You are on page 1of 176

Introduction

to

Seismic Inversion Methods

Brian H. Russell
Hampson-Russell
SoftwareServices,Ltd.
Calgary,Alberta

Course Notes Series, No. 2


S. N. Domenico, Series Editor

Societyof Exploration
Geophysicists

Thesecoursenotesare publishedwithoutthe normalSEGpeerreviews.


They havenot beenexaminedfor accuracyand clarity.Questionsor
commentsby the readershouldbe referreddirectlyto the author.

ISBN 978-0-931830-48-8
ISBN 978-0-931830-65-5

(Series)
(Volume)

Libraryof Congress
CatalogCardNumber88-62743
Societyof Exploration
Geophysicists
P.O.

Box 702740

Tulsa, Oklahoma 74170-2740

1988 by the Societyof Exploration


Geophysicists
All rightsreserved.
Thisbookor portionshereofmaynotbe reproduced
in anyformwithoutpermission
in writingfromthe publisher.
Reprinted1990, 1992, 1999, 2000, 2004, 2006, 2008, 2009
Printed in the United States of America

]:nl;roduct1 on o Selsmic I nversion thods

Table

Bri an Russell

of Contents
PAGE

Part

Introduction

1-2

Part

The Convolution

Model

2-1

2.4 The Noise Component

2-2
2-6
2-12
2-18

Recursive

3-1

2.1 Tre Sei smic Model


2.2 The Reflection Coefficient
2.3

Part

Part

The Seismic

Wavelet

Inversion

- Theory

3.1

Discrete

3.2

Problems encountered

Inversion

3.3

Continuous

with

data

4-1

4. !

4-2
4-4
4-6
4-12
4-14

4.4
4.5

I ntroduc ti on
resolution

Lateral
resolution
Noise attenuation

Recursive

Inversion

- Practice

5.3 Seismically derived porosity


Sparse-spike Inversi on

6-1

6.1

6-2
6-4
6-22
6-30

The recursive

inversion

method

5.2 Information in the low frequency component


6

I ntroduc ti on

6.2 Maximum-likelihood
6.3
6.4
P art

Part

5-1
5-2
5-10
5-16

5.1

P art

3-2
3-4
3-8

Seismic Processing Considerati ons


4.2 Ampli rude recovery

real

Inversion

4.3 Improvementof vertical

Part

Series

aleconvolution and inversion

The L I norm method


Reef Problem

I nversion applied to Thi n-beds

7-1

7.1 Thin bed analysis

7.Z Inversion comparison of thin beds

7-2
7-4

Model-based

8-1

Inversion

B. 1 I ntroducti

8.2

Generalized

on .

linear

inversion

8.3 Seismic1ithologic roodelling (SLIM)


Appendix8-1 Matrix applications in geophysics

8-2
8-4
8-10
8-14

Introduction

Part

to Seismic

Travel-time

Inversion

Methods

Brian

9-1

Inversion

g. 1. I ntroducti

on

9.2 Numerical examplesof traveltime


9.3 Seismic Tomography

inversion

Part 10 Amplitude versus offset (AVO) Inversion


10.1 AVO theory
10.2 AVO inversion by GLI

9-2
9-4
9-10

10-1
10-2
10-8

Inversion

11-1

I ntroduc ti on

11-2
11-4

Part 11 Velocity

Theory and Examples


Part 12 Summary

12-1

Russell

Introduction

to Seismic nversion

Methods

Brian Russell

PART I - INTRODUCTION

Part

1 - Introduction

Page 1 -

Introduction

to Seismic

Inversion

Methods

Brian

Russell

I NTRODUCT
ION TO SEI SMIC INVERSION METHODS
,

__

Part

This

_,

l_

Introduction
_

i.,.

course is intended as an overview of the current techniques used in

the inversion of seismic data. It would therefore seemappropriate to begin


by defining what is meant by seismic inversion. The most general definition
is

as fol 1 ows'

Geophysical inversion

involves

mapping the physical structure and

properties of the subsurface of the earth using measurementsmadeon


the surface of the earth.

The above definition

work that is done in

is so broad that it encompassesvirtually

seismic analysis

course we shall primarily 'restrict

and interpretation.

all

the

Thus, in this

our discussion to those inversion

methods

which attempt to recover a broadband pseudo-acoustic impedance log from a


band-1 imi ted

sei smic trace.

Another way to look at inversion is to consider it as the technique for


creating a model of the earth using the seismic data as input. As such, it

can be considered as the opposite of the forwar modelling technique, which


involves creating

a synthetic seismic

section

based on a model of the earth

(or, in the simplest case, using a sonic log as a one-dimensional model). The
relationship between forward and inverse modelling is shownin Figure 1.1.

To understandseismic inversion, we must first


processes involved
therefore

in

the

look at the basic

creation of seismic data.


convolutional

model

understandthe physical
Initially,

we will

of the seismic trace

in the

time and frequencydomains,consideringthe three components


of this model:
reflectivity,

seismic wavelet, and noise.

Part

- Introduction

Page 1 -

--.

Introduction to Seismic InverSion Methods

FORWARDMODELL
I NG
i

Brian Russell

INVERSEMODELLING(INVERSION)
_

EARTH
MODEL

Input'

Process:

Output'

MODELLING

INVERSION

ALGORITHM

ALGORITHM

SEISMIC RESPONSE
i

mlm

ii

EARTH
MODEL
i

ii

Figure1.1 Fo.ard
' andsInverse
Model,ling

Part

I - Introduction

Page I -

Introduction.

to Seismic Inversion Methods

Brian lussel 1

Once we have an understanding of these concepts and the problems which

can occur, we are in a position to

look at

the methodswhich are currently

used to invert seismic data.

These methods are summarizedin Figure 1.2.

be on poststack seismic inversion where

primary emphasis of the course will


the

ultimate

resul.t,

The

as was previously

Oiscussed, is a

pseudo-impeaance

section.

We will

start by looking at

inversion,

the

most contanonmethods of

which are based on single trace recursion.

these recurslye
relationship

inversion

procedures,

it

the

unUerstand

important to look at the

between aleconvolution anU inversion, and how Uependent each

method is on the deconvolution scheme Chosen.

classical

is

To better

poststack

Specifically,

we will

consider

"whitening" aleconvolutionmethods, wavelet extraction methods, and

newer sparse-spike deconvolution methods such as Maximum-likelihood

deconvolution

and the

L-1

norm metboa.

Another important type of inversion methodwhich will be aiscussed is


model-based inversion, where a geological moael is iteratively upUatedto finU
the

best

fit

with the seismic data.

After this,

traveltime

tomography,will be discussedalong with several illustrative

inversion,

or

examples.

After the discussion on poststack inversion, we shall move into the realm
of pretstack. These methoUs,still fairly new, allow us to extract parameters
other than impedance, such as density and shear-wave velocity.
Finally,

we will

aiscuss the geological aUvantages anU limitations

each seismic inversion roethoU,looking at examples of each.

Part

1 -

Introduction

Page i -

of

Introduction to SelsmicInversion Methods

Brian Russell

SEI SMI
C I NV
ERSI
ON

.METOS,,,

POSTSTACK

PRESTACK

INVERSION

INVERSION

EF
IEL
D
MODEL-BASED
I RECURSIVEWAV
TRAVELTIME

INVERSION
,INVESION

INVERSION

,,

I METHODS
]

!TOMOGRAPHY)
- "NARROWSPARSEBAND

Figure 1.2

Part

1 - Introuuction

--

LINEAR

NVERSIOUMETHODS
i

SPIKE

A summaryof current inversion techniques.

Page 1 -

Introduction

to Seismic Inversion Methods

Brtan Russell

PART
2 - THECONVOLUTIONAL
MODEL

Part

2 - The Convolutional

Model

Page 2 -

Introduction

to Seismic Inversion Methods

Part 2 -

Brian Russell

The Convolutional

Mooel

2.1 Th'e Sei smic Model

The mostbasic and commonly


used one-Oimensionalmoael for the seismic
trace is referreU

to as the convolutional

moOel, which states that the seismic

trace is simplythe convolutionof the earth's reflectivity with a seismic


source function

with the adUltion of a noise component. In

equation

form,

where * implies convolution,

s(t) : w(t) * r(t) + n(t)s


where

and

s (t)

= the sei smic trace,

w(t)

: a seismic wavelet,

r (t)

: earth refl ecti vi ty,

n(t)

: additive

noise.

An even simpler assumptionis to consiUerthe noise component


to be zero,
in which case the seismic tre is simply the convolution of a seismic wavelet
with te earth ' s refl ecti vi ty,
s(t)

In

= w{t) * r(t).

seismic processingwe deal exclusively with digital data, that

data sampled
at a constanttime interval.

is,

If weconsiUerthe relectivity to

consist of a reflection coefficient at each time sample(som of which can be

zero), and the wavelet to be a smooth function in time, convolutioncan be


thoughtof as "replacing"eachreflection. coefficient with a scaledversion of
the waveletandsumming
the result. The result of this processis illustrated

in Figures 2.1 and2.Z for botha "sparse"anda "dense"set of reflection


coefficients.

Notice that convolution

with

the wavelet tends to "smear" the

reflection coefficients. That is, there is a total loss of resolution,which


is the ability

to resolve closely spacedreflectors.

Part 2 - The Convolutional

Model

Page

Introduction

to Seismic Inversion

Nethods

Brian Russell

WAVELET:

(a) '*

-' ':'

REFLECTIVITY

TRACE:

Figure 2.1

(a)

Convolutionof a wavelet with a sparse"reflectivity.


(a) avelet. (b) Reflectivit.y. (c) Resu1ting Seismic Trace.

'?t

(b')

Fi ure 2.2

Convolution of a wavelet with a sonic-derived

reflectivity.
,

Par

, ....

2 - The Convolutional

(a) Wavelet. (b) Reflectivity.


i

L_

Model

"dense"

(c) SeismicTrace

'

Page 2 -

Introduction

to Seismic

An alternate,

Inver'sion

Methods

Brian

but equivalent, way of

the frequency domain.

Russell

looking at the seismic trace is in

If we take the Fourier transform of

the previous

equati on, we may write

S(f)
where

= W(f) x R(f),

S(f) = Fouriertransform
of s(t),
W(f) = Fourier transform of w(t),
R(f) = Fourier transform of r(t),

In the above equation we see that

ana f = frequency.

convolution becomesmultiplication

in

the frequency domain. However, the Fourier transform is a complex function,


and it

is normal to consiUer the amplitude and phase spectra of the individual

components. The spectra of S(f) may then be simply expressed

esCf)= ew(f) + er(f),


where

I ndicates
amplitude
spectrum,
and
0

In
the

Figure 2.3

illustrates

the convolutional model

frequency domain. Notice that the time Oomainproblem of

resolution becomesone of loss of


reOuceo by the effects

2 - The Convolutional

loss

of

frequency content in the frequency domain.

Both the high and low frequencies of the reflectivity

Part

other words, convolution involves multiplying the amplitude spectra

and adding the phase spectra.

in

indicates phase spectrum.

have been severely

of the seismic wavelet.

Mooel

Page ?. -

Introduction to Seismic Inversion Methods

AMPLITUDE

Brian Russell

SPECTRA

PHASE SPECTRA

w (f)
I

-tR (f)

i i

,
i.

I
iit

loo

|11

s (f)
i

i!

Figure 2.3

Part

2 - The Convolutional

Convolution in the frequency domain for


the time series shown in Figure 2.1.

Model

Page 2 -

Introduction

2.g

to Seismic

The Reflection
l_

,m

Inversion

Coefficient
_

m_

_,

Methods

Brian

Russell

Series
_ _

el

'The reflection coefficient series (or reflectivity,

as it is also called)

describedin theprevious
sectionis oneof thefundamental
physical
concepts
in the seismic method. Basically, each reflection coefficient maybe thought
of
as
the res ponse of the seismic wavelet to an acoustic impeUance change
within
the
ear th,
where acoustic impedance is defined as the proUuct of
compressi onal velocity and Uensity. Mathematically, converting from acoustic
involves dividing the difference in the acoustic
i ropedanceto re flectivity
impedances by the sum of the acoustic impeaances. This gives te
coefficient

at

the boundary between the two layers.

reflection

The equation is as

fo11 aws:

i+lVi+l- iVi
i
where

Zi+l- Zi
i+1

r = reflection

coefficient,

/o__density,
V -- compressional velocity,
Z -- acoustic impeUance,
and

Layer i overlies Layer i+1.

Wemust also convert from depth to time by integrating the sonic log
transit times. Figure .4 showsa schematicsonic log, density log, anU
resulting acoustic impedancefor a simplifieU

earth moael. Figure 2.$ shows

the resultof converting


to thereflection
coefficient
seriesandintegrating
to

time.

It should be pointed out that this formula is true only for the normal
incidence case, that is, for a seismic wave striking the reflecting interface
at right angles to the beds. Later in this course, we shall consider the case
of

Part

nonnormal

inciaence.

2 - The Convolutional

Model

Page 2 -

Introduction to Seismic Inversion Methods

STRATIGRAPHIC

Brian Russell
OENSITY

SONICLOG

SECTION

30O

4OO

loo

200

2.0

3.0

SHALE

LOG.

T (usec./mette)

.....

3600 m/s

DEPTH

SANOSTONE

. .

'I

- .. ,

!_1

v--I

UMESTONEI I I ! I ! I 1

V--3600
J

V= 6QO0

LIMESTONE

2000111

Fig. 2.4. BoreholeLogMeasurements.


REFLECTWrrY

ACOUSTIC

VS TWO.WAY
TIME

IMPED,MCE (2

(Yocrrv
mm

,mm

mm

mm

rome

-----

V$ OEPTH

x OEaSn
20K -.25
I

.am

Q.2S
I

-.25
v

O
'

+ .2S
I

mm

SHALE .....

OEPTH

--------'-[

SANDSTONE . . ...
!

!11

I1

UMESTONE
I I 1 I I I II
i ! I 1 i I i
SHALE .--._--.----

1000m

1000 m

--

NO

.'

LIMESTONE

- 20o0 m

2000 m

Fig.

2.5.

, ..

Creation of Reflectivity

Part g - The Convolutional Model

I SECOND

Sequence.

Page 2 -

IntroductJ

on 1:o Sei stoic Inversion

Our best method of

derlye

Herhods

observing

them from well log curves.

Bri an Russell

seJsmc impedance and reflectivity

is o

Thus, we maycreate an impedancecurve

by

multiplying together he sonic and density logs from a well. Wemayhen


computethe reflectivlty by using he formula shownearlier. Often, we do not
have the density log available to us and must makedo with only the sonJc. The

approxJmatJonof velocJty to mpedance


1s a reasonable approxjmation, and

seemsto holdwell for clas;cics and carbonates(not evaporltes, however).


Figure 2.6 showsthe sonic and reflectJvty traces from a typJcal Alberta well
after they have been Jntegrated to two-way tlme.
As we shall see later,

the type of

aleconvolution and inversion used is

dependent on the statistical assumptionswhich are made about the seismic


reflectivity
and wavelet. Therefore, howcan we describe the reflectivity
seen
in

well?

reflectivity

The

traditional

to be a perfectly

answer has always been that

we consider

random sequence and, from Figure .6,

the

this

appears to be a good assumption. A ranUomsequencehas the property that

autocorrelation is a spike at zero-lag.


autocorrelation are zero except the

its

That is, all the componentsof the

zero-lag value, as shownin the following

equati on-

t(Drt = ( 1 , 0 , 0 , .........

t
zero-lag.

Let

2.7.

us test this idea on a theoretical

Notice that the

autocorrelation

of

random sequence, shownin

Figure

this sequence has a large spike at

the zeroth lag, but that there is a significant noise component at nonzero
lags. To have a truly random sequence, it must be infinite in extent. Also
on this figure is shown the autocorrelation of a well
log erived

reflectivity.
Wesee that it is even less "random"than the randomspike
sequence. Wewill discuss this in more detail on the next page.

Part

2 - The Convolutional

Model

Page 2 -

IntroductJon

to Se.s=c Inversion

Methods

Bran

Russell

RFC

Fg. 2.6. Reflectivitysequence


derivedfromsonJc
.log.

RANDOM

SPIKE SEQUENCE

AUTOCORREJATION
OF RANDOMSEQUENCE

Fig.

2.7.

WELL LOG DERIVED REFLECT1vrrY

AUTOCORRELATION

OF REFLECTIVITY

Autocorrelat4ons of random and well log

der4vedspike sequences.

Part

2 - The Convolutional

Model

Page 2-

Introductlon

to Sei smic Inversion

Methods

Therefore, the true earth reflectivity

truly

Brian Russel 1

cannot be consideredas being

random. For a typical Alberta well we see a numberof large spikes

(coresponding
to majorlithol ogic change)sticking up abovethe crowd.A good
way to describethis statistically is as a Bernoulli-Gaussian
sequence. The
Bernoulli part of this term implies a sparsenessin the positions of the
spikes and the Gaussianimplies a randomness
in their amplitudes. Whenwe
generatesuch a sequence,there is a term, lambda, which controls the
sparsenessof the spikes. For a lambdaof 0 there are no spikes, and for a
lambdaof 1, the sequence
is perfectly Gaussian in distribution. Figure 2.8
shows a number of such series for different

typical Alberta well log reflectivity

values of lambda.

Notice that

wouldhavea lambdavalue in the 0.1 to

0.5 range.

Part

2 - The Convolutional

Model

Page 2 -

10

I ntroducti on to Sei smic I nversi on Methods

Brian Russell

It

tl

11 I

LAMBD^0.01

511 t

tl

(VERY SPARSE)

11

311

4#

511 I

#1

TZIIE

LAMBDA--O.

(KS !

1,1

::." ';'"' "";''l'


"'r'

- "(11
I
TX#E

(HS)

LAMBDAI0.5

LAMBDA--

1.0 (GAUSSIAN:]

EXAMPLESOF REFLECTIVITIES

Fig.

2.8.

Examplesof reflectivities
factor

to be discussed

using lambda

in Part

6.

Part 2 - The Convolutional Model

Page 2 -

11

Introduction

2.3

to Seismic Inversion ,Methods

The Seismic
--

Brian Russell

Wavelet

Zero Phase and Constant Phase Wavelets


m _

m _

The assumptiontha.t there is a single, well-defined wavelet which is


convolved with the reflectivity
to producethe seismic trace is overly
simplistic. Morerealistically, the wavelet is both time-varying and complex
in shape. However,the assumptionof a simple wavelet is reasonable, and in
this

section

we shall

consider

several

types

of

wavelets

and

their

characteristics.

First,

let us consider the Ricker wavelet, which consists of a peak and

two troughs, or side lobes. The Ricker wavelet is dependentonly on its


dominant frequency, that is, the peak frequencyof its alitude spectrum or
the inverse of the dominantperiod in the time domain(the dominantperiod is

found by measuringthe time from troughto trough). TwoRicker wave'lets are


shownin Figures 2.9 and 2.10 of frequencies 20 and 40 Hz. Notice that as the
anqlitude spectrumof a wavelet .is broadened,the wavelet gets narrower in the

timedomain,
indicatingan increase
of resolution.Ourultimatewaveletwould
be a spike, with a flat amplitude spectrum. Sucha wavelet is an unrealistic
goal in seismic processing, but one that is aimedfor.
The Rtcker wavelets of

Figures 2.9

and 2.10

are also zero-phase, or

perfectly symmetrical. This is a desirable character.tstic of wavelets since


the energy is then concentrated at a positive peak, and the convol'ution of the
wavelet

with

a reflection

coefficient

will

better

resolve

that

reflection.

To

get an idea of non-zero-phase wavelets, consider Figure 2.11, where a Ricker


wavelet

has been rotated by 90 degree increments, and Figure 2.12, where the

samewavelet has been shifted by 30 degree increments.

Notice that the 90

degree rotation

180 degree shift

displays perfect antisnmnetry, whereas a

simply inverts the wavelet.

Part

2 - The Convolutional

The 30 degree rotations are asymetric.

Model

Page 2-

Introduction to Seismic Inversion Methods

Brian Russell

Fig.

2.9.

20 Hz Ricker

Wavelet'.

Fig.

.10.

40 Hz Ricker

wavelet.

Fig.

2.11.

Ricker

wavelet

rotated

by 90 degree increments

Fig.

2.12.

Ricker

wavelet

rotated

by 30 degree increments

Part

2 - The Convolutional

Model

Page 2 -

13

Introduction

to Seismic

Of course,

Inversion

a typical

frequencies than that

filer

Methods

seismic wavelet

shownin Figure 2.13,

would be noticeable

a larger

Consider the

range of
banapass

where we have passed a banaof frequencies


has also had cosine tapers applied between 5

and 15 Hz, and between60 and 80 Hz.


box-car.

contains

shownon the Ricker wavelet.

between15 and 60 Hz. The filter

that

Brian Russell

The taper reduces the "ringing" effect

if the wavelet amplitude spectrum was a

The wavelet of Figure 2.13 is

simple

zero-phase, and would be excellent as

a stratigraphic wavelet. It is often referred to as an Ormsbywavelet.


Minimum Phase Wavelets

The concept of minimum-phaseis one that

is

vital

to aleconvolution, but

is also a concept that is poorly understood.

The reason for

understanding is that most discussions of

concept stress the mathematics

at

the

expense of

the

physical

the

interpretation.

use of minimum-phaseis adapted from Treitel

The

this lack of

definition

we

and Robinson (1966):

For a given set of wavelets, all with the sameamplitude spectrum,

the minimum-phase
waveletis the onewhichhasthe sharpest
leading
edge. That is, only wavelets which have positive

The reason that

time values.

minimum-phase concept is important to us is

that

typical wavelet in dynamite work is close to minimum-phase. Also, the wavelet


from the

seismic instruments

equivalent of the 5/15-60/80

in the aefinition

is

also

zero-phase wavelet is shownin Figure 2.14.

