinitesimally small, can be expressed in terms of displacement components
δu and δw, by using the relations
∂w
ξ−ζ = (L − 4a)
∂x
and
∂u
ξ+ζ = , (L − 4b)
∂z
2004 Seismic Data Analysis

which, by adding both sides, yield

1 ∂w ∂u
ξ = exz = + = ezx . (L − 5a)
2 ∂x ∂z
Similarly, we obtain
1 ∂v ∂u
exy = + = eyx (L − 5b)
2 ∂x ∂y
and
1 ∂w ∂v
ezy = + = eyz . (L − 5c)
2 ∂y ∂z
The quantitites described by equations (L-3) and (L-5) make up the strain tensor
 
exx exy exz
{eij } =  eyx eyy eyz  . (L − 6)
ezx ezy ezz
Note that, by way of equations (L-5a,b,c), the strain tensor (L-6) is symmetric.
Also from equations (L-4a,b), we obtain by subtraction
1 ∂w ∂u
ζ = θxz = − − = −θzx . (L − 7a)
2 ∂x ∂z
Similarly,
1 ∂v ∂u
θxy = − − = −θyx (L − 7b)
2 ∂x ∂y
and
1 ∂w ∂v
θyz = − − = −θzy . (L − 7c)
2 ∂y ∂z
Note that by definition
θxx = θyy = θzz = 0.
The angular deformations given by equations (L-5a,b,c) are called shear strains since they
result in a shearing of the volume around a point within a solid body (Figure L-3b). The quan-
tities given by equations (L-7a,b,c) are associated with rotation without deformation (Figure
L-3c).
The displacement tensor in equation (L-2) can be expressed as
   
∂u/∂x ∂u/∂y ∂u/∂z ∂u/∂x + ∂u/∂x ∂v/∂x + ∂u/∂y ∂w/∂x + ∂u/∂z
1
 ∂v/∂x ∂v/∂y ∂v/∂z  =  ∂u/∂y + ∂v/∂x ∂v/∂y + ∂v/∂y ∂w/∂y + ∂v/∂z 
2
∂v/∂x ∂v/∂y ∂v/∂z ∂u/∂z + ∂w/∂x ∂v/∂z + ∂w/∂y ∂w/∂z + ∂w/∂z
 
0 ∂v/∂x − ∂u/∂y ∂w/∂x − ∂u/∂z
1
− ∂u/∂y − ∂v/∂x 0 ∂w/∂y − ∂v/∂z  .
2
∂u/∂z − ∂w/∂x ∂v/∂z − ∂w/∂y 0
(L − 8)
The elements of the matrices in equation (L-8) can then be expressed in terms of the normal
strain components exx , eyy , and ezz , given by equations (L-3a,b,c), the shear strain components,
exz , exy , and eyz , given by equations (L-5a,b,c), and the rigid rotational components θxz , θxy , and
θyz , given by equations (L-7a,b,c). All of these components are then substituted into equation
(L-2) to get
       
δu exx exy exz 0 θxy θxz δx
 δv  =  eyx eyy eyz  +  θyx 0 θyz   δy  . (L − 9)
δw ezx ezy ezz θzx θzy 0 δz
 Mathematical Foundation of Elastic Wave Propagation 2005

Next, we need to establish the relation between the stress tensor (L-1) and the strain
tensor (L-6). For an elastic solid, Hooke’s law states that the strain at any point is directly
proportional to the stresses applied at that point. First, consider a volume (Figure L-1) under
tensional principle stresses, Pxx , Pyy , and Pzz . The stress-strain relations are written as
Pxx = Eexx , (L − 10a)

−σPxx = Eeyy , (L − 10b)

and
−σPxx = Eezz , (L − 10c)
where E and σ are proportionality constants, which are specific to the material and are called
Young’s modulus and Poisson’s ratio, respectively.
Consider a cylindrical rod that is subjected to a longitudinal extension in the x-direction. All
other stresses being zero, this causes a lateral contraction in the y-direction. Note from equation
(L-10a) that Young’s modulus is the ratio of the longitudinal stress Pxx to the longitudinal
strain exx . Substitute Pxx from equation (L-10a) into equation (L-10b) and note that Poisson’s
ratio is the ratio of the lateral contraction defined by the strain component −eyy to longitudinal
extension defined by the strain component exx . Since strain is a dimensionless quantity, Young’s
modulus has the dimensions of stress, and Poisson’s ratio is a pure number.
Similar to equations (L-10a,b,c), we establish the following relations
Pyy = Eeyy , (L − 11a)

−σPyy = Eexx , (L − 11b)

−σPyy = Eezz , (L − 11c)

and
Pzz = Eezz , (L − 12a)

−σPzz = Eexx , (L − 12b)

−σPzz = Eeyy . (L − 12c)

By combining equations (L-10), (L-11), and (L-12), we rewrite the principal stress-strain
relations as
Pxx − σPyy − σPzz = 3Eexx , (L − 13a)

−σPxx − Pyy − σPzz = 3Eeyy , (L − 13b)

−σPxx − σPyy − Pzz = 3Eezz . (L − 13c)

By rewriting equations (L-13a,b,c), we get
(1 + σ)Pxx − σ(Pxx + Pyy + Pzz ) = Eexx , (L − 14a)

(1 + σ)Pyy − σ(Pxx + Pyy + Pzz ) = Eeyy , (L − 14b)

(1 + σ)Pzz − σ(Pxx + Pyy + Pzz ) = Eezz , (L − 14c)

and adding them, we obtain
(1 − 2σ)(Pxx + Pyy + Pzz ) = E(exx + eyy + ezz ). (L − 15)
2006 Seismic Data Analysis

Refer to Figure L-1. If the unstrained volume is (δxδyδz), and the strained volume is
(δx + δu)(δy + δv)(δz + δw), then the fractional change in volume, ∆, is
∆ = (δx + δu)(δy + δv)(δz + δw) − (δx δy δz) /(δx δy δz).
By neglecting the higher-order terms in this ratio, and referring to the definitions of the principal
strain components given by equations (L-3a,b,c), we find that the fractional change in volume,
or dilatation ∆, in the limiting case of the volume becoming infinitesimally small, is given by
∆ = exx + eyy + ezz , (L − 16)
which, upon substitution into equation (L-15), yields
E∆
Pxx + Pyy + Pzz = . (L − 17)
1 − 2σ
Finally, by using the relations (L-16) and (L-17), and back substituting into equations (L-
13a,b,c), we obtain the relations between the principal stress and principal strain components:
Pxx = λ∆ + 2µexx , (L − 18a)

Pyy = λ∆ + 2µeyy , (L − 18b)

Pzz = λ∆ + 2µezz , (L − 18c)

where λ and µ are the elastic moduli for the solid given by
σE
λ= (L − 19a)
(1 + σ)(1 − 2σ)
and
E
µ= . (L − 19b)
2(1 + σ)
These elastic moduli have the dimensions of stress.
Now consider the volume in Figure L-1 under shear stress components, Pxy , Pxz , and Pyz .
The deformations associated with these stress components are the shear strains, exy , exz , and
eyz . These stress and strain components also are linearly related for elastic solids:
Pxy = 2µexy , (L − 20a)

Pxz = 2µexz , (L − 20b)

Pyz = 2µeyz , (L − 20c)

where the proportionality constant µ is known as the modulus of rigidity. Note, from equation
(L-20a), that modulus of rigidity is the ratio of shear stress to shear strain.
By combining equations (L-18a,b,c) and (L-20a,b,c), we obtain the stress-strain relation for
elastic solids:
     
Pxx Pxy Pxz 1 0 0 exx exy exz
 Pxy Pyy Pyz  = λ∆ 0 1 0  + 2µ  exy eyy eyz  . (L − 21)
Pzx Pzy Pzz 0 0 1 ezx ezy ezz
This is the formal expression for Hooke’s law that relates the stress tensor on the left to the
strain tensor on the right. Recall that these two tensors are symmetric, and that the diagonal
elements represent the normal components and the off-diagonal elements represent the shear
components. Equation (L-21) holds for homogeneous, isotropic, elastic solids (for which elastic
behavior is independent of direction), and for deformations that are sufficiently small (usual
case for seismic waves) to satisfy the linear relationship between stress and strain.
 Mathematical Foundation of Elastic Wave Propagation 2007

Since the stress tensor (L-1) and the strain tensor (L-6) are symmetric, equation (L-21) can
be written in the form
    
Pxx λ + 2µ λ λ 0 0 0 exx
 Pyy   λ λ + 2µ λ 0 0 0   eyy 
    
 Pzz   λ λ λ + 2µ 0 0 0   ezz 
 =  . (L − 22)
 Pxy   0 0 0 2µ 0 0   exy 
    
Pxz 0 0 0 0 2µ 0 exz
Pyz 0 0 0 0 0 2µ eyz
This equation is a special form of the generalized Hooke’s law given by (Officer, 1958)
    
Pxx c11 c12 c13 c14 c15 c16 exx
 Pyy   c21 c22 c23 c24 c25 c26   eyy 
    
 Pzz   c31 c32 c33 c34 c35 c36   ezz 
 =  , (L − 23)
 Pxy   c41 c42 c43 c44 c45 c46   exy 
    
Pxz c51 c52 c53 c54 c55 c56 exz
Pyz c61 c62 c63 c64 c65 c66 eyz
where cij = cji are the 21 independent constants for an elastic medium. The stress vector on
the left is related to the strain vector on the right by the stiffness matrix {cij }. Equation (L-23)
states that a stress component is a linear combination of all the strain components. This relation
is the foundation of the linear theory of elasticity and its physical basis is the assumption that
elastic deformations in solids are infinitesimally small.
For an isotropic solid, the number of independent constants is reduced to two — Lamé’s
constants, λ and µ given by equations (L-19a,b); hence equation (L-23) reduces to the special
form of equation (L-22). For a transversely isotropic solid, for which elastic behavior is the same
in two orthogonal directions but different in the third direction, the number of independent
constants is five (Sheriff, 1991).

