Uo JNLM

Seismic Processing - Table of Contents
01.01 Chapter 1 - In the beginning ...
01.02 An introduction
02.01 Chapter 2 - Seismic Acquisition
01.03 The geological time scale
02.02 The ideal seismic source
01.04 Rock types
02.03 Onshore seismic sources
01.05 Sedimentary basins
02.04 Other Land sources
01.06 Oil and Gas formation
02.05 Recording the data - Onshore
01.07 Oil and Gas Traps
02.06 Offshore seismic sources
01.08 Approximately Mathematical
02.07 Recording the data - Offshore
01.09 Chapter 1 - Questions
03.01 Chapter 3 - Waves and Raypaths
03.02 Waves
03.03 P and S Waves
03.04 Wavefronts
03.05 Ray Paths
03.06 More Ray Paths
1
03.07 Ghost Reflections
03.08 Multiple Reflections
03.09 Diffractions
04.01 Chapter 4 - Geometry
04.02 Marine 2D Geometry
04.03 Multi-Fold Geometry
04.04 Calculating the fold
04.05 Land Geometry
04.06 Elevations and shot depths
04.07 Field Statics
04.08 Crooked Lines
04.09 The problems with 2D
04.10 3D Geometry
04.11 3D binning
05.01 Chapter 5 - Recording the data
05.02 Number systems
05.03 Binary numbers
05.04 Binary arithmetic
05.05 Digitisation
05.06 Aliasing
2
05.07 Multiplexed data
05.08 Recording filters
05.09 Tape Formats
05.10 Field Tape Formats
05.11 SEG-D
05.12 SEG-Y
06.01 Chapter 6 - Frequencies
06.02 Complex Numbers
06.03 Frequencies
06.04 Combining different frequencies
06.05 The Fourier Transform
06.06 The Forward Transform
06.07 The Inverse Transform
06.08 Example FFT's
06.09 Digital Filtering
06.10 Convolution
06.11 The frequency content of the seismic trace
06.12 Phase
07.01 Chapter 7 - Processing Flows (1)
07.02 A typical processing flow
3
07.03 Transcription
07.04 Vibroseis data & correlation
07.05 Shot summing
07.06 Initial Statics
07.07 Signature Deconvolution (1)
07.11 Gain Recovery
07.12 Trace editing
08.02 Resample
08.03 Spatial Resampling
08.04 Spatial Frequencies
08.05 Spatial filtering
08.06 FK Filtering
08.07 Linear Tau-P filtering
08.08 FX Deconvolution
08.09 Spatial Filtering Examples (1)
08.10 Spatial Filtering Examples (2)
08.11 Spatial interpolation
08.12 Sorting & Gathering
4
09.02 Dynamic corrections
09.03 NMO and Velocities
09.04 Seismic Velocities
09.05 Picking Velocities (1)
09.06 Picking Velocities (2)
09.07 Velocity problems
09.08 Velocity QC
09.09 Other velocity analyses and QC
09.10 DMO (1)
09.11 DMO (2)
09.12 DMO (3)
10.02 Multiples - Again!
10.03 Deconvolution (1)
10.07 De-Multiple (1)
10.08 De-Multiple (2)
5
10.09 Residual Statics (1)
10.10 Residual Statics (2)
10.11 Other Statics (1)
10.12 Other Statics (2)
11.02 Trace muting
11.03 CDP Stack
11.04 Filtering (1)
11.05 Filtering (2)
11.06 Equalisation & AGC
11.07 Migration (1)
11.08 Migration (2)
11.09 Migration (3)
11.10 Other Post-Stack Processes / Display
11.11 Display (2)
11.12 What happens next?
12.01 Chapter 12 - Advanced Processing
12.02 Complex Trace Analysis
12.03 Well Log Processing
12.04 Data Matching
6
12.05 Zero Phasing
12.06 Seismic Inversion
12.07 AVO (1)
12.08 AVO (2)
12.09 Scanning & Reprocessing
12.10 QC - Trials and Tribulations
12.11 Yesterday, Today and Tomorrow
12.13 Final Questions
7
Chapter 1 - In the beginning ...
As the beginning seems an appropriate place to start, Chapter 1 provides a tiny bit of
geological and mathematical background to Seismic Processing. Please make sure that you
have read Navigating through this course before going any further!
Page 01.02 - An introduction
We start with a brief introduction to the whole process of Seismic Exploration, a mention of
its history, and an explanation of the types of seismic trace displays used in this course.
Page 01.03 - The geological time scale
As a prelude to a four page instant geological background, nothing less than the history of
the world is used to familiarise you with the formation names used by geologists. Although
not strictly related to Seismic Processing, some background to the overall geological setting
of seismic data is useful.
Page 01.04 - Rock types
Specific rock types, and their formation, are discussed, with particular emphasis on the
sedimentary rocks that are the foundation of the world's Oil & Gas production.
Page 01.05 - Sedimentary basins
Since all of the world's Oil & Gas reserves are found in sedimentary basins, this page
illustrates the formation of a typical basin. The structures produced during basin
formation provide the setting for both the generation and subsequent "trapping" of Oil &
Gas deposits.
Page 01.06 - Oil and Gas formation
The chemical and physical processes necessary for the production of Oil & Gas are
discussed, together with an example of an actual sedimentary basin cross-section.
Page 01.07 - Oil and Gas Traps
8
Once the Oil & Gas has been produced, the conditions must exist for the "trapping" of the
Oil & Gas in a suitable structure. Examples of the major types of trap are shown.
Page 01.08 - Approximately Mathematical
To finish this introduction, something non-geological. A look at least-squares regression,

one of the mathematical algorithms used extensively in the Seismic Processing route.
Page 01.09 - Questions
A set of questions to test your knowledge of the topics covered in Chapter 1.
9
An introduction
Seismic Exploration
Although this course will concentrate on the processing of reflection seismic data for hydrocarbon
exploration, it's probably worth reviewing the historical context and the other uses of seismic
techniques.
The Chinese had a device as early as 100 AD. for detecting earth tremors - probably the
first seismic receiver! The first use of explosives to delineate structures under the earth was
in the 1920's and 30's in the Southern US and South America. The techniques used
developed fairly slowly over the next twenty or so years until the advent of tape recording
in the 1950's, and digital computer processing in the 1960's. Since then the technology has
increased exponentially, with the ups and downs of the world oil price controlling the
overall research effort.
This course deals exclusively with seismic reflection data processing. The recording of
refracted seismic waves is used for shallow investigations and will be mentioned in passing
(we can't avoid recording refractions with the reflections). Reflection techniques can also
be used for very shallow site investigations (either for placing an oil rig, or for engineering
work), or very deep penetration into the earth for examination of the limits of the earth's
crust. Other geophysical techniques (gravity, magnetics etc.) will not be discussed.
Like most real-world activities, seismic exploration has not featured well in the movies.
The 1953 film "Thunder Bay" has James Stewart throwing sticks of dynamite from a boat
in a Louisiana bayou, and the 1976 re-make of "King Kong" used the excuse of seismic
exploration as a reason for visiting the appropriate island. Neither of these is
recommended viewing! (I won't mention the single shotgun blast at the beginning of
"Jurrasic Park" producing a 3D image, though it would be interesting to develop such a
technique!)
10
In simplistic terms, seismic exploration can be thought of as the sonic equivalent of
radar. An energy source produces sound waves that are directed into the ground.
These waves pass through the earth and are partially reflected at every boundary
between rocks of different types. The response to this reflection sequence is
received by instruments on or near the surface, and recorded on magnetic tape for
computer processing. The process is repeated many times along a seismic "line"
(generally a straight line on the surface), and the resultant processed data provides
a structural picture of the sub-surface. Sophisticated processing techniques can be
used (usually in conjunction with calibration data recorded down a well) to turn the
resultant seismic section into a direct indicator of rock types and (possibly) detect
the presence of hydrocarbons (oil & gas) within the earth.
The data recorded from one "shot" (one detonation of an explosive or implosive
energy source) at one receiver position is referred to as a seismic trace, and is
recorded as a function of time (the time since the shot was fired). As this time
represents the time taken for the energy to travel into the earth, reflect, and then
return to the surface, it is more correctly called "two-way time" and the vertical
scale is generally measured in milliseconds (one thousandth of a second - 0.001
seconds). During the processing sequence these traces are combined together in
various ways, and modified by some fairly complex mathematical operations, but
are always referred to as "traces". The display of many traces side-by-side in their
correct spatial positions produces the final "seismic section" or "seismic profile"
that provides the geologist with a structural picture of the sub-surface.
For reasons of efficiency and data redundancy, the results from each shot are
actually recorded at many different receiver positions. Receivers are placed at
regular intervals around or to one side of the shot position typically extending over
some 3 kilometres or more of the surface. The resultant collection of traces from
one shot is generally recorded together and referred to as a "Field Record". Each
shot position is numbered, and the position of each shot (normally the
"shotpoint") is accurately mapped. This "shotpoint map" shows the position of the
seismic cross-section on the surface. For conventional so-called two-dimensional
(2D) seismic data (we'll talk about 3D later...) this cross-section is assumed to lie
directly below the surface "line".
11
Since the early 1960's seismic data has been recorded and processed digitally.
What we visualise as a seismic trace is actually nothing more than a string of
numbers, where each number represents the amplitude (or height) of the seismic
trace at a particular time. Traces are typically recorded with a sample period (the
time interval between numbers) of 1-2 milliseconds (0.001 - 0.002 seconds), and
recorded to a total two-way time of (typically) 5 or 6 seconds. Each trace thus
consists of some 2,500 - 6,000 numbers recorded on tape. As each of these
numbers can take up to 4 bytes of computer storage, and as one field record can
consist of (for example) 240 seismic traces recorded every 25 metres on the
surface, the data storage problems are, even now, considerable. Six seconds of
data recorded at a 2 millisecond sample period, with one field record of 240 traces
shot every 25 metres = 115,200,000 bytes per kilometre (recorded every 5-6
minutes offshore, or 1.3 gigabytes per hour!)
The seismic trace

There are many different ways of displaying a seismic trace, most of
which are used in this course. When we are dealing with a short piece of
trace, and wish to examine the numbers that make up the digital
representation of the trace we will probably use one of the examples
shown here.
1) Shows the trace as a series of "spikes" representing the

numerical value of the trace at each sample. 2) Shows the same
series with the implied continuous waveform drawn in. If we
wish to be more precise, we will use 3) which shows the
continuous waveform in a smooth fashion (such a curve can be
reconstructed, subject to certain conditions, from the numerical
values).
In all of these cases we will assume that values above the zero line
represent positive numbers, whilst those below are negative
numbers.
12
When we are showing longer traces, or
collections of traces, we will resort to more
conventional displays.
1) Shows a "Wiggle-Trace" display of a

whole trace, 2) a "Variable-Area/Wiggle-
Trace" display - used for seismic sections
as it enhances continuity, and 3) and 4)
show types of "variable density" or
colour displays which we will use when
lots of traces are involved.
For all of these displays, the positive

values will normally be plotted towards
the right, or as black or red "peaks" on
the variable density displays. Variable-
Area/Wiggle-Trace displays normally
have the peaks filled-in as black.
The geological time scale

ERA PERIOD EPOCH YEARS PAST LIFE FORMS
{ Recent 10,000
Quaternary
{ Pleistocene 2,500,000 Humanoids
Tertiary { Pliocene 12,000,000 Grazing & Carnivorous
CENOZOIC { Minocene 26,000,000 Mammals
{ Oligocene 38,000,000
{ Eocene 54,000,000
{ Paleocene 65,000,000
MESOZOIC Cretaceous 135,000,000 Primates & Flowering

Plants
Jurassic 195,000,000 Birds
Triassic 225,000,000 Dinosaurs & Mammals
PALEOZOIC Permian 280,000,000 Reptiles & Fern Forests

Carboniferous { Pennsylvanian 320,000,000
{ Mississippian 345,000,000
13
Devonian 395,000,000 Amphibians & Insects
Silurian 430,000,000 Land Plants
Ordovician 500,000,000 Fish
Cambrian 570,000,000 Shellfish
PRECAMBRIAN 700,000,000 Algae

700,000,000 Single-cell organisms
3,500,000,000
4,650,000,000+ Formation of the Earth
The age of the Earth is approximately 4 thousand million years (4,650,000,000). Life first
appeared some 600 million years ago, with humanoids appearing about 3 million years ago.
The Earth's age is conveniently divided into two major time divisions marking the
boundary when life first appeared: the Cryptozoic (hidden life), or Precambrian; and the
Phanerozoic (obvious life), or Cambrian.
Until comparatively recently, with the advent of radio-carbon dating and similar processes,
the only way to establish the relative ageing of rocks was by means of the fossilised remains
within those rocks. This led to difficulties in dating rocks earlier than the earliest solid
remains (greater than 600 million years old, or Precambrian).
The time period over the remaining geologic time scale has been sub-divided into three eras
(Palaeozoic, Mesozoic and Cainozoic), each sub-divided into named periods and ages, as
well as further sub-divisions referred to by the name of a characteristic fossil.
Most, but not all, of the major oil discoveries are in rocks formed during the last 200
million years (Triassic and younger).
14
Rock types
Rocks can be classified into three main types, depending on the chemistry of their formation.
Igneous rocks
Igneous rocks were formed by the cooling and subsequent solidification of a molten mass of rock
material, known as magma. These rocks are still being produced by active volcanoes.
Plutonic (coarse-grained) rocks, such as granite and syenite, were formed from a magma
buried deep within the crust of the Earth which cooled very slowly during the initial stages
of the Earth's solidification, thus permitting large crystals of individual minerals to form.
Volcanic rocks, typified by basalt and rhyolite, were formed when the molten magma rose
from a depth and filled cracks close to the surface, or when the magma was extruded upon
the surface of the Earth through a volcano. The subsequent cooling and solidification of the
15
magma were very rapid, resulting in the formation of fine-grain minerals or glasslike
rocks.
As igneous rocks are composed almost entirely of silicate minerals, they are often classified
by their silica content. The major categories are referred to as acid (granite and rhyolite)
and basic (gabbro and basalt).
Metamorphic rocks
Metamorphic rocks are those whose composition and texture has been altered by heat and pressure
deep within the Earth's crust. Dynamothermal, or regional, metamorphism refers to those rocks
where both heat and pressure have caused changes. Where the changes have been produced by the
heat of an intrusion of igneous rock, the metamorphism is termed thermal, or contact.
Metamorphism occurs to both igneous or sedimentary rocks, where the resultant rock
depends on the amount of heat and pressure they have been subjected to. Shale is
metamorphosed to slate in a low-temperature environment, but if heated to temperatures
high enough for its clay minerals to re-crystallise as mica flakes, shale becomes
metamorphosed into a phyllite. At even higher temperatures and pressures, shale and
siltstone completely re-crystallise, forming schist or gneiss, rocks in which the alignment of
mica flakes produces a laminated texture called foliation.
Among the non-foliated metamorphic rocks, quartzite and marble are the most common.
Quartzite is typically a tough, hard, light-coloured rock in which all the sand grains of a
sandstone or siltstone have been re-crystallised into a fabric of interlocking quartz grains.
Marble is a softer, more brittle, varicoloured rock in which the dolomite or calcite of the
original sedimentary material has been entirely re-crystallised.
16
Sedimentary rocks
Sedimentary rocks are the weathered debris derived by the slow processes of erosion of upland
regions containing other rock types.
These weathering products are ultimately transported, by water, wind or ice to the seas,
lakes or lowland areas where they settle out and accumulate to form clastic (fragmented)
sediments. As the sediments are transported, the individual grains are battered and tend to
become more rounded and sorted according to size by the varying strengths of current and
wave action.
By the time it reaches the sea, and is distributed over the sea-floor, the sediment is
commonly well-enough sorted to be distinguishable as shingle, sand, silt or mud. Although
mixtures are also present, these are the deposits that later become hardened to form the
sedimentary rocks, conglomerate, sandstone, siltstone and mudstone or shale respectively.
During this process, trapped organic material gives rise to the oil and gas we are trying to
find!
Two other types of sediment are additionally deposited in the marine environment in which
they are created. An abundance of calcium carbonate secreting organisms, including
certain algae, corals and animals with shells, can give rise to limestone, a rock composed
almost entirely of the mineral calcite. An important variety is dolomite, where the basic
mineral constituent is a calcium-magnesium carbonate and which most commonly results
from changes to the rock due to percolating waters after deposition.
The intense evaporation of restricted or isolated sea areas can give rise to the accumulation
of sea salts on the sea floor. They may reach considerable thickness and include anhydrite
(calcium sulphate), calcium carbonate, rock salt (sodium chloride) and, eventually,
potassium salts. They are collectively referred to as evaporites.
At the edges of the continental land masses, this eroded and precipitated material,
deposited in the shallows of ancient seas, caused the sea bottom to subside and the gradual
build-up of sedimentary basins.
17
Sedimentary basins
Sedimentary basins were formed over hundreds of millions of years by the action of the
deposition of eroded material and the precipitation of chemicals and organic matter in the
sea water. External geological forces then distort and modify the layered strata. The
following pictures show (vertically exaggerated) the formation of a typical basin.
18
Sediment collects on the sea-bed, the weight causing subsidence. Different materials
collected at different times, so producing the regular "layering" of strata in the basin.
19
Volcanic action, or the movement of land masses, causes faults to appear in the basin.
These same forces cause rotation of the overall basin forming a new mountain range.
20
Erosion of the highlands, and additional subsidence forms yet another area of low-lying
land that is filled with water forming another ancient sea.
21
Additional sedimentation takes place, causing an "unconformity" in the underlying strata.
22
Finally, land mass movement causes folding and distortion of the basin.
In reality the above processes may have occurred again and again and in any order during
the formation of a sedimentary basin, giving rise to thick, complex structures in the
sediments.
23
Oil and Gas formation
Sedimentary basins exist around the world at the edges of ancient continental shelves.
These basins can be of complex structure, with many different layers within the sediments
deposited in a particular geological age.
The temperature increases with depth within the Earth's crust, so that sediments, and the
organic material they contain, heat up as they become buried under younger sediments.
As the heat and pressure increase, the natural fats and oils present in buried algae, bacteria
and other material link and form kerogen, an hydrocarbon that is the precursor of
petroleum.
As this source rock becomes hotter, chains of hydrogen and carbon atoms break away and
form heavy oil. At higher temperatures the chains become shorter and light oil or gas is
formed. Gas may also be directly formed from the decomposition of kerogen produced
from the woody parts of plants. This woody material also generates coal seams within the
strata.
If the temperature and pressure gets too high, the kerogen becomes carbonised and does
not produce hydrocarbons.
24
The oil and gas produced by these processes may be in any combination and are almost
always mixed with water. The minute particles of hydrocarbon are produced within the
pores of permeable rocks (for example sandstone) and, being lighter than the surrounding
material, move up through the rock until prevented from doing so by an impermeable rock.
Although the initial source rock may only contain minute amounts of hydrocarbon, as the
particles of oil, gas and water move, or migrate*, through the pore space within younger
permeable rocks, they coalesce into larger volumes.
By the time this movement is stopped by the presence of a cap of impermeable rock (or
when they reach the surface) the total hydrocarbon volume may be large enough to be a
produce an oil or gas field that will be profitable to develop. The ultimate profitability of
such a field depends, of course, on external economic forces and world demand as much as
on ease of extraction.
As seismic exploration is concerned with the imaging of sub-surface structures, it is those

structures that may indicate a potential hydrocarbon trap that are of most interest to the
explorationist.
* Don't confuse the migration of hydrocarbons with the use of the term migration in seismic
processing - we'll be talking about that later!
25
Oil and Gas Traps
There are many types of traps associated with hydrocarbon accumulations, here are a few
examples.
A structural trap formed by the folding of

the strata into an anticline. The
hydrocarbons permeate up through the
porous rock below until trapped by the
denser rock above. One of the first types of
traps to be identified, as they are sometimes
associated with anticlines on the surface.
This type of structure is readily visible on a

seismic section, but, as seismic sections are
normally "time-sections", the actual
structure may be obscured (or even
artificially produced) by velocity changes
above the anticline.
A structural trap formed around a fault.

Many combinations are possible, requiring
the impermeable cap rock to be present on
the other side of the fault.
Under certain conditions the hydrocarbons

will actually migrate along the fault plane,
and so move several kilometres from the
source rock.
May be difficult to identify on the seismic

data due to raypath problems around the
fault.
26
Some of the possible traps associated with a
salt intrusion. The actual trap may form
above the salt plug, in which case it may be
easier to image on the seismic data than
those on the sides of the plug.
Another early discovery; the first seismic

reflection surveys were used to identify salt
intrusions in and around the Gulf of Mexico
and southern USA.
A more complex structural trap, where the

reservoir rock was first folded and eroded,
then sealed by an impermeable rock which
was deposited later over the eroded
structure.
Although this type of structure may be

visible on the seismic data, it may not be
obvious that this is a trap.
A stratigraphic trap formed by lateral

changes within one (apparent) rock layer.
In this case, the reservoir rock may, for
example, have come from river sands which
were deposited amongst clays from
surrounding swamps. The clays have
solidified into an impermeable seal, so
trapping the hydrocarbons within the
sandstone.
The most difficult type of trap to find on

seismic data. May require additional
processing (tied to information from wells)
to identify.
There are obviously many more types of trap possible (some still to be found) but you
should now have a basic idea of the kinds of structures that may be "interesting" on a
seismic section. We'll now move on to some very basic mathematics!
27
Approximately Mathematical
Although seismic processing utilises some of the most sophisticated numerical algorithms
known, the processing geophysicist can probably get by with simply understanding what
the processes do; not how they do it!
It is useful, however, to understand some of the basic principles involved. A basic

knowledge of arithmetic, geometry and trigonometry is almost essential. Although we rely
on the computer to do most of the work, we need to supply parameters for each processing
stage that are mathematically (as well as geologically) sensible, and to be able to check the
computer's results.
The single most common mathematical thread that runs through seismic processing is that
of "Least-Squares", the process of minimising the errors involved in making some
approximation to our data. This technique is used again and again within the seismic
processing sequence and is worth spending a few moments on. If you are quite happy with
this technique, or simply bored or terrified at the prospect then please feel free to click the
"Next Page" button above.
In order to explain the principle of Least-Squares, here's a set of numbers representing the
time of my journey to work over several days:-
Day 1 - 25 minutes
Day 2 - 37 minutes
Day 3 - 28 minutes
Day 4 - 35 minutes
I would like to establish the "best-estimate" for my journey time, without having any
concept of the meaning of "average", but with a knowledge of some basic maths.
I'll start by making a guess at the best time - say 30 minutes. In order to see how good a
guess this is, I'll simply subtract it from each actual value:-
Day 1 - 25: 25 - 30 = -5
Day 2 - 37: 37 - 30 = 7
Day 3 - 28: 28 - 30 = -2
Day 4 - 35: 35 - 30 = 5
The total error could be described as -5 + 7 + -2 + 5 = 5, but this does not take into account
the fact that some of the numbers are positive, and others negative. I'm really only
interested in the magnitude of the error, not it's sign, so I'll do the simplest thing
(mathematically) I can do and square the numbers before adding them. This gives me (for
a guess of 30) a total error squared of 25 + 49 + 4 + 25 = 103. My best guess will be where
this number is a minimum.
Here's a whole series of guesses, with the associated "error-squared":

Guess 20 - error squared = 603 Guess 30 - error squared = 103
28
Guess 26 - error squared = 207 Guess 36 - error squared = 187 and
so on ...
Here's a plot of the error squared against guess for a whole range of numbers:-
It's fairly obvious that the Total Error-Squared reaches a minimum value at the base of the
curve, and this corresponds to the position of the "best-fit". In order to calculate its value,
we need to express our calculations in general terms.
If we call our initial data values X1, X2 etc., then any given value's error-squared is:-
where G is the guess. The total error squared (E) is:-
where N is the number of values. We can expand this to:-
or (by simplifying):-
Now, the only (slightly) heavy bit. In order to minimise this total error-squared, we need to
differentiate the right-hand side of the above with respect to G (the thing we're trying to
find). This will give us the slope of the resultant curve, and the "turn-over" point where
29
this equals zero.
The differential of E is then:-
which we set equal to zero to find the minimum error position for G:-
and rearrange (and divide by 2):-
and solve for G:-
This appears to tell us that the best guess for G is the sum of all of the individual values
(25+37+28+35=125), divided by the number of values (125/4=31.25). A very long-winded
way of proving that the best-fit of a constant value to a set of numbers is the AVERAGE!
Of course, this process can be extended to "best-fit" any mathematical function to any set
of numbers of any dimension; the solution in each case having the minimum error-
squared. Here's our data points once again with a whole set of higher-order curves fitted:-
30
The red line is the average we just computed, the green is a straight line, the blue quadratic
and the brown cubic. The brown (cubic) curve fits four points exactly, but is hardly the
most meaningful "fit" in this case. (It implies that, next week, it'll take me a month to get
to work, I suppose the traffic's going to be really bad!).
We will come back to the concept of least-squares much later in this course!
31
Chapter 2 - Seismic Acquisition
This Chapter presents a very brief look at Seismic Acquisition, with particular emphasis on
those topics relevant to the seismic processor. If you've spent the last 15 years on a land
crew in the Amazon, or an equivalent length of time in the middle of the Arctic Ocean
collecting marine data (or are doing either of these as you read this), you might want to
skip this bit!
Page 02.02 - The ideal seismic source
What goes into the ground comes back out again! The characteristics of the ideal seismic
source are discussed.
Page 02.03 - Onshore seismic sources
The use of explosives onshore - still the most common source for "Land" recording.
Page 02.04 - Other Land sources
Other land sources are mentioned, and vibratory sources (the second most common source)
are examined in some detail.
Page 02.05 - Recording the data - Onshore
The logistics and mechanics of recording data onshore can be enormous. A brief
explanation of the standard recording device is followed by a wider review of recording
techniques.
Page 02.06 - Offshore seismic sources
From land to sea! The differences in the marine environment, and details of Air-Guns, the
most common offshore seismic source.
Page 02.07 - Recording the data - Offshore
Highlights the differences between onshore and offshore recording and addresses the
general problems associated with Marine Acquisition.
32
A set of questions to test your knowledge of this very brief introduction to Seismic
Acquisition.
The ideal seismic source
Changes in the speed (velocity) of sound and the density within particular rocks causes
reflection and refraction of the sound waves produced by a seismic source. Specifically,
variation of these parameters at an interface between two different rock types causes a
reflection of some of the seismic energy back towards the surface. It is the record of these
reflections against time that produce our seismic section.
A seismic reflector can only reflect back to the surface an image of the energy pulse it
receives. If we send a complex pulse into the ground, that pulse will be superimposed on
every reflector we record. For this reason we wish to make the actual seismic source as
close as possible to a single pulse of energy - a spike.
A spike
of energy
sent into
the earth
produces
a set of
clear
reflection
s.
A more
complex
energy
pulse
produces
confused
reflection
s
In practice and ideal spike is impossible to achieve. As we will see later, a spike implies that
33
an infinitely wide range of frequencies need to be present in the source, all released over an
infinitesimally small time range.
The earliest seismic surveys used explosives

as a seismic source with, for offshore
exploration, up to 50 pounds (23 kg) of
dynamite being exploded just below the
surface of the water.
This is a very effective source, still used for

onshore surveys, but is environmentally
obviously no longer a desirable source for
offshore acquisition.
Many other designs of source have been

used over the years, and we will now go on
to discuss the most common.
34
Onshore seismic sources
There are enormous logistical problems associated with Onshore Seismic Exploration.
The seismic "line" must first be

accurately marked out by surveyors.
This may mean painting marks on roads

through residential areas ...
... or cutting through dense jungle to

mark shot and receiver positions.
In either case modern GPS equipment has

simplified the positioning, but accurate
elevation (height above sea level)
measurements must also be made using
conventional surveying techniques.
Once the line position is marked, the shooting and recording equipment can be transported
onto the line. Oil & Gas deposits tend to be in some of the more inhospitable regions of the
Earth, so the actual terrain conditions may limit the available shooting / recording
positions as well as define the costs of the acquisition.
Dynamite and other explosives are still used for roughly half of all onshore seismic
exploration. 1 kg of seismic explosive releases about 5MJ of energy almost instantaneously,
enough energy to keep your electric fire burning for almost 1 hours. The part of this
energy which can usefully be converted into a compressional wave of seismic energy
depends on the depth of the shot in the ground, and the local ground conditions.
Seismic shots are normally placed below the near-surface highly weathered layers of the
earth. This improves the coupling of the source to the ground, and avoids problems with
the vary variable (slow) acoustic velocities in the weathering layer. Tests may be necessary
in a new exploration area to determine the optimum shot depth and charge size.
It may be necessary to fire an array of shots for each shotpoint. The number and position of
35
each shot designed to improve the downward-going energy but to attenuate the energy
going in other directions.
In areas where the near-surface

conditions demand it, large drilling rigs
may be necessary to drill the shot-holes
for burial of the explosive charge.
As mentioned above, the position and

height of each shot-hole are carefully
recorded, and the depth of the shot in the
hole is measured by simply noting the
length of the tamping rod used to place
the shot in the hole.
These parameters are necessary for the

correct processing of the data.
Charges can vary from a few grams to several tens of kilograms, depending
on the depth of the target reflectors.
The explosive used is very stable, almost impossible to detonate without the
correct electrical detonator, and often comes in small "cans" which can be
combined together to make larger charges.
Where better surface conditions exist, or

access is difficult, a portable form of
drilling rig may be used.
Water & mud pumps, compressed air,

emulsion and foam have all been used to
improve the circulation of the drill bit in
different conditions. The types of drill
used extends from hand-held augers to
large truck-mounted hammer drills.
Production rates for "conventional"

(dynamite) exploration depend almost
entirely on the rate at which holes can be
drilled.
36
If we assume that the shooting medium is consistent in all directions, we can make some
generalisations about the effect of an explosive charge on the surrounding rock.
In the immediate vicinity of the charge extremely high pressures will exist very briefly at
the shot instant, pulverising the neighbouring earth materials and displacing these to form
a physical cavity within the shot hole. Beyond this actual cavity there will exist a region
where movement is so great that materials are stressed beyond their elastic limits. This
part of the sub-surface will be permanently altered.
This region is expected to be a spherical volume, and is commonly referred to as the

equivalent cavity. Beyond the radius of this notional equivalent cavity, displacements are
such that we can simply consider the compressional wave produced by the shot as a
conventional "seismic" wave, and assume that any pressure changes will only cause
transient changes in the rocks - they will return to their normal state after the wave has
passed.
37
Other Land sources
Almost anything that could possibly be used as a source of acoustic

energy has been tried onshore at one time or another.
Metal plates hit with hammers (still used for very shallow refraction
surveys), weights dropped from various devices, explosive charges and
offshore seismic sources in water containers, even shotguns fired into
the ground.
Modified hardcore-tamping equipment has been used for shallow surveys, and ground penetrating
radar is used by archaeologists (and some police forces) for detecting near-surface disturbances.
Out of all of these, by far the majority of other onshore surveys are conducted using a vibratory source
on the surface. The most common of these being the vibroseis method developed by Conoco.
Vibroseis
In a Vibroseis survey, specially designed vehicles lift their weight onto a large plate, in contact with the
ground, which is then vibrated over a period of time (typically 8-16 seconds), with a sweep of
frequencies.
In upsweeping, the frequency begins low and

increases with time and in downsweeping the sweep
begins high and decreases in frequency with time.
Up
Sweep
Down
Sweep
38
Regardless of the sweep direction, vibroseis
trucks normally operate in synchronised
groups, so increasing the total amount of
vibratory energy input into the ground.
With less chance of damage to surrounding

property than explosives, vibrators are ideally
suited for used in urban areas and have been
used successfully in the centre of major cities
and along the shoulder of major highways.
Of necessity, vibrators are a surface source.
On the first page of this Chapter, it was pointed out that the ideal seismic source is a spike, or as close
to it as possible. Explosives meet this criteria very well, but vibroseis is obviously very different - it's
akin to the "chirp" used by radar systems - very long in duration but carefully controlled and very
repeatable.
Because the vibroseis sweep is so carefully controlled (and directly recorded for each shot), it's effects
can be readily removed during the data processing. The technique, involving correlation of the
recorded data with the recorded sweep, reduces the apparent source to a symmetrical wavelet
containing the same frequencies as the sweep. The vibroseis correlation is now often performed
directly in the field and will be discussed when we come to look at correlation.
Recording the data - Onshore
39
Onshore seismic data is recorded using a simple (normally electro-magnetic) device known
as a geophone.
A moving-coil geophone consists of a coil of wire, suspended from a

spring, surrounded by a "W" shaped magnet.
The metal spike is pushed into the ground, and any upward-
travelling energy from the seismic shot is recorded as the electric
current generated by the movement of the coil relative to the
magnet.
The amount of energy recorded by the geophone is, of course, minute. Where conditions
allow (for example on relatively flat ground), several geophones may be grouped together,
or place in strings around the central (nominal) receiver position. This not only improves
the total signal output from the group, but also "tunes" the geophones so that energy from
below is enhanced whilst that from the side (ground-roll) is attenuated. We'll see more on
this when we discuss marine seismic sources.
In some cases, where the surface elevation varies rapidly, or there is very loose near-surface
material, it may be necessary to drill holes and bury the geophones below ground level. In
other cases (for example along a shopping street in the middle of a town) the geophones
may be mounted on metal cones and just placed in contact with the ground. Both of these
techniques have their own problems which must be addressed in the processing of the data.
Once the shot positions have been

marked, the geophones are laid out (in
groups if necessary) and connected either
by wire or radio (a telemetric system) to
the recording truck.
Although this may seem a trivial task,

the planting of one geophone every metre
over maybe 5 kilometres is non-trivial,
and an enormous amount of planning
(and labour) must be used to "lay" the
line of geophones.
Remember once again the possible
40
environmental problems - from desert to
frozen tundra!
The geophone groups may be laid out for several kilometres prior to the start of shooting.
As the shot position advances down the line, different sections of the recording groups are
made "live" by the recording instruments to maintain a similar range of offsets (distances
from shot to receiver) for each shot.
At some stage the groups of geophones must be physically moved in order to maintain the
"live" section.
Even in a rural setting, geophone placing

can be arduous, and noise can be
generated by traffic or power lines
(typically 50-60 Hz).
In more remote locations, transportation

problems can add to the already
considerable cost of Land Acquisition.
With these problems a conventional

(explosive) seismic crew may only record
about 80-100 shots per day. A Vibroseis
crew (in ideal conditions) may achieve as
many as 800.
Offshore seismic sources
41
Most Offshore seismic exploration does not
have the logistical problems associated with
Onshore exploration, but the operational
difficulties more than compensate for this!
All of the necessary shooting and recording

equipment must be deployed from the rear
of the vessel, and towed continuously.
Of necessity, offshore seismic exploration

vessels have become larger over the years
to cope with the increasing workload, and
are expected to operate in all but the very
worst weather conditions.
In many areas of the world 24-hour

operations are conducted, requiring
sufficient personnel to operate both the
vessel and the seismic equipment round-
the-clock. Multiple seismic sources and
receiver cables are used to provide the high
densities of data now required.
Even in the simplest 2D work, such a vessel

can easily obtain 10 times the amount of
data as the best (Vibroseis) land crew in
any given time.
Although explosives were once used as an energy source for offshore exploration, the
environmental repercussions, and the need for rapid firing and repeatability have brought
about the design and construction of new sources.
The most common offshore (or Marine) source in use today is a variety of Air-Gun, first
produced in the 1960's. These guns use compressed air (at typically 2,000 to 5,000 psi) to
produce an explosive blast of air into the water surrounding the gun. The latest of these,
with the movable shuttle that releases the air on the outside, is the Sleeve-Gun.
Air enters through the pipe (A) and is fed into the main chamber (D) and the air-spring
return chamber (C).
Once the Solenoid valve (B) opens, air is allowed into the firing chamber (E), and the
pressure differential forces the outside sleeve to the left with great force, releasing the air
from the main chamber. The resultant air-bubble produces a shock-wave in the
42
surrounding water.
A single air-gun produces a pulse of energy (or signature) that looks something like this (the
upper plot shows the time-function, and the lower shows the frequency content of the
signature):-
Hardly a perfect energy source!
Although the initial energy burst is

reasonable, a complex pressure interaction
between the air "bubble" and the water
causes the bubble to oscillate as it floats
towards the surface - this produces the
extraneous bursts of energy following the
initial burst.
The amplitude and period (time difference)

between these bubble pulses depend on the
depth of the gun and the size of the main
chamber in the gun.
We can't do much about the depth (see Ghosts in the next Chapter), but, if we build an
array of guns, made of different chamber sizes, and fire these simultaneously, we gain
several advantages.
1. We obviously increase the total amount of energy being directed into the ground for
one "shot".
2. The different chamber sizes will produce different bubble responses, and these will
tend to cancel out.
3. We improve the directivity of the source. Other than directly below the source
array, some frequencies will be attenuated by the spatial design of the array.
43
Here's a
typical
gun
array,
and the
sleeve
guns
being
deploye
d from
the rear
of the
vessel.
Once again, here's a plot showing the time and frequency response of the entire array.
When the entire array is fired, the bubbles

"cancel-out" (more or less), and the
frequency content is much flatter over the
range of typical seismic frequencies.
This is now close to an ideal source, and is

very repeatable.
It has to also be very reliable as shots are

normally fired roughly every 5-10 seconds -
possibly up to 10,000 shots in 24 hours!
We have mentioned before the concept that an array or group of shots or geophones can
improve the spatial response of our source and/or receivers.
This plot shows the hemisphere of energy emanating from the source array shown above
(viewed from below).
The grey line shows the direction of the seismic line (the direction the boat is moving in)
with the arrow showing the vertical output from the array. The colours show the total
energy, red being the highest.
Change the frequency of interest and see how, although the downward energy is always
maximum, the energy at other angles is attenuated by the array design.
Although the actual "shooting" of Marine data is made simple by modern Air-gun arrays,
there are still some operational difficulties associated with these sources. The high
44
operating pressures are very dangerous. Air at 80-100 psi is used in industry, with an
appropriate abrasive, to remove paint from metal. Air at 2000-5000 psi will remove almost
anything (including skin) without any abrasive.
The guns must be properly maintained - any gun failure will damage the desired array
output response and re-introduce bubbles into the signature. Deployment of the arrays is
made relatively simple by the use of floats etc., but the position of each array (multiple
arrays may be used for alternate shooting etc.) must be carefully monitored in all three
dimensions. We'll discuss the positioning of arrays in more detail when we discuss shooting
geometry.
Again, just like on land, many different types of seismic source have been used in the
marine environment. However, as almost all modern data is acquired with variations of
air-guns, we will restrict our discussion to those and move on to the recording instruments.
Recording the data - Offshore
45
The recording of offshore seismic data is complicated by the fact that all of the recording
equipment must be encased in an oil-filled cable or streamer (about 10 cm in diameter) that
is towed behind the vessel.
Unlike land geophones, the hydrophones used in marine recording normally use a piezo-
electric device to record the incoming energy. These hydrophones are connected together
in groups (just like land recording) and may be placed every metre or so along a 3000
metre streamer.
The front-end of the streamer is connected to the vessel by a complex system of floats and
elastic stretch-sections, which are designed to eliminate any noise reaching the streamer
from the vessel. The end of the streamer farthest from the vessel is connected by similar
stretch-sections to a tail-buoy. This buoy may contain its own GPS receiver and radar
reflector so that its position can be established.
There are several problems associated with marine acquisition:-
1. Keeping the streamer at a constant depth is important.
2. Determining the position of (possibly) multiple gun arrays, and every hydrophone
group in multiple streamers (vessels are now on the drawing board with up to 20
streamers!).
3. Getting all of the seismic signals from all of the recording groups (in all of the
streamers) back to the recording system on the vessel.
All of these problems are solved by the complex system of mechanical and electronic
systems inside or on the outside of the streamer itself. Here's some of them:-
Although the oil used within the streamer

is designed to give the streamer neutral-
buoyancy, changes in tides and currents
can effect the depth of the streamer.
Mechanical depth controllers (known as

birds) are placed at intervals along the
streamer which (using pressure as a guide)
adjust the angle of their "wings" to correct
for undesirable changes in depth.
46
Combinations of acoustic transceivers
(transmitter-receivers), operating at
frequencies above the normal seismic
frequencies can be used to establish
distances from one part of one streamer to
another and to the source array.
Compasses are also used within the

streamer itself to check the angle of the
streamer at several positions along it's
length.
Complex electronics within the streamer

filters the incoming signal from a whole
group of geophones, and then converts the
resultant voltage into a numeric value
(digitisation).
The numbers corresponding to the values

for all of the groups at any one time are
multiplexed (interleaved) together and sent
digitally down just a few wires to the
recording instruments.
This process is repeated roughly every 2

milliseconds (2 ms or 1/500th of a second)
and the resultant digital recording is
eventually sent to the processing centre.
(Which may also be on the vessel!).
Other equipment, either in the streamer or in the instrument room on the vessel, can be
used for real-time processing of the seismic data. Other, more complex processing, can be
done while the vessel is turning-around between seismic lines. (This can take a time -
remember the 3 kilometres of equipment out the back!).
Other techniques can be, and are used for the recording of marine data. Ocean-Bottom
Cables, where the receivers are actually placed in contact with the seabed, are becoming
increasingly common. These allow for the recording of S-Waves (remember, these don't
travel though water), and can be fixed in position to allow for the re-recording of the data
in future years. This technique, or 4D recording (3 dimensional seismic data recorded at
time intervals), can be used to measure changes in an Oil or Gas field caused by the actual
extraction of the hydrocarbon.
47
Although the "per-kilometre" rate for offshore acquisition is much less than that for
onshore, there are still considerable costs involved. A single, modern, seismic streamer
costs about $1,000,000, and the running costs of personnel and equipment are also high.
Chapter 3 - Waves and Raypaths

