You are on page 1of 79

7.Effective medium

Upscaling problem Backus averaging • O’Doherty-Anstey approximation Reuss and Voigt models Bio-Gassmann model Hertz-Mindlin model

Upscaling problem

Upscaling problem Does seismic wave see the thin-layering?

Does seismic wave see the

thin-layering?

Upscaling problem

From microscopic to macroscopic scale

Upscaling problem From microscopic to macroscopic scale • • From pore (graine) scale (millimeters) • From

From pore (graine) scale (millimeters)

From log-scale (centimeteers)

Upscaling problem

Traditionally, upscaling has meant upscaling of reservoir petrophysical properties and flow parameters dedicated for reservoir fluid flow simulation. However, due to the progresses

mentioned above, there is a need to extend the

concept of upscaling of geological models, for rock physics properties, seismic modelling and analysis. For instance, in 4D history matching,

the need for up and downscaling might differ

from the traditional concept of upscaling.

Backus averaging

Sequential Backus Averaging is a method of averaging the properties of a

stack of thin layers so they are similar to average properties of a single

thick layer.

Backus averaging • Sequential Backus Averaging is a method of averaging the properties of a stack

Figure 7.1. The Backus averaging scheme

Backus averaging

The advantage of Sequential Backus Averaging is that no artificial "blocks" are introduced into the geology during the upscaling of the well-log data. In this example

the density log is blocky, but the compressional- and shear-

wave velocity logs have

gradational tops and appear thicker. Blocking would distort the amplitudes. Furthermore, if blocking were based solely upon either the density or the

sonic curves, the result would

be wrong for the other curve.

Backus averaging • The advantage of Sequential Backus Averaging is that no artificial "blocks" are introduced

Figure 7.2. The Backus averaging versus blocking averaging

Backus averaging

Thin beds appear thinner at oblique incidence angles.

Backus averaging • Thin beds appear thinner at oblique incidence angles. Figure 7.3. The thin beds

Figure 7.3. The thin beds

Backus averaging

At nonnormal incidence, the averaging operator must be adjusted to include the

apparent bed thinning.

Backus averaging • At nonnormal incidence, the averaging operator must be adjusted to include the apparent

Figure 7.4. Adjusting of averaging operator

Backus averaging

The offset synthetic shows differing

AVO signatures for the same elastic property contrasts, associated with step-functions, blocky beds, and gradational interfaces.

Backus averaging • The offset synthetic shows differing AVO signatures for the same elastic property contrasts,

Figure 7.5. AVO signatures from different models

Backus averaging

C

ij

,

 , k  1,M k ˆ C , ˆ ij
,
k  1,M
k
ˆ
C
, ˆ
ij

(7.1)

Backus averaging

A

c

1

33

c

13

c

1

33

p

p

2

c

13

c

1

33

p

c

11

c

2

13

c

1

33

(7.2)

 

p

B   

p

c

1

44

 

(7.3)

How many combinations of the stiffness coefficients enter these matrices?

Backus averaging

A

c
1

11

c

2

13

c

1

33

A

c
2

1

33

A

c
3

13

c

1

33

A

c
4

1

44

Backus averaging A c 1  11  c 2 13 c  1 33 A
Backus averaging A c 1  11  c 2 13 c  1 33 A

1

M

k

1

Backus averaging A c 1  11  c 2 13 c  1 33 A
  • m d m

D

k

k

(7.4)

ˆ

  • c
    11

1

A

A

2

3

A

2

ˆ

  • c
    13

A

3

A

2

ˆ

  • c
    33

1

A

2

ˆ

  • c
    44

1

A

4

ˆ

Backus averaging A c 1  11  c 2 13 c  1 33 A

Backus averaging A c 1  11  c 2 13 c  1 33 A

(7.5)

The effective vertical velocity from Backus averaging

1

V

2

EF

1

D

2

N

j

1

d

j

j

N

j

1

d

j

j

v

2

j

1

V

2

TA

1

D

2

N

1

N

 

j

1

k

j

 

1

d

j

d

k

v

j

v

k

j

v

j

k

v

k

k

v

k

2

j

v

j

       

1

V

2

TA

4

D

2

N

1

N

 

j

1

k

j

 

1

d

j

d

k

2

r

jk

v

j

v

k

1 r

2

jk

(7.6)