L.2 Elastic Wave Equation

We now review the equations of motion and examine how stress fields are propagated through
an elastic solid. Refer to Figure L-1 and note that, for small displacements and velocities, and
neglecting body forces such as gravity acting on the volume surrounding the points, Newton’s
second law of motion gives, for the displacement component u,
∂2u ∂Pxx ∂Pxy ∂Pxz
ρ 2
= + + , (L − 24)
∂t ∂x ∂y ∂z
where ρ is the density. From the expression (L-21) for Hooke’s law, we have
Pxx = λ∆ + 2µexx , (L − 25a)

Pxy = 2µexy , (L − 25b)

and
Pxz = 2µexz . (L − 25c)
By making these substitutions into equation (L-24), and assuming that the elastic param-
eters λ and µ are constant, we obtain
∂2u ∂∆ ∂exx ∂exy ∂exz
ρ =λ + 2µ + 2µ + 2µ . (L − 26)
∂t2 ∂x ∂x ∂y ∂z
By using the definitions for the principal strains given by equations (L-3a,b,c) and that for the
dilatation given by equation (L-16), the latter can be expressed in terms of the displacement
2008 Seismic Data Analysis

components as
∂u ∂v ∂w
∆= + + . (L − 27)
∂x ∂y ∂z
Next, by substituting equation (L-27) and the relations for the strain components in terms of
the displacement components given by equations (L-3a,b,c) and (L-5a,b,c) into equation (L-26),
we obtain
∂2u ∂ ∂u ∂v ∂w ∂2u ∂2v ∂2u ∂2w ∂2u
ρ = λ + + + 2µ + µ + + µ + . (L − 28a)
∂t2 ∂x ∂x ∂y ∂z ∂x2 ∂y∂x ∂y 2 ∂z∂x ∂z 2
Rearrange the terms on the right-hand side to get the following expression
∂2u ∂ ∂u ∂v ∂w ∂2u ∂2u ∂2u
ρ = (λ + µ) + + + µ + 2 + 2 . (L − 28b)
∂t2 ∂x ∂x ∂y ∂z ∂x2 ∂y ∂z
Finally, back substitution of equation (L-27) and the definition for the Laplacian operator,
∇2 : (∂ 2 /∂x2 + ∂ 2 /∂y 2 + ∂ 2 /∂z 2 ) into equation (L-28b), yields the equation of motion for the
displacement component u:
∂2u ∂∆
ρ = (λ + µ) + µ∇2 u. (L − 29a)
∂t2 ∂x
Similarly, we can derive the equations of motion for the displacement components v and w
∂2v ∂∆
ρ = (λ + µ) + µ∇2 v (L − 29b)
∂t2 ∂y
and
∂2w ∂∆
ρ 2
= (λ + µ) + µ∇2 w. (L − 29c)
∂t ∂z
Define the displacement vector u :(u, v, w) and combine the three equations (L-29a,b,c) to
get
∂2u
ρ = (λ + µ)∇∆ + µ∇2 u. (L − 30)
∂t2
This is the equation of wave propagation in homogeneous, isotropic, and elastic solids.

L.3 Seismic Wave Types — Body Waves and Surface Waves

Equation (L-30) can be specialized to describe various wave types that travel within solids and
fluids (body waves), and along free surfaces and layer boundaries (surface waves). We shall
derive the equations for two types of body waves that are of interest in exploration seismology
— the compressional wave for which the displacement is in the direction of propagation and
the shear wave for which the displacement is in the direction perpendicular to the direction of
propagation. Surface waves are more of an interest in earthquake seismology; as such, we shall
not deal with them here.
To begin with, differentiate equation (L-29a) with respect to x
∂ ∂2u ∂2∆ ∂ ∂2u ∂2u ∂2u
ρ = (λ + µ) + µ + 2 + 2 , (L − 31a)
∂x ∂t2 ∂x2 ∂x ∂x2 ∂y ∂z
equation (L-29b) with respect to y
∂ ∂2v ∂2∆ ∂ ∂2v ∂2v ∂2v
ρ = (λ + µ) +µ + 2+ 2 , (L − 31b)
∂y ∂t2 ∂y 2 ∂y ∂x2 ∂y ∂z
 Mathematical Foundation of Elastic Wave Propagation 2009

and equation (L-29c) with respect to z

∂ ∂2w ∂2∆ ∂ ∂2w ∂2w ∂2w
ρ = (λ + µ) + µ + + . (L − 31c)
∂z ∂t2 ∂z 2 ∂z ∂x2 ∂y 2 ∂z 2
Next, reorder the differentiation on the left-hand side of equations (L-31a,b,c) and add them to
get
∂ 2 ∂u ∂v ∂w ∂2∆ ∂2∆ ∂2∆
ρ + + = (λ + µ) + +
∂t2 ∂x ∂y ∂z ∂x2 ∂y 2 ∂z 2
2 2 2
∂ ∂ u ∂ u ∂ u ∂ ∂ v ∂2v ∂2v
2
∂ ∂2w ∂2w ∂2w
+ µ + + +µ + + +µ + + .
∂x ∂x2 ∂y 2 ∂z 2 ∂y ∂x2 ∂y 2 ∂z 2 ∂z ∂x2 ∂y 2 ∂z 2
(L − 32)

Then, change the order of differentiation and rearrange the terms on the right-hand side to get
∂ 2 ∂u ∂v ∂w ∂2∆ ∂2∆ ∂2∆
ρ + + = (λ + µ) + +
∂t2 ∂x ∂y ∂z ∂x2 ∂y 2 ∂z 2
∂ 2 ∂u ∂v ∂w ∂2 ∂u ∂v ∂w ∂ 2 ∂u ∂v ∂w
+µ 2 + + +µ 2 + + +µ 2 + + .
∂x ∂x ∂y ∂z ∂y ∂x ∂y ∂z ∂z ∂x ∂y ∂z
(L − 33)

Finally, substitution of equation (L-27) and the definition for the Laplacian operator, ∇2 :
(∂ 2 /∂x2 + ∂ 2 /∂y 2 + ∂ 2 /∂z 2 ) into the above expression, yield the equation for dilatational or
compressional-wave propogation:
∂2∆
ρ = (λ + 2µ)∇2 ∆. (L − 34)
∂t2
The velocity with which compressional waves propagate in an elastic solid then is

λ + 2µ
α= . (L − 35)
ρ

Equation (L-34) also can be derived by using the more compact vector algebra. Specifically,
by taking the divergence of both sides of equation (L-30) and reordering the differentiation, we
have
∂2
ρ (∇ · u) = (λ + µ)∇ · (∇∆) + µ∇2 (∇ · u). (L − 36)
∂t2
By referring to equation (L-27), note that the dilatation is the divergence of the displacement
vector: ∆ = ∇ · u. Substitution of this relation into equation (L-36) and observing that the
divergence of a gradient is the Laplacian, ∇ · (∇∆) = ∇2 ∆ (Lass, 1950), yield equation (L-34)
that describes the compressional-wave propagation.
Differentiate equation (L-29b) with respect to z
∂ ∂2v ∂2∆ ∂
ρ = (λ + µ) +µ ∇2 v , (L − 37a)
∂z ∂t2 ∂z∂y ∂z
and equation (L-29c) with respect to y
∂ ∂2w ∂2∆ ∂
ρ = (λ + µ) +µ ∇2 w . (L − 37b)
∂y ∂t2 ∂y∂z ∂y
Next, change the order of differentiation and subtract equation (L-37a) from (L-37b)
∂ 2 ∂w ∂v ∂w ∂v
ρ − = µ∇2 − . (L − 38)
∂t2 ∂y ∂z ∂y ∂z
2010 Seismic Data Analysis