48
We now move on to the two ways that seismic energy can be described, either as waves or
as ray paths, and look at some of the wave and ray path phenomena that can appear on our
sections.
Page 03.02 - Waves
The general parameters associated with waves, in both time and space.
Page 03.03 - P & S Waves
The two types of waves encountered in seismic exploration, their differences, and all their
possible names!
Page 03.04 - Wavefronts
One way of looking at seismic energy. A very brief mention of the wave equation used (in
an approximate form) in some of the more complex processing.
Page 03.05 - Ray Paths
The other way of looking at the energy, and the one used most of the time. Some of the
physics associated with reflections and refractions.
Page 03.06 - More Ray Paths
More on ray paths. Reflection coefficients, and the arithmetic of reflection and refraction.
Page 03.07 - Ghost Reflections
One of the more common problems associated with marine data. The duplicate reflections
produced by energy that has reflected back down from the sea surface.
Page 03.08 - Multiple Reflections
The biggest single problem for the processing geophysicist! Events on our seismic section
produced by the energy reflecting more than once.
49
Page 03.09 - Diffractions
Another problem that can sometimes be useful data. Energy that is reflected back in all
directions from abrupt changes in the physical parameters of the Earth.
Another set of questions to conclude this Chapter.
50
Waves
Making Waves
Whenever an acoustic source is detonated on or near the surface of the Earth, an acoustic wave is
produced that propagates away from the source.
Apart from effects very close to the source, this wave moves through the medium without
causing a net movement of the material - the medium (more or less) returns to its normal
state once the wave has passed through.
Waves can travel through a body (body waves), or along the surface of a body (surface or
interface waves), and, although we are not directly interested in surface waves they can be
used for shallow investigations (refraction studies) or they can cause problems by masking
body waves within seismic data.
Here are some of the parameters associated with a wave recorded as a function of time:-
A simple sinusoidal wave can be described by three parameters. Its amplitude, or maximum excursion
from the zero level, its frequency, or the number of "cycles per second" of the wave, and its phase -
the offset of the maximum value from time 0 measured in degrees along the cycle (1 cycle = 360
51
degrees). For more complex waves, the RMS or root-mean square amplitude may be more useful -
we'll come back to that later.
A wave shown as a function of distance has similar parameters:-
The wavenumber is usually measured in "cycles per 1000 metres" and represents the frequency of the
wave in space. For a wave measured in both time and space (on, for example, a seismic section) the
velocity relationship shown above gives the horizontal velocity of the wave through the earth.
Here's another time-domain wave, use the scroll bars to change frequency, amplitude and
phase:-
Even restricting our discussion to body waves, we still have to consider two wave types - P & S Waves.
52
P and S Waves
Energy that is applied exactly at right-angles to an elastic body produces an elastic body
wave in which the particle motion is in the direction of propagation - a P-Wave.
The pressure wave pushes the particles of

material ahead of it, causing compression
and expansion of the material.
The P-Wave is the type of wave assumed

for conventional seismic exploration.
The P-Wave is also known as:-
Primary wave
Compressional wave
Longitudinal wave
Push-pull wave
Pressure wave
Dilatational wave
Rarefaction wave
Irrotational wave
53
A wave in which the particle motion is at
right-angles to the direction of
propagation is known as an S-Wave.
S-Waves have been used for some forms of

seismic exploration but they do not
propagate through fluids so are not
recorded (directly) in conventional marine
acquisition.
The S-Wave is also known as:-
Secondary wave
Shear wave
Transverse wave
Rotational wave
Distortional wave
Equivolumnar wave
Tangential wave
Whenever a P-Wave or S-Wave hits a change in velocity or density, a process known as

mode conversion takes place and some part of the wave converts into the other form (P to S,
S to P). The use of this phenomenon is just beginning to be investigated but, at the
moment, it is ignored in conventional seismic processing. It can, however, explain some of
the artefacts seen on seismic sections.
The (somewhat gross) assumptions made in seismic processing assume only P-Waves,
travelling through isotropic* and homogeneous* material.
* isotropic - the physical properties of the material don't depend on the direction of the wave -
it's the same in all directions.
* homogeneous - the physical properties of the material are uniform throughout the material.
54
Wavefronts
In much the same way as light, we can either consider the seismic energy as a wavefront, or
as a series of rays emanating from the shot.
For a wavefront, imagine a sphere of energy, expanding from the shot in all directions as
time increases. We are not normally interested in the upper part of this sphere, except for
where it interferes with the down going energy - see the following pages on Ghosts and
Multiples. We can therefore concentrate on the lower half of this sphere - it's expansion in
time being dependant on the velocity of the medium through which it is moving.
Here's a cross-section view of the

expanding wavefront in a simple geological
model, as it appears at various times
throughout the recording.
The model assumes a constant velocity

within each layer - in practice the velocity
may change both vertical and laterally (in 3
dimensions!).
The actual shape of the expanding

wavefront can, therefore, become very
complex, even with relatively simple
structures.
We can also view the exploding wavefront in plan view on one reflector. The highlighted
area showing the different regions of the horizontal layer that are "illuminated" by the shot
energy at different times (the buttons show the time in seconds).
As the shot expands, of course, the energy originally present in the shot is spread over a
larger and larger area as time increases.
This, coupled with energy losses due to friction within the rocks, causes a progressive loss of
energy with time that must be compensated for early in the processing.
55
Remember that the above diagrams are greatly simplified - the actual expanding wavefront
will be like a very distorted sphere, with the distortion changing as it passes through each
major reflector.
Each point on each reflector will also act like a seismic source, with a sphere of energy
being radiated from the reflecting point, some of which will reach the surface. To put it in a
nutshell, here, in rectangular co-ordinates, is the equation relating the spatial and temporal
dependence of a seismic wave:-
If this gives you a headache (it does me!) don't worry. I just included it to show the kinds
of books I read and, although it will be referred to in passing (THE WAVE EQUATION), I
will not be explaining it in great detail.
Perhaps, because of its complexity, the processing geophysicist can concern himself
99.95% of the time with the relative simplicity* of the ray path assumptions which we will
now discuss!
* Relatively simple, of course, depends on your point of view!
56
Ray Paths
Ray paths, or lines drawn on a cross-section showing the path of the energy from the shot
to the receiver, are a useful way of showing the total travel-time of a seismic "ray".
This is the simplest form of ray path

diagram, showing just one ray from a shot,
to a reflecting horizon, and back to the
receiver.
The reflector in this case is perfectly

horizontal, and, as the angle of incidence
must equal the angle of reflection, the total
travel time from source to receiver can be
computed with nothing more complicated
than the Pythagorean equation.
(Jokes about sons of squaws and

hippopotami are strictly forbidden at this
point.)
Things become a bit more complicated

when we move up to more than one
reflector.
The upper ray path travels through the

upper layer (with a velocity of V1),
whereas the lower ray refracts at the first
interface, and then reflects at the lower.
Its average velocity will be some
combination of V1 and V2.
The refractions at each interface follow

Snell's law - the sines of the angles are
proportional to the velocities.
57
Now we have lots of reflectors/refractors.
As well as the ray path shown here, we will
also have reflections from each interface.
Note that the fourth velocity down (2000)

is slower than that above (a velocity
inversion). The wave refracts outward
slightly at this point.
In reality, of course, we may not have a

perfectly constant velocity either laterally
or vertically within each layer. The rays
will follow curved paths.
Generally, of course, we record hundreds

of channels of data from any one shot,
using receiver groups spread over some
thousands of metres.
Here's the ray paths for just 24 receivers,

and just one reflector.
Two things to note here - 1) the events are

still horizontal, try to imagine dipping or
curved events, and 2) the regions below
ground (the sub-surface coverage) of one
shot is just one-half of the receiver spread
length.
Finally, here's an interactive model. Click close to the surface to move the shot position, or
on a different horizon to map reflecting rays from that horizon. Use the buttons to change
the structure in the model and shoot some rays.
Pretty disgusting isn't it! Note that, on the more complex models, some of the ray paths
just stop. These have reached a critical angle, and no longer refract through a layer.
Just keep this model, and the complexity of the ray paths in mind during the later parts of
this course.
58
More Ray Paths
We can also use our ray path models to determine the actual amplitude of the reflections
returned from any layer. Referring back to our initial ray path diagram:-
For any one reflector, the interface

between two rocks of differing velocity
and/or density, the reflection coefficient
(RC), or the amount of incoming energy
reflected back is simply the difference in
products of velocity & density, divided by
their sum.
V1 and V2 are the velocities above and

below the interface, and p1 and p2 are the
respective densities. It doesn't matter
what units are used as long as they are
consistent. The resultant reflection
coefficient is between -1 and +1.
A reflection coefficient of, for example, 0.3 implies that 30% of the energy reaching a
reflecting interface is returned towards the surface. The remaining 70% of the energy
passes through the interface. This remaining energy (1 - RC) is known as the transmission
coefficient. As we are only considering P-waves, these terms should more correctly be
referred to as the P-wave reflection and transmission coefficients.
The product of velocity and density for any layer is often referred to as the acoustic
impedance of that layer. The above equation then becomes simply difference divided by
sum of the acoustic impedances (AI's). If we use the normal units of metres/second for
velocity and grams/cc for density then the units for AI are somewhat complicated. For this
reason the term "AI units" is often used.
Generally speaking, both velocities and densities increase with depth. If density is roughly
proportional to velocity then for interfaces where the velocity increases across the interface
the reflection coefficient will be positive. RC's are negative when moving from a high
velocity to a low velocity.
What does a negative reflection coefficient imply? It simply means that the energy is
reflected in the opposite sense; a positive pressure wave becomes a negative one. Or, in
terms of the seismic trace:-
59
Incoming Reflection Reflection
"Wavelet" RC = positive RC = negative
The above RC equation is, of course, an approximation. If fact it only holds true for rays at
right-angles to an interface (which the ones above are obviously not!). We'll come back to
this point much later during our discussions on AVO (Amplitude Versus Offset).
We can also use ray paths to examine some of the problem rays associated with seismic
acquisition and processing. These are generally rays that have reflected more than once
before returning to the receiver.
60
Ghost Reflections
One of the commonest form of undesirable ray associated with marine seismic acquisition
is the ghost reflection. The sea surface is an almost perfect reflector. Energy travelling
from the shot (under the water) is travelling through a medium with a velocity of about
1500 metres per second, and a density close to 1.025 grams/cc. The air above the sea
surface has an acoustic velocity of about 350 metres per second, with a density of about
0.0013 grams/cc. Plugging these into the "RC" equation gives a reflection coefficient from
below the sea surface of about -0.9994, or almost perfect reflection (with sign reversal).
Here's the ray paths showing the possible routes for ghost reflectors:-
The energy travels from the shot, up to the

surface, reflects almost perfectly (but sign
reversed) and then travels a similar path to
the direct ray from the shot to the
reflector.
The ray returning from the reflector does

exactly the same thing at the receiver.
There can be four different rays
produced:-
1. Direct ray
2. Ghosted only at the shot
3. Ghosted only at the receiver
4. Ghosted at both shot &

receiver.
Given that the actual ray paths will have more curvature than those shown in the diagram,
the ray paths from the shot to the surface and back down again will be almost vertical. If
we assume that they are vertical, we can calculate the time difference (in milliseconds)
between the direct ray and the ghosted ray as approximately 4/3 times the depth of the shot
in metres (we're assuming a water velocity of 1500 m/s). The same calculation can be done
for the receiver.
If, for example, our shot depth is 6 metres, then the time difference between the direct and
61
ghosted rays will be about 8 milliseconds. If we assume that the shot energy consists of a
set of constant frequency cosine waves added together (we'll see later that this is a valid
assumption), we can consider the effect of the ghost on the individual frequency
components.
A Frequency of 40 Hz A Frequency of 80 Hz A Frequency of 125 Hz
Delayed by 8 ms. and Delayed by 8 ms. and Delayed by 8 ms. and

reversed reversed reversed
Added to the original to give: Added to the original to give: Added to the original to give:
You can see that the component frequencies of 40 and 80 Hz are actually increased by the
ghost, whereas the 125 Hz component (in this case) is completely removed! The direct ray
and the ghost are exactly 180 degrees out of phase, and one removes the other.
In general terms, a ghost will cause

"notches" in the frequency spectrum at
frequencies that are a multiple of (roughly)
750/(Shot Depth) and 750/(Receiver Depth)
Hz.
In practice, the Shot and Receiver depths

are usually chosen so that these frequency
notches are beyond the range of
frequencies required for the seismic data.
Typically, depths of less than 10 metres are

used, making the first notch > 75 Hz.
62
Multiple Reflections
Given that the sea surface is an almost perfect reflector, and that the seabed can also be an
equally good reflector, it's not surprising that these cause other problems for the processing
geophysicist.
The water layer is one of the prime candidates for the generation of multiple reflections (or
multiples), which occur when the energy reflects more than once on any reflector. It should
be stressed that the water layer is not the only source of multiples. Any shallow layer, with
sufficiently strong velocity contrast, can become a source of multiples on both marine and
land data.
Here's the ray paths showing the possible routes for multiple reflectors from the water
layer:-
The energy travels from the shot, down to

the seabed, then up to the surface,
reflecting almost perfectly each time (but
sign reversed at the sea surface). It then
travels a similar path to the direct ray
from the shot to the reflector.
The ray returning from the reflector does

exactly the same thing at the receiver. For
multiples, may different combinations can
be generated at both the shot and the
receiver position, including repeated
"bounces" of energy within the layer
causing second, third etc. generations of
multiples.
The amplitude of the multiples will normally be sign-reversed (again due to the sea-surface
reflection) and will appear as an image of the primary reflector, usually some constant time
below it. Subsequent multiples will also exhibit this "periodicity". The amplitude of the
multiple can be anything up to a complete reversed image of the primary!
63
Multiples generated by the water layer will
cause "peaks" in the frequency spectrum
at frequencies which are a multiple of
(roughly) 750/(Water Depth).
Other multiples can produce peaks at

almost any frequency, generally at the
lower end of the frequency range.
These can be (to a greater or lesser degree)

attenuated in the processing by identifying
their periodicity, or by the fact that most
multiples will exhibit lower average
velocities than primaries - more on this
later.
The possible multiple paths for rays are endless, here are a few possibilities:-
None of those shown above are generated in the second layer, try to imagine the total
combinations possible! In practice, each pair of reflectors is a multiple generator - it's
simply a question of how strong the multiple is!
We will examine different techniques for multiple removal later in the course.
Diffractions
64
Two other types of ray commonly appear on our seismic records. There are refractions in
the early part of our records, caused by the energy refracting along a boundary between
the rapidly changing shallow velocities, and diffractions. We'll look at refractions briefly in
various parts of this course but they generally don't cause the processing geophysicist any
problems - they are removed from the front-end of the records at an early stage of the
processing. As well as being easy to remove, these refractions can also give us important
information about the shallow velocities on land data - more on this later as well.
Diffractions, however, can be a major problem.
Imagine that this is a plan (map) view of a small part of some

shallow-water area, and that the North-South line in the
centre represents a seismic line being shot.
The seabed here is very hard, and has (to use a technical
term) "lumps" of some kind scattered about on it. These
lumps are, effectively, single points that reflect energy back
from all directions.
(Parts of the Irish Sea between the UK and the Republic of

Ireland appear just like this - any discontinuities acting like
point reflectors.)
Ignoring for a moment any actual (primary) reflectors on the data,

this is what a (synthetic) seismic section looks like from the above
model. All of the data shown here is, essentially, noise.
It appears at the same time, and with the same average velocities
(in fact, a whole range of velocities) as our primary reflectors, and
can only be removed by its apparent dip (the slope of the event on
the section).
65
Any isolated point, either the
"lumps" shown above, or, for
example, the end of an interface
that truncates against a geological
fault, will scatter energy from all
directions back towards its
source.
Although the diffraction curves

shown on the right are a problem,
the curves associated with breaks
in reflectors are important and
will be discussed again when we
consider the migration process
necessary to correctly position our
seismic data.
All of the data recorded also suffers from other forms of undesirable "noise". Some of this
may appear as continuous events on our section (coherent noise), or as a background to all
of our data (random noise). Both of these types of noise are attenuated during the
processing, but the final level of noise may still be sufficient to mask primary reflections on
our seismic section - in some areas it's difficult to find any signal!
Chapter 4 - Geometry
We need to start the processing sequence by telling the computer where all our seismic data
came from!
We need to supply the X, Y and Z co-ordinate of every shot and geophone station for the
66
line. Luckily, in many cases, we can rely on a regular shooting pattern to simplify the
input.
Page 04.02 - Marine 2D Geometry
The simplest and most regular geometry - a review of the important parameters necessary
to specify regular shooting.
Page 04.03 - Multi-Fold Geometry
We overlap the data from many shots to provide a redundancy of sub-surface information.
Page 04.04 - Calculating the fold
The calculation of the fold (the level of sub-surface redundancy) is simple for regular
shooting, and this page will calculate it for you!
Page 04.05 - Land Geometry
We no longer have regular shooting! Shots and geophones can be positioned anywhere in
three dimensions!
Page 04.06 - Elevations and shot depths
The height above sea level of all of our shots and geophones is as important as their position
in the other two dimensions.
Page 04.07 - Field Statics
A simplified look at some of the calculations necessary to correct for data shot and
recorded at different elevations.
Page 04.08 - Crooked Lines
Another dimension of problems! When we can no longer shoot in straight lines.
Page 04.09 - The problems with 2D
67
Although 2D seismic data provides a cross-section of the earth, it is not always all in the
same plane. The need for 3D acquisition and processing.
Page 04.10 - 3D Geometry
Multiple crooked lines! An introduction to 3D geometry.
Page 04.11 - 3D binning
How we handle the collecting together of the 3D data in the processing.
A set of geometric questions to end this Chapter.
68
Marine 2D Geometry
We'll start with the simplest geometry - a marine vessel with just one source and streamer
shooting a conventional (2D) seismic line.
This diagram, typical of that provided to a processing centre by the acquisition crew,
provides all of the basic geometric information necessary to process the data. It may be
necessary, however, to check the logs provided for each seismic line to ensure that none of
these parameters varies dramatically from one part of the survey to another.
We'll examine each of these values in turn:-
The depth of the cable is critical for two reasons. One, we need to (eventually)
correct all of the data to Mean-Sea-Level (MSL), and two, remember the
Ghost problem from Chapter 3? The cable ghost in this case will be at about
750/7 or 107 Hz - well above our normal seismic frequencies.
The group interval (the distance between hydrophone group centres) defines
the basic cable geometry. This, together with the information that we have
240 recording channels, enables us to check the overall cable length (240 X
12.5 = 3000 metres). The actual "live" part of the cable will be 12.5m less
than this - from the centre of group 1 to the centre of group 240.
There is no convention regarding the numbering direction of the groups.

Either group 1 or the highest numbered group is nearest to the boat, generally
depending on the company doing the acquisition.
69
The (incorrectly marked!) CDP position actually refers to the position of the
mid-point between the shot and the centre of the first recording group. This
would be the "common-depth-point" (CDP) if we only had perfectly horizontal
reflectors. This will become important when we decide how to label the shot
positions on our final section.
The depth of the shot is obviously as important as the depth of the streamer,
and may effect the signature of the source array (remember the bubble
periods for Air-Guns depended on the depth). The ghost frequency here will
be about 150 Hz - even more above the frequencies of interest.
Probably the single most important number, and the one that most errors are
made on, the offset or distance from the shot to the centre of the nearest
recording group. Although (for 2D recording) we assume that the streamer is
in a straight line behind the vessel, we may have a lateral, or cross-line offset if
the shot and streamer are not in the same "plane" (for example, the shot
being on the port side of the vessel, and the streamer on the starboard side).
The distance from the navigation recording antenna to the shot is not of great
importance to the seismic processor, but must be compensated for when the
navigation data is processed.
All of these parameters are important, and all are required to process the data correctly.
The paper (or electronic) logs from the acquisition must be checked to ensure that none of
these parameters vary widely along or between lines - if they do then we may need to
compensate for it in the processing.
It's about time we looked at some seismic! Here's one shot record from marine geometry
similar to that shown above:-
70
The annotation down the left-hand side shows the two-way time in seconds, and the
numbers across the top are the channel numbers, or numbers corresponding to the group
numbers on the cable. What's the differences between this record and the geometry shown
above?
Well, firstly we only have 120 channels, and, as the energy arrives first on channel 1, it's
safe to assume that channel 1 is nearest the shot. Note also that channel 116 (5 from the
right) looks to be a dead trace. This may well be a dead or bad channel throughout this
line, we'll need to check other shots and make sure we exclude it from the processing (it
may appear dead, but could just contain random noise).
The shallow part of the record, at longer offsets (further from the shot) become dominated
by refractions. These travel almost directly down from the shot, along an interface between
two layers at high velocity, and then back up to the receivers to arrive before the energy
coming directly from the shot through the water. We'll remove most of this refraction
"noise" in the processing.
The line-up of events on the left hand side of the section at about 1 second are reflections,
although they probably include some multiples (note the ringing associated with short-
71
period multiples). We'll discuss these in some detail later, in particular the curvature of
these reflections.
There is one other parameter, missing from all of the above diagrams, that is vital for the
processing of "regular" seismic data (normally 2D marine data).
We'll now go on to discuss this parameter, and its relevance to the processing sequence.
72
Multi-Fold Geometry
The other parameter that is important for regular shooting is the distance between shots.
This may be known as the shotpoint interval, the shot interval, the shot move-up, etc. It's
basically (in the case of marine data) the distance the vessel moves before firing the gun
array again.
Here's one shot, with a recording spread of length "S".
If we assume that all of our reflectors are perfectly horizontal*, it can

be seen that the reflection point on any reflecting horizon will be mid-
way between the shot and the receiver.
The blue line on the sub-surface shows the sub-surface coverage for
this one shot - exactly half of the spread length.
* Another one of the gross assumptions used in seismic processing!
If the shooting vessel moves exactly "S/2" units before the

next shot, we obtain continuous coverage of the sub-surface.
(The red shot and receivers are moved vertically up on the
diagram for simplicity - in practice they would overlap the
blue shot.)
This was, until the 1950's, the way that all marine data was
shot. The section produced from the placement of all the
shot records side-by-side was known as a 100% section (as
all of the sub-surface was covered).
If we reduce the distance between shots to something less

than "S/2", then we will duplicate some of the sub-surface
data. This is the principle of multi-fold shooting, also called
the common-midpoint (CMP) method or, (incorrectly, as we
will see later), common-depth-point (CDP) shooting.
If we reduce the distance between shots, we obtain multiple coverage of the sub-surface
points.
In this simple case, moving the shot by "S/X" covers each point under the ground "X/2"
times.
This is known as the fold, CMP fold or CDP fold, and provides a redundancy of data that
73
can be used to attenuate random noise, and to provide additional information on the
reflecting horizon.
Another way of specifying the fold refers everything to the 100% section mentioned above.
For example, 6-fold data is sometimes referred to as a "600%" section.
Although the theoretical fold is simple to calculate, the actual fold may be complicated if
the shot interval is not a multiple of half of the recording group interval - we'll look at this
next. In the meantime it's probably worth mentioning one additional constraint on the
shotpoint interval for marine data.
If we are recording 6 seconds of data, we

need about 8 seconds between one shot and
the next (in order to allow the shot energy to
die away, and recycle the air-guns).
With 25 m between shots this means that the

vessel has to travel 25 m in 8 seconds, or at a
speed of about 6 knots.
With a 18.75 m shot interval the speed

decreases to 4.6 knots, and below this (a
smaller shotpoint interval) the speed of the
vessel is insufficient to keep the equipment
floating - the streamer sinks!
The shotpoint interval can be reduced if we are recording less than 6 seconds, although we
increase the risk of the energy from one shot interfering with the next and need multiple
source arrays to allow for the recycle time.
Calculating the fold
74
The calculation of CDP fold is normally quite simple for regular shooting.
When the shot interval is a multiple of one-

half of the group interval then things are
simple.
This shows just 6 groups at 100m intervals

with a shot interval of 50m. The total
recording spread length is 6 X 100 = 600m,
so we are moving 1/12th of the spread
between shots.
1/12th moveup gives 6-fold data, with the

sub-surface readings every 50m (half the
group interval).
When the shot interval is something other

than a multiple of one-half of the group
interval then things get more complicated.
If the shotpoint interval is changed to just

25m (1/4 group) then we don't get 12 fold
as expected (we don't have enough
channels).
Instead, we still get 6-fold data, but now

our sub-surface readings, or CMP interval,
or CDP interval is 25m - note the
"interleaving" of the sub-surface coverage.
Here's the full calculation of fold:-

SPINT = Shotpoint interval GINT = Group interval
NCHAN = Number of recording groups
GINT2 = 0.5 * GINT
LCM = Lowest Common Multiple of SPINT and GINT2
NS = LCM / SPINT
NG2 = LCM / GINT2
CMPINT = LCM / ( NS * NG2 )
MC = SPINT / CMPINT
NFOLD = NCHAN / MC
Where NFOLD is the resultant fold, and CMPINT the resultant CMP interval.
If the shotpoint interval is an exact multiple of one-half of the group interval, then the
above simplifies to:-
75
CMPINT = GINT / 2
NFOLD = ( NCHAN * GINT ) / (2 * SPINT )
Number of CMPs on line = ( NCHAN / NFOLD ) * ( Number of shotpoints -
1 ) + NCHAN
As the computation can be complicated, here's a quick program to compute the fold using
the above formulae. Plug in the first three values (any units as long as there are consistent),
and press the button to compute the CMP interval and fold.
You may also note that, even though the

diagram shown above shows some other
shots on the sub-surface diagram (in grey),
the first and last shots on the line do not
generate "full-fold" CMPs.
The CMPs from the so-called "taper-on"

and "taper-off" of the line will contain
folds from 1 up to the nominal fold
expected for the line.
Note that those at the beginning of the line

(on the left) only contain traces some
distance from the shot (far offsets), whilst
those at the end of the line contain only the
near offsets.
All of this assumes totally regular shooting. Any shots missing from the sequence, or any
consistent bad traces recorded from the receiver groups, will reduce the overall fold of
data.
Land Geometry
76
Seismic data recorded on land does not normally follow the same regular pattern as that
shot at sea. It may be impossible to arrange our shots and / or geophones in a straight line,
or to place them with totally regular spacing.
Here's a diagram we've seen before! The

colours of the geophone groups across the top
show the groups that are "live" for each of the
five shots shown below.
Note that neither the geophones or shots are in

a straight line, the shots are offset from the
geophone line, and the shot is positioned in
roughly the centre of the live spread. This split-
spread shooting is common on land data, unlike
the off-end shooting necessary for marine
acquisition.
Added to the above problems is the fact

that land data, unlike marine, is not shot at
a constant elevation (height above sea
level).
Maybe we're shooting up the side of a

quarry, or over the top of a sand dune.
In every case, the elevation will vary from

shot to shot and from geophone station to
geophone station, and, when we're using
explosives, the shot depth may also vary.
The above problems can be simply stated. We need to know the precise position in 3
dimensions of every shot and every geophone station for our line, together with information
on which geophone groups are live for each shot.
77
The enormous amount of additional
information required for the processing of
land data was, until fairly recently,
supplied on hand-written documents.
The position of every shot and geophone

station (often supplied relative to the
desired line position) had to be entered into
the processing centre computer by hand.
Modern surveys use GPS navigation

systems and digital recording to provide
accurate positioning information, often on
floppy disk.
The digital positioning data, or that

supplied on paper allows us to produce an
accurate map showing every shot and
geophone position on the line (this may be
done in the field office).
This provides two of three dimensions

required to process the data. The other,
the elevations and shot depths, and their
impact on the processing will be discussed
next.
78
Elevations and shot depths
The elevation problem is a simple one. If
our shots and geophones are not all at the
same elevation (i.e. not marine data), then
the reflections from any event will be
distorted.
The "record" on the right of the diagram

shows the image of the deep, horizontal
reflector on the seismic shot record.
A perfectly flat horizon appears distorted

due to the different travel-times of the rays
from shots and receivers at different
elevations. (We can assume that most of
the energy will be moving almost vertically
close to the surface.)
The distortion is (more or less) the same for ever reflector - it does not change with time.
For this reason it is known as a static correction (we'll mention dynamic corrections later),
and correcting for this is a major consideration in land data processing.
So, as well as the map shown on the

previous page, we need accurate elevation
information for every shot and geophone
group (or geophone station) on our line.
These are now also provided on digital disk
files, but, in the past were simply supplied
on paper.
The elevations, or
heights above sea level,
are still often measured
in the field by
conventional surveying
methods.
79
Here's an (old) hand-written chart from
the field giving (at the top) details of the
elevations and static calculations.
The lower half of the diagram is a stacking

chart, showing the sub-surface midpoints
between shots and receivers, and the
expected fold along the line.
Much of the computational work on statics

is now automated, and is often processed in
the field.
In order to remove the effects of the different elevations of shots and geophones (and other
changes in the near surface), we need to time-shift or static correct all of our data to a new
datum at an early stage in the processing.
This datum may be a fixed datum, at a fixed elevation (for example, sea level), or may be a
floating datum - a smooth line through the mean of the shot and geophone elevations.
Either way we need to consider these initial Field Static computations in some detail.
80
Field Statics
In order to establish the time corrections (statics) for every shot and geophone station in
our line, it's necessary (once again) to look at some ray paths.
Given a weathering (low velocity) layer of depth "d", we can consider three types of ray
paths that will be recorded on the early part of our seismic field records.
There will be direct rays , that travel either through the air (air waves) at very low
velocity, or through the top of the weathering layer with a horizontal velocity of V1. There
will be reflected rays , travelling at velocity V1 and reflecting from the boundary at
the base of the weathering layer, and refracted waves , reaching critical angles and
travelling along the base of the weathering layer with (predominantly) velocity V2.
81
Here's how they will look on our shot
record.
As usual, we have distance across the top

(increasing left-to-right), and time
increasing downwards.
The various "noise-trains" visible of the

early part of the record come from:-
The surface wave.

The direct wave.
The reflected wave.
The refracted wave.
At the lowest offset (X1), the first arrival is

formed by the direct wave at time T1, the
second arrival is the surface wave (T2) and
the third is the reflected wave (T3). The
refracted wave does not reach the short
offsets. At other offsets (X2 & X3) the
order of arrivals changes as each wave
moves at its own velocity.
Here's the first part of a record shot at part of a LVL (low velocity layer) survey. This
survey, shot especially to establish the shallow information necessary to static correct our
data, is usually shot with a low energy source (maybe even the hammer and plate shown
before!), and low geophone group spacing.
The "picks" of first arrivals (usually made by the processing geophysicist "helping" the
automatic picking of the computer) can be fitted with straight lines (probably least-
squares), and the various velocities established. Three distinct velocities (and hence three
shallow layers) can be identified on this record.
Once the velocities have been established, the intercept times (found by extrapolating the
lines back to zero-offset) can be used to establish the depths of the layers. For the two layer
case shown at the beginning of this page the depth can be calculated from:-
82
Where "t" is the intercept time.
All the above assumes two things. 1) that the events are horizontal, and 2) that the
horizontal velocities we calculate are also applicable vertically - there is no anisotropy*.
The first problem can be solved by shooting into both ends of the spread and averaging the
results (this "cancels out" the effects of dip). The second problem can only be solved by
other techniques such as "uphole-surveys" where geophones are placed down the hole and
the uphole times used to calculate true vertical velocities.
* Anisotropy - where the seismic velocity depends on the direction in which it is measured.
This only touches on the complex area of field statics. Other calculations need to be made
to tie uphole information to the LVL results and the whole process, although often done in
the field, can get very complex. As a guide to the sorts of velocities we may meet in LVL
surveys, and later in the normal processing sequence, here's the theoretical velocities of
some of the substances the seismic wave has to go through:-
83
All of the above static calculations, as usual, imply some level of approximation. The LVL's
are only run periodically along the line and the velocities and depths are interpolated for
every geophone and shot station.
Because of these approximations, and errors in elevations, shot depths and positioning the
field statics are almost always (to some degree) in error. This necessitates the use of
residual static calculations in the processing sequence where the seismic data itself is used to
refine (and sometimes recalculate) the field statics. More on this (much) later.
84
Crooked Lines
There are obvious situations in onshore exploration where we are unable to shoot straight
lines. In these cases a "crooked line" can be shot.
Imagine trying to shoot an East-West

Vibroseis line through the middle of a
residential district.
The roads (shown in grey) provide the only

viable positions for both the shots and
receivers, but this will not give us a
straight line.
We can approximate an East-West line by

following the major and minor roads
across the survey area.
The geophone stations follow the black

line, with the shots (in red) placed every
two stations, shooting into 60 groups (30
either side of the shot).
The mid-points between all shots and

groups are shown here in grey.
Note that as the line bends, the mid-points

scatter "inside" the bend, with some mid-
points under the buildings.
Although we will not be able to use every

mid-point in our processing, a crooked line
processing sequence uses a complicated
calculation, based on mid-point positions,
85
to determine the optimum "CMP"
(common mid-point) line that passes
through as many mid-points as possible.
After we have input all of the geophone

and shot station positions, and specified
the "live" geophone stations for every shot,
the computer calculates all of the mid-
points and fits a CMP line to them.
This line (shown here in red) is the "best"

smooth line that passes through as many
mid-points as possible.
The mid-points shaded blue are more than

4 CMP intervals away from this line, and
will not be used in this case. We would
need to adjust this parameter for any given
geometry.
Here's an enlargement of the top curve of

our line.
The CMP line (shown on this diagram in

blue) defines a series of bins which are
used to decide which CMP each mid-point
is assigned to, and to omit those mid-points
outside the range we specified.
The mid-points within each bin will be

combined together as though they came
from the same sub-surface point. Although
this introduces some errors, it does allow
us to process multi-fold data for a crooked
line.
86
If we stretch-out our line of CMPs (or as more commonly but incorrectly called CDPs!), we
can see the spread of mid-points around our desired "line". We can also see that only those
mid-points within the pink rectangle will be included in our processing, maybe our choice
of binning parameters should be modified?
If we check the fold of our CMPs we can see that, excluding the taper-on and taper-off of
fold at the ends of the line, that we reach our nominal 15 fold for most of the line, only
dropping to about 7 fold in areas where we have excluded lots of mid-points. A decision to
increase the bin "width" would have to depend on our knowledge of the area. Would the
noise attenuation we achieve by widening the bins be offset by the errors introduced by
including data from further off the line? If we have a major North-South structure in the
area then the cross-dip within each arbitrary CMP may cause problems. If the data is of
very high quality, maybe we can measure this cross-dip and compensate for it when we
combine our mid-points together. All of these decisions have to be made every time a
crooked line is processed, and may best be decided by test runs using different parameters.
There are as many problems caused by crooked-line shooting and processing as are solved
by the technique. It is, however, the only technique possible in many areas.
Before moving into other dimensions, here's an example 60-channel land shot record.
87
This is from a high-resolution survey (only 1 second of data), with the shot obviously in the
centre (a split-spread), and is of very high quality for land data.
See if you can find the following things on this record:-

The irregular timing of the first arrivals on each trace due to statics.
The inverted "V" in the centre probably caused by ground-roll.
A bad geophone group producing a very weak trace.
A badly connected geophone group that is polarity reversed (a peak when it should
be a trough, etc.).
A curved primary reflector at about 0.9 s. Note it's asymmetrical because it's a
dipping reflector.
88
The problems with 2D
Although 2D seismic data is still common (especially in frontier areas), there is increasing
use of 3D seismic acquisition and processing, which solves some of the problems associated
with 2D seismic data. What are these problems?
Firstly, there is a problem related to the

fact that our 2D seismic lines cover thin
"slices" of the sub-surface.
We can make some assumptions about

what happens in the gaps between our lines
(an interpolation based on possible
geological scenarios), but we don't really
know what's happening in the areas that
our lines miss.
If the lines are very widely spaced, we

could miss a vital structure!
The second problem is slightly more difficult to visualise ...
Imagine a 2D seismic survey, with the boat

sailing off towards the horizon, shooting
over a deep canyon in the seabed.
As well as reflections from the bottom of

the canyon, the geometry is such that we
also receive reflections from the sides of
the canyon - three reflections from the
same structure!
These off-line reflections, sometimes

referred to as side-swipe are generally
indistinguishable from the reflections from
directly below!
This problem effects all 2D seismic data to some degree. Although, as we have seen, we can
"tune" our shot arrays to reduce the energy going sideways, some energy (at some
frequency) will get through.
The "canyon" shown above could, of course, be a buried canyon deep in the sedimentary
section, and could be just as likely in both onshore and offshore surveys. Similar effects
89
can occur close to any steep reflector - the sides of buried sea cliffs, the edges of salt domes,
etc.
The only way to solve both of these problems is to cover the entire survey area with a series
of very closely spaced seismic lines, producing a 3D volume of seismic data.
90
3D Geometry
In order to produce a 3D volume of data, we need to acquire seismic data with a line
spacing similar to the spacing between the CMP's along each line - typically 12.5 to 50
metres.
Both land and marine data are acquired using multiple sources and geophone arrays, to
facilitate the acquiring of the large volumes of data necessary. The geometry for land data
can be extremely complex, essentially shooting multiple crooked lines at once!
Marine 3D data is normally acquired using

multiple streamers and shot arrays.
The shot arrays (shown in blue) are fired

alternately, producing 6 lines of CMP's
(shown in red) at once.
In practice up to 20 streamers may be used

- this requires over 60 km of equipment to
be deployed for each swath of lines being
recorded.
The streamers are allowed to feather, or

drift, in order to obtain data from a wide
range of mid-points.
Compasses in the streamers, acoustic

transponders on both gun arrays and
streamers, and direct measurement of tail-
buoy and float positions are used to
determine the position of every
hydrophone group for every streamer for
every shot.
After completing one pass of the area, the

vessel will go back through the area in the
other direction, overlapping lines with
those shot previously.
91
This shows the mid-point coverage for one
sail-line (6 CMP lines) for just a few
hundred shots.
The plot is exaggerated vertically by a

factor of 25!
Imagine, if you can, another sweep of mid-

points overlapping this one and shot in the
opposite direction and then again and
again back and forth - the subsequent
binning of the data into a regular grid
makes 2D crooked lines look simple!
We will come back to the binning problems on the next page, but will now briefly consider
the problems of data volumes associated with 3D data.
Here's a new area ready for exploration. The types of surveys that may be required for the
development of the area are:-
1. A 2D reconnaissance survey
2. A detailed 2D survey
3. A 3D survey
The initial 2D survey will determine the predominant direction of dip in the area, which
will be used for the subsequent detailed 2D survey (to minimise the side-swipe problem).
Although not strictly necessary, the 3D lines are often also orientated in this direction.
The initial 2D survey, shot with a wide line

spacing, will produce about 7 Gigabytes of
field data covering some 90 km of the sub-
surface.
The detailed 2D survey will produce about

