PETROLEUM GEOPHYSICS PENG 256

GROUP FIVE (5)

ALFRED AMOAKO UEB0500520

AMIN SULEIMAN A. AMPONSAH UEB0507620
LINDA MESU-ANTWI UEB0507320
AMPONSAH KOBENA DANIEL UEB0502320
NIBIA ABDUL SAMED UEB0506620
OTI PHINEHAS UEB0506520
NSOSAKIA ISAAC UEB0501820
APAFLO KWESI THEODORE UEB0500920
STACKING IN SEISMIC
PROCESSING
 INTRODUCTION
What is stacking?
 Stacking is an essential part of seismic data processing.
 It is the process of combining collection of processed seismic data traces into a single
trace.
 Stacking is done in other to reduce CMP gathers into one trace.
 Increase demand for high resolution and true amplitudes, and allowing interpretations and
amplitude ratios have led to seismic stacking methods.
 INTRODUCTION
Why stacking?
 The primary goal of seismic stacking methods is the enhancement of the Signal-to-Noise
Ratio of the material data.

 Along with improving Signal-to-noise ratio, stacking reduces disturbing events and energy
in the data. This energy is the unwanted energy.
 These unwanted energies are;
Multiples energy, refracted energy, uncorrelated noise, noise burst with large amplitude and the
cable noises.
 TERMS AND KEYWORDS IN STACKING
• FOLD
• BIN
• COMMON MID POINT (CMP)
• COMMON REFLECTION POINT (CRP)
• REFLECTION
• NOISE
• STACKING VELOCITY
• SIGNAL TO NOISE RATIO
• OFFSET
• ISOCHRONES
DIAGRAM FOR SEISMIC STACKING
PROCESS
 METHODS OF STACKING IN SEISMIC
PROCESSING
• STRAIGHT STACK, MEAN STACK.

•STACKING WITH DATA ADAPTIVE WEIGHTING

 Optimum weighted stack(OWS)
 Diversity stack(DS)

• CMP STACKING

• CDP STACKING

• CRS STACKING
 METHODS OF STACKING
STRAIGHT STACK, MEAN STACK
Straight stack is the most simple one. It sums up the sample amplitudes values at the
isochrones locations and divides by the number of values for all channels to be processed.
 METHODS OF STACKING
STACKING WITH DATA ADAPTIVE WEIGHTING
• OPTIMUM WEIGHTED STACK
Base on optimum criteria, this algorithm is used before summation, including optimum
stacking filters.