Stovas and Arntsen, 2003

Layering

0,04 0,02 0,00 M8 -0,02 -0,04 0,04 0,02 0,00 M4 -0,02 -0,04 0,04 0,02 0,00 M2
0,04
0,02
0,00
M8
-0,02
-0,04
0,04
0,02
0,00
M4
-0,02
-0,04
0,04
0,02
0,00
M2
-0,02
-0,04
0,04
0,02
0,00
M1
-0,02
-0,04
0,00
0,05
0,10
0,15
0,20
0,25
0,30
0,35
0,40

Time, s

Figure 7.6. The layering effect (each model computed by compression and doubling of the previous one)

Reflection-transmission versus layering and contrast

2 2 0 0 M32 M32 -2 -2 2 2 0 0 M28 M28 -2 -2
2
2
0
0
M32
M32
-2
-2
2
2
0
0
M28
M28
-2
-2
2
2
0
0
M24
M24
-2
-2
2
2
0
0
M20
M20
-2
-2
2
2
0
0
M16
M16
-2
-2
2
2
0
0
M12
M12
-2
-2
2
2
0
0
M8
M8
-2
-2
2
2
0
0
M4
M4
-2
-2
2
2
0
0
M2
M2
-2
-2
2
2
0
0
M1
M1
-2
-2
0,0 0,0 0,1 0,1 0,2 0,2 0,3 0,3 0,4 0,4 0,5 0,5 0,6 0,6 0,7 0,7
0,0
0,0
0,1
0,1
0,2
0,2
0,3
0,3
0,4
0,4
0,5
0,5
0,6
0,6
0,7
0,7
0,8
0,8
0,9
0,9
1,0
1,0
Time, s
Time, s
0,5
0,5
0,0
0,0
M32
M32
-0,5
-0,5
0,5
0,5
0,0
0,0
M28
M28
-0,5
-0,5
0,5
0,5
M24
M24
0,0
0,0
-0,5
-0,5
0,5
0,5
0,0
0,0
M20
M20
-0,5
-0,5
0,5
0,5
0,0
0,0
M16
M16
-0,5
-0,5
0,5
0,5
0,0
0,0
M12
M12
-0,5
-0,5
0,5
0,5
0,0
0,0
M8
M8
-0,5
-0,5
0,5
0,5
0,0
0,0
M4
M4
-0,5
-0,5
0,5
0,5
0,0
0,0
M2
M2
-0,5
-0,5
0,5
0,5
0,0
0,0
M1
M1
-0,5
-0,5
0,0
0,0
0,1
0,1
0,2
0,2
0,3
0,3
0,4
0,4
0,5
0,5
0,6
0,6
0,7
0,7
0,8
0,8
0,9
0,9
1,0
1,0
Time, s
Time, s
0,003 0,003 0,000 0,000 M32 M32 -0,003 -0,003 0,005 0,005 0,000 M28 M28 0,000 -0,005 -0,005
0,003
0,003
0,000
0,000
M32
M32
-0,003
-0,003
0,005
0,005
0,000
M28 M28 0,000
-0,005
-0,005
0,01
0,01
0,00
0,00
M24
M24
-0,01
-0,01
0,03
0,03
0,00
0,00
M20
M20
-0,03
-0,03
0,1
0,1
M16
M16
0,0
0,0
-0,1
-0,1
0,1
0,1
0,0
0,0
M12
M12
-0,1
-0,1
0,2
0,2
0,0
0,0
M8
M8
-0,2
-0,2
0,5
0,5
0,0
0,0
M4
M4
-0,5
-0,5
0,5
0,5
0,0
0,0
M2
M2
-0,5
-0,5
1
1
0
0
M1
M1
-1
-1
0,0 0,0 0,1 0,1 0,2 0,2 0,3 0,3 0,4 0,4 0,5 0,5 0,6 0,6 0,7 0,7
0,0
0,0
0,1
0,1
0,2
0,2
0,3
0,3
0,4
0,4
0,5
0,5
0,6
0,6
0,7
0,7
0,8
0,8
0,9
0,9
1,0
1,0
Time, s
Time, s
1
1
0
0
M32
M32
-1
-1
1
1
0
0
M28
M28
-1
-1
1
1
0
0
M24
M24
-1
-1
1
1
0
0
M20
M20
-1
-1
1
1
0
0
M16
M16
-1
-1
1
1
0
0
M12
M12
-1
-1
1
1
0
0
M8
M8
-1
-1
1
1
0
0
M4
M4
-1
-1
1
1
0
0
M2
M2
-1
-1
1
1
0
0
M1
M1
-1
-1
0,0
0,0
0,1
0,1
0,2
0,2
0,3
0,3
0,4
0,4
0,5
0,5
0,6
0,6
0,7
0,7
0,8
0,8
0,9
0,9
1,0
1,0
Time, s
Time, s

Figure 7.7. The reflection (bottom)and transmission (top) responses with different contrasts (to the right is 4 times larger).

