3D strike vs. dip streamer shooting direction comparison

Abstract

A decision to pursue 3D streamer acquisition in a certain shooting direction requires a consideration of seismic phenomena including subsurface illumination, spatial sampling, wave propagation, and the idiosyncrasies of seismic imaging technology. We provide both theoretical and synthetic modeling examples to provide a framework for objective discussion. The important aspect is that the 2D dip-shooting requirement becomes irrelevant in 3D. In any 3D survey location, a series of arguments will arise that support each possible shooting direction. The key issue is that both the subsurface model and the surface acquisition geometry are intimately linked, and each must be given specific consideration during processing. Consideration is also given to new streamer acquisition technologies that are helping to blur the distinctions between dip and strike shooting results.