400 km of data, increasing the data volume
up to over 60 Gbytes.
The 3D survey produces 7,500 km of CMP

lines, and needs over 400 Gbytes just to
store the field data!
The positioning information increases by a
92
similar amount with an enormous amount
of navigation data processing required
before the seismic processing can really
begin.
93
3D binning
It's almost impossible to visualise the
computations necessary for the binning of
3D data. The area needs to be divided into
regularly spaced rectangular bins, and all
of the mid-points in each bin cross-indexed
by line, shot and group number. We may
have 120 mid-points, from different shots
and different lines in just one 3D CMP bin,
and several tens of thousands of bins in the
survey.
Although the angle of the binning grid

normally follows the predominant shooting
direction, minor adjustments to this angle
may improve the overall data density
within each bin.
The bins in the direction of shooting (the
in-line bins) normally have their size
determined by the nominal CMP interval
being shot. The cross-line bin size depends
on the spacing between our original lines.
To maintain the necessary number of

traces, and range of offsets in each bin, it
may be necessary to "stretch" each bin (in
either or both directions) to include more
data. This elastic-binning of 3D data
actually duplicates some data from
adjoining bins but helps to maintain the
overall CMP fold.
94
The total fold in any bin
is normally examined
graphically. This is also
normally produced on
the shooting vessel.
The map of bins shown

here would need to be
rotated to match the
actual map.
We can see the taper-on

and taper-off of fold at
the end of each line, and
the overall variation of
fold over the whole
area.
The small rectangle in

the centre of the plot
shows the area that we
will now examine in
some detail.
Here's an enlargement of the area marked above - now you can see the individual bins.
We will see later that not only is the total fold important, but that we also need a good
spread of source-receiver offsets in each bin. The second button shows the fold for just the
far offsets (the last third of the streamer). Note that some lines (shown in white) have no
contributions from these offsets.
The third button shows the azimuth, or the average direction of each mid-point from the
centre of the bin. If this shows large areas with a constant azimuth, we may need to adjust
our binning parameters to avoid the overall spatial "shift" that this may introduce.
As we mentioned before, 3D binning is just like crooked line binning, with multiple lines
being binned at once! The only advantage is that the final output bins normally follow a
regular grid. As with crooked line binning, it may be necessary to test various binning
parameters on the seismic data itself, and make a qualitative decision as to the optimum
binning parameters.
Remember, for the correct processing of either 2D or 3D land or marine data, that we must
get the geometry correct or all that follows is a waste of time (and money).
95
Chapter 5 - Recording the data
This Chapter looks at how the voltages produced by the energy arriving at the geophones
96
(or hydrophones) are stored on magnetic tape for future processing.
There's "many a slip.." as the old proverb says between geophone and tape, and we'll try to
address some of the problems and limitations associated with digital recording.
Page 05.02 - Number systems
For those of you unfamiliar with the number systems used by computers, the first three
pages of this Chapter provide a brief introduction to number systems ...
Page 05.03 - Binary numbers
... binary numbers ...
Page 05.04 - Binary arithmetic
... and binary arithmetic.
Page 05.05 - Digitisation
Some of the problems of recording data in a digital form are covered, with audio-visual
output!
Page 05.06 - Aliasing
One particular problem, that of the digital representation of the different frequencies
present in the data (and their reconstruction) is discussed in some detail.
Page 05.07 - Multiplexed data
The seismic data arrives at all our geophone groups at once! How the multiplexing of data
solves the problem when no temporary storage is available.
Page 05.08 - Recording filters
A quick look at recording filters, with a digression into dBs and Octaves.
Page 05.09 - Tape Formats
97
The remaining pages in this Chapter cover the various standard tape formats currently in
use in seismic field recording and processing. This page presents an overview of these
formats.
Page 05.10 - Field Tape Formats
SEG-A, B, C and D are the most common formats for field data still in use. This page looks
briefly at SEG-A, B and C ...
Page 05.11 - SEG-D
... before moving on to an in-depth look at SEG-D, the most common format at present.
Page 05.12 - SEG-Y
Finally SEG-Y, a format more often used for processed data but becoming popular for field
data that has been partially processed in the field.
As before, some questions to keep your brain active!
98
Number systems
A number system is defined by the base (or radix) it uses, the
base being the number of different symbols required by the
system to represent any of the infinite series of numbers.
Due to obvious anatomical reasons, the decimal system in

universal use today requires ten different symbols (digits) to
represent numbers and is therefore a base-10 system. This
system was first developed by the Hindus and was in use in
India in the 3rd century BC.
As any whole number greater than 1 can be used as a base,

it's not surprising that many different number systems have
been used throughout history. Some cultures have used
systems based on the numbers 3, 4, or 5. The Babylonians
used the sexagesimal system, based on the number 60, and the
Romans sometimes used the duodecimal system, based on the
number 12. The Mayans used the vigesimal system, based on
the number 20 (which probably means that they removed
their socks when counting).
The binary system, based on the number 2, was used by some tribes and, together with the
systems based on 8 and 16, is used today in computer systems.
Here's an example of a large decimal number (as an exercise, copy this onto your own
cheque and send it to the author of this course!). The text expansion of the number gives
some clue to the way that the position of a symbol in a number defines its value.
99
The number 21698.00 can be expressed in the following way:-
2 x 10000 = 2 x 104 = 20000

+ 1 x 1000 = 1 x 103 = 1000
+ 6 x 100 = 6 x 102 = 600
+ 9x 10 = 9 x 101 = 90
+ 8x 1 = 8 x 100 = 8
+ 0x 0.1 = 0 x 10-1 = 0
+ 0 x 0.01 = 0 x 10-2 = 0
= 21698.00
Like all number systems, the decimal system uses positional notation to provide the
exponent (the power of 10) that the symbol needs as a multiplier; the "hundreds", "tens"
and "units" used in primary schools.
We can use any other integer as a base, here's 21698 decimal expressed in octal (to the base
eight):-
5x 84 = 5 x 4096 = 20480
+ 2x 83 = 2 x 512 = 1024
+ 3x 82 = 3 x 64 = 192
+ 0x 81 = 0x 8= 0
+ 2x 80 = 2x 1= 2
= 21698
So 2169810 = 523028, we'll use subscripts to indicate the base, but normally omit them for
decimal numbers.
Octal numbers need just 8 symbols. Unlike decimal numbers we don't use 8 and 9. Any
number base needs as many symbols as the base, and "x" digits in this base will store base x
numbers (from 0 to basex-1). For example, 3 decimal digits will store 103 or 1000 numbers
(0-999). 3 octal digits will store 83 numbers (0-7778 or 0-51110).
Conversion from one base to another is fairly simple - converting back to decimal is done
like the example shown above, multiply each digit (from the right) by successive powers of
the base.
To convert a decimal number to another base, divide by the base and keep remainders
(until you can't do it any more). Here's 21698 again, this time converted to hexadecimal
(base 16):-
100
21698 16 = 1356 remainder 2 = 216
1356 16 = 84 remainder 12 = C16
84 16 = 5 remainder 4 = 416
5 16 = 0 remainder 5 = 516
We then read the last column upwards to give 54C216 = 2169810. We need 16 symbols to
specify hexadecimal numbers so, by convention, we use the letters A-F to represent the
decimal number 10-15.
Let's now move on to the number system used in computers - the binary system, or
numbers to the base 2.
101
Binary numbers
Most electrical equipment (computers included!) only really
understands two states - on or off.
The electrical circuits on a computer chip use the equivalent of

electronic switches to store and process a series of 1's and 0's that
make up a binary number (a number to the base 2).
We can convert a number to base 2 (which needs just 2 symbols) in the same way as any
other base. Once again here's the conversion of 2169810 to binary:-
21698 2= 10849 remainder 0

10849 2= 5424 remainder 1
5424 2= 2712 remainder 0
2712 2= 1356 remainder 0
1356 2= 678 remainder 0
678 2= 339 remainder 0
10 2= 5 remainder 0
5 2= 2 remainder 1
2 2= 1 remainder 0
1 2= 0 remainder 1
Reading up the last column we get 1010100110000102 = 2169810.
You can see that binary numbers are a lot longer than the decimal equivalent. Each binary
digit (or bit) can only store one of two possible values, so the fifteen bits shown here will
only store a number up to 215-1, or 3276710.
A group of 8 bits, or one byte, is generally the smallest unit that can be accessed by a
computer. This will store integers from 0-255, or, if we use one bit to indicate that the
number can be either positive or negative (a sign-bit) we can store values from -128 to +127.
To avoid writing long strings of binary numbers, programmers make use of the fact that
every 4 bits (half a byte, or a nibble) can be directly converted into one hexadecimal digit.
Here's the conversion table from decimal to hexadecimal to binary for the numbers 0 to
102
15:-
Decimal Hexadecimal Binary

0 0 0000
1 1 0001
2 2 0010
3 3 0011
4 4 0100
5 5 0101
6 6 0110
7 7 0111
8 8 1000
9 9 1001
10 A 1010
11 B 1011
12 C 1100
13 D 1101
14 E 1110
15 F 1111
So, instead of writing 1010100110000102, we can left pad it to 16 bits, and convert each
nibble into hexadecimal; 01012 = 516, 01002 = 416, 11002 = C16, 00102 = 216, giving 54C216 =
1010100110000102 = 2169810.
If we wish to store number in other ranges, we need to use combinations of bytes to

produce longer "words". We can also use floating point storage of numbers where, just as
your calculator can show 1000 as 1.0e+3, the number is stored as a mantissa (the 1.0) and
an exponent (the +3 meaning "times 103").
Here's some typical number formats, and the range of values they can store:-
Type Bits Bytes Minimum Maximum

Signed byte (char) 8 1 -128 127
Unsigned byte 8 1 0 255
Signed short word 16 2 -32768 32767
Unsigned short word 16 2 0 65535
Signed long word 32 4 -2147483648 2147483647
Unsigned long word 32 4 0 4294967295
Floating point (single) * 32 4 -3.40E+48 3.40E+48
Floating point (double) * 64 8 -1.7E+308 1.7E+308
103
* The format and range of floating point numbers depends on the manufacturer of the
computer!
There is no fixed convention as to how multiple bytes are

stored in any computer. They may be stored with the highest
byte first, or the lowest.
Like the cause of the war in Lilliput in Gulliver's Travels,

these are sometimes referred to as "big-endian" or "small-
endian" computers.
Binary arithmetic
104
Binary arithmetic is simple enough for a computer to understand!
Here's the sort of thing you might once (long ago) have done in school - a decimal addition
table. Next to it is the (somewhat simpler!) binary version:-
+ 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
0 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
1 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
2 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11
3 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 + 0 1
4 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 0 00 01
5 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 1 01 10
6 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15
7 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 Binary
8 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17
9 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18
Decimal
The logic in the binary table is almost obvious. If both inputs are the same, output a zero.
If they are different, output a one. If both inputs are "1" then carry one to the next
column.
Here's a simple example of binary arithmetic using 16-bit words to add 1234510 to 1487210:-
12345 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 1 0 0 1
+ 14872 + 0 0 1 1 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 0
27217 0110101001010001
Subtraction is done by adding negative numbers, where negative numbers are coded in 2's
complement. This technique, known as 10's complement in the decimal world, was known
to abacus operators long ago and is very simple.
Suppose we wish to subtract 1234510 from 1487210 in binary. We do this by adding -12345
to 14872. To convert 12345 to -12345, we take the binary version (0011000000111001),
105
reverse each bit (1100111111000110) and add "1" (1100111111000111). This gives us the 2's
complement of 12345.
Now we add -1234510 to 1487210:-
-12345 1 1 0 0 1 1 1 1 1 1 0 0 0 1 1 1
+ 14872 + 0 0 1 1 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 0
2527 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 1 1 0 1 1 1 1 1
This gives the correct answer (252710), but one bit overflows off the end of the answer. This
bit is ignored during subtractions.
Multiplication is done by shifting and adding (much like long multiplication by hand, but
only multiplying by "1" or "0"), and subtraction is done by repeated addition of 2's
complements and shifting, using the overflow bit to decide when to shift! All of this can be
accomplished by very simple logic circuits on the computers CPU chip.
When floating point numbers are being added, the exponents must be normalised before
addition. This is like trying to add 1.0e+3 to 1.0e-3 on your calculator. The calculator goes
through this normalisation to give the correct answer (1.000001e+3).
Here's a version of that previous addition in IBM floating point (one of the common
floating point formats). This format uses 32 bits for each number:-
Exponent Mantissa
1.00E+03 is 1.95312510 x 29 coded as: 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 1 1 1 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
1.00E-03 is 1.02410 x 2- coded as: 0 0 1 1 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 1 0 1 0 1 1 0 1 1 0
10
Normalis 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 1 1 1 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
e
01001001000000000000000000000010
Add 01001001000111110100000000000010
The answer converts to 1000.00097610, which as close as we can get to 1000.001 in this
format.
106
Finally, here's a string of binary bits (128 bytes in all) - what do they signify?
The answer, of course, is almost anything! We need to know the

format of a particular file on disk or tape in order to decipher it.
These bits could represent a

picture (0=white, 1=black)
or encoded text: _ _H _( __ _@@ _ _ ____ __b/___""_

_,Q__,Q__.Y___ ` _ 8___8___8|__` b__ B_ ___
_____a__XUx_? (Unlikely!)
or it could be a piece of
seismic trace, or CD music.
We will be examining some formats for seismic tapes once we've looked at digitising
problems.
Digitisation
Almost everything we see and hear these days comes from a digital source. Special effects
in the cinema or on TV depend on digital techniques, CD's are digital music. Even radio
107
and TV are about to be transmitted as digital signals. This text is just a series of black dots
defined by a series of binary numbers in a disk file.
Digital recording of seismic data has been in use since the 1960's, and, in deciding how to
record our data, we have to make three decisions.
1. What is the largest possible amplitude in our incoming analogue signal, and how do
we scale this for storage?
2. What is the smallest possible number (other than zero) we wish to record (relative to
the largest)?
3. How often do we sample the data, what sample period do we use?
The scaling of the data can be arbitrary - there is no guaranteed relationship between the
minute voltages produced at the receivers and the numbers we store on tape. These
numbers could represent, for example, millivolts, but may be scaled in almost any way - we
need to scale them so that they "fit" the numeric range we are using.
The total possible range of numbers (from the smallest to the largest) is often expressed as
the dynamic range of the system. This is usually expressed in decibels (dB), which is a
logarithmic scale where every 6dB represents (roughly) a doubling of amplitude. Each bit
of an integer system will thus give 6dB of dynamic range. 16-bit words used for some
systems (and CD's!) hence have a 6 x 16 or 96 dB dynamic range, just about equivalent to
the total audible volume range. Floating point systems now in use have much larger
ranges.
The choice of sample period is slightly more complicated, and we'll leave this until the next
page!
In order to illustrate some of the pitfalls associated with digital recording, the following
show a sine wave of 150 Hz sampled every 2 milliseconds, a digitised image, and a digitised
sound. If your system has a sound output, use the control buttons to play the sound.
All of these will be (mis-)treated in the same way to illustrate some of the problems
associated with digital recording.
108
This is our original data. The sine wave is sampled every 2 milliseconds, and the sound is
sampled at 1/8th of a millisecond. Both the sound and the picture use 256 levels of
digitisation. In the picture this represents a colour, while in the sound it's an amplitude
level.
The data here has been clipped (the blue line shows the original data). A bad choice of
recording parameters means that any very large amplitudes go beyond the recording range
(into the green area), and are recorded as the largest possible number.
Modern recording equipment makes automatic allowances for high amplitudes, but this
phenomenon is possible on some older field systems, and in some processing systems.
Displays are often clipped to prevent high amplitude traces obscuring other data. Clipped
data is usually fairly easy to spot - peaks and troughs will have flat tops rather than being
rounded. We need to make sure, in any digital system, that we have a sufficient numeric
range to record the largest amplitudes.
109
This set of data has been quantised. Although we have avoided clipping the data by using
large enough number, the actual range of numbers is limited. In this example we have used
only the numbers from -3 to +3 (in integers) to cover the full range of the data.
This problem also occurred on some early field systems, and can still be apparent on some
processed data with a very large amplitude range. If we store our data in 16-bit words so
that the largest value is +32767, and the data is incorrectly scaled (or is the raw field data),
we may find at the end of the trace that our amplitudes are in the range 0 to 0.5. All of these
small values will be quantised to the integer value zero!
Random noise, caused by all sorts of things in the field, will radically distort the signal in
our seismic trace. We will see later how much of the processing sequence is designed to
attenuate this random noise.
110
Coherent noise is another problem. The 150 Hz original trace now has 50 Hz noise added to
it (land data can suffer from 50 or 60 Hz noise from power lines).
The sound sample in this case has 100 Hz noise - 50 Hz is almost inaudible, and may
damage your speakers!
We also need to be sure that we record the correct frequencies in the field. The examples
shown here have all been filtered with a low-pass filter, removing any frequencies above a
fixed value. The 150 Hz sine wave has been completely removed by this filter, and we only
record zeroes!
Finally, the most complex problem, that of aliasing. Once again we only have low
111
frequencies, but, in this case, simply achieved by taking every other digital sample from our
original waveform (we have resampled the data to 4 ms). You'll note that the picture looks
like something from a TV "true-life" crime programme!
This example shows under sampling, with the added problem that the original 150 Hz sine
wave (and some of the higher frequencies in the sound sample) now alias to the wrong
frequency. The original 150 Hz signal now appears as 100 Hz! We'll discuss this in detail
on the next page.
Aliasing
This is a piece of seismic trace, sampled at a

1 ms sample period. The vertical grey lines
show the sample positions.
As we progressively resample the data to a

lower sample rate (higher sample period),
note the distortions introduced into the
waveform.
With a 2 ms sample period, the

reconstructed waveform (from the numeric
samples) almost matches the original (in
red).
There is some minor distortion, however,

due to the highest frequencies being mis-
represented.
112
Moving to a 4 ms sample period, and things
really start to go very wrong!
Although the reconstructed waveform

(blue) goes through the same sample values
as the original, there are large deviations
from the original waveform.
An 8 ms sample period shows the problem

in an extreme case.
All of the high frequencies in the original

waveform have aliased to incorrect lower
frequencies.
The mis-representation of high frequencies in sampled data is known as aliasing. The

American statistician Wyman Ellsworth Nyquist proved that the highest frequency that can
be successfully recovered from sampled data is 0.5 divided by the sample period.
Here's a list of upper limits (or Nyquist frequencies) for some typical sample periods:-
Sample
Nyquist
Frequency
Period
(Hz)
(ms)
1 500
2 250
4 125
Seismic 8 62.5
Music CD's 0.02268 22050
Frequencies above the Nyquist frequency, if they are not removed before the data is
sampled, fold-back into the range of frequencies from 0 to Nyquist.
This plot shows input frequency against output frequency for data sampled with a 4 ms
sample period:-
113
The blue line in the plot above shows the
150 Hz signal from our previous examples
"aliasing" back to 100 Hz on data sampled
at 4 ms.
The blue line on this plot shows the

original, the red line is the reconstructed
100 Hz output.
If we can guarantee that we only have the correct range of frequencies in the original
recording (by applying the appropriate filters to the data before it is digitised), we can fully
reconstruct the total waveform from the sample values.
This reconstruction makes use of Sinc functions *, or the

function sin(x) divided by x.
The function is scaled so that it crosses zero at each sample

point, and so that its maximum value is that of each sample
value. Summing all of sinc functions gives the intermediate
points.
* Not to be confused with a sink function, which is something

to do with plumbing!
This example shows the stages of reconstruction.
1. The sample values
114
2. The interpolating sinc functions on every sample
3. The sum of all of the since functions - the interpolated waveform
Multiplexed data
A typical recording system will look something like this:-
Data from Geophones The data from each group of receivers
Preamplifier is initially amplified
Low-cut filter optionally low-cut filtered to remove noise
always high-cut filtered to remove frequencies above Nyquist

High-cut filter

Amplifier amplified again to within the range of numbers we are
115
recording
Analogue to digital
converted to a numeric value
conversion
Formatted output to tape and recorded on tape.
There is a problem associated with recording multi-channel seismic data. If we consider

some point in time, after the shot has fired, all of our receiver groups are receiving data
simultaneously.
If this data is recorded on tape as soon as it is available, the data on tape will be in the
wrong order. We will have all channels at one time sample, followed by all data at the next
sample - the data is ordered by time, not as seismic traces.
This type of recording format, known as multiplexed recording, is still found on older data,
or current data shot with old recording instruments! If we place the "clock" in the flow
shown above (just before the A/D conversion), we only need one conversion unit for all
channels.
You should spot one other problem here. If the multiplexing "clock" shown here (for just 6
channels) rotates in 2 milliseconds, then the data from recording group 6 (and all those in
between) are recorded later than channel 1.
This multiplexer skew, dependant on the channel number, is usually corrected in the earliest
stages of the processing - when the data is being de-multiplexed from the field tapes into an
internal tape format in trace order.
When you get tired of clock watching, click on the animation to pause it!
The data is always received at the recording instruments in multiplexed order. If the
instruments have enough local storage (computer memory) available, then the data can be
collected in one order and output in the other - the data is de-multiplexed in the field.
In a nutshell , the difference between multiplexed and de-multiplexed data is simply

the order in which the data for one field record is stored. Either "across" the channels
(multiplexed) or down the traces (de-multiplexed).
Channel
116
Time 1 2 3 239 240
0.000 A001 B001 C001 YY001 ZZ001
0.002 A002 B002 C002 YY002 ZZ002
0.004 A003 B003 C003 YY003 ZZ003

1.000 A501 B501 C501 YY501 ZZ501
1.002 A502 B502 C502 YY502 ZZ502
Multiplexed order: A001, B001, C001 etc.
De-Multiplexed order: A001, A002, A003 etc.
When data is stored in de-multiplexed format (often known as a trace sequential format),
the groups of numbers are (logically) referred to as "traces".
For multiplexed formats, the group of numbers are often referred to as a "scan" - the data
from all channels at one time.
Recording filters
Before we get deep into the business of recording filters, we need to define a couple of terms.
Filters are applied to the seismic data before it is digitised to remove

(among other things) frequencies above the Nyquist frequency for
the sample rate we are using.
These filters are, of necessity, analogue filters (somewhat more

complicated than the one shown here!), with cut-off frequencies
defined in Hertz, and "slopes" that are usually specified in dB's per
117
octave.
Decibels
A bel (named after Alexander Graham, not ding-
dong!), is defined as the logarithm (to the base
10) of a power difference.
For example, one of the fastest piston-engined

aircraft, the North American P-51D Mustang,
has flown with an engine that develops 3000
hp. This compares with the 0.85 hp of Karl-
Friedrich Benz's first car in 1885.
The power ratio here is 3000 0.85, or about

3530:1. Taking the logarithm of this ratio, we
can express this difference as "3.55 bels".
The bel was soon found to be a somewhat unwieldy unit. The total range of sound audible to humans,
from the flap of a butterfly's wings to the threshold of pain (or the average rock concert) represents a
power difference of about 1,000,000,000,000 to 1, or about 12 bels.
In order to be able to use a unit with more meaning, the decibel (dB), or one tenth of a bel has come
into general use. Thus the range of human hearing is usually expressed as about 120 dB.
The dB is a power ratio. If we are dealing with amplitudes (of, for example, a seismic trace) then, as
power equates to the amplitude squared, we can define the decibel as:-
Where A1 and A2 are amplitudes.
118
Here's some typical amplitude ratios expressed in the logarithmic scale of dB:-
Amplitude Ratio Log10 dB Approx.
1:1 0 0 0
1.4:1 0.14613 2.92256 +3dB
2:1 0.30103 6.0206 +6dB
4:1 0.60206 12.0412 +12dB
8:1 0.90309 18.0618 +18dB
10:1 1 20 +20dB
100:1 2 40 +40dB
0.7:1 -0.1549 -3.098 -3dB
0.5:1 -0.301 -6.0206 -6dB
0.1:1 -1 -20 -20dB
Octaves
We're probably familiar with the concept of octaves in a musical sense.
Here's the centre three octaves of a piano keyboard (middle "C" marked in red), with a plot showing
the frequency of each note (including the black ones!).
Use the buttons to switch the frequency axis to a logarithmic scale. It should now be obvious that the
frequency for each note is a constant factor (about 1.0595) times the frequency for the previous note;
a geometric progression.
The ratio is actually equal to the 12th root of 2 - each octave (12 notes) representing a doubling of
frequency. (The "A" below middle "C" is a fixed point - 440 Hz.)
An octave is, once again, a logarithmic scale representing the ratio between two different frequencies
(it comes out as about 3.322 x Log10 of the frequency ratio). This following shows some frequency
119
ratios expressed in octaves:-
Frequency 1 Frequency 2 Ratio Octaves
10 15 1.5 0.58496
10 20 2 1
10 40 4 2
10 80 8 3
80 40 0.5 -1
80 10 0.125 -3
50 70.71 1.4142 0.5
dBs/Octave
It we put the two concepts of dBs and Octaves together, we get a "Log/Log" scale.
This plot shows some typical filter "slopes" specified in dBs per octave. I've used an amplitude of "1"
at 50 Hz as my starting point (remember that both dBs and octaves are relative measures).
As 6dB is about one half, a slope of 6dB per octave means we halve the amplitude at half the
frequency - amplitude is proportional to frequency.
12dB per octave applies a scalar equal to frequency squared, and so on.
Switch the axes to log scales to see the different representations of the slopes - the only all appear
linear on the log-log scale.
Recording filters
Now we've worked our way through that lot, we can talk about recording filters!
120
Here's the amplitude response of a typical
recording filter.
Plotted on a logarithmic amplitude scale (dB),

this shows the frequency passband for a 8 to 77
Hz filter, with slopes of 18 dB/Oct. at the low
end, and 70dB/Oct. on the high end.
This filter is designed for recording data at a 1

millisecond sample interval - if we recorded the
data at 2 ms, the amplitudes present above 250
Hz would still alias - they are only about 25 dB
down, or about 5% of the maximum amplitude.
Another vital characteristic of a recording filter

is its phase response. This shows the "shift"
introduced into each frequency component by
the electronics.
A phase shift is inevitable in a recording filter,

but, the best types of filters have a linear phase
shif over the important (the strongest)
frequencies.
This curve is fairly linear over the region of

highest amplitudes, this (as we will see later)
will introduce an overall time shift in our data,
but will not affect the timing of the individual
frequency components in the seismic trace.
Although the high-cut filter is very important to prevent aliasing, a low-cut filter is not always applied
(often referred to as "OUT"). This can cause some unwanted low frequency noise that can be removed
in the processing, provided that it doesn't completely obliterate the signal!
It's important for the person processing the data to be aware of any changes in recording
filters within one seismic survey. Because both the amplitude and phase characteristics of
the recorded data are irreversibly affected by this filter, data recorded using different
filters will not "tie".
It's usual for the signatures supplied to the processing centre by a marine vessel acquiring
data to be recorded with the same filter as the seismic data - just make sure you use the
121
right filter for the right data!
What is the effect of high-cut filters on the appearance of seismic data?
The small piece of (fully processed) seismic data shown here has been filtered with a whole range of
high-cut filters.
These were applied in the processing as digital filters, which do not introduce any time shifts in the
data.
Note the changes in fine detail as the high-cut moves lower. (The data are sampled at 4 ms so 125 Hz
= no filter.)
122
Tape Formats
Once upon a time, there was a multitude of different tape

formats used for seismic acquisition and processing.
Every manufacturer of recording equipment had their own

format, and every processing contractor had their own
format for "in-house" storage of data during processing.
Although there are still a few different internal formats in

use by the processing companies, the format of field data has
now (largely) been standardised.
Thanks to the on-going efforts of the Society of Exploration

Geophysicists (the SEG), the number of field formats has
rapidly decreased over the last few years.
The more common historical formats, SEG-A, SEG-B and

SEG-C will be discussed briefly, but SEG-D, the most
common current format, will be discussed in some detail.
At the other end of the alphabet, SEG-Y is really the only

format now used for storing processed seismic data, and is
becoming popular for the storage of field data, or partially
processed data from field processing crews.
123
All tape formats use some kind of error checking. The most simple form of error checking
for the binary numbers on tape is parity checking.
This technique, used throughout the computer industry, is a very simple check for the
individual "bits" in a binary number. The number of "1's" in a byte is counted and, if the
result is even, a "1" is put in a special parity bit appended to each byte. This is known as
odd parity.
When the number is read back from the tape, if the number of "1's" (byte plus parity bit)
is no longer odd, then one or more bits are in error. This is known as a parity error and
doesn't tell you which bits are wrong - just that something is wrong. Of course, if two bits
flip from 1 to 0 (or vice-versa), the parity check won't spot it.
Here's a few bytes with their parity bit added:-
Binary number Parity Bit

01000000 0
00001110 0
11000001 0
00101101 1
00101111 0
10110100 1
11011010 0
11010110 0
Even parity is also possible (the number of "1's" is made even).
Another technique used is known as a checksum. This takes all of the bytes in one
particular part of the tape (for example, one multiplexed scan of all channels at one time),
and sums them together. Any overflow from the resultant one or two byte value being
ignored.
Once again, on reading the tape, an error in the checksum shows that one of the numbers is
wrong - not which one.
This technique is similar to that used by accountants (before the advent of calculators) to
check a sum of a column of figures. Each figure was divided by 9 and the remainder noted
(known as Modulo-9). The sum of these results (again, Modulo 9) should equal the original
sum (Modulo-9).
124
Here's an example:-
Number Mod 9
6307 7
9622 1
316 1
183 3
4099 4
2446 7
Sum 22973 23
Mod 9 5 5
The one major failing of this technique (which you may like to test) is that is doesn't spot a
transposition of digits in the sum. If we add "6442" instead of the last figure "2446", we
get the answer 26969 which is still 5 Modulo 9!
Seismic field tapes (particularly multiplexed tapes) make use of yet another
form of error checking. At the beginning or end of each logical section in the
tape (for example, one scan), a sync code is written.
This sync code (generally a sequence of "all 1's") covers multiple bytes and is
used to check that the correct number of values has been recorded in each
section. A "sync error" generally means that things have got out of step, and
we may have to remove this shot from the processing sequence.
All tape format share a common general layout:-
125
Regardless of the physical format of the actual magnetic media on the tape (which I will not
be addressing), each tape, or file on a multi-file tape consists of some or all of the
following:-
A general header that identifies the tape, or this part of the tape.
A header for each "batch" of data (for example, one field record) on the tape.
A header for the individual traces (de-multiplexed) or scans (multiplexed) on the

tape.
The seismic samples themselves (in whatever format).
This sequence is repeated along the tape, with an "End-of-file" (a particular code) recorded
at the end of each file on the tape. A file may consist of many individual traces or records,
and the tape may consist of many different files.
The end of the tape is marked with a double End-of-file (EOF), and some kind of physical
marker may be used to prevent the device writing the tape from spinning off the end.
When the writing device recognises the end of the tape, it completes the writing of the
current record, and then instructs the operator to mount a new tape (or switch devices).
The data on the tape may be blocked into physical records (either fixed length or variable
length), and there may be "gaps" between these blocks of data. The blocking was
introduced so that simpler tape devices could be used that didn't have to cope with some of
the enormous record lengths possible in seismic recording. In the same way, the gaps are
needed for "stop/start" tape devices to stop at each gap so that one record doesn't run into
the next.
Let's go on to talk about some specific formats ...
126
Field Tape Formats
SEG-A
SEG-A was the first attempt to standardise the format for seismic field tapes. Although not in general
use today, you may come across it when reprocessing older data.
Like many field formats, the tape consists of a series of records:-
Each shot record consists of a header block followed by a data block which may be stored as a
separate record or as part of the same logical record as the data block on tape. A single end-of-file
mark follows each shot record on the tape.
The header contains useful information on each shot - the exact format varies with the manufacturer
of the recording equipment. Some things will always be in the header. A Field Record number will
always be stored that identifies this particular shot (this may or may not be the same as the shotpoint
number annotated on the map and final section - the Observer's Logs will show the relationship).
One other useful item from the header is the initial gain. This is the gain that was used by the
127
recording amplifiers at the start of the record. This used to have to be set by hand so some overflow is
possible at the start of the record. The amplifier has only 15 bits (including the sign bit) with which to
represent the signal. Instead of recording a gain value with each sample, the recorder merely records
changes of gain from that applying at the previous scan, and periodically records the actual gain so far
calculated (the redundant gain) so that this may be checked by the decoding software. Gains are
stored as binary numbers representing multiples of 6dB gain applied to the data (for example a value
of "6" would mean 36dB or a gain of 26).
The actual seismic data (in multiplexed format) is stored in a series of scans, where each
scan consists of a 3 byte sync code, 1 byte in which the redundant gain is written, two byte
sample values for each data channel, and a number of auxiliary channels. The auxiliary
channels may contain additional information, the first generally containing the time value
for each scan.
A single scan (for 48 channel recording) looks something like this:-
Scan byte 1 2 3 4 5/6 7/8 9/10
FF FF FF G G Seis ch 1 Seis ch 2 Seis ch 3
Scan byte 101/102 103/104 105/106 107/108 109/110 111/112 113/114
Seis ch 48 Aux ch 1 Aux ch 2 Aux ch 3 Aux ch 4 Aux ch 5 Aux ch 6
The scan code will always consist of 3 bytes, normally FFFFFF; the 4th byte, shown above
as GG, contains the redundant gain. The redundant gain is the total gain applied to the
appropriate channel at that scan, recorded sequentially for each channel. On the first scan
it applies to channel 1, on the 2nd to channel 2, etc. The gain value at the start of the
record is taken from the field record header.
Bit 15 (the most significant bit) of every data sample is the "G" bit, and when set to "1"
indicates that there has been a gain change of 6dB since the previous scan. To determine
whether this gain was an up change or a down change, it is necessary to look at the U bit.
This is bit 7 (the most significant bit) of the 4th byte of the scan (GG). If on, it is an up
change, if off, it is a down change. Since the U bit applies to an entire scan at once, it is
clear that the gain in any scan can only change up or down, if it changes at all; it cannot
change up on one channel in that scan and down on another. This can lead to overflow
(and clipping of the data) but this is unusual.
Thankfully, most of the messy checking required by this format should be handled by the
128
processing software. It may be useful, however, to be aware of the format in order to be
able to spot any problems!
SEG-B
The SEG-B format uses 16 binary bits to represent the signal, plus another 4 bits for gain ranging the
values so that the 16 bits have the greatest possible significance. When writing to the tape the
channels are blocked into groups of 4, preceded by a gain word containing the gain bits for each of the
4 channels.
The first 4 bytes of each scan contain the sync code, the next 10 bytes are auxiliary channels
which are recorded as 16 bit integers with no gain. Auxiliary channel 1 is normally used as
a sync increment word. Hence each scan starts something like this:-
Scan
0/1 2/3 4/5 6/7 8/9 10/11 12/13 14/15 16/17 18/19 20/21 22/23 24/25 26/27 28/29
byte
aux aux aux aux aux Gain Seis Seis Seis Seis Gain Seis
0101 0103
ch.1 ch.2 ch.3 ch.4 ch.5 1-4 ch.1 ch.2 ch.3 ch.4 5-8 ch.5
Sync Timing Gain Gain
Code Word Word Word
Once again, each set of data from one shot is preceded by a header block (or separate record) that
contains the Field Record number and other useful information
SEG-C
In SEG-C format, the potential in millivolts (the exact value!) generated by the geophones is converted
to IBM floating point format. IBM floating point format uses 32 bits as shown below :-
Bit 0 1-7 8-31
Sign Exponent Mantissa
The sign bit is bit 0, while bits 1 to 7 are the exponent which is biased by Hexadecimal `40'. Bits 8 to
31 contain the mantissa. We saw some examples of this format earlier.
129
The tape is recorded as before, with a header for each shot followed by the individual
scans. Each scan begins with a 4 byte sync code, normally FFFFFF00, then 2 bytes which
is used as a sync increment, followed by 2 bytes which are not used and normally set to
zero. Immediately following these 2 unused bytes are the IBM floating point
representations of channels 1 to N. Hence each scan starts like this :-
Scan byte 0-3 4-7 8-11 12-15 16-20 21-24
FFFFFF00 ???? spare channel 1 channel 2 channel 3
Sync Timing
Code Word
Although this format had none of the "gain" complications of the other formats, it proved unpopular
due to the amount of tape it used (only low density tapes were then available). As tape densities
improved, the format was quickly replaced by the more versatile SEG-D format which has now become
the general standard.
130
SEG-D
SEG-D is the most complicated of field formats to date. Firstly, it can contain either
multiplexed or de-multiplexed data and, secondly, it has so many variants and optional
parts that it can vary greatly from one set of instruments to another.
The general format is as follows, with the green sections optional, "IBG" meaning inter-
block gap (a space on the tape), and "EOF" as an end-of-file marker:-
Additional 2nd Last
General Channel Channel Channel Sample Channel Channel I I E I Next
General General Sample Sample Extended External Trailer
Header Set 1 Set 2 Set n Skew Sets 1-n Sets 1-n B DATA B O B Record
Header Header Skew Skew Header Header Blocks
2 Header Header Header Header Header Header G G F G Header
Blocks Header Header
1ST SCAN TYPE HEADER 2ND SCAN LAST SCAN
TYPE HEADER TYPE HEADER
The header record is a single block of information separated from the data by a standard
inter-block gap. The header record is composed of a general header, one or more scan type
headers and optionally, the extended and external headers. The header record is
"officially" between 300 and 10000 bytes in length and a multiple of 32 bytes, in practice
headers in excess of 20000 bytes are already in use for multiple-streamer (3D) marine data.
Within the extended and external headers, it is possible for equipment manufacturers and
seismic contractors to record certain additional information that is not defined in the SEG
standard. This information is defined and documented by the equipment manufacturer or
seismic contractor. Some contractors' formats contain shotpoint event time, source
identifiers, even latitude and longitude for the shotpoint. This is particularly useful for the
QC of 3D processing.
131
The order of actual data values (in red) will be described below, the format of the samples
can be in a number of possible different formats:-
0015 Multiplexed 20-bit binary data 8015 Demultiplexed 20-bit binary data
0022 Multiplexed 8-bit quaternary exponent data 8022 Demultiplexed 8-bit quaternary exponent data
0024 Multiplexed 16-bit quaternary exponent data 8024 Demultiplexed 16-bit quaternary exponent data
0036 Multiplexed 24-bit 2's complement integer data 8036 Demultiplexed 24-bit 2's complement integer data
0038 Multiplexed 32-bit 2's complement integer data 8038 Demultiplexed 32-bit 2's complement integer data
0042 Multiplexed 8-bit hexadecimal exponent data 8042 Demultiplexed 8-bit hexadecimal exponent data
0044 Multiplexed 16-bit hexadecimal exponent data 8044 Demultiplexed 16-bit hexadecimal exponent data
0048 Multiplexed 32-bit IBM floating point format 8048 Demultiplexed 32-bit IBM floating point format
data data
0058 Multiplexed 32-bit IEEE floating point format 8058 Demultiplexed 32-bit IEEE floating point format
data data
The numerical values are the format codes stored in the header for each block of data (I
don't propose to go into these in detail!).
Multiplexed data is stored very simply. Each scan is preceded by a Start-Of-Scan code and
a time value which identifies the following scan - the data samples being stored in one of the
formats given above, and additional information (gains, etc) being available in the general
header:-
S T All S T All S T All

O I 1st Scan O I 2nd Scan O I Last Scan
S M Samples S M Samples S M Samples
Demultiplexed SEG-D format tapes (the most common format) consist of a header record
followed by a number of demultiplexed data records and then a single end of file mark.
This sequence is repeated for each shot on the line:-
H Trace I H I H H I H H I I I
D Header Data B D Data B D Data D Data B D Data D Data B Data Blocks B Data Blocks B Data Blocks
R Extension GR GR R GR R G G G
TRACE TRACE TRACE TRACE TRACE
TRACE 1
2 3 i 1 j
CHANNEL CHANNEL CHANNEL
CHANNEL SET 1 CHANNEL SET 2
SET n SETS 1-n SETS 1-n
LAST
SCAN
SCAN TYPE 1 SCAN
TYPE 2
TYPE
The data records are recorded immediately following the header record. Each data record
is separated from the next by a standard inter-block gap and may be identified using
information stored in the trace header which precedes each data channel. The original
132
SEG-D format only allowed 20-byte trace headers. This has now been extended to almost
any length, and, like other formats, the data is sometimes blocked into convenient units for
the tape drive to read. The most important things stored in the trace headers are:-
Bytes 1/2 File number (BCD)

Byte 3 Scan type (BCD - typically 01)
Byte 4 Channel set (BCD - typically 01 --> 09)
Bytes 5/6 Channel number (BCD)
Bytes 7/8/9 First timing word
Byte 10 Trace header extensions (BCD - SEG-D revision 1 and beyond)
BCD stands for "Binary Coded Decimal" where each decimal digit is separately encoded
into 4 binary bits.
The data traces are recorded into a number of different channel sets for example, seismic
channels 1 to 240 may be recorded into channel set 1 of scan type 1, while a number of
auxiliary channels may be recorded into channel sets 2, 3, 4, etc of scan type 1.
If you need to become fully conversant with SEG-D (for whatever reason!) I would suggest
the SEG publications "Digital Field Tape Format Standards - SEG-D" or "Digital Field
Tape Format Standards - SEG-D Revisions 1 & 2", which describe the format in bit-by-bit
detail!
133
SEG-Y
In order to facilitate the movement of data from one preocessing contractor to another, the
SEG initially designed the SEG-X format for data eXchange. This was rapidly superceded
by SEG-Y which is a trace sequential (or de-multiplexed) format designed to store fully or
partially processed seismic data. Its versatility has led to it being used more and more for
raw or partially processed field data in a de-multiplexed format.
The standard SEG-Y tape format looks like this:-
The tape is divided into seismic "lines" by End-Of-File marks (EOF's), with a double EOF
at the end of the tape. Each line consists of two line headers, followed by a series of seismic
traces each with their own header. The actual format of the seismic samples (and the
number of bytes in each trace) is defined by the format codes in the binary line header.
134
The first line header is a
free-format text header of
exactly 3200 bytes. Each
byte represents one
character, which is stored in
the (now) somewhat archaic
EBCDIC (Extended Binary
Coded Decimal Interchange
Code) format.
By convention, this header is

organised as 40 rows of 80
columns, with the first three
columns (shown in yellow)
containing a "C" followed
by the row number (1-40).
Although the remaining

information has no defined
format, this example (from a
fully processed seismic line)
shows a typical layout of
general line information,
recording information and
processing information.
The standard SEG-Y binary header consists of 400 bytes, with integer binary coding
containing useful information for the whole line. Bytes 25-26 are particularly important, as
they define the format of the seismic samples that follow:-
Bytes 1-4 Job identification number