Binary medium (multiples)

Full reflected field

0 M7 0 M6 0 M5 0 M4 0 M3 0 M2 0 M1 0,0 0,1
0
M7
0
M6
0
M5
0
M4
0
M3
0
M2
0
M1
0,0
0,1
0,2
0,3
0,4
0,5
Time, s
Multiples only
0
M7
0
M6
0
M5
0
M4
0
M3
0
M2
0
M1
0,0
0,1
0,2
0,3
0,4
0,5

Time, s

Primaries only

0 M7 0 M6 0 M5 0 M4 0 M3 0 M2 0 M1 0,0 0,1
0
M7
0
M6
0
M5
0
M4
0
M3
0
M2
0
M1
0,0
0,1
0,2
0,3
0,4
0,5

Time, s

Figure 7.8. Multiples contribution into

the reflection response

Propagation versus contrast

r=0.00

r=0.16

r=0.33

r=0.48

r=0.60

r=0.70

r=0.79

r=0.87

Model: 256 x 1m primary transmission first multiple second multiple 0,00 0,05 0,10 0,15 0,20 0,25
Model: 256 x 1m
primary transmission
first multiple
second multiple
0,00
0,05
0,10
0,15
0,20
0,25
0,30
0,35
0,40
0,45
0,50

Time, s

Figure 7.9. Transmission from thin layer model (change in r due to change in r only)

Effective properties versus net-to- gross

2,25 2,20 2,15 non-linear 2,10 V P0 , km/s 2,05 2,00 1,5 1,4 1,3 non-linear 1,2
2,25
2,20
2,15
non-linear
2,10
V P0 , km/s
2,05
2,00
1,5
1,4
1,3
non-linear
1,2
1,1
V S0 , km/s
1,0
0,9
2,20
2,18
2,16
linear
2,14
, g/cm 3
2,12
2,10
0,0
0,1
0,2
0,3
0,4
0,5
0,6
0,7
0,8
0,9
1,0

Net-to gross ratio

0,00

-0,02

-0,04

-0,06

-0,08

-0,10

-0,12

-0,14

non-symmetric 
non-symmetric

0,00

-0,02

-0,04

-0,06

-0,08

symmetric  0,0 0,1 0,2 0,3 0,4 0,5 0,6 0,7 0,8 0,9 1,0
symmetric
0,0
0,1
0,2
0,3
0,4
0,5
0,6
0,7
0,8
0,9
1,0

Net-to gross ratio

Figure 7.10. Effective properties from Backus averaging in a binary medium

Stovas, Landro and Avseth, 2004

Turbidite sequence from Ainsa basin

Turbidite sequence from Ainsa basin Figure 7.11. Turbidite system as an example of binary medium

Figure 7.11. Turbidite system as an example of binary medium

Binary medium

S

  • 1 e

i

1

t

12

t

21

  • 0 e

0

i

1

 1





r

r  e

1





i

2

0

e

  • 0  1

i

2

  r



r

  • 1

a

b

*

b

*

a

(7.7)

a

i

e

 

1

2

1

2

r e

2 i

2

1 r

2

b  

i

re

 

1

2

1

e

2 i

2

1

2

r

2

ir

sin

2

1 r

e
2

  • i

1

k

Binary medium S  1  e  i 1 t 12 t 21 0 e

2fd v

k

k

(7.9)

(7.8)

Binary medium

Re

a

cos

1

2

2

r

2

1 r

2

sin

1

sin

2

Im

a

sin

1

2

2

r

2

1 r

2

cos

1

sin

2

(7.10)

det S

a

2

b

2

1

(7.11)

The propagator matrix is not unitary

H

S S

 

a

2

b

2

2 ab

*

2

*

a b

a

2

b

2

 

I

4

r

sin

2

1 r

2

2

i

2

r

sin

2

2

r e

i

 2
2

e

i

2

i

2

r e

i

2

e

i

 2
2

2

r

sin

2

I

(7.12)

Binary medium

From the characteristic equation

det

S

I0

(7.13)

we compute the eigenvalues

1,2

Re a i

1  Re a  2
1
Re a
 2

(7.14)

Binary medium

The propagating regime with complex eigenvalues and the blocking regime with real eigenvalues:

