You are on page 1of 5

Surface consistent deconvolution on seismic data with surface consistent noise Xishuo Wang*, Anthony Chaney, Monica Martin

& Mike Perz (Geo-X Systems Ltd., Calgary, Alberta, Canada) 2000 CSEG Summary Surface consistent noises are identified with eigen-component analysis of surface consistent spectral solutions and isolated by their corresponding noise spectra. These statistical noise components are then removed from the spectra of the input data. The spectra of the seismic data are now free of surface consistent noise and regular surface consistent deconvolution solution is computed and deconvolution applied. Introduction Surface consistent deconvolution (SCD) is widely employed in the seismic exploration industry due to its stability in the presence of noise. It is often overlooked that SCD may still have trouble handling certain types of noise. In particular, we can identify two problematic noise types. The first is random noise whose strength varies spatially in a surface consistent manner, probably due to variable surface conditions. The second is not exactly noise, but the manifestation of severe near surface effects. The 3D data example treated for this type is a deep notch of the spectrum near 10 Hz. Both types of noise will corrupt SCD spectral estimates in spite of the statistical advantages of the inherent ensemble averaging. In either type of the noise cases, a necessary condition for the successful application of our technique is that the surface-consistent spectral solution can be adequately modeled by a few distinct groups. In our 3D data example, the essential characteristics are modeled by four states, corresponding to good & bad shots coupled with good & bad stations. While this may seem to be a crude scheme, our 2D & 3D data examples produce surprisingly good results. Surface consistent deconvolution model & noise diagnostics Our SCD algorithm has an adaptive feature (Xishuo Wang, 1992), whereby a trace spectrum at shot point s & station point r is approximated by: (1) lsr Lf + ssr Sf + rsr Rf + xsr Xf + msr Mf , where, f is frequency index, L is the line component spectrum, S/R/X/M are shot/station/offset/CMP component spectra, and lsr/ssr/rsr/xsr/msr are adaptive factors for the trace sr of shot/station number s/r. When the conventional surface consistency holds true, the adaptive factors are all very close to unity. The line component spectrum is a single spectrum whose inverse is applied to all the live traces in the data volume. It can be considered as the spectrum of an average seismic wavelet for the data set. Since the line component is the most significant component in (1), the behavior of its adaptive factor lsr can serve as an indicator of noise, particularly surface consistent noise. We shall explain how this is done with our data example. Isolating shot/station points with surface consistent noise Once our diagnostic tools indicate a surface consistent noise problem, we proceed to isolate and remove the noisy shot & station spectra. When surface consistent noise exists for shot point s (likewise for station), the computed shot component spectrum Sf will display a systematic difference from clean shot points. For example, if such noise is white, the average spectra for such shots will be more white than clean shot points. By inspecting the shot component spectra, some grouping features should be noticeable. To isolate such shot points, eigen-component analysis is carried out on shot component spectra. Since each element of the first

eigen-component in shot space is the strength of a common spectrum, analysis of the deconvolution with surface consistent noise relative change of such strengths among all shots gives us the spatial distribution of any shot-consistent noise patterns. In practice the automatic picking based on the eigen-component analysis should be closely monitored by data processors for safety. Details are more easily described with data examples. Surface consistent spectral solution free (more or less) from surface consistent noise With shot/station points identified as having surface consistent noise, models for noises are generated and removed from spectra of such shot/station. After the removal of surface consistent noise, surface consistent spectral solutions are solved in normal manner. Because of the existence of surface consistent noise, the minimum phase part of the deconvolution is based on partially adapted spectra. Specifically, we have four cases depending on the types of shot/station coupling: (2a) lsr Lf + ssr Sf + rsr Rf , (2b) Lf + ssr Sf + Rf , (2c) Lf + Sf + rsr Rf , (2d) Lf + Sf + Rf , where, (2a) is for clean shot and clean station, (2b) is for clean shot and noisy station, (2c) is for noisy shot and clean station, and (2d) is for noisy shot and noisy station. In (2b)-(2d) some adaptive factors are removed (replaced by unity). These choices are easy to understand: with the effort of removing contributions from data with surface consistent noise, the noisy shot/station components are improved but still not as reliable as those clean ones. Adapting these components runs the risk of honoring noise. The line adaptive factor is turned off except for the clean/clean coupling of shots & stations. The rationale here is that, after isolation and removal of the surface consistent noise, the traces originally suffered from the noise problem make very little contribution to the line component, and therefore application of adaptive factors to this line component would again run the risk of over-fitting the noise. 3D data example After ordinary SCD, the shot and station stacks show some anomalous zones (Figs.1 & 2), where the deconvolution appears to be weaker. In the preliminary inspection of diagnostics, adaptiveness improves overall fitting by 40%, while empirically anything beyond 30% indicates possible noise effects. Moreover, the adaptive factors for the line component deviate from unity by a maximum of 0.35, and such high deviations show similar patterns in both shot & station average maps. All of the above indicate that the data contain surface consistent noise. The eigen-component analysis shows similar patterns in shot & station maps. On some station lines, the automatic picking of noisy stations is confirmed by manual picking of station stacks of Figs.1 & 2. After the surface consistent noise being isolated and removed from SCD design, the shot and station stacks appear to be more uniform (Figs.3 & 4). The noise model spectra are in Fig.5. At about 10 Hz, the noisy/noisy coupling is about 40 dB down, and the clean/noisy cross coupling is about 15 dB down. These dB values represent amplitude decays about 20 (!) and 6 times at around 10 Hz, causing the overall low frequency shot and station stacks. The noisy/noisy coupling accounts for only 3% of traces, while the two types of cross coupling (noisy shot with clean station & clean shot with noisy station) account for 11% each. The small contribution of the bad/bad coupling has no overwhelming effects on the stacks, while the moderate contribution of the cross coupling shows prominent

anomalies. Conclusion

Surface consistent noise can be identified and removed in deconvolution design to improve surface consistent

deconvolution. Automatic identification of such noise is reliable but should be complemented by manual processor intervention. Acknowledgement We are grateful to PanCanadian Resources Ltd. for allowing the use of their data as examples. References Wang, Xishuo, Five component adaptive surface consistent deconvolution, CSEG National Convention, Calgary, AB., Canada, 1992 Biographical notes Xishuo Wang graduated from Graduate School of China University of Science & Technology in 1981 with an M.Sc., and again from University of Alberta in 1987 with a Ph.D., both in Geophysics. He worked as a research group leader with Geophysical Institute of State Seismological Bureau of P.R. China between 1981 and 1982, and a research geophysicist with Geo-X Systems Ltd. of Calgary since 1988. deconvolution with surface consistent noise

deconvolution with surface consistent noise