Bytes 5-8 Line number
Bytes 9-12 Reel number
Bytes 13-14 Number of data traces per record
Bytes 15-16 Number of auxiliary traces per record
Bytes 17-18 Sample interval in micro seconds for this reel
Bytes 19-20 Same for original field recording
Bytes 21-22 Number of samples per trace for this reel
Bytes 23-24 Same for original field recording
Bytes 25-26 Data sample format code:
1 = IBM floating point (4 bytes)
135
2 = fixed point (4 bytes)
3 = fixed point (2 bytes)
4 = fixed point (wcode) (4 bytes)
5 = IEEE floating point (4 bytes) } NON-STANDARD!
6 = fixed point (1 byte) } May be redefined in future revisions!
Bytes 27-28 CDP fold expected per CDP ensemble
Trace sorting code:
1 = as recorded (no sorting)
Bytes 29-30 2 = CDP ensemble
3 = single fold continuous profile
4 = horizontally stacked
Vertical sum code:
1 = no sum
Bytes 31-32
2 = two sum
N = n sum
Bytes 33-34 Vibroseis sweep frequency at start
Bytes 35-36 Vibroseis sweep frequency at end
Bytes 37-38 Vibroseis sweep length (ms)
Vibroseis sweep type code:
1 = linear
Bytes 39-40 2 = parabolic
3 = exponential
4 = other
Bytes 41-42 Trace number of Vibroseis sweep channel
Bytes 43-44 Vibroseis sweep trace taper length at start
Bytes 45-46 Vibroseis sweep trace taper length at end
Vibroseis sweep trace taper type code:
1 = linear
Bytes 47-48
2 = COS-squared
3 = other
Vibroseis correlated data traces code:
Bytes 49-50 1 = no
2 = yes
Binary gain recovered code:
Bytes 51-52 1 = yes
2 = no
Amplitude recovery method code:
1 = none
Bytes 53-54 2 = spherical divergence
3 = AGC
4 = other
Measurement system code:
Bytes 55-56 1 = metres
2 = feet
136
Impulse signal polarity code:
Bytes 57-58 1 = increase in pressure or upward geophone case movement gives negative number on tape
2 = increase in pressure or upward geophone case movement gives positive number on tape
Vibrator polarity code:
1 = seismic signal lags pilot by 337.5 to 22.5 degrees
Bytes 59-60 4 = seismic signal lags pilot by 112.5 to 157.5 degrees
Bytes 61-400 Spare
The standard SEG-Y trace header consists of 240 bytes, many of the terms used won't
mean much to you at present, but should become clearer as we discuss the processing
sequence:-
Bytes 1-
Trace sequence number within line
4
Bytes 5-
Trace sequence number within reel
8
Bytes 9-
Field record number
12
Bytes
Trace number within field record
13-16
Bytes
Energy source point number
17-20
Bytes
CDP ensemble number
21-24
Bytes
Trace number within CDP ensemble
25-28
Trace identification code:
1 = seismic data
2 = dead
3 = dummy
Bytes 4 = time break
29-30 5 = uphole
6 = sweep
7 = timing
8 = water break
N = optional use
Bytes
Number of vertically summed traces
31-32
137
Bytes
Number of horizontally summed trace
33-34
Data use:
Bytes
35-36 1 = production
2 = test
Bytes Distance from source point to receiver group (negative if opposite to direction in which the line was
37-40 shot)
Bytes
Receiver group elevation from sea level (above sea level is positive)
41-44
Bytes
Source elevation from sea level (above sea level is positive)
45-48
Bytes
Source depth (positive)
49-52
Bytes
Datum elevation at receiver group
53-56
Bytes
Datum elevation at source
57-60
Bytes
Water depth at source
61-64
Bytes
Water depth at receiver group
65-68
Bytes Scale factor for previous 7 entries with value plus or minus 10 to the power 0, 1, 2, 3 or 4 (if positive
69-70 multiply, if negative divide)
Bytes Scale factor for next 4 entries with value plus or minus 10 to the power 0, 1, 2, 3 or 4 (if positive
71-72 multiply, if negative divide)
Bytes
X source co-ordinate
73-76
Bytes
Y source co-ordinate
77-80
Bytes
X group co-ordinate
81-84
Bytes
Y group co-ordinate
85-88
Co-ordinate units code for previous four entries:
Bytes 1 = length (metres or feet)
89-90 2 = seconds of arc (in this case the X values are longitude and the Y values are latitude, a positive
value designates the number of seconds east of Greenwich or north of the equator)
Bytes
Weathering velocity
91-92
Bytes
Sub-weathering velocity
93-94
Bytes
Uphole time at source
95-96
Bytes
Uphole time at receiver group
97-98
Bytes Source static correction
138
99-100
Bytes
Group static correction
101-102
Bytes
Total static applied
103-104
Lag time A, time in ms between end of 240-byte trace identification header and time break, positive
Bytes
if time break occurs after end of header, time break is defined as the initiation pulse which maybe
105-106
recorded on an auxiliary trace or as otherwise specified
Bytes Lag time B, time in ms between the time break and the initiation time of the energy source, may be
107-108 positive or negative
Bytes Delay recording time, time in ms between initiation time of energy source and time when recording
109-110 of data samples begins (for deep water work if recording does not start at zero time)
Bytes
Mute time--start
111-112
Bytes
Mute time--end
113-114
Bytes
Number of samples in this trace (unsigned)
115-116
Bytes
Sample interval; in micro-seconds (unsigned)
117-118
Gain type of field instruments code:
1 = fixed
Bytes
119-120 2 = binary
3 = floating point
N = optional use
Bytes
Instrument gain constant
121-122
Bytes
Instrument early or initial gain
123-124
Correlated:
Bytes
125-126 1 = no
2 = yes
Bytes
Sweep frequency at start
127-128
Bytes
Sweep frequency at end
129-130
Bytes
Sweep length in ms
131-132
Sweep type code:
Bytes 1 = linear
133-134 2 = COS-squared
3 = other
Bytes
Sweep trace length at start in ms
135-136
Bytes
Sweep trace length at end in ms
137-138
139
Taper type:
Bytes 1 = linear
139-140 2 = COS-squared
3 = other
Bytes
Alias filter frequency if used
141-142
Bytes
Alias filter slope
143-144
Bytes
Notch filter frequency if used
145-146
Bytes
Notch filter slope
147-148
Bytes
Low cut frequency if used
149-150
Bytes
High cut frequency if used
151-152
Bytes
Low cut slope
153-154
Bytes
High cut slope
155-156
Bytes
Year data recorded
157-158
Bytes
Day of year
159-160
Bytes
Hour of day (24 hour clock)
161-162
Bytes
Minute of hour
163-164
Bytes
Second of minute
165-166
Time basis code:
Bytes 1 = local
167-168 2 = GMT
3 = other
Bytes
Trace weighting factor, defined as 1/2N volts for the least significant bit
169-170
Bytes
Geophone group number of roll switch position one
171-172
Bytes
Geophone group number of trace one within original field record
173-174
Bytes
Geophone group number of last trace within original field record
175-176
Bytes
Gap size (total number of groups dropped)
177-178
Bytes Overtravel taper code:
179-180 1 = down (or behind)
140
2 = up (or ahead)
Bytes
Spare
181-240
Each trace header is then followed by the seismic samples, in a fixed length record with the
format specified in the binary header for the line.
Many variations on the standard SEG-Y format exist in practice, and a revision of the
format is due at any moment from the SEG. Regardless of variations, however, the
standard information in the headers should be in the bytes shown in the tables above.
141
Chapter 6 - Frequencies
The manipulation of the individual frequency components within a seismic trace is a key
part of the seismic processing sequence. This chapter looks at frequencies in some detail,
and establishes the basic principles of time & frequency domain conversions.
Page 06.02 - Complex Numbers
Another possibly unfamiliar number system - complex numbers. A brief history and even
briefer look at some of the mathematical operations on complex numbers.
Page 06.03 - Frequencies
Frequency components as complex numbers and combinations of two components of the

same frequency.
Page 06.04 - Combining different frequencies
This time, the combination of different frequencies.
Page 06.05 - The Fourier Transform
Going into the frequency domain!
Page 06.06 - The Forward Transform
Converting from time to frequency using the Fourier Transform ...
Page 06.07 - The Inverse Transform
142
... or going the other way (from frequency to time).
Page 06.08 - Example FFT's
Example Fourier Transforms of some standard functions.
Page 06.09 - Digital Filtering
Filtering in the frequency domain ...
Page 06.10 - Convolution
... or the time domain.
Page 06.11 - The frequency content of the seismic trace
The seismic trace as a combination of spectra.
Page 06.12 - Phase
Phinally, the phenomena of phase ...
... and some questions to phinish the Chapter!
143
Complex Numbers
The numbers we use in everyday life can be expressed as a one-dimensional graph

extending from minus infinity to plus infinity:-
Although some numbers are difficult to represent in some number bases (for example 7
divided by 3 gives 2 and one-third, which is 2.333333 ... in decimal), they become simple in
other bases (7/310 = 2.13). Other irrational numbers (like pi), which cannot be fully
represented in any number of digits in any base, still have a position on the range of real
numbers we normally use.
Real numbers allow us to solve equations such as x2 = 49. Remember that there are two
answers to this, +7 or -7.
144
The problems start when we try to solve equations like x2 = -49. Our normal range of real
numbers does not allow us to solve this and early mathematicians believed that this
equation had no solution. By the middle of the 16th century, however, the Italian
mathematician Gerolamo Cardano and his contemporaries were experimenting with
solutions to equations that involved the square roots of negative numbers, and, by 1777, the
Swiss mathematician Leonhard Euler introduced the symbol i to stand for the square-root
of -1.
The imaginary numbers produced by using the symbol i have no physical meaning, but they
do allow for the solution of all polynominal equations (the square root of -49 is either 7i or
-7i). They also lead to some interesting mathematical solutions like e(pi i) = -1!
Numbers which consist of part real and part imaginary (for example 22.3 + 1.925i) are
called complex numbers.
In the same way that real numbers can be thought of as

points on a line, complex numbers can be thought of as points
in a plane.
The number a + bi is identified with the point in the plane

with x co-ordinate a and y co-ordinate b. The points 1 + 4i
and 2 - 2i are plotted here using the convention invented by
the Swiss bookkeeper Jean Robert Argand in 1806. Logically,
this type of plot is sometimes referred to as an Argand
diagram.
If a complex number in the plane is thought of as a vector
joining the origin to that point, then addition of complex
numbers corresponds to standard vector addition.
This shows the complex number 3 + 2i obtained by adding the
vectors 1 + 4i and 2 - 2i.
The complex number -2 + 3i has the real part -2 and the

imaginary part 3. Addition of complex numbers is performed
by adding the real and imaginary parts separately. To add 1
+ 4i and 2 - 2i, for example, add the real parts 1 and 2 and
then the imaginary parts 4 and -2 to obtain the complex
number 3 + 2i. The general rule for addition is:-
(a + bi) + (c + di) = (a + c) + (b + d)i
145
Multiplication of complex numbers is based on the premise
that i i = -1. This gives the rule:-
(a + bi) (c + di) = (ac - bd) + (ad + bc)i
All of the normal mathematical functions (logs, trigonometric
functions etc.) can be applied to complex numbers (they
usually give complex answers). Plots of some part of some of
the more esoteric functions of complex numbers give rise to
the fractal patterns popular with computer artists!
Since points in a plane can be written in

terms of the polar co-ordinates r and p ,
every complex number z can be written in
the form:-
z = r (cos p + i sin p)
Here, r is the modulus, or distance to the
origin, and p is the argument of z, or the
angle that z makes with the x axis. If z = r
(cos p + i sin p) and w = s (cos q + i sin q) are
two complex numbers in polar form, then
their product in polar form is given by:-
zw = rs (cos (p + q) + i sin (p + q))
We'll go on now and discuss frequencies, and how complex numbers play their part!
146
Frequencies
Way back in Chapter 3 we showed how a
waveform, consisting of a single frequency,
would appear in the time domain (as a
function of time).
We can define such a waveform by three

parameters - its frequency (usually in
Hertz - the number of cycles per second),
its amplitude (the maximum value of the
waveform), and its phase - the offset of the
central peak from time zero measured as
an angle.
Here then is one such single frequency

waveform, with some numbers assigned to
its three parameters.
The horizontal scale is time (shown in

seconds), and the period between
successive peaks of the waveform is 40 ms.
This corresponds to a frequency of 1/0.04
or 25 Hz.
The amplitude of the waveform is "4", and

the waveform begins at a point 1/6th of a
wavelength from its maximum value - the
phase is 360/6 or 60 degrees (or pi/3
radians).
The actual equation for the type of waveform shown above is:-
147
a*Cos(2*pi*f*t+p)
where a is the amplitude, f the frequency, t the time and p the phase. pi is either 3.14159...
if we're working in radians, or 180 if we're working in degrees, so the example given (with
everything in degrees) is:-
4*Cos(180*25*t+60) = 4*Cos(4500*t+60)
You can plot functions like this (in the

same way that I did) by using a
spreadsheet.
Simply build a column of times

incrementing by your chosen sample
period, and plug the equation above into
the next column (you may need to convert
it to radians).
An X/Y plot of these numbers should

produce something like the plot shown
above!
We could look at the above waveform in

the frequency domain, plotting both the
amplitude and phase of this waveform as a
function of frequency.
This obviously only gives us one point on

each graph, but we need two graphs for
this representation as opposed to the one in
the time domain. Why?
The clue to this is on the previous page. In the frequency domain we need a complex
number to specify the waveform. The combination of phase and frequency values in the
frequency domain transform into waveforms in the time domain, and allow for complex
numbers in both domains, as well as for negative frequencies (a concept that we'll discuss
when we get to spatial frequencies!).
Luckily, we don't record either complex or imaginary numbers in our seismic data (which
is just as well, as they'd be difficult to display!), and we don't record negative frequencies
(if you like, energy from the shot going backwards in time!), so we actually only need about
half as many "samples" in the frequency domain as we have in the time domain - more on
this later.
148
Once again, we'll go back to clock watching! Imagine a clock that rotates through 360
degrees in 40 ms.
If the length of the "hand" is four units, and we plot the height of the end of the hand from
the centre of the clock, we get the cosine wave shown here.
Click on the animation to stop it - if you can stop it after 1/6th of a revolution (at 2 o'clock),
you'll get the same time function as shown above - a 60 degree phase value!
So, as we might expect from the clock above, we could

represent this single frequency as a complex number vector
with a radius of "4", and an angle of 60 degrees to the
"Real"-axis in this Argand diagram.
We could express this 25 Hz. component as "2 + 3.464i",

and, although it is (slightly) more intuitive to talk about its
amplitude and phase, we need to remember that we are
dealing with a complex number when we look at combining
different frequencies (or different amplitudes and phases of
the same frequency) together.
Here's the complete relationship between amplitude (A), phase (p), and the Real (R) and
Imaginary (I) components of a complex number expressed in polar co-ordinates, or our
single frequency component expressed in Amplitude and Phase converted to its complex
equivalent:-
149
Combining different frequencies
Let's start by looking at what happens when we combine two waves of the same frequency
with different amplitudes and phases.
The plot here shows the time functions (from -0.2 to +0.2 seconds) for two 20 Hz
waveforms, their amplitude and phase values, and an Argand diagram showing the
amplitude and phase components as a vector. Change the amplitude (0 to 100) and phase (-
360 to +360) of each waveform and click on the button to add them together.
Note particularly what happens when the two waves have the same amplitude and exactly
180 degrees difference in phase - adding them together "cancels-out" this frequency.
Check what happens when they are 90 degrees apart, or when both have the same phase.
Now we'll increase the complexity by adding two waveforms of different frequencies. Once
again, try a range of amplitudes and phases with frequencies close together and far apart
(you can only specify frequencies from 0 to 125 Hz - I've assumed a 4 ms sample period):-
The result will always look "cyclic" (the pattern repeats). Try adding 100 Hz to 110 Hz -
you should see an apparent 10 Hz (the difference) in the output. This is due to some of the
relationships you might remember from trigonometry at school (COS (a + b) = COS (a)
COS (b) - SIN (a) SIN (b) and the like!).
If we extend this summation process further, we can consider a waveform that is

constructed from the summation of many different frequencies.
150
Here's a few hundred milliseconds of one such waveform constructed by adding together 11
different frequencies with different amplitudes and phases. The sum (in blue) is scaled up
by a factor of 2 relative to the individual components in order to make it more visible!
The amplitude for each frequency varies up to an arbitrary value of 100, the phase is more
or less random for each component.
The addition of all of these frequencies produces, once again, a cyclic waveform (containing
a repetitive sequence). This sequence repeats every 80 ms (every 20 samples at a 4 ms
sample period).
I have deliberately used a set of sampled frequencies going from 0 Hz to the Nyquist
frequency (125 Hz), and, in fact, if we have "N" samples of amplitude and phase over the 0
to Nyquist range, the time function will repeat every (N-1)*2 samples (80 ms).
This ties in with a comment made on the previous page. If we only have positive
frequencies (from 0 to Nyquist), and "Real" numbers in our trace of "M" time samples, we
need (M/2)+1 frequency samples to represent all of the frequencies in that trace (we assume
that the trace repeats after "M" samples).
Here's just one "cycle" of the output

"trace" from the above summation - I've
"stretched-out" just 20 samples around
time zero (at a 4 ms sample period).
151
We could represent the
little piece of trace shown
above by plotting the
amplitude and phase of
each of the component
frequencies (when we
move on to many
frequency components
this will really be the
only way we can show
them).
Here's the amplitude and

phase spectra of the
above trace.
Each frequency
component is shown on
both graphs - the top
giving the amplitude of
the particular frequency,
and the bottom the phase
angle.
These plots are simply

another way of looking at
the trace, and are a
graphical representation
of the Fourier Transform
of the trace.
The Fourier Transform

is a mathematical process
that allows us to move
from the time domain
(the plot of amplitude vs.
time - the "trace") to the
frequency domain
(amplitude and phase
spectra).
The Inverse Fourier

Transform (from the
spectra back to the trace)
is often known as
Fourier Synthesis - we
152
synthesise the trace by
adding together the
individual frequency
The Fourier Transform

153
The Fourier Transform is named after Baron Jean Baptiste Joseph Fourier, a French
mathematician, who, in his treatise The Analytical Theory of Heat (1822), employed a
trigonometric series, usually called the Fourier series, to express discontinuous functions as
the sum of an infinite series of sines and cosines.
The Fourier Transform is simply a mathematical process that allows us to take a function
of time (a seismic trace) and express it as a function of frequency (a spectrum). The full-
blown formal statement of the Fourier Transform is:-
... and its inverse is:-
Both of the above transforms require an integral over the range -infinity to +infinity, not a
lot of use when we have a finite string of numbers representing a seismic trace. Here's an
alternative formulation of the forward transform for sampled data:-
Although we've replaced the integration with a summation over a finite interval ("N"
samples), the "i" in the exponent on the right should give you the clue that we are dealing
here with complex numbers. We'll look at a practical example of this over the next few
pages for just real numbers, but let's first examine the results by using a ready-built
program.
The Fourier transform, for sampled data, can be SUBROUTINE FFT(A,M,N)

programmed fairly simply to take advantage of the COMPLEX A(N),U,W,T
fact that the Cosine of "2x" is related to the Cosine N = 2**M
of "x" (Cos(2x)=2(Cos(x))2-1). NV2 = N/2
NM1 = N - 1
This can produce some surprisingly fast "code" (the
J = 1
FFT or Fast Fourier Transform), and the example
154
shown here on the right (From: J. W. Cooley, P.
Lewis, and P. D. Welch, "Historical Notes on the Fast
Fourier Transform", IEEE Transactions on Audio
and Electroacoustics 1969 and later papers) is a
FORTRAN program that will compute the forward
FFT of any number of points that are a power of 2
(2, 4, 8, 16, etc).
DO 7 I = 1,NM1
Both the input and output series of numbers in this IF (I .GE. J) GO TO 5
program are complex numbers, and similar
T = A(J)
algorithms are available in other programs.
A(J) = A(I)
A(I) = T
5 K = NV2
6 IF (K .GE. J) GO TO 7
J = J - K
K = K/2
GO TO 6
7 J = J + K
PI = 3.141592653589793
DO 20 L = 1,M
Instead of programming this, we can use existing LE = 2**L
software. For example, there is an option in the
LE1 = LE/2
"Analysis Tool Pack" in Microsoft Excel to perform
U = (1.0,0.)
forward or inverse FFT's on a (once again) number
W =
of points that is a power of 2. CMPLX(COS(PI/LE1),SIN(PI/LE1))
DO 20 J = 1,LE1
The example output shown below, for an "8-point"
DO 10 I = J,N,LE
FFT, was produced using the Microsoft Excel
spreadsheet on a PC - note that the output consists IP = I + LE1
of complex numbers. T = A(IP) * U
A(IP) = A(I) - T
Input FFT
10 A(I) = A(I) + T
88 88 20 U = U * W
77 172.509667991878-49.5807358037436i RETURN
-39 124-18i END
4 -8.50966799187825-145.580735803743i
6 40
-56 -8.509667991878+145.580735803744i
9 124+18i
-1 172.509667991878+49.5807358037435i
We'll look at the output of this "forward transform" in some detail on the next page.
155
The Forward Transform
Let's examine the output from the spreadsheet on the previous page in more detail:-
156
Time Input FFT Real Imag Amp Phase Freq
0 88 88 88.00 0.00 88.00 0.00 0
0.004 77 172.509667991878-49.5807358037436i 172.51 -49.58 179.49 -16.04 31.25
0.008 -39 124-18i 124.00 -18.00 125.30 -8.26 62.5
0.012 4 -8.50966799187825-145.580735803743i -8.51 -145.58 145.83 -93.35 93.75
0.016 6 40 40.00 0.00 40.00 0.00 125
-0.012 -56 -8.509667991878+145.580735803744i -8.51 145.58 145.83 93.35 -93.75
-0.008 9 124+18i 124.00 18.00 125.30 8.26 -62.5
-0.004 -1 172.509667991878+49.5807358037435i 172.51 49.58 179.49 16.04 -31.25
I have added both time and frequency scales to this table, note that both of these scales
must start at "0", and that the last three values (N/2-1 where N is 8) represent negative
times and frequencies. Since I have chosen a 4 ms sample period for these values, the
frequency scale must reach a maximum of 125 Hz (Nyquist). For "N" points at a "DT" ms
sample period, the frequency increment will be 1000/(N*DT). In this case 1000/(8*4) =
31.25.
I have split the FFT output into its real and imaginary components, and then used the
relationships given at the bottom of page 3 of this Chapter to convert these to Amplitude
and Phase (in Degrees). In fact, as I was using a Microsoft Excel spreadsheet to do this, I
used the spreadsheet functions IMABS and IMARGUMENT to compute the amplitude and
phase directly from the complex FFT output (I multiplied the phase by 180/PI() to convert
to Degrees).
If we re-arrange the data sets into time order, we can plot the time function, the amplitude
spectrum, and the phase spectrum for this set of numbers:-
If we ignore, for the moment the value at the right of the two spectra (125 Hz), we should
notice that the amplitude spectrum is totally symmetrical, and that the phase spectrum is
asymmetrical. We can see this also in the original complex numbers in the above table:-
FFT Real Imag Amp Phase Freq

-8.50966799187825-145.580735803743i -8.51 -145.58 145.83 -93.35 93.75
-8.509667991878+145.580735803744i -8.51 145.58 145.83 93.35 -93.75
157
For a frequency of "-x", the real part of the complex FFT output is the same, the imaginary
part is sign reversed (in mathematical terms the second complex number is the complex
conjugate of the first). This is always true when we only have real numbers in the input
time function - the information contained in the negative frequencies is the same as in the
positive frequencies (with the sign of the phase reversed).
What this actually all means is that we can get away with just one-half of the spectrum
when we have an input that is just real numbers (like, for example, a seismic trace).
We'll look at this (and the "fiddle" that is required to handle this properly) by inverse
transforming the amplitudes and phases from the above table back into a seismic "trace".
The Inverse Transform
Back to our trusty spreadsheet once again - the inverse Fourier Transform simply means
158
that we need to add together all of the appropriate frequency components at each time.
The left-hand columns in this table show the amplitude and phase values for the positive
frequencies in the transform on the previous page. Across the top are the output time
values (in normal order this time), and each white square contains the result of the
equation Amp*Cos(2*pi*frequency*time+phase) for each set of values.
Time
-0.012 -0.008 -0.004 0.000 0.004 0.008 0.012 0.016
Freq Amp Phase Cos Cos Cos Cos Cos Cos Cos Cos
0.00 88.00 0.00 88.00 88.00 88.00 88.00 88.00 88.00 88.00 88.00 x1
31.25 179.49 -16.04 -157.05 -49.59 86.91 172.50 157.05 49.59 -86.91 -172.50 x2
62.50 125.30 -8.26 18.00 -124.00 -18.00 124.00 18.00 -124.00 -18.00 124.00 x2
93.75 145.83 -93.35 -108.97 145.58 -96.92 -8.52 108.97 -145.58 96.92 8.52 x2
125.00 40.00 0.00 -40.00 40.00 -40.00 40.00 -40.00 40.00 -40.00 40.00 x1
Sum/8 -56 9 -1 88 77 -39 4 6
We add up the columns to give the totals at the bottom with TWO PROVISOS.
1. Because we have ignored the negative frequency components, we have to double all
of the values for frequencies other than 0 Hz and Nyquist (125). These "end" values
have their negative components "built into them", whereas the other components do
not! The multipliers are shown in red in the last column.
2. We need to divide the final sum by the number of points in the original transform (8
time points) in order to normalise the amplitudes.
If we perform both of these steps correctly, then the final result (using just 5 frequency
points) will be the same as if we used all of the original 8 points. In general we only need
"N/2+1" samples in the frequency domain to represent "N" real numbers in the time
domain. For example, if we have 1024 sample values in time, we actually need just one
value each for 0 Hz (DC) and Nyquist (neither of these has an imaginary component in the
frequency domain), and 511 complex values for all of the other frequencies - in other words
511 x 2 + 2 = 1024 sample values in frequency!
We have shown a simple way of doing the inverse transform using a spread sheet. Is the
forward transform possible using a similar technique?
Well, not quite so simply, but a solution is possible. Expanding the original Fourier
Transform equations (no, I'm not going to do that here!) reveals that the real component of
the transform for any particular frequency can be calculated by multiplying the time
"trace" by a cosine wave for the frequency of interest, and summing all of the results. In
159
the same way the imaginary part can be computed by multiplying the trace by a sine wave
and summing the results.
Here's our original example again, this time with the transform calculated from the cosine
and sine cross multiplications:-
F=0 F=31.25 F=62.5 F=93.75 F=125

Time Amp Cos Sin Cos Sin Cos Sin Cos Sin Cos Sin
-0.012 -56 1.00 0.00 -0.71 -0.71 0.00 1.00 0.71 -0.71 -1.00 0.00
-0.008 9 1.00 0.00 0.00 -1.00 -1.00 0.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.00
-0.004 -1 1.00 0.00 0.71 -0.71 0.00 -1.00 -0.71 -0.71 -1.00 0.00
0.000 88 1.00 0.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 0.00
0.004 77 1.00 0.00 0.71 0.71 0.00 1.00 -0.71 0.71 -1.00 0.00
0.008 -39 1.00 0.00 0.00 1.00 -1.00 0.00 0.00 -1.00 1.00 0.00
0.012 4 1.00 0.00 -0.71 0.71 0.00 -1.00 0.71 0.71 -1.00 0.00
0.016 6 1.00 0.00 -1.00 0.00 1.00 0.00 -1.00 0.00 1.00 0.00
Mult/Add 88.00 0.00 172.51 49.58 124.00 18.00 -8.51 145.58 40.00 0.00
Real Imag Real Imag Real Imag Real Imag Real Imag
The first two columns contain the original time function. The columns labelled "F 0"
contain a cosine and sine wave for 0 Hz, the next two columns for 31.25 Hz and so on.
The Mult/Add row is the result of multiplying the "Amp" column by the appropriate
cosine/sine column and adding all of the results. The values computed are the same real
and imaginary values that we obtained before. Although this technique is not as fast as the
FFT program shown earlier, it is simpler to implement on a spread sheet.
Enough theory - let's look at some real examples!
Example FFT's
160
It's common, when discussing Fourier Transforms, to show transform "pairs" - that is the
equivalent time and frequency domain representations of some common functions.
Because we are only dealing with real numbers in the time domain, the following plots
show the time domain function (T), the amplitude spectrum (A) and the phase spectrum
(P). You can assign almost any scale to these displays - if the time samples are, for example,
4 ms apart, then the frequency scale will go from 0 to 125 Hz. If you stretch the time scale
(make them 8 ms apart), then the frequency scale compresses (from 0 to 62.5 Hz).
The amplitude plots are on a linear scale (not dB), and the phase plot goes from -180 to
+180 degrees. The time function, in each case, is centred around time zero.
The first example has a single

"spike" at time zero, and no other
values in the time domain. Imagine
a series of cosine waves of all
possible frequencies, with the centre
peaks all lining up at time zero. The
centre values combine
constructively, and all of the other
values cancel out!
The single spike therefore contains

all frequencies, with zero phase (the
cosine waves all peak at time zero).
This is often referred to as a
"white" spectrum.
Now we've extended the spike to

cover a range of samples - each
sample has the same value. The
frequency response is identical to
the "sinc" function we've mentioned
before, with the amplitude reaching
zero at the reciprocal of the width of
the live samples.
If the red time function is 100 ms

long, then the first zero in the
amplitude spectrum is at 10 Hz.
Note that the phase spectrum
"flips" to 180 degrees at this point.
161
A sinc function in the time domain
corresponds to a constant amplitude
"block" in the frequency domain,
showing the similarity between the
forward and inverse Fourier
Transform.
The phase is zero because the time

domain function is symmetrical - a
single cosine wave (with no phase
shift) is symmetrical therefore the
sum of these is also symmetrical.
Any symmetrical wavelet in the time
domain will have zero phase.
Here's the spike from our first

example, but no longer at time zero.
The amplitude spectrum is still
white, but the phase spectrum now
has a linear phase shift (the
apparent jump in the phase
spectrum is due to the fact that we
cannot measure phases greater than
180 degrees, 200 degrees will appear
as -160 degrees, etc).
At 10 Hz, 360 degrees, or one

wavelength, is 1000/10 or 100 ms. A
shift of 5 ms on this represents
5/100th's of a wavelength or 18
degrees. For 20 Hz, a 5 ms shift
represents a 36 degree phase shift
and so on. A linear phase shift is
equivalent to a constant time shift.
One frequency, in this case at zero

phase, is represented by one spike in
the amplitude spectrum.
If this spike were at 0 Hz (DC), then

the time domain representation
would be just a constant value -
once again showing the symmetry of
the transforms (the inverse of the
first example shown above).
162
We looked at ghost's in Chapter 3,
this example shows a single source
or receiver ghost, with it's frequency
domain "notches".
Note how the phase drifts around

zero - although it's close to zero,
these minor phase changes can
distort the appearance of each
reflector in the seismic section.
Another example from Chapter 3 - a

multiple sequence.
Note that, once again, there is some

phase distortion, and that certain
frequencies (multiples or harmonics
of the dominent multiple frequency)
are enhanced.
A sequence of random numbers! As

one might expect, the frequency
spectrum contains all frequencies -
in practice, if the "trace" were
longer, the amplitude spectrum
would be almost white.
The phase spectrum, however, is

almost as random as the original
time function!
Just two sample values, with the

second sample smaller than the
first.
This is a minimum-phase wavelet,

that we will discuss briefly in a few
pages.
Two samples again, with the

smallest value first. The amplitude
spectrum is identical to the last
example, but now we have a
maximum-phase wavelet - once
again, more on this later.
163
Finally, here's a live FFT running in real time. The "zero" samples in each domain are
shown as open circles (time zero is in the centre). Use the left mouse button to drag any
sample, in any domain, to a new value, or the right mouse button to zero a sample. Use the
buttons to initialise or modify the appropriate spectra. Try single frequencies, linear
phases, or any of the examples shown above!
Digital Filtering
We've seen how to build containing specified amplitude and phase spectra, and how to
convert a "trace" from the time domain to and from the frequency domain. How do we use
164
this in the seismic processing sequence?
Here's a small piece of seismic "trace" which obviously contains a good

mixture of frequencies. The rapid change from positive to negative numbers
implies that some high frequencies are present, so let's try to remove them
by a combination of forward and inverse Fourier transforms.
We will transform this trace from the time domain into the frequency domain, apply a
filter to remove the high frequencies, and transform it back. We apply the filter by
multiplying the amplitude spectrum by our desired filter pass-band, and, to avoid
introducing timing errors, we will leave the phase as it is - we will apply a zero-phase filter.
Pictorially, here's what happens.
1. The input trace is

converted into its
amplitude and phase
components.
2. The amplitude spectrum is

multiplied by the desired
filter.
3. The phase spectrum is

added to our desired filter
phase response (in this
case zero).
4. The output is transformed

back into the time domain.
You can see that the high (and

very low) frequencies have been
attenuated, and the result is
"smoother".
We can obviously extend this process to apply any kind of filter - the following are more
examples, each uses our standard "trace" as input.
165
This is another low-pass filter.
In this case we have totally

removed any frequencies above
one-half of the Nyquist frequency,
leaving the lower frequencies
alone (x 1), and not modifying the
phase.
This is an example of an anti-

alias filter. We can now throw
away half of the original samples,
and still fully reconstruct the data
up to our filter cut-off point.
This filter does nothing to the

amplitude spectrum, but applies
a 90 degree shift to the phase
spectrum.
The effect of the trace is quite

strange - we have shifted all of
the component frequencies by 90
degrees.
We have shown before that a

linear phase shift is equivalent to
a time shift.
Here we're applied a linear phase

shift that goes from 0 at 0 Hz, to
90 degrees at Nyquist. Once
again the amplitude spectrum is
unchanged.
This applies a half-sample time

shift to the data (even if the data
is sampled at 4 ms, we could use
this technique to apply 2ms or
any other shift.
166
A 90 degree phase shift once
again, this time coupled with an
amplitude correction
proportional to frequency.
The total result of this (believe it

or not!) is to differentiate the
input trace - the output
represents the slope of the input
at each sample.
An example of an Inverse Filter.