1,2

 i  ,   e   2 Re a  Re a 
 i
,
  e
 
2
Re
a
Re
a
1
e
 
 

Re a

1

 

(7.15)

,

Re a

1

Propagating and blocking regimes

r=0.87

M1

M2

M4

M8

M16

M32

M64

1

0

-1

1

0

-1

1

0

-1

1

0

-1

Propagating and blocking regimes r=0.87 M1 M2 M4 M8 M16 M32 M64 1 0 -1 1

1

0

-1

Propagating and blocking regimes r=0.87 M1 M2 M4 M8 M16 M32 M64 1 0 -1 1

1

0

-1

Propagating and blocking regimes r=0.87 M1 M2 M4 M8 M16 M32 M64 1 0 -1 1

1

0

-1

0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700
0
100
200
300
400
500
600
700

Frequency, Hz

r=0.16

M1

M2

M4

M8

M16

M32

M64

1

0

-1

1

0

-1

1

0

-1

1

0

-1

Propagating and blocking regimes r=0.87 M1 M2 M4 M8 M16 M32 M64 1 0 -1 1

1

0

-1

Propagating and blocking regimes r=0.87 M1 M2 M4 M8 M16 M32 M64 1 0 -1 1

1

0

-1

Propagating and blocking regimes r=0.87 M1 M2 M4 M8 M16 M32 M64 1 0 -1 1

1

0

-1

0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700
0
100
200
300
400
500
600
700

Frequency, Hz

Figure 7.12. Re a as a function of frequency versus layering and contrast. Filled low frequency area relates to an effective medium, next coming gap relates to transition medium. The interchanging of these zones is repeatable.

Velocity limits

The time average limit means that the pulse width is much less than the propagation time through the cycle)

v

TA

d

d

1

d

2

v

1

v

2

(7.16)

The effective medium limit can be computed assuming phases being small (low frequency limit)

1

v

2

EF

1

2

v

TA

4 d d

1

2

1

r

2

d

2

v v

1

2

1

r

2

(7.17)

The geometrical average limit

v

d

2

v v 1 2 d d 1 2
v v
1
2
d d
1
2

(7.18)

Velocity limits versus volume

8000 fraction 7000 v RT v  v EF 6000 5000 v  4000 r=0.16 v
8000
fraction
7000
v
RT
v
v
EF
6000
5000
v
4000
r=0.16
v
r=0.48
RT
3000
r=0.87
2000
1000
0,0
0,1
0,2
0,3
0,4
0,5
0,6
0,7
0,8
0,9
1,0
Velocity, m/s

Volume fraction

Figure 7.13. Velocity versus fraction. The larger reflection coefficient the more deviation between time-average and effective medium velocities. The position for maximum

difference between them moving to high values of volume fraction with r increase.

Stack of binary layers

The propagator matrix can be represented by the eigenvalue decomposition

S UΛU

1

U

Λ  diag  ,    1 2  1    
Λ  diag  , 
1
2
1
 
 a b
1
2
1    a b  
1
 a b

(7.19)

(7.20)

(7.21)

Stack of binary layers

Product of M cycles

Q S

M

M

UΛ U

1

1

u

22

v

21

M

1

u

22

u u

21

22

M

2

u

21

M

2

M

1

M

2

M

2

u

22

M

1

M

1

u

21

Transmission and reflection response

t

D

q

1

22

2

1

2

a

M

2

1

a

M

1

r

D

q q

12

1

22

M

2

M

1

b

2

a

M

2

1

a

M

1

(7.22)

(7.23)

Stack of binary layers

Propagating regime

Re a

1

1,2

e

i

cosRe a

Blocking regime

Re a

1

1,2

e



cosh

Re a

(7.24)

(7.25)

(7.26)

Stack of binary layers

Propagating regime

t

D

r

D

 

sin

 

sin

cos

M

b

sin

i

Im

M

a

sin

M

sin

cos

M

cos

i

Im

a

sin

M

cos M

2 1  C
2
1  C
i  e  2 1  C    i    
i
e
2
1  C
i
 
 
1
2
Ce
2
1  C

C

sin M  b sin 
sin M
b
sin

(7.27)

(7.28)

Stack of binary layers

Blocking regime

t

D

r

D

 

sinh

sinh

cosh

M

b

sinh

i

M

Im

a

sinh

M

sinh

cosh

M

i

Im

a

sinh

cosh M

M

 

cos

 
 
 
2 1  C
2
1  C
 
 

C

b

sinh M

 
 

sinh

i  e  2 1  C    i    
i
e
2
1  C
i
 
 
1
2
Ce
2
1  C

(7.29)

