Generating starting models for seismic refraction tomography with common offset stacks*
Derecke PalmerThe University of New South Wales, Sydney, NSW 2052, Australia. Email: d.palmer@unsw.edu.au
Exploration Geophysics 43(4) 242-254 https://doi.org/10.1071/EG11012
Submitted: 25 February 2011 Accepted: 15 August 2012 Published: 26 September 2012
Abstract
Common offset refraction (COR) traveltime attributes are derived from multi-fold data with novel adaptations of the generalised reciprocal method (GRM). COR GRM stacks are generated from a refraction equivalent of common midpoint (CMP) gathers, which are computed at each CMP with the COR GRM algorithms. The COR GRM stacks, which generate detailed spatially varying attributes for each layer detected in the near surface region, provide useful starting models for automatic refraction tomography.
The spatial resolution of the depth models of the wavepath eikonal traveltime (WET) refraction tomograms obtained with starting models derived with the COR GRM is similar to the WET tomogram obtained with the standard GRM, whereas the COR GRM seismic velocity model is a smoothed version of the standard GRM model. In all cases, the GRM-derived WET tomograms avoid the generation of undetectable artefacts with common implementations of automatic refraction tomography, which can occur with the use of default starting models consisting of smooth vertical velocity gradients and with the need to minimise misfit errors through over-processing.
The COR GRM attributes demonstrate that the traveltime data are consistent with minimal penetration within the sub-weathering, representative of uniform seismic velocities, and that the spatial variations in the time model and seismic velocities are more significant than any variations caused by vertical velocity gradients in the sub-weathered zone. However, the occurrence of vertical velocity gradients in the sub-weathering largely remains unresolved because minimal penetration of the first arrivals can occur even with large vertical velocity gradients, such as the hyperbolic velocity function.
The WET tomograms generated with the COR GRM time model and seismic velocity attributes are generally very similar visually to the starting models, even though the misfit errors may differ. It is concluded that COR GRM starting models can frequently be a useful alternative to refraction tomography.
Key words: common offset methods, GRM, refraction, seismic, tomography, vertical velocity gradients.
References
Aki, K., and Richards, P. G., 2002, Quantitative seismology: University Science Books.Barton, R., and Barker, N., 2003, Velocity imaging by tau-p transformation of refracted traveltimes: Geophysical Prospecting, 51, 195–203
| Velocity imaging by tau-p transformation of refracted traveltimes:Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Barton, P. J., and Jones, L. E. A., 2003, Tau-p velocity imaging of regolith structure. 16th ASEG Geophysical Conference and Exhibition, Adelaide (Extended Abstract).
Berry, M. J., 1971, Depth uncertainties from seismic first arrival studies: Journal of Geophysical Research, 76, 6464–6468
| Depth uncertainties from seismic first arrival studies:Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Coppens, F., 1985, First arrival picking on common-offset trace collections for automatic estimation of static corrections: Geophysical Prospecting, 33, 1212–1231
| First arrival picking on common-offset trace collections for automatic estimation of static corrections:Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Fulton, T. K., and Darr, K. M., 1984, Offset panel: Geophysics, 49, 1140–1152
| Offset panel:Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Gelchinsky, B., and Shtivelman, V., 1983, Automatic picking of first arrivals and parameterization of traveltime curves: Geophysical Prospecting, 31, 915–928
| Automatic picking of first arrivals and parameterization of traveltime curves:Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Healy, J. H., 1963, Crustal structure along the coast of California from seismic-refraction measurements: Journal of Geophysical Research, 68, 5777–5787
Ivanov, J., Miller, R. D., Xia, J., Steeples, D., and Park, C. B., 2005a, The inverse problem of refraction travel times, part I; types of geophysical nonuniqueness through minimization: Pure and Applied Geophysics, 162, 447–459
| The inverse problem of refraction travel times, part I; types of geophysical nonuniqueness through minimization:Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Ivanov, J., Miller, R. D., Xia, J., and Steeples, D., 2005b, The inverse problem of refraction travel times, part II; quantifying refraction nonuniqueness using a three-layer model: Pure and Applied Geophysics, 162, 461–477
| The inverse problem of refraction travel times, part II; quantifying refraction nonuniqueness using a three-layer model:Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Jones, L. E. A., and Drummond, B. J., 2001, Effect of smoothing radius on refraction statics corrections in hard rock terrains. 15th ASEG Conference and Exhibition, Brisbane (Extended Abstract).
Merrick, N. P., Odins, J. A., and Greenhalgh, S. A., 1978, A blind zone solution to the problem of hidden layers within a sequence of horizontal or dipping refractors: Geophysical Prospecting, 26, 703–721
| A blind zone solution to the problem of hidden layers within a sequence of horizontal or dipping refractors:Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Oldenburg, D. W., 1984, An introduction to linear inverse theory: IEEE Transactions on Geoscience and Remote Sensing, GE-22, 665–674
Oldenburg, D. W., and Li, Y., 2005, Inversion for applied geophysics: a tutorial, in D. K. Butler, ed., Near-surface geophysics: Investigations in Geophysics No. 13, 89–150, SEG, Tulsa.
Palmer, D., 1980, The generalized reciprocal method of seismic refraction interpretation: Society of Exploration Geophysicists, 104 pp.