Finally, substitute equation (L-7c) to get

∂ 2 θyz
ρ = µ∇2 θyz . (L − 39)
∂t2
Similarly, differentiate equation (L-29a) with respect to z
∂ ∂2u ∂2∆ ∂
ρ 2
= (λ + µ) +µ ∇2 u , (L − 40a)
∂z ∂t ∂z∂x ∂z
and equation (L-29c) with respect to x
∂ ∂2w ∂2∆ ∂
ρ = (λ + µ) +µ ∇2 w . (L − 40b)
∂x ∂t2 ∂x∂z ∂x
Next, change the order of differentiation and subtract equation (L-40a) from (L-40b)
∂ 2 ∂w ∂u ∂w ∂u
ρ − = µ∇2 − , (L − 41)
∂t2 ∂x ∂z ∂x ∂z
and substitute equation (L-7a) to get
∂ 2 θxz
ρ = µ∇2 θxz . (L − 42)
∂t2
Finally, differentiate equation (L-29a) with respect to y
∂ ∂2u ∂2∆ ∂
ρ 2
= (λ + µ) +µ ∇2 u , (L − 43a)
∂y ∂t ∂y∂x ∂y
and equation (L-29b) with respect to x
∂ ∂2v ∂2∆ ∂
ρ = (λ + µ) +µ ∇2 v . (L − 43b)
∂x ∂t2 ∂x∂y ∂x
Next, change the order of differentiation and subtract equation (L-43a) from (L-43b)
∂ 2 ∂v ∂u ∂v ∂u
ρ − = µ∇2 − , (L − 44)
∂t2 ∂x ∂y ∂x ∂y
and substitute equation (L-7b) to get
∂ 2 θxy
ρ = µ∇2 θxy . (L − 45)
∂t2
Define the rotational vector Θ : (θxy , θxz , θyz ), and combine the three equations (L-39), (L-42),
and (L-45) to get the equation for rotational or shear-wave propagation:
∂2Θ
= µ∇2 Θ.
ρ (L − 46)
∂t2
The velocity with which shear waves propagate in an elastic solid then is
µ
β= . (L − 47)
ρ
Equation (L-46) also can be derived by using the more compact vector algebra. Specifically,
by taking the curl of both sides of equation (L-30) and reordering differentiation, we have
∂2
ρ (∇ × u) = (λ + µ)∇ × ∇∆ + µ∇2 (∇ × u). (L − 48)
∂t2
By referring to equations (L-7a,b,c) note that the rotational vector Θ : (θxy , θxz , θyz ) is the curl
of the displacement vector: Θ = (1/2)∇ × u. Substitution of this relation into equation (L-48)
and observing that the curl of a gradient is zero, ∇ × ∇∆ = 0 (Lass, 1950), yield equation (L-46)
for rotational or shear-wave propagation.
 Mathematical Foundation of Elastic Wave Propagation 2011

By taking the ratio of equations (L-35) and (L-47), and using the relations (L-19a,b),
we obtain the expression for the ratio of the shear-wave velocity β to the compressional-wave
velocity α

β 1 − 2σ
= , (L − 49)
α 2(1 − σ)
which indicates that the velocity ratio β/α, depends on Poisson’s ratio σ, and that the
compressional-wave velocity α is always greater than the shear-wave velocity β.
The wave type described by equation (L-34) is commonly referred to as the P -wave (or
equivalently, longitudinal wave, dilatational wave, or compressional wave), and the wave type
described by equation (L-46) is commonly referred to as the S-wave (or equivalently, rotational
wave, transverse wave, or shear wave). For P -waves, the particle motion is in the direction of
wave propagation, whereas for S-waves, the particle motion is in the direction perpendicular to
the direction of wave propagation.
To understand the nature of P - and S-wave propagation, consider the simple case of plane-
wave propagation in the x-direction. This makes the displacement vector u : (u, v, w) a function
of x only. Refer to equations (L-29a,b,c), substitute for the cubical dilatation from equation
(L-27), and finally, retain only the derivatives with respect to x to obtain
∂2u ∂2u
ρ = (λ + 2µ) , (L − 50a)
∂t2 ∂x2

∂2v ∂2v
ρ = µ , (L − 50b)
∂t2 ∂x2
and
∂2w ∂2w
ρ 2
=µ 2. (L − 50c)
∂t ∂x
From equation (L-50a), note that the particle displacement u (the longitudinal vibration)
which is in the direction of propagation (in this case in the x-direction) travels with the velocity
of compressional waves (equation L-35). From equations (L-50b,c), the particle displacements v
and w (the transverse vibrations), which are in the directions perpendicular to the direction of
propagation, travel with the velocity of shear waves (equation L-47).
To a great extent, seismic waves traveling in the earth can be considered as elastic waves.
Therefore, we can use the wave equation (L-30) for elastic solids to describe seismic wave propa-
gation. Source types used in seismic prospecting often generate P -waves. Furthermore, in marine
exploration, because of the water layer surrounding the source, S-waves cannot propagate. Nev-
ertheless, at non-normal incidence, part of the P -wave energy is converted to S-waves. The
P -to-S conversion phenomenon is the basis for the 4-C seismic method (Section 11.6).
Equations for elastic wave propagation can be specialized to describe acoustic wave propa-
gation induced by hydrostatic stress. Hooke’s law given by equation (L-21) takes the form
Pxx = λ∆ + 2µexx , (L − 51a)

Pyy = λ∆ + 2µeyy , (L − 51b)

and
Pzz = λ∆ + 2µezz . (L − 51c)
Also, note that the normal stress components are equal to the hydrostatic pressure, Pxx =
Pyy = Pzz = −P , and that shear stress components vanish, Pxy = Pxz = Pyz = 0. By summing
the three equations (L-51a,b,c) and substituting for the dilatation from equation (L-16), we
obtain
2
κ = λ + µ, (L − 52a)
3
2012 Seismic Data Analysis

where κ = −P/∆ is the ratio of the hydrostatic stress P to the volumetric strain ∆ and is called
the incompressibility or bulk modulus.
Solve equation (L-52a) for λ and substitute into equation (L-35) to get the expression for
the compressional-wave velocity in terms of bulk modulus κ and modulus of rigidity µ
4
κ+ µ
α= 3 . (L − 52b)
ρ
For fluids, modulus of rigidity is zero. Hence, by setting µ = 0, κ = λ and using the relation
(L-52), for acoustic waves traveling in fluid media, equation (L-34) takes the form
∂2P
ρ = κ∇2 P, (L − 53)
∂t2
where P represents the pressure wavefield, which travels with a speed κ/ρ.
Since the P - and S-waves travel within an elastic solid, they are called body waves. When
an elastic solid is bounded, it can also support waves traveling along the boundary, such as the
free surface. Waves that travel along the surface are called surface waves. Surface waves are
generally characterized as dispersive; that is, each frequency component travels at a different
speed.
There are two common types of surface waves: Rayleigh waves and Love waves. Rayleigh
waves travel along the free surface and give rise to particle motion that is always in a vertical
plane, and elliptical and retrograde with respect to the direction of propagation. Although the
wave motion attenuates rapidly with depth, Rayleigh waves attenuate less rapidly with distance
along the direction of propagation because of their two-dimensional (2-D) character, compared to
P - and S-waves that have three-dimensional (3-D) character. The velocity with which Rayleigh
waves travel is a little less than that of shear waves in the same medium.
In many seismograms recorded on land where the near-surface comprises a low-velocity
layer, Rayleigh waves are observed in the form of a low-velocity, large-amplitude, and low-
frequency wavetrain. These waves are commonly known as ground roll, and they obscure the
useful reflection energy on recorded seismograms.
Love waves are surface waves with particle motion that is horizontal and transverse to the
direction of propagation. They occur when there is a low-velocity layer overlying a high-velocity
medium. Because the corresponding particle motion is horizontal, Love waves are usually not
recorded in seismic prospecting by receivers that respond only to vertical displacements.

L.4 Wave Propagation Phenomena — Diffraction, Reflection, and Refraction

A seismic energy source generates a spherical wave in a 3-D earth. Following an explosion, a
spherical cavity is created with its periphery forming a zone of permanent deformation. However,
a short distance away from the cavity, the seismic energy induces an elastic deformation. The
particle motion associated with this deformation can be described by a time-varying function,
commonly known as the source waveform.
It turns out that every point on the spherical wavefront acts like a secondary source that
generates its own spherical wave. This is known as Huygens’ principle which is the physical
basis for wave propagation. Huygens’ principle can be used to conveniently describe reflection
and refraction at layer boundaries, and diffraction from sharp discontinuities in the subsurface.
At sufficiently large distances away from the source location, the spherical wavefront can
be represented by plane waves traveling at different angles from the vertical. Each plane wave
carries along the propagation path the seismic energy contained in the source waveform with a
certain frequency band. The propagation path is known as the raypath which is perpendicular
to the wavefront in isotropic media.
 Mathematical Foundation of Elastic Wave Propagation 2013