(7.30)

Stack of binary layers

r=0.87

M1

1,0

0,5

0,0

-0,5

-1,0

M2

1,0

0,5

0,0

-0,5

-1,0

M4

1,0

0,5

0,0

-0,5

-1,0

M8

1,0

0,5

0,0

-0,5

-1,0

1,0

0,5

0,0

-0,5

-1,0

M16

1,0

0,5

0,0

-0,5

-1,0

M32

1,0

0,5

0,0

-0,5

-1,0

M64

Stack of binary layers r=0.87 M1 1,0 0,5 0,0 -0,5 -1,0 M2 1,0 0,5 0,0 -0,5
Stack of binary layers r=0.87 M1 1,0 0,5 0,0 -0,5 -1,0 M2 1,0 0,5 0,0 -0,5
Stack of binary layers r=0.87 M1 1,0 0,5 0,0 -0,5 -1,0 M2 1,0 0,5 0,0 -0,5
0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700
0
100
200
300
400
500
600
700

Frequency, Hz

r=0.16

M1

1,0

0,5

0,0

-0,5

-1,0

M2

1,0

0,5

0,0

-0,5

-1,0

M4

1,0

0,5

0,0

-0,5

-1,0

M8

1,0

0,5

0,0

-0,5

-1,0

1,0

0,5

0,0

-0,5

-1,0

M16

1,0

0,5

0,0

-0,5

-1,0

M32

1,0

0,5

0,0

-0,5

-1,0

M64

Stack of binary layers r=0.87 M1 1,0 0,5 0,0 -0,5 -1,0 M2 1,0 0,5 0,0 -0,5
Stack of binary layers r=0.87 M1 1,0 0,5 0,0 -0,5 -1,0 M2 1,0 0,5 0,0 -0,5
Stack of binary layers r=0.87 M1 1,0 0,5 0,0 -0,5 -1,0 M2 1,0 0,5 0,0 -0,5
Stack of binary layers r=0.87 M1 1,0 0,5 0,0 -0,5 -1,0 M2 1,0 0,5 0,0 -0,5
Stack of binary layers r=0.87 M1 1,0 0,5 0,0 -0,5 -1,0 M2 1,0 0,5 0,0 -0,5
Stack of binary layers r=0.87 M1 1,0 0,5 0,0 -0,5 -1,0 M2 1,0 0,5 0,0 -0,5
0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700
0
100
200
300
400
500
600
700

Frequency, Hz

Figure 7.14. cos a as a function of frequency versus layering and contrast (blue line is for the reference time average medium).

Stovas and Ursin, 2005

Stack of binary layers

r=0.87

M1

M2

M4

M8

20

10

0

-10

-20

20

10

0

-10

-20

20

10

0

-10

-20

20

10

0

-10

-20

Stack of binary layers r=0.87 M1 M2 M4 M8 20 10 0 -10 -20 20 10

M16

20

10

0

-10

-20

M32

20

10

0

-10

-20

Stack of binary layers r=0.87 M1 M2 M4 M8 20 10 0 -10 -20 20 10

M64

20

10

0

-10

-20

Stack of binary layers r=0.87 M1 M2 M4 M8 20 10 0 -10 -20 20 10
Stack of binary layers r=0.87 M1 M2 M4 M8 20 10 0 -10 -20 20 10

0

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

Frequency, Hz

M1

M2

M4

M8

M16

M32

M64

2

1

0

-1

-2

2

1

0

-1

-2

r=0.16
r=0.16

2

1

0

-1

-2

2

1

0

-1

-2

2

1

0

-1

-2

2

1

0

-1

-2

Stack of binary layers r=0.87 M1 M2 M4 M8 20 10 0 -10 -20 20 10

2

1

0

-1

-2

Stack of binary layers r=0.87 M1 M2 M4 M8 20 10 0 -10 -20 20 10
Stack of binary layers r=0.87 M1 M2 M4 M8 20 10 0 -10 -20 20 10

0

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

Frequency, Hz

Figure 7.15. Amplitude C as a function of frequency versus layering and contrast (the gaps relates to the extremely large values).