Part

As

used, notice that the minimum-phasewavelet has no component

prior to time zero and has its energy

possible.

minimum-phase. The minimum-phase

concentrated

as close to the origin

as

The phase spectrum of the minimum-waveletis also shown.

2 - The Convolutional

Model

Pa.qe 2 -

14

Itroducton to Seistoic!nversionNethods.
ql

Re R
f1.38

Zero Phase Iauelt

5/15-68Y88

0.6

- e.3e

Trace

iii

...... ,

.....

'

2be
Trace

Reg 1)

BranRussell

min,l

wavelet

Fig.

2.13. Zero-phase bandpass

Fig.

2.14. Minim-phase equivalent


of zero-phase wavelet
shownin Fig. 2.13.

wavelet.

/15-68/88 hz

18.00 p

Trace I

RegE

wayel

Speetnm

'188.88

Trace1

0.8

188

m,m,

Part 2 -Th 'e Convolutional Model

Page 2-

15

Introduction

to Seismic Inversion Methods

Brian Russell

Let us nowlook at the effect of different waveletson the reflectivity


function itself.

Figure 2.15 a anU b shows a numberof different

conv6lved with the reflectivity


in Figure Z.5.

(Trace 1) from the simple blocky model shown

The following wavelets have been used- high frequency

zero-phase (Trace ),

low frequencyzero-phase(Trace ), high frequency

minimumphase (Trace 3),


figure,

wavelets

low frequency minimum phase (Trace 5).

From the

we can make the fol 1owing observations:

(1) Low freq. zero-phase wavelet:


- Resolution of reflections

- Identification

(Trace 4)
is poor.

of onset of reflection

is good.

(Z) High freq. zero-phase wavelet: (Trace Z)


- Resolution of reflections

- Identification

is good.

of onset of reflection

is good.

(3) Lowfreq. min. pase wavelet- (Trace 5)


- Resolution

of reflections

i s poor.

- Identification of onset of reflection is poor.


(4) High freq. min. phase wavelet: (Trace 3)
- Resolution of refl ec tions is good.

- Identification

of onset of reflection

is poor.

Based on the aboveobservations, we wouldhave to consider the high

frequency,zero-phase
waveletthe best, andthe low-frequency,
minimum
phase
wavelet

Part

the

worst.

2 - The Convolutional

Model

Page 2 -

16

Introduction

!ql

RegR

to Seismic Inversion

Zer PhaseUaelet

,'1G-1

Methods

14z

Russell

q2 RegC ZeroPhase
14aue16('
' 'le-34B Hz
e

- . ['

Brian

'

,3 RecjB miniilium
phue

'

q Reg1) 'minimum
phase "

'

,leJ3e/4eh

'

17 .

e.e

(a)

//'-"v--,._,,
-r

e.' ' "se''


,m

,,

Tr'oce

[b)
700

Fig.

2.15.

Convolution of four different


in (a) with trace I of (b).
shown on traces

Part

2 - The Convolutional

Model

wavelets shown
The results are

2 to 5 of (b).

Page 2 -

17

Introduction

to Seismic Inversion

Methods

Brian Russell

g.4 ThN.oi se.Co.mp.one


ntThe situation

that has been discussed so far is the ideal case.

That is,

we have interpreted every reflection wavelet on a seismic trace as being an


actual

reflection

from a

lithological

boundary.

Actually,

many of the

"wiggles"on a trace are not true reflections, but are actually the result
seismic noise.

of

Seismic noise can be grouped under two categories-

(i) Random
Noise - noise which is uncorrelated from trace to trace and is
ue mainly to environmental factors.

(ii)

CoherentNoise - noise which is predictable on the seismic trace but

is unwanted. An exampleis multiple reflection interference.


Randomnoise can be thought of as the additive componentn(t) which was

seen in the equationon page 2-g.


Correcting for this term is the primary
reason for stackingour ata. Stackingactually uoesan excellent job of
removing ranUomnoise.

Multiples, one of the major sources of coherent noise, are causedby


multiple "bounces"
of the seismic signal within the earth, as shownin Figure
2.16. They may be straightforward, as in multiple seafloor bouncesor
"ringing", or extremelycomplex,as typified by interbed multiples. Multiples
cannot be thoughtof as additive noise andmustbe modeledas a convolution
with the reflecti

vi ty.

Figure 2.17

shows the

theoretical

multiple

sequence which

generatedby the simple blocky modelshown on Figure . 5.


this

data,

it

is

Multiples maybe partially

powerful

the

multiples

be

removed by

stacking,

but

important that

elimination

technique.

aleconvolution, f-k filter.ing,

Such

techniques

and inverse velocity

If

we are

effectively

would
to

be

invert

removed.

often require a more


include

stacking.

predictive

These techniques

wil 1 be consi alered in Part 4.

Part

2 - The Convolutional

Model

Page 2 -

18

Introduction to Seismic Inversion Methods

Fig.

2.16. Several multiple generating mechanisms.

TIME

TIME

[sec)

[sec)

0.7

REFLECTION
COEFFICIENT

SERIES

Fig.

Brian Russell

2.17.

0.7

R.C.S.
WITH

ALL

MULTIPLES

Reflectivi ty sequenceof Fig.

2.5.

with

and without multipl es.

Part 2 - The ConvolutionalModel

Page 2 -

19

PART 3 - RECURSIVE INVERSION - THEORY


mmmm---'

,-

'

Part 3 - Recurstve Inversion - Theory

_-

Page 3 -

ntroducton

to SeJsmic Znversion Methods

Brian Russell

PART 3 - RECURSIVE INVERSION - THEORY


3.1

Discrete
,

Inversion
,

In section 2.2, we saw that reflectivity


was defined in terms of
acoustic impedancechanges. The formula was written:

Yi+lV+l
' iV! 2i+1' Zi
ri--yoi'+lVi+l+
YiVi---Zi..+l
+ Zi
where

r -- refl ecti on coefficient,

/0-- density,
V -- compressional velocity,
Z -- acoustic impedance,
and

Layer i overlies Layer i+1.

If we have the true reflectivity


available to us, it is possible to
recover the a.coustic impedanceby inverting the above formula. Normally, the
inverse' formulation is simply written down,but here we will supply the
missing steps for completness. First,

notice that:

Zi+l+Zi

Zi+1- Zt

2 Zi+1

Zi+l+Zi

Zi+1- Zi

2 Zf[

Zi+l+ Zi

Zi+l+Zi

Zi+l+Zi

I +ri- Zi+l
+Zi + Zi+l
+2i

Zi+l
+Zi

Also

I-

ri--

Ther'efore

Zi+l
Zi

l+r.

ill,

Part 3 - RecursiveInversion- Theory

Page

Introduction to Seismic Invers-onMethods

Brian Russell

pv-e-

TIME

(sec]

0.7

REFLECTION
COEFFICIENT
SERIES

Fig.

Part

3.1,

RECOVERED
ACOUSTIC
IMPEDANCE

Applying
the recursiveinversionformulato a
simple,and exact, reflectivity.

3 - Recursive

Inversion - Theory

Page 3 -

!ntroductt
9r

on to Se1 smJc ! nversi on Methods

; ; -

9rgrt-k'k9r9r -; ;

Or, the final

Brian

Russell

.................................................

esult-

l+r i

Zi+[=Z

This is called

the discrete

recursive

inversion

formula and is the basis

of many current inversion techniques. The formula tells us that if we know


the acoustic impedanceof a particular layer and the reflection coefficient at
the base of that layer, we may recover the acoustic impedance of the next
layer. Of course we need an estimate of the first layer impedanceto start us
off.
Assumewe can estimate this value for layer one. Then

l+rl

Z2:
Zli r1

Z3=
Z2 11
+r2
-

To find the nth impedancefrom the first,

Figure
reflection

3.1

shows the

coefficients

application

derived

in

and so on ...

we simply write the formula as

of the

section

recursive

2.2.

formula to

As expected,

the

the full

acoustic impedance was recovered.


Problems

encountered

When the

with

real
i

data
!

recursive inversion formula is applied to real data,

that two serious problems are encountered.

we find

These problems are as follows-

(i) FrequencyBandlimi ti ng
_

Referring back to Figure 2.2


bandlimited

when

it

we see that

is convolved

with

the reflectivity

the seismic

wavelet.

is severely
Both

the

low frequency componentsand the high frequency componentsare lost.

Part 3 - Recursive Inversion

- Theory

Page 3 -

"

Introduction to SeismicInversion Methods

0.2

Brian Russell

V) 'V,

Vo:1000
m

Where:
{ASSUME
j: l)

-- V,= 1000 i-o.t

R = +0.2

-- 1500 ec'.
m
(a)
- 0.1

'0.2

R
R=

Vo=1000m

= 818ii.m
R=-0.1 -'+ 1
R =+0.2
R: -0.1

Figure 3.2 Effect of banUlimitingon reflectivity,


single reflection coefficient,

where(a) shows

anU (b) showsbandlimited

refl ecti on coefficient.


I

__

___

Part 3 - Recursire Inversion - Theory

Page 3 -

Introduction

to Seismic

(ii)

Noise

The

inclusion

Inversion

of coherent

makethe estimate reflectivity

Methods

or random noise

let

us first

into

the seismic

Russell

'trace

will

deviate from the true reflectivity.

To get a feeling for the severity


inversion,

Brian

of

the above limitations

use simple models. To illustrate

on recursire

the

effect

of

bandlimiting, consider Figure 3.Z. It shows the inversion of a single spike


(Figure 3.2 (a)) anUthe inversion of this spike convolved with a Ricker
wavelet (Figure 3.2 (b)).
Even with this very high frequency banUwidth

wavelet, we have totally lost our abil.ity to recover the low frequency
componentof the acoustic impedance.
In Figure 3.3 the model derived in

minimum-phase wavelet.

section Z.2 has been convolved with a

Notice that the inversion of the data again shows a

loss of the low frequency component. The loss of the low frequency component
is the most severe problem facing us in the inversion of seismic data, for
is extremely

Oifficult

to

directly

recover

spectrum, we may recover muchof

the

it.

original

At

the

it

high end of the

frequency content using

deconvolution techniques. In part 5 we will address the problem of recovering


the low frequency component.
Next,

consider

sources, but will

reflectivity.
reflection train

the

problem of noise.

always tend

to

interfere

This noise
with

our

may be from many


recovery of the true

Figure 3.4 showsthe effect of adding the full


(including

multiple

transmission losses) to the model reflectivity.

As we can see on the diagram, the recovered acoustic impedancehas the


basic shape as the true acoustic impedance, but becomesincreasingly

same

incorrect

with depth. This problemof accumulatingerror is compoundeU


by the amplitude
problemnsintroduced by the transmission losses.

Part 3 - Recurslye Inversion - Theory

Page 3 -

Introduction

to Seismic Invers,ion Methods

Brian Russell

pv-,

TIME

0.?

REFLECTION
COEFFICIENT
SERIES

Fig.

3.3.

RECOVERED
ACOUSTIC
IMPEDANCE

The effect

SYNTHETIC

INVERSION

(MWNUM-PHASE
WAVELET)

OF SYNTHETIC

of bandlimiting on recurslye inversion.

TIME

TIME

(see)

(re.c)

0.7

REFLECTION
COEFFICIENT
SERIES

Fig.

Part 3 - Recursive

3.4.

RECOVERED
ACOUSTIC
IMPEDANCE

The effect

Inversion

- Theory

R.C.S.
WITH ALL
MULTIPLES

of noise on recursive

RECOVERED
ACOUSTIC
IMPEDANCE

inversion.

Page 3 -

Introduction

to Seismic Inversion Methods

3.3 Continuous

Brian Russell

Inversion

A logarithmic

relationship

is

often used to

approximate the above

formulas. This is derived by noting that we can write r(t)


function in the following way:

as a continuous

r(t) -- Z(t+dt)
Z(t+dt)+- Z{t)
_ 1 d Z(t)
Z() - ' z'(t)

Or

! d In Z(t)

r(t) =

The inverse

formula

dt
is

thust

Z(t)=Z(O)
exp
2y r(t)dt.
0

The precedingapproximation
is valid if
case.

r(t) <10.3 which is usually the

A paper by Berteussen and Ursin (1983), goes into muchmore detail

the continuous versus discrete approximation.

Figures 3.5 and 3.6 from their

paper showthat the accuracy of the continuous inversion algorithm is


4% of the correct value between reflection

If

on

coefficients

within

of -0.5 and +0.3.

our reflection coefficients are in the order of + or - 0.1, an even

simplerapproximation
maybe made
by dropp'ing
the logarithmicrelationship:
t

1d
Z(t)_==
Z(t)--2'Z(O)
fr(t) dt
r(t)--
-dr
VO

Part 3 - Recursive Inversion - Theory

Page 3 -

Introduction to Seismic Inversion Methods

,,

,m

I +gt
-1.0
-0.9
-0.8
-0.7
-0.6
-0.5
-0.4
-0.3
-0.2
-0.1
0.0
0.1
0.2
0.3

Fig. 3.5

Brian Russell

xp
(26)

IIIII

Difference

0.0
0.05
0.11
0.18
0.25
0.33
0.43
0.
0.667
0.8182
1.0
1.222
1.500
1.86

0.14
0. I?
0.20
0.25
0.30
0.37
0.45
0.5
0.670
0.8187
1.0
1.221
1.492
1.82

-0.14
-0.12
-0.09
-0.07
-0.05
-0.04
'
--0.02
--0.01
-0.003
--0.0005
0.0
0.001
0.008
0.04

0.4
0.5

2.33
3.0

2.23
2.7

o.1
0.3

0.6

4.0

3.3

0.7

0.7
0.8
0.9
1.0

5.7
9.0
19.0
co

4.1
5.0
6.0
7.4

1.6
4.0
13.0
o

Numericalcpari son of discrete and continuous


i nversi

on.

(Berteussen and Ursin, 1983)

$000
}m
MPEDANCE
(O
ISCR.
) r-niL
O

${300
-O
IFFERENCE
o

SO0

OI FFERENCE( SCALEDUP)

T 'E

Fig. 3.6

t SECONOS

Cparisonbetween
impedance
cputatins basedona
discrete and a continuousseismic del.

(Berteussenand Ursin, 1983)

Part 3 - Recursire .Inversion - Theory

Page 3 -

Introduction'to

Seismic Inversion

Methods

Brian Russell

PART 4 - SEISMIC PROCESSINGCONSIDERATIONS

Part 4 - Seismic Processing Considerations

Page 4 -

ntroduction

4.1

to Seismic nverson Methods

B.r.ian Russell

Introduction

Havinglookedat a simple model'of the seismic trace, anu at the


recursire inversion alogorithmin theory, we will nowlook at the problem of

processingreal seismiceata in order to get the best results fromseismic


inversion. We may group the key processingproblemsinto the following
categories:

( i ) Amp
1i tu de recovery.
(i i) Vertical

resolution

improvement.

(i i i ) Horizontal resol uti on improvement.


(iv)

Noise elimination.

Amplitudeproblemsare a majorconsiderationat the early processing


stagesandwewill look at both deterministicamplitude
recoveryandsurface
consistent

residual static time corrections.

Vertical resolution improvement

will involve a discussion of aleconvolution and wavelet processing techniques.

In

our discussion of horizontal resolution we will look at

the resolution

improvement
obtained in migration, using a 3-D example.Finally, wewill
consider several approaches
to noiseelimination, especially the elimination
of multi pl es.

Simply stateu, to invert our seismic data we usually assume the


And to arrive at an
one-dimensional model given in the previous section.
approximationof this model (that is, that each trace is a vertical,
band-limited reflectivity
function) we must carefully process our data with
these

considerations in minU. Figure 4.1 showsa processing flow which could

be useUto do preinversion processing.

Part 4 - Seismic Processing Considerations

Page 4 -

Introduction

to Seismic Inversion

Methods

Brian Russell

INPUT RAW DATA

DETERMINISTIC
AMPLITUDE

CORRECTIONS

,.

SURFACE-CONSI STENT
AMPt:ITUDE ANAL'YSIS

_m

mlm

SURFACE-CONS ISTENT

DECONVOLUTIO,
NFOLLOWED

BY HI GH RESOIJUTI.ON DECON
i

SURFACE-CONSISTENT
STATI CS ANAIJYSIS

VELOCITY ANAUYSIS

APPbY STATICS AND VEUOCITY

MULTIPLE

ATTENUATION

STACK

MI GRATI ON
,

Fig.

ll

'

Simpl
i fiedi nversi
onprocessing
flow.

4.1.

11

Part 4 - Seismic Processing Considerations

--

,11

Page 4 -

Inl;roducl:ion 1:oSeJsmlc Invers1on Nethods

4.2

BrJan Russell

Am.p'l
i tu.de..P,.ecovery

The most dJffJcult job in the pocessing of any seismic line

is

econstuctingthe amplJtudes
of the selsmJc
taces as they wouldhavebeenJf
thee

were no dJs[urbJnginf'luences present.

We normally make the

simplJficationthat the distortionof the seJsmic


amplJtudes
maybe put into
three main categories'spheJcaldivergence, absorptJon,and tansmJssion
loss.

Based on a consideration of

these three factors, we maywrJte aownan

approximatefunctJonfor the total earth attenuation-

At: AO*
(b

/ t) * exp(-at),
where

anU

Thus, if
data,
formula.

the

= time,

At = recorded
amplitude,
A0 = true ampl
i tude,
a,b

= constants.

we estimate the constants in the above equation from the seismic

true amplitudesof the data coulUbe recoveredby using the inverse


The deterministic

amplitude correction and trace

to

trace

mean

scaling will accountfor the overall gross changesin amplitude. However,


there may still be subtle (or even not-so-subtle) amplitude problems
associatedwith poorsurface conditions or other factors. To compensate
for
these effects, it is often advisable to computeand apply surface-consistent

gain corrections. This correction involves computing


a total gain value for
each trace and then decomposing
this single value in the four components

Aij=
SixRjxG
kxMkX
j,
where A = Total amplitude factor,

M = Offset

component,

S = Shot component,

X = Offset

distance,

R:

i,j

Receiver

component,

G = CDP component, and

Part 4 - Seismic Processing Considerations

= shot,receiver

pos.,

k = CDP position.

Page 4 -

Introduction to Seismic .Inversion Methods

Brian Russell

SURFACE
SUEF'A

AND

CONSIb'TEh[O{

T |tVE :

,RiL-rER

Fig.

4.2.

Surface and sub-surface geometryand


surface-consistent decomposition. (Mike Graul).
,

Part 4 - SeismicProcessing
Considerations

Page 4 -

Introduction

to Seismic Inversion Methods

Figure 4.g

Brian Russell

(from Mike Graul's unpublished course notes) shows the

geometryusedfor this analysis. Notice that the surface-consistent


statics
anti aleconvolutionproblemare similar. For the statics problem,the averaging

can be 1oneby straight summation.For the amplitude problemwemust


transform the above equation into additive form using the logarithm:

InAij=
InSi +InRj+InGk+lnkMijX.
The

problem can then be treated exactly the same way as in the

statics

case. Figure 4.3, fromTaner anti Koehler (1981), showsthe effect of doing
surface consistent amplitude and statics corrections.

4.3 Imp.
rov.
ement_
o.[_Ver.
t.i.ca.1..Resoluti
on
Deconvolution

is

process by which an attempt is made to

seismic wavelet from the seismic trace,

remove the

leaving an estimate of reflectivity.

Let us first discussthe "convolution"part of "deconvolution" starting with


the equation for the convolutional model

st--wt* r t

st= the seismictrace,

where

wt= the seismicwavelet,


rt= reflection coefficient series,
* = convolution operation.
In

the

frequency domain
S(f)

The

procedure
reflection

deconvol ution

and consists
coefficients.

W(f) x R(f)

process

of

is

simply the

reverse

of the convolution

"removing" the wavelet shape to

reveal

the

We must design an operator to do this, as in the

fol 1owlng equati on-

rt: st* o

whereOr--operator-- inverseof wt .

Part 4 - Seismic Processing Considerations


,

Page 4 -

Introduction

to Seismic

Inversion

Methods

ii

Brian

Russell

11

1'

ii

'..,' ,

,"

"

"

d.

Preliminary
stack
bet'ore
surface
consistent
static
andomplilude corrections.

Fig.

4.3.

Stacks with and without

Stockwith surfaceconsistent
staticand amplitudecorrections.

surface-consi stent

corrections. (TaneranuKoehler,1981).

Part 4 - Seismic Processing Considerations

Page4 - 7

Introduction

to Seismic Inversion Methods

Brian Russell

In the frequency domain,this becomes


R(f) = W(f) x 1/W(f) .

After this extremely simple introduction, it

may appear that the

deconvolutionproblemshouldbe easy to solve. This is not the case, and the


continuing research into the problem testifies to this. There are two main
problems. Is our convolutionalmodelcorrect, and, if the modelis correct,
can we derive the

true

wavelet

from the

data?

The

answer to the first

questionis that the convolutionalmodelappearsto be the best modelwe have


comeup with so far. The main problem is in assuming
that the wavelet does
not vary with time. In our discussionwe will assumethat the time varying
problemis negligible within the zoneof interest.