As the spherical wave propagates outward and away from its source, two things happen
to the source waveform. First, the energy generated by the source is spread over the area of
the spherical wavefront, which increases as the square of the radius of the wavefront. Hence,
the energy per unit area is inversely proportional to the square of the radius, while the wave
amplitude is inversely proportional to the radius. The phenomenon of wave amplitude decaying
with distance from the source is called spherical spreading.
Second, part of the seismic energy is lost along the path of propagation because of intrinsic
attenuation of rocks. This attenuation is in the form of frictional dissipation of energy into heat.
Attenuation mechanisms are still subject to research; nevertheless, a probable cause of loss of
seismic energy from absorption is widely believed to be the presence of pore fluids. When set
to motion by the passing wave, fluids take out a significant part of the seismic energy. Wave
attenuation is generally described by an amplitude function that decays exponentially with
distance from the source. The rate of decay depends on the rock type and is described by a
constant factor. The constant fractional energy loss per cycle of seismic waves is highest for
weathered rocks (3 dB/wavelength), and it is about 0.5 dB/wavelength for normal rock types.
Since the energy loss is considered to be constant for a given wavelength, higher frequencies are
attenuated more rapidly than lower frequencies. As the source waveform travels down in the
earth, it gets broader along the propagation path because of gradual loss of higher frequencies.
This means that the earth behaves as a low-pass filter.
Another aspect of wave attenuation is related to the observation made about many of the
earth materials that do not behave as perfectly elastic when subjected to extended loading. This
nonelastic behavior is called viscoelasticity (Fung, 1965), and it requires some modifications to
Hooke’s law given by equation (L-21). Specifically, stress components are related to strain com-
ponents and the rate of change of strain components themselves. When viscosity is introduced
into the wave propagation in solids, we can still identify P - and S-wave types. However, these
waves are now damped and dispersive — they are subjected to frequency-dependent attenuation.
It is generally believed that the dispersive nature attributable to viscoelastic wave propagation
is negligible within the range of frequencies used in seismic prospecting.
Seismic waves — whether compressional or shear, are subjected to reflection and refraction
at layer boundaries with impedance contrast and diffraction at a sharp discontinuity. In this
section, we shall briefly review diffraction phenomenon and discuss reflection and refraction of
seismic waves within the context of amplitude variation with offset (AVO) analysis and amplitude
inversion.
When the incident plane wave encounters a sharp discontinuity with the radius of curvature
much less than the seismic wavelength, such as a fault edge, then the energy propagates outward
from that point acting as a Huygens’ secondary source in the form of a spherical wave. This
phenomenon is known as diffraction.
The amplitude of the diffracted wave along the hyperbolic traveltime trajectory decays with
distance away from the diffractor. For an incident plane compressional plane wave, Sommerfeld
gives the exact solution for the diffracted wave amplitude as (Grant and West, 1965)
ω π
A(ω, x, z) = A1 exp i( r + ) , (L − 54a)
α 4
where
ω 1 1
A1 = −A0 8π sec (ψ − ϕ) − csc (ψ + ϕ) , (L − 54b)
α 2 2
and √A0 is the incident wave amplitude, α is the wave velocity, ψ is the angle of incidence,
r = x2 + z 2 , ϕ is the angle at which energy diffracts, and ω is the angular frequency. Note that
the solution given by equation (L-54a) is for 2-D geometry and for sufficiently large distances,
thus the term far-field solution.
It is interesting to note that a reflector can be represented by a series of discrete point
diffractors. The response of a series of diffractors is simply the superposition of the individual
responses. In the limit, we obtain the traveltime response associated with the reflector which is
made up of diffractors with an infinitesimal separation between them.
2014 Seismic Data Analysis

FIG. L-4. A two-layered 2-D earth model used in deriving the Zoeppritz equations (L-78).

We now review the reflection and refraction phenomena. For simplicity, consider a
monochromatic compressional plane wave that impinges at normal incidence upon a flat layer
boundary at z = 0. The incident energy is partitioned between a reflected and transmitted
compressional plane wave. This special case is discussed in Section 11.2. In the next section, we
shall treat the general case of a compressional plane wave that is incident at an oblique angle to
the interface. Derivation of the reflected and transmitted wave functions gets complicated, and
we find that the reflection coefficient changes with angle of incidence. Moreover, at non-normal
incidence, the incident compressional-wave energy is partitioned at the interface into four com-
ponents — reflected compressional, reflected shear, transmitted compressional, and transmitted
shear waves.

L.5 The Zoeppritz Equations

Consider the case of a 2-D medium in (x, z) coordinates that comprises two solid layers sepa-
rated by a flat interface as shown in Figure L-4. We shall adopt the derivation of reflected and
transmitted wave amplitudes by Officer (1958) for this 2-D case between an acoustic layer (water
layer) on top and a solid layer (elastic half space) below to derive the Zoeppritz equations that
describe the reflected and refracted P - and S-wave amplitudes for the case of two solid layers,
again separated by a flat interface at z = 0.
In many of the wave propagation problems, it is convenient to work with displacement
potentials in lieu of the displacement vector u : (u, w) itself (Officer, 1958). We shall define
 Mathematical Foundation of Elastic Wave Propagation 2015

two displacement potentials, a compressional-wave potential Φ and a shear-wave potential Ψ in

terms of the displacements u and w as
∂Φ ∂Ψ
u= + (L − 55a)
∂x ∂z
and
∂Φ ∂Ψ
w= − . (L − 55b)
∂z ∂x
Choice of the displacement potentials is made on the basis that they satisfy the wave equation
while enabling us to describe the displacement vector u in terms of a compressional component
and a rotational component. To see that the two potentials defined by equations (L-55a,b) satisfy
the wave equation, proceed as follows.
Adapt the dilatation ∆ given by equation (L-27) to the geometry of Figure L-4 in (x, z)
coordinates
∂u ∂w
∆= + , (L − 56)
∂x ∂z
and subsitute equations (L-55a,b)
∂ ∂Φ ∂Ψ ∂ ∂Φ ∂Ψ
∆= + + − . (L − 57)
∂x ∂x ∂z ∂z ∂z ∂x
Then, simplify to get the relation
∂2Φ ∂2Φ
∆= + . (L − 58)
∂x2 ∂z 2
Finally, substitute equation (L-58) into the compressional-wave equation (L-34) to obtain
∂2Φ ∂2Φ 1 ∂2Φ
+ = , (L − 59)
∂x2 ∂z 2 α2 ∂t2
where the compressional-wave velocity α is given by equation (L-35). Equation (L-59) indicates
that the displacement potential Φ obeys the wave equation.
Now consider the rotational shear component θxz given by equation (L-7a). This is the
shear strain that is relevant to the wave motion in (x, z) coordinates of Figure L-4. Substitute
equations (L-55a,b) into equation (L-7a)
1 ∂ ∂Φ ∂Ψ ∂ ∂Φ ∂Ψ
θxz = − − − + , (L − 60)
2 ∂x ∂z ∂x ∂z ∂x ∂z
and simplify to obtain
1 ∂2Ψ ∂2Ψ
θxz = + . (L − 61)
2 ∂x2 ∂z 2
Finally, substitute equation (L-61) into the shear-wave equation (L-42) to obtain
∂2Ψ ∂2Ψ 1 ∂2Ψ
+ = , (L − 62)
∂x2 ∂z 2 β 2 ∂t2
where the shear-wave velocity β is given by equation (L-47). Equation (L-62) indicates that the
displacement potential Ψ also obeys the wave equation.
The plane-wave solutions Φ(x, z, t) and Ψ(x, z, t) to the wave equations (L-59) and (L-62)
in (x, z) coordinates of Figure L-4 are expressed as follows:
ω ω
Φ1 = A0 exp i sin ϕ0 x + i cos ϕ0 z − iωt
α1 α1
ω ω , (L − 63a)
+ A1 exp i sin ϕ1 x − i cos ϕ1 z − iωt
α1 α1
2016 Seismic Data Analysis
ω ω
Ψ1 = B1 exp i sin ψ1 x − i cos ψ1 z − iωt , (L − 63b)
β1 β1

ω ω
Φ2 = A2 exp i sin ϕ2 x + i cos ϕ2 z − iωt , (L − 63c)
α2 α2

ω ω
Ψ2 = B2 exp i sin ψ2 x + i cos ψ2 z − iωt , (L − 63d)
β2 β2
where A0 , A1 , B1 , A2 , and B2 are the incident P -wave, reflected P -wave, reflected S-wave,
transmitted P -wave, and transmitted S-wave amplitudes, α1 and β1 are the P - and S-wave
velocities in layer 1 (top layer), and α2 and β2 are the P - and S-wave velocities in layer 2
(bottom layer). The angles ϕ0 , ϕ1 , ϕ2 , ψ1 , and ψ2 are denoted in Figure L-4. Finally, ω is the
angular frequency, and the z variable is positive in the downward direction.
Note that the displacement potential Φ1 given by equation (L-63a) has two components
associated with the incident P -wave and the reflected P -wave. To prove that the wave functions
given by equations (L-63a,b,c,d) are solutions to the wave equation, simply substitute these
functions into the respective equations (L-59) and (L-62).
Given the incident P -wave amplitude A0 , our objective is to compute the amplitudes of
the partitioned wave components — A1 , B1 , A2 , and B2 . We will require the following four
boundary conditions to be satisfied at the layer boundary z = 0:

(a) The displacement component tangential to the interface is continuous: u1 = u2 .

(b) The displacement component normal to the interface is continuous: w1 = w2 .
(c) The stress component normal to the interface is continuous: Pzz 1 = Pzz 2 .
(d) The stress component tangential to the interface is continuous: Pxz 1 = Pxz 2 .