Stack of binary layers

r = 0.87 TRT 1 M1 0 -1 1 M2 0 -1 1 0 M4 -1
r = 0.87
TRT
1
M1
0
-1
1
M2
0
-1
1
0
M4
-1
1
0
M8
-1
1
0
M16
-1
1
0
M32
-1
TEM
1
M64
0
-1
0,00
0,02
0,04
0,06
0,08
0,10

Time, s

M1

M2

M4

M8

M16

M32

M64

r = 0.16 TRT 4 0 -4 4 0 -4 4 0 -4 4 0 -4
r = 0.16
TRT
4
0
-4
4
0
-4
4
0
-4
4
0
-4
4
0
-4
4
0
-4
TEM
4
0
-4
0,000
0,013
0,026
0,039
0,052
0,065
0,078
0,091

Time, s

Figure 7.16. Transmission response versus layering and contrast. Note the difference between TRT (transmission time for time average medium) and TEM (transmission time for effective medium). Weak transmission for r=0.87 and

Stack of binary layers

M1

M2

M4

M8

M16

M32

M64

r = 0.87

4 0 -4 4 0 -4 4 0 -4 4 0 -4 4 0 -4 4
4
0
-4
4
0
-4
4
0
-4
4
0
-4
4
0
-4
4
0
-4
4
2*TEM
0
-4
0,00
0,02
0,04
0,06
0,08
0,10

Time, s

M1

M2

M4

M8

M16

M32

M64

r = 0.16

1,5

0,0

-1,5

Stack of binary layers M1 M2 M4 M8 M16 M32 M64 r = 0.87 4 0

1,5

0,0

-1,5

Stack of binary layers M1 M2 M4 M8 M16 M32 M64 r = 0.87 4 0

1,5

0,0

-1,5

Stack of binary layers M1 M2 M4 M8 M16 M32 M64 r = 0.87 4 0

1,5

0,0

-1,5

Stack of binary layers M1 M2 M4 M8 M16 M32 M64 r = 0.87 4 0
1,5 0,0 -1,5 1,5 0,0 -1,5 2*TEM 1,5 0,0 -1,5 0,00 0,02 0,04 0,06 0,08 0,10
1,5
0,0
-1,5
1,5
0,0
-1,5
2*TEM
1,5
0,0
-1,5
0,00
0,02
0,04
0,06
0,08
0,10

Time, s

Figure 7.17. Reflection response versus layering and contrast.

Stack of binary layers

r=0.87

1,0 M1 0,5 0,0 1,0 M2 0,5 0,0 1,0 0,5 M4 0,0 1,0 0,5 M8 0,0
1,0
M1
0,5
0,0
1,0
M2
0,5
0,0
1,0
0,5
M4
0,0
1,0
0,5
M8
0,0
1,0
M16
0,5
0,0
1,0
M32
0,5
0,0
1,0
M64
0,5
0,0
0
100
200
300
400
500
600
700

Frequency, Hz

M1

M2

M4

1,0

0,5

0,0

r=0.16
r=0.16

1,0

0,5

0,0

Stack of binary layers r=0.87 1,0 M1 0,5 0,0 1,0 M2 0,5 0,0 1,0 0,5 M4

1,0

0,5

0,0

Stack of binary layers r=0.87 1,0 M1 0,5 0,0 1,0 M2 0,5 0,0 1,0 0,5 M4

M8

1,0

0,5

0,0

Stack of binary layers r=0.87 1,0 M1 0,5 0,0 1,0 M2 0,5 0,0 1,0 0,5 M4

M16

1,0

0,5

0,0

Stack of binary layers r=0.87 1,0 M1 0,5 0,0 1,0 M2 0,5 0,0 1,0 0,5 M4

M32

1,0

0,5

0,0

M64

1,0

0,5

0,0

0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700
0
100
200
300
400
500
600
700

Frequency, Hz

Figure 7.18. Transmission (solid line) and reflection (dotted line) amplitudes as a function of frequency versus layering and contrast.

Phase velocity

r=0.87 M8 M4 6000 M2 M16 M1 4500 V TA 3000 M32 V EF M64 1500
r=0.87
M8
M4
6000
M2
M16
M1
4500
V
TA
3000
M32
V
EF
M64
1500
0
100
200
300
400
500
600
700

Frequency, Hz

r=0.16

M16 4200 M8 M4 M2 M1 4000 V TA V M64 EF M32 3800 3600 0
M16
4200
M8
M4
M2
M1
4000
V
TA
V
M64
EF
M32
3800
3600
0
100
200
300
400
500
600
700

Frequency, Hz

Figure 7.19. Phase velocity as a function of frequency versus layering and contrast. The effective medium is the low frequency part (around effective medium limit), the transition medium is for dramatical increase in velocity and time average medium is

for oscillating part around time average velocity limit. Note that for small r, the width

of transition zone is narrow comparing with high r case.