The secondproblemis much more severe, since it requires solving the


ambiguousproblemof separatinga wavelet and reflectivity sequencewhenonly
the seismic trace is known. To get around this problem, all deconvolution or

wavelet estimation programsmakecertain restrictive assumptions,either about


the wavelet or

the

reflectivity.

There are

methods: those which make restrictive

two classes of deconvolution

phase assumptions and can be considered


,

true wavelet processingtechniquesonly whenthese phaseassumptionsare met,


and those

which do not

make restrictive

phase assumptions and can be

consideredas true wavelet processingmethods. In the first category are


(1) Spiking deconvolution,
(2) Predictive

deconvolution,

(3) Zero phase deconvolution, and


(4) Surface-consi stent deconvoluti on.

Part 4 - Seismic Processing Considerations

Page 4 -

Introduction

to Seismic Inversion Methods

Brian Russell

(a)

Fig.

A comparison of non surface-consistent and surface-consistent


decon on pre-stack data. {a) Zero-phase deconvolution.
{b) Surface-consistent soikinB dconvolution.

4.4

(b),
Fig. 4.5

Surface-consistent decon comparisonafter stack.


(a) Zero-phase aleconvolution. (b) Surface-consistent
deconvol ution.

'--'-

,t

_ _

,,

Part 4 - .Seismic
Processing
Consioerations

,_

Page4 -

Introduction

to Seismic Invers.ion Methods

Brian Russell

In the second category are found


(1) Wavelet estimation using a well 1og (Strat Decon).

(Hampson
and Galbraith 1981)
(2) Maximum-1ikel ihood aleconvolution.

(Chi et al,
Let

us

illustrate

the

lg84)
effectiveness

surface-consi

stent

aleconvolution.

surface-consi

stent

scheme involves

components.
di recti

ons-

must therefore

We
common

con,non offset

Referring

the

of

one

of.

to Figure 4.,

convolutional

average

source, commonreceiver,

over

four

notice

proauct

different

ways to perform it.

that

of four
geometry

common depth point (CDP), and

(COS). The averaging must be performed iteratively

are several different

the methods,

and there

The example in Figures 4.4 ana 4.5

shows an actual surface-consi stent case study which was aone in the following
way'

(a) Computethe autocorrelations

of each trace,

(b) average the autocorrelations in each geometry eirection to get four


average autocorrel ati OhS,

(c) derive and apply the minimum-phase


inverse of each waveform, and
() iterate through this procedure to get an optimumresult.
Two points to note

when you are

looking

at

the

case study are the

consistent definition of the waveform


in the surface-consistentapproachan
the subsequent improvementof the stratigraphic

interpretability

We can compareall of the above techniques

page.

of the stack.

using Table 4-1 on the next

The two major facets of the techniques which will

be comparedare

the

wavelet estimation procedure and the wavelet shaping procedure.

Part 4 - Seismic Processing Considerations

Page 4 -

10

Introduction to Seismic Inversion Methods

Table

4-1

Comparison of Deconvolution MethoUs


m

METHOD

Spiking

Brian Russell

WAVELET ESTIMATION

WAVELETSHAPING

Min.imum
phase assumption
Randomrefl ecti vi ty

Ideally shapedto spike.


In practice, shapedto minimum

assumptions.

phase,higherfrequencyoutput.

Predi cti ve

No assumptions about

Does not whiten data well.

Deconvol uti on

wavelet

Removes
short andlong period

Deconvol ution

multiples.

Does not affect

phaseof wayelet for long lags.


..1_,

Zero

Phase

Deconvol utton

Zero phaseassumption.
Randomrefl ectt vi ty

Amplitude spectrumi$

assumption.

whi tened.

Phase is not altered.

Canshapeto desired output.


Surface-cons.

Deconvolution

Minimumor zero phase.


Randomreflecti vi ty

Ampli rude spectrum i s

assumption.

whitenedless than in single

Phasecharacteri s improved.

trace

methods.

Stratigraphic

No phase assumption.

Phase of wavelet is zeroed.

Deconvol ution

However, well must match

Amplitude
spectrum
not

sei smi c.

whi tened.

Maximum-

No phase assumption.

Phase of wavelet is zeroed

L ik el i hood

Sparse-spike assumption.

Amp
1i rude spectrumi s

deconvol ution

Part 4 - Seismic Processing Considerations

whi tened.

Page 4

11'

Introduction

4.4

to Seismic

Lateral

Inversion

Methods

Brian

Russell

Resol uti on

The complete three-dimensional (3-D) diffraction problemis shownin


Figure 4.6 for a modelstudy taken fromHerman,et al (1982). Wewill look'at
line 108, which cuts obliquely across a fault and also cuts across a reef-like
structure.

Note that

it misses the second reef

structure.

Figure 4.7 shows the result of processing the line.


In the stacked
section we maydistinguish two types of diffractions, or lateral events which
do not represent true geology.

The first

type are due to point reflectors

the plane of the section, and include the


corners at the base of the reef structure

secondtype are out-of-te-plane

in

sides of the fault and the sharp

which was crossed by the line.

diffractions,

The

often called "side-swipe". This

is most noticeable by the appearance of energy from the second reef booy which
was not crossed. In the two-dimensional (2-D) migration, we have correctly
removed

the

2-D

out-of-the-plane
problems.

diffraction

diffractions.

The final

patterns,

but

are

The full

3-D

migration

migrated section has also

still

bothere

the

corrects for these

accounted for

positioned evehts such as the obliquely dipping fault.

by

incorrectly

This brief summaryhas

not been intended as a complete summaryof the migration procedure, but rather

as a warning that
structural

migration {preferably 3-D) mustbe performedon complex

lines for the fol 1 owing reasons:

(a)

To correctly position dipping events on the seismic section, and

(b)

To remove

diffracted

Although migration

events.

can compensatefor someof the

lateral

resolution

problems, we must rememberthat this is analogous to the aleconvolution problem


in that not all of the interfering

be aware that the

interference,

true

effects may be removed. Therefore, we must

one-dimensional

seismic trace,

free of any lateral

is impossible to achieve.

Part 4 - Seismic Processing Considerations

Page 4 -

12

Introduction

to Seismic Inversion Methods

Brian Russell

71

lol

I
131

101

131

(a] 3-

108

D MODEL

..................................

LINE
.............................

.........................................

....................................

{hi 880
Fig.
i

4.6.

LAYOU

3-D model experiment.


mm

ml

(Herman
et al, 1982).

mm

Part 4 Seismic Processing Considerations

Page 4 -

13

Introduction

4.5

Notse

to Seismic Inversion Methods

Attenuation

As we' discussed in an earlier

either

Brian Russell

andom 'or coherent.

section, seismic noise can be classified

Random noise

is

as

reduced by the stacking process

quite well unlessthe signal-to-noise ratio dropsclose to one. In this case,


a coherencyenhancement
programcan be used, which usually involves sometype
of trace mixing or FK filtering.
However,the interpreter mustbe aware that
any mixing of the data will "smear" trace amplitudes, makingthe inversion
result on a particular trace less reliable.
Coherent

noise

is much more difficult

sources of coherent noise is multiple

Two of

to eliminate.

One of

major

interference, explained in section 2.4.

the major methodsused in the elimination of multiples

filtering

the

are

the FK

method,and the newerInverse Velocity Stacking method. The Inverse

VeiocityStackingmethod
involvesthe followingsteps:
(1) Correct the data using the proper NMOvelocity,
(2) Model the data as a linear

sumof parabolic shapes,

(This involves transforming to the Velocity domain),

(3) Filter outthe parabolic


components
with a moveout
greaterthansome
pre-determined
limit (in the order of 30 msec),and
(4) Perform the inverse transform.

Figure 4.8, taken from Hampson


(1986), showsa comparisonbetweenthe two
methodsfor a typical multiple problemin northernAlberta. The displays are
all' coon offset stacks.

Notice

that

although both methods have performed

well on the outside traces, the Inverse Velocity Stacking methodworks best on

the inside traces. Figure4.9, also fromHampson


(1986), showsa comparison
of
final

stacks with and without multiple attenuation.

It is obvious 'from this

comparison
that the result of inverting the section whichhas not had multiple
attenuation

would be to introduce spurious velocities

into the solution.

The

importanceof multiple elimination to the preprocessingflow cannot therefore


be overemphasized.

Part 4 - Seismic Processing Consideration

,=m__

Page -

14

Introduction to Seismic Inversion Methods

Brian Russell.

!lilt
tiiti
ll!1111iitt
i)tt
iltli
ii/lit
tttl
ill

(b] LINEld8 - 2-D MIGRATION

IIIIIIll!!1111111111111it
I!1111111
I!11111111111illl
illIiIIIIIIIIIil!111111tllilil!illlllll!111illlll
[1111111111111111111111111
III!!1111
I!111111111111111
IIIIIIIilllllllll!111111111111111111111
?111[i
IIIIIIIII
!1111111111111111
IIII!IIIiillilllllillllllllllliillllllllllllh

.,

}!l!iilll
lllllilllllll
i!iiJ
:illllllllllllilitiilillit!illllll
,o

111lllllllllllllllllllll1111llllll
Iilllllll!ll!llll
I111
illllllllilllllllllllllllllllllllllii{lilllllllllllll

"fillllllllll!1111illi!111
IIIIIIIII
IIIIIII1111111111
IIIIIlillilllllll!1111!1!111111111
'
Col LINE 108 - 3-D MIGRATION

Fg. 4.7. Migrationof modeldata shown


in Fg. 4.6.

- -(Hermanet al, 1982).


Part 4 - Seismic ProcessingConsiderations

Page 4 -

15

Introduction

to Seismic

Inversion

Methods

Brian

AFTER

AFTER

F-K MULTIPLE

INVERSE VELOCITY STACK


MULTIPLE ATTENUATION

INPUT

Russell

ATTENUATION
J. '

"

' ')'%':!!t!'!11!1'1

';.m,:'!:',./--l- r'm--

"';;:.m;: .... ,;lliml;..

all

m#l

Fig, 4.8.

Commonoffset

stacks

calculated

from data before multiple

attenuation,
after inverse velocity
and after F-K multiple attenuation.

stack multiple attenuation,


(Hampson, 1986)

888

Zone d
Interest

1698
-4
Secondreal-dataset conventional
stackwithout
multiple
attenuation.

'", ......

,,t./:,.t.,.

lee

,ii%' .t

---';-'
"" ""

).

;,<,:u(:'J,.J
L,..,!I',,',
,'; ,
,
, ,

.% '.

' "'

"'"t"

1%';J
'
'

,,,,

I ,,,,,..... '1"' ',''...;t(' ,)",'.m,,"".


,,, ';

t,

..'t,..'"'i'

.... -....

; -'".' ,..'....
'. 2>.': '..', ;,%"'1

'" "'

Zone of

,,, .tiill).);l',"P,')'"'".r'"mm"""P"
")r'"
,,..,.,,..,,,_.
,,.,.....,...,..,...,..,...,....,,,.,.,..
gt'
..,,,. ' '" - ..... ,

Interest

.. ,,,
,,p}h?.,.,,
r.,.
.}.U.,..,
,nm,
";'
........
,,,,
../.
,.', .'-%....
,'......._
,,,,.,.,,,,,..,
.l,
), .,
' ,,{.
,,m,l,,
.''
','...r'
....
'.""::"''""""="'"""
Fig. 4.9.

Second real data stack after inverse velocity


multiple attenuation.
(Hampson, 1986)

Part 4 - Seismic Processing Considerations

stack

Page 4 -

16

Introduction

to Seismic Inverslon

Methods

Brian Russell

PART 5 - RECURSIVE INVERSION - PRACTICE


_

Part

5 - Recursive

Inversion

- Practice

..

Page 5 -

Introduction

5.1

to Seismic

The Recurslye

Inversion

Inversion

Methods

Brian

Russell

Method

We have nowreached a point

where we may start aiscussing the various

algorithms currently usedto invert seismicdata. Wemustremember


that all
these techniquesare baseUon the assumptionof a one-aimensionalseismic
trace model. Tat is, we assumethat all the corrections which were aiscussed
in section 4 have been correctly applied, leaving us with a seismic section in

whic each trace represents a vertical, band-limiteU reflectivity


this section we will

series.

In

look at someof the problems inherent in this assumption.

The most popular techniquecurrently used to invert seismic Uata is

referred

to as recursire

inversion

and goes under such trade

names as SEISLOGana

VERILOG. The basic equations used are given in part 2, anU can be written

Zi+
1 Zi

ri--Zi+l+
Zi
where

and

The seismic data are

<===__===>
Zi+l
=Zi

LIJ

r i = ith reflection

coefficient,

Zi --/Vi= density
x velocity.
simply assumeato fit

the forward model and is

inverted usingthe inverse relationship. However,as wasshownin section 3,


one of te key problemsin the recursire inversion of seismic data is the loss
of the low-frequency component. Figure 5.1 shows an exampleof an input
seismic

section

aria the

resulting pseuao-acoustic impeaance without

the

incorporationof low frequency information. Notice that it resemblesa


phase-shifteU version of the seismicata. The questionof introUuclng the
low frequencycomponent
involvestwo separateissues. First, wheredo we get
the low-frequency
component
from, ana, second,howao we incorporateit?

Part

5 - Recurslye

Inversion

- Practice

Page 5 -

2.

Introduction

to Seismic Inversion Methods

Brian Russell

1171121e9leS1ol 92 93

i'11
I I Ittltl
=::::::::::---lll[l1111t
' 1tlllttllltl
Illl1t1 l!IIit!
'ti! llltfltll!!l
I I !1!tn'il, ,
"

--''
'
.

,
'

.- -.

.,.,
4

,,
.... _.

f .

............
.........

-::-=

-,
., ,l,,..,,,
,-,, ..,, ,,,,.,,
,,,I,....,
.......
.,,
. ....
.,%.
' .,, ,.,....
i .......
.......
,;.
.,
..,
..... .......,
.,.,,,,..,..,
,,,.,,..
.....,
.,.............
. '2
q, ,,
,..
J.I .,,,
.,
.......
: .......
:,.. . , . ,'-..
....

,',:''

....2Y'

___ ....
.. ,.
-

.......

...
- ]
,',,..,
,v,
:,..l.;..'..ll;ql
.n....................
...;'.
;....:
',J',
.. ,
...................
''',,:'l,fm;
,' ,,,'
',',,
",,','",','
":''"m
iq't''a
....:.,
,],'
.' ' - '""W',-

. ,'.

:, m,'.

lJ ":!

- (
,,

- ,,.-....,'.;.',-,..
.........

7*

. :ci

'

':; , /....................

. ....

-(-( .,(''":"'7

' . , .

x{

....

..................
m:''

,_

............

...................

':.,

......

....- ......... " 7'

"''

.... ; '_ ],;,' ; '--,-----m'l

r'u'" $ .... ,......r ... <

- ' '' /."


,,,_
. ; .... ,.:.-..............
......
%--=:
. ...

=". ....
' . .''q

7' ' '. '

.----

". q
.....
...........
.... ,...........
.....

';u

,.,,-.,,?'..%.,

*'dti',i

lll'i'/lt' i"'; :;tl,i21..l'*.'.'l,-ii.''..,:b-''?

?'' ;q .('''"",h/''}
''"' c'((''"..........
"

.....

"

'1 '

'

' '

.... ,
, -'

'

.....

--.- -_

'

"'I'iI
,,._.'.';'".

........

:: ::

......

'.--
'. ,,,' ,,'-<.,
,. ,, ,

(a) OriinalSeismic
Data. Heavylines indicatemajorreflectors.
N

'"

"

0.7
0.7
0.8

0.8
0.9

'I

10

!l

1.0
I 1
I

1.2

12

.I
.!

1.3

!.3

1 4

1.4

1.5

1.5
1.6

1.7
1.7

18
i

(b)

19

Recursiveinversion of data in (a).

Figure
Part 5 - Recursive Inversion - Practice

5.1

(Galbraith and Millington, 1979)


Page 5 -

Introduction to Seismic Inversion Methods

Brian Russell

Thelow frequencycomponent
can be foundin oneof three ways'
(1) From a filtered

sonic log

The sonic log is the best wayof derivinglow-frequency


information in
the vicinity of the well. However,
it suffers fromtwomainproblems'it is
usually stretched with respectto the seismicdata andit lacks.a lateral

component.
Theseproblems,
discussed
in GalbraithandMillington(1979), are
solved by using a stretching algorithm which stretches the sonic log
information to fit

the seismic data at selected control points.

(2) From seismic velocity

analysis

In this case, interval velocities are derived from the stacking velocity
functions along a seismicline usingDix' formula. The resulting function

will be quite noisyandit is advisable to do someformof two-dimensional


filtering on them. In Figure 5.2(a), a 2-D polynomialfit has beendone to
smoothout the function.

This final

set of

traces represents the filtered

interval velocity in the 0-10 Hz rangefor eachtrace and may be added


directly to the invertedseismictraces. Refer to rindseth (1979), for more
de ta i 1 s.

(3) Froma geological model


Using all
incorporated.

available sources, a

blocky geological model can be built

and

This is a time-consuming method.

Part 5 - Recursire Inversion - Practice

Page 5 -

4.

Introduction

to Seismic InversiOn Methods


.

Brian Russell

70000

GOOO0

$0000

(pvl 4oooo

'/sgc

( b)

$oooo
ZOOO0

I0000

/ --V..308
(PV)*
3460
,

(a)
i

Figure 5.2

VELocrrY SURFACE 2rid ORDERPOLYN


Frr
s mTZeH CUTFtT
tRussell and Lindseth,

Part 5 - RecursiveInversion- Practice

Page5 -

1982).

Introduction

to Seismic Inversion Methods

Brian Russell

Second, the low-frequency component


can be addedto the high frequency

component
by either adding reflectivity stage or the impedance
stage. In
section 2.3, it wasshownthat the continuousapproximationto the forwardand
inverse equations was given by
Inverse Equation

Forward Equati on

n Z(t)
r(t) =-1 d 1dt
-

<::==> Z(t)

=Z(O)
exp
20r(t)dt.

Sincethe previoustransforms
are nonlinear(because
of the logarithm),
Galbraith and Millington (1979) suggestthat the addition of the low-frequency

component
shouldbe madeat the reflectivity stage. In the SEISLOG
technique
they are addedat the velocity stage. However,
dueto other considerations,
this should not affect the result too much.

Of course, we are really interested in the seismic velocity rather than

the acoustic impedance.


Figure5.2(b), fromLindseth(lg79), shows
that an
approximatelinear relationship exists between velocity and acoustic
impedance, given by
V = 0.308 Z + 3460 ft/sec.

Notice

that

this

relationship

is good for carbonates and clastics and

poor for evaporitesand shouldtherefore be usedwith caution. A moreexact


relationship may be found by doing crossplots from a well close to the
prospect. However,
usinga similar relationshipwemayapproximately
extract
velocity information from the recoveredacoustic impedance.

Figure 5.3 showslow frequencyinformationderived from filtered

sonic

logs. The final pseudo-acoustic


impedancelog is shownin Figure5.4
including the low-frequency
component.Notice that the geologicalmarkersare
moreclearly visible on the final inverted section.

Part 5 - Recurslye Inversion

- Practice

Page 5 -

Introduction

to Seismic Inversion

Figure 5.3

Methods

Brian Russell

LowFrequency
comDonent
derived from"st.reched:'sonic lo.

0.7
0.8
0.9

0.9

l.O

1.0

1.1

1.1

1.2

1.2

1.3

1.:)

1.4

1.4

1.5

I$

1.6

1.6

1.7

1.7

1.8
19

19

Figure 5.4

Final inversioncombininFigures 5.1(b) and 5.3.


Lines indicate major reflectors.

(Galbraith and Millington, 1979)


Part

5 - Recursive

Inversion

- Practice

Page 5 -

Introduction

to Seismic Inversion

In sugary,

Methods

Brian Russell

the recursive methodof seismic inversion may be given by the

fol 1owing flowchart'

INTRODUCE
LOW
FREQUENCIES
)
I.voDO-COc

ICORRECT
TO
PSEUDO
' VELOCITIES

CONVERT
TO
DEPTH
I

Recursi ve Inversion
,

Procedure

.,

A commonmethod of display used for inverted sections is to convert to


actual

interval

transit

times.

coloured according to a lithological

These transit

times are then contoured and

colour scheme. This is an effective way

of presentingthe information especially to those not totally familiar'with


normal

seismic

sections.

Part 5 - Recursive Inversion

- Practice

Page 5 -

Introduction

to Seismic

Inversion

(a)

Methods

Brian Russell

Frequency
(e)

(b)

Fig.

(a) Frequency response of a theoretical

differentiator.

(b) Frequencyresponseof a theoretical integrator.


(Russell and Lindseth, !982 )
,m

Part

5 -Recursire

Inversion

- Practice

,i

ml

Page 5 -

Introduction

5.2

to Seismic

Inver.si.on

Methods

Brian

Russell

I nfor.marl
o.nI ?_Th.e.
Lo..w
.F.r.equ.e.
ncycompo..ne.
nt
The key factor which sets inverted data apart from normal seismic data is

the inclusion of the low frequency component,regardless of howthis component

is introduced. In this section we will look at the interpretational


advantages of introducing this component. The information in this section is
taken from a paper by Russell and Lindseth (1982).
We

start

by

assuming

reflectivity-impedance

the

extremely

simple

moael

for

the

relationship which was introduced in part 5.1. However,

we will neglect the logarithmic relationship of the more complete theory (this
is justifiea
for reflection coefficients less that 0.1), so tat
t

_1dZ(t)<=__==>
Z(t)
=2Z(O)j
0r(t)at'

r(t) - dt-

If we consider a single harmonic component, we may derive the frequency


response of this tel ationship, which is

dejwt
-dt
"-- jwejwt<===> . jwtdt= -jw

eJWt

where

w--

21Tf,

In words.,differentiation introducesa -6 riB/octaveslope from.the high


end of the spectrumto the low, and a +90 degree phase shift. Integration
introduces a -6 dB/octave slope from the low end to the high end,

and a -90

degree phase shift. Simpler still,


differentiation removeslow frequencies
and integration puts them in. Figure 5.5 illustrates these relationships.
But how aoes all this effect our geology? In
illustrated three basic geological models'
(1) Abrupt 1i thol ogi c change,

Figure 5,6 we have

(2) Transitional

lithologic

change, an

(3) Cyclical change.