By way of Snell’s law that relates the propagation angles

sin ϕ0 sin ϕ1 sin ϕ2 sin ψ1 sin ψ2
= = = = . (L − 64)
α1 α1 α2 β1 β2
Note that the phase of the wave functions given by equations (L-63a,b,c,d) coincide at the layer
boundary z = 0. With this obervation in mind, refer to equation (L-55a) and consider the first
boundary condition expressed as
∂Φ1 ∂Ψ1 ∂Φ2 ∂Ψ2
+ = + . (L − 65)
∂x ∂z ∂x ∂z
Differentiate the respective wave functions given by equations (L-63a,b,c,d) and substitute into
equation (L-65), while noting from Snell’s law that ϕ0 = ϕ1
sin ϕ1 sin ϕ1 cos ψ1 sin ϕ2 cos ψ2
A0 + A1 − B1 = A2 + B2 . (L − 66)
α1 α1 β1 α2 β2
Next, refer to equation (L-55b) and consider the second boundary condition expressed as
∂Φ1 ∂Ψ1 ∂Φ2 ∂Ψ2
− = − . (L − 67)
∂z ∂x ∂z ∂x
Differentiate the respective wave functions given by equations (L-63a,b,c,d) and substitute into
equation (L-67)
cos ϕ1 cos ϕ1 sin ψ1 cos ϕ2 sin ψ2
A0 − A1 − B1 = A2 − B2 . (L − 68)
α1 α1 β1 α2 β2
Next, refer to equation (L-18c) rewritten below
Pzz = λ∆ + 2µezz
 Mathematical Foundation of Elastic Wave Propagation 2017

and substitute equation (L-56) for ∆ and equation (L-3c) for ezz to get
∂u ∂w ∂w
Pzz = λ + + 2µ . (L − 69a)
∂x ∂z ∂z
Combine the terms
∂w ∂u
Pzz = (λ + 2µ) +λ , (L − 69b)
∂z ∂x
and substitute equations (L-55a,b) for the displacement potentials
∂ ∂Φ ∂Ψ ∂ ∂Φ ∂Ψ
Pzz = (λ + 2µ) − +λ + , (L − 69c)
∂z ∂z ∂x ∂x ∂x ∂z
and simplify to get
∂2Φ ∂2Φ ∂2Ψ
Pzz = (λ + 2µ) 2
+ λ 2 − 2µ . (L − 69d)
∂z ∂x ∂z∂x
Rewrite equation (L-69d) as
∂2Φ ∂2Φ ∂2Φ ∂2Ψ
Pzz = (λ + 2µ) + − 2µ + , (L − 69e)
∂x2 ∂z 2 ∂x2 ∂z∂x
and substitute equations (L-35), (L-47), and (L-59) to get the final expression for the normal
stress Pzz in terms of the displacement potentials Φ and Ψ
∂2Φ ∂2Φ ∂2Ψ
Pzz = ρ 2
− 2ρβ 2 2
+ . (L − 69f )
∂t ∂x ∂z∂x
Now, refer to equation (L-69f) and consider the third boundary condition expressed as
∂ 2 Φ1 2
2 ∂ Φ1 ∂ 2 Ψ1 ∂ 2 Φ2 2
2 ∂ Φ2 ∂ 2 Ψ2
ρ1 − 2ρ 1 β1 + = ρ 2 − 2ρ 2 β2 + . (L − 70)
∂t2 ∂x2 ∂z∂x ∂t2 ∂x2 ∂z∂x
Differentiate the respective wave functions given by equations (L-63a,b,c,d) and substitute into
equation (L-70) to get the expression at the boundary z = 0
β12 β2
−ρ1 A0 − ρ1 A1 + 2ρ1 2 sin2 ϕ0 A0 + 2ρ1 12 sin2 ϕ1 A1 − 2ρ1 sin ψ1 cos ψ1 B1
α1 α1

β22
= −ρ2 A2 + 2ρ2 sin2 ϕ2 A2 + 2ρ2 sin ψ2 cos ψ2 B2 . (L − 71a)
α22
Simplify by combining terms and using the trigonometric relation sin 2ψ = 2 sin ψ cos ψ to get
β12 2 β12
− 1−2 sin ϕ 1 A 0 − 1 − 2 sin2 ϕ1 A1 − sin 2ψ1 B1
α12 α12

ρ2 β2 ρ2
=− 1 − 2 22 sin2 ϕ2 A2 + sin 2ψ2 B2 . (L − 71b)
ρ1 α2 ρ1
By way of Snell’s law given by equation (L-64), note that
β12
sin2 ϕ1 = sin2 ψ1 (L − 72a)
α12
and
β22
sin2 ϕ2 = sin2 ψ2 . (L − 72b)
α22
2018 Seismic Data Analysis

Substitute equations (L-72a,b) into equation (L-71b), while noting the trigonometric relation
1 − 2 sin2 ψ = cos 2ψ
ρ2 ρ2
− cos 2ψ1 A0 − cos 2ψ1 A1 − sin 2ψ1 B1 = − cos 2ψ2 A2 + sin 2ψ2 B2 . (L − 73)
ρ1 ρ1
Finally, refer to equation (L-20b) rewritten below as

Pxz = 2µexz

and substitute equation (L-5a) for exz to get

∂w ∂u
Pxz = µ + . (L − 74a)
∂x ∂z
Next, substitute equations (L-55a,b) into equation (L-74a) for the displacement potentials
∂ ∂Φ ∂Ψ ∂ ∂Φ ∂Ψ
Pxz = µ − + + , (L − 74b)
∂x ∂z ∂x ∂z ∂x ∂z
and simplify to get

∂2Φ ∂2Ψ ∂2Ψ

Pxz = µ 2 + − . (L − 74c)
∂z∂x ∂z 2 ∂x2
Now, refer to equation (L-74c) and consider the fourth boundary condition expressed as

∂ 2 Φ1 ∂ 2 Ψ1 ∂ 2 Ψ1 ∂ 2 Φ2 ∂ 2 Ψ2 ∂ 2 Ψ2
µ1 2 + − = µ2 2 + − . (L − 75)
∂z∂x ∂z 2 ∂x2 ∂z∂x ∂z 2 ∂x2
Differentiate the respective wave functions given by equations (L-63a,b,c,d) and substitute into
equation (L-75) to get the expression at the boundary z = 0
2 2 1 1
µ1 − 2 sin ϕ0 cos ϕ0 A0 + 2 sin ϕ1 cos ϕ1 A1 − 2 cos2 ψ1 B1 + 2 sin2 ψ1 B1
α1 α1 β1 β1

2 1 1
= µ2 − sin ϕ2 cos ϕ2 A2 − 2 cos2 ψ2 B2 + 2 sin2 ψ2 B2 . (L − 76a)
α22 β2 β2

Simplify by combining terms and using the trigonometric relation sin 2ψ = 2 sin ψ cos ψ to get
µ1 µ1 µ1
− 2 sin 2ϕ1 A0 + 2 sin 2ϕ1 A1 − 2 (cos2 ψ1 − sin2 ψ1 ) B1
α1 α1 β1

µ2 µ2
=− 2 sin 2ϕ2 A2 − 2 (cos2 ψ2 − sin2 ψ2 ) B2 . (L − 76b)
α2 β2

Substitute equation (L-47) into equation (L-76b), while noting the trigonometric relations
sin 2ψ = 2 sin ψ cos ψ and cos 2ψ = cos2 ψ − sin2 ψ to get

α12 ρ2 β22 α12 ρ2 α12

− sin 2ϕ1 A0 + sin 2ϕ1 A1 − 2 cos 2ψ1 B1 = − 2 2 sin 2ϕ2 A2 − cos 2ψ2 B2 . (L − 77)
β1 ρ1 β1 α2 ρ1 β12

Equations (L-66), (L-68), (L-73), and (L-77) are the Zoeppritz equations that can be solved
for the four unknowns — the reflected compressional-wave amplitude A1 , the reflected shear-
wave amplitude B1 , the transmitted compressional-wave amplitude A2 , and the transmitted
shear-wave amplitude B2 .
 Mathematical Foundation of Elastic Wave Propagation 2019

Equations (L-66), (L-68), (L-73), and (L-77) are best displayed in matrix form normalized
by the incident-wave amplitude A0 = 1:
 α1 α1 α1 
cos ϕ1 sin ψ1 cos ϕ2 − sin ψ2    
β α β A1 cos ϕ1
 1 2 2 
 α1 α1 α1    
 − sin ϕ1 cos ψ1 sin ϕ2 cos ψ2     
 β α β   B1   sin ϕ 1 
 1 2 2    
 ρ 2 ρ 2  = .
 − cos 2ψ1 − sin 2ψ cos 2ψ − sin 2ψ  
2 A    
 1
ρ1
2
ρ1  cos 2ψ 1
  2   
 α12 ρ2 β22 α12 ρ2 α12 
sin 2ϕ1 − 2 cos 2ψ1 sin 2ϕ2 cos 2ψ2 B2 sin 2ϕ1
β1 ρ1 β12 α22 ρ1 β12
(L − 78)
Given the model parameters and angles of propagation as in Figure L-4, equation (L-78) can
be used to model angle-dependent reflection amplitudes. In the next section, we shall discuss
the practical use of an approximate solution of the Zoeppritz equations for P -to-P reflection
amplitudes to derive the AVO attributes.