We've applied an amplitude
spectrum scalar proportional to
the reciprocal of the input, and a
phase correction that is the
negative of the input.
The output contains all

frequencies at zero phase - a
single "spike" at time zero.
Although this process seems

totally useless (we've lost all of
our original trace information),
we will see later how a modified
version of this can increase the
signal frequencies in our data.
It's fairly obvious from the above that we can perform almost any sort of filtering by this
method, but it does require a double transform to perform the filtering. Can we
accomplish the same thing in the time domain, without going through the transforms?
The answer to this is, of course, YES, and we now move on to Convolution!
167
Convolution
Yet another filter applied to our
poor seismic trace!
The amplitude and phase spectra

for the filter should be vaguely
familiar. This is a "sinc" function
(sin(x)/x) that we've seen in other
places.
This is obviously a low-pass filter,

which applies a fairly strong
"smoother" to our seismic trace.
Can we do this in the time

domain?
The equivalent process to a complex multiplication in the frequency domain (multiply
amplitude, add phase) is known as Convolution, and is described by the formula:-
Where x is the input time function, h is the time domain representation of the filter, f is the
output, and * is used to indicate convolution - a combination of multiplication and addition.
In its full form the equation looks like this:-
Which, roughly translated, means:-
1. Time-reverse the filter (the -T bit).
2. Lay it next to the seismic trace.
168
3. Cross-multiply each sample in the filter by each sample in the trace, and add the
results to give one output sample.
4. Move the filter along one sample and do it again.
We need the time-domain representation of our filter. We can get this by simply inverse
transforming the desired amplitude and phase spectra into the time domain, or, if our filter
is a "black-box" (for example, the electronics in the recording instruments), we can obtain
the filter response by using a single spike as the input to the filtering process.
Here's the same filter as above,

with a single spike used as input
to the filtering process.
Remember that a single spike
contains all frequencies, and, if
we make our time zero the centre
of the spike, the phases are all
zero. Time zero is shown on both
time plots by the blue line.
Since the input contains all

frequencies, the output is an
image of the filter - in this case
three samples of constant values
(1/3rd), centred around time zero.
Let's use this filter, and the equation shown above, to filter our data in the time domain!
Here's the original "trace" in digital samples (at a 4 ms sample interval), the time-reversed
filter (it's symmetrical, so no change), and the result of all the multiplications and
additions. Use the buttons to show each stage of the process:-
The final column above matches the plot shown at the top. We have low-pass filtered our
trace in the time domain by taking a running-average of every three samples (I had to
append zeroes to the trace to handle the "ends").
So, a running average is a convolution - we could accomplish the same thing in the
frequency domain by multiplying the spectrum of the trace by a complex spectrum which is
a sinc function.
169
Here's a final example of a convolution run as an animation.
The same input trace (again!) with a somewhat arbitrary filter of four points: 1, -2, 4, -1.
Click on the animation to pause and re-start it.
The same filter shown, once

again, in the frequency domain.
170
The frequency content of the seismic trace
We can assume that the seismic trace itself is made up of a series of convolutions of
different waveforms. The following displays show the time domain functions and the
amplitude spectra of just some of the functions that contribute to the recorded trace.
The shot
command -
the signal
from the
instruments
that a shot
must be fired.
Convolved with ... Multiplied by ...
The shot itself,
in this case an
array of
airguns from a
marine
survey.
A ghost
reflection on
marine data
caused by the
energy
reflecting
from the sea
surface.
The
reflections
themselves,
assumed to be
a random
sequence with
a fairly white
spectrum.
171
Energy losses
due to the
spreading of
the energy
from the shot,
and
absorption
caused by
friction within
the rocks.
The response
of our
recording
hydrophones
(and
amplifiers).
EQUALS EQUALS
The final
seismic trace!
We could continue this list ad infinitum! Random noise may be added at any stage,
coherent noise may be added, for example, at the recording instruments, and multiple
reflections will cause other peaks within the final amplitude spectrum.
All that the processing geophysicist needs to

do is to remove all of the other effects from
the above data, leaving just THE
REFLECTIONS!
We'll conclude our look at frequencies with one last topic - phase!
Phase
172
We need two parameters to specify a component of a given frequency - both its amplitude
and its phase. The following display shows six different "wavelets", each with the same
amplitude spectrum, but with differing phase spectra.
The phase spectrum, in each case, have been "unwrapped" to remove apparent jumps of
360 degrees in the phase. The grid lines on this plot show 90 degree steps as a reference.
Remember that a large linear phase component simply represents a "time-shift" in the
wavelet.
Flick through the different wavelets and try to find the one that is as short as possible in the
time domain, and that releases its "energy" as soon as possible.
The first wavelet in the sequence is obviously zero phase - it is symmetrical, so all the
component cosine waves must be symmetrical and peak at time zero. The subsequent
wavelets have various phase spectra, and various lengths but the last (number 6) meets the
criteria mentioned above - it's as short as possible in the time domain, and releases its
energy as soon as possible. Wavelet 5 is of equal length, but all of its energy is at the rear of
the wavelet.
The wavelet which, for a given amplitude spectrum, occurs only in the positive time range
(it starts at "0"), and releases its energy in the shortest possible time is known as a
minimum phase wavelet. It is possible (by a fairly complex process involving logs of
complex FFTs!) to compute the appropriate minimum phase spectrum from a given
amplitude spectrum and there is only one possible result - only one wavelet meets these
criteria for a given amplitude spectra.
Why is this important?
Almost all of the filtering processes that occur to the seismic energy as it passes through the
earth are minimum phase processes. The shot energy itself is fairly close to minimum
phase, as are most of the effects shown on the previous page. Some of the processes
performed on the data (in particular Deconvolution which we will discuss later) are
minimum phase processes. The result of all of these combinations of minimum phase
"processes" is itself minimum phase!
173
We will come back to minimum phase concepts later, but for now, just remember that a
minimum-phase wavelet starts at time zero, is as short as possible, and releases its energy
as soon as possible. If you try to draw a wavelet, the chances are that it will start off with a
big peak, and then die away fairly quickly - it will be (roughly) minimum phase.
The fifth example in the sequence shown above is the time-reversal of the minimum phase
wavelet and is known as the maximum phase wavelet. Any other wavelet (not zero,
minimum, or maximum phase) is referred to as mixed phase.
One final note on phase. If we have just 2 samples (and it only works for 2!), there are
three possible phase spectra. Ignoring any linear phase components (or time shifts), if both
samples have the same value then the wavelet is symmetrical and hence zero phase. If the
second sample has a smaller absolute value than the first it's minimum phase, and
maximum phase if the second sample is larger.
Chapter 7 - Processing Flows (1)
174
It's about time we got onto processing!
We start with a look at some of the very early stages in the processing sequence.
Page 07.02 - A typical processing flow
An example of a modern processing flow that could apply to 2D or 3D land or marine data
- we'll look at all stages in detail.
Page 07.03 - Transcription
Stage 1 - reading the data from the field tapes (and making sure that it's all there!).
Page 07.04 - Vibroseis data & correlation
Some special processing sometimes required for Vibroseis data, with an explanation of
correlation.
Page 07.05 - Shot summing
The summing of data from multiple shots sometimes required for Vibroseis data and other
"low amplitude" sources.
Page 07.06 - Initial Statics
Calculating and applying the initial statics necessary to get our data referenced to the
correct "time zero".
Page 07.07 - Signature Deconvolution (1)
Everything you wanted to know about signature deconvolution ...
... and more ...
175
... and more ...
... and more, including a "live" example.
Page 07.11 - Gain Recovery
The initial amplitude corrections applied to correct for the spreading of the energy (and
other factors).
Page 07.12 - Trace editing
The only chance the processing geophysicist has to make a killing!
Page 07.13 - Chapter 7 - Questions
Some questions (as usual) to end the chapter.
176
A typical processing flow
As we've finally got around to talking about processing, we'll start with a typical processing
flow, showing all of the processes applied to one "line" of seismic data. This flow is based
on a typical marine 2D line, but could apply almost equally to any type of processing.
The processes necessary for the geometrical correction of the data are shown in red, whilst
the others (in yellow) are really just cosmetic processes designed to improve the final
result. Many of the processes are optional, and other processes may be used within the
sequence. We will discuss each process in detail in the following pages and Chapters.
Field Data
1 Transcription Conversion of the field data to an appropriate internal format.
A static correction so that time zero is the time that the shot was
2 S.O.D Correction
fired.
Signature
3 Replacement of the source signature with a more desirable wavelet.
Deconvolution
Initial Gain An initial correction for the spherical spreading of the signal with
4
Recovery time.
Anti-aliased and resampled to the highest sample period
5 Resample
commensurate with the desired frequency range.
Removal of bad traces / shots and correction of any polarity
6 Edit
reversals.
Multichannel Attenuation of shot-generated noise, improvement in spatial
7
Filtering coherency.
Input of geometry, and calculation of traces from every common
8 CMP Gather
mid-point.
9 De-Multiple Removal of long period multiple reflections.
Correction of the spread of data within one CMP for dipping
10 Dip Moveout
events.
11 Deconvolution Removal of short period multiple and frequency balancing.
12 NMO Correction Correction of curvature on events due to differing trace offsets.
13 Mute Removal of first-break noise.
14 Equalisation Amplitude normalisation.
15 CMP Stack Summation of all data from one common mid-point.
177
16 Datum Correction Final static correction to the final datum.
Adjustment of the initial gain recovery to compensate for velocity
17 Final Gain Recovery
changes.
Multichannel
18 Additional coherency enhancement (spatially).
Filtering
19 Deconvolution Final frequency balancing.
20 Migration Re-positioning of dipping events to their correct spatial position.
21 Spectral Shaping Adjustments to the final amplitude / phase spectrum.
22 Bandpass filter Limiting of frequencies to the useful signal range.
Final Display
Although many of these processes are optional the CMP (or incorrectly named CDP) stack
(item 15) is essential when we are processing multi-fold data. The processes prior to this
stage are called (logically) pre-stack processes, and those after post-stack processes. It's
useful to distinguish between these two parts of the processing sequence, as there may be a
60:1 or more reduction of data at the stack stage.
178
Transcription
The first stage of any processing sequence
requires that the data from the field be
loaded and checked.
Remember that the field data has been

acquired at enormous cost, and that the
field tapes and associated data (if they are
the original copies) must be treated with
some respect!
On more than one occasion the field data

from marine surveys has been dropped
overboard during data transfer, and, again
more than once, field tapes have been
over-written in the processing centre!
All processing systems have their own internal format for the storage of data. Even with
the current trend towards cheap storage devices, it may still be impossible to store all of the
data on disk, and tape-to-tape systems are still quite common. Let's repeat an earlier
exercise and calculate the storage requirements for some typical field data.
If we assume 6 seconds of recording, at a 2 ms sample period, then we have 3000 samples

for each trace. If these are stored in 32-bit longwords then the total storage for one trace
(excluding any header information) will be about 12,000 bytes.
Again, we'll assume a 240 channel recording system, which gives us 240 x 12,000 bytes, or
about 3 megabytes (with headers) for each field record. We've already got enough to fill
two 3" floppy disks with data.
Now we'll assume a 25 m shotpoint interval which, for a 30 km seismic line gives us 1200
shots. Multiplying up again, we now have a total of 3,600 megabytes (3.6 Gb) for just the
field data for this line. If we want to keep other processed versions of this line then we'll
need as much again for each stage before stack (unless we're resampling the data).
When one considers that a complete marine survey may consist of 1,000 or more kilometres
of data (120 Gb), and we will normally be processing many lines simultaneously, you begin
to see the storage problem. With multiple streamer 3D surveys the problem gets totally out
of hand!
179
So, our initial processing stage must read all of the field data and convert it into our
internal format.
If the data has been recorded in a

multiplexed format (ordered by channel,
not trace) then the computer has to have
enough temporary storage (ideally
memory) to read the entire record, and
then re-order it.
We need to check this initial stage to ensure that every trace of every shot has been read
correctly. Many of the problems at this stage (hopefully getting fewer) are related to the
physical condition of the recording media. The reprocessing of old data that has not been
stored correctly may require the resources of one of the specialised companies that can,
hopefully, ensure that as much data as possible can be read from the field tapes.
We also need to compare the list of shots read from the tape against those listed in the
various field reports (normally the Observer's Logs). Although each shot is identified by a
shotpoint number, these may not be recorded on the tape. Instead a Field Record Number
may be used which might be designed to match the shotpoint number but which might,
occasionally, get out of step.
At the end of this stage we must have a complete list of the shotpoints and traces now in our
internal format - errors at this stage will affect everything that follows!
What kind of problems can we encounter even if we read the data (apparently) correctly?
Most of these are fairly obvious since they usually involve some kind of mis-interpretation
of the data on the field tapes. If, for example, we are expecting (and the field tape headers
agree) data recorded at 2 ms sample period, and in fact it has been recorded at 4 ms, then
we'll only get half the number of samples we expected.
If the computer gets confused about the actual format of the numbers on the tape, then the
output will normally be very "un-seismic" looking. A scan error (where one multiplex scan
of the channels gets out of "sync"), will generally mean that we'll have to omit that shot
from any processing, but, we should look at the data as soon as possible to confirm this.
The following display shows four examples of loaded data, using SEG-Y as an example.
Note the (sometimes fairly subtle) errors when we read data in the wrong format. The
180
abbreviation "FP" indicates floating-point data.
There are one or two other considerations that may be required by data from Vibroseis or
other (more unusual) sources - we'll look at these briefly before moving on through the
processing sequence.
181
Vibroseis data & correlation
You should remember, from Chapter 2,

that Vibroseis data is "shot" using a
sweep of frequencies over maybe 12 to
16 seconds.
As one might expect, the amplitude

spectrum (over the whole time range) of
the data shows the full range of
frequencies present in the sweep - a
good amplitude response.
The phase spectrum however, is a

disaster! Some of the very rapid changes
in phase cannot be seen on this plot, and
the whole spectrum "wraps-around"
many times between -180 and +180
degrees.
This sweep is effectively superimposed on every reflection in our seismic section. If we could leave the
amplitude spectrum alone (it's pretty good), but change the phase spectra to something more useful
then maybe we would be able to "collapse" all of the sweep into a more concise source.
We could, of course, transform the sweep into the frequency domain, modify its phase, and transform
it back, but this would be quite costly given that a sweep may be (in some cases) more than 20
seconds long. There is, however, a time-domain technique that is just as useful!
Correlation
At this point we will digress slightly to refer back to the section on Convolution given in the previous
Chapter.
182
This is the formula for Convolution given in the last
Chapter. You should recall that Convolution in the
time domain (remember the multiplying and
adding) is equivalent to multiplying the amplitude
spectra of x and h together, and adding their phase
spectra.
Here's the formula for the process known as

Correlation. The only change is the sign on the last
term - we do not time-reverse the second trace
before the cross-multiplication and addition
common to both Convolution and Correlation.
What effect does this have on the outcome? Time-reversing a trace reverses all of its phase
components (+X degrees become -X degrees, etc.), and since Convolution multiplies the amplitude
spectra and adds the phase spectra, as we might expect Correlation still multiplies the amplitude
spectra but subtracts the phase spectra.
We will see later on how Correlation can be used to compare two traces, but, for now, let's
concentrate on the Correlation of a trace with itself - an Autocorrelation.
Autocorrelation
This diagram shows the Autocorrelation of a
three-point "trace". The input (in black) is not
time-reversed, and is placed alongside itself,
shifted, cross-multiplied, and added to give the
output trace.
If, as shown here, the input trace consists of the

samples "a", "b" and "c", then the output will
be:-
ac ab+bc a2+b2+c2 ab+bc ac
Note two things from the above example. Firstly the centre value of the Autocorrelation, when the
183
trace lines up with itself exactly (the zero-lag value) is always going to be equal to the sum of the
squares of all of the amplitudes in the traces (this is regardless of the number of samples and shifts we
use). Since these squares will always be positive, this will always be the largest number in the
Autocorrelation.
The output Autocorrelation is symmetrical. Once again this is independent of the number of samples,
and the actual values. Sample "x" times sample "y" always equals sample "y" times sample "x". As
the output is symmetrical, it must be zero phase.
If we think about this in terms of the Fourier transform of the trace, we multiply the amplitude
spectrum by itself, and subtract the phase spectrum from itself - giving (ALWAYS) a zero-phase output
with the amplitude spectrum squared!
Here's the Autocorrelation of the

Vibroseis sweep given above - I've had to
plot this on a different time scale as the
entire sweep collapses down to just a
few milliseconds.
The amplitude spectrum, after

Autocorrelation, is the square of the
input - the cut-offs at either end are a
little sharper but the frequency range is
still good.
The phase spectrum is now zero.
If we Autocorrelate the sweep with itself, we obtain a nice, short, zero-phase wavelet. If we correlate
the sweep with all of the traces recorded using that sweep, then every sweep present in the trace
(each reflection) will be collapsed down to the zero-phase wavelet shown above. We can then reduce
the data length down to the typical lengths needed for the final seismic data - we no longer need the
184
extra 12-16 seconds for the sweep.
Luckily, nowadays, almost all Vibroseis correlation is done in the field and the processing centre
receives correlated data which looks much like any other seismic data. Note that, unlike some of the
marine sources we have looked at, Vibroseis data (after correlation) is ZERO PHASE not minimum
phase, and we may need to make some additional allowances in the processing to compensate for
this.
Vibroseis correlation is really a form of signature deconvolution, where we change the source shape
(present on every reflector) into something more useful - more on this in a couple of pages time!
185
Shot summing
Another technique common with Vibroseis data, and also with other less "energetic" sources, is the
summation of a number of shots (at the same position) to produce one "field record".
Once again, this is normally done in the field but it's worth considering as a possible processing step
on older data.
Here's a small portion of seismic data from 4

shots at the same position. In an ideal
situation, the signal (the reflections) from
each shot will be in the identical positions in
space and time, and any random noise will
differ (as here) from shot to shot. Simply
adding the data together (and dividing by 4)
will enhance the signal and attenuate the
random noise.
It can be shown (by some fairly messy Maths) that the root-mean-square amplitude of the random
noise is reduced by one over the square-root of the number of summations - in this case a factor of 2
(4 summations).
Before closing this section of processing that is normally done in the field, let's digress again to discuss
the order of processes and so-called linear processes.
186
Linear Processes
A linear process is essentially one that can be reversed. Multiplying the samples in a trace by a
constant (for example -1 to polarity reverse it) is reversible (and hence linear) unless the multiplying
factor is zero (once we've killed a trace, we can't bring it back, or 1/0 = ?).
Correlation is non-linear unless we keep one of the two inputs as well as the output, we can then
reverse it. Convolution is the same, and both of these can suffer from the "1/0" syndrome shown
above - if we completely filter-out a certain frequency or frequencies then we cannot bring them back.
Autocorrelation is non-linear since it looses all of the phase information in a trace.
We'll look at some more examples of this later, but think about each process in terms of its
linearity.
Processing order
One classic example of process ordering is the Correlation and summation mentioned above for
Vibroseis data. If the sweeps used for a series of shots (in one position) were all identical, then we
could sum the data and then correlate it.
In practice each Vibroseis truck has different physical characteristics and the sweep is recorded for
every shot for every vibrator. As these can be quite different it's usually necessary to apply the
Correlation before the summation.
This is another thing we have to think about in the processing sequence - just what order to
apply things in!
187
Initial Statics
For the initial stages of processing, which may rely on the precise positions of shots and receivers, it is
important to correct the data so that the timing corresponds to the time from the shot to the reflector
and back to the surface again.
For marine data this will normally be relatively simple, we'll simply need to apply a static correction (a
fixed amount for each trace - normally for the whole survey!) to correct for any delays in the recording
system.
This time of correction is often referred to as a Start-Of-Data (S.O.D) correction.
Even on marine data it's often possible to check this from the data itself.
This shows the "front-end" of a modern 240

channel field record, after some initial gain
correction (which we'll discuss later).
If you look very carefully, you should be able to

see the very first arrivals of energy (travelling
directly along the streamer), starting on the first
trace at about 30 ms and moving diagonally
across the spread (the timing lines are 100 ms
apart).
188
Here's a straight line fitted to the above first
arrivals. This changes by 233 ms between traces
1 and 15 on the record.
Since the recording groups are 25 m apart, we

can calculate the velocity of this direct energy as
(14 x 25) 0.233 or almost exactly 1500 metres
per second - the velocity of sound in water.
We have been told on the Observers Logs that

the near trace offset is 40 m, and we can time
the arrival on the first trace (27 ms) to check
this - 1500 x 0.027 = 40 (and a bit).
If the above timing did not correspond to the expected offset, and if we were sure that we
were picking the very first arrival on each trace, then we could estimate the recording
delay by this method. Any calculated delay should, of course, agree with the value for the
delay in the Observers Logs or ancillary field information.
As this delay is typically 120 - 140 ms, it should be obvious, and should probably be zero
(no delay) on most modern data.
Things get a lot messier when we are processing land data!
You should remember

our previous
discussions regarding
the calculation of
static corrections by
picking the early refractions on land data.
By picking the horizontal velocities apparent

within the first-breaks, we are able to establish
estimates of the shallow velocities and depths
necessary for the initial static corrections.
189
Picking the first breaks is the geophysical equivalent of
banging your head against a wall - it's nice when you stop!
Unfortunately, despite some advances in automatic picking,

almost all of the picking still has to be done (or at least
checked and modified) by hand for EVERY trace on EVERY
shot of EVERY line.
(At times like these it's difficult to know who's in charge - you
or the computer!)
One of the nice things about picking the first breaks is that, provided you're reasonably consistent in
what you pick, you don't have to pick exactly the same part of the "break" on every single trace. It's
the time difference between successive traces that's important and any random errors in absolute
timing should cancel out in the complex calculations done on the results.
If we plot the picked values in their correct

spatial position (using each shot and geophone
position obtained from the navigation data
supplied from the field) we can check the
consistency of the slopes we are picking.
This plot shows very clearly an area of low

velocity corresponding to a buried channel of
loose material near the surface - it is exactly this
type of anomaly that this technique can
identify.
Datums
A datum is defined in Sheriff's Encyclopedic Dictionary of Exploration Geophysics as a reference value
to which other measurements are referred, or an arbitrary reference surface, reduction to which
minimises local topographic and near-surface effects.
For the initial stages of the processing we need to be sure that the times on our seismic records are
referenced to the time at which the shot was fired. For marine data this simply means applying the
S.O.D correction mentioned above - our "datum" in this case is now the shot and streamer position, a
190
few metres below sea level (and hopefully pretty constant). We will make the final adjustments to
(normally) sea level at the very end of the processing.
For land data our shots and receivers can be at almost any depth. In this case it is common to use a
floating datum - a smooth line that follows the general elevation trends along our line, but removes
any rapid shot-to-shot and receiver-to-receiver variation along the line. Once again, the correction to
final datum (which can be almost any fixed value for land data) will be done at the end.
The floating datum may be above or below the actual shot or geophone position and the resultant
statics may be positive (adding to the time and moving the data downwards) or negative (subtracting
from the time and moving the data up towards time zero).
In this diagram, where the floating datum is below the shot datum (at either end) we need
to take time off the events so a negative static correction is applied. It's positive when the
floating datum is above the shot datum.
Signature Deconvolution (1)
191
Signature Deconvolution is normally applied early on in the processing to change the "source wavelet"
present on every reflection in the data set into something more desirable. The name "deconvolution"
should give a clue to one of the methods used - we need to find the convolution filter that will
accomplish our desired transformation.
If we can change the wavelet from something "long" into something "short" (and preferably minimum
phase) as shown in the top of the above diagram, then the image of that wavelet on every reflection
will be shortened (as show the bottom of the diagram), and individual reflections will be visible.
We've already seen a similar process in the correlation of a Vibroseis sweep with the data - the sweep
is reduced to the autocorrelation of the sweep (unfortunately zero-phase in this case).
This photograph of a familiar landscape has been modified in a similar way to the distortion that
occurs when long source wavelets are used.
Every dot in the picture has been replaced with a spread of values (in a pyramid shape).
Click on the second button to "remove" the effects of the long "signature".
192
Here's the time function, amplitude spectrum and phase spectrum
of a typical marine sleeve-gun signature.
It has a pretty good range of frequencies, but there are some

undesirable secondary pulses after the main pulse caused by
bubble oscillations as the air moves towards the sea surface.
The signature looks to be (and is) fairly minimum phase, but the
phase spectrum gets very inaccurate at the high frequencies
because the amplitudes are so small.
Here's a slightly better wavelet.
The frequency range has been limited to the frequencies required

for our seismic data, and the phase spectrum has been computed to
give an exact minimum-phase wavelet.
If we could change the signature shown above into this, we would

improve the resolution of the seismic data (individual reflections
would be more visible).
So, how do we do this?
Frequency Domain Signature Deconvolution

One way of doing this deconvolution is in the frequency domain:-
We take the spectra of the desired

output wavelet ...
193
... and the spectra of the input
wavelet ...
... divide the two amplitude

spectra (top bottom), and
subtract the two phase spectra
(top - bottom) to give the
necessary filter in the frequency
domain.
Although the spectra look a bit weird, this will perform the transform we require. To check the filter,
we'll transform the final spectrum back into the time domain to give:-
This doesn't look too good does it! Why is it dominated by high frequencies?
This is a common problem with frequency division. When the input amplitude spectrum and desired
amplitude spectrum are about the same, then the output filter spectrum will be around "1". When
the input spectrum gets very small (at the high frequencies) we could be dividing 0.001 by 0.000001 -
very small numbers, but the answer is 1000!
194
Before leaping to any conclusions, let's check this filter by applying
it to the input signature - this shows the result.
The output looks pretty close to the desired output (except for
some "wobble" at the high frequencies where the division gets
prone to error).
So, is there any problem?
Well ..., it all works O.K. if the input trace is perfect - it has no noise! To see what happens when there
is some noise, let's add a single "spike" of noise to the input trace and run the filter through it again:-
Input
with
spike
give
"noise",
s
convolve
d with
filter
YES, THERE IS A PROBLEM! Any noise in the input trace (unrelated to the original source signature)
will be overlaid with an image of the deconvolution filter (or operator). In this case the high frequency
noise generated by this has wiped out much of the information on the preceding reflection!
Although frequency domain division is often used for final shaping of the spectra at the end of the
processing sequence (and, of course, we will come back to this) we must always be aware that any
frequency domain process can introduce unwanted anomalies in the time domain.
To resolve this problem we go for an "approximate" filter of a fixed length - time domain
deconvolution!
195
Can we design a filter in the time domain, of a fixed length, that will perform the same kind
of inverse filtering as that done in the frequency domain without the unwanted side effects?
Since we use Convolution to filter in the time domain, this problem reduces to:-
All we need to do is find out what "?" is!
We'll take the simplest possible example, a three-point input trace (with values "a", "b"
and "c"), convolved with a three-point filter ("x", "y", "z") to give a three-point desired
output ("p", "q", "r"). Cycle through the buttons in the following display to show the
complete convolution process:-
Each individual multiply & add yields one equation, so we have 5 equations for 3
unknowns (x,y & z). We can (approximately) solve this using the Least-Squares technique
outlined in Chapter 1. If you want to see the full derivation then click here, here's the final
three equations arrange by variable:-
a2+b2+c2 x + ab+bc y + ac z = ap+bq+c

r
ab+bc x + a2+b2+c2 y + ab+bc z = aq+br
ac x + ab+bc y + a2+b2+c2 z = ar
The coefficients are highlighted in yellow, the right hand side in red. Note the symmetry of
the coefficients. In mathematical terms this is a Hermitian Toeplitz matrix, which can be
solved by an iterative process (the Wiener-Levinson algorithm) which is much faster than a
conventional solution.
Are the terms on the left hand side familiar? On page 4 of this Chapter we looked at
correlation, in particular the autocorrelation of the sequence "a, b, c" came out as "ac,
196
ab+bc, a2+b2+c2, ab+bc, ac" which are the coefficients in the above equation. The right
hand side is the cross-correlation of the input with the desired out (a,b,c cross p,q,r). So the
above equation (in matrix form) reduces to:-
Let's try some examples on the next page ...
197
O.K., here's the same example using a time-limited convolution filter to change our
wavelet. Given, once again, that:-
The input signature looked like this ...
... and the desired output looked like this ...
... then, after autocorrelating the input, and cross-

correlating the input and desired output, and solving all the
equations, we get this convolution filter.
This still, of necessity, has some high frequencies in it, but is only the length that we specify
- the deconvolution process does "the best it can" to change the input to the desired output
under these constraints.
We'll apply it to the input to see how well it performs:-
The input signature convolved with the filter (or operator as

it's sometimes called) gives us ...
... which compares very favourably with the desired output.
If we now apply this filter to

the data with the erroneous
"spike" in it, although the
output has stretched the spike,
the time-limiting of the filter
has prevented it obscuring the
reflector.
198
In calculating the operator to apply to our data, it may only be necessary to perform the
actual deconvolution calculation once for a whole survey. If the signature is reasonably
consistent from shot to shot (as in modern marine surveys), we may only have one
"typical" signature recorded for the whole survey. We design an inverse operator (or
deconvolution filter) on this signature to give a filter than can be applied (by convolution)
to every single trace in the survey.
It's obviously important to get this right! The most common errors associated with
signature deconvolution are usually in the timing of the data. If we specify the start time of
our desired output to be very different to the start time of the actual signature, then we will
introduce an unwanted time shift in all of our data. (Remember that a time shift is simply
a linear phase shift which the deconvolution will try to correct.)
We also need to ensure that our filter length and start time are optimal for a given filter
design - a filter with only positive time values, for example, can only shift the energy in each
reflector "down" (to a later time).
Here's a particularly gruesome "signature", its autocorrelation, and its amplitude

spectrum (on a dB scale):-
We can see from both the autocorrelation (it's nice and "sharp"), and the amplitude
spectrum that, although the phase spectrum must be really awful, the signature contains a
good range of frequencies and will respond well to signature deconvolution.
We need to specify a "window" on the signature (usually called the design gate) over which
the autocorrelation is computed and the deconvolution operates. What happens if we get
this wrong?
Here's the same "signature" again, but this time both the autocorrelation and spectrum are
only computed over the part shaded blue:-
It should be obvious that, in this case, the errors introduced into the autocorrelation and
199
spectrum will result in a "bad" signature deconvolution - the deconvolution operator will
only work on the part of the signature that it can "see".
The same criterion applies to the window used on the desired output, and the positioning of
the input with the desired output (often referred to as the lag of the filter). We'll go on to
look at some "live" examples now to show the problems.
200
Here's a "live" example of Signature Deconvolution! The top two displays show 300 ms of
input "signature" and minimum-phase "desired output". The bottom displays show the
filter (the centre of this display is time "zero" for the filter), and the filtered output. To
start with, leave the design gates as they are and try changing the filter length to see how a
shorter filter effects the actual output - the blue line on the lower right plot shows the
desired output.
Try changing the input and output "windows" (the grey lines are every 50 ms), and see how
this effects the output. The "windowed" button shows the filter applied to the selected
input window, the "Full" button applies the filter to the whole input signature (including
the bits that the design window doesn't reach!).
Note that, like most processing systems, the design windows are specified in milliseconds,
but are converted to the nearest 4 ms sample by the program. The filter length is assumed
to be inclusive so that 8 ms (the smallest value you can specify) implies a "3-point" filter (0,
4 and 8 ms samples).
In some cases (particularly where the input and desired output window lengths are very
different) the filter cannot do anything useful - it doesn't have enough "length" to perform
an optimum calculation.
There's a lot of computation going on behind the scenes in the above example. Although
we can specify the filter length, we don't specify the time range of the filter relative to the
input and output windows.
This time shift (often known as the lag of the filter - the time at which it starts) is calculated
by the program by trying all possible lags, and finding the "best" one. For example, when
you specify a 51 point filter (200 ms), the program starts with the filter starting 25 samples
before time zero and then computes 50 different filters (up to a start 25 samples after
zero). The results of all of these trials are applied back to the input window, and the
difference between this and the desired output is squared and summed. The position
corresponding to the minimum error is finally selected and applied again to the input. This
is known as an optimum lag filter.
201
Depending of the computer you're running this on the computations listed above should
happen almost instantly. When digital processing first started (in the 1960's) the cost of
computing just one deconvolution operator was such that contractors could charge
something like 0.50 ($0.80) for the computation of one operator. Allowing for inflation,
one run of the example shown above (more than 50 operators are computed) should cost
you about 250 ($400), and would probably take several hours to run!
We very often use signature deconvolution just to modify the phase of a wavelet (not
changing its amplitude spectrum). Any attempt to change the bandwidth of the signature
(the overall frequency range) will lead us back into problems with in trying to enhance
frequencies that simply are not present.
It's very common just to design an operator that will convert the signature to minimum
phase, and to apply this to all the data from that source. This is a common technique where
the source is correlated Vibroseis data which, hopefully you'll remember, is zero phase.
We'll come back to other forms of deconvolution and inverse filtering in due course, but for
now we'll look at one more stage of the very initial processing, gain recovery!
202
Gain Recovery
Imagine a sphere of energy expanding from the seismic shot in all directions (click on the
image to stop it!):-
All of the energy initially contained in the shot is spread out over a larger and larger area
as time passes. This causes one of the possible losses of energy on a field record, and is
generally referred to as spherical divergence.
The surface area of a sphere (the area over which the energy is spread) is 4/3 pi times the
radius squared (I had to go and look that up, which just shows how long ago I was in
school!).
We can calculate the radius as the distance the wavefront travels in a given time, which is
equal to the time (T) multiplied by the average velocity over that time interval (V). We
would expect, therefore, that the energy loss due to spherical divergence would be
proportional to (VT)2.
Another cause of energy loss is known as inelastic attenuation. This is simply

the energy lost due to the particles of earth through which the wave travels
not being perfectly elastic - some of the energy is absorbed and permanently
alters the position of the particles.
Other more complex forms of energy loss (some of which are frequency
dependent) include that caused by the friction of particles moving against
each other, and losses at each interface through which the wave travels and
is refracted. (Some of the energy in the original seismic P-wave is converted
into an S-wave at each interface and not recorded - more on this later!)
In all cases this generates a total loss of signal that decreases with time,
which approximates to:-
where r is the radius of the wavefront and x is an absorption coefficient.
203
Accurate determination of the inverse of this energy loss, the gain function that we need to
apply to the data is difficult. We've already seen that the radius of the expanding sphere
depends on the velocity of the medium through which it has travelled, and, as yet, we have
no idea what that velocity is. We could attempt to use the data itself to establish a function,
but how do we (at this stage) distinguish between primary and multiple reflectors and
random noise (all of which will have different decay functions)?
The solution is (as so often in seismic processing) to make some educated(?) guesses, and
choose the "best" result by looking at the data.
Here's part of a single (marine) shot record with different gain functions applied. Flick
through the various functions and choose the one that gives the best overall balance to the
data at all times (time is shown in seconds):-
The left-hand scale of the upper plot is in dB, and this plot shows the function that was
applied to the data. We tried some straightforward logarithmic scaling of 3, 6 and 9 dB per
second, two functions based on time and velocity, and two exotic functions based on an
approximation of the inelastic losses (the e0.002TV function), and a complex function which
applies a different correction to every trace in the record depending on its offset (distance)
from the shot.
The example with 6dB/second is reasonable, as is the simple T2 curve. The examples using
"V" (particularly the last one) are good, but, as I said above, we don't yet know the
velocities for this shot (I cheated in this case!). The exponential function (e0.002TV) is
obviously much too strong.
Out of all of these, one of the simplest (and reasonable) functions is the T2 curve. This is
simple to apply (multiply each sample by its time-squared) and has the advantage that we
can remove it later in the sequence (when we have velocity information) and apply a better
approximation. Removal of the function simply requires division by time-squared.
Although a "dB/sec" type function causes less distortion within the data, in practice a T2
curve is generally sufficient to balance the data over the time range. If there is excessive
noise at the bottom of the record (later time), we may need to stop applying the function at
some time (keeping it constant from then on). This is best determined, once again, by
testing.
We should expect the gain function to be pretty constant over a given area (provided the
source and recording conditions remain similar).
204
Trace editing
Once upon a time it was necessary to

examine every trace of every shot record
on paper displays to establish the traces
within the seismic line that were "bad".
With improvements in data acquisition,

and the increased used of advanced
computer techniques, such detailed
examination may not be necessary, but
the processing geophysicist is wise to
examine at least a smattering of records
from each line. In some cases it may still
be necessary to look at every shot, but at
least this can now be done on a VDU.
We need to find those traces that contain spikes or noise trains that are unrelated to the
"true" seismic data, and to spot any traces with the incorrect polarity.
In marine data, as the recording instruments move with the shot, we should find that any
"bad" channels are consistent from shot-to-shot. For example, trace 163 may be badly
connected and hence needs to be removed from every shot on a line. If we're lucky the
report from the field may mention this!
For land data the problem is more complex. Firstly a bad recording group will affect
different traces on different shots. By examining the geometry we should be able to spot
the logical progression of the bad trace through a sequence of records. 50 or 60 Hertz noise
is common on land data recorded near power lines. We don't normally kill these traces,
but use a notch filter to remove the offending frequency. This is simply a frequency domain
filter that simply wipes out the appropriate frequency.
Land data may also contain noise from the shot itself. This noise that travels through the
very near surface is usually referred to as ground roll, and we'll remove this with other
forms of filtering that we will discuss later.
Some fairly sophisticated processing techniques can be used to "automatically" remove

spikes and noise trains, but these need to be used with caution and careful testing. Any
anomalous data samples in just one trace may go right through the processing, being
spread in both time and space by the various filters we use.
We also need to identify any complete shots that need to be removed. These may be due to
some kind of "mis-fire" in the field (uncommon these days) or a mis-reading of the data
from tape (such as the sync errors we mentioned earlier). Once again a brief look at a
205
selection of data (and careful examination of the computer output "listing" from the
process that read the tape) should spot this.
This shows the last second or so of part of a

240 trace marine record.
We can see some "noisy" traces in the data

set, particularly the forth trace from the left.
This display was scaled so that each trace was

displayed with its own "gain" - any trace to
trace variations have been lost in the display.
Here's the same piece of record with the

display now set to display the entire screen
with one gain - the true trace-to-trace
variations are now visible.
It would now appear that the forth trace is

"dead", or very weak. We will need to "kill"
this trace in the processing to make sure that
it is really zero - some process (like the
display above) may enhance the noise in this
trace.
We can also see some heavy noise trains on

the right hand side of the record. These
almost certainly correspond to the position of
depth controllers on the recording streamer.
The controllers are obviously generating
noise.
We will probably leave these alone (unless

they contain any large spikes) and try to
attenuate them later in the processing.
206
It's obvious from the above that one recurring problem is
that of "dead" traces.
Although a trace may appear dead in the original

recording we need to tell the processing system to zero all
of the samples in the trace, or omit that trace (or traces)
completely from the subsequent processing stages.
The usual convention is to "zero" or "kill" the bad trace

within records, but to omit any completely bad records
from the following stages.
One final problem is that of polarity. By convention most

modern seismic data is recorded using the standard
specified by the Society of Exploration Geophysicists - SEG
polarity.
This clearly states that the onset from the compression wave
produced by an explosive source is represented by a negative
number on tape (and throughout the processing) and
displayed as a negative (white) trough.
We need to spot those traces within our records that have

reverse polarity with respect to all other traces and check the
above convention.
Polarity reversal simply requires the computer to multiply every sample in the trace by -1.
Once again, the logical arrangement of reversed traces will follow that discussed above for
land or marine data. Do make sure that you only reverse the trace once in the processing
sequence. Doing it again will put it back to the reversed state!
207
On with the processing sequence - some more of the early stages common to all types of
processing.
Page 08.02 - Resample
We generally record more data than we really need for "conventional" seismic processing.
With the appropriate filtering, we can throw away some of the samples in time ...
Page 08.03 - Spatial Resampling
... or in space (our seismic traces).
Page 08.04 - Spatial Frequencies
Although we have (somewhat rigorously) discussed frequencies in time, we now need to

discuss frequencies in space.
Page 08.05 - Spatial filtering
In the same way as we can filter our temporal frequencies (in time) we can also filter our
spatial frequencies.
Page 08.06 - FK Filtering
One type of spatial filtering - frequency (F) vs. wavenumber (K).
Page 08.07 - Linear Tau-P filtering
Another type of spatial filtering which transforms our traces from time and space into time
and dip.
Page 08.08 - FX Deconvolution
Yet another type of spatial filtering, using deconvolution techniques on the complex
numbers which make up the frequency spectra of a group of traces.
Page 08.09 - Spatial Filtering Examples (1)
208
Some examples of spatial filtering on real seismic data.
Page 08.10 - Spatial Filtering Examples (2)
Some more examples.
Page 08.11 - Spatial interpolation
Interpolating data in the space domain - adding more traces to our seismic record or
regularising data with inconsistent spatial sampling.
Page 08.12 - Sorting & Gathering
Sorting, gathering and displaying our seismic data in a variety of different directions.
Some questions to end this Chapter.
209
Resample
Those of you that can remember back as far as the start of
Chapter 7 will realise that I am describing the processes in a
different order to that shown in the processing sequence at
the start of that Chapter.
This is because 1) I can't remember that far back, and 2) the

processing sequence is, of course, not fixed.
Think of the processing sequence as a list of items selected

from a menu of many - the actual processes used, and the
order in which they are applied, will vary from survey to
survey.
Resample, or the reduction of the data to a smaller sample rate (higher sample interval) is a
typical process that is normally applied near the start of the processing but not in any
particular position. If we don't have any frequencies in the original data above the new
Nyquist frequency then the process is reversible, and hence linear.
You may remember our earlier discussions

regarding sample rates and Nyquist frequencies -
the highest frequencies that can be recovered from
sampled data.
The actual mechanics of resampling (in time) is

simple. We transform the trace into the frequency
domain, remove any frequencies above the (new) 2:1 resample removes half the
Nyquist frequency, and then transform back to a frequencies
fewer number of samples.
Why resample seismic data?
For conventional (deep) seismic data we rarely see good information at frequencies greater
than 100 Hertz. The bandwidth of the seismic source is usually quite limited, and the
absorption and other effects in the earth rapidly attenuate the higher frequencies.
210
Most field data is acquired at a higher sample rate than that usually used in the
processing. The cost of acquisition can be enormous and, if we find that we haven't
recorded quite the frequency range we require, we would have to go back and re-shoot the
data (anyone with a background in accountancy should go and lie down at this point).
Having acquired the data at a low sample period (typically 2 ms), we normally find that,
apart from the very shallowest data, we only have frequencies that can be handled by a
higher sample period (typically 4 ms). We therefore resample the data to this new period as
soon as possible in the sequence to avoid processing twice as many numbers.
Where does it come in the sequence?
Field signatures are normally recorded at the same sample rate as the data and, since the
first stage of reading the data has to read all of the samples from the tape, we normally
apply the signature deconvolution at the recorded sample rate. After that, subject to the
removal of frequencies that will alias, we can more or less do it at any stage (the sooner the
better).
Why don't we simply resample all data to (for example) 8 or 10 ms and reduce the volume
even further?
We need to keep the high frequencies to improve the resolution of the data. Here's a single
trace showing two distinct peaks progressively filtered down to lower frequencies (higher
sample periods). You'll notice that the two peaks become one at the lower frequencies (on
the right):-
We can see the same effect when we progressively resample a trace, with the appropriate
anti-alias filter applied (the buttons show the sample period in milliseconds):-
211
Similar considerations also apply in the other dimension - space. We'll go on to discuss
these next.
Spatial Resampling
As we are able to reduce the amount of data in the time domain, by resampling, can we do
the same in the other dimension - space?
The answer is yes, provided we take the same care with the frequency content, in this case,
the spatial frequencies.
Assume a burst of single frequency energy (sometimes called a monochromatic signal)

emanating in all directions from the shot:-
Each geophone, or group of geophones, records a different part of the waveform as it

moves through the recording spread. In the same way as we have to have enough time
samples to successfully record a given frequency, we must have a sufficiently small group
interval to record a particular spatial frequency.
This display shows a small piece of a seismic record with a single frequency dipping at 10
milliseconds per trace upwards towards the right. By convention, as time decreases as
space (trace number) increases, we will refer to this as a negative dip. In other words,
-10ms/trace dip.
The buttons show the frequency (in Hertz) of the dipping signal, divided by 10 ("10" = 100
Hz). Increase the frequency, and look at the apparent dip of the event:-
You should notice the first problem when the signal reaches 50 Hz. The event, in this case,
could be dipping in either direction. Above 50 Hz, the signal appears to dip in the other
212
(positive) direction, and at 100 Hz the event appears flat.
If we plot the apparent dip for each of the above

frequencies, we get the plot shown here.
A signal of 50 Hz can appear as either plus or minus

10 ms/trace, and higher frequencies appear at the
wrong dip. The data has aliased in space in the same
way as a signal trace can alias temporal frequencies
when we use the wrong sample rate.
In order to understand the aliasing, we need to define a few terms:-
The dipping event has a horizontal

velocity that is defined simply as the
distance divided by the time. We'll
be specifying our dips in milliseconds
per trace, hence the multiplier of
1000.
The wavelength, or distance between
successive peaks of the waveform
will be measured in distance units
(metres?) and is defined here.
Substituting the first equation in the
second, we get wavelength in term of
dip and frequency.
The wavenumber, the equivalent of
frequency in the time domain, is
defined (normally) as "cycles per
1000 distance units" (i.e. cycles per
km).
Our final substitution relates
wavenumber (cycles per km) to
temporal frequency (Hz), dip
(ms/trace) and trace interval (m).
Let's assume a trace interval of 25 metres in the above example, and compute the
wavenumbers at each frequency using the above equations:-
Freq. App. Dip H.Vel. Wavelength Wavenumber
213
10 -10 -2500 -250 -4
20 -10 -2500 -125 -8
30 -10 -2500 -83.33 -12
40 -10 -2500 -62.5 -16
50 -10 -2500 -50 -20
50 10 2500 50 20
60 6.67 3750 62.5 16
70 4.29 5833.33 83.33 12
80 2.5 10000 125 8
90 1.11 22500 250 4
100 0 Inf. Inf. 0
We can now plot the temporal frequency (along the

bottom) against the wavenumber.
This clearly shows the aliasing at 50 Hz, and the