Transition from effective to time average medium

Critical wavelength-spacing ratio:

l/d=3 (Helbig, 1984) l/d=5-8 (Carcione et al., 1991) l/d=10 (Marion et al., 1992, 1994)

Transition from effective to time average medium

Re a  1   1  r 1 2 tan tan  2 2
Re a  1
1  r
1
2
tan
tan
2
2
1  r
1  r
 a tan
d
1  r
1

1

d

2

2

a tan

 1  r   1  r 
1
 r
1
 r

(7.31)

(7.32)

 

(7.33)

1

 

(7.34)

/d

Transition from effective to time

average medium 40 36 32 28 24 Effective medium 20 16 12 Transition zone 8 4
average medium
40
36
32
28
24
Effective medium
20
16
12
Transition zone
8
4
Time average medium
0
0,0
0,1
0,2
0,3
0,4
0,5
0,6
0,7
0,8
0,9

Absolute value of r

Figure 7.20. Effective, transition and time average medium (volume fraction 0.5) versus contrast.

O’Doherty-Anstey

approximation

Plane waves are normally incident on a sequency of horizontal layers. If the layers are lossless the shape of the frequency spectrum of the reflection response depends on the

reflection coefficient series. The law of dependence can be found by solving the wave equation for the boundary and initial conditions of the seismic experiment. The O’Doherty- Anstey formula is an approximation to this law,

and its validity would imply a lowpass spectrum of the reflection/transmission response if the reflectivity power spectrum has a highpass trend.

O’Doherty-Anstey

approximation

O’Doherty -Anstey approximation

O’Doherty-Anstey

approximation

The ODA result for the retarded transmissivity caused by propagation through a set of layers is:

O’Doherty -Anstey approximation The ODA result for the retarded transmissivity caused by propagation through a set

(7.35)

where N is the number of layers and R + (z) is the causal half of the normalized autocorrelation of the reflectivity function in a z-transform notation

z-transform:

z

e i 
e
i

(7.36)

O’Doherty-Anstey

approximation

its Fourier representation

O’Doherty -Anstey approximation its Fourier representation (7.37) (7.38)

(7.37)

O’Doherty -Anstey approximation its Fourier representation (7.37) (7.38)

(7.38)

O’Doherty-Anstey

approximation

Now recall that reflectivity is a differential process, and if the elastic parameters are stationary in time, then

O’Doherty -Anstey approximation Now recall that reflectivity is a differential process, and if the elastic parameters

(7.39)

and our first, scaling, coefficient goes to zero leaving,

O’Doherty -Anstey approximation Now recall that reflectivity is a differential process, and if the elastic parameters

(7.40)

O’Doherty-Anstey

approximation

O’Doherty -Anstey approximation Figure 7.21. Examples of submillimetric fine layering from Beringen coal mine: Top –

Figure 7.21. Examples of submillimetric fine layering from

Beringen coal mine:

Top coarse sedimentary rock (sandstone), Bottom fine sedimentary rock (shaly siltstone)

O’Doherty-Anstey

approximation

O’Doherty -Anstey approximation Figure 7.22. Thin micrograph of Rotliegend Sandstone (at 2990m depth). Left – laminated

Figure 7.22. Thin micrograph of Rotliegend Sandstone (at 2990m

depth). Left laminated structure due to differences in grain size and

packing.

Right details of two laminae, upper: coarser grained laminae with intergranular pores, lower: finer grained laminae with partly filled inrergranular space by detrital clays

and dolomite.

O’Doherty-Anstey

approximation

O’Doherty -Anstey approximation Figure 7.23. Thin section micrographs. Scale = 0.25 mm. (A) Single lamina of

Figure 7.23. Thin section micrographs. Scale = 0.25 mm.

  • (A) Single lamina of very fine-grained, poorly sorted quarz sandstone in shale (2570m depth).

  • (B) Two laminae of very fine-grained, well sorted quartz arenit interlaminated wirh sandy shale (2920m depth).