L.6 Prestack Amplitude Inversion

Consider the two-layered earth model in Figure L-4. The Zoeppritz equations (L-78) can be
solved for the amplitudes of the reflected and refracted P - and S-wave potentials of equations
(L-63a,b,c,d) — A1 , B1 , A2 , and B2 . However, our interest in exploration seismology is largely
the angle dependency of the P -to-P reflections given by the coefficient A1 . Specifically, we wish
to infer or possibly estimate elastic parameters of reservoir rocks from reflection amplitudes and
relate these parameters to reservoir fluids.
The exact expression for A1 derived from the solution of the Zoeppritz equations (L-78) is
complicated and not intuitive in terms of its practical use for inferring petrophysical properties
of reservoir rocks. Instead, we shall use the approximation provided by Aki and Richards (1980)
as the starting point for deriving a series of practical AVO equations. Now that we only need to
deal with the P -to-P reflection amplitude A1 , we shall switch to the conventional notation by
replacing A1 with R(θ) as the angle-dependent reflection amplitude for AVO analysis.
By assuming that changes in elastic properties of rocks across the layer boundary are small
and propagation angles are within the subscritical range, the exact expression for R(θ) given by
the Zoeppritz equation can be approximated by (Aki and Richards, 1980)

1 ∆α β2 ∆β 1 β2 ∆ρ
R(θ) = 1 + tan2 θ − 4 2 sin2 θ + 1 − 4 2 sin2 θ , (L − 79)
2 α α β 2 α ρ

where α = (α1 + α2 )/2, average P -wave velocity and ∆α = (α2 − α1 ), β = (β1 + β2 )/2, average
S-wave velocity and ∆β = β2 − β1 , ρ = (ρ1 + ρ2 )/2, average density and ∆ρ = ρ2 − ρ1 , and
θ = (ϕ1 + ϕ2 )/2, average of the incidence and transmission angles for the P -wave (Figure L-4).
Consider the case of N -fold CMP data represented in the domain of angle of incidence. In
discrete form, equation (L-79) can be rewritten as
∆α ∆β ∆ρ
Ri = ai + bi + ci , (L − 80)
α β ρ
where i is the trace index and the coefficients ai , bi , and ci are given by
1
ai = 1 + tan2 θi , (L − 81a)
2

β2
bi = −4 sin2 θi , (L − 81b)
α2
2020 Seismic Data Analysis

and
1 β2
ci = 1 − 4 2 sin2 θi . (L − 81c)
2 α
Note that the reflection amplitude Ri is a linear combination of three elastic parameters —
fractional change in P -wave velocity ∆α/α, fractional change in S-wave velocity ∆β/β, and
fractional change in density ∆ρ/ρ.
We have, for each CMP location and for a specific reflection event associated with a layer
boundary, N such equations (L-80) and three unknowns — ∆α/α, ∆β/β, and ∆ρ/ρ. We have
more equations than unknowns; hence, we encounter yet another example of generalized linear
inversion (GLI) problem. The objective is to determine the three parameters such that the
difference between the modeled reflection amplitudes Ri represented by equation (L-80) and the
actual reflection amplitudes Xi is minimum in the least-squares sense (Smith and Gidlow, 1987).
The least-squares error energy S is defined as
N
2
S= Ri − Xi . (L − 82)
i

Smith and Gidlow (1987) argue in favor of solving for only two of the three parameters by
making use of the empirical relation between density ρ and P -wave velocity α (Gardner et al.,
1974):
ρ = kα1/4 , (L − 83a)
where k is a scalar. This relation holds for most water-saturated rocks. Differentiate to get
∆ρ 1 ∆α
= . (L − 83b)
ρ 4 α
Now substitute equation (L-83b) into the original Aki-Richards equation (L-80) and combine
the terms with ∆α/α

1 1 β2 ∆α β2 ∆β
R(θ) = 1 + tan2 θ + 1 − 4 2 sin2 θ − 4 2 sin2 θ . (L − 84)
2 8 α α α β

Simplify the algebra to obtain the desired two-parameter model equation for prestack amplitude
inversion
5 1 β2 1 ∆α β2 ∆β
R(θ) = − 2
sin2 θ + tan2 θ − 4 2 sin2 θ . (L − 85)
8 2α 2 α α β

Redefine the coefficients ai and bi and write the discrete form of equation (L-85)
∆α ∆β
Ri = ai + bi , (L − 86)
α β
where
5 1 β2 1
ai = − 2
sin2 θi + tan2 θi (L − 87a)
8 2α 2
and
β2
bi = −4 sin2 θi . (L − 87b)
α2
Now substitute equation (L-86) into the error-energy equation (L-82) and expand the terms
N 2 2
∆α ∆α ∆β ∆β ∆α ∆β
S= a2i + 2ai bi + b2i − 2 ai + bi Xi + Xi2 . (L − 88)
i
α α β β α β
 Mathematical Foundation of Elastic Wave Propagation 2021

Minimization of E with respect to the parameters ∆α/α and ∆β/β that we wish to estimate
from prestack amplitude inversion requires that
∂S
=0 (L − 89a)
∂(∆α/α)
and
∂S
= 0. (L − 89b)
∂(∆β/β)
Compute the partial derivatives using equation (L-88) and substitute into equations (L-89a,b)
to get two simultaneous equations
N N N
∆α ∆β
a2i + ai bi = ai Xi (L − 90a)
i
α i
β i

and
N N N
∆β ∆α
b2i + ai bi = bi X i . (L − 90b)
i
β i
α i

These equations are put into matrix form

 
 N N
∆α   N

i a2i i ai bi
 α  i ai Xi
    ,
N N 2
 ∆β  = N
(L − 91)
i ai bi i b i i bi X i
β
and solved for ∆α/α and ∆β/β.
The two parameters ∆α/α and ∆β/β represent fractional changes in P - and S-wave veloci-
ties; as such, they are related to P - and S-wave reflectivities, ∆IP /IP and ∆IS /IS , respectively,
where IP and IS are the P - and S-wave impedances given by
IP = αρ (L − 92a)
and
IS = βρ. (L − 92b)
The fractional change in P -wave impedance is given by
∂IP ∂IP
∆IP = ∆α + ∆ρ. (L − 93a)
∂α ∂ρ
Apply differentiation to equation (L-92a) and substitute into equation (L-93a), then divide both
sides of the resulting equation by IP to get the expression for P -wave reflectivity
∆IP ∆α ∆ρ
= + . (L − 93b)
IP α ρ
Similarly, the fractional change in S-wave impedance is given by
∂IS ∂IS
∆IS = ∆β + ∆ρ. (L − 94a)
∂β ∂ρ
Apply differentiation to equation (L-92b) and subsitute into equation (L-94a), then divide both
sides of the resulting equation by IS to get the expression for S-wave reflectivity
∆IS ∆β ∆ρ
= + . (L − 94b)
IS β ρ
Petrophysical interpretation is then made using the crossplot of P - and S-wave reflectivities.
Note from the definitions of the coefficients ai and bi given by equations (L-87a,b) that you have
to choose a value for the ratio β/α to compute the two reflectivities.
2022 Seismic Data Analysis

An alternative formulation of prestack amplitude inversion is based on transforming the

Aki-Richards equation (L-79) to new variables in terms of Lamé’s constants λ and µ (Goodway
et al., 1998). Refer to equation (L-35) and define a new quantity ν = λ + 2µ. The relationship
between the two sets of variables (ν, µ) and (α, β, ρ), by way of equations (L-35) and (L-47), is
given by
ν = ρα2 (L − 95a)
and
µ = ρβ 2 . (L − 95b)
The fractional changes in ν and µ are given by
∂ν ∂ν
∆ν = ∆α + ∆ρ (L − 96a)
∂α ∂ρ
and
∂µ ∂µ
∆µ = ∆β + ∆ρ. (L − 96b)
∂β ∂ρ
Apply differentiation to equation (L-95a) and substitute into equation (L-96a), then divide
both sides by ν
∆ν ∆α ∆ρ
=2 + . (L − 97a)
ν α ρ
Similarly, apply differentiation to equation (L-95b) and substitute into equation (L-96b), then
divide both sides by µ
∆µ ∆β ∆ρ
=2 + . (L − 97b)
µ β ρ
Now solve equations (L-97a,b) for ∆α/α and ∆β/β, respectively, and substitute into the
Aki-Richards equation (L-79)

1 ∆ν 1 ∆ρ
R(θ) = 1 + tan2 θ − 1 + tan2 θ
4 ν 4 ρ
. (L − 98)
β2 ∆µ β2 ∆ρ 1 β2 ∆ρ
− 2 2 sin2 θ + 2 2 sin2 θ + 1 − 4 2 sin2 θ
α µ α ρ 2 α ρ

Finally, simplify to get the Aki-Richards equation transformed to the new variables ∆ν/ν and
∆µ/µ

1 ∆ν β2 ∆µ 1 ∆ρ
R(θ) = 1 + tan2 θ − 2 2 sin2 θ + 1 − tan2 θ . (L − 99)
4 ν α µ 4 ρ

As for the original Aki-Richards equation (L-79), consider the case of N -fold CMP data
represented in the domain of angle of incidence. In discrete form, equation (L-99) can be rewritten
as
∆ν ∆µ ∆ρ
Ri = ai + bi + ci , (L − 100)
ν µ ρ
where i is the trace index and the coefficients ai , bi , and ci are given by
1
ai = 1 + tan2 θi , (L − 101a)
4

β2
bi = −2 sin2 θi , (L − 101b)
α2
 Mathematical Foundation of Elastic Wave Propagation 2023

and
1
ci = 1 − tan2 θi . (L − 101c)
4
The reflection amplitude Ri in equation (L-100) is a linear combination of three elastic param-
eters — fractional changes ∆ν/ν, ∆µ/µ, and ∆ρ/ρ. Based on the least-squares minimization
given by equation (L-82), these three parameters can, in principle, be estimated for a specific
event from CMP data.
A variant to the transformation given by equation (L-99) can be formulated in terms of
the P - and S-wave reflectivities, ∆IP /IP and ∆IS /IS , respectively. Solve equation (L-93b) for
∆α/α and equation (L-94b) for ∆β/β, and substitute into the Aki-Richards equation (L-79)

1 ∆IP 1 ∆ρ
R(θ) = 1 + tan2 θ − 1 + tan2 θ
2 IP 2 ρ
. (L − 102)
β2 ∆IS β2 ∆ρ 1 β2 ∆ρ
− 4 2 sin2 θ + 4 2 sin2 θ + 1 − 4 2 sin2 θ
α IS α ρ 2 α ρ

Simplify to get the Aki-Richards equation transformed to the new variables ∆IP /IP and ∆IS /IS