Part

5 - Recursire

Inversion

- Practice

Page 5 -

10

Introduction to Seismic Inversion Methods

(A)MAJORLITHOLOGIC
CHANGE

Brian Russell

(B)TRANSITIONAL LITHOLOGIC
CHANGE

Vl

I
i

I.
I

I
I

V1

I
i
I

V:V+KZ

(C)CYCLICALCHANGE

Fig.

Part

5.6.

5 - Recursire

Threetypesof lithological models' (a) Major change,


(b) Transitional, (c) Cyclical. (Russell andLindseth, 1982).

Inversion

- Practice

Page 5-

11

Introduction to SeismicInversion Methods

Brian Russell

Wemayillustrate the effect of inversiononthesethreecasesbylooking


at both seismic anUsonic log Uata. To showthe loss of high frequencyon the

sonic log, a simple filter

is used,andthe associated
phaseshift is not

introUuced.

To start with, considera major1ithologic boundary


as exempl
i lieu by the
Paleozoicunconformity
of Western Canada,a changefroma clastic sequence
to

a carbonate
sequence.Figure5.7 shows
that mostof the information
aboutthe

largestepin velocityis containeU


in theD-10liz component
of the soniclog.
In Figure5.8, the seismicdataandfinal Uepthinversion
are shown.On the
seismic data, a major boundaryshowsup as simply a large reflection
coefficient, whereas,on the inversion, the large velocity step is shown.
RAWSONIC

FILTERED
SONICLOGS

VELOCITY FT/SEC

10000

10-90HZ

O-IOHZ

O-CJOHZ

TIME

0.3-

0.5-

Fig. 5.7. Frequency


components
of a sonic
log.

(Russell and Lindset, 1982).

, , ,

[ I

Part 5 - Recursire Inversion - Practice

Page 5 -

12

Introduction

to Seismic

Inversion

Methods

Brian

Russell

o'- .

(a)

.%;

DEPTH

SEISLOG
DEPTH

.....
lOP OF
"' . ""I:'ALEOZOIC
-425'

(b)

Fig.

.....
Part

5.8.

_.........

5 - Recursive

Major litholgical'change,
Saskatchewan example.
(a) Sesimic s_ection, (b) Inverted section.

_(R_qsell
....and Li,pqse_th,_!98_2)___
Inversion

- Practice

Page 5 -

13

Introduction to Seismic Inversion Methods

To illustrate

transitional

and cyclic

Brian Russell

change, a single examplewill be

used. Figure. 5.9 showsa soniclog from an offshore Tertiary basin,


illustrating the rampswhichshow a transitional velocity increase, and the
rapidly varyingcyclic sequences.
Noticethat the 0-10 Hzcomponent
contains
all the information about the ramps, but the cyclic sequenceis containedin

the 10-50 Hz component.Onlythe Oc component


is lost from the cyclic
component
uponremovalof the low frequencies. Figure 5.10 illustrates the
samepoint usingthe original seismicdata andthe final depthinversion.
In summary,
the informationcontainedin the low frequencycomponentof
the soniclog is .lost in the seismic data. This includessuchgeological
information as the dc velocity component,large jumps in velocity, and linear

velocity ramps. If this informationcould be recoveredandincluUeaduring


the inversion process, it wouldintroducethis lost geological information.

Fig. 5.9. Soniclog showing


cyclic andtransitionalstrata.
(Russell

Part

5 - Recurslye

Inversion

- Practice

and LinOseth, 1982)


Page 5 -

14

Introduction

to Seismic

Inversion

Methods

Brian

Russell

SEISMIC SECTION-CYCUC & TRANSITIONAL STRATA

(a)

(b)
i

1-3500

Part

5 - Recursive

Inversion

- Practice

Page 5 -

15

Introduction

5.3

to Seismic Inversion Methods

Brian Russell

Sei smical ly Derived Porosi ty


--

ILI

We have shownthat

seismic data may be quite

adequately inverted to

pseudo-velocity (and hence pseudo-sonic)information i f our corrections and


assumptions are reasonable.

true

sonic log

Thus,

information

we may try to treat

and extract

the inverted

petrophysical

data

data as

from

it,

specifically porosity values. Angeleri and Carpi (1982) have tried just this,
with mixed results. The flow chart for their procedure is shown in Figure
5.11. In their chart, the Wyllie formula and shale correction are given by:

At

where

--transit

time for fluid saturated rock,

Zstf= porefluid transittime,


btma:rockmatrixtransittime,
Vsh
= fractionalvolume
of shale,and

btsh: shaletransittime.
The derivation

of

porosity

control.

Figure 5.12 shows the

porosity

for

was tried on a line which had good well


plot

each of three wells.


from

the

seismic

well

log

Notice that the fit

clean sands and very poor in the dirty


information

of

sands.

section

only

porosity versus seismic


is reasonable in

the

Thus, we mayextract porosity


under

the

most

favourable

conditions, notably excellent well control and clean sand content.

Part 5 - Recurslye Inversion - Practice

Page 5 -

16

Introduction to Seismic Inversion Methods

Brian Russell

!ILI61C
.AT&'$[IS'MI
.AT&'

F ']w[tt
'ill
]

I-"' ''' m.,,,


_,ml.111,l lit

-[ ,gnu mill i' ill. Utl..I


%lOtOG

I IIITEIPllETATII
i

l!

WlltK

Fig.

' .

5.11. Porosity eval uati on flow diagram.

(AngeleriandCarpi, 1982).
,

WELL

__

ClII

"

PNIIVI

o..- OPt

,
e

WELL

,
I

.....

'
e

WELL

poeoItrv

I
e

,e

CPI

-e

1.4

1.7

1.8,

1.9

Fig.

5.12. Porosity profiles from seismic data and borehole data.

Shalepercentage
is al so displayed. (Angel
eri andCarpi, 1982).
i

Part

5 - Recursire

Inversion

- Practice

Page 5 -

17

Introduction

to Sei stoic Inversion

Methods

Brian

Russel 1

PART 6 - SPARSE-SPIKE INVERSION


{

Part 6 - Sparse-spike Inversion

......

6-

Introduction to Seismic Inversion Me.thods

6.1

Brian Russell

Introduction

Thebasic theoryof maximum-1


ikeli hooddeconvol
ution (MLD)wasdeveloped
by Dr. Jerry Mendeland his associatesat USCanUhasbeenwell publicised
(KormyloandMendel,1983;Chiet el, 1984). A paperby Hampson
and Russell
(1985) outlined a modification of maximum-likelihood
Ueconvolutionmelthod
,

which allowed the methodto be moreeasily applied to real seismic ata. One
of the conclusionsof that paper wasthat the methodcould be extenoedto use

the sparsereflectivity as the first step of a broadbandseismic inversion


technique.This technique,which will be termedmaximum-likelihood
seismic
inversion, is discussed later

You will

in these notes.

recall that our basic model of the seismic trace is

s(t) = w(t) * r(t) + n(t),


where

s(t)

: the seismic trace,

w(t) : a seismic wayelet,

Notice that the solution to the

there

r(t)

: earth reflectivity,

n(t)

= addi tire

above equation

are three unknownsto solve for.

and

noise.

is indeterminate,

However, using certain

since

assumptions,

the aleconvolution
problem can be solved. As we have seen, the recursire
method of seismic inversion is basedon classical aleconvolution techniques,
which assumea randomreflectivity

and a minimumor zero-phase wavelet.

They

produce
a higherfrequency
waveleton output,but neverrecoverthe reflection
coefficient series completely. More recent aleconvolution
techniquesmaybe

groupedunder the categoryof sparse-spike


meths. That is, they assumea
certain modelof the reflectivity

and make a wavelet estimate based on this

assumption.

Part 6 - Sparse-spike

Inversion

6-

Introduction

to Seismic Inversion

Methods

Brian Russell

ACTUAL REFLECTIVITY

POISSON-GAUSSIAN
I,:,

..

SERIES OF LARGE
EVENTS

--F

GAUSSIAN

BACKGROUND

OF SMALL

SONIC-LOG

EVENTS

REFLECTIVITY

EXAMPLE

Figure 6.1 The fundamental


assumption
of the maximum-likelihood
method.

Part 6-

Sparse-spike Inversion

6-

Intr6duction to Seismic Tnvetsion Methods

Brian Russell

These techniques include(1) btaximum-Likel ihood deconvolutton

and inversion.

(2) L1 norm deconvolution and inversion.

(3) Minimumentropy deconvol


ution (MEO).
From the point of view of seismic inversion, sparse-spike methods have an

advantage over classical methodsof deconvolutionbecause the sparse-spike


estimate, with extra constraints,
the

reflectivity.

We

deconvolution, and will

will

Maximum-Likelihood
i

focus

l!

Figure 6.1 illustrates

on

maximum-likelihood

the L1 normmethod of Dr.

Doug

and Inversion

Maximum-Li kel i hood Deconvoluti


I

bandwidth estimate of

not be discussed in these notes.

Deconvolution

initially

then move on to

O1denburg. The MEDmethod will


6.2

can be used as a full

am

..

the

on
I

fundamental assumption of Maximum-Likelihood

deconvolution, which is that the earth' s reflectivity

is composed
of a series

of large events superimposedon a Gaussian backgroundof smaller events.

This

contrasts with spiking decon, which assumesa perfectly randomdistribution


reflection

Figure

coefficients.

The real

sonic-log

reflectivity

at the bottom of

6.1 shows that in fact this type of model is not at all

Geologically,

the

large

events

correspond to

of

unreasonable.

unconformities

and major

1i thol ogic boundaries.

From our assumptions about the model, we can derive an objective

function

whichmaybe minimizedto yield the "optimum"


or mostlikely reflectivity. and
wavelet

combination consistent with the statistical

assumption. Notice

this method gives us estimates of both the sparse reflectivity


,,

Part 6 - Sparse-spike Inversion

that

and wavelet.

Introduction to Seismic Inversion Methods

Brian Russell

INPUT

WAVELET

SPIKE SIZE'

SPl :

9.19

50.00

REFLECTIVITY

NOISE' 39.00
NOISE

OB,.ECTIVE'

98.19

Figure6.2(a) Objectivefunctionfor onePoSsible


solutionto inputtrace.

INPUT

WAVELET

SPIKE S!7_F: 6.38

SPIKE DENSIq', 70.85

REFLECTIVITY

NOISE: 81. 5

NOISE

OBJECTIVE:158.98

Objective
function
fora second
possible
solution
toinput

Figure 6.2(b)

trace. Thisvalueis higher


than6.2(a),.indicating
a less
1ikely solution.

,,

Part 6 - Sparse-spike Inversion

6-

Introduction

to Seismic Inversion Methods

Brian Russell

The objective function j is given by

k=l

- R2

N2

k=l

r(k)

where

- 2mln(X)-

= reflection

2(L-re)In(i-A)

coeff.

at kth

sample,

m = numberof refl ecti OhS,

L : total numberof samples,

N : sqare root of noise variance,


n : noise at kth sample, and

= likelihood that a given


sample has a reflection.

Mathematically,

the

expected behavior

of

the

objective function is

expressed in terms of the parametersshownabove. No assumptions are made

aboutthe wavelet. The reflectivity sequenceis postulatedto be "sparse",


meaning that the expected numberof spies is governed by the parameter
lambda, the ratio of the expected numberof nonzer.
o spikes to the total number
of trace samples. Normally, lambda is a numbermuchsmaller than one. The

other parametersneededto describe the expected behavior are R, the RMSsize

of the large spies, andN, the RMSsize of te noise. With these parameters
specified,

any glven deconvolution sol ution

can be examined to see.whether it

is likely to be the result of a statistical processwith thoseparameters.For


example,if the reflectivity estimate has a number
of spikesmuchlarger than
the expectednumber,then it is an unlikely result.
In

simpler terms, we are looking for the solution

with

the minimum

number
of spikesin its reflectivity and te lowestnoisecomponent.Figures
6.2(a) and 6.2(b) showtwopossiblesolutionsfor the sameinput synthetic

trace. Noticethat the obje6tive functionfor the onewith the minimum


spike
structure

is indeed the lowest

Part 6 - Sparse-spike Inversion

value.

6-

Introduction to Sei smic I nversi.on Methods

Bri an Russel1
Synthetic

Reflectivity

Original

I,

Model

I terati

,1.2.

ill.
-.I

,i.

on I

I terati

on 2

Iteration

I teration

Iteration

Iteration

Iterati

on 7

Figure 6.3.

The Sinlle Most Likely Addition (SMLA)algorithm illustrated


for a simple reflectivity

Part 6 - Sparse-spi ke Inversion

model.

6-

Introduction

to Seismic Inversion Methods

Brian Russel1

Of course, there maybe an infinite numberof possible solutions, and it

would take too muchcomputertime to look at eachone.


mTherefore, a simpler
method is used to arrive at the answer. Essentially,

we start with an initial

wavelet estimate,es'timatethe sparsereflectivity, ' improve


the wavelet and
iterate through this sequence of steps until an acceptably low objective
function is reached. This is shownin block form in Figure 6.4. Thus, there

is a two step procedure-havingthe waveletestimate, updatethe reflectivity,


and then,

In

having the

reflectivity

estimate,

update the

wavelet.

These procedures are illustrated on model data in Figures 6.3 an 6.5.


Figure 6.3, the proceUure for upUating the reflectivity
is shown. It

consists of adding reflection

coefficients oneby one until an optimumset of

"sparse" coefficients hasbeenfound. Thealgorithmusedfor updatingthe


reflectivity

is callee the single-most-likely-addition

algorithm (SMLA)since

after each step it tries to find the optimumspike to add. Figure 6.5 shows
the procedure for updating the wavelet phase. The input model is shownat the

top of the figure, and the upated reflectivity and phaseis shownafter one,
two, five, and ten iterations.
Notice that the final result compares
favourably

with the model wavelet.

WAVELET

ESTIMATE

IMPROVE
ESTE

WAVELET

ESTIMATE

REFLECTIVITY

Fiure 6.4.

Theblockcomponent
method
of solvingfor both
reflectivity andwavelet. Iterate around
the
loop unti 1 converRence.

Part 6 - Sparse-spike Inversion

6-

Introduction

to Seismic Invers.ion Methods

Wayel
et

Brian Russell

ReflectiVity '

Synthetic

INPUT
MOD
INITIAL

Ill

Fi ure 6.5.

,I ,

CUESS

TEN ITERATIONS

The procedure for updatin the wavelet


in the maximum-likelihood

Between each iteration

iter. ation on reflectivity

method.

above, a separate

(see Fiure 6.3)

has been done.

Part 6 - Sparse-spike Inversion

6-

Introductionto SeismicInversionMethods

Figure 6.6

is

an exampleof the

Brian Russell

algorithm

applied

to a synthetic

seismogram. Notice that the major reflectors have been recovered fairly

and that the resultant trace matchesthe original trace quite accurately.
course, the
reflection

smaller

reflection

coefficient

coefficients

are

missing

well

Of

in the recovered

series.

Let us nowlook
Cretaceous gas play

at
in

comparison between the

some real data.


Southern Alberta.
input

anU

The first
example is a' basal
Figure 6.7(a) and (b) shows the

output

stack

from the

aleconvolution

procedure. Also shownare the extracted and final wavelet shapes. The main
things to note are the major increase in detail
(frequency content) seen in
the final stack, and the improvementin stratigraphic content.

Figure 6.8 is a comparisonof input and output stacks for a typical


Western

Canada basin seismic line.

The area is an event of interest

between

0.7 anU 0.8 seconds, representing a channel scour within the lower Cretaceous.

Although the scour is visible on both sections, a dramatic improvementis seen


in the resolution

of the infill

Within the central

of

this

channel

on the deconvolved section.

portion of the channel, a .positive reflection

lateral extent of five traces is clearly

with a

visible and is superimposed


on the

Uominant negative trough.

INPUT:

V.

,.: --

ESTIMATED:

ttl J':ll'j'

"'"
Figure 6.6

"
Synthetic

Part 6 - Sparse-spi ke Inversion

seismogram test.

6-

10

Introduction

to Seismic Inversion

Methods

Brian Russell

'SONIC

SYNTHETIC
0.5

LOG
iZ.i

0.6

0.7

0.8

EXTRACTED

(a) Initial

WAVELET

seismicwith extracted wavelet.

0.5

0.6

0.8

(b)

Final deconvolved seismic with zero-please wavelet.


....

Part 6-

Figure

Sparse-spike Inversion

-_

6.7
__

._

11

Introduction

This

to Seismic

is

quite

Inversion

possibly

Methods

Brian

a clean channel sand and may or

Russell

may not be

prospective. However, this feature is entirely absent on the input stack.


Overlying the channel is a linear anomalywhich could represent the 'base of a
gas sand, and is muchmore sharply
lateral

and vertical

Finally

reflectivity.
reflections

This

is

the

shown in

deconvolved output

Figure 6.9.

both in a

the base of

the

are

present.

and estimated

the

Although some of the subtle

missing from this estimated reflectivity,

that all the main reflectors

clearly

on the output section,

sense.

we have taken

are

defined

It

is

there is no doubt

interesting

channel (at 0.7;- seconds)and the

to note how

base of

the

6-

12

postulated gas sand on top of the channel have been delineated.

Part 6 - Sparse-spike Inversion

Introduction to Seismic Inversion Methods

Brian Russell

INPUT

DECONVOLVED

STACK

STACK
0.6

0.7

0.8

0.9
Figure 6.8

An input stack over a channelscour and


the resul ting deconvol
ved sei smic.

ESTIMATED

DECONVOLVED

REFLECTIVITY

STACK

0.6

0.7

0.8

0.9
Figure 6.9

The deconvolved result from Figure 6.8


and its

Part 6 - Sparse-spike Inversion

estimated reflectivity.

13

Introduction

to Seismic

Maximum-Likel

An

ihood

obvious

reflectivity

Inversion

Methods

Brian

Russell

Inversion

extension

of

the

theory

to

invert

the

"blocky" impedancefrom

to Uevise a broad-band or

data (Hampson
and Russell, 1985).
impedanceZ(i) maybe written

is

Given the reflectivity,

r(i),

es ti mated

the

seismic

the resul ting

Z(i)=Z(i_l
)[1+r(i)]
1 - r(i)

Unfortunately,
from MLD produces

additive

noise.

'

of thi s formula to the reflectivity

application

res ults,

unsatisfactory

especially

this

estimate

spectrum.

the

presence of

Although the MLD algor itm'extrapol ares outsi de the bandwidth

of the wavelet to produce a broad-band reflectivity

of

in

estimates

The result

degraaed by noi se at the

is
is

that

the

while

estimate, the reliability


low frequency

short

wavelength

end of

features

the

of the

impedancemay be properly reconstructed, the overall trenu is poorly resolvea.

This is equivalent to saying that the times of the spires on the reflectivity
estimate are better

of

resolved than their

amplituaes.

In order to stabilize the reflectivity


estimate, independent knowleUge
the impedancetrenU may be input as a constraint. Since r(i) < l, we can

derive

a convolutional

reflectivity,

type

equation

between

acoustic

impeUance anU

written

In Z(i)

= 2H(i) * r(i)

+ n(i),

where Z(i) = the knownimpedancetrend,

i <0
H(i)

i >0
and

n(i) : "errors" in the input trend.

Part 6 - Sparse-spike

Inversion

14

Introduction

to Seismic

Inversion

Figure 6.10

Figure 6.11

Methods

Brian

Russell

Input Model parameters.

Maximum-L
i kel i hood i nversi on result from Figure 6.10.

Part 6 - Sparse-spike Inversion

.m

__

6-

lb

Introduction

The

to Seismic

Inversion

error series n(i)

'Methods

reflects

the fact

Brian

that the trend

Russell

information

is

approximate. We now have two measured time-series:

the seismic trace, T(i),

and the

own wavelet

log

of

impedanceIn Z(i),

each with

its

and noise

parameters. The objective function is modified to contain two terms weighted


by their relative noise variances. Minimizing this function gives a solution

for r(i) whichattemptsa compromiseby simultaneouslymoUellingthe seismic


trace while

conformingto the knownimpedancetrend.

If

both the

seismic

noise and the impedance


trend noise are modelledas Gaussiansequences,their
respective variances become"tuning" parameterswhich the user can modify to
shift the point at which the compromise occurs. That is, at one extreme only

the seismicinformationis usedand at the oter extremeonly the impedance


trend.

In our first example,the methodis tested on a simple synthetic. Figure


6.10 showsthe sonic log, the derived reflectivity, the zero-phase wavelet
used to generate

the

synthetic,

and finally

the

synthetic

itself.

This

example was usedinitially becauseit truly represents a "blocky" impedance


(and therefor.e a "sparse" reflectivity)
and therefore satisfies the basic
assumptions of the method.

In

Figure

6.11 the maximum-likelihood inversion result

is

shown.

In

this casewe haveuseda smoothedversion of the sonic velocities to provide


the constraint.