  • (C) Laminated, very fine grained sandstone and interbedded silty shale (2650m depth)

O’Doherty-Anstey

approximation

O’Doherty -Anstey approximation Figure 7.24. Thin section of Rotliegend sandstone (left) and P-wave increase with triaxial
O’Doherty -Anstey approximation Figure 7.24. Thin section of Rotliegend sandstone (left) and P-wave increase with triaxial

Figure 7.24. Thin section of Rotliegend sandstone (left) and P-wave increase with triaxial pressure increase

O’Doherty-Anstey approximation

0

''

z

'

z

z

P P P g 11 g 12 P P P P P S P g 11
P
P
P
g 11
g 12
P
P
P
P
P
S
P
g 11
g 12
P
P
P

0

z'''

z''

z'

S 11 g 11 g 12 g 12 P P P P P P P g
S
11
g
11
g
12
g
12
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
g
S
S
S
P
S S P 22 g 12 g g 22 S S S S 12 g
S
S
P
22
g
12
g
g
22
S
S
S
S
12
g
S 11 g 11 g 12 g 12 P P P P P P P g
S 11 g 11 g 12 g 12 P P P P P P P g

z

Figure 7.25. Contrubution of first-order multiples into PP transmission (left) and PS reflection (right).

t

Dkk

,k,z

exp  

 1  0  i   z  exp  r  z 
1
0
i

z
exp
r
z
k
 
Dkk
2

2

1 2   0  r  z   DPS 2 
1
2
0
r
z
DPS
2

(7.40)

Stovas and Ursin, 2004

O’Doherty-Anstey approximation

The propagator matrix for the stack of N layers (see eq. 7.7)

Q

N

A

 

N

B

*

N

B

N

A

N

*

 

N

Q

j

j 1

(7.41)

A

N

e

  • i

N

N

1 r

j

1

N

1

N

 

k

1

j k

 

1

2 i

r r e

k j

 

j

k

B

N

j 1

e

  • i

N

N

j

r e

2 i

N

j 1

j

...

N

1 r

j

(7.43)

j 1

...

(7.42)

 j
j

k

 d  v j j k    j
 d
v
j
j
k
j

j 1

(7.44)

Stovas and Arntsen, 2003

O’Doherty-Anstey approximation

Determinant of propagator matrix

det Q

N

A

N

2

B

N

2

N

det Q

j

j

1

N

j

1

  • 1 r

j

  • 1 r

j

(7.45)

For binary medium

det Q

N

1

(7.46)

O’Doherty-Anstey approximation

The elements of the total propagator matrix

Q

N

1,1

e

i

N

N

j 1

1 r

j

1

N

1

N

 

k

1

j k

 

1

2

i

r r e

k j

 

j

k

...

(7.47)

Q

N

1,2

e

i

N

N

j

r e

2 i

N

j 1

j

...

N

j 1

1 r

j

(7.48)

O’Doherty-Anstey approximation

The transmission and reflection response:

t

N

D

Q

1

N

r

N

D

Q

N

2,2

1,2

Q

 

N

 

i

N

1

r

k

   
 

e

 

k 1

 

1

 

N

k

 
 

2 i

r r e

k

j

 

j

...

1

j

k

 

1

 

N

N

j

r e

j 1

 

 
 

e

2 i

 

2 i

N

j

...

   

 

1

 

N

1

N

 

 

r r e

k

j

2 i

 

j

k

...

 

k

1

j

k

 

1

N

 

k

 

1

1

N

2,2

(7.49)

(7.50)

O’Doherty-Anstey approximation

The transmission amplitude

N

t

1 r

k

N

k 1

  • D 1  

(7.51)

consists of two two terms:

N

1 r

k

k 1

attenuation due to transmission

1  

1

attenuation due to scattering

O’Doherty-Anstey approximation

The transmission phase

N

N

a tan

Im

1

Re

also consists of two terms

(7.52)

N

a tan

Im

1 Re

the time-average term

the scattering term

O’Doherty-Anstey approximation

The phase velocity

 
  • 1 1

 

tan

Im

t

1

1

  • D tan

Im

 
  • V

D

a

Re

t


D

TA

V

D

a

N

1

N

1

Re

 

1

 

1

 

 

r r

k

j

sin 2

j

k

...

k

1

j

k

 

1

 
 

a tan

 
 

V

TA

D

 

1

N

1

N

 

r r

k

j

cos 2

j

k

...

 

k

1

j

k

 

1

 

The zero-frequency limit

 

N

1

N

 

1

1

 

1

2

 

r r

k

j

j

k

...

lim

k

1

j

k 1

 
 

 

V

0

0

V

V

TA

D

1

N

1

N

 

r r

k

j

...

 
 

k

1

j k 1

(7.53)

(7.54)

O’Doherty-Anstey approximation

With approximation of the type

1    e

(7.55)

and transmission amplitude 7.51 we obtain

 

N

1

N

t

N

  • D e

 

k

1

j k

 

1

r r

k j

cos2

 

j