"folding-back" of the higher wavenumbers into the
recordable range.
If our group interval is 25 metres, then the

maximum wavenumber we can record is (just like
the time domain Nyquist frequency) 500/25 or 20
cycles per kilometre.
Here's an attempt to show the maximum dips it's

possible to record, which (in ms/trace) is quite
simply 500/(the temporal frequency). We can record
almost any dip, but only at the lower (temporal)
frequencies.
The dip in milliseconds per trace will translate into

higher "true" dips as the trace interval is reduced.
In other words, if we want to record high spatial and
temporal frequencies we need to use a small group
interval.
214
Spatial Frequencies
We can analyse spatial frequencies in the same way as we analyse temporal frequencies - by
using the Fourier Transform. (I'll try to use the term "frequency" when referring to
frequencies in time (Hz), and "spatial frequencies" or "wavenumbers" when referring to
those in space.)
All recording systems, using as they do arrays of geophones or hydrophones, introduce

some form of spatial filtering in the recorded signal.
Here's a typical array of geophones (11 in all) spaced 2 metres apart to cover 80% of the 25
metres between one geophone "station" and the next:-
These geophones would typically be arranged "in-line" with the shot, so that the energy
from the shot (and reflections) would be arriving from either the left or right edge of the
picture.
This energy will arrive at slightly different times at each 'phone, and the results from all of
the receivers will be combined together in the recording truck. This summation introduces
some form of spatial filtering to the data.
If we compute the Fourier transform of this array (using wavenumbers instead of

frequencies, and distances instead of time) we can predict the spatial frequency response of
this array:-
215
The vertical scale shows the amplitude of the
recorded signal (as usual in decibels), and the
horizontal scale now shows spatial frequency
(or wavenumbers) in cycles per kilometre.
We should recognise (once again) a sync type

function, common to any equally spaced,
equal set of numbers.
The lower spatial frequencies, up to about 30 cycles per kilometre (in both directions) will
be recorded with no attenuation, but frequencies above this will be attenuated by more
than 10 dB. This prevents the recording of very high wavenumbers (or dips) that will
spatially alias across the shot record.
Unfortunately, this array only fully attenuates these higher frequencies for energy arriving
from the direction of the shot (along the line of geophones). Most of the energy will, of
course, come this way, but some (possibly reflected from shallow structures "off" the
seismic line) may arrive from other directions. What's the directional response of this
array?
The following plot shows wavenumbers on a circular axis coming from the centre of the
plot, and moving around the circles to a different "direction", gives the response in that
direction:-
If you look along the "East-West" line across the centre of the plot (through the numbers)
you will see the same wavenumber response as that shown in the plot above - red
represents high values, down through yellow, green and blue for the low values.
Now look along a line from the "South-West" to the "North-East". Any energy arriving
from these directions will not be as greatly attenuated as that along the centre line. Data
from top-to-bottom (at right angles to the array) will arrive at all geophones at the same
time, and not be attenuated at all.
Button "2" shows how we can introduce some directivity into the array by adding another
string of geophones (with the same spacing) just two metres away from (and parallel to) the
original string. The other buttons show the response for spacings of 4 and 8 metres.
It's also possible to design shot arrays to improve directivity, you'll remember from
Chapter 2 the discussion on arrays of air guns (of different sizes) used for most modern
marine surveys. I was able to compute the frequency / directivity response of one such
array by computing the Fourier Transform of the appropriate wavenumbers and then
converting these to temporal frequency by using the equation "wavenumber = 1000 x
frequency velocity". This was derived from the equations on the previous page, and, for
216
marine data, we can use a water velocity of about 1500 m/s.
This is one of the pretty pictures from

Chapter 2, showing the response from
below a typical marine source array.
If you draw a line through the centre of the

red "peaks" (at right angles to the grey
line, and around the outside of the
hemisphere), you should be able to
visualise a similar sync function to those
shown above.
This response is complicated by the fact

that the air guns are not all of the same
size.
Once again, given the high cost of acquisition, it may be advisable to record more spatial
data than is strictly necessary for an initial seismic section. We can spatially resample our
seismic data in many ways, the most common being by combining pairs of traces from each
shot and so reducing the number of traces per shot by a factor of two.
This trace mixing can be performed after applying time-shifts to each of the traces. This
slant-stack will bias the mix towards enhancing certain "dips" in the data and is sometimes
known as beam-steering.
There is a slight problem associated with trace mixing, caused by the fact that the two
traces we are summing together are at different offsets from the shot. We will address this
problem during our discussions on seismic velocities.
How do we decide how much data to process? We could do some fancy calculations
involving dips and wavenumbers, or we could (more usefully) see what sort of parameters
gave good results in this (or a similar) area before. If all else fails we may need to process a
small part of line with different spatial sampling to establish the cost / quality relationship
within our data.
217
An old (low fold) example of marine data
processed with different combinations of trace &
shot summation and omission.
Although the finer spatial sampling (without

summing) looks slightly better, the section on the
extreme right only contains of the data of that
on the extreme left.
Nowadays, the cost of processing is such that we

routinely process all of the data that was shot.
The arrays of shots and geophones, and any trace mixing we do in the processing, introduce
some form of spatial filtering on our data. We can also apply other forms of spatial
filtering as part of our data enhancement techniques. We'll go on to discuss these next.
218
Spatial filtering
In order to understand the effects of various forms of spatial filtering, we need to look at a
2-dimensional spectra of both the temporal and spatial frequencies within a seismic record.
There is a great deal of equality between the time/frequency domains and the
space/wavenumber domains. Consider a simple "triangular" filter, with sample values
1,2,3,2,1. In the time domain it (and its amplitude spectra) look like this:-
The time samples (every 4 ms apart) transform into a "sync-like" function in the frequency
domain.
Now consider the same function in space:-
Apart from the scales, and the fact that in space we consider both negative and positive
wavenumbers, the two plots are identical.
In order to examine both the temporal and spatial frequencies at the same time, a type of
analysis, known as a FK analysis (F = temporal frequency, K =spatial frequency or
wavenumber), is used throughout the processing to design some types of spatial filters
219
(usually FK filters).
The transformation of a block of traces

from time and space into "F" and "K" is
mathematically simple (or relatively so!),
but time consuming. Each trace is Fourier
Transformed from time to frequency, and
then every frequency component (a
complex term) is Fourier Transformed
across all of the traces to give an FK
spectrum.
This display shows a couple of seconds of a

(believe it or not!) synthetic seismic record
which contains just one frequency dipping
from left to right at a constant dip.
If we look down one trace in this display,

we (and the computed amplitude spectra)
will see just one frequency.
If we look across the traces (for example,

along the timing line) we will see an
arrangement of peaks and troughs that
again represent just one (spatial)
frequency).
Here's the FK spectrum of the record
above. The vertical scale goes from 0 to
125 Hz (our data is recorded at 4 ms
sample period). The horizontal scale goes
from -20 to +20 cycles per kilometre (our
traces are 25 m apart). The colours
represent amplitude, with all of the data
from the above record compressed in the
single tiny "spike" shown in yellow.
220
Since this
plot
attempts to
show a 3D
surface in
just 2D,
you'll have
to imagine
that the
yellow spike
comes out of
the screen
towards
you!
If we were to remove the spike from the FK spectrum (just by editing it out), when we
transformed back into time & space, we would have dead traces!
Note that we don't normally look at the phase part of the FK spectrum (although it is, of
course, computed). We generally assume that any FK editing we do will leave the (very
complex) phases unchanged.
Let's go on to look at some more FK examples.
221
FK Filtering
Yet another synthetic record, this time looking a little more complicated.
In fact, this just consists of two different temporal frequencies (two cosine waves) dipping
with two different dips, added together.
As we
might
hope, the
FK
spectrum
shows
both
frequenci
es and
dips as
separate
points in
the FK
spectrum
If we "surgically" remove the area inside the red
circle in the above transform, and then transform
back to the time/space domains, we'll totally
remove the cosine wave with positive dip (down to
the right).
All that we are left with is the slightly higher

(temporal) frequency event with negative dip (up
towards the right).
Remember that our dip convention of increasing

time with increasing distance means that on this
"record" I have assumed that distance increases to
the right.
222
A slightly more reasonable synthetic! We have
just one event, with a limited range of
frequencies, and one dip.
(I built this by adding a spike to all traces at

one time, filtering (convolving) it with a single
bandpass filter, and then applied statics to add
the dip.)
The FK analysis also shows a dip! Remember

our equation:-
So a constant dip will give a "dipping" event in

the FK space - in fact all events on the section
with this frequency content and this dip will
appear in this thin "slab" in FK space.
You can clearly see the range of temporal

frequencies present in my filter "wavelet".
For a given trace interval, we can plot lines

of constant dip on our FK analysis (this is
sometimes done for you). Here's a set of
dips from -20 to +20 milliseconds per trace
when the trace interval is 25 metres.
223
Any dips of more than 4 milliseconds (one
time sample) per trace will alias in
wavenumber.
This plot attempts to show some of the

potential aliasing (I included it because it
looked pretty).
If you follow the lowest line on the right

(+20ms / trace dip) from the origin
(centre), you'll notice that it "reflects" or
aliases twice in the range of frequencies
shown (from 0 to 125 Hertz).
One last synthetic example - three dipping

events with the FK analysis shown below it.
The steepest event (with the widest frequency
range) aliases rather nicely.
The plot below shows the results of an inverse

transform after editing out the two dips
closest to zero (the two events that cross on
the timing line).
Note that the transform does not work

correctly at the ends - the FFT's assume that
the data is repeating in space and we have
truncated the transform to just 64 traces.
We could now subtract the traces below from

the section on the right and (more or less)
remove the aliased high dip.
224
FK filtering can be used in other ways to enhance the coherent signal within a shot record.
One common way is to compute the transform, raise it to some power (typically 1.1 to 2)
and transform back - this enhances any coherent dipping data. We can use the FK
spectrum to limit both the temporal and spatial frequencies, any editing usually being done
by marking part of the spectrum for removal, and transforming back into our normal
seismic record.
We can use FK filtering at the end of the processing sequence to remove other sorts of noise
(particularly diffracted noise), and we'll come back to it again when we talk about multiple
attenuation.
For now, let's discuss some other forms of "dip" filtering.
225
Linear Tau-P filtering
When we transform data into the FK domain, dipping events (in time/space) become
dipping events (in frequency/wavenumber). The Tau-P transform is yet another way of
looking at our data that transforms dips into (effectively) single points. We can then edit
the data in this "dip" domain and transform back into the time domain.
Here's a problem of the type normally encountered in IQ tests

and the like. Given the total prices (in whatever currency you
like) of various rows and columns, can you fill in the missing
ones?
(I won't insult your intelligence by supplying the answer to this

one!)
This is simply a graphical representation of 4 simultaneous equations for three unknowns.

The equations are all internally consistent, so there is only one possible answer. If the "11"
at the bottom of the diagram was changed to something else ("12" for example), the
equations would be internally inconsistent, and we'd have to resort to a "least-squares"
solution to get an approximate answer.
We get a similar problem if we sum seismic traces along lines of constant dip.
Here, for example, is a set of three samples from three seismic traces summed for a
particular dip (-2 samples per trace).
The summations of the sample values are shown as equations on the left, and, by clicking
on the buttons, you can see the summation for other dips.
From the above we have fifteen different equations (covering 5 different dips) for 9
unknowns. If we compute (as usual) a least-squares solution to these equations, we end up
with the following 9 equations to solve:-
226
Solving this (computers have their uses!) gives the answers:- a=6, b=-1, c=1, d=-9, e=-4, f=3,
g=7, h=-8 & i=1 - which are the numbers that I started with!
The results of summing along the original lines of "dip" gives us some estimate of the
coherent data along that dip. The ability to reconstruct the original data from these "dip-
stacks" enables us to transform to and from this "dip" domain.
We define the slope, or dip, of the line along which the summation is performed as "p", and
the intercept time (the time where this dip crosses some reference point) as "Tau". For this
reason, this type of transform (summing along linear "dips") is usually referred to as the
linear Tau-P transform.
As usual, a synthetic record to demonstrate!
This "field record" (one shot) has three dipping

events extending from the low offsets (on the
left) towards the high offsets (on the right). The
traces are 25m apart and the timing lines are
500 ms apart. Our "events" can be described
as follows:-
Dip Horizontal
Velocity
Even ms/trac Trace Int. = Slowness (s/km)
t e 25m
A -10 - = -2500 - = -0.4
25/0.01 1000/2500
0
B -4 - = -6250 - = -
227
25/0.00 1000/6250 0.16
4
C 2 25/0.00 = 1250 1000/1250 = 0.08
2 0 0
The "horizontal velocity" shown above is simply the velocity at which the "event" moves
across the recording spread, the trace interval divided by the dip. Slowness (a term often
used in Tau-P transforms) is simply the reciprocal of this velocity (usually measured in
seconds per kilometre).
Here's the linear Tau-P transform of the

above record. The colours in the
background correspond to the dips of the
three coloured events shown above.
The time of these "bow-ties" is the time at

zero-offset (roughly three traces to the left
of the record shown above - the near trace
offset is about 75m).
I have used about three times as many

traces in the transform as are present in
the original record. This is a good idea, as
it provides more statistics for the inverse
transform.
We now have a display that shows time (vertically) against dip (horizontally). Each of our
events has collapsed (more or less) into a small "spot" on the Tau-P transform, and are
easily separable in this domain.
In order to keep the editing in this domain

simple (in practice we can "cut-out" any
areas we wish), I simply transformed back
into the time domain using only the
negative dips in the above transform (I
removed everything to the right of the
blue/green area - 0 dip).
I haven't bothered to colour this display,

but it should be obvious that I have (more
or less) removed the one event (C) that had
positive dip ("down" towards the right).
There are a few remnants of this event left

on the end traces. This "edge-effect" is
228
common in all types of spatial filtering - the
filter has no data beyond this to continue
its computations.
In order to minimise some of the errors involved in Tau-P filtering we often transform back
that which we wish to remove (for example, the two negative dipping events shown above)
and then subtract this from the original record. Any "smoothing" inherent in the
transforms is then less obvious.
We will look at some real examples of Tau-P filtering (and some other techniques in the
Tau-P domain) in a couple of pages time. We will also come back to another form of Tau-P
filtering when we look at multiple removal.
For now, however, we'll look at yet another example of spatial filtering - FX Deconvolution!
FX Deconvolution
FX Deconvolution is another spatial filtering process that enhances

coherent data (regardless of dip) across a group of traces.
Like many of the techniques used in seismic processing, it's

reasonably simple to describe, but complicated to implement - not
the sort of calculation that you would do without a computer!
We'll start with a formal definition of FX Deconvolution:-
229
If we transform seismic data from time(t)
and distance(x) to frequency (f) and
distance (x), a time slice is converted into a
frequency slice, each sample in the
transformed data being a complex number
with both real and imaginary components.
Events with similar dips appear as a

sinusoidal complex signal (cos wt + i sin
wt) along a given frequency slice, and are
therefore predictable.
A complex (deconvolution) prediction filter

is used to predict the signal one trace
ahead, across the frequency slice. Any
difference between the predicted waveform
and the actual one can be classified as
noise, and removed.
The computed prediction filter is run in one direction across the traces, and then run again
in the opposite direction. The resulting predictions are averaged, in order to reduce
prediction errors.
Here's a simple example of five traces

showing three events, each with a constant
dip across the five traces.
This plot shows the real component of the

Fourier Transform of each of the traces in
the "section" above.
The horizontal scale is now frequency, and

the vertical scale is "space" (the original
trace numbers).
Predictable trends are clearly visible in this

"frequency-space" domain related to the
dipping events in the original "time-space"
230
domain.
The same plot again, this time showing the
imaginary component of the Fourier
Transform.
Once again, a trend is clearly visible.
(These two plots should really be plotted as

complex numbers on just one plot. This
requires a four-dimensional plot, however,
something beyond my drawing
capabilities!)
In practice, we normally select a series of overlapping windows in both time and space on
our original seismic data, and the process works on each of these windows in turn.
The data is transformed (trace by trace) into the frequency domain. For each frequency in
the transforms, an optimum deconvolution operator is designed that will "predict" the next
trace in the sequence. This operator is designed in the same way as that used in signature
deconvolution:-
In this case, however, every term in the above equation is a complex number, and the
solution is a complex filter!
Each trace is then "predicted" based on the traces before and after it (the filter is designed
and applied in both directions) and the output spectrum is based on the averaging of these
results. The resultant filtered spectrum is transformed back into the time domain to give
our output trace.
Typically a group of 10 or so traces is used at one time, with a filter of about 5 traces in
length. Overlapping time windows (1000 ms gates are typical) are used to keep the dips
within one gate fairly constant. FX deconvolution is a very robust process - even widely
varying parameter choices will produce similar results.
We'll look at some of these results (together with the other types of spatial filtering) on the
next page.
231
Spatial Filtering Examples (1)
In order to
demonstrate some
of the spatial
filtering
techniques we've
discussed, here's
a high resolution
land shot record
that we saw
earlier.
I've applied some

initial corrections
to the data
(including
statics), and the
232
panel on the right
shows the part of
the data
highlighted in
(very light) red.
The offsets in the above section increment

by 25 m, giving a spatial range of (500/25)
20 cycles per kilometre.
Here then is the FK analysis of the above

shot, temporal frequencies from bottom to
top, and spatial frequencies across the top.
The amplitude scale is in dB, from white
through blue to yellow and red.
You can see the (temporal) band limited

nature of this data (from about 10 to 90
Hz), some strong dips (probably the first
breaks) and even some spatial aliasing (the
yellow line ending at the "W" of
"Wavenumber".
The same FK analysis after a heavy "dip"

or "fan" filter.
We have removed all events with dips in

excess of 2.6 ms per trace (a horizontal
velocity of 25/0.0026 = 9615 m/s).
233
Here's what the above filter looks like in
three dimensions - a wedge shaped filter
(these filters are sometimes called "pie-
slices") with sharp edges.
In practice we would normally smooth the

edges a little to avoid sharp changes in the
frequency domain - these introduce long
anomalies in the time domain.
The inverse
transform of the
filtered FK
spectrum.
We have removed
all of the high
dips (especially
the ground roll),
but the data now
has a slightly
"wormy"
appearance (it
lacks spatial
detail) indicating
that we've
probably
overdone the
spatial filtering.
234
One common way
of reducing the
effects of a heavy
FK filter is to
"mix-back" some
of the original
(unfiltered) data
with the output.
We are generally
allowed to make
this mix-back
time and space
variant, which
allows us to
modify the filter
response for
different parts of
the record.
We determine
this, as usual, by
testing!
We can also look at the time domain

response of our FK filter (the wedge shown
above). Imagine this filter convolved (in
both directions - remember all those
multiplies and adds?) with our original
seismic record. The result would be the
same as our transform-wedge filter-
transform sequence shown above.
Many computer based graphic programs

allow the 2-dimensional filter of images -
some even provide FK transforms!
235
Another copy of our FK analysis, this time
we have raised each point in the FK
spectrum to its "1.3" power.
This FK power exponent enhances the high

values in the spectrum (the consistent dips)
at the expense of the lower values.
For example, 21.3 equals about 2.46 while

41.3 equals about 6.06, increasing the
difference from 2:1 to about 2.46:1.
Once again, the

result of the
inverse
transform.
A "light"
coherency
enhancement just
slightly
enhancing all the
coherent data
(including the
ground roll).
Once again, a
fairly robust
process that will
provide some
data
enhancement.
236
Spatial Filtering Examples (2)
For reference,
I've reproduced
the picture from
the top of the
previous picture,
showing the input
to all of our
filtering
examples.
237
Once again (for reference) the FK
spectrum of the above data.
We could (usually by "drawing" on the

computer screen) mark all kinds of shapes
on the FK spectrum for zones of "accept"
or "reject".
Being lazy, I'll use my "fan" filter again,

but this time in reverse.
So now I'm removing all of the low dips,

and keeping just the data with dips above
2.6 ms/trace.
Note that some parts of the aliased data

mentioned earlier (the reddish line moving
upwards from the "c" of "Frequency") will
be removed at the higher frequencies.
The transformed
back high dip
section.
In theory we
could add this to
the low dip
section from the
previous page
and reproduce
our original
record.
We could also
subtract this
record from our
238
original record to
remove the high
dips.
Now for a Tau-P transform of the record

shown at the top of this page (time vs. space
to time vs. dip).
You can see (as we would expect) a lot of

events "lining-up" around zero dip, and
also the steep dips of the first breaks and
the ground roll (which is spatially aliased).
A simple edit in the Tau-P domain!
I've removed any data with dips greater

than 5 ms per trace (less severe than the
FK example on the previous page).
We could, of course, make these edits in

Tau-P space as complicated as we like -
picking parts of the data that we wish to
retain.
This type of careful editing can also be

done on FK transforms - we can select
polygons of data to pass or reject.
239
The transform
back from the
(now limited)
Tau-P dataset
shows just the
low dips.
Although not as
severe as the FK
example shown
on the previous
page, we might
still want to mix-
back some of the
original data into
this output to
lessen its effects.
Finally, an
example using FX
Deconvolution.
The design and

filtering was done
using a 5 point
(complex) filter
on sets of 10
traces across the
record. I used
250 ms time
windows (with a
25 ms overlap).
As usual, a
"clean" data
enhancement that
doesn't overcook
things!
We can normally be fairly conservative in our choice of filtering on pre-stack seismic data.
The stacking process itself (when we sum maybe 120 individual traces together) is an
excellent spatial filter that will remove much of the noise in the original field data.
We may need to use fairly heavy filtering techniques, however, if we intend to extract some
information from the unstacked data - we'll come back to this later.
240
Once we've avoided any problems of spatial aliasing, with the application of the
appropriate spatial filter, we may want to reduce the total volume of data by trace
summing (or shot summing) or alternate trace (or shot) processing.
We may also (for numerous reasons) wish to improve the (apparent) spatial sampling by
inserting more data into our records - we'll look at this next.
Spatial interpolation
We can interpolate data spatially in much the same we as we resample data in the time
domain:-
A few chapters back, we saw that,

subject to aliasing considerations, we
could "fill-in" the missing values
between time samples by the use of
"sync" functions.
We can use similar techniques in the

spatial domain to interpolate traces in
our seismic data.
We can resample in both time and space by using a modified FK transform.
241
Here's the FK transform from the last
couple of pages, "padded-out" to twice the
frequency in both time and space.
If our original data were at 4 ms sample

period, and 25 m trace spacing, we could
fill all of the areas outside the original FK
spectrum with zeroes, and transform
back. We'd now have traces with a 2 ms
sample period, and 12.5 m trace spacing.
This "FK-interpolation" (which is

normally only done in the spatial domain -
the lower half of this diagram) doesn't
introduce any new data, it simply
interpolates (or averages) the existing data
together to yield the new traces. Doing it
in the FK domain, however, effectively
interpolates along every dip present in the
data.
Why should we need to interpolate data?
Some processes perform best when the input data is evenly sampled in both space and
time. The temporal sample period is normally fixed, so why isn't the spatial?
One possible problem occurs if the data is shot with irregular geophone spacing:-
This diagram shows a marine acquisition system popular at one time, that is still used on
rare occasions. The "mini-streamer", at the front of the main streamer, has one-half of the
group interval of the main streamer. This is designed to give better spatial sampling of the
shallow seismic data recorded by the groups nearest the shot.
For conventional processing, it's common to simply omit every other channel from the
mini-streamer, giving a constant "conventional" seismic record. In some cases, however,
we may want to retain as much spatial resolution as possible by interpolating the main
streamer data to the finer trace interval, and processing twice as much data as the
"conventional" approach.
242
Another problem with spatial sampling occurs in 3D surveys and 2D crooked line surveys.
Here's a typical gather of all of the traces

within one "bin" of a crooked line (or 3D)
survey. The traces are arranged in offset
order, and many are obviously missing.
In order to provide a "well-ordered"

dataset for subsequent processing stages,
we'll interpolate these missing traces using
the Tau-P transform that we discussed
earlier.
The linear Tau-P transform of the above

data (the horizontal scale is now dip)
shows mostly zero dip (horizontal events).
The transform uses the correct offsets in

computing the dip response, effectively
ignoring the missing traces.
Now we transform back into time/space,

but asking for a set of regularly spaced
offsets covering the range of our original
data.
Although the results look a little "wormy",

we haven't created any new data by this
technique - simply spread the existing data
out over a regular set of offsets.
We can (and do) apply spatial filtering and resampling/interpolation using many different
trace orders. Having decided on exactly which traces we are going to process, we now need
to provide the necessary geometry information to the computer to enable us to address our
243
traces in any number of different directions.
Just as early cave dwellers became gatherers and hunters, it's time for us to
become gatherers and sorters!
Sorting & Gathering

As we have said so many times before, the
position of every seismic trace within our
survey must be entered into the computer at an
early stage of the processing.
This "geometry" may be simple (for example,

regular 2D marine data), or extremely complex
(a land 3D survey shot over sand dunes).
For the more complex 2D and 3D surveys, it

may be necessary to plot numerous statistics to
check that the initial geometry is correct.
244
Once all of the geometric information has been input and
checked, it may be stored in a separate database, or in
the headers of each seismic trace (or both).
This information allows us to sort, gather and view the

data in many different "directions" through the seismic
dataset.
This diagram shows a few shots in the middle of a regular

2D seismic line, together with all of the possible ray paths
for one reflector.
Note that I have only shown 12 receiver channels for each

shot (240 got a bit messy!), and that I have staggered the
shots vertically (for marine data these would all overlap).
Remember from previous Chapters, that if the shotpoint

interval is an exact multiple of one-half of the group
interval, then we can compute:-
CMPINT = GINT / 2
NFOLD = ( NCHAN * GINT ) / (2 * SPINT )
No. CMPs = ( NCHAN / NFOLD ) * ( No. Sps - 1 )
+ NCHAN
Anything more complicated (or irregular) than this requires

a computer!
245
We're now looking at all of the ray paths recorded by one
shot.
This normally corresponds to the initial "sort" of our data -

we process shot records through the initial stages of the
processing.
One shot will provide a short "slice" of the sub-surface

geology, but distorted by the fact that each successive trace
comes from a different receiver group offset by a different
distance from the shot. We will address these distortions in
the next Chapter when we examine velocities.
If we take every N'th shot along our line (where N is the

CMP fold), we will obtain a continuous representation of the
geology along the line (subject to the distortions mentioned
above). This type of section, often referred as a 100%
section, can be used for QC purposes, but has now generally
been superseded by an initial CMP/CDP stack of the data.
The first three seconds of a modern

240 trace marine shot record.
If our trace numbers increase from

left to right, it should be obvious that
the shot is positioned off of trace (or
channel) 240.
The data has been processed through

the initial stages of editing, gain
recovery and SOD statics.
246
All of the ray paths recorded by receivers that are at a
constant offset from each shot - a common offset gather.
For regular (marine) data this will also correspond to a

"common channel gather", all channels 240 for example.
For land or 3D data we may not actually have a consistent
range of offsets. In these cases a "binning" technique is
used, taking all traces with, for example, an offset of 100m
plus or minus 25m.
When, as in this case, we gather together the traces from the

recording channels nearest to the shot, we usually refer to
the gather as a near trace gather. This NTG section provides
another continuous coverage (or 100%) section of the sub-
surface without the offset distortions mentioned above.
The near trace gather for many shots

from our 2D marine line.
We can see that, in this case, the

water is sufficiently deep to provide a
clear "water-bottom" reflection at
about 200ms of two-way time. We
can also see the first-order multiple of
this reflector at twice this time (the
energy bounces twice in the water
layer).
Deeper in the section we get our first

hint of the geology with some
evidence of continuous reflectors.
247
Another common offset section, this
time from channel 200 (40 channels
offset from the shot).
The increased offset adds some time

to all of our reflections so that the
water-bottom reflector now appears
at about 500 ms.
This section also provides a

continuous picture of the geology, and
is one of 80 sections (this line has a
CDP fold of 80) that cover the same
sub-surface.
All of the ray paths recorded

at one (surface) receiver
position.
Not of great importance for

marine data, but, on land, all
of these traces will contain
information about the
response of this particular
geophone group (and any
static corrections).
On the right are the traces

from one receiver position on
our marine line.
248
Probably the most important
gathering order! All of the
traces from one Common
Mid-Point (CMP).
These traces contain

(distorted by offset)
information from the same
sub-surface point for
horizontal reflectors. Often
referred to as a Common
Depth Point (CDP), this is
really incorrect (as we will
see) for dipping events.
In common with the rest of

the industry, I will use the
terms interchangeably (I
probably have already)!
If our data processing system stores all of our data on disc, then we can select and display
data from any dataset using any of these (or other) criteria. If the data is stored on tape it
may be necessary to physically sort the data into the order required for any subsequent
stages of processing.
It's quite common to sort the data several times during a processing sequence. Data in the
common offset domain (each gather representing one view of the sub-surface) responds
well to some forms of spatial filtering, and it is necessary to have data in this order for some
of the following stages.
Data in CDP order is necessary for our final stack where, after making the necessary
corrections of the offset distortion, we will sum all of the traces from one CDP together.
These CDP stacked traces will be displayed side-by-side to provide our final stack section.
249
The processing sequence continues - NMO, velocities and DMO.
Page 09.02 - Dynamic corrections
Why and how our seismic reflections are curved on our CDP gathers - NMO.
Page 09.03 - NMO and Velocities
250
How the NMO is related (albeit only just) to the true velocities of sound within the earth ...
Page 09.04 - Seismic Velocities
... and what (if anything) these "seismic velocities" might mean.
Page 09.05 - Picking Velocities (1)
Some of the methods used to estimate the velocities required to "flatten" our seismic
events.
Page 09.06 - Picking Velocities (2)
More velocity picking (something you'll just have to get used to!).
Page 09.07 - Velocity problems
Possible problems, including primary and multiple reflectors.
Page 09.08 - Velocity QC
How we can check the consistency of our velocity picking ..
Page 09.09 - Other velocity analyses and QC
... and how this QC extends to 3D data and other types of velocity analysis.
Page 09.10 - DMO (1)
Dip Moveout corrections - required when events are dipping.
Page 09.11 - DMO (2)
More on DMO, which continues onto ...
Page 09.12 - DMO (3)
251
... yet even more on DMO!
Finally, the questions to end this Chapter.
Dynamic corrections
252
For all sorts of reasons, the ideal
seismic section would consist of a
series of traces shot with the shot and
receiver in the same position. This
would produce a true zero-offset or
normal-incidence section where, for a
horizontal reflector, the incident rays
would be at right angles.
In practical terms, placing the

recording instruments on top of the
shot is not a viable proposition!
So, in the real world, our shot and receiver are

always some distance (or offset) apart, and our
reflections will include some distortion due to
the increased travel-time of the raypath to the
longer offsets.
We can determine the
magnitude of the
correction required by
using the Pythagorean
theorem on the triangle
highlighted in yellow.
The three sides of our triangle are:-
Across the top of the triangle.
The vertical distance from the centre of the shot and receiver to the
horizon.
The hypotenuse, or the distorted distance due to the offset.
Putting these together we

or
get:
253
Which, solving for TX gives us:
An equation that gives us the time at offset "X" (TX) as a function of the zero-offset time
(TV) and the velocity (V).
We often express the difference between this time and the zero offset time:-
If we plot the TX function shown above, it looks like this. Each

reflection in our CDP gather appears as a hyperbola.
To correct for this distortion we need to move the sample at

time TX up to time T0 so that each reflector is horizontal on our
CDP.
The velocities determined from these hyperbolas are some kind of average velocity through
all of the layers down to the horizon we're considering. The actual relationship between
this velocity and the true interval velocities (the velocities in each rock layer) is complex,
and we'll be looking at this over the next few pages. Because the rock velocities generally
increase with depth (more pressure = more compaction = higher velocities), we would
expect our velocity function (a plot of velocity vs. time) to also increase.
254
Here's a typical velocity function from somewhere in
the middle of the North Sea.
As this is marine data, we can safely assume that the

function will start off at the velocity of water (about
1500 m/s), and remain constant throughout the
water layer. Beyond this the velocities of other rocks
effect this "average", and the function gradually
increases.
Note the sharp "break" at about 2 seconds where

we reach the base of the Tertiary rocks in this area.
Below this reflector the individual velocities
suddenly get much higher, and the average increases
fairly rapidly.
This "function" applies to just one position on our

seismic line, and we must use the data itself to
determine the suite of velocity functions that cover
the whole line. Much more on this later!
Here's a plot constructed from the above velocity

function. I have created a "reflection" every 100 ms
down the record, and computed the arrival times for
each offset out to 6 km from the shot.
The shallowest events are grossly distorted, with the

"curved" distortion decreasing as we move further
down the record.
This is simply because the

difference between the zero-offset
and far-offset times decrease as we
move deeper into the earth. The
correction changes with time
(hence sometimes called a dynamic
correction).
This hyperbolic distortion of events is known as

moveout or normal moveout (NMO) and we'll discuss
this in some detail over the next few pages
255
NMO and Velocities
Here's the
velocity
function
from the
previous
page once
again, this
time with a
synthetic
record
constructed
from the
move-out
hyperbolas
computed
from the
function
every 100
ms.
I've put a
wideband
zero-phase
wavelet on
each
synthetic
"event".
256
This is the same record processed through Normal
Moveout Correction (sometimes also known just as
NMO).
This process, using the velocity function shown

above, calculates the arrival time of the NMO
hyperbola at every time for every offset. It then
shifts each sample back to the true "zero-offset"
time.
There are obviously some problems with the shallow

data. As the NMO curves overlap and cross-over in
this region, the computer is trying to stretch the
data back to the correct time. At some point this
amount of stretch becomes infinite, and the trace is
zeroed above this point. This is known as NMO-
Stretch, and is discussed below.
Note also that there is no data available for the far

offsets at times close to 5 seconds (the end of our
recording).
We can illustrate this "stretching" by considering two events on the far trace (offset = 6000
m).
Time (s) Vel (m/s) NMO T6000

0.160 1490 3.870 4.030
3.500 3003 0.530 4.030
This table shows two events, their time and "average" velocity, and the computed moveout
and time for a trace with an offset of 6000 metres.
Both of these events arrive at the same time at this offset, even though their true "zero-
offset" times are almost 3 seconds apart!
This means that the sample at time 4.03 seconds on this trace would have to be stretched
over the entire range from .16 to 3.5 seconds!
257
The plot on the right shows (for our "typical"
function) the amount of stretch necessary for each
sample.
The data in red is relatively unharmed, but the

other colours show various degrees of stretch up to
the purple region which corresponds to the infinite
stretch region mentioned above.
This stretch causes a lowering of all of the

frequencies in the data and regions of high stretch
(which also correspond to the region of shallow
refractions - the first-breaks) will have to be omitted
from subsequent processing stages.
This is done by applying a front-end mute to the

traces (which, as usual, we'll come back to).
The only way that we can really examine the precise rock velocities
within the earth is to drill and hole, and lower a tool down the hole
that measures the exact velocity of each rock layer at very small
intervals.
If we plot these very detailed velocities, we see all of the

minute changes that will cause reflections in our dataset.
For NMO purposes, we will see some sort of average

function (the blue line?) down to each reflector that
represents the average of all the layers above that
reflection.
We'll go on now to examine just what this "average"

represents.
258
Seismic Velocities
So what do our seismic velocities measure? Even assuming horizontal reflectors, the
velocity calculated from the moveout hyperbolas doesn't correspond to the true average
velocity. This first model shows just five layers with an increasing interval velocity in each
layer. The velocity computed from the moveout hyperbolas is always faster than the actual
average velocity down to each layer. The plot of the left is scaled in depth (4000 m), whilst
the right-hand velocity plot is scaled in time (4s).
If we add a sharp break in the interval velocity (I've made them much faster in this model),
the difference between the two functions becomes even more extreme.
Even with an inversion in interval velocities (the green layer is slower than that above it),
the velocities that we would pick from the seismic data are still faster than the true
averages.
259
Can we use the velocities determined from the moveout curves for anything? Well, with
some fairly gross assumptions, we can use the formula derived by the American
Geophysicist C. Hewitt Dix. This formula (known funnily enough as the Dix Formula)
gives us an approximation of the interval velocity between any two points on our
time/velocity graph established from the hyperbolas.
Taking V1 and V2 respectively as the velocities at times T1 and T2, VI is the interval velocity
between these layers. This is an approximation, however, and works best for horizontal
layers and small offsets.
This table shows the first few

points in a velocity function,
and the calculation of interval
velocity using the formula
shown above. Time Vel VI
0 1490 1490
The time is (typically) shown
in milliseconds, and the "Vel" 129 1490 1802
column shows the velocity that 342 1691 1987
we have established for one
496 1788 1976
particular location - the
velocity that best "flattens" 653 1835 2143
the moveout hyperbolas. 770 1885 2117
The VI column shows the 975 1936 2162
computed interval velocity ... ... ...
between each point and the
next, and the plot of the far
right shows the complete
sequence of interval velocities
for the whole function.
In general we can only use the interval velocities derived from the Dix formula as a rough
guide. Under conditions of steeply dipping events or complex geology, the velocities we
derive are not much more meaningful than just a set of numbers that "best-correct" the
moveout hyperbola.
260
Now we've established what these velocities mean, how do we measure them?
261
Picking Velocities (1)
In order to establish the velocity field for our seismic line, we

must determine the parameters necessary to correct the
moveout hyperbolas within our data at every time and
position in the seismic line.
In practice this means that we need to determine a suite of

velocity functions at discrete positions along our line.
The earliest forms of velocity analysis relied on the direct

measurement of the moveout hyperbola on selected CDPs along
the line.
This was, of course, extremely difficult in areas of poor signal-

to-noise ratio, and relied entirely on the visual ability of the
geophysicist.
Although we are still trying to measure the moveout for each

hyperbola down the record, we can now use some computing
power to help us to establish these velocities.
The simplest form of "computer-aided"

velocity analysis is generated by applying a
whole series of different velocities to a
CDP, and establishing (by eye) the best
velocity at each time.
This display shows one CDP from a seismic

line, processed through NMO correction
with a series of constant velocities.
We can use this constant velocity gather (or

CVG) to determine the appropriate velocity
at various times down the record by simply
seeing which velocity best "flattens" each
event. You should be able to see how the
"best" velocity increases with time.
262
Another variation of the velocity gather -
the velocity fan. Here I've applied a (very
bad) "guess" velocity function to the
record marked "0%", and modified this
function by the percentages shown for the
other records.
Although this type of display shows NMO

stretch better than the constant velocity
gather, it's more difficult to interpret
(particularly when our first guess is a long
way off!).
Where the data quality is not so good, or

the geology is complex, we can take
advantage of the fact that all of our traces
within one CDP gather come from the same
(nominal) point in the sub-surface.
Here I've taken a group of CDPs, applied

the same constant velocity sequence, and
then summed or stacked the traces
together.
This constant velocity stack (CVS) shows

how our final section will look for any
given velocity - once again we must
determine the time/velocity function.
Finally, the same stack process applied to
the velocity fan.
You can now quite clearly see the "S"

shape of the optimum stack - my initial
function was initially too fast, but too slow
at 2.5 seconds.
This is probably one of the best "semi-

manual" ways of picking velocities and can
be used (with very small percentage
increments) to fine-tune a function for very
accurate picking.
263
The first attempts at automatic velocity
picking made use of a "moveout-scan".
The vertical scale on this display is still

time, but the horizontal scale now shows
moveout - the time difference between the
hyperbola at the trace farthest from the
shot and zero-offset. This scale is in
milliseconds.
The technique used here (which we will

come back to later) is equivalent to the
"Tau-P" transform discussed earlier.
Instead of summing the traces for constant
dips, we've summed the data along
constant parabolas (which approximate the
hyperbolas).
This "parabolic Tau-P transform", often
referred to as a Radon transform, reaches a
peak where the stacking parabola matches
that of the data.
Here's the same display again, with my

very rough "guess" velocity function
converted to moveout and plotted on the
display.
We could apply this function to the data,

and re-run the transform "around" our
chosen function. This would enable us to
measure the residual moveout between our
function and the seismic data.
After applying our function we're left with
moveout errors that are both positive and
negative.
The drift to the right at the top of the

function is where my function was too fast
(not enough moveout applied), and the
drift the other way (at about 2.5 seconds) is
where my function was too slow.
Using an initial function, and measuring

the differences, is more difficult to
interpret, but avoids problems caused by
approximating the moveout hyperbolas to
264
parabolas!
With the computational power now available, it's possible to combine the best of all of the
above techniques into one display. These "composite" methods of velocity analysis,
possibly using some forms of automatic picking of the results, are now commonplace.
We'll go on to look at some of these, and a "live" example of velocity analysis.
265
Picking Velocities (2)
Modern computer-aided velocity analysis makes use of all of

the techniques that were discussed on the previous page.
As well as displaying gathers and stacks, the hyperbolas are

picked by the computer using a series of constant velocity or
velocity fan stacks and comparing the input to the stack
against the output - a semblance display.
The semblance of a small window of stacked data is effectively a measure of how well the
stack compares to the individual components going into the stack. Here's two examples:-
This table shows just 5 time samples from

Trace 1 Trace 2 Trace 3 Stack three traces, and their stack (sum divided
Time -263 -164 79 -116 by 3). A dipping event (which could be part
| 1886 -988 815 571 of a moveout hyperbola with the wrong
v velocity) is shown in grey.
-847 1998 307 486
-802 753 2497 816
The average sum of the amplitudes squared
-497 -20 154 -121
(before stack) is divided into the sum of the
amplitudes squared after stack to give the
Sum Sq. 5233787 5562453 7023440 1256190 semblance value. This value is always
Average 5939893 0.211 between 0 (no match) and 1 (perfect
match). A semblance of 21% indicates a
poor match (the data does not "line-up").
A similar calculation for a flat (corrected)