1 ∆IP β2 ∆IS 1 β2 ∆ρ
R(θ) = 1 + tan2 θ − 4 2 sin2 θ − tan2 θ − 2 2 sin2 θ . (L − 103)
2 IP α IS 2 α ρ
Again, consider the case of N -fold CMP data represented in the domain of angle of incidence.
In discrete form, equation (L-103) can be rewritten as
∆IP ∆IS ∆ρ
Ri = ai + bi + ci , (L − 104)
IP IS ρ
where i is the trace index and the coefficients ai , bi , and ci are given by
1
ai = 1 + tan2 θi , (L − 105a)
2

β2
bi = −4 sin2 θi , (L − 105b)
α2
and
1 β2
ci = − tan2 θ − 2 2 sin2 θi . (L − 105c)
2 α
The reflection amplitude Ri in equation (L-104) is a linear combination of three parameters —
∆IP /IP , ∆IS /IS , and ∆ρ/ρ. Again, based on the least-squares minimization given by equation
(L-82), these three parameters can be estimated for a specific event from CMP data.
Goodway et al. (1998) implemented a specific form of equation (L-104) to derive the AVO
attributes ∆IP /IP and ∆IS /IS . For a specific value of α/β = 2 and small angles of incidence,
the third term in equation (L-104) vanishes. The resulting equation then is solved for the P -
and S-wave reflectivities, ∆IP /IP and ∆IS /IS , respectively, using the least-squares solution as
in equation (L-91)
 N 2 N
  ∆IP   N 
i ai i ai bi IP  
ai Xi

i
  = . (L − 106)
N N 2 ∆IS N
i a b
i i i b i i b X
i i
IS
2024 Seismic Data Analysis

REFERENCES

Aki, K. I. and Richards, P. G., 1980, Quantitative seismology: W. H. Freeman and Co.
Alam, A. and Millahn, K., 1986, Interactive model-based VSP-CDP transform: Presented at the
Symp. on Practical Aspects of Modeling in Exploration and Development, Kristiansand, Nor-
way.
Alford, R. M., 1986, Shear data in the presence of azimuhtal anisotropy: Dilly, Texas: 56th Ann.
Internat. Mtg., Soc. Expl. Geophys., Expanded Abstracts, 476-479.
Alkhalifah, T., 1996, Transformation to zero offset in transversely isotropic media: Geophysics, 61,
947-963.
Alkhalifah, T. and Larner, K., 1994, Migration error in transversely isotropic media: Geophysics,
59, 1405-1418.
Alkhalifah, T. and Tsvankin, I., 1995, Velocity analysis for transversely isotropic media: Geophysics,
60, 1550-1566.
Alkhalifah, T., Tsvankin, I., Larner, K., and Toldi, J., 1996, Velocity analysis and imaging in
transversely isotropic media: Methodology and a case study: The Leading Edge, 371-378.
Anderson, J. E., Alkhalifah, T., and Tsvankin, I., 1996, Fowler DMO and time migration for
tranversely isotropic media: Geophysics, 61, 835-845.
Anderson, J. E, and Tsvankin, I., 1997, Dip-moveout processing by Fourier transform in anisotropic
media: Geophysics, 62, 1260-1269.
Ata, E. and Michelena, R., 1995, Mapping distribution of fractures in a reservoir with P S -converted
waves: The Leading Edge, 664-673.
Barr, F. J. and Sanders, J. I., 1989, Attenuation of water-column reverberations using pressure
and velocity detectors in a water-column cable: 59th Ann. Internat. Mtg., Soc. Expl. Geophys.,
Expanded Abstracts, 653-656.
Bernitsas, N., 1990, Curvature effect of a reflecting surface for arbitrary offset and azimuth: 60th
Ann. Internat. Mtg., Soc. Expl. Geophys., Expanded Abstracts, 1053-1055.
Bortfeld, R., 1961, Approximation to the reflection and transmission coefficients of plane longitu-
dinal and transverse waves: Geophys. Prosp., 9, 485-502.
Bracewell, R., 1965, The Fourier transform and its applications: McGraw-Hill Book Co.
Caldwell, J., 1999, Marine multicomponent seismology: The Leading Edge, 1274-1282.
Cassell, B., Alam, A., and Millahn, K., 1984, Model-based interactive VSP-CDP transformation:
Presented at the 54th Ann. Internat. Soc. Expl. Geophys.
Castagna, J. P., 1993, AVO analysis — tutorial and review: in Offset-dependent reflectivity —
theory and practice, Soc. Expl. Geophys.
Castagna, J. P., Bazle, M. L., and Eastwood, R. L., 1985, Relationship between compressional-wave
and shear-wave velocities in elastic silicate rocks: Geophysics, 50, 571-581.
Cooke, D. A. and Schneider, W. A., 1983, Generalized linear inversion of reflection seismic data:
Geophysics, 48, 665-676.
Daley, P. F. and Hron, F., 1979, Reflection and transmission coefficients for seismic waves in
ellipsoidally anisotropic media: Geophysics, 44, 27-38.
Demirbag, E. and Coruh, C., 1988, Inversion of Zoeppritz equations and their approximations:
58th Ann. Internat. Mtg., Soc. Expl. Geophys., Expanded Abstracts, 1199-1203.
den Rooijen, H. P. G. M., 1991, Stacking og P − SV reflection data using dip moveout: Geophys.
Prosp., 39, 585-598.
Dillon, P. B. and Thomson, R. C., 1983, Image reconstruction for offset source VSP surveys:
Presented at the 45th Ann. Eur. Assoc. Expl. Geophys. Mtg.
Dragoset, W. and Barr, F. J., 1994, Ocean-bottom cable dual-sensor scaling: 64th Ann. Internat.
Mtg., Soc. Expl. Geophys., Expanded Abstracts, 653-656.
Eaton, D. W. S. and Lawton, D. C., 1992, P -SV stacking charts and binning periodicity: Geo-
physics, 57, 745-748.
Eastwood, R. L. and Castagna, J. P., 1983, Basis for interpretation of vP /vS ratios in complex
lithologies: 24th Ann. Meeting of Logging Symp., Soc. Prof. Well Log Analysts.
 Mathematical Foundation of Elastic Wave Propagation 2025

Ecker, C., Lumley, D. E., Tura, A., Kempner, W., Klosnky, L., 1999, Estimating separate steam
thickness and temperature maps from 4-D seismic data: An example from San Joaquin Valley,
California: 69th Ann. Internat. Mtg., Soc. Expl. Geophys., Expanded Abstracts, 2032 - 2034.
Fatti, J. L., Smith, G. C., Vail, P. J., Strauss, P. J., and Levitt, P. R., 1994. Detection of gas
in sandstone reservoirs using AVO analysis: A 3-D seismic case history using the Geostack
technique: Geophysics, 59, 1362-1376.
Fromm, G., Krey, T., and Wiest, B., 1985, Static and dynamic corrections, in Dohr, G., Ed., Seismic
Shear Waves: Handbook of Geophysical Exploration, vol. 15a: Geophysical Press, 191-225.
Fung, Y. C., 1965, Foundations of solid mechanics: Prentice-Hall.
Gaiser, J. E., 1998, Compensating OBC data for variations in geophone coupling: 68th Ann. In-
ternat. Mtg., Soc. Expl. Geophys., New Orleans, Expanded Abstracts, 1429-1432.
Gaiser, J. E., 1999a, Applications of vector coordinate systems of converted waves obtained by
multicomponent 3-D data: Presented at the Offshore Technology Conference, Paper No. 10985.
Gaiser, J. E., 1999b, Applications of vector coordinate systems of 3-D converted-wave data: The
Leading Edge, 1290-1300.
Gaiser, J. E. and Jackson, A. R., 1998, 3-D P S -wave midpoint transformation in variable media:
68th Ann. Internat. Mtg., Soc. Expl. Geophys., Expanded Abstracts, 1417-1420.
Gardner, G. H. F., Gardner, L. W., and Gregory, A. R., 1974, Formation velocity and density —
The diagnostic basis for stratigraphic traps: Geophysics, 39, 770-780.
Grant, F. S. and West, G. F., 1965, Interpretation theory in applied geophysics: McGraw-Hill Book
Co.
Goodway, B., Chen, T., and Downton, J., 1998, AVO and prestack inversion: Presented Ann. Mtg.
Can. Soc. of Expl. Geophys.
Grechka, V. and Tsvankin, I., 1997, Inversion of nonhyperbolic moveout in transversely isotropic
media: 67th Ann. Internat. Mtg., Soc. Expl. Geophys., Expanded Abstracts, 1685-1688.
Haase, A. B., 1998 (November), Nonhyperbolic moveout in Plains data and the anisotropy question:
The Recorder, Can. Soc. Expl. Geophys., 20-34.
Hale, D. and Artley, C., 1992, Squeezing dip-moveout for depth-variable velocity: Geophysics, 58,
257-264.
Hardage, B. A., 1983, Vertical seismic profiling: Geophysical Press.
Hilterman, F. J., 1970, Three-dimensional seismic modeling: Geophysics, 35, 1020-1037.
Hilterman, F. J., 1975, Amplitudes of seismic waves — A quick look: Geophysics, 40, 745-762.
Hilterman, F. J., 1982, Interpretive lessons from three-dimensional modeling: Geophysics, 47, 784-
8012.
Hilterman, F. J., 1983, Seismic lithology: presented as a continuing education course at the 53rd
Ann. Internat. Mtg., Soc. Expl. Geophys.
Kallweit, R. S. and Wood, L. C., 1982, The limits of resolution of zero-phase wavelets: Geophysics,
47, 1035-1046.
Kitchenside, P. W., 1993, 2-D aniostropic migration in the space-frequency domain: J. of Seis.
Expl., 2, 7-22.
Koefoed, O., 1955, On the effect of Poission’s ratio of rock strata on the reflection coefficients of
plane waves: Geophys. Prosp., 3, 381-387.
Larner, K. L., 1993, Dip-moveout error in transversely isotropic media with linear velocity variation
in depth: Geophysics, 58, 1442-1453.
Lass, H., 1950, Vector and tensor analysis: McGraw-Hill Book Co.
Levin, F. K., 1971, Apparent velocity from dipping interface reflections: Geophysics, 36, 510-516.
Levin, F. K., 1990, Reflection from a dipping plane — transversely isotropic solid: Geophysics, 55,
851-855.
Li, Xiang-Yang and Yuan, Jianxin, 1999, Developing and exploiting effective techniques to overcome
the difficulties of 4-C seismic reservoir monitoring in deep water: Edinburgh Anisotropy Project
Ann. Report, 129-155.
Lindseth, R., 1979, Synthetic sonic logs — a process for stratigraphic interpretation: Geophysics,
44, 3-26.
2026 Seismic Data Analysis