A visual

comparisonwoulU indicate

that

the extracteU

velocity profile corresponds very well to the input.


A moredetailed
comparisonof the two figures showsthat the original and extracted logs do
not matchperfectly. Tese small. shifts are due to slight amplitude problems
on the extracted reflectivity.

It is doubtful that a perfect match could ever

be obtai neU.

Part 6 - Sparse-spike Inversion

6-

16

Introduction

to Seismic

Figure 6.12

Inversion

Creation of a seismic model from a sonic-log.

Figure 6.13
-

......

ii__

Bri an Russel 1

Methods

Inversion result from Figure 6.12.


-

Part 6 - Sparse-spie Inversion

_!

mm

It_l

17

Introduction to Seismic Inversion Methods

Let us nowturn our attention to

Brian Russell

a slightly

more realistic

synthetic

example. Figure 6.12 showsthe applicationof this algorithmto a sonic-log


derivedsynthetic. At the' top of the figure we see a sonic log with 'its
reflectivity
sequencebelow. (In this example,we have assumedthat the
density is constant, but this
is
not a necessary restriction.)
The

reflectivity wascbnvolved
with a zero-phase
wavelet,bandlimitedfrom10 to
60 Hz, andthe final syntheticis shown
at the bottomof the figure.
The results

Figure 6.13.

of

The initial

the middle panel,

the maximum-likelihood inversion method are

log is shownat

sbown in

the top, the constraint is shownin

and the extracted resull is shownat the

bottom of

the

diagram. In this calculation, the waveletwasassumed


known. Notethe blocky
nature of the estimatedvelocity profile compared
with the actual sonic log
profile. Again, the input and output logs do not matchperfectly.
The fact that the two do not perfectly matchis due to slight errors in
the reflectivity sizes whichare amplified by the integration process,and is
partially the effect of the constaintused. Theconstraintshownin Figure

6.13 wascalculatedby applying a 200 ms smootherto the actual log. In


practice,
nearby well

this information could be derived from stacking velocities or from


control.

Part 6 - Sparse-spi ke Inversion

6-

18

Introduction

to Seismic

Inversion

Methods

Brian

Russell

* !

Figure 6.14

An input seismic 1ine to be inverted.

'.
eel'?

e4dl

Figure 6.15

Maximum-Liklihood reflectivity

estimate

from

seismic in Figure 6.14.

Part 6 - Sparse-spike Inversion

6-

19

Introauction

to Seismic Inversion Methods

Brian Russell

Finally, we showthe results of the algorithm applied to real seismic


data. Figure 6.14 showsa portion of te input stack. Figure 6.15 showsthe
D extracted reflectivity.
Figure 6.16 shows the recoveredacoustic
impedance,wherea linear ramphas beenusedas the constraint. Notice that
the inverted section isplays a "blocky" character, indicating that the major
features of the impedance
log havebeen successfullyrecovered. This blocky

impedance
canbe contrastedwith the more traditional narrow-band
.inversion
procedures, whichestimate a "smoothed"
or frequencylimited version of the
impedance.Finally, Figure 6.17 shows a comparison
betweenthe well itself
and the

inverted

section.

In summary,
maximum-likelihoodinversion is a procedurewhich extracts a
broad-band estimate of the seismic reflectivity

and, by the introduction of

1inear constraints, al lows us to invert to an acoustic impedancesection which


retains the major geological features of boreholelog data.

Part 6 - Sparse-spike Inversion

6-

20

Introduction to Seismic Inver.sion Methods

Figure 6.16

Brian Russell

Inversion of reflectivity shownin Figure 6.15.

SEISMIC INVERSION
WELL

Figure 6.17

SONIC
LOG

A comparison of the inverted seismic data and


the sonic log at well location.

Part 6 - Sparse-spike Inversion

..

21

Introduction to Seismic Inversion Methods

6.3

Brian Russell

The L 1 Norm Method


--

__LI

Another method of- recursive,

single trace inversion which uses a

"sparse-spike"
assumption
is the L1 normmethod,
developed
primarilyby Dr.
DougOldenburgof UBC.
and Inverse Theory andApplications (ITA). This method
is also often referred to as the linear programming
method,and this can lead

to confusion. Actually, the two namesrefer to separateaspectsof the


method. Themathematical
modelusedin the construction
of the algorithm is
the minimizationof the L1 norm. However,the methodusedto solve the
problem is linear programming. The basic theory of this methodis found in a
paper by Oldenburg, et el (1983). The first part of the paper discussesthe
noi se-free convolutional model,

x(t) --w(t) * r(t),

where x(t) = the seismictrace,


w(t) --the wavelet, an

r(t) -- the reflectivity.


The authors point out that if

high-resolution

aleconvolution

is

performedon the seismictrace, the resulting estimateof the reflectivity can


be thought of as an averagedversion of the original reflectivity,

as shownat

the top of Figure6.18. This averaged


reflectivity is missingbothte high
andlow frequency
range,andis accurateonly in a band-limiteacentral range
of frequencies. Although there are an infinite numberof ways in which the
missing frequencycomponentscan be supplied, Oldenburg, et al (1983) show
that

we can reduce this nonuniqueness by supplying more information

to

the

problem, such as the layered geological model

= 0 if t l
r(t)--,rj6(t-l), where
j--!

Part 6-

Sparse-spike

Inversion

=1 ift:

, an
.

6-

22

Introduction

to Seismic Inversion Methods

Brian Russell

0.0

T.IJdE(J

1m

.50

joo

j25

FR F.,O [HZJ

I
I

Figure 6.18

Part 6-

Synthetic test of L1 NormInversion, moUified fro.q


Oldenburget al (1983). (a) Input impedance,
(b) Input reflectivity, (c) Spectrumof (b),
(d) Low frequencymodeltrace, (e) Deconvolutionof (),
(f) Spectrumof (U), (g) Estimatedimpedancefrom L1 Norm
method, () Estimated reflectivity,
(i) Spectrumof ().

Sparse-spike Inversion

6-

23

Introduction

to Seismic

Inversion

.le.thods

Brian

Russell

Mathematically, the previous equation is considered as the constraint to

the inversion problem. Now, the layered earth model equates to a "blocky"
impedancefunction, which in turn equates to a "sparse-spiKe" reflectivity
function.

The

above constraint

will

thus

restrict

"sparse" structure so that

extremely fine

reflection

not be fully

coefficients,

will

our inverted

structure,

result

to

such as very small

inverted.

The other key difference in the linear programmingmethod is that the L1


norm is minimized

rather

than the L2 norm.

The L1 norm is defined

of the absolute values of the seismic trace.

is

as the

sum

TrueL2 norm, on the other hand,

defined as the square root of the sumof te squares of the seismic

trace

values. The two norms are shownbelow, applied to the trace x:

x1 :

xi

and

x2:

xi

i--1

i:1

The fact that the L1 norm favours a "sparse" structure is shown in

following simple example. (Taken from the notes to Dr.


convention course'

"Inverse

seismograminversion").

theory with application

the

Oldenburg's1085 CSEG
to

aleconvolution and

Let f and g be two portions of seismic traces, where'

f: (1,-1,0) and g : (0,%,0) .


The L2 norms are

therefore'

The L1 normsare given by'

fl -- 1 + 1 : 2

and gl =

Notice that the L1 norm of wavelet

is

'
smaller than the L1 norm of f,

whereas the L2 norms are both the same. Hence, minimizing the L1 norm would

reveal that g is a "preferred" seismic trace based on it's

Part 6 - Sparse-spike Inversion

sparseness.

6-

24

Introduction

to Seismic

Inversion

Methods

Brian

Input sei smic data

(a)

(b)

Estimated refl ec ti vi ty

(c)

Figure 6.19

Russell

Final

impedance

L1 14ormmetboOapplied to real seismic data,

(Walker and Ulrych, 1983)


Part 6 - Sparse-spike Inversion

6-

25

Introduction to Seismic Inversion MethoUs

Brian Russell

Several other authors had previously consideredthe L1 normsolution in

deconvolution
(Claerboutand Muir, 1973, andTayloretal., 1979), however,
they considered
the problem
in the timedomain.Oldenburg
et al.w suggested
solving the problemusing frequencydomainconstraints. That is, the reliable

frequencyband is honored
whileat the same
timea sparsereflectivity is
created.

The results of their. algorithm on synthetic data are shownat the

bottom of Figure6.18. Theactual implementation


of the L1 algorithmto real
seismicdata has been done by Inverse Theory andApplications(ITA). The
processingflow or the linear programming
inversion methodis shownbelow.

InterPreter'=
CMPStacl<ed
section
<r(t)>=

r(t)w(t)

,i

I,,ico,ect,',
,o,'
Residu
Pm'm,e
o,w(t) I

i i

I Fourier
Trans
of<r
(t)> I
i

Scale
Data

Const.
mints.
From
$tackins_V'elocitles
I
Con,straints
From
'Well
Logs
I
ii &

Unear Programing Invemion

Assume
r(t) n;)(t-q),isaspame,
reflection
series.
Minimize the sum of absolute reflection strengU.
FulFBand Reflectivity Series r (t)
Signal to Noise Enhancement and Display Preparation
Integration to Obtain Impedance Sections

Figure 6.19(b) The L1 Norm(Linear Programming.)


Method. (Oldenburg,1985).
Part 6-

Sparse-spike Inversion

6-

26

Introduction

TSN

tO0

to Seismic Inver. s,ion Methods

90

80

70

60

Brian Russell

50

40

30

20

tO

1,2

1,3

1,4

1,5

1,6

1,7

1,:8

.2,0

22

Figure 6.20

Inputseismicdatasectionto L1Norm
inversion. (O1denburg, 1985'

Part 6 - Sparse-spike Inversion

6-

27

Introduction

to Seismic Inversion

Figure 6.19 showsthe

Methods

application

Brian Russell

of

the above technique to an actual

seismic line from Alberta. The data consist of 49 traces with a sample rate
of 4 msecand a 10-50 Hz bandwidth. The figure showsthe linear programming
reflectivity

and impedanceestimates below the input

should be pointed out that a three


the

final

results

in

both

seismic section.

It

trace spatial smootherhas been applied to

cases.

Finally, let us consider a dataset fromAlberta which has been processeU


through the LP inversion method. The input seismic is shownin Figure 6.2D
and the final inversion in Figure 6.21.
The constraints useU here were from
well

log

data.

In the final

superimposed on the final

inversion notice that the impedance has been

reflectivity

Part 6 - Sparse-spike Inversion

estimate using a grey level

scale.

6-

28

Introduction to SeismicInversion Methods

Brian Russell

1.6

1.7

1.8

1.9

2.0

2.1

2.2

Figure 6.21

Part 6 -Sparse-spike

Reflectivity and grey-level plot of impedancefor


the L1 Norminversion of data in Figure 6.20.

Inversion

(O1denburg, 1985

6-

2-9

Introduction

6.4

to Seismic Inversion Methods

Reef P roblee

Bran Russell

Onthe next fewpages 'is a comparisonbetweena recursiveinversion


procedure (Verilog) anda sparse-spikeinversionmethod(MLD). The sequence
!

of pages includes the following:

- a sonic log and its derived reflecti vt ty,


- a synthetic seismogramat both polarities,
- the original seismic line, showingthe well location,
- the Verilog inversion,
- the MLD inversi

and

on.

BaseUon the these data handouts, do the following interpretation


exerc i se:

([) Tie the synthetic to the seismicline at SP76. (Hint- use reverse
polari ty syntheti c).

(g) Identify and color the following events in the reef zone- the Calmar shale (which overlies the Nisku shaly carbonate),
- the 1retort shale, and

- .the porous Leduc reef.

(3) Comparethe reefal events on the seismic and the two inversions. Use
a blocked off version of the sonic log.

(4) Determine for parallelism which section tells you the most about the
reef

Part 6-

zone?

Sparse-spike Inversion

6-

30

Introduction to Seismic Inversion Methods

Rickel,

Phas

3g

26

Hz

Ns,

REFL.
COEF.

Brian Russell

DEPTH
lib

VELOCI
Eft,/sec.

...,--

...,--

...m

$11qPLE I HTI3tViILAliPLI IIi)E

Figure 6.22

Part 6-

Sonic Log and synthetic

Sparse-spike Inversion

2 Ns.

tiC. Ilql. - Sonic

Pei.ri es onlg

at the reef well.

6-

31

Introduction

to Seismic

Inversion

Methods

Brian

Russell

.47

'49

5!
55
57

?!
'?

;'5
??

B5

$5

99

41

Part 6-

Sparse-spike

Inversion

32

Introduction

to Seismic

Inversion

Methods

Brian Russell

***__********************************************************

0.7

Part 6-

0.8

.la.El

Sparse-spike Inversion

1 .:0

1.1

1..2

1. E)

6-

33

Introduc%ion

0.?

[o Seismic

IB.G

Inversion

O.G

Meltotis

1.0

Brian

1.1

1.2

i i

i i

1.

eet I i e

I i

eI

Russell

1.4
ei l
e

25
27
31

$1

$?

67
?.1
?$

i
i

'111

113

119

123
127
I

131

I
.

137

IIIII

ii

iii

Part 6 - Sparse-spike
Inversio

i iiiiiiiiii

I1111111
ii

lee-

IIII

..,

34

Introduction to Seismic Inversion Methods

Brian Russell

PART 7 - INVERSION APPLIED TO THIN BEDS

Part 7 - Inversion applied to Thin Beds

Page 7-

Intro4uction

7.1

to Seismic Inversion

Methods

Brian

Russell

Thin Bed Analysis

One of the problemsthat we have identified in the inversion of seismic


traces is the loss of resolution caused by the convolution of the seismic
wavelet with the earth's reflectivity.
As the time separation between
reflection

coefficients

becomessmaller, the interference between overlapping

wavelets becomesmore severe.

effect

Indeed,

of reflection coefficients

in Figure 6.19 it was shownthat the

one sampleapart and of opposite sign is to

simply apply a phaseshift of 90 degrees to the wavelet. In fact, the effect


is

more of

a differentiation

of the wavelet,

which alters

the

amplitude

spectrumas wel1 as the phase spectrum. In this section we will look closer
at the effect
thin

of wavelets on thin

beds and how .effectively

we can invert

these

bed s.

The first
(1973).

comprehensivel'ook at thin bed effects was done by Widess

In this paper he used a model which has becomethe standard for

discussing thin beds, the wedgemodel. That is, consider a high velocity
laye6 encasedin a low velocity layer (or vice versa) and allow the thickness
of the layer to pinch out to zero. Next create the reflectivity responsefrom
the impedance,and convolvewith a wavelet. The thickness of the layer is
given in terms of two-waytime through the layer and is then related to the
dominantperiod of the wavelet. The usual wavelet used is a Ricker becauseof
the simpl i city of its shape.

Figure 7.1 is taken from Widess' paper and showsthe synthetic section as
the thickness of the layer

decreases

from twice

wavelet to 1/ZOth of the dominant period.

the dominant period of the

(Note that what is refertea to as a

wavelengthin his plot i s actually twice the dominantperiod). A few important


points can be noted from Figure 7.1.

First,

the wavelets start

interfering

with eackotherat a thicknessjust below two dominant


periods,but remain
Clistinguishable down to about one period.

Part 7 - Inversion

applied

to Thin Beds

Page 7-

Introduction

to Seismic

Inversion

Methods

Brian

Figure 7.1

Effect

Russell

of bed thickness

on

reflection waveshape,where
(a) Thin-bed model,
(b) Wavelet shapesat top

PIOPAGA! ION I NdC


ACnOSS TK arO)
.

and bottom re fl ectors,

'-----).z _1

(c) Synthetic seismic

model, anU (d) Tuning


parameters

as measured

from

resul ting waveshape.

--t

(C)

5O

(D)

2.0

,.

THINBEDREGIME
J PEAK-TO-TROUGH/
AMPLITUDE

0.8

1.0

<
0.4

/
-0.4

, i

-40

\
.

. .

20

40

MS

TWO-WAY TRUE THICKNESS


(MILLISECONDS)

Figure 7.2

A typical detection and resolution chat used


to interpret bed thickness from zero phase seismic data.

('Hardage, 1986)
.

..

,,

Part 7 - Inversion applied to Thin Beds

-_-

_ .....

Page 7-

l.

Introduction

to Seismic

Inversion

Methods

Brian

Russell

Below a thicknessvalue of oneperiodthe waveletsStart merginginto a


single wavelet,
increase

and an amplitude increase

is

observe.

This

amplitude

is a maximumat 1/4 period, and decreases from this point down... The

amplitude is appraochingzero at

1/0

period, but note that the resulting

waveform is a gO degree phase shifted version of the original wavelet.

A more quantitative way to measurethis information is to plot the peak


to trough amplitude difference and i sochron across the thin bed. This is done
in Figure 7., taken from Hardage (1986). This diagram quantifies what has
already been

seen qualitatively

the

seimsic

section.

That

is

that the

amplitude is a maximumat a thickness of 1/4 the wavelet dominant period,

also that this is the lower isochron limit.


considered

to

obtain fully

be

the thin bed threshhold,

resolved reflection

and

Thus, 1/4 the dominant period is


below which it

is

difficult

to

coefficients.

7.2 In.versionCamparison
of T.hinBees

To test out this theory, a

using

both

recursire

thin

bed model was set up and was inverted

inversion and maximum-likelihood

impedance model is shown in Figure

7.3,

aleconvolution.

and displays a velocity

The

decrease in

the thin bed rather than an increase. This simply inverts the polarity of
Widess' diagram. Notice that the wedge starts at trace 1 with a time
thickness

sample.

of

100 msec and thins down to a thickness of 2 msec,.or

The resulting

synthetic

seismogram is shownin Figure 7.4.

.one

time

A 20 Hz

'Ricker wavelet was usedto create the synthetic. Since the dominant period

(T) of a 20 Hz Ricker is 50 msec,the wedge hasa thicknessof 2T at trace 1,


T at trace 25, T/2 at trace 37, etc.

Parl'7 - 'inverslYn'ap'plled 1oThin'-Beds


.....

Page 7 --'4

'-

Introduction

to Seismic

12

Inversion

16

Methods

20

24

Brian

28

32

36

40

44

Russell

48

lOO

200

3OO

400

500

Figure7.3 True impedance


fromwedge
model.

lOO

200
.

300

400

500

Figure 7.4

Wedgemodel reflectivity
20 HZ Ricker

convol ved with

wavelet.

Part 7 - Inversion applied to Thin BeUs

Page 7-

Introduction

to Seismic

First,

the

Inversion

Methods

let us consider the effect

Brian

of

performing a recursire inversion on

wedgemodel. The inversion result is shownin Figure 7.5.

low frequency component


was not added into
better

show the effects

was also felt

little

of the initial

that the

information

with recursire

addition

inversion..

Note that the

the solution of Figure 7.5, to

recursire phase of the inversion.

of

to this test.

the

low frequency

the

thickness of

It

componentwould ado

Notice that there'are two major

First,

Russell

problems

the beU has only been

resolved downto about 25 msec, which is 1/2 of the dominantperiod. Remember,


that this is a two-way time,
has

been resolved

therefore

we say that the bed thickness itself

down to 12.5 msec,

or

1/4

period.

This

theoretical

resolution limit is the sameas that of Widess. Also, the top of the weUge
appears "pulled-up" at the right side of the plot as the inversion has trouble
with the interfering

wavelets.

that there are actually


recursire

inversion

A second problem is that, although we know

only three distinct

has estimate

at

velocity

least

units in the section, the

seven

in the vertical

=irection.

This

result

is Uue to the banu-limited

Uescriptively,

nature

of the Ricker

wavelet.

More

every wiggle on the section has been interpreted as a velocity.

Next,

consider

a maximum-likelihood inversion

constraint used was simply a

linear

ramp.

In

of

the

weOge.

The

this case, the shape of the

wedge has been much better


inversion.

That

is,

defined,

However, notice that

the maximum-likelihood

due to the broad-band

the resolution

inversion

inverted

has still

method also failed

bed thickness below 1/4 dominant period.


recursively

limit

nature

of

the

been observeU.

to

resolve

the

The "pUll-up" observedon the

section is also in evidence here.

In summary,even though sparse-spike methods give an output section that

is visually

more appealing than recursively

appear to be a way to break the

inverted sections, there does not

low resolution

limit

of 1/4 of the dominant

sei smic peri od.

Part 7 - Inversion applied to Thin Beds

Page 7-

mk

Introduction to Seismic Inversi.on Methods

12

16

20

24

28

Brian Russell

32

36

40

44

48

300-

400.

Figure 7.5 Recursive inversion of wedgemodelshownin Figure 7.4.

'

12
16
' i '

20
' I i

24

28

32

36

40

44

48

100-..................
300

400

500

,,

Figure 7.6

Maximum-likelihoodderived impedanceof wedgemoUel


shown i n Figure 7.4.

Part 7 - Inversion applied to Thin Beds

Page 7-

[ntroductJon

to Seismic Inversion

Methods

Bran Russel

PART 8 - MODEL-BASED INVERSION


_

Part

8 - Model-based

Inversion

....

Page 8 -

Introduction

8.1

to Seismic

Introducti

In the

information

Inversion

Methods

Brian

Russell

on

past

sections

directly

of

the

course,

we have derived

reflectivi-ty

from the seismic section and used recursire

produce a final velocity versus depth model.

inversion to

We have also seen that these

methods can be severely affected by noise, poor amplitude recovery, and the
band-limited nature of seismic data.
will

be included

In
first

in

the

final

inversion

and comparing the model to

our

approac is

intuitively
data

itself.

seismic data.