Trace 1 Trace 2 Trace 3 Stack event. The semblance value here (82%)
indicates an excellent line up.
Time 650 189 16 285
| -62 657 -352 81 We can exaggerate the differences between
v
2049 2131 1274 1818 these "bad" and "good" values by raising
437 736 723 632 the calculated semblance to some power.
For example:-
-592 997 660 355
SEMB SEMB1.1 SEMB1.5
Sum Sq. 5166178 6544236 2705565 3918359 21% 18% 10%
Average 4805326 0.815 82% 80% 74%
Ratio 3.9 4.4 7.6
266
If we plot the computed
semblance against velocity,
together with a gather and
stack that are continually
updated, and a suite of
stacked velocity fans, we
have a very powerful tool
for analysing velocities.
We simply need to "pick"

(probably with a mouse) the
semblance peaks that
provide the best stack at a
series of times down the
record.
Although a rapid process,

remember that we may have
to repeat this process every
500 metres throughout a
1,000 km survey!
Despite the most

comprehensive software,
some data can be extremely
difficult!
This display of semblance,

gather and CVS's shows just
how awful some data can be.
Static problems and very
poor quality data can make
the picking of velocities very
time consuming.
Once
again, it's
a question
of who's
in charge
- you or
the
computer!
267
Now comes your chance to pick some velocities! You had better get used to this - if you
start processing data, you'll probably be doing a lot of this!
The display on the left shows the computed semblance as a function of time and velocity.
The display on the right shows the corresponding part of the CDP gather. Click the left
mouse button inside the semblance display to add a velocity "pick". Use the right button to
delete a pick. Try picking the correct semblance "peaks" (in red), but also try picking
some erroneous points to see the effect on the gather (and the NMO stretch).
Velocity problems
268
The picking of seismic velocities is one of the most boring,
routine and important jobs still left firmly in the hands of
the processing geophysicist.
In the past, velocities would be picked on paper displays,

and then entered by hand into the computer for the next
stage of processing. Although this has largely been
superseded by direct picking of the velocities on a computer
screen, we still need to check the spatial consistency of our
functions, and be aware of some of the potential problems in
velocity picking.
In the dim distant past of this course, we discussed

some of the possible raypaths for multiple
reflections. These multiples will appear on our
velocity analysis as spurious semblance peaks
alongside our genuine primary reflection peaks.
What criteria can we use to distinguish the multiples

from the primaries?
Consider two events appearing on our velocity analysis at the same time, one a primary
reflector, and the other a strong multiple reflector. The multiple reflector must be
generated by some shallower primary reflector (or reflectors) and would have spent more
time travelling through the shallower parts of the section than the primary.
As the rock velocities generally increase with depth, we can make the general statement
that multiple reflections will have slower velocities than primary reflectors at the same
time. For this reason we would normally ensure that we pick the higher range of velocity
peaks on our semblance display.
Unfortunately, in a few areas of the world, velocity

inversions in the shallow section give the multiple reflections
faster velocities than the primaries.
Where there is also very little dip difference in primaries

and multiples, the picking of velocities requires a very
detailed knowledge of the geology.
We also, of course, have to deal with other forms of coherent and random noise within our
data. One way of improving the apparent signal-to-noise ratio of our data (and increasing
the number of traces in our CDP gather) is to examine several CDPs at once in our analysis.
This technique, normally referred to as a super gather, is based CDP Channels
269
X 1,4,7,10 ...
on the fact that if, for example, we are shooting 80 fold data 238
with 240 recording groups, each set of three CDPs contains all X+1 2,5,8,11 ... } Super
possible offsets. 239 Gather
X+2 3,6,9,12 ... }
In this case a super gather may be formed by taking 3 or 6 240
CDPs and merging traces together and summing identical X+3 1,4,7,10 ... }
channel numbers. 238
This resultant 240 trace "gather" actually covers 3 or 6 X+4 2,5,8,11 ... }
adjacent sub-surface points but the advantages we gain in 239
signal improvement outweigh the disadvantages of X+5 3,6,9,12 ... }
"smearing" the analysis across more than 1 CDP. 240
X+6 1,4,7,10 ... }
Decisions on the use of super gathers must consider the 238
likelihood of steep dips and/or rapid horizontal velocity X+7 2,5,8,11 ...
changes in the area. 239
We'll be discussing some of the problems caused by dipping events in a couple of pages
time, other problems involving static correction errors, or shallow velocity anomalies, we'll
come back to later.
If we pick the wrong velocity for our primary event, when we come to add all of the traces
together from one CDP (the stack), we will attenuate some of the primary reflection. Here's
an example of just how much attenuation we can expect from (for example) a 60 fold
stack:-
The horizontal scale on this graph is "Frequency times Moveout". Imagine a reflector with
a dominant frequency of 30 Hz and a residual moveout of 330 ms (0.33 seconds) on the far
270
trace. Frequency time Moveout equals 30 x 0.33, or about 1. Looking down the scale at
this point reveals that the stack will attenuate this event by about 12 dB - a factor of 4:1.
Higher frequencies will be attenuated even more.
We'll now move on to some of the ways in which we can "Quality Control" our velocity
picks.
Velocity QC
271
Once we've picked all of the velocity functions for one line, we
need to find some convenient way to check the consistency of
our velocities - to quality control (QC) our picking.
We may have picked a new function at evenly spaced positions

along our line (or throughout a 3D survey), or tried to position
our velocity analyses at key geological positions on the data (by
looking at, for example, a near trace gather).
Either way, except in cases of very extreme structures, we would

expect our velocities to vary smoothly in both space and time
(following the "geology").
One of the more common methods of

spatial checking is by examining Iso-
Velocity contours along the line.
The axes here are the same as our seismic

section (space and time), and the colours
represent the interpolated value of our
velocity functions at discrete intervals
throughout the section.
In this case, red represents low velocities

and purple the high values - the velocities
here are very smooth and we would not
expect to see much in the way of structural
variations on the section.
We could also compute interval velocities

from out functions (using Dix's equation
over small intervals), and plot these as a
function of time and space.
Once again, these show a smooth set of

functions, with an obvious break from slow
to fast interval velocities about halfway
down the section.
Since our reflection coefficients are

dependent on changes in interval velocity
(and density), we would expect to see a
major reflection in the middle of our
section.
272
In some cases we need to be aware of exactly how the computer interpolates the velocities
between our picked functions. Unless we are very careful and track each event from
analysis to analysis using an initial stack or NTG (near trace gather), we are unlikely to
pick exactly the same events on each analysis. The processing software has to make some
decisions as to how to interpolate the values between the CDPs analysed.
This diagram shows one of the problems common in seismic data from the North Sea. The
Base Tertiary reflector is very strong and causes a sudden "break" in our velocity
function. If, as shown here, we picked velocities at CDPs 500 and 700, and the Base
Tertiary dips strongly between these locations, an interpolation error can occur.
The function generated by interpolating our functions over constant time intervals
(sometimes known as IsoTime interpolation) gives the black function at CDP 600. The true
function should follow the blue line.
Depending on the magnitude of the error, the simplest solution is usually to simply add
more functions - to analyse additional CDPs.
273
A gross error will usually show up fairly
easily on an Iso-Velocity display.
In this case the velocities

were input from a
previously processed
paper section, and the
typist has been dealt with!
Before finishing our long discussion on velocities, let's look at some more exotic forms of
analysis and QC.
Other velocity analyses and QC
Many other methods have been (and are still being) used to both pick and QC seismic
274
velocities. With careful picking and analysis of stacking velocities and modelling, it's
possible to establish quite a good interval velocity field from the seismic data itself.
It is common to examine a near trace

gather, or initial stack of the CDP prior
to picking the final set of velocity
functions.
If we make some geological

interpretation of our seismic section,
identifying the major reflections
throughout the survey (or even just
along one line) we can attempt to pick
the same set of horizons on every
analysis - sometimes known as "knee-
consistent" velocities (there are the
same number of turning points or
"knees" in each function).
We can even make use of these picked horizons to make detailed analyses of the velocities
along each horizon. Instead of computing velocity semblance plots for selected CDPs over
the whole time range, we produce displays for every CDP over a limited time interval
around each horizon.
Although time-consuming (and costly) in both computer and man time this technique can
provide detailed information concerning the interval between two reflectors.
With 3D seismic data the QC possibility are endless!
275
This shows part of a 3D survey, rotated from its true position, with
the blue dots representing the velocity analysis locations used during
the processing.
You can see from this that there are:-
1. an awful lot of velocity functions to pick!
2. many ways in which the resultant functions can be checked for

consistency
Basically, we use the picked functions to build a 3D volume of

velocities (a velocity field), and can examine this in any direction.
One way of QC'ing these velocities is by examining the normal Iso-Velocity contours for a
series of lines to check consistency.
Use the buttons to switch between the velocity contours for different parallel lines in the
survey.
We could, of course, equally well examine the "North-South" lines in our 3D volume.
Another way of checking

for consistency is in another
dimension. We can take all
of the velocities for one
picked horizon, or a
constant time, and plot
these as a function of
space.
Although normally plotted

as a map, these colours
really represent the highs
and lows of velocities shown
on the right.
We may need to pick (and QC) our velocities several times during the processing sequence.
To explain why, and to look at one of the fundamental geometric distortions present in all
seismic data, we'll examine the technique known as Dip-Moveout, or DMO.
276
DMO (1)
Seismic data suffers from the same problem as a bad
holiday choice. It's always in the wrong place at the
wrong time!
Anytime we have dipping events within our seismic

section (i.e. ALWAYS!) our seismic data will not be
recorded at the correct spatial position and the
assumption that a Common Mid Point is the same as a
Common Depth Point breaks down.
The problem varies with offset and is generally handled

in two stages. DMO or Dip-Moveout correction before
stack (to correct the CDP/CMP mis-match), and
Migration (generally after stack) to correctly position the
data in space and time.
This diagram shows one reflector in a medium with a constant velocity of 2000 m/s. The
black line shows a "normal-incidence" ray at right angles to the reflector and the blue and
red lines show reflections for two different offsets.
Click on the buttons below the image to see the reflections (and apparent velocity) of events
with 10, 20 and 30 degrees of dip (or slope).
Note that not only do the reflection points move "up-dip", away from the nominal "CDP"
in the centre of the diagram, but that the actual points being recorded are different for
different offsets. The apparent velocity (obtained from common mid-point gathers) is also
incorrect. For events with constant dip the velocity will be wrong by a factor equal to 1 /
Cosine(Dip).
Dip (Deg) Cos. 1/Cos. Velocity

0 1.0000 1.0000 2000
10 0.9848 1.0154 2031
20 0.9397 1.0642 2128
30 0.8660 1.1547 2309
We obviously need to do something about this problem! Until the early 1980's this effect
was largely ignored, but, work by a number of geophysicists led to an understanding of the
problem and various approaches to solutions. The solutions are generally rather complex,
but try to correct everything to it's true zero-offset position so that a) the velocities are no
277
longer dependent on dip, and b) the data will stack together correctly.
We'll use a synthetic data set to show the principles of DMO.
On the left is a
simple syncline at
a depth of about
2000 metres.
Once again I
have assumed a
constant velocity
of 2000 m/s above
this reflector.
The diagram on
the right shows
some of the
normal-incidence
(zero-offset)
reflections from
this model. Note
how, at the
surface, they
cluster together
around the centre
of the model.
The dip angle computed from the

model above.
The dip starts at zero (horizontal),

increases to a maximum of about 6
degrees in one direction, goes back
through zero (in the centre of the
structure) and increases to slightly
more than 6 degrees in the other
direction before returning, once again,
to zero.
278
Time sections computed from this
model.
The blue line shows the theoretical

model converted to time vertically.
The red line shows the best-possible

recording that could be made with
coincident source and receivers (zero-
offset), and the green line shows the
(NMO corrected) times for an offset of
2000 metres.
Not only are the red and green reflections in the wrong place, they are also not coincident.
Applying NMO to this data with the correct velocity of 2000 m/s will result in an over-
correction of the gathers in the region of dip.
You'll note from the above that the image we get of the syncline is compressed
(the red line). In general un-corrected (un-migrated) seismic data will
compress all synclines and expand all anticlines.
Close to the centre of the syncline reflections from the right of the structure
may appear on the left of our section (and vice-versa).
This is rather like the reflections from any concave surface (like the inside of a
spoon) - the curvature can reverse the order of reflections. We'll see more of
this when we look at the seismic data from this model on the following page.
279
DMO (2)
Here's 161 CDPs covering the 2 km of
model shown on the previous page.
This section is a common-offset-gather

from the traces nearest to each shot (as
you'll remember, also known as a near
trace gather). The data in the centre of the
syncline just "bow-ties" - reflections from
either side of the structure just cross over.
The change of dip (curvature) in this

region causes this cross-over, and will be
corrected by our migration process after
the data has been stacked. As usual, we'll
discuss this later.
The same CDPs, but this time a common-

offset-gather of the farthest trace (an offset
of 2000 m). I have applied NMO to the
data (with a velocity of 2000 m/s) to
correct for the offset distortion.
Because these reflections generally come

from more "up-dip" than the near traces,
the "bow-tie" effect is exaggerated. Some
of the CDPs close to the centre of the
structure now have at least two reflections
on them - one from each side of the
structure.
Comparing the two sections above you can see that we will have problems stacking the data
in the centre - in fact all of the dipping data will "mis-stack" with our model velocity.
280
This display shows 5 complete CDP
gathers from along the line, NMO
corrected with the (theoretical) model
velocity of 2000 m/s.
As you can see, most of the events are

over-corrected (they curve upwards,
implying a velocity that is too slow).
At CDP 81 we have two events (with

different apparent velocites) from
opposite sides of the syncline, note how
the deeper event only appears on the
far offsets - causing the larger "bow-
tie" on the stacked display above.
If the velocity were directly dependent
on the dip of the model, then we could
expect the velocities to follow the line
shown in purple.
Because the events are curved,

different offset traces "see" different
dips and the velocity errors are more
exaggerated (shown in red).
This is a stack of the model, with

velocities picked from the model itself.
As might be expected, the events can

be pretty much "flattened" with some
velocity ('though not the correct one)
and we can produce a "reasonable"
stacked section.
Let's apply DMO to this data, and see what effect it has on the velocities and the stack.
281
DMO (3)
DMO computes the necessary data "movements" in a number of ways. We can use
modified approximations to the horribly complex "wave equation" (a partial differential
equation), or methods that rely on convolutions in odd domains.
None of the "routine" methods of DMO require any knowledge of dip. The various
algorithms move the data for each offset "plane" into all possible zero-offset positions.
Believe it or not, the signal within the data combines correctly whilst the noise (and the
data that is in the wrong place) cancels out.
One of the most robust methods, using a Fourier transform technique, sometimes known
(incorrectly) as FK DMO, goes through a complex transformation. Each offset plane is
first transformed horizontally into "K" (spatial frequencies), and the time scale is stretched
logarithmically. Spatial convolution is then applied to this transform to perform the DMO
and the data is transformed back into normal "T-X" data. I do not propose to explain the
mathematics behind this or other methods in detail as it's probably beyond the scope of this
course. If you're desperate to find out then look at any of the massive amount of technical
papers available on DMO in the geophysical periodicals.
As a reminder of the need for DMO, here's

a horizontal reflector beneath a high
velocity contrast dipping reflector.
Even though the bottom event is

horizontal, DMO is still required because
of the raypath distortion caused by the
shallower dipping event.
This is an example of a horizontal reflector

with mid-point dispersion.
Allowing ourselves the privilege of considering DMO as a "black-box" process, let's

examine the processing route required, and it's effects on our model data set.
All of the normal DMO methods generally require that we process the data in a particular
order:-
282
1 Apply some pre-processing to our data (data enhancement)
2 Pick a widely spaced set of velocities along our line
3 Apply NMO to the data to "more-or-less" correct the data
4 Mute the first-break noise in the data
5 Sort the data into common-offset planes (see below)
6 Apply DMO to the data
7 Remove the NMO applied in stage 3 (inverse NMO)
8 Re-pick our velocities at the final interval
All of which generally requires at least three runs on the computer, and (as usual) lots of
velocity picking.
We need to ensure a "good" spatial sampling within each offset plane. For this reason we
may need to combine several offset planes together into one for DMO, adding a pseudo
offset (a constant) to each plane. Even on regular 2D data, we may have the odd numbered
channels in one CDP, and the even numbered in the next. We would normally combine the
two sets together giving each offset plane the correct CDP interval by using a DMO offset
increment of twice our group interval (and using the average offset for the "plane").
For crooked line land processing, or 3D processing, we may have a continually varying set
of offsets in each CDP "bin". We need to group these together into a regular set of offset
planes for the DMO process (we use the true offsets etc. for all other processing). In 3D
data we may also need to apply "3D-DMO" to correctly allow for those traces that are
displaced "sideways" from our desired bin-line. Some of these algorithms are complex and
require a full 3D velocity field before DMO.
Here's the CDPs and stack shown

previously, only now as they appear after
DMO.
The CDPs all have had NMO applied with

a velocity of 2000 m/s. This now appears
to be the correct velocity for each event.
Although the stack still shows the "bow-

tie" effect (this is, after all, a "real" event
on a reflection section), the events are
much sharper and the background noise
283
has been reduced by the DMO process.
Perhaps more importantly the velocities

are now correct. This display shows a
semblance velocity analysis before and
after DMO from the centre of our model.
Before DMO the velocity is wrong, because

of the dip, and "spread-out" over a
possible range of velocities (note the "tail"
on the red contour).
After DMO the velocity is spot on our

model velocity of 2000 m/s, and the pick is
better defined.
DMO is now a standard part of almost every processing sequence. We should expect some
noise attenuation in the DMO itself, but much better stacks because of the stabilisation of
the velocities, and the correction from CMP to CDP. After DMO we really can refer to
"CDPs" with confidence.
284
Here, finally, is the effects of DMO on some real data. This shows about 700 ms of stacked
data before and after DMO (each section having its own set of velocities). The differences
are not enormous, but you can see the random noise reduction and the enhancement of
some of the fine detail in the section after DMO. The velocities are, of course, much more
"reasonable" (and smooth) after DMO.
We mentioned above some data enhancement techniques that are required before DMO.
In the true tradition of putting the cart before the horse, we'll go on in the next Chapter to
discuss the most important ones connected with (among other things) multiple removal.
There's a few more thoughts on seismic velocities and DMO in a published paper by the
author of this course. Click here to read the article on "Seismic Velocities", otherwise just
click below as usual to move on to the questions for this Chapter.
285
Finally moving (almost) onto the CDP stack stage, let's talk about multiples (and their
removal) and some more static corrections.
Page 10.02 - Multiples - Again!
A tuneful reprisal of some of the important characteristics of multiples, and how we may
try to remove them.
Page 10.03 - Deconvolution (1)
Statistical deconvolution - designing inverse filters from the seismic trace to try to
normalise the frequency content, and/or remove short period multiples.
A discussion on the differences between spiking and predictive deconvolution.
The addition of "white-noise" to stabilise the deconvolution equations.
A final summary of the important parameters for deconvolution, and some "live"
examples.
Page 10.07 - De-Multiple (1)
Some of the methods for removing longer period multiples ...
Page 10.08 - De-Multiple (2)
286
... and yet more de-multiple techniques.
Page 10.09 - Residual Statics (1)
Tidying up the statics problem. Using the seismic data to determine the final statics
corrections.
Page 10.10 - Residual Statics (2)
Some of the techniques used to determine the residual statics from the mass of statistics
obtained from the seismic data.
Page 10.11 - Other Statics (1)
Other problems requiring static solutions. Near-surface anomalies requiring replacement

statics ...
Page 10.12 - Other Statics (2)
... and tidal corrections for high-resolution marine data.
The inevitable questions to end this Chapter!
287
Multiples - Again!
We now move on to one of the areas in which seismic processing software writers
spend a lot of their time - multiple removal!
You'll remember from previous Chapters that multiple reflections occur

whenever the energy from our shot reflects more than once in any one layer.
These multiples can obscure our primary reflectors, and make the final
interpretation of the seismic section very difficult.
On marine data the most obvious multiple generator is the water layer itself but,
of course, any pair of strong reflectors can generate inter-bed multiples that will
also cause problems.
We normally distinguish between those multiples with a short period, and those with longer
periods. If your system supports it here, once again, is a "sound" example of short and
long period multiples!
Here's a short piece of "music" in it's original form.

Then with a short period reverberation added - the kind of
effect common in a large concert hall. The period of this
"multiple" is short enough to actually modify the
individual notes - it adds a spatial quality to the music. On
seismic data, short period multiples will modify the spectra
of the data, adding unwanted information to the fine detail
in each primary reflector.
Long period multiples, or "echo" in the case of sounds,
generate additional reflections at a later time in the record.
The primary and it's "echo" appear as separate events.
288
The removal of multiples generally relies on either or both of two recognisable
characteristics.
1. Multiples will generally go on and on (rather like this course), repeating with the
same time interval and gradually decreasing in amplitude (think of repeated
"bounces" of energy in a water layer).
2. Multiples will generally appear on our CDP gathers with a velocity slower than the
primary velocity. They will have larger moveout values (more curvature).
Note the use of the word generally above - anything's

possible with the right combination of geometry and
geology.
One class of internal multiples that causes apparent

signal enhancement (and modifies the spectrum)
occurs when we have a series of cyclic beds with
alternate high and low acoustic impedance (velocity
times density).
The reflection coefficients at each interface (shown by

the blue signs) actually increases the apparent amount
of energy going down to deeper layers. The same
thing happens on the return path to the surface.
289
Such repetitive bedding of the type shown
above occurs quite regularly within
nature, causing an apparent increase in
seismic energy below the "cyclic" section.
All of the above considerations give us

some clues as to how we can remove
multiples. Short period (and those
generated by cyclic bedding) will modify
the frequency spectrum in some way,
longer period multiples will have a regular
period, and a low velocity (relative to
primaries).
Let's attack the frequency components first by looking at

statistical deconvolution!
Deconvolution (1)
We've discussed Deconvolution before, in the section on Signature Deconvolution (Chapter

7, pages 7-10), and the section on FX Deconvolution (Chapter 8, page 8). If you use either
of these links to go back to previous pages, use the "Back" button on your browser to
return to this page.
Both of these methods used the same principles - finding a limited-length convolution filter
that either
1. changes a specified input wavelet into a more suitable output wavelet, or
2. uses the filter to predict another waveform from the input.
Either technique can be applied directly to a seismic trace, with the appropriate values
derived statistically from the trace itself. For this reason it's (logically) known as statistical
deconvolution, or, since it was the first use of these techniques, just deconvolution (without
the preceding "signature" or "FX").
290
Here's an example of one of the things that deconvolution is useful for - removing short-
period multiples (or reverberations) from the seismic trace.
You may remember from

previous examples the classic
response of the water layer to a
seismic source. The energy
repeatedly bounces between the
seabed and the sea surface,
producing the sort of time
response shown here.
In this case the reverberations
are produced from about 88
metres of water. This gives a
two-way time of about 0.117s (2
x 88 1500), and a frequency
spectrum (shown here in dB)
with a repetitive frequency peak
every 8.5 Hz (1 0.117).
This multiple sequence will be

superimposed on every
reflection within our seismic
section (as will any other
multiples generated by other
shallow layers).
If we could change the
reverberating waveform shown
above into a single spike, we
would remove the multiple from
every reflection in the section.
The spectrum of the spike looks

like this (remember that a spike
contains "all" frequencies) so
we are really trying to invert the
spectrum from the spiky thing
shown above into this constant
value.
Remember these last two

pictures when we discuss
spiking deconvolution below!
291
Is it likely that we could successfully design a limited-length filter that could collapse an
effectively infinite length reverberating waveform into a spike?
Here's the input reverberating waveform (in blue) with an amplitude ratio of "-R" from
peak to peak.
The filter (red), which you'll remember is time reversed, just consists of the two samples
"1" and "R" with the exact reverberation time period between them.
Flipping through the buttons shows some of the convolution multiply and add products -
everything except the first point comes out as zero! The first 3 convolution results are:-
1x1=1
1xR-Rx1=0
1 x R2 - R x R = 0 etc.
This technique was one of the first approaches used for multiple
removal in the days before digital processing.
The seismic trace (recorded as a variable voltage) was delayed

(using capacitors) by the multiple period, scaled by the
primary/multiple amplitude ratio (our "R" above) and added back
into the original trace. If the timing and scaling were exactly
correct, the multiple would be removed.
Unfortunately if the timing was wrong, not only would the multiple
remain, but the subtraction would introduce another multiple-like
anomaly into the data!
Let's move on to see how we can determine the correct timing and scaling from the data
itself!
292
Deconvolution (2)
Remember our much-repeated formulation of the equations used in deconvolution?
For statistical deconvolution we use the trace itself to provide an estimate of the
reverberations and other nastiness associated with every reflection on the trace. Since the
autocorrelation removes all of the phase information from the trace (makes it zero) we can
imagine that the central zero-lag of the autocorrelation represents every primary reflection
on the trace (which we hope are randomly spaced) and any repetitive signal present on the
autocorrelation must be present throughout the trace (or the part of the trace we are
examining - the design window).
In the same way as the previously mentioned types of deconvolution we now have two
options as to how we specify the key part of the right-hand side of the above equation - the
desired output:-
1. for spiking deconvolution we specify our desired output as a spike, and try to convert
the entire trace into a single spike. This cannot be done exactly by a time-limited
293
filter but has the effect of equalising the frequencies within the trace (trying to get to
a "flat" spectrum).
2. for predictive deconvolution we use a later part of the trace as the desired output and
try to design a filter that will make the trace look like a time-shifted version of
itself. Subtracting this "model" from the actual trace is exactly equivalent to the
analogue process discussed on the previous page, but with the time-shift and scaling
automatically designed.
Here, once again, is the principle of predictive deconvolution.
If we can successfully predict the necessary time-shift and scaling values from the data
itself then subtracting the scaled time-shifted trace from itself will remove all of the
multiple reflections.
In practice, the whole process of both spiking or predictive deconvolution is controlled by

just four parameters:-
1. The filter length. Sometimes specified in milliseconds, sometimes in "number of

samples" this should be long enough to include at least two "bounces" of the
maximum reverberation time we are trying to remove.
2. The gap (again in ms or samples). A gap is inserted into the filter that prevents the
filter from changing the data close to every reflector. A gap of 1 sample or less
implies spiking deconvolution, any higher gap implies predictive deconvolution.
The gaps normally used extend from 2-10 samples of data and cause less spectral
whitening (and associated noise). High gaps of say 90% of the reverberation period
may be used for just removing certain multiples.
3. The design gate (see below). This should include only the regions of signal in our
data (omitting the first breaks) and may have to be specified as a function of trace
offset. For optimum results a design gate should be at least ten times the total filter
length (filter length plus gap). This may limit the effectiveness of long-period
multiple removal by deconvolution.
4. A "White-Noise" level. This is discussed in some detail on the next page.
294
Here's a display of some seismic data before and
after stack.
When we are using deconvolution before stack

(DBS), designed on either a shot record or a
CDP (or other) gather, we need to limit the
design gate to the part of the data containing the
best signal (and multiples). We normally use a
design gate that depends on the trace offset,
omitting the "first-breaks" and the later noise.
After stack (or, for example, on a common-offset

gather) we can generally use a larger window
but may still need to limit the design gate to the
area of best signal. If our frequency content
changes rapidly with time (and we can meet the
"ten times" rule mentioned above), we may
want to use time-variant deconvolution. We
simply design different filters over different
windows and apply then in the same way as
other time-variant filters (more on this later).
Deconvolution after stack is usually abbreviated

to "DAS".
In areas of very complex structure (for example, a line shot off the edge of a continental
shelf into very deep water), we may need to vary our time gates in space along the line.
Logically this is known as time and space variant deconvolution!
295
Deconvolution (3)
Remembering that the left-hand side of our deconvolution is the autocorrelation of the
trace, what happens if (mathematically) we can't solve the equations?
Here's a simple enough equation - imagine we're trying to design a two point
3a-3b=20 deconvolution filter and that the "3,-3" terms are the first two values in our
-3a+3b=-21 autocorrelation. This cannot be solved! We must make some adjustment in
order to reach an approximate solution.
3.003a-3b=20
The same equation with the diagonal values on the left increased by 1/10th of
-3a+3.003b=- 1 percent. Now the equation can be solved ...
21
a=-163.25 ... giving these solutions for "a" and "b" which we can plug 3a-3b=20.49
296
back into the original equations to see how our "adjustment" -3a+3b=-
b=-170.08
effects the results. 20.49
The value that we need to add to the diagonal by is usually of the order of 0.1 to 1 percent,
and is usually referred to as the white-noise level. To see why we'll have to delve once more
into the frequency domain.
On the left is the amplitude

spectrum of a seismic trace (or
wavelet) that we wish to
deconvolve to a "spike". Since a
spike contains all frequencies we
need to scale each frequency by
it's inverse - we multiply each
frequency by the values shown
on the right.
If some frequencies are missing

from our input spectrum - the
inverse goes mad.
We have a problem because 10

gives infinity!
We can fix this (and get an

approximate answer) by adding
a "pedestal" (shown in yellow) to
all frequencies before the
inversion.
Since this pedestal contains all

frequencies it is known as white
noise.
White noise addition reduces the effectiveness of the deconvolution at other frequencies but
allows us to solve the equations. This pedestal addition is achieved by adding a small
amount to the zero-lag value of the autocorrelation, exactly the same as that shown in the
equations above. For all normal purposes, the white noise level should be kept as small as
possible whilst still giving a solution to the equations.
297
Having briefly discussed the choice of design gate and white noise
levels, we'll now move on to the two most important parameters, the
filter and gap lengths!
Deconvolution (4)
Let's start this last page on deconvolution by re-iterating the points made before
concerning parameters.
We need to make our total filter length long enough to "see" the multiple period -
preferably at least two bounces.
We should keep the gap fairly small (or even zero - spiking deconvolution) unless we
are specifically aiming the deconvolution at just one multiple. In that case we can
make the gap about 90% of the multiple period.
298
We should, whenever possible, obey the 10% rule. The total filter length should not
be more than 10% of the design window length.
Only use the white noise level to "help" the deconvolution. Only in very exceptional
circumstances should this parameter be changed from the "default" value suggested
by the program.
Use a design window (or windows) that contain just the data for deconvolution.
Deconvolution is a minimum-phase process. Whenever possible ensure that your

input data is minimum-phase, if there is any doubt, use longer gaps.
Test everything, and look at both filtered and un-filtered results from each test.
So, keeping that lot in mind, here's a single trace "live" deconvolution example. About
1200ms of seismic trace is shown in red, with its autocorrelation in blue, and its amplitude
spectra in magenta (or pink if you prefer!). The multiple period is very obvious on the
autocorrelation and is exactly 117ms. Use the parameters to check their effects, especially
when the filter/gap combination "misses" the multiple. Notice that increasing the gap
reduces the amount of "whitening" in the spectrum, and leaves the autocorrelation
unchanged close to the zero-lag value.
You should see how longer filters and shorter gaps increase the apparent amount of noise in
the trace, and that increasing the white noise level decreases the effectiveness of the filter. A
white noise of "0" uses the smallest necessary to successfully perform the mathematics.
Deconvolution is one of the processes tested extensively for any new processing. The
following is an example deconvolution trial from somewhere in the North Sea. The
parameters on the right show the filter length / gap combinations (in milliseconds). The
display shows unfiltered and filtered sections (we've already discussed the principles of
filtering - but see the next Chapter), and an autocorrelation OVER THE SAME DESIGN
WINDOW AS THE DECONVOLUTION (this is important). The autocorrelation is
plotted at twice the vertical scale so that you can really see the multiples. Choose your
favourite deconvolution!
A - None
B - 200/0
C - 400/0
D - 200/12
E - 200/24
F - 400/12
299
G - 400/24
H - 260/140
We'll come to deconvolution yet again when we look at DAS (deconvolution after stack).
I'll also try to mention some of the more esoteric forms of decon (as it's affectionately
known) at that time. In the meantime just one last item - where do we do our
deconvolution in the processing sequence?
We would like to generally perform decon as early as possible

in the sequence to stabilise the frequency content (and remove
multiples) prior to velocity analysis etc.
Here's a "shot record" (offsets across the top, time down the
side) showing a series of water-bottom reverberations from a
primary at 2 seconds. The moveout differences at the far
offset mean that the time differences (in blue) between the
multiples are not constant. In signal processing terms it is a
non-stationary period. If we apply deconvolution before
NMO, the filter design will not "see" the true period and the
decon will be ineffective. If we apply NMO first (decon after
NMO), the stretch caused by the NMO will distort the
wavelet differently on different "bounces". Once again the
filter design will have problems. This is one of those
situations where you can't win!
In most cases deconvolution before or after NMO won't matter too much but, in some
cases, it can be critical. If in doubt, test it! A general (short) decon before NMO may
"clean-up" shot-to-shot variations in the amplitude spectra, but you may need another
(after NMO) to remove the multiples.
De-Multiple (1)
300
We're now ready to start attacking the longer
period multiples on our section.
For these, we rely on the fact that the multiples

will almost always have a slower velocity than
the primaries - we use this velocity discrimination
to remove them!
I'm going to use this model to demonstrate come of the more common methods of de-
multiple. On the left is a velocity plot showing the primary velocity function (red) and
multiples generated by the single interface at about 1.2 seconds. The plot on the right
shows a theoretical CDP gather, with the multiples marked in red. Note that these always
have more moveout (curvature) than the primaries.
Here's a synthetic gather for the model

shown above, before and after NMO
correction (using the model primary
velocity function).
Note that the corrected data has been

muted because of the NMO stretch in
some regions, and also note that the
multiples are all under-corrected.
It is this differential moveout between the

primaries and multiples that will help us
to remove them.
301
I've reproduced the corrected gather again
here (on the left). The plot on the right
shows a CDP stack of a series of CDP
gathers along our synthetic "line". We've
simply summed all of the traces for each
CDP together.
Note that, although they appear weaker

than the primaries, the multiples still come
through very clearly on the stack. With
just the stacked section to examine, and
the sort of amplitude variations that occur
on "real" data, could you spot the
multiples?
The problem above is obviously related to the energy on the near traces (those traces
closest to the shot). Although the far traces have sufficient residual moveout to mis-stack
(and so attenuate), the multiples are pretty flat on the near traces and so stack fairly well.
Can we reduce the effects of the near traces?
Here's a gather and stack where the traces

have been weighted by offset - a weighted
stack. Each trace is simply multiplied by a
scalar proportional to its offset, so that the
near traces contribute less to the
summation.
Although this greatly reduces the

amplitude of the multiples, this (very
cheap) technique does destroy any
information concerning the variation of
trace amplitude with offset.
We will see later that the analysis of

Amplitude Versus Offset effects (AVO) can
give us insights into rock properties and is
therefore important to retain.
302
Another form of trace weighting - a near
trace mute. The near traces have been
removed below a selected time with a mute
similar to that used to remove the first
break noise (at the front).
We'll look into the mechanics of muting

shortly, but, once again, this technique is
quite useful at removing the multiples
from the stack.
This near trace muting is quite commonly

used (possibly in conjunction with other
methods) and retains more of our AVO
information. Again, it's a cheap process.
These two methods, or variations thereof, provide the first steps in multiple attenuation. If
these techniques are unsuccessful, then we must move on to more sophisticated approaches!
De-Multiple (2)
303
Here, once again, is our synthetic gather
with, on the right, a gather that has had
NMO applied using a velocity function
that lies between the primary and multiple
velocity functions.
That over-corrects our primaries, and

under-corrects the multiples. Or, to put it
another way, events dipping upwards
(towards the right) are primaries whilst
those dipping downwards are multiples -
we can now use a dip filter to remove
them.
Remember our FK analyses from Chapter

8? This display shows wavenumbers
across the top and temporal frequencies
up the side (as usual).
Events from our gather dipping

downwards (multiples) now appear in the
mess on the right-hand side of the display,
and those dipping upwards (primaries) on
the left.
We can now use

a FK filter to
remove the
positive dips and
transform back
into the normal
time-offset
domain.
The resultant
CDP (on the
right) has the
positive dips
removed.
304
We now remove the NMO applied before
(reverse NMO), apply the correct primary
velocity function, and stack the data.
We have attenuated the multiples

somewhat but, because, once again, the
near traces are pretty much un-affected by
the FK filter, the result is still not perfect.
If (as is typically done) we combine this

FK multiple attenuation with the near-
trace mute seen earlier, the results can be
very dramatic.
FK multiple attenuation (or FK de-multiple) is sometimes quite effective in removing

multiples. If the problem is really severe, however, we have one more trick up our sleeve -
radon de-multiple.
On the left is our gather with the

correct (primary) velocity function
applied. The right hand display
shows a parabolic radon transform
(or parabolic Tau-P transform) of the
type we mentioned briefly in the last
Chapter on velocity analysis.
This section is produced by summing

the input gather along constant
parabolas. The leftmost trace
represents about -80ms of total
moveout, and the right about
+400ms. These limits are shown on
the gather as the red and blue lines.
The parabolic transform nicely "splits" the primaries and multiples. The primaries "line-
up" close to zero moveout whilst the multiples appear as the "event" at higher moveouts.
To avoid problems with any non-parabolic data (which appears as the "noise" on the left-
hand traces) we remove the primaries from this display, transform back (the multiples),
and subtract them from the original record.
305
On the left is the gather (and it's
associated stack) after the sequence shown
above:-
1. Transform into the parabolic Tau-P

domain.
2. Remove the values close to (and

below) zero - these are the
primaries.
3. Transform back into T-X.
4. Subtract from the original gather.
Very effective (in this case) on both the

gather and the stack - we have removed
the multiples!
Radon (or Tau-P) de-multiple is generally very effective (but quite expensive). It preserves
any AVO effects and works pretty well on real data as well as synthetics!
This display shows a (real) CDP gather corrected (believe it or not!) for primaries. The
centre panel shows the multiples extracted via Tau-P, and the right-hand panel shows the
resultant primaries (after the subtraction). As usual the stack (shown below) is not quite so
dramatic but you can see the dipping primaries coming through on the right-hand panel
(after de-multiple).
306
There are many other methods used for multiple attenuation, including, for example, using
the wave equation to predict multiples from the primaries and then subtract them from the
input. Other methods can be used where the dip of the multiple is very different to that of
any primary information, but these can be quite dangerous.
So we'll leave the world of de-multiple for now and move on to another important pre-stack
process - residual statics!
307
Residual Statics (1)
We've already looked in some detail at methods for computing static corrections from field
data. The problem is that these are never perfectly correct - we need some method of
refining these static corrections during the processing of the data. We use the seismic data
itself to determine these residual statics. (IRS = Inspector of Residual Statics, a newly
invented abbreviation!)
This table shows a few CDPs from a simple 12-channel, 6-fold regular data set.
Down the left are CDP numbers, with a trace count across the top. Clicking on the buttons
will show you the:-
trace offsets
original shot numbers
original receiver positions
Note that the traces from one particular shot or receiver position follow a regular pattern
in the table (either up or down towards the right). Although the pattern is complicated by
the 12-channel, 6-fold arrangement, any shooting geometry will yield a similar pattern - we
can relate our traces back to the original shot and receiver positions.
In a modern high-fold data set, the number of traces recorded from one shot, or into one
receiver position are very high. We can make use of this data redundancy by assuming that
all traces recorded from one shot will have a consistent "shot-static", and those recorded
into the same receiver group will have the same "receiver-static".
308
Here's part of a stacked seismic section with, as before, the part lightly shaded red enlarged
on the right. Although this is a "reasonable" section, showing a nice "bow-tie" in the
deeper section, the frequency content is poor (low), and the events look a little "ragged".
As this is land data, we can expect that there are some residual statics still present in the
data set that cause the inferior quality stack.
In order to establish the values of these residual statics, we need some estimate of what the
final section should look like - a sort of idealised final result. We pick one (or more)
reflections across our section (the red event here follows a strong peak on the data), and use
the data around this horizon (or horizons) to build a "pilot" section - the idealised final
result.
309
I've taken a window of a few hundred
milliseconds around this one event (now
marked in blue), and we will use the data in
this window to determine our residual static
corrections.
To build our pilot traces, the computer simply

takes the event we have picked and sums
together a large number of traces (usually 20
or more) following the event. This "smash"
of traces together yields a very "smooth"
section (shown with its enlargement below).
This doesn't look very seismic, but it does contain the major structural elements of the
original data (in a somewhat simplified form). Now we will go back to the data before
stack and compare the individual traces for every CDP against the pilot traces to try to
establish a set of surface-consistent residual statics.
310
Residual Statics (2)
In statistics, we use the term "correlation" as a measure of the similarity of two data sets.
In the same way we can use the correlation of two waveforms to establish their similarity
and their time difference.
Here's a little bit of seismic data

together with its amplitude and
phase spectra (the good 'ol Fourier
transform!).
Another piece of data, very like the

first, but with a slight time-shift (or
static) applied.
The amplitude spectrum is

unchanged, but the phase spectrum
shows a different shape.
The result of correlating these two
together. Unlike convolution
(which involves a time reversal)
correlation multiplies the
amplitude spectra together and
subtracts the phase spectra. In the
time domain we have a correlation
peak that is shifted from time zero.
We can use this technique to compare our individual input traces against the ideal pilot
traces, measure time differences (by picking the peaks) and then try to rationalise these as
one value for each shot and one for each receiver position.
On the left of this display are all of the

traces going into the stack that come from
the same shot - we've re-gathered the data
back into the shot domain.
The centre panel shows the pilot traces

corresponding to the individual shot traces,
and the right-hand panel (at an enlarged
scale) shows the correlations between the
pairs of traces.
The peak correlation values (around the
311
centre of the right-hand display) show the
individual time differences between the
input traces and the pilot.
A similar display for traces from one

receiver position.
Once again the right-hand panel clearly

shows the individual time shifts of each
trace. If there were no residual statics
present, the correlation peaks would line-
up on the central timing line.
These are
plots of the
picked
correlation
peak times
from the
above
displays.
Although
there's
quite a lot
of scatter,
you can see
some
overall bias
to the
values for
this shot
and this
receiver.
To resolve these statics in a surface consistent manner, the computer goes through the
following steps:-
1. Average together all of the results for one shot - apply this "shot-static" to the
values.
312
2. Average together all of the results for one receiver - apply this "receiver-static" to
the values.
3. Iterate through steps 1 and 2 for either a predetermined number of steps or until the
results stop changing.
Here's the original stack once again (at the top) together with the improved "residual
statics stack" at the bottom. The frequency content is much better, and the events are more
continuous even outside of the window we used for the pilot. This is a good indication that
our residual statics are correct.
Static corrections are just what they say they are - static! That is corrections (or shifts) to
the data that are time invariant - they don't vary with time. This will, of course, add
confusion when we are trying to determine our dynamic corrections (to pick our
velocities). In practice this may mean going through a cycle of residual statics and velocity
picking until we're sure we're about right (or until things get really bad and we start
again!). Some residual static programs attempt to pick errors in residual moveout at the
313
same time as resolving the statics, but this is not always very successful.
While in a static mood, let's examine some other static requirements in our processing
sequence.
Other Statics (1)
Static errors occur anywhere we have a "near-surface" anomaly - they are not just restricted to data
recorded onshore. We'll look at just two examples that can affect marine data.
314
Replacement Statics
Here's a piece of reasonable quality marine data (with a different colour scheme) after stack. Some of
the events, particularly the shallow ones, appear "broken-up", and there is obviously some sort of
shallow anomaly causing the inverted "V" patterns in the shallow section.
315
If we examine a near-trace gather (from the data going into the stack), we can see that something is
happening to the very shallowest reflector - the water bottom itself appears "lumpy".
A "stretched" version of the NTG shows the problem. There are reefs on the seabed which distort the
raypaths passing through them (note the wonderful multiple reflectors!). The lines drawn on this
section show the top of the reefs, and (what is assumed to be) the smooth "seabed" going underneath
them. As is common with most systems that are designed for "event-picking", these lines have been
"snapped" to the nearest peak or trough of the seismic data in order to give an accurate
representation of the anomalies caused by the reefs.
Here's the model constructed from the