Palmer, D., 1981, An introduction to the generalized reciprocal method of seismic refraction interpretation: Geophysics, 46, 1508–1518
| An introduction to the generalized reciprocal method of seismic refraction interpretation:Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Palmer, D., 1986, Refraction seismics: the lateral resolution of structure and seismic velocity: Geophysical Press.
Palmer, D., 1992, Is forward modeling as efficacious as minimum variance for refraction inversion? Exploration Geophysics, 23, 261–266, 521
| Is forward modeling as efficacious as minimum variance for refraction inversion?Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Palmer, D., 2001, A new direction for shallow refraction seismology: integrating amplitudes and traveltimes with the refraction convolution section: Geophysical Prospecting, 49, 657–673
| A new direction for shallow refraction seismology: integrating amplitudes and traveltimes with the refraction convolution section:Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Palmer, D., 2006, Refraction traveltime and amplitude corrections for very near-surface inhomogeneities: Geophysical Prospecting, 54, 589–604
| Refraction traveltime and amplitude corrections for very near-surface inhomogeneities:Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Palmer, D., 2007, Is it time to re-engineer geotechnical seismic refraction methods? 19th ASEG Conference and Exhibition, Perth (Extended Abstract).
Palmer, D., 2008a, Is it time to re-engineer geotechnical seismic refraction methods? First Break, 26, 69–77
Palmer, D., 2008b, Non-uniqueness in near-surface refraction inversion, in Y. X. Xu, and J. H. Xia, eds., Proceedings of the 3rd International Conference on Environmental and Engineering Geophysics, Wuhan, China: Science Press, Beijing. 42–54.
Palmer, D., 2009a, Integrating short and long wavelength time and amplitude statics: First Break, 27, 57–65
Palmer, D., 2009b, Maximising the lateral resolution of near-surface seismic refraction methods: Mulli-Tamsa, 12, 85–90
Palmer, D., 2010a, Non-uniqueness with refraction inversion – a synclinal model study: Geophysical Prospecting, 58, 203–218
| Non-uniqueness with refraction inversion – a synclinal model study:Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Palmer, D., 2010b, Non-uniqueness with refraction inversion – the Mt Bulga shear zone: Geophysical Prospecting, 58, 561–575
| Non-uniqueness with refraction inversion – the Mt Bulga shear zone:Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Palmer, D., 2010c, Are refraction attributes more useful than refraction tomography? First Break, 28, 43–52
Palmer, D., 2010d, Characterizing the near surface with detailed refraction attributes, in R. D Miller, J. H. Bradford, and K. Hollinger, eds., Advances in near-surface seismology and ground-penetrating radar: SEG Geophysical Development Series No. 15, Chapter 14, 233–250.
Palmer, D., 2010e, Is visual interactive ray trace an efficacious strategy for refraction inversion? Exploration Geophysics, 41, 260–267
| Is visual interactive ray trace an efficacious strategy for refraction inversion?Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 1:CAS:528:DC%2BC3cXhsFyjt7jP&md5=99b2ace5302edfcbaa12e1961ca83709CAS |
Palmer, D., 2010f, Non-uniqueness with refraction inversion – a syncline model study. 21st ASEG Conference and Exhibition, Sydney (Extended Abstract).
Palmer, D., 2010g, Detailed refractor imaging with the RCS. 21st ASEG Conference and Exhibition, Sydney (Extended Abstract).
Palmer, D., 2010h, Imaging the base of the weathering by stacking shot records. 21st ASEG Conference and Exhibition, Sydney (Extended Abstract).
Palmer, D., 2011, Response to comments by Robert J. Whiteley on: Palmer, D., 2010. Is visual interactive ray trace an efficacious strategy for refraction inversion? Exploration Geophysics 41, 260–267: Exploration Geophysics, 42, 218–226
| Response to comments by Robert J. Whiteley on: Palmer, D., 2010. Is visual interactive ray trace an efficacious strategy for refraction inversion? Exploration Geophysics 41, 260–267:Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Pullammanappallil, S. K., and Louie, J. N., 1994, A generalized simulated annealing optimization for inversion of first arrival times: Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America, 84, 1397–1409
Rohdewald, S., Sheehan, J., and Burton, B., 2010, Processing of seismic refraction tomography data, SAGEEP, Keystone, Colorado. Available at http://rayfract.com/SAGEEP10.pdf
Scales, J. A., and Tenorio, L., 2001, Prior information and uncertainty in inverse problems: Geophysics, 66, 389–397
| Prior information and uncertainty in inverse problems:Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Schuster, G. T., and Quintus-Bosz, A., 1993, Wavepath eikonal traveltime inversion: theory: Geophysics, 58, 1314–1323
| Wavepath eikonal traveltime inversion: theory:Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Slichter, L. B., 1932, Theory of the interpretation of seismic travel-time curves in horizontal structures: Physics, 3, 273–295
| Theory of the interpretation of seismic travel-time curves in horizontal structures:Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Whiteley, R. J., 2004, Shallow seismic refraction interpretation with visual interactive ray trace (VIRT) modelling: Exploration Geophysics, 35, 116–123
| Shallow seismic refraction interpretation with visual interactive ray trace (VIRT) modelling:Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Yilmaz, O., 1991, Seismic data processing: Investigations in Geophysics Volume 2, Society of Exploration Geophysicists.