We shall then use the

comparison between real and modeled data to iteratively

the model in such a way as to better

this

result.

this chapter, we shall consider the case of builaing a geologic moUel

results of tis

of

That is, any problems in the data itsel f

match the seismic data.

shown in Figure 8.1.

Notice

that

update

The basic idea

this

method is

very appealing since it avoids the airect inversion of the seismic


On the other hand, it may be possible to come up with a model

that matchesthe data'very well, but is incorrect. (This can be seen easily
by noting that there are infinitely manyvelocity/depth pairs that will result
in the sametime value.) This is referred to as the problem of nonuniqueness.
To implement the approach shown in
fundamental questions.

First,

Figure 8.1,

we need to answer two

what is the mathematical relationship

the model data and the seismic data?

Second,

between

how do'we update the' model? We

shall consider two approaches


to theseproblems,the generalizedlinear
inversion (GLI) approach outlined in CooRe and Schneider (1983}, and the
Seismic Lithologic
(SLIM) method which was developed in Gelland and Larner
(1983).

Part

8 - Model-based

Inversion

Page 8 -

Introduction

to Seismic

Inversion

Methods'

Brian

Russell

CALCULATE
UPDATE
IMPEDANCE

ERROR

ERROR
SMALL
ENOUGH

NO

YES

SOLUTION
= ESTIMATE

Model Based Invemion

Figure 8.1

Flowchart for the model based inversion

Part

8 - Model-based

Inversion

technique.

Page 8 -

Introduction

8.2

%o Seismic

Generalized

Linear

Inversion

Methods

Brian

Russell

Inversion

The generalized linear inversion(GLI) method is a methodwich can be.


applied to virtually any set of geophysicalmeasurementsto determine the
geologicalsituation whichproduced these results. That is, given a set of
geophysicalobservations, the GLI method
will derive the geological model
which best fits

tese observations in a

least squares sense.

Mathematically,

if we express the model and observations as vectors

M:(m
1,m
2, ..... , mk)
T=vector
ofkmodel
parameters,
and
T: (t1,t2, ..... , tn)T:
functional

of n observations.

between the model and observations can be expressed

Then the relationship


in the

vector

form

t i = F(ml,m2, ...... , mk)


Once

the

functional

relationship

i : 1, ...

, n.

has been derived

observations and the model, any set of

between

model parameters will

the

produce an

output. But what model?GLI eliminatesthe needfor trial

and error by

analyzing the error betweenthe model output and the observations, and then
perturbing the model parameters in such a way as to produce an output which
will produceless error.
In this way, we may iterate towards a solution.
Mathematically'
F(M)

)F(MO)

= F(Mo)+ aT

M,

MO-Initialodel,

where

M:

true earth model,

AM:

changein model parameters,

F(M) : observations,

F(Mo):calculated
valuesfrominitial

model, and

)F(M
O)

.2

Part

8 - Model-based

Inversion

= change
in calculated
values.

Page 8 -

Introduction to Seismic Inversion Flethods

Brian Russell

IMPEDANCE

(GM/CM3)(FT/SEC)
X1000

IMPEDANCE

4.6

41.5AMPLITUDE

41.5 4.6

ml

41.5 4.6

41.5

ii

,i

i,

ii

:.
__

Figure 8.2

A synthetic

test of the GLI approach to model based

inversion.

(a) Input impedance. (b) Reflectivity derived from (a)


with added multiples. (c) Recurslye inversion of (b).
(d) Recurslye

inversion

of (b)convolved

(e) GLI inversion of (b).

Part

8 - Model-based

I nversi on

with wavelet.

(Cooke and Schneider, 1983)

Page 8 -

Introduction

to Seismic

Inversion

Methods

Brian

Russell

But note that the error between the observations and the computed values
i s simply

F = F(M)- F(MO).
Therefore,

the above equation can be re expressed as a matrix equation


F

where

= A AM,

A:

matrix
with

of deri vatives
n rows anU k columns.

The soluti on to the above equation would appear to be

-1

= A

where A-l: matrixinverseof A.

F,

However, since there are usually more observations than parameters (that

is, n is usually greater


therefore

does

not

than k)

have

the matrix A is

true

inverse.

This

usually not square and


is

overdeterminedcase. To solve the equation in that

referred

to

as

an

case, we use a least

squares solution often referred to as the Marquart-Levenburg


method(see Lines
and Treitel

(1984)).

The solution

is given by

M: (AT'A)-IA
TZF.
Figure 8.1 can be thought of as a flowchart of the GLI methodif we make
the impedanceupdate using the methodjust described. However, we still must
derive

the

observations.
convol utional

functional

relationship

The simplest

necessary to relate

solution

the

which presents itself

model to

the

is the standarO

model

s(t)

= w(t) * r(t),

where r(t)

= primaries only.

Cooke and Schneider (1983) use a modilied version of the previous formula

in which multiples

and transmission losses are modelled. Figure 8.2 is a

composite from their paper showingthe results of an inversion applied to

single synthetic impedance trace.

Part

8 - Model-based

Inversion

Page 8 -

Introduction

to Seismic

Inversion

Methods

Brian

'

Russell

IMP.EDANCE
x1OOO
(GM/CM3)(FT/$EC)

._
,.o

. .:-:

. .:.

,, ,,

. . .....

. .:.........::
:...., ...... .. :...lO
? "e'.

: :........:..:.-.-_-

........

,,

, ....-.

-.

4':
-':::./-.:.!i!i..::..':..
:.:......:.':ii.'-'-:..
:.....
'......'..'..
:.' }::!
- ..'.:"

'

300M$

Figure 8.3

2-D model to test GLI algorithm.

The well on the right


encountersa gas sand while the well on the left does not.
(Cooke and Schneider, 1983)
IMPEDANCE

AMPLITUDE

(GM/CM3! (FT/SEC)X1000
10

,,,.l

Figure 8.4

Model

traces

derived

from

m)del in Figure 8.3.


{Cooke and Sc)neider, 1983)

Part 8 - Model-based nversion

Figure 8.5

38 10

38

GLI inversion of model traces.


Compare
with sonic log on right side of Fiiure 8.3.
(Cooke and Schneider, 1983)
Page 8 -

Introduction

to Seismic

Inver. sJon Methods

Brian

Russell

In Figure 8.2, notice that the advantage of incorporating multiples in


the solution is that, although they are modelled in couting
the seismic

response,they are not included in the model parameters. This is a big


advantage over recursire methods, since those methods incorporate
multiples into the solution if they are not removedfrom the section.
Another

important

feature

of

this

particular

method is

the

the

parameterizationused. Instead of assigninga different value of velocity at


each time sample, large

geological blocks were defined.

assigneda starting impedancevalue, impedancegradient,


time.

This

Each block was

and a thickness in

reduceU the numberof parameters and therefore

simplified

the

computation.However,there is enough flexibility in this modellingapproach


to

derive a fairly

detailed geological inversion.

Wewill

now look at both a

syntheticandreal examplefromCookeandSchneider(1983).
A 2-0 synthetic example was next considered by Cooke and Schneider
(1983). Figure 8.3 showsthe model, which consisted of two gas sands encased
in shale.

One well encountered the

sand and the other missed.

The impedance

profile of the discovery well is shownon the right.


Figure 8.4 shows
synthetic traces over the two wells, in which a noise component
has been
added.

Finally,

Figure 8.5 showsthe initial

guess and the

final

solution,

for which the gradients have been set to zero.


Notice that although the
solution is not perfect, the gas sand has been delineated.

Part

8 - Model-based

Inversion

Page 8 -

Introduction to Seismic Inversion Methods

Brian Russell

YES

_____J
' '

- _

FINALMObEL

._ x,

.... r - ;,

-.-'%..

-cx-r.
.,'_;'.:.
-, . . . .. .-.
t ...

Figure 8.6

I11 ustrated

flow chart

for

the SLIM method.

(Western GeophysicalBrochure)

Part 8 - Model-based Inversion

Page 8 -

! ntroducti

on to Sei stoic !nver si on Methods

Brian

Russel 1

8.3 Sei_smic
L_ithologicModelling(,SLIM)
Although the nthod outlined in Cookeand Schneider (1983)
promise, it has not,
commercially.

as

far

However,

fully

released,

than

the

direct

of

a seismic

flowchart

the

layers

of

variable

points along the line.

similar

and

is

Modeling (SLIM) method of

perturbation

of

the

SLIM method taken from a Western

as in the GLI method, an initial


velocity,

Also, the

of a model rather

section.

created and comparedwith a seismic section.


of

very

Although the details of the algorithm have not been

inversion

Notice that,

aware, been implemented

appears

Seismic Lithologic

the method does involve

Figure 8.6 shows a

brochure.

author is

one method that

commercially available is the

Western Geophysical.

as this

showed much

density,

geological model is

The model is defined as a series


and thickness at

seismic wavelet is either

various

control

supplied (from a

previous wavelet extraction procedure) or is estimated from the data.


synthetic model is then comparedwith

the

The

seismic data and the least-squared

error sum is computed. The model is perturbed in such a way as to reduce the
error,

and the process is repeated until

convergence.

The user has total


geological information

control over the constraints and may incorporate


from any source. The major advantage of this method

over classical

methods is

recurslye

that

noise

in the seismic

section

is not

incorporated. However,as in the GLI method,thesolution is nonunique.


The best examples of

Gelland and Larner (1983).


initial

applying

this

method to

Figure 8.7 is taken from their paper and shows an

Denver basin model which has 73 flat

boundaries

of

real data are given in

sonic log.

layers derived from the major

Beside this is the actual stacked

data

to

be

Page 8 -

10

inverted.

Part

8 - Model-based

I nversi

on

Introduction

to Seismic

Inversion

Methods

Brian

Russell

1kit

,1.4

1.4

1.6

2.0

2.0

Stack

Initial
Figure 8.7

Left' Init)al Denver


Basinmodelseismic.
Right: Stacked section from DenverBasin.
(Gelfand andLarner, 1983).

lkft

.4

1.6

1.8

2.0

1.8

Field
data

Synthetic

Figure 8.8

Left:

Reflectivity

Fna SLIM JnversJon of


Figure 8.7 spl iceU into
Right- Final reflectivity
from
' -- _ -- __--__ii m
' -'
(Gelfand and Larner,
Part 8 - Model-based Inversion

data shown 1n
field data.
inversion.
1983).
..........
Page 8 -

2.0
.m:
11

Introduction

to Seismic

Inversion

Methods

Brian

Russell

In Figure 8.8 the stack is again shown in its most complexregion, with
the final synthetic data is shownafter 7 iterations through the program.
Notice the excellent agreement. On the right hand sie of Figure 8-.9 is the
final reflectivity section from which the pseudoimpedanceis derived. Since
this reflectivity is "spiy", or broad band, it already contains the low

frequencycomponent
necessary
for full inversion. Finally, Figure 8.10 shows
the final inversion compared
with a traditional recursire inversion.

Note the

'blocky' nature of the parameterbasedinversion when comparedwith the


recurs i ve i nvers i on.

In

summary,

which can
reflectivity

parameter

be thought
is

of

extracted.

based inversion i s an iterative

as a geology-baseddeconvolution since the full


I

propagatedthroughthe final result

Part

8 - Model-based

Inversion

model1ing scheme

has the

advantage

as in recursire

that

errors

are

not

inversion.

Page 8 -

12

Introduction

to Seismic

Methods

500-ft
N

lkft

Inversion

Brian

114
mile
S

Russell

114
mile
SE

.5

.7

l m

1.9

Figure 8.9

Impedance section

derived

from SLIM inversion

of

Denver Basln 1 ine showni n Figure 8.7.

{GelfanUand Larner, 1983)


W

lkft

50011
N

114mileS

114mileS

1.7

19

Fi gure 8.10

Traditional

recursire

inversion

of Denver Basin line

from Fi gur.e 8.7.

(Gelfana anU Larner, 1983)


Part

8 - Model-based

Inversion

Page 8 -

13

Introduction

to Seismic

Inversion

Appendix
8-!

Methods

Brian

Russell

Mat_r_ix
.appljc.at.
ions_inGeophy.s.ics

Matrix theory showsup in every aspect of geophysicalproocessing.Before


looking at generalized matrix theory, let us considerthe application of
matrices to

the solution of a linear equation, probably the most important

application.

For example, let

3x1+2x2 : 1, and
x1- x2 = 2.
By inspection, we see that the solution is

However,we Could .haveexpressed the equations in the matrix form


A

x1

1 -1

x2

y,

or

The sol ution

is,

therefore
x

-1

x1
x2

8 - Model-based

Inversion

1 . -2

-1/5

or

Part

y,

Page 8 -

14

Introduction

to Seismic Inversion

Me.thods

In the above equations we had the


and the

problem terefore

of dimension N.

same numberof equations as unknowns

had a unique answer. In matrix terms, this

that the problem can be set up as a

vector

Brian Russell

square matrix of dimension N x N times a

However, in geophysical problemswe are Uealing with

the real earth anU the equations are never as nice.

fewer

means

equations than

unknowns (in

Generally,

which case the

we either

situation

is

have

called

underdetermined) or more equations than unknowns(in which case the situation

is
is

calleU overdetermined). In geophysicalproblems,the underUetermined


case
of

little

interest

overde termi neU

to

case is

us since

there

is

no unique

of muchinterest since it occurs in

solution.

the

The

following

problems:
(!)

Surface

consi stent

resi dual statics,

(2) Lithological modelling,and


(3) Refracti on model
1i ng.
The overdetermined system of
categories-

consistent

extending our earlier

equations can be split into two separate


inconsistent.
These are best described
by

an

example.

(a) Cons.i
st Overd..etermined
Lin.earEqua.t.
ion.s

In

this

equations

case

are

we

simply

reUunUant equations may

have more equations

than

unknowns, but

scaled versions of te others.

In

this

the extra

case,

the

simply be eliminated, reducingthe prlemto the

square matrix case. For examp.le, consider adding a third equation to our
earl ier example,

so that

3x1+2x2 : 1,
x1- x2 : 2,
anU

Part

8 - Model-based

Inversion

5x1- 5x2 : 10.

Page 8 -

15

Introduction

to Seismic

This may be written

Inversion

Methods

Brian

Russell

in matrix form as

x1
x

But notice that the third equation is simply five times the second, and
therefore conveys no new information.

equations back to the original

We may thus

reduce the system of

form.

(b) Inco,
ns,
is,tentOverd.
eermine.
d L.i.near
Equai.on?

In this case the

extra

equations are not scalea

versions

of other

equations-in the set, but conveyconflicting information. In this case, there


is no solution to the problem which will

solve all the equations.

This is

usually the case in our seismic wor and indicates the presence of measurement
noise and errors.
As an example, consider a modification to the preceding
equations, so that

3x1+2xZ -- 1,
x1- x2 -- Z,

ana 5x1- $x2 = 8.


This may be written

in matrix form as

2
-I
-5

Part

8 - Model-based

Inversion

xI

x2

Page 8 -

16

Introduction

to Seismic

Inversion

He.thods

Brian

Russell

'Now the third equationis not reducible to either of the other two, ana
an alternate

of

least

solution

solution must be found.

The most popular aproach is the method

squares, which minimizes the sumof the squared error


and the observed results.

That is,

if

we set the error

between the
to

e=Ax-y,

then we si reply mini mize


n

eTe-(eI , ez, .......

, en)

ei

Le.
Re expressing the 'preceding equation in terms of the values x, y, and A,
we

have

E = eTe= (y - Ax)T(y
- Ax)

= yTy_ xTATy
_ yTAx
+ xTATAx.
We then solve the equation
bE_

bxi
The final

solution to

the

least-squares

problem is given by the normal

equati OhS

AT
Ax = AT y
or

Part

8 - Model-based

Inversion

x = (ATA)-lATy
.

Page 8 -

17

Introduction

to Seismic Inversion Methods

Bran Russell

PART g - TRAVELTIME INVERSION

ml

Part

g - Traveltime

Inversion

ii

Page 9 -

Introduction

to Seismic

Inversion

Methods

Sei smi c Travel

9,1

Brian Russell

Inversion

time

Introduction
_

In

L_

_.

this

section we will

look at a type of inversion

several names, incluUing traveltime


tomography.

The last

term

inversion,

that

raypath inversion,

goes under
ana seismic

tenUs to be overuseU at the moment, so it

is

important to use the term correctly.


In section 9.3 we shall showan example
whic may be considerea as seismic tomography. As all of te other names
suggest,

however,

seismic

measurements to infer

the structure

extracteU are velocities

structure

traveltime

and

can be derived.

of the earth.

depths,

Initial)y,

but Jr'has becomeobvious that

inversion

this

measurements can be used effectively

uses a set of traveltime


The parameters

aria [herefore

which

a gross model of earth

this was considered the ultimate


accurate

set

are

of velocity

goal,

versus depth

to constrain other types of

inversion.

For example, the'velocities could be used as the low frequency componentin


recursire inversion, or as the velocity control for a depth migration.
The way in which traveltime
set of times from a dataset.

inversion is carried out is to first

These picks

pick

my come from any of three basic

types of seismic datasetsSurface

seismic measurements

- shots and geophones on the surface,


VSP measurements

- shots. on surface,

geopones in well,

and

Cross-hol e measurements

- sots anU geophonesboth in well.


Once the times have been picked, they must be made to fit
subsurface.

In the next section,

we will

a model of the

look at some straighforwara

examples

of using traveltime picks in order to resolve the earth's velocity and depth
structure.

Part

9 - Travel

time

I nversi on

Page 9 -

Introduction

to Seismic

Inversion

(a)

Methods

Brian

Russell

(b)

Figure 9.1 Travel paths through a single,

constant velocity

block.

(a.) Surface recording, (b) VSP recording, (c)Cross-hole recording

(b)

(c)

Figure 9.2 Travel paths through two blocks of slightly

differing

veloc-ity.

(a) Surface recording, (b) VSP recording, (c) Cross-hole recording

Part

9 - Travel

time

Inversion

Page 9 -

Introductfonto SefsmJ
c Inversfon Methods

Brjan Russell

9. Numerical_Examples
of .Travelti Inv.
ersion

Consider
the simplestpossiblecase, a constant
velocityearth. Figure
9.1 showsthe travel paths that wouldresult from the three geometry
configurationsgiven a square area of dimension L by L. Note that the
traveltimes in Figure 9.1 would simply be:
(1) Surface sei smic'

t--Z

L p

or

p-- t/Z

L,

(z) vsP-

t --L p

or p -- t /iL, ana

t=Lp

or

(3) Cross-hol e'

p=t/L,

where p -- ! / V.

Obviously, all three sets of measurementscontain the sameinformation.

However,if the velocity(or slowness


p) andthe depth are both unknown,
neitheronecanbe determined
froma singletimemeasurement.
Anevengreater
ambiguity comes into play if we havea single measurement
but morethan one

box. In Figureg.g this situation is shown. Notice that the equationsnow


would involve three unknownsand only one measurement.

A moregeneralmodelis proposed
in Bishopet al (lg85) an Boringet al
(1986). The earth is representedas a number
of boxesof constantsize and

velocity.
Although
thevelocity
of eachboxis a constant,
thevelocity
may
vary from box to box. This is shownin Figure 9.3. The objective is thus to
computethe seismic travel path through each box using the traveltime

measurements.
A keyproblem
hereis howto allowthe rays to travel through
the boxes. The first order approximationwould be straight rays with no
bending. However,i f Snell's law is use4, the problembecomes
moredifficult
to sol ve.

Part-g

Travel i'i me'-'in'ver'si on .....

Pag g' '-

4'

Introduction

to Seismic

Inversion

Source

Figure 9.3

Methods

Brian

Russell

Receiver

Separation of the earth into small constant vel oci ty blocks


for sei stoic travel time inversion.

(Bording et al,

Part

g - Traveltime

Inversion

1986)

Page 9 -

Introduction to Seismic Inversion Methods

Brian Russell

Let us apply the straight ray approximationin the simplecaseof having


simply two blocks of different velocity. In this case, we have coupled
together both surface and VSP measurements. Two possible recorUing
arrangementsare shownin Figures 9.4 and 9.5.

The situations illustrated

are

obviously oversimplified since we have assumeda straight ray approximation in

both boxes. That is, there is no refraction at the velocity discontinuity,


and the reflection point is directly at the center of the two boxes. However,
if we assumethat the velocities vary only slightly, this approximation is
reasonable.

Let us start with the situation illustrated by Figure 9.4. In this case,
tere is a single shot with geophonesboth on the surface and in a borehole at
the base of the layer. If we assume that the sides of the boxes are unity in
length (1 cm or m or km.
m), the travel time equations are
(1) For the. raypath from S to R

wherePl: 1/velocityin box1


P2: 1/velocityin box2

(Z) Fortheraypath
fromS to R2:

t2=
qPl+ P2.
2

Thus, the total problem can be expressed in matrix form as:

Pl

r ]

P2

tl
:

t2

or Ap: t .

The solution to the previous equation is then

p = A-lt.
Unfortunately,

a quick try at solving the above equation will show that

the Ueterminant of A is

Physically,

this

is

O,

which

telling

means that

the inverse is nonrealizable.

us that the two travel

paths spene equal

proportions of their paths in eac box.

Part

9 - Travel

time

Inversion

Page 9 -

Introduction to Seismic Inversion Methods

Brian Russell

P,,

P"% P,'v,

Figure 9.4

Surface

for a single shot.

R!

Figure 9.5

and VSP raypaths

St

Surface and VSP raypaths for two separate

Part 9 - Travel time Inversion

shots.

Page 9 -

Introduction

to Seismic Inversion

Methods

Brian Russell

A simple way to remedy this situation

raypath.