Lumley, D. E., 1995a, Seismic time-lapse monitoring of subsurface fluid flow: Ph. D. thesis, Stanford
University.
Lumley, D. E., 1995b, 4-D seismic monitoring of an active steamflood: 65th Ann. Internat. Mtg.,
Soc. Expl. Geophys., Expanded Abstracts, 203-206.
Lumley, D. E., Nur, A., Strandenes, S., Dvorkin, J., and Packwood, J., 1994, Seismic monitoring of
oil production: A feasibility study: 64th Ann. Internat. Mtg., Soc. Expl. Geophys., Expanded
Abstracts, 319-322.
Martin, M. A. and Davis, T. L., 1987, Shear-wave birefringence: A new tool for evaluating fractured
reservoirs: The Leading Edge, 22-28.
MacLeod, M. K., Hanson, R. Bell, R. C., and McHugo, S., 1999, The Alba Field ocean bottom
cable seismic survey: Impact on development: The Leading Edge, 1306-1312.
Miller, S. L. M. and Stewart, R. R., 1999, Effects of lithology, porosity and shaliness on P - and
S -wave velocities from sonic logs: SEG Continuing Education Class Notes.
Oldenburg, D. W., Scheuer, T., and Levy, S., 1983, Recovery of the acoustic impedance from
reflection seismograms: Geophysics, 48, 1318-1337.
Officer, C. B., 1958, Introduction to the theory of sound transmission with application to the ocean:
McGraw-Hill Book Co.
Ostrander, W. J., 1984, Plane-wave reflection coefficients for gas sands at nonnormal angles of
incidence: Geophysics, 49, 1637-1648.
Paffenholz, J. and Barr, F. J., 1995, An improved method for deriving water-bottom reflectivities for
processing dual-sensor ocean-bottom cable data: 65th Ann. Internat. Mtg., Soc. Expl. Geophys.,
Expanded Abstracts, 987-990.
Pickett, G. R., 1963, Acoustic character logs and their applications in formation evaluation: J. Can.
Petr. Tech., 15, 659-667.
Probert, T., Hoare, R., Ronen, S., Godfrey, R. J., Pope, D., and Kommedal, J., 1999 (November),
Imaging through gas using 4-C 3-D seismic data: a case study from Lomond Field: Petr. Expl.
Soc. of Great Britain Newsletter.
Richards, T. C., 1961, Motion of the ground on arrival of reflected longitudinal and transverse
waves at wide-angle reflection distances: Geophysics, 27, 277-297.
Ricker, N., 1953, Wavelet contraction, wavelet expansion and the control of seismic resolution:
Geophysics, 18, 769-792.
Rickett, J. and Lumley, D. E., 1998, A cross-equalization processing flow for off-the-shelf 4-D
seismic data: 68th Ann. Internat. Mtg., Soc. Expl. Geophys., Expanded Abstracts, 16-19.
Ristow, D. and Ruehl, T., 1997, Migration in transversely isotropic media using implicit operators:
67th Ann. Internat. Mtg., Soc. Expl. Geophys., Expanded Abstracts, 1699-1702.
Rueger, A., 1997, P -wave reflection coefficients for transversely isotropic models with vertical and
horizontal axis of symmetry: Geophysics, 62, 713-722.
Rutherford, S. R. and Williams, R. H., 1989, Amplitude-versus-offset variations in gas sands:
Geophysics, 54, 680-688.
Sheriff, R. E., 1991, Encyclopedic dictionary of exploration geophysics: Soc. Expl. Geophys.
Shuey, R. T., 1985, A simplification of the Zoeppritz equations: Geophysics, 50, 609-614.
Shuey, R. T., Banik, N. C., and Lerche, I., 1984, Amplitude from curved reflectors: 54th Ann.
Internat. Mtg., Soc. Expl. Geophys., Expanded Abstracts, 664-665.
Smith, G. C. and Gidlow, P. M., 1987, Weighted stacking for rock property estimation and detection
of gas: Geophys. Prosp., 35, 993-1014.
Soubaras, R., 1996, Ocean-bottom hydrophone and geophone processing: 66th Ann. Internat. Mtg.,
Soc. Expl. Geophys., Expanded Abstracts, 24-27.
Spratt, R. S., Goins, N. R., and Fitch, T. J., 1984, Pseudo-Shear — The analysis of AVO: in
Offset-dependent reflectivity — theory and practice: Soc. Expl. Geophys.
Stolt, R. H. and Benson, A. K., 1986, Seismic migration — theory and practice: Geophysical Press,
London-Amsterdam.
Taner, M. T., 1978, Complex seismic trace analysis: Geophysics, 44, 1041-1063.
Taner, M. T. and Koehler, F., 1981, Surface-consistent corrections: Geophysics, 46, 17-21.
 Mathematical Foundation of Elastic Wave Propagation 2027

Tessmer, G. and Behle, A., 1988, Common reflection point data stacking technique for converted
waves: Geophys. Prosp., 36, 671-688.
Theilen, F., Ayres, A., and Lange, G., 1997, Phyiscal properties of near-surface marine sediments:
59th EAGE Mtg., Extended Abstracts.
Thomsen, L., 1986, Weak elastic anisotropy: Geophysics, 51, 1954-1966.
Thomsen, L., 1998, Converted-wave reflection seismology over anisotropic, inhomogeneous media:
68th Ann. Internat. Mtg., Soc. Expl. Geophys., Expanded Abstracts, 2048-2051.
Tsvankin, I., 1995, Normal moveout from dipping reflectors in anisotropic media: Geophysics, 60,
268-284.
Tsvankin, I., 1996, P -wave signatures and notation fro transversely isotropic media: An overview:
Geophysics, 61, 467-483.
Tsvankin, I. and Thomsen, L., 1994, Nonhyperbolic reflection moveout in aniostropic media: Geo-
physics, 59, 1290-1304.
Tura, A. and Lumley, D. E., 1999, Estimating pressure and saturation changes from time-lapse
AVO data: 69th Ann. Internat. Mtg., Soc. Expl. Geophys., Expanded Abstracts, 1655-1658.
Uren, N. F., Gardner, G. H. F. and McDonald, J. A., 1990a, The migrator’s equation for anisotropic
media: Geophysics, 55, 1429-1434.
Uren, N. F., Gardner, G. H. F. and McDonald, J. A., 1990b, Dip moveout in anisotropic media:
Geophysics, 55, 863-867.
Uren, N. F., Gardner, G. H. F. and McDonald, J. A., 1990c, Normal moveout in anisotropic media:
Geophysics, 55, 1634-1636.
Verwest, B. J., 1989, Seismic migration in elliptically anisotropic media: Geophys. Prosp., 37,
149-166.
Widess, M. B., 1973, How thin is a thin bed?: Geophysics, 38, 1176-1180.
Wiggins, R., Kenny, G. S., and McClure, C. D., 1984, A method for determining and displaying
the shear-wave reflectivities of a geologic formation: European patent application (Mobil Oil
Corporation).
Winterstein, D. F., 1990, Velocity anisotropy terminology for geophysicists: Geophysics, 55, 1070-
1088.
Wyatt, K. and Wyatt, S.B., 1981, Determination of subsurface structural information using the
vertical seismic profile: Presented at the 51st Ann. Internat. Mtg., Soc. Expl. Geophys.
Yuan, J. and Li. X-Y., 1997, Converted-wave CCP binning and velocity analysis: in Processing
three-component seafloor seismic data, Edinborough University.
Zhang, Y. and Robinson, E. A., 1992, Stacking P -SV converted wave data with raypath velocity:
62nd Ann. Internat. Mtg., Soc. Expl. Geophys., Expanded Abstracts, 1214-1217.
Zhang, Y., 1996, Nonhyperbolic converted wave velocity analysis and normal moveout: 66th Ann.
Internat. Mtg., Soc. Expl. Geophys., Expanded Abstracts, 1555-1558.
Zhu, X., Altan, S. and Li, J., 1999, Recent advances in multicomponent processing: The Leading
Edge, 1283-1288.