• DIVERSITY STACK
The results of the DS is the amplitude variation of the input data.
 CMP STACKING
The vertical summing technique with the objective of improving S/N ratio may be
somehow problematic because they used reflections from portions of the reflectors
that were too large and therefore tends to obscure the very detail which is being
sought. Stacking of the CMP data after a hyperbolic correction with the NMO velocity
improves the signal to noise ratio(as shown in the fig.) CMP stacking introduced as
techniques for 2D seismic data is equally applicable to 3D data processing for a long
time. Stacked sections or volumes(in 3D) are standard deliverables in the industry. The
by-product (stacking velocity of subsurface) of the techniques is equally valuable than
the prime objective of the technique but this contribution of the technique is not
properly recognized in industry. Subsequent improvement in the stacking technique
has provided accurate information of the sub-surface and helps in interpretation. CMP
stacking is the powerful tool for the enhancement of S/N ratio by stacking of in-phase
signal and out of phase stacking of random as well as coherent noises recorded in
traces having different offset.
 CDP STACKING
The collection of seismic traces that correspond to a particular midpoint is called a
Common Midpoint (CMP) gather. In older literature, this collection of traces is
referred to as a Common Depth Point (CDP) gather. the CDP method is used to
enhance the signal to noise ratio.
In the case of horizontal layers, reflection events on each CMP gather are reflected
from a common depth point (CDP). For dipping reflectors, the principal of CDP
breaks down because the reflection points no longer lie directly below the shot-
detector/geophone midpoint (CMP) for various offsets. For small dips, however, the
CDP stacking retain its usefulness in improving the SNR. In cases where dips are large
(˃ 10 degree ), Dip Move Out (DMO) corrections may have to be applied to a set of
pre-stack CDP gathers so that each gather contains events from the same reflection
point.
The main advantage of CDP stacking is that the signal-to-noise ratio (SNR) of
stacked traces increased by a factor of root n over the SNR of the n individual traces.
Fig. Common depth-point
(CDP) reflection profiling.
(a)A set of rays from different
shots to detectors reflected
off a common depth point
(CDP) on a horizontal
reflector.
(b) (b) The common depth
point is not achieved in the
case of a dipping reflector.
 CRP STACKING
CMP stacking devised to increase the multiplicity was actually thought “Common
Reflection Point” gathers than CMP gathers. These two concepts are equivalent only
for a horizontal reflector below an overburden with purely vertical velocity variations.
For a planar dipping reflector below a homogeneous overburden, there is smearing of
reflection point called reflection point dispersal. All the traces of a CMP gather are
now no longer belong to one and the same reflection point. Application of dip
moveout correction (DMO) to the data makes the gathers (generally called DMO
gathers) which contains reflections from a single reflection point. The stacking of such
gathers provides the DMO stack and improves the resolution of the obtained image.
However, as soon as the reflector becomes curved or the overburden becomes
inhomogeneous, the DMO is not exact and a residual reflection point smear still will
remain.
 CRS STACKING
The CRS technique uses larger stacking surfaces rather than relying on a single CMP
stack location in conventional stacking processes. This leads to a larger stacking fold
and results in the improvement in resolution in time and depth domain. The CRS stack
corresponds to subsurface model, where reflector elements the common reflection
surface- are defined by their subsurface location, reflector curvature and dip. The
increased validity of the CRS reflection time approximation is provided by three
independent parameters for 2D seismic data, whereas only one parameter is required
for the conventional NMO stack technique, i.e. the stacking velocity. The CRS method
has proved to be a valid alternative to conventional NMO/DMO processing. Numerous
application examples demonstrate the increase in resolution by this technique. The
superior signal to noise ratio and reflector continuity are supplemented by an enhanced
imaging of structural details and dipping events.
 APPLICATIONS OF STACKING
IN SEISMIC DATA PROCESSING
• Imaging steep dips: The flanks of salt dome displays strong dips. The CRS method,
which explicitly incorporates the reflector dip in the stacking planes, strongly
enhances the dipping reflections that have not been visible in DMO/NMO stack.
• The imaging of deeper targets: the imaging of deeper targets where a very poor
signal to noise ratio hardly allows to reconstruct reflections. The top of the anticline
which was hardly resolved by the DMO/NMO stack is now clearly defined.
• Improved AVO Analysis: Increased fold of the CRS imaging allow extending AVO
analysis in noises zones.
• The stacking methods provide various algorithms handling signals and noise,
suitable for the different nature of data.
(a) Shows multiple record of traces which
include greater noise from the source to the
reflector then to the receiver.
(b) Is referred to as, the enhanced signal. This
signal is commonly known as a stack.
This stack combines multiple records
or traces into single trace colour-in-
half wavelet. In the enhanced signal,
the noise cancels out. The kicks
represent the reflections.
This will be displayed on a seismic
paper by carrying one side of the wave
formed (in this case, the right kick). This
is repeated from place to place building up
a profile.
 OVERVIEW
Stacking procedures with the objective of improvement of signal to noise ratio were in use
before the introduction of Common reflection point stacking . But, these techniques were
problematic, at times, because they used reflections from a portion of reflectors that were too
large. Hence, stacking tends to obscure the very detail of reflector which is being sought.
Sorting to CMP gather and their stacking after normal moveout correction and provided a
practical means of increasing multiplicity without losing the detail of the reflector. The
quantified average enhancement of signal to noise ratio shows that it is proportional to the
square root of the number of signals. CMP stacking is a robust enough to handle seismic data
from many different part of the world and provide reasonable good image. However, it
assumes stratified earth in applying normal moveout correction and that the CMP stack is
equivalent to a zero offset section. Recent developments in stacking methods include common
reflection surface (CRS) stack which uses far more traces than those present in a CMP stack
which leads to a better signal to noise ratio and continuity of the reflector in CRS stack. The
CRS technique uses larger stacking surfaces rather than relaying on a single CMP stack
location in conventional stacking processes. This leads to a larger stacking fold and results in
the improvement in resolution in time and depth domain.
 REFERENCES
Andrews, H. C., and C. L. Patterson, 1976, Singular value decomposition and digital image processing: IEEE
Transactions on Acoustics, Speech, and Signal Processing, 24, 26–53. Audebert, F. L., and P. Froidevaux,
2005, Regularization of illumination in angle domains – a key to true amplitude migration: The Leading
Edge, 24, 643–654. Chang, X. W., Y. J. Guang, C. M. Zhang, and G. Q. Xu, 1996, Stacking based on
correlation saving frequency: OilGeophysics Prospecting (in Chinese), 31, 110–113. Claerbout, J. F., 2005,
Basic Earth imaging: Stanford Exploration Project, http://sepwww.stanford.edu/sep/prof/. Donoho, D. L.,
1995, De-noising by soft-thresholding: IEEE Transactions on Information Theory, 41, 613–627. Fomel, S.,
2007a, Local seismic attributes: Geophysics, 72, A29–A33. ——–, 2007b, Shaping regularization in
geophysical-estimation problems: Geophysics, 72, R29–R36. Fomel, S., M. Backus, K. Fouad, B. Hardage,
and G. Winters, 2005, Amultistep approach to multicomponent seismic image registration with application to
a West texas carbonate reservoir study: 75th Annual International Meeting, SEG, Expanded Abstracts,
1018–1021. Fomel, S., and L. Jin, 2007, Time-lapse image registration using the local similarity attribute:
77th Annual International Meeting, SEG, Expanded Abstracts, 2979– 2983. Freire, S. L. M., and T. J. Ulrych,
1988, Application of singular value decomposition to vertical seismic profiling: Geophysics, 53, 778–785.
Grion, S., and A. Mazzotti, 1998, Stacking weights determination by means of svd and crosscorrelation: 68th
Annual International Meeting, SEG, Expanded Abstracts, 1135–1138. Hale, D., 2006, Fast local
crosscorrelation of images: 76th Annual International Meeting, SEG, Expanded Abstracts, 3160–3163.
Mayne, W. H., 1962, Common reflection point horizontal data stacking techniques: Geophysics, 27, 927–
938. Neelamani, R., T. A. Dickens, and M. Deffenbaugh, 2006, Stack-and-denoise: A new method to stack
seismic datasets: 76th Annual International Meeting, SEG, Expanded Abstracts, 2827–2831. Peterson, B. J.,
and D. R. DeGroat, 1988, Nearly optimal, SVD-based stacking of seismic data: Maple Press. Rashed, M. A.,
2008, Smart stacking: A new CMP stacking technique for seismic data: The Leading Edge, 27, 462–467.