This is shownin Figure 9.5.

In

shot one-half a box length to te left

case, the traveltime

is to move the shot for the second.

this situation,

we have moveUthe

for the recorUing in te hole.

In this

equations are

(1) Forthe raypathfromS1 to R1:

tl: 1Pl+P2
(2) Forthe raypathfromS2 to R2In this case notice from the diagramthat

tan 0 : 1/1 $ : 2/3 = 0 6667, or B : 33 69o


Thus

cos 0 = 0.8320

and (see figure)

x = 1/(2 x 0.832) = 0.6


y = 3/(

x 0.832) = 1.8

y-x=l.2
Therefore

t2:1.2 Pl + 0.6 P2 '


Thus, the total

1.2

with

problem can be expressed in matrix form as'

Pl

tl

0.6

P2

t2

sol ution

Pl

0.6

- 2

t1

-1.2

t2

o.85

P2

Problem' Try to solve the above equation

and 1.1 kin/sec.

Tat is,

when the two velocities

work out the traveltimes

are 1.0

and plug them into the last

matrix equati on.

Part

9 - Travel time

Inversion

Page 9 -

Introduction to Seismic Inversion Methods

Brian Russell

Pick seismic

Estimatevelocityat well
usingsoniclogandVSP

reflectiontimes,t

Estimate
V(x,z)byusing
V(xo,z),

Initial
Model

the reflection traveltimes and the

theassumption
of verticalrays
Start with

top layer

Layer

Computer
forward

Stripping
.Inversion
PerturbV(x,z)
byleastsquares
or manually

Add another

layer

Final
Seismic Model

Figure 9.6

modeltraveltimes,
f,
by normalraytracing

It- fll'

layersbeen

ii

Model
iscomplete,,
I

A possibleflowchart for seismictraveltim inversion.


(Lines et al,

Part 9 - Travel time Inversion

1988)

Page 9 -

Introduction to Seismic Inversion Methods

Brian Russell

9.3 Seismi
c.T..omo.
graphy
The term tomography
was first used in the medicalfield for the imaging
of humantissue using Nuclear MagneticResonance
(NMR) and other physical
measurements. In the seismic field

the

velocity

field

it

has come to mean the reconstruction

of the earth by the analysis of traveltime

of

measurements.

Excellent overviews of tomographyare g.iven in Bording et al (1986), and Lines


et al (1988}.
You will find tat the latter
paper introduces the term
"cooperative inversion" since both seismic and gravity measurementsare used
in

the inversion, but that much of the technique used by the authors

can be

consi alered sei smic tomography.

Figure 9.6, taken from the paper'by Lines et al (1988), shows the
chart that they propose for performing
be considered quite general,

traveltime

inversion.

even though many variations

of it

flow

This method can


are used in the

industry. Basically, the process starts with an estimate of the model which,
in the flowchart shownin Figure 9.6, is deriveU from the sonic log and VSP
measurements. Next, traveltime

picks are made from the seismic data.

In this

case, stacked CDPdata is usecl, but the shot profiles (or CDPprofiles)

could

also be used.
refraction

As well,

arrivals.

travel time
In

raytraced, and an error

traveltimes.

the
is

next

picks

can be made from VSP data and

stage of

the

computed between the

process,

the

model is

computed and observea

Based on the error computed, a new model is computeU. This

done using the GLI

technique

described

procedure shownin Figure 9.6,

in Chapter 7 of these notes.

is

In the

the inversion is done layer by layer until

the

model is complete.

Although any traveltime

Stewart

inversion can be considered tomography, Dr.

(personal communication) points out that to be analagous with

medical field,

where physical

measurements are

Rob

the

taken completely around t'he

imaged object, a true seismic tomography experiment would involve aata on more
than one side of the portion
seismic

Part

of

the

earth

to

be

imaged,

such as surface

and VSP.

9 - Travel time

Inversion

Page 9 -

10

Introduction to Seismic Inversion Methods

Brian Russell

WlC

0
_

roll i

-1Z

..2

x
I vsP SOURCE

3-D SOURCE GEOPHONE

Surface geometry for tomographicimaging example.

Figure 9.7

(Chiu and Stewart,

Well C VSP

Une8901
898921
89DB8960
898980
89CDP
Une

CDP

0.0

..........
::=':".::"--'::':.-:'::.ir.:iE)".Z!;.".h.
.

0.1 ---':......

-" ''":'":

1987)

Depth (m)
185 9O7

205
0

fi'L .o.
:(;:

460

730

895

1o

?6o

895

. mow, .'.'

.......

. --'-..

oJ
0.4
o.5

..

(b)

(a)
Fi gue 9.8

(a) Picked events on 3-D seismic..


(b) Picked events

on VSP.

(Stewart and Chui,


.....

Part

9 - Traveltime

Inversion

Page 9 -

11

1986)

Introduction

to Seismic Inversion Methods

Brian Russell

An example of using multiple datasets for seismic tomography is found in

Stewart and Chiu (1986), and Chiu and Stewart (1987).

The objective was a

Glauconitic

Since

channel

sand which

containeU heavy oil.

this

was a

development survey, a lot of measurementswere available to imagethe


subsurface, including well log data, VSP, and 3-D seismic. Figure 9.7 shows

the ensity of information along a portion of one seismic line. Figure 9.8
shows the various datasets used in the tomographicimaging. Figure 9.8(a)
showsthe stacked seismic data with the key events indicated and Figure 9.8{b)
showsthe picked VSP from well C. Finally, Figure 9.9 showsthe well l'ogs and
synthetic

from a different

well,

clearly

indicating

the Glauconitic

channel.

The tomographic technique involved picking events from both the VSP first

arrivals and the prestack 3-D seismic data. Traveltime inversion wasdone by
the

technique described

in Chiu and Stewart (1987).

The method involves

starting with a simple modelof the subsurfaceand perturbing this modelusing


the errors between the picked traveltimes and the raypath times through the
model. This
raytracing

method differs

from the

method shown in

is done a nonzero source to receiver

offset,

Figure

9.6 since

and also the VSP data.

To test the method, Chiu and Stewart created a synthetic model. Figures
g.10(a) and (b) show raytrace plots for the VSP and surface Uata,
respectively,

through this model.

ZERO PHASE
BANDPASS
10/15 - 80/110 Hz
RFC

NORMAL

DENSITY (kg/m 3 )

VE-OCITY(m/sec)
SOIl

lime

030O

(sec)
till

Figure g. g

Wel1 log curves and synthetic

IO#

showing Glauconitic

channel.

(Stewart and Chiu 1987)


Part

9 - Travel

time

I nversi on

Page 9 -

12

Introduction

to Seismic Inversion

Methods

Brian Russell

offset (krn)
1.o

0.0

2.0

$OulCE

A OPHONE'

(a)
Figure 9.10

{)

(a) Surface raypaths through model used to test inversion.


(b) VSP raypaths through model.

1.0
,

ii

2.0
! i 1! -

1987)

Voity

Offset (km)
0.0

(Chiu and Stewart,

0.0

2.0

4.O

---

Figure 9.11

Results of tomographicinversion of model data

using VSPand surface data.


Part

9 - Travel

time

Inversion

(Chiu and Stewart,

1987)

Page 9 -

13

Introductionto SeismicInversionMethods

Brian Russell

Figure9.11 shows
the results of the inversionprocessusingboththe VSP
and surface seismicdata. To makethe test morerealistic,

randomnoise was

added
to travel'time
picks. Notice that thecorrectresulthasbeenobtained
in

four

iterations.

Let us now return to the case study described initially.


The final
velocity/depth model is shownin Figure 9.12. Notice that the velocities fit

quite well with the averagedsonic log velocities. This velocity model was
usedto produceboth a depthmigrated seismic section, shownin Figure 9.13,
and a full seismicinversionbasedon the maximum-likelihood
technique. The
final inversion is not showndue to colour reproduction limitations.
As can be seen in Figure 9.13,

the Glauconitic

delineated. The depth tie is also excellent.

channels have been well

The conclusion that the authors

makeis that if severaltypesof geophysical


measurements
can be intergrated,
the result is an improvedproduct. Each set of data acts as a constraint
the

Part

on

others.

9 - Travel

time

Inversion

Page 9 -

14

Introduction

to Seismic Inversi on Methods

Offset(km)

-1.0

0.0

Brian Russell

Velocity
Oan/s)

LO

0.0

3.0

6.0

TC)iliO6RAPmC
(C)
INVERSION

- SONCL06 (1:2)

Figure 9.12

Results of tomographic inversion of G1auconitic channel.

(ChiUandStewart,1987)
. : .m,,,
...

.......... ' 't ''"','


l..,.,.,;,,.

-.--:'

._:_.4sll
,_,
i!',i,?
,a..
,:.I.,,t.:,
?

800 ..
:
900

:'":

""' ""' .......

'

Depth

(m) 1000
11oo
1200

1300
1400

Fi gure g. 13

Depth
migration
of seismic
aatashown
in-Figure
9.8(a).
Tomographic
velocities of Figure9.12 havebeenused.

(Stewart an Chiu,
Part

9 - Travel time

Inversion

Page 9 -

15

1986)

Introduction to Seismic Inversion Methods

Brian Russell

PART 10 - AMPLITUDE VERSUS OFFSET INVERSION

Part 10 - Amplitude versus Offset

Inversion

Page 10 -

Introduction

to Seismic

Inversion

Methods

Brian

Russell

10.1 AV.O
Theo.y.._
Until

traces.

result

now, we have discusseO only the inversion of zero-incidence seismic

That is, we have considered

of

a seismic ray striking

each reflection

coefficient

to be the

the interface between two layers

at

zero

degrees. In this case, the 'reflection coefficient is a simple function of the


P-wave velocity and density in each of the layers.

The formula, which we have

seen many times, is simply

i+lvi+ - ivi

zi+- zi

ri= Yoi+iVi+l+
yO
iVi
where

r:

Zi+l
+ Zi
reflection

coefficient

yo: density,
V = P-wave vel oci ty,

Z:
and

Layer i overlies

When we allow the seismic ray to strike

angles,

as

results.

coefficient

in

a commonshot recording,

In this case, there is P- to

becomes a function

density of each of the layers.

derived:

reflected

acoustic impedance,
Layer i+1.

the boundary at nonzero incidence

a much .more complicated


S-wave conversion

of the P-wave velocity,

situation

and the reflection

S-wave velocity,

and

Indeed, there are now four curves that can be

P-wave amplitude, transmitteU P-wave amplitude,

reflected

S-waveamplitude,and transmittedS-wave amplitude. The variation of

amplitude

with

Poisson's ratio,

offset

also

involves

another

physical

parameter

called

which is related to P-and S-wave velocity by the formula

' =-

(Vp
/ VS
2- Z .

Poisson's ratio can theoretically

vary between 0 and 0.5.

Part 10 - Amplitude versus Offset Inversion

Page 10 -

Introduction

to Seismic Inversion Methods

$i

Brian Russell

Sr

at, t
BOUNDARY

(X2'2

Figure 10.1

Reflectedandtransmittedrays createdwhena P-wave


strikes the boundarybetweentwo layers.

(Waters, 1981).

o,2+,
-sin2,
- ' 'cos2,- x,n-:/
D,/-cos2+,/
Figure 10.2

Zoeppritzequationswhichdescribethe amplitudes
of the rays shownin Figure 10.1.

(Waters, 1981).

Part 10 - Ampli rude versus Offset

Inversion

Page 10-

Introduction

to Seismic Inversion

Methods

Brian Russell

The equations from which the ampl'itude variations can be derived are
callea

the Zoeppritz

equations. They are derived from the

continuity

of

displacement and stress in both the normal and tangential directions across an
interface

between two layers.

Figure 10.1 showsthe seismic rays

across a

boundary, and Figure 10.2 gives the final form of the equations. They are
taken from textbook by Waters (however, someof the signs were wrong, and

they are fixed

in

the diagram).

Since we have four equations with four

unknowns,they can be rearranged in the form of a x 4 matrix equation


Ax--y
with

soluti

on

x = A-ly .
Over the years, several
effects.

authors

have discussed amplitude versus offset

However, these authors concluded that the effect would be negligible

on seismic data.

In

a landmark paper, Ostrander (1984) showedthat for a

significant changein Poisson's ratio, a major changein the P-waveamplitude


coefficient can be seenas a function of offset. This Poisson's ratio change
is

most noticeable

in a gas sand, where the ratio


.

encasing shales to as low as 0.1


that,

in

the

gas sand itself.

such extreme cases, the P-wave reflection

positive to negative for


increase

in

can change from 0.4 in

Ostrander showed

coefficient

a decrease in Poisson's ratio

in P-wave velocity,

or from negative to positive

the

can go from

coupled with an

for an increase

in

Poisson's ratio coupled with a decrease in P-wave velocity.

Figure 10.3(a) showsthe gas sand model that Ostrander used and Figure
10.3(b)

shows the result of

reflection
shows that

coefficients.
this

effect

can

amplitude

versus

offset modelling of the P-wave

Figures 10.5(a) and (b), also taken from Ostrander,


inUeed

be

observeU

on

common offset

stack.

Figure 10.5(a) showsa stackeOseismic section witl three apparent "bright


spot" anomalies. Unfortunately, only wells A anU B were productive. The three
common
offset stacks, shownin Figure 10.5(b), indicate that only locations A
,

and B actually Uisplay an AVOeffect.

Part 10 - Amplitude versus Offset Inversion

Page 10 -

Introduction to Seismic Inversion Methods

Brian Russell

GAS*':*"**
tt

VlZ=8.000
/32 -"2.14

;...::.,
SHALE

:o.,

$=10.000

---'

/4)3 =2.40
('3 =0.4

Figure 10.3 (a)

Synthetic

gas sand model.

(Ostrander,

1984)

0.41
IN SAND
0.3

0.2

t..,

0.1

ANGLE
OF INCIDENCE
- ,-'-e'

I0 o

20 o

30

40

..,

NO

GAS

.,,,,,,,.,.ooo.o.o..... ..ooo.,
o.,.,o.,-'.
o,.,,,o
.,,o*oo......
-0.2

-0.3

-0.,4

Figure 10.3 (b) Computedreflection coefficients as a function of offset


for reflections

from top and bottom interfaces

of model

sown in Figure 10.3 (a).

(Ostrander,
IlL

--

Part 10 - Amplitudeversus Offset Inversion

_,

11

m m

im

1984)

Page 10 -

Introduction

The

to Seismic

Inversion

Methods

method useU to identify

this effect

Brian

is only partly

Russell

qualitative,

and

can be diagrammedas shownbelowINPUT

BUI L D MODEL

SEISMIC

SHOT PROFILES

COMPUTE

COFFSTACK

SYNTHETIC

im

...

VISUAL

COMPARISON

MANUALLY

CHANGE PARAMETERS

,m

NO

MODEL MATCHES
REALITY
.

Figure 10.4

Flow

Chart

for

Manual

AVO Inversion

Obviously, this visual meth'od


of comparison
leavesmuchto be Oesired.
We will therefore look at several methods for the qualitative

inversion of AVO

data,

the

both

of

normal-incidence

which have been looked at

previously

in

context

of

inversion.

Part 10 - Amplitude versus Offset

Inversion

Page 10-

Introduction

10

0.0

to Seismic Inversion

170

160

150

140

Methods

130

Brian Russell

120

110

100

90

70

, -- , "
! : " :.
' '' -' ' : .... - ' - I;
"

-'I'*O..',m * ....
. re-!: ' l, 't
.". '.'..' ' t'-'

I
, I i I, mm I.. i ' ,. '

'

..,.,,.,....,.,,....
,",',,-.
.....
--,,,,'.,,.-,',,,,,
.....
,,.,.....
,,,'
.........
,-~.,
.......
,,.'""'....'!.'_'"' ..... ,,., .............
'....

'

i i.

ii I

IIII

II

0.0

'i: _--.,......'_'_-..
,::;.-':
', ..=..:.'
-':."i "=-"
'...'-'?'?'?'?'?'L--,.'....,'::
....
-..c
.._ .o..:?;i.
' --?.-" ":'..
: ' ......
il ;,.:.?:-=;.'.'..='.::-1: . .
,..
.-...,_....:,..:..,.;,..-.

.*...
.... .

.- -...--- . ; ...... .. .:..;,-.;:...

0.5 '.l_'.-. .: : __..._. .... _

_:_- ....4.
..... <?--r..-..

. .:.;. ,""-.r.._-".::

-:.:...:..._...
........
_:.....;._..=
,'*' .......
':'.:-r-'_..;
. . 0.5

1.0

I.,...,:,....,;..
.........:.,...-..

...

....,..,

t,,,

"_,,,d,.,
Il.leeile*e,,I,'t
! :litIll""'
IIt'l';I;,d

..........12.0
.

..

,e.. Illllll.1111el'..le

............
;.;
.... :.....i:-;
- .. '."-'1,
.'1-.

'.:--;=....=:;;:.1
.... ...,;.".....

2.5

'.........
""":":
.......................
2..5
-..... ,.....-.,.-.,.-..-,.,...........,............

,..,- .1,
..----?'"'1

"' '

Figure 10.5(a)

........;:.-.'..

"1;;::=
....:":"
.....;""':"'
""1'.'-'-'-' ' "':,';;;;":',::
....:"

'}i:.;.=i.;-."':;::.'.::
'.'

.......;.::.;:..

Sacked seismic line showing"brigh spot" anomalies.


Loca%ions

A an

B are

known gas.

(Osl:rander,

!984)

SP 80

":l:1111il

....
,e*'11:,l:,

ol,, titIll,
....

eellie

;;;;;;;;i;il
,,

' '

..111tl

' ........

6$'

1012'

6952'

1012

Fiure 10.5(D)

Common
offset sl;acksover locations A, B, andC from
stackedsection in Figure 10.5/a). Notice the AVO
increase

on A and B.

(Os!;ranOer,

Par[ 10 - A,pli[ude

versus Offset

Inversion

1984)

Page 10 -

Introduction

to Sei stoic Inversi

10.2 AVO Inversion

Recall

on Methods

Bri an Russell

by GLI

that

in the theory of generalized linear inversion

were three important components'a geological


relationship

(.GLI)

there

modelof the earth, a physical

between the earth and a set of geophysical measurements,anU a

set of geophysicalobservations. This methodWasdiscusseain both chapters8


anU

9,

applied

to

stacked data

respectively.

Now, let us apply the

wil 1 be cal led

AVO inversi

In

secti on 10.1,

inversion
method to

an traveltime
unstacked data.

inversion,
The result

on.

the three components needed to perform GLI inversion

on

AVOUatawe,redescribed. Ourmodel of the earth is a series of layers with


te el astic 'parameters of P-and S-wave vel oci ty, density, and Poi sson'S ratio.
Our physical relationship

between this

derived using the Zoeppritz equations.

model ana seismic CDPprofiles


And, finally,

picked amplitudes and times of events on a CDPprofile

was

the observations are the

or common
offset

stack.

By computingderivatives from the Zoeppritz matrix, it is possible to set up a


GLI solution
data.

This

to te AVO problem similar


solution

to the solution

found for zero-offset

is

aF(Mo)

FIM): F(M
D)+ )M bM,
where

Mo:initial earthmodel,
M:

AM:

true earth model,

change in model parameters,

F(M) -- AVOobservations,

F(MO):Zoeppritz
valuesfrominitial model,and

)F(M
O)

i)--: change
in calculated
values.

The implementation is simply a variation

of

the manualmethod, anO is

sinownon the next page.

Part 10 - Amplitude versus Offset Inversion

Page 10 -

Introduction to Seismic Inversion Methods

Brian Russell

INPUT SEISMIC
SHOT PROFILES

COFFSTACK
J

COMPUTE

SYNTHETIC

PICK

STORE COMPUTED

AMPLITUDES

AMPLI TUDES

COMPUTE

COMPUTE MODEL

ERROR

PARAMETER CHANGE
USI NG GLI

NO

ERROR

YES

MODEL MATCHES

REAbITY
,

Figure 10.6

AVO inversion by the GLI method

Part 10 - Amplitude versus Offset

Inversion

Page 10 -

Introduction

to Seismic Inversion Methods

Brian Russell

Wewill nowlook at an example of GLI inversion of


offset

data.

amplitude versus

First, consider the integrated well logs shownon the left hand

panel of Figure 10.7. Actually., only the sonic log or P-wavelog wasrecorded
in the field. The density log was derived from the sonic using Gardner's
equation, the Potssonratio wasfixed at 0.25, and the S-wavewasderived from
the

P-wave and Potsson ratio logs.

On the logs, three

layers

have been

blocked at depth and a significant Poisson's ratio changehas been introduced


in the middle block. On the right hand side of Figure 10.7, notice that the
amplitudeversusoffset curves have been displayed for the third layer. As
predicted earlier, the P-wave reflection coefficient displays a strong
increase of amplitude with offset.

Figure 10.8 showsthe sameset of blockedlogs on the left, but showsthe


seismic responseof the amplitude change on the right. This synthetic was
produced
by simply'replacingthe zero-incidenceamplitudeswith the amplitudes
derived from the Zoeppritz calculations.
The events between600 and 700 msec
display a pronounced
amplitude changewit h offset.

ZOEPPRII'Z
$IHI:LE INTERFFJCE

TESTLO
TESTLO
TESi'DE
lE-S t;$TPO

Eq,
m,nt: 3 Ti,:

$7 Depth: 795

589

1998

Of*f's:c'
..........................

i Reflected

.....

2,5

4;8

P-Wave

Transmitted P-Wave(-9.8)

......
Ref'l ected
S-Wave
........... Transmitted S-Wave
,,,

mm

Figure 10.7 Blockedwell logs on left,

with computedZoeppritz curves

for layer 3 on right.


_

Part 10 -^mplJtude versus Offset InvesJon

Page 10-

10

Introducti

on to

Sei smi c Inversi

on Methods

Brian

Russel 1

20EPPRITZ EFLECTIUITY tlODEL

TESTLOG TESTLOG IEH$ITY1


uYm
u/m
9/

......

MODEL1 (meters.)

S-I,IFIUE! POISSOH1
EU
usam

,L

909

727

545

363

181

...o...-.. ............... ,

....,....

ee-.
.........................
-."
.........
.........
..............
.'.........,.

::
.........................
...
...........
"
268

268

Figure 10.8

2.5

468

LeftRight:

.$

A "blowup"of the blockedlogs shownin Figure 10.7.


A synthetic

commonoffset

stack and the AVO curves

shown on the right of Figure 10.7.

Part 10 - Amplitude versus Offset Inversion

Page 10-

11

Introduction

to Seismic Inversion

Methods

However, does the change seen in

Brian Russell

Figure 10.8 reflect

the reality

of the

situation?
Figure 10.9 showsa set of CDPgathers which correspond to the
model. The gathers are a realistic modelled dataset and were generatedwith
no changein Poisson's ratio. Since the gathers are noisy and contain fewer

tracesthanthe synthetic
CDP
profile shownin Figure10.8, theywereusedto
create

a commonoffset stack.

The geometry of this st.ack

is

described

in

Ostrander'spaper, and the resulting gathersare often referredto' as


Ostrander gathers. Traces within a CDP/offset window were gathered and
stacked, resulting in increased signal to noise. Figure 10.10 showsa display
of the logs, synthetic model, and common
offset stack. The mismatch in
amplitudes is now obvious.

Next,

the

amplitudes of

the

event on the

contanon offset

stack

correspondingto the event displayed in Figure 10.7 were picked. The event
above the

anomalous layer was also picked.

The picks were then

used along

with the computedamplitude versus offset curve to invert the data by the GLI
method. In the inversion, two parameters were allowed to vary- the Poisson's
ratio

in the layer of interest,

and a

scalar

which relates the magnitude of

the seismic
picksto themagnitude
of theactual'amplitudes.

Figure 10.9

CDPgathers from a seismic dataset corresponding to


synthetic shownin Figure 10.8.

Part 10 -Amplituae

versus Offset Inversion

Page 10 -

12

I ntroducti
onto SeistoicI nversi
onMethods

Bri an Russel
1

I NVER$]ON FULL HOIIEL

TESTL TESTL I)EN$I $-WI:IUPOI$$


_ us/m

u/

g/cc

us/

rIO]]EL1 (meters)
EU

909

727

545

353

181

COFFSTK1( n,elers )

838

64

498 :)32

liE;

ItIII
50

I
20

20

2.5

40

Figure 10.10

,5

A comparison of the synthetic coneon offset stack from


Figure 10.8 {middle panel) with a con,nonoffset stack
created from the CDPgathers of Figure 10.9 (right panel).
Te left panel showsthe blocked well logs from which
the synthetic

was created.

Part 10 - Amplitude versus Offset Inversion

Page l(J-

13

Introduction to Seismic Inversion Methods

Brian Russell

The results of this inversion are shown in Figure 10.11. The figure

shows
the change
in Poisson's
ratio beforeandafter inversion(dashed
line
before, solid line = after) on the left hand side. Onthe upperright is
shownthe matchbetween
the observed
picksin the upperlayer (shown
as small

squares)
andthefinal theoreticalcurve{sown
asa solidline). Thelower
right showsthe samething for the lower layer.

Finally, Figure10.1Zshowsthe comparison


betweenthe coanon
offset
stackandthe syntheticmodelafter the modelhasbeenrecomputed
with the new
amplitude
changes
fromtheupdated
Poisson's
ratio. Noticethe improvement
in
the

match.

II'RSIOH

SINE

LIER:

I101ELI

Ewnt (2) P.bove Laver

e .e

0.042

6.666

..

O''r

Event (3) Belo4aLaver

0.048

OO

6.624

70O

6,8

Figure 10.11

Poiss

Ratio

e.

6.606

S5e

O('set

( m)

Theresultsof a GLI inversionbetween


the computed,
amplitudes

of Figure10.7andthepickedamplitudes
fromtheconmon

offset stackof Figure10.10. Thedashed


line onthe plot
onthe left is the Poisson'sratio beforeinversion,andthe
solid line is after inversion. Theplots on the right show
the newcomputed
curveswiththe picks(squares)
superimposed.

Part 10 - Amplitude versus Offset Inversion

Page 10-

14

Introduction

to Seismic

Inversion

Methods

Brian

Russell

IHUER$IOH FULL MODL

MOIlEL2(meer$)

EU

Figure 10.12

909

727

545

363

COFFSTKI ( meters )

lB1

838

664

498

332

166

A replot of Figure 10.10, where the synthetic has been

recomputedusing the newPoisson's ratio value.

Part 10 - Amplitude versus Offset

Inversion

Page 10 -

15

[ntoduct

on t $e smc [nvesJ on Methods

B an Russe ]

PART 11 - VEI:OCITY INVERSION

Part 11 - Velocity

Inversion

Page 11 -

Introduction to Seismic Inversion Methods

Brian Russell

Part 11 - Veloci..tyI.n.v.
ersi on
__

11.1

! ntroduc ti on
The

last

inversion.

topic to be discussedin these notes is the topic of velocity

Alth

acutally

fit

ough this technique is

referred

to as inversion, it does not

in to the narrower category of inversion techniques that we have

been dtscussing in this course. These techniqueshaveall involved inputting

a stacked, or unstacked, seismic dataset and inverting to a velocity


depth section.

seismic

The output of

section

amplitudes,

the

velocity

inversion

properly positioneU in depth, but still

and still

band-limiteU.

versus

described here is the

plotted

as seismic

As such this technique is closer

to that

of depth migration.

In

this

section,

we will

inversion, and then look at a

this

at

few examples.

the theory of

summary. Our discussion here will

11

- Velocity

Inversion

and

there

follow

velocity

An excellent review article

subject is given in Bleistein and Cohen(1982).

theory of the method is reviewed

Part

look briefly

is

In this

article,

also an extensive

on

the

literature

that article.

Page 11 -

Introduction to Seismic Inversion Methods

Brian Russell

KII.OFET

-2

-1

KILOFEET

-2

-I

(a)
Figure 11.1

(b)

The effect of the velocity inversion methodon synthetic

data. (a) A "buried focus"effect, (b) The output from


the velocity

inversion

method.

(Bleistein

KILOFEET
o

-1

C)

and Cohen 1982 )

KILOFEET
o

ii'1
uJ
LL
m

o
....

(a)
Figure 11.2

(b)

A second example of the effect

synthetic data.

of velocity

inversion on

(a) Input section with diffraction,

(b) Output from velocity

inversion.
(Bleistein

and Cohen

1982 )

......

Part 11 - Velocity

Inversion

Page 11 -

Introduction

to Seismic

Inversion

Methods

Brian

Russell

11.2 Theory and .Examples

The velocity inversion procedure is referred to as an inverse

scattering

problem, in which the interior of the earth is mapped by inver.ting the


observations from multiple acoustic sources. (This is a long way of saying
that the seismic

section

is

inverted!)

method is the acoustic wave equation.

and classical migration is

that

Thus,

the

point for this

The difference between this

perturbation

techniques

transforms are used rather than downwardcontinuation


The initial

starting

technique

and integral

of the wave equation.

work in this area was done by NormanBleistein

and Jack Cohen

at the University of Denver. In their initial


paper, Cohenand Bleistein
(197g), they employed only a perturbation technique in the inversion of
seismic data. In simple terms, this technique involves using a constant
velocity in the wave equation, perturbing this constant velocity by a small
amount, and then, by observing the backscattered wavefield, solving for the
perturbed velocity.

This methodsolves for only the reflection

strength

of

the mappedinterfaces.

In their morerecent paper, Bleistein


solution

was proposed which al.so solves for

refraction.
inversion

and Cohen(1982), a moreaccurate

Clayton and Stolt


of

seismic

data.

(1981)
Their

transmission losses

and

have applied a similar methodto the

method is referred

to as

the

Born-WKBJ

method, and thus this approach to inversion is often cal led Born inversion.

Despite the differences in the mathematicsbetweenthe velocity inversion


methodsand migration methods, the results look very similar to those of

migration. For example,Figure 11.1, fromBleistein andCohen(1982), shows


the input an inverted

result

for

a g-D buried focus.

Note that, as in

migration, the "bow-tie" has been imagedto a synclinal feature.

Part 11 - Velocity

Inversion

Page 11 -

Introduction

o Seismic Inversion

q ! ()f!. []

I,;,(11). iJ

ll;11]ll. ()

Methods

I I 3l)!]. l,

Brian Russell

I ;i'llroll. IJ.

I I,I O0. II

I I11.)[11J. fl

(a)

qlOO
.-.,,

6500

8900

I 1 300
-

1 37.r.,P

16' ,'!..[]

18bG

c)

(b)

Figure 11.3

The effect

of velocity

inversion on real data.

(a) Input section (MarathonOil),

() Output section.
(Bleistein

Part 11 - Velocity Inversion

and Cohen 1982)

Page11 -

Introduction to Seismic Inversion Methods

Brian Russell

Figure 11.2, also from Bleistein and Cohen (1982), showstle velocity
inversion of a diffraction tail from a geological discontinuity. Notice that
the diffraction tail has been "collapsea", again as in migration.

Finally, Figure 11.3 showsan example of applying the velocity inversion


techniqueto a real dataset. Again, note the similarity with classical depth
migration. The fact that this section is plotted as wiggle trace only makes
the plot di fficul t to evaluate.

In summary,this technique cannotbe classed with the other methodswhich


have been discussed in this'course due to its similarity with depth migration.
However, research in'this
area is continuing at a steady pace, and the
technique promises much for the future.

Part

11 - Velocity

I nversion

Page11 -

Introduction to Seismic Inversion Nethods

Brian Russell

PART 12 - SUMMARY

Part 12 - Summary

Page 12 -

Introduction

to Seismic Inversion

Methods

Brian Russell

lZ.1 Sgmmary
In
inversion

these

notes,

we have

of seismic data.

reviewed the current

The basic

model

methods used

in

the

used in most of these methods is

the one-dimensionalmodel, which states that the seismic trace is simply the
convolution of a zero phase wavelet

the

earth's

acoustic

shownin Figures

with a reflectivity

impedanceprofile.

12.1,

12.2,

sequence derived from

Flowcharts for these methoUs are

and 12.3.

Let

us initially

summarizethe

advantages and disadvantages of the three methodsof single trace


which

inversion

have been discussed:

(1) Recursire
_

Inversion

Advantage s:

(i)

Utilizes

the complete seismic trace in its calculation.

(l i ) A robust procedure when used on clean seismic data.


(iii)

Output is in wiggle trace format similar

to seismic data.

Di sadvantages:

(i)

Errors

are

propagated through the recurslye solution

if there are

phase, amplitude, or noise problems.


(i i) The low frequency componentmust be derived from a separate source.

(2) Spar.
se-SP.i
kg_.Invers.
ion
Advantages-

(i)

The data

itself

is

used in

the

calculation,

as

in

recursi

ve

i nver si on.

(ii)
(iii)

A geological looking inversion is produced.


The low frequency information

is included mathematically

in

solution.

Part 12 - Summary

Page 12

the

Introduction

to Seismic Inversion

Methods

Brian Russell

BAND-LIMITED
SEISMIC
TRACE
INTRODUCE
LOW
FREQUENCY
COMPONENT

REFL

COEFF.

INVERT

TOIMPEDANCE

IMPEDANCE

SCALE TO
VELOCITY
AND DEPTH

DISPLAY

Fiure

12.1

Band-Limited

Inversion

(Recursive)

Part

12 - Summary

Page 12-

Introduction

to Seismic

Inversion

Methods

Brian Russell

Dsadvantages'

Statistical

(i)

nature of the sparse-spike methodsused are subject to

probl eros i n noisy Uata.

Final output lacks muchof the fine detail seen on recursively


inverted data. Only the "blocky" componentis inverted.
(3) Model-Base I nver si on

Advantages'

(i) A complete solution, including low frequencyinformation, is possible


to

(ii)

ob rain.

Errors are distributed

(iii)

through the solution.

Multiple and attenuation effects can be modelled.

Di sadvantages'

(i) A completesolution is arrived at iteratively andmayneverbe


reached ( i.e. the solution maynot converge).
It is possible that more than one forward modelcorrectly fits
data (nonuniqueness).

(ii)

The

other

methods which

were considered

were

traveltime

the

inversion,

velocity inversion, and amplitude versus offset inversion. All are important
methods, but cannot be compareddirectly with the three previous methods
(comparingapples with oranges?).
,

The traveltime

accurate velocity
constraint

for

either

inversion

method was

an excellent

versus depth model. These velocities


one of

the

classical

method for finding an


make

an

excellent

inversion methodsor for a depth

migration.

Part

12 - Summary

Page 12 -

Introductionto SeismicInversionMethods

BrianRussell

EXTRACT

SPARSE
REFLECTIVITY
INTRODUCE
LINEAR
CONSTRAINTS

INVERT
TO IMPEDANCE

vELcmTY!

DL_._.
AND
m

Fiure

Part 12 - Sugary

12.2

Broad-BandInversion (Sparse-Spike)

Page 12-

Introduction

to Seismic Inversion

Methods

Brian Russell

The velocity inversion methodwas shownto be very similar to depth


migration. The output from this method could therefore be used as input to
one of the other

Finally,

three

classical

amplitude versus offset inversion adds an extra dimension to the

inversion problem since it


velocity
future,

methods of inversion.

inversion
but still

is

method.

truly
This

has a number of

a lithologic

inversion

method is definitely
hurdles

the

rather than a
method of

the

to overcome. This author's humble

opinion is that once the interpreter is able to do a complete lithological


inversion on their seismic datasets, the other methodswill be replaced.
The other conclusion from this course is that the more separate datasets
(surface seismic, VSP, well log, gravity, etc..) the interpreter can use in an
inversion,

the better

Part 12 - Sumnary

the final

product will

be.

Page 12-

Introduction

to Seismic Inversion Methods

Brian Russell

MODEL
TRACE

CALCULATE
ERROR

ERROR
SMALL
ENOUGH

IMPEDANCE
ESTIMATE

UPDATE
IMPEDANCE

NO

YES

ON

=ESTIMATE

Fiure

Part 1'- '"


....
Summary

12.3

Mode 1-Based

Inversion

Page 12-

Introduction

to Sei stoic Inversion

Herhods

Brian Russell

REFERENCES

Angeleri, G.P., and Carpi, R., 1982, Porosity prediction from

seismic data'

Geophys.Prosp., v.30, p.$80-607.

Berteussen, K.A., and Ursin, B., 1983, Approximate computation of

the acoustic impedancefrom seismic datap.

Geophysics, v. 48,

1351-1358.

Bishop, T.N.,

Bube, K.P., Cutler,

Resnick, J.R.,

Shuey, R.T.,

R.T., Langan, RT., Love, P.L.,

SpinUler,

Tomographic determination of velocity

D.A., and Wyld, H.W., 1985,

and depth in laterally

varying media- Geophysics, v. 50, p. 903Bleistein,

N., and Cohen, J.K.,

Present status,

Bording, R.P.,

198, The velocity inversion problem-

new directions:

Lines, L.R.,

923.

Geophysics, v.47. p.1497-1511.

Scales, J.A.,

ana Treitel,

S., 1986,

Principles of travel time tomography' SEGContinuing EUucation notes,


Geophysical inversion and applications.

Chi, C., Mendel, J.M., and Hampson,D., 1984, A computationally fast


approach to maximum-likelihood aleconvolution:
p.

Geophysics, v. 49,

550-565.

Chiu, S.K.,

and Stewart,

R.R.,

dimensional seismic velocity

seismic profiles,

1987, Tomographic determination

structure

of three-

using well logs, vertical

and surface seismic data:

Geophysics, v.52,

p. 1085-1098.
Claerbout,

J.F.,

and Muir, F.,

Geophysics, v. 38, p.

Part 12 - Summary

1973, Robust Modeling with erratic

data:

8Z6-844.

Page 12 -

Introduction

Clayton,

to Seismic Inversion Methods

R.W., and Stolt,

acoustic reflection

Cohen, J.K.,

R.H.,

data:

and Bleistein,

Brian Russell

1981, A born WKBJinversion

Geophysics, v. 46,

method for

1559-1568.

N, 1979, Velocity inversion procedure for

acoustic waves: Geophysics, v. 44, p. 1077-1087.


Cooke, D.A.,

and Schneider, W.A., 1983, Generalized linear

of reflection
Galbraith,

J.M.,

seismic data:
and Millington,

Geophysics, v. 48, p.
G.F.,

inversion

665-676.

1979, Low frequency recovery in

the inversion of seismograms: Journal of the CSEG, V. 15, p. 30-39.


Gelland, V., and Larner, K., 1983, Seismic litholic

modeling:

presented at the 1983 convention of the CSEG,Las Vegas.


Graul, M., Deconvolution and wavelet processing:

Unpubished SEG course

notes.

Hardage, R., 1986, Seismic Stratigraphy:


London

Geophysical Press,

- Amsterdam.

.Hampson,
D., and Galbraith, M., 1981, Wavelet extraction by sonic-log
correltation:

Journal of the CSEG, v. 17, p. 24-

Hampson, D., 1986, Inverse velocity


Journal of the CSEG, V. 22, p.
Hampson, D., and Russell,

42.

stacking for multiple

elimination:

44-55.

B., 1985, Maximum-Likelihood seismic

inversion (abstract no. SP-16)- National CanauianCSEGmeeting,


Ca.!gary, Alberta.

Part 12 - Summary

Page 12 -

Introducti on to Sei stoic Inversi on Methods

Bri an Russell
.

Herman, A.J.,

Anania, R.M., Chun, J.H.,

Jacewitz,

C.A.,

and

Pepper, R.E.F., 1982, A fast three-dimensionalmodeling technique


and fundamentals of three-dimensional frequency-Uomainmigration:
Geophysics, v. 47, p.

Jones, I.F.,

1627-1644.

and Levy, S., 1987, Signal=to-noise ratio enhancementin

multi channel seismic data via the Karhunen-Loeve transform,

Geophysical Propecting, v. 35, p.


Kormyl o, J.,

anu Mendel., J.M.,

deconvolution-

IEEE Trans.

12-32.

1983, Maximum-likelihood seismic

on Geoscience and Remote Sensing,

v. IT - 28, p. 482 - 488.

Lines, L.R.,

Schultz, A.K., and Treitel,

of geophysical data:

Lines, L.R.,

Geophysics, v. 53, p. 8-

and Tritel,

anU its application

S., 1988, Cooperative inversion

S.,

1984, A review of least-squares

to geophysical problems'

Prospecting, v. 32, p.

20.
inversion

Geophysical

159-186.

Lindseth, R.O., 1979, Synthetic sonic logs - a process for stratigraphic


interpretation:

Geophysics, v. 44, p. 3-

26.

Oldenburg, D.W., 1985, Inverse theory with applica.tion to aleconvolution


and seismogram inversion.

Oldenburg, D.W., Scheuer, T.,

impedancefrom reflection
Ostrander,

W.J.,

Unpublished course notes.

and Levy, S., 1983, Recovery of the acoustic

seismograms:Geophysics, v. 48, p. 1318-1337.

1984, Plane wave reflection

at non-normal angles of incidence:

Part 12 - Summary

coefficients

for gas sands

Geophysics, v. 49, p. 1637-1648.

Page 12 -

10

Introduction %oSeismic Inversion Methods

Brian Russell

Russell, B.H., and Lindseth, R.O., 1982, The information content of


synthetic sonic logs - A frequencydomainapproach- presentedat
the 1982 convention of the EAEG, Cannes, France.

Shuey,R.T., 1985, A simplification of the Zoeppritz equations:


Geophysics,v. 50, p. 609-614.
Stewart, R.R., andChiu, S.K.L., 1986, Tomography-based
imagingof a
heavyoil reservoir usingwell-logs, VSPand3-D SeismicdataJournal of the CSEG, v. 22, p.

73-86.

Taner, M.T., an Koehler, F., 1981,


Geophysics,v. 46, p. 17-22.

Surface

consistent

corrections-

Taylor, H.L., Banks,S.C., and McCoy,J.F., 1979, Deconvolutionwith


the L1 norm: Geophysics,v. 44, p.

39-52.

Trei tel, S., and Robinson,E.A., 1966, The design of hi gh-resolution

digital filters IEEETransactions


on Geocience
Electronics,
v. GE-4, No. 1, p.

25-38.

Walker, C., and Ulrych, T.J., 1983, Autoregressive recovery of the


acoustic impedanceGeophysics,v. 48, p. 1338- 1350.
1981, Reflecti on seismology, a tool for energy resource

Waters, K.H.,

(second edition)-

exploration

Wiley, NewYork.

Western Geophysical Co., 1983, Sei smic Li thol ogic MoUeli ng:

Technical

Brochure.

Widess, M.B., 1973, How thin is a thin bed?- Geophysics, v. 38,

p. 1176-

Part

1180.

12 - Summary

Page 12 -

11

ISBN: 978-0-931830-65-5

90000

306

ISBN 978-0-931830-48-8
ISBN 978-0-931830-65-5

(Series)
(Volume)