"picks" made on the NTG section above.
We can assume that, this close to the surface,

most of the energy is travelling vertical down
from the shot (and back to the receiver).
We'll use the region marked with the blue

arrow to illustrate how we determine the
time differences (or static corrections)
associated with these reefs for every shot
and receiver.
316
The reef is about 40 m thick at the point marked by the blue arrow. We can estimate the interval
velocity of the rocks just below the surface from our conventional velocity analysis. These, together
with published estimates of velocities within reefs, seem to imply an interval velocity of about 2500
m/s.
The two-way time for the seismic energy travelling through the reef is 2 x 40 2500, or about 32
milliseconds. If the reef was not there, the wave would be travelling through water with a velocity of
about 1500 m/s, giving a two-way time of 2 x 40 1500 or 53 ms. The time difference between these
two (53-32) is about 21 ms, in other words the time difference we would get if we could replace the
reef with water. Since any data travelling through the reefs will arrive earlier than expected, we apply
this static as a positive value - shifting the seismic data down.
We compute these statics for every shot and receiver that lies over one of the reefs. The spread
length shown in the diagram above indicates to us that some of our shots will partially or completely
"straddled" some of the reefs - the raypaths in these regions will be very distorted.
Once we've computed and applied these replacement statics, we re-stack the data to give this
section:-
317
To avoid trying to compare this with the one at the top of the page, the next page shows a detailed
comparison!
Other Statics (2)
Replacement Statics (continued)

As promised, here's a detailed comparison of:-
1. The original stack
2. The stack with replacement statics
3. The stack with both replacement and residual statics
(We can quite legitimately run surface-consistent residual statics after the replacement statics since
the reef problem is entirely surface-consistent.)
318
You'll note that the replacement statics "flatten" some of the deeper events as well as improving
overall continuity. They remove the apparent "pull-ups" on the events due to the high velocities in
the reefs (remember that this is a time section).
The residual static corrections "fine-tune" our original statics and improve the high frequency content
(and continuity) of our final stack section.
Tidal Statics
Anyone who's tried to process seismic data
onboard a seismic vessel in a gale will
appreciate the effects that tides and weather
can have on seismic recording.
Although we try to keep our shots and receivers

at fixed depths in the water, these are always
relative to the sea surface - if the surface is
changing then so is our true elevation.
Some parts of Canada have tidal ranges in

excess of 15 m. This could cause "mis-ties" on
our seismic data of 20 ms or more.
For "normal" 2D seismic data the effects of tides can generally be ignored - they, after all, vary very
slowly and will hardly be noticeable along our seismic lines. For high resolution seismic data however,
and, more especially, for 3D data, they can be significant.
319
This is a fully processed stacked section extracted from a 3D volume of high resolution seismic data.
It's what's known in 3D terms as a "crossline" - a line made up of 3D bins at right angles to the
direction in which the data were shot. Each trace on this section comes from a different original line,
shot at a different time (and possibly in a different direction) from the adjacent traces. The original
seismic lines were shot from your viewing position "into" the screen of your monitor (or vice-versa).
You'll notice the "jitters" in the above section - high (spatial) frequency static errors from trace to trace
caused by tidal differences.
We can calculate the necessary corrections from

published tidal information or by placing tide
gauges within our survey area.
The corrections we apply (to mean sea level -

MSL) are computed from these tides as a
function of shot position and data and time of
shooting.
The tidal ranges shown here (from "somewhere

in Southeast Asia!") show the 12 hr 25 min
cycles caused by the Moon, overlaid with other
cycles caused by Sun/Moon interactions.
There's possibly something to do with "neap"

and "ebb" in here, but I have no idea what they
mean!
Once we've made these adjustments, we can re-display our data:-
Now we have much better continuity, and the data is correctly positioned for any processing we need
320
to do in the crossline direction. If we want to run some form of residual statics after this, we need an
approach that uses time-differences between adjacent traces as a basic input - the results are not
surface-consistent.
There is one other type of residual static correction that is sometimes used as a final "clean-up". It can
use the initial approach of correlations against a pilot used in our residual statics discussion, but make
no assumptions about surface-consistency - it just applies individual computed statics to individual
traces.
The technique, known as trim statics or CDP statics, can provide additional data improvements but is
inherently dangerous! Applying arbitrary large static corrections may change the apparent structure
on our final section and are better solved by other surface-consistent approaches (for example re-
computing the initial statics by re-picking the first breaks on every shot).
We finally get to stack our data, and move on to the final stages of the "regular" processing
sequence.
Page 11.02 - Trace muting
Front-end, back-end and surgical muting. Removing all of the nasty bits from our seismic
traces.
Page 11.03 - CDP Stack
Nothing more complex than simply adding all of the traces from one CDP together - with a
few variations.
321
Page 11.04 - Filtering (1)
The practical aspects of digital filtering. How we specify our filters ...
Page 11.05 - Filtering (2)
... and how we choose the filters (as usual, lots of testing).
Page 11.06 - Equalisation & AGC
If we don't need to retain the "true" amplitudes within our data, we can use equalisation
and AGC to tidy-up the data both before and after stack.
Page 11.07 - Migration (1)
Finally moving the data to its correct spatial position. We start by looking at some
theoretical stack responses for simple structures ...
... move on to some of the techniques used to migrate the data ...
... and extend them to 3D and pre-stack data.
Page 11.10 - Other Post-Stack Processes / Display
A quick discussion of some of the other Post-Stack processes we may use, and a look at the
types of final displays that we might use.
Page 11.11 - Display (2)
Other displays, 3D displays, and the final section.
Page 11.12 - What happens next?
Once we've finished the processing, what happens next?
322
As usual, some questions to finish this Chapter.
Trace muting
323
On the left is a CDP gather
(with, hopefully, the correct
NMO applied) showing the
stretch introduced by the
NMO and the "first-break"
noise present on all the
longer offsets.
Before we stack this data we

need to remove this early
noise by muting the data out
in this region. The
conventional approach to
this is to "pick" a mute (as
shown on the right) ...
... and apply a ramp to the data starting at our picked time.
This "top" mute can also be known as ramping or tapering

the data, and typically zeroes everything above the line we
pick, and then slowly ramps (over say 30-120 ms.) the data
to full contribution.
The computer normally uses a linear ramp to multiply with

the data to avoid any nasty edge effects caused by an abrupt
break in the data.
324
We could, equally well, pick
our mute before NMO. We
need to do this anyway prior
to any velocity analysis.
Picking the mute post-NMO

is usually safer, however, as
it allows us to remove any
additional noise introduced
by the stretching in NMO.
If the mute is difficult to establish,

or we would like to include as much
data as possible without introducing
noise, we can, as usual, test it!
This display, sometimes known as a

mute-scan, shows a stack of a small
portion of our line with different
CDP fold (and no muting).
The left-hand panel is just one fold

(an NTG), with subsequent panels
gradually including larger offsets
until the last panel contains all 60
fold.
You can clearly see the noise from the first breaks in the later panels. We can pick this
(much like a CVS for velocity analysis) to determine the minimum time for each fold (and
hence the mute). Note also the improvement in the deeper data due to the increase in stack
fold.
325
We saw in our discussions in the last Chapter on multiple
attenuation, how we can use a near trace (or "bottom")
mute to remove the near traces and so improve the multiple
cancelling properties of the stack.
Yet another type of muting is the surgical mute, a "taper-

off" and "taper-on" over a small region of the trace to
remove spikes and noise bursts etc.
You can see that, even using a computer screen, it would be

quite arduous to mark every spike on this record (and every
other on the line) for surgical muting!
Luckily, we usually have at

our disposal some fancy
software to automatically
edit spikes within our seismic
datasets.
The display on the left is the

record from above processed
through an automatic spike
edit (with parameters
determined by testing).
The right hand record has

had an additional pass of
interpolation (using linear
Tau-P) to "fill-in" most of
the missing data - anything
roughly correct is probably
better than a hole in our
data!
Before (at long last) we finally get to stack our data, just one small digression. Although we
normally only use linear tapers in the mutes for stack, there are some other shapes of mutes
commonly used for the tapering of windows used for statistical (or spectral) analysis and
the like. These are shown below, as usual use the buttons to switch between them.
1. A Linear taper - normally used for top, bottom and surgical muting of traces.
326
2. A Hanning function (sometimes called COS-Squared). Named after Julius von
Hann.
3. A Hamming function, really just a Hanning function on a pedestal. Named

(confusingly) after R. W. Hamming, and no real connection with Hanning!
The last two functions are suitable for the ramping of the ends of short time windows - they
don't introduce spurious frequency effects.
327
CDP Stack
328
We're finally ready to handle one of the simplest, but most
important, stages of the seismic processing sequence - the CDP
stack. (Although it should more correctly be called a CMP stack -
Common Mid-Point, we'll stick to the conventional name!)
Let's review all of the geometric processes

applied to our data so far.
The data from different shots and receiver

groups (and, for 3D data, different lines) is
gathered together into the groups of traces
that share one common mid-point - the CMP
gather (usually called the Common Depth
Point gather which isn't true for dipping
events).
We've applied static corrections (and

residual statics for land data), to effectively
move our shots and geophones to a fixed (or
floating) datum.
We've picked our velocities, and applied the

necessary dynamic corrections (NMO) to
correct our data to zero-offset.
We still don't really have CMPs however,

and the recorded data is clearly not below
the mid-point for dipping data.
We've applied a Dip Moveout correction

(DMO) to correct everything to a "true"
common depth point, but it's still not in the
correct spatial position (we'll deal with that
later).
We can now simply sum together all of the

329
We typically have up to 120 or more traces to sum together for each CMP, and, if we wish
to maintain the "relative-amplitude" of the data, we should divide the sum by the number
of traces. We have to make allowances in the mute-zone, however, because of the reduced
fold in this region.
This shows the mutes over the first second

of a "12-fold" CDP. The red lines show
the mute function for each trace (shortest
offset at the bottom), and the blue curve
shows the total number of "live" traces
being summed at any one time (it finally
reaches 12).
Dividing by "N" (the fold) in this region

generally over amplifies the noise on the
short offset traces and we need to make
some allowance for this in conventional
processing.
Way back at the beginning of the processing sequence (shot summing) we mentioned that
purely random noise is attenuated by a factor equal to the square-root of the fold of stack.
For this reason (it's the random noise we're trying to attenuate), we normally use a scalar
equal to the square-root of the fold rather that the fold itself. This type of scaling
(sometimes known as root-N scaling) only effects the relative amplitudes in the mute zone -
once we're into full-fold data it just represents an overall (constant) scale factor.
Here's a fully processed

seismic section showing
clearly the "taper-on" at
the beginning of the line. In
this region we only have
long offset traces
contributing to the stack so
we always get to see the
mute as the fold gradually
increases.
You may see some signal

degradation at the other
end as the fold decreases
down to zero - we only have
near traces at this end and
would see any near-trace
330
(bottom) mutes here.
It's quite common to plot the total fold along

the line for lines that may not generally have
constant fold (typically 3D or 2D crooked
lines). This data actually comes from a
conventional 2D marine line with tape
problems! The fold (supposed to be 60)
never gets above 59.
Once again, you can see the taper-on and off

at the ends.
There are many possible variations in the stacking process, most of which are now rarely
used. Here's a list of some of the more esoteric options:-
Weighted Stack - We saw this in action in our discussion on multiple attenuation.

Although a valid technique it does obliterate any AVO effects and is perhaps better
replaced by a near trace mute (which is, after all, an extreme form of weighting).
Median & Min/Max Stacks - Either computes the mathematical median of the data
or eliminates the highest and/or lowest amplitudes from the stack before summing.
I guess this could be useful to eliminate spikes, but is now generally handled by
other techniques.
Diversity stack - The traces are equalised over small windows prior to stack (see a
few pages time for equalisation) and the average equalisation is removed after
stack. Basically knocks down high amplitudes and pushes up low amplitudes.
Much conventional processing now uses a full equalisation before stack, so this
process is unnecessary.
Inversity stack - The opposite of diversity! High amplitude traces are boosted, and
lower amplitude traces are further attenuated. Probably better just to (once again)
equalise the data before stack.
Most of these techniques are not now generally in use, but may be necessary to solve some
obscure problems. If in doubt (as usual) test it!
331
Before finishing with stack, I'll just
mention one occasion where we
may need to mute the data after
stack. This is the first three
seconds of a stacked data set (at a
very high display gain). The first
major event (at about 2.2 seconds)
is the seabed, we've obviously
moved off the continental shelf!
The noise visible above this first

(valid) reflector is generated from
previous shots and instruments
(and, I suppose, reflections from
giant squids and the like). We need
to remove this after stack by
picking the water bottom reflection
and using space-variant muting
parameters that follow these picks.
In practice, many of our processing

parameters (design gates etc.) may
also need to be "tied-in" to the
picked water bottom, and varied
along every line.
332
Filtering (1)
Way back in the dim distant past of this course (Chapter 6), we discussed the theory behind
digital filtering. We use frequency filters at numerous points during the processing
sequence - any time that we need to remove some of the background "noise". Filters are
almost always applied, however, at the end of the sequence to tidy-up the final stacked
section and/or migration.
We briefly mentioned DAS (deconvolution after stack) in the last Chapter, and it is this
process that, more than any other, requires some filtering to reduce the unwanted
frequencies enhanced by the deconvolution.
We've seen many examples of filtering before - here's an example of a low-pass filter (only
passing the low frequencies) applied to a photograph.
In this case the filter is applied in both directions (across and down) but, having discussed
spatial filtering in some detail earlier, we are now looking at the "down" direction -
filtering in the time domain.
You'll see in what follows that filtering is one subject that is littered with names. We'll
mention Ormsby, Bartlett, Hanning, Butterworth and others!
Assuming that we have some idea of the frequencies we wish to "pass" through to our final
section, how do we design these filters?
We could simply decide (by testing) on the frequencies we want, and then simply apply a
filter in the frequency domain that just passes those filters. For example we might apply a
20-50 Hz filter which passes only the frequencies from 20 to 50 Hz.
The problem with this is the sharp cut-offs at 20 and 50 Hz. The resultant filter (in the time
domain) is roughly equivalent to the difference in two of the sync functions we mentioned
earlier - a pretty messy wavelet!
333
To avoid the "edge-effects" associated with
sharp cut-offs, we usually use filters that slope
on and off in the frequency domain.
The first of these, sometimes known as Ormsby

or trapezoidal filters, uses four frequencies to
define the slopes.
All frequencies below F0 and above F3 are

removed, whilst those from F1 to F2 are fully
passed. The amplitudes are tapered on from
F0 to F1 and off from F2 to F3. When we use
linear slopes (as shown here) they are
sometimes known as Bartlett tapers.
Although these slopes greatly reduce any

undesirable "wobbles" in the time domain, the
sharp corners can cause problems (especially
when the overall passband is narrow). One
solution to this is to use the Hanning tapers
discussed earlier (sometimes called Cos-
Squared) to "smooth-out" the slopes.
This tends to improve the time response but

still has one major problem - the frequencies
outside F0 to F3 are completely removed,
they're gone forever! In fact we can achieve
the sharp cut-offs mentioned above (and the
other effects) by making F0 equal to F1, and F2
equal to F3.
So we might want to use Butterworth filters, a

leftover from electronic filtering that provide a
different approach to the design (again, using
four parameters).
For these filters we specify the low and high

cut-off points (FA & FB), which will be reduced
by 3dB (70%) by the filter, and slopes (in
dB/Octave) at either end. Typical slopes vary
from 6 to 72 dB/Octave.
What type of design do we use, Ormsby or Butterworth? In general, if the seismic data is
of high quality, it doesn't matter very much and Butterworth filters are probably slightly
easier to use. Ormsby filters require that we are careful in our choice of "corner-
334
frequencies" (F0, F1, F2 & F3) so that we don't introduce "ringy" wavelets into our data,
but have the advantage that they do remove certain frequencies. As usual, if in doubt, test
it!
Before the age of Fast-Fourier-Transforms, it was necessary to design and apply filters in
the time domain (by convolution). The Martin-Graham technique uses an approximation
(assuming that our data is continuos, not sampled), to design Ormsby filters (with linear
tapers) directly in the time domain. The equation is surprisingly simple:-
Butterworth filters, on the other hand, must be designed in the frequency domain. Here's
the amplitude spectrum for a Butterworth filter:-
O.K., putting all that lot into practice, the following program designs zero-phase Ormsby
filters by three methods. The time domain equation derived by Martin & Graham (with
the filter truncated to the 200 ms displayed), and frequency domain designs using linear
and Hanning tapers. In each case the amplitude spectrum is displayed in blue below the
time function.
The "reject" option produces a filter that removes the frequencies you specify. It's simply
produced by subtracting the bandpass filter from a white spectrum (a "1" in the middle).
Remember that F0 <= F1 <= F2 <= F3, and that all frequencies are less than or equal to 125
(I've assumed 4ms data).
You should notice that the time domain design is much "noisier" in both time and
amplitude, and that the Hanning tapers give a slightly better result than the linear tapers.
Here's a similar display for Butterworth filters. Remember that SA and SB are slopes (in
335
dB/Octave).
Once again you should see that low slopes give the smoothest time function.
We'll now move on to choosing filters (testing as usual) and see how we can vary them in
both time and space.
336
Filtering (2)
So here we go with our filter trials! We would expect that the frequency content of our
signal will become lower as we move to deeper times (the higher frequencies are absorbed),
so we are looking for the "optimum" filter at various times down the section - time variant
filters.
We'll start by looking at part of a stacked seismic line with a series of exclusive filters
applied. These were all applied as Ormsby filters with slopes of about half an octave on
each end (for example, 7-10-20-28).
The key on the right gives the passband for each filter (section "A" is unfiltered). Look for
the point at which 1) the low-cut removes signal, or 2) the high-cut no longer enhances the
signal content.
A Unf.
B 0-10
C 10-20
D 20-30
E 30-40
F 40-50
G 50-60
Not easy is it? You can see the reduction in high frequencies at later times (towards the
right), but it's quite difficult to establish exact passbands at different times.
Let's try a different technique. This time we've used a set of filters of equal "length" - one
octave. Each filter overlaps by half an octave with the previous! See if this is any easier to
interpret!
A Unf.
B 0-10
C 7-14
D 10-20
E 14-28
F 20-40
G 28-56
H 40-80
337
Perhaps a little bit easier to interpret, but still difficult!
Let's try the brute force approach - all the likely filters that we might use!
A Unf.
B 5-30 I 15-30
C 5-40 J 15-40
D 5-50 K 15-50
E 10-30 L 15-60
F 10-40 M 20-40
G 10-50 N 20-50
H 10-60 O 20-60
Although we now have a lot to look at (and we probably need to look at this at a large scale
on paper), this approach is probably the easiest to interpret. With the small running times
on modern machines, such a trial is not significant and we may save the more valuable
personnel time by running lots of filters in (maybe) several places in our survey.
Once we've decided on our filters, we

should plot the selected passbands as a
function of time and establish a smooth
time variant filter pattern.
In areas of strong structure (or, for

example, deep water) it may be necessary
to vary the filter times based on some
interpreted reflections on the section. We
might, for example, use a filter that
"follows" the main reflector across the
whole area.
Here's the above stacked section again, this time with a selected time-variant filter pattern.
The final selected filters vary from 10-90 at time zero to 7-40 at the final section time.
338
How are these filters applied?
We can imagine each filter

being tapered on and off over
our time range, with each
filter reaching its full effect at
the time (or time range) we
specify.
In practice the actual

application is normally done
in the frequency domain so we
need to consider this in our
filtering parameters.
The section on the left is a synthetic

example where we've tried to apply a
very severe time variant filter. The
Ormsby corner frequencies were:-
At the top of the

25-30-60-80
section
At the bottom 0-5-20-30
Which we would expect to give us

something like 12-17-40-55 in the
middle.
Unfortunately the modern TVF

program uses a FFT technique,
usually as follows:-
1. Transform the trace to the

frequency domain.
2. Apply each filter to the trace.
3. Time variantly mix the

filtered traces together.
This gives us the mix shown on the

right - the filter in the centre is
roughly 0-5-60-80 at half amplitude!
339
The solution to this is very simple - just insert more filters into the
pattern to avoid rapid passband changes.
Here I've just added a 12-17-40-55 filter in the middle, which at

least makes the very weak horizontal event visible!
Before entering your final filter parameters into the computer,

check how the program changes the filter between your key points
in both time and space, and adjust your parameters accordingly!
Equalisation & AGC
340
Just as there are many examples in our lives where some level of
equalisation would be useful, in many cases of seismic processing some
level of equalisation of the trace amplitudes may be very beneficial.
If, as is often the case, we are not trying to retain the absolute relative
amplitudes within our data, the equalisation of amplitudes throughout
the data may improve the signal to noise ratio.
Equalisation does just what it says it does - it equalises the amplitudes both from trace-to-
trace and down the time scale. AGC or Automatic Gain Control is a variation on this which
we'll reach further down this page.
It's normally applied before stack to improve the stack response and remove high
amplitude noise bursts, and/or after stack to "balance" the final section. We'll use one
example trace to show how it works.
Here we have 3 seconds of seismic trace

(either before or after stack). You'll notice
the high amplitudes at the front (water
bottom reflection?), the weaker portion in
the centre, and the high part again at the
end.
This probably implies that our gain

recovery correction is not absolutely
correct - as we selected it for a whole area
by testing this is not surprising!
We have chosen to apply an equalisation to

this trace with 500 ms windows.
The computer first measures the root-

mean-square (RMS) amplitude in each 500
ms window down the trace. The RMS is
just the square root of the average
amplitude-squared in the window - it gives
us a measure of the overall absolute
amplitudes in the window (both positive
and negative).
341
The inverse of these RMS values (shown in
red) are positioned at the centre of each
window and a "gain-curve" is interpolated
between these points.
This gain-curve can now be applied as a

multiplier to the trace to equalise the
amplitudes ...
... and here's the result. The weaker

portions are amplified, and the stronger
portions attenuated.
We can control the extent of the

equalisation by our choice of window
lengths which (as usual) we may want to
vary in both space and time.
Instead of using discrete windows we can

use a continuous process similar to the
Automatic Gain Control used on some
electronic equipment. The term AGC is
still used for the digital version.
We still use windows (or gates) - again I've

used 500ms. This time the RMS is
computed over every 500 ms window.
After computing the first window, the
window is moved by just one sample and
the scalar computed again. This is
repeated for every sample to give an AGC
correction curve which is again multiplied
by the data.
The result of the AGC. For a given

window length AGC is usually slightly
more "severe" than equalisation but does
avoid difficulties with window design.
To examine the differences in more detail

use the buttons on the display below for a
direct comparison.
342
Yet another example. This time we have a
very weak trace with one major event in
the centre.
Although this is probably unusual, similar

strong events may often occur within
regions of our data.
The 500 ms AGC curve computed from the

above trace.
Note that the very strong event causes a

low inverse over any 500ms window that
includes this event.
Here's the result of the AGC. Although the

weaker portions have been slightly
"lifted", the strong event still dominates
and there is a shadow around this event
where the AGC hasn't really worked well.
These shadow zones are quite common and

should be looked for after AGC or
equalisation!
Shadow zones can be reduced by either careful window design or by more sophisticated
scaling. One option is to use two windows simultaneously (one short, one long) to try to
statistically predict very strong events and reduce the effects of the short-window scaling in
these regions.
AGC or equalisation always destroys any "true-amplitude" information within the data.
In all cases the inverse scaling produces a fixed RMS on output which may be some
arbitrary numerical value (in the examples shown above the direct inverse gives an output
RMS of "1").
Since we, once again, usually establish our equalisation/AGC parameters by testing, here's
some stacked seismic data with varying AGC length (in ms) applied. The first example,
where the AGC window is equal to the trace length is the same as an equalisation of the
same length and is often referred to as a base-level - it base levels each trace without
changing the amplitudes down the time scale.
343
Migration (1)
Migration is the process that moves the
data on our stacked seismic section into its
correct position in both space and time.
Even after our NMO and DMO

corrections, reflections from dipping
events are plotted on our stack section in
the wrong place. They need to be moved
"up-dip" along a hyperbolic curve in
order to put them in the right place, the
shape of this hyperbola depending on the
velocity field.
Before we start to look at some of the

methods of migration, let's look at the
appearance of some simple structures on
our stacked section.
In each of the displays below, press the buttons to switch between 1) the way the structure
should look (after migration) and 2) the way it looks on our stacked section. The two boxes
on the right give a description of the appearance of the structure before migration and, in
the lower box (in red), the errors we can expect if our velocity field is incorrect. Remember,
it's the section you see when the number 2 button is pressed that represents our stacked
section - the migration process tries to correct this back to its true position (button 1).
A local high, or, in geological terms, an anticline appears wider on the stack section than
it should be.
The amount of "stretch" depends on the dips on each flank - the higher the dips the
wider the structure will appear on our stacked section.
If our velocities are incorrect then the final migrated structure may be narrower or wider
than the true structure - this could lead to the wrong estimate of any oil or gas reserves
underneath this "high".
The opposite of this, a syncline, appears narrower on the stack section.
Where the dip changes (at the centre of the structure) there is a danger that a cross-over
of raypaths will occur.
Once again, incorrect velocities will lead to an incorrect shape. In the velocities are too
high then the syncline will be wider than it should be after migration. Velocities that are
344
too low will "under-migrate" the structure, leaving it too narrow.
Steep dips on the flanks of the syncline, and a rapid change of curvature at the bottom,
leads to the "bow-tie" effect that we've seen before.
(Remember the upside-down reflection in a spoon? The reflections from the left-hand
side of the steep slope appear on the right and vice-versa.)
We can over or under migrate this with the wrong velocities. In the extreme case the
reflection will not be properly "focused" by the process and pieces of the "bow-tie" will
remain.
An event that should appear as a single point reflector on our migrated section appears
as a diffraction curve on the stack. I've had to increase the gain on the stack display
because all of the energy in the original point is now spread out over the diffraction
curve.
The hyperbolic shape of this curve is important - it's very similar to the curves we
compute from the velocities in applying NMO.
A velocity error will lead to the "point" being smeared on our final migrated section.
If our velocities are too high, the point will be over-migrated into a "smile".
If they're too low, the under migration will leave a residual "frown" in the data.
A discrete event, that terminates abruptly, will generate diffraction curves at its ends.
These curves have the same shape as those from a single point but exhibit an interesting
polarity anomaly.
The part of the curve "under" the actual event is polarity reversed relative to the other
part of the curve (with this colour scheme, red and blue change over).
Over and under migration here will mask the abrupt end of the event - it will, once again,
be badly focused.
A gap within an otherwise continuous event also generates diffractions at each break.
Note, once again, the polarity reversal and the interference between the two diffractions
in the centre of the gap.
If our velocities are wrong in this case, the gap will be poorly imaged. In extreme cases
"smiles" from over migrated data, or from random noise bursts in the data may
completely hide the gap.
345
If we have very small "events" and "gaps" then the interference pattern becomes very
complex.
One way to understand some of the migration methods that follow is to realise that even
a continuous event could be considered to be a series of discrete points with diffractions,
but these curves interfere with each other and "cancel-out" everywhere but along the
event.
This "cancelling-out" relies on the velocity field being correct. If it's wrong, the events
will effectively move to the wrong place (and time).
A perfectly horizontal event with a fault plane.
The reflection from the fault plane (if it's not too steep to be imaged) will be recorded to
the right of the fault and needs to be migrated up-dip into its correct position.
If the velocity field is incorrect, the fault plane will not "move" to the correct place and
the diffraction curves from the "corners" of the structure will not focus correctly.
Finally a very strange structure. If we had a perfectly parabolic event in the ground,
with its centre on our CDP, we would see only one point on our stacked section - the event
would be like a parabolic mirror, concentrating all of the reflected energy into one point.
Our synthetic stack doesn't quite show this - the errors caused by the very steep dips in
the "inverse-migration" program I used are the same as those we will encounter in the
forward migration programs - they are all (to some extent) an approximation!
Add a velocity error to the errors already introduced by the migration process and this
will be very difficult to image. If we have a single "point" of energy in our stacked
section that doesn't correspond to a "real" event (for example a spike), this will migrate
into a parabolic "smile" on our migrated section.
The equations that govern the amount of correction required for migration are relatively
simple. The spatial shift (delta-X) and the new (migrated) time can be calculated by
picking dips on a stacked section and using the stacking velocities. The equations are:-
346
Where Time is in seconds, Dip in seconds per metre and velocity in metres per second. Our
normal dip convention (increasing time with increasing distance is positive) is used. You
should be able to see from the above that any event will move "up-dip". The time equation
is identical to that used for NMO, except that we use half the velocity (or twice the distance)
in the calculation.
Some more ray tracing!
The top diagram shows a 5km seismic "line", with a depth scale extending down to 4km.
There is one single reflector (shown in red) with the "normal incident" raypaths (in blue)
drawn from this to the surface.
The lower diagram shows the "stack" produced from this section (in, for a change, green).
Use the scroll bar to add either a synclinal or anticlinal structure to the centre of the line
and examine the stack response!
Migration (2)
347
A stacked seismic data set is a little bit like the view of the world seen
by someone wearing thick glasses with cracked lenses! Every velocity
change in the shallow layers causes a bend in the rays entering (and
leaving) the earth, distorting everything below that layer.
The methods used to correct for this, and migrate the data to its
correct position, rely on some of the work done by the early pioneers
in optic research explaining similar effects on light rays.
We can, by simple geometry, establish the equations

necessary to move seismic data from its position on
the stacked section to its position on the migrated
section. These are the equations shown on the
previous page namely:-
Assuming an event at 2 seconds two-way time with a

velocity of 2000 m/s on our stack section, I've
plotted these equations on the right for all possible
dips.
Note that, even only allowing dips up to 45 degrees,

the event could actually be mis-positioned by up to
2000 metres and 2 seconds!
348
If we combine the above equations, removing the
dip term, we can plot all possible positions for the
migrated event.
This curve shows us that this single "point" at 2

seconds could (depending on its dip) migrate to
any position on this curve - the shape of the curve
being controlled only by the geometry and
velocities.
Initial work done by Christian Huygens more than

three hundred years ago, and later work done by the
German physicist Gustav Robert Kirchhoff led to one of
the first methods used for migration.
A Kirchhoff Migration takes each point on one CDP in

our stacked section and moves it (using the equations
above) to all possible positions.
The resultant scan of traces can cover many kilometres,

and will be muted where the stretch caused by the
process (identical to that caused by NMO) becomes
excessive.
This process is repeated for every CDP in the line, and

the massively overlapping results are summed together.
As if by magic (provided it's done properly), all of the
data interferes destructively in areas where there are no
coherent reflections, and constructively along events,
the resultant sum producing a migrated section.
It can be shown (but not by me!) that this approach

gives an integral solution to the wave equation and, with
a small phase and amplitude adjustment after the
process, still provides an extremely good migration
product.
All migration methods (and there are many of them) derive some (sometimes very
approximate) solution to the wave equation:-
349
(Shown in Chapter 3 with a promise never to be shown again!)
Other methods involve some sort of differential solution to this equation, and are generally
known as finite difference methods. The term finite difference arises in the way in which
the differential (or slope) of a sampled curve is computed.
With a course sampling interval, an estimate of the slope from the sample values (shown in
green) is very inaccurate. As sampling (and computer time!) increases, the finite difference
more closely approached the true slope.
Other approximations in the solution lead to techniques that only work for limited dip
ranges (say up to 45), and yet other methods use a transformation into either F-K or F-X
domains to accomplish the migration.
Most of these wave equation methods use a technique known as downward continuation.
The stacked section is divided into thin layers in time (typically 16-40ms, but dependent on
dip and velocity changes), and the velocities within each layer are used to compute the
effects of this layer on everything below it. It is as though we moved the shots and
geophones through this layer so that they are now buried in the earth (and everything
above them is fully migrated).
Here's the same "model" from the last page, but this time an additional bar has been
added to allow you to "move" the shots and geophones down to some time in the section.
Use the lower scroll bar as before to introduce some structure, then move the upper scroll
bar down progressively "migrating" the lower section.
Everything above the grey line is fully migrated (the "lens" effect of the upper layers has
been removed) and the deeper data is partially migrated.
Before moving on to some real examples, and the extensions of migration to 3D and pre-
stack data, here's a brief summary of some of the more common migration methods with
an indication of their effectiveness (and cost) for various conditions:-
Migration Name Type Dip Vel-T Vel-X Cost Criteria
350
Type of migration (see
Kirchhoff Time Time Type
next page).
Effectiveness for steep
Kirchhoff Depth Depth Dip
dips.
Handling velocity
Kirchhoff Depth - Depth Vel-T
variations in time.
Modified Handling velocity
Vel-X
Kirchhoff Depth - Depth variations in space.
Explicit Relative cost (computer
Cost
Phase-Shift Time time).
Finite Difference Time

Symbol
Finite Difference - Time
Explicit Not supported!
Finite Difference - Time
Steep Dip Poor.
Finite Difference - Depth
Explicit, Depth Fair.
FK (Stolt) Time
Good.
Reverse-Time T-K Time
Excellent!
Migration (3)
351
Both the Kirchhoff migration and variations on the other wave equation techniques can be modified to
take into account the bending of the raypaths (by refraction) within a complex section. These
modified techniques are usually referred to depth migrations - as well as imaging the data in the
correct position they also convert the vertical time scale of our section to depth. For the sake of
consistency we often convert the final depth section back into time since that's the usual scale for a
seismic section.
Both time and depth migrations are only approximations when applied to 2D seismic data.
Unless the 2D line runs exactly across the maximum dips in the structure (normally called a
"dip" line), some of the data should be migrated out of the plane of the section in three
dimensions. The only solution to this is, of course, 3D processing (and 3D migration) which
we will discuss below.
Let's start by looking at some real examples of migration, and some of the problems
common to all migration programs.
This section shows the bottom two seconds of a seismic line that was processed to four seconds
through wave equation migration.
The buttons show the time (in seconds) of the "downward continuation" computed by the
approximation to the wave equation above that point. 0 is unmigrated (the stack) and 4
(representing 4 seconds) is fully migrated.
Note how the complex unconformity at the bottom of this section gradually becomes
imaged as the wavefront effectively moves down the section.
If you are running this course on a fairly fast standalone system, or over a fast network,
you may wish to look at an animation of the complete migration of the above line - if you're
running on a slow machine I would not recommend this!
All migration algorithms suffer when the spatial sampling of the data is not enough to properly image
any steep dips in the section.
Here's a small piece of line migrated at its original 12 metre CDP interval, and then (by
simply processing every other trace) at a 25 metre interval. You can clearly see the
352
migration "noise" introduced by the under-sampling (or spatial aliasing).
Spatial aliasing of this sort can be reduced by some form of interpolation on the original
data. Just as we can reduce the sample period of our data in the time domain by
interpolating samples between those already there*, we can use FFT or Tau-P transforms
on our stacked section to interpolate the traces to a finer spatial interval before migration.
Almost any interpolation is better then none!
* Using, of course, sync functions!
The other problem, of course, is velocity.
We normally use our stacking velocities as a basis for building a "velocity-field" for
migration. We have already seen how inaccurate these velocities can be (in a geological
sense) and we may need to smooth them and adjust them (typically adding a few per cent
to them) prior to migration.
Small errors in velocity are difficult to spot but, as we mentioned a couple of pages back,
the wrong velocities can produce the "wrong" structure. In cases of extreme structure the
velocity field should itself be migrated prior to migrating the data. This requires an
interpretation of the stacked section and velocities picked on each horizon. We then use
the local dip to migrate each velocity and rebuild our velocity field.
As an extreme example this section was processed with the "correct" velocities (or what we
believed were "about right"!) and then much lower (less 25%) and higher (+25%).
Some structures are impossible to stack correctly without migrating the data before stack. Pre-Stack
Time and Pre-Stack Depth migrations are now becoming commonplace and use all of the data (usually
in common-offset planes) as input to the migration process. Even with a relatively simple pre-stack
time migration we have the opportunity to re-pick our velocities after migration (with the events now
in the correct position) and re-iterate through the whole process combining NMO, DMO, Migration
and Depth Conversion into one (expensive!) single process.
353
A pre-stack depth
migration of a complex
(and very steep)
structure can produce
a very accurate
migration.
The initial velocity

field for these data
were modified
(using genetic
algorithms) during
the processing to
provide the "best"
migration.
The colours on the

final display
represent the final
computed velocity
field.
3D Migration
After 3D binning and stacking our 3D volume now represents a
complete "volume" of 3D traces - evenly spaced (though not
necessarily the same spacing) in both spatial directions (X and Y) and
sampled in time in the Z direction.
For 3D data we need to migrate the data in 3D. A single point

in space will appear as a paraboloid in 3 dimensions on our
stacked data and we must "move" the data both along the line
and across the line to its new position (the green arrow in this
diagram).
Note that we almost achieve the same result (the errors are
probably less than our velocity errors) by moving the data in
two orthogonal directions (along X and Y) and, by judicious use
of Pythagorean geometry accomplish our 3D migration in two
steps.
This shows a 3D surface before and after migration (imagine that this is just one reflection from our
3D dataset).
354
Once again every reflection point will move "up-dip", only this time the dip is not assumed
to lie on the line - the data is migrated in 3D.
You should be able to see the "tightening" of each peak, and the widening of each trough
within the data set - each peak and trough moving in the direction of its own slope (or dip).
Notice how the coloured grid, drawn on the original (stack) dataset, distorts into a new
position after migration.
We can also perform this 3D migration as a two-step migration.
Here the data is first migrated along each "inline" (the lines parallel to the direction of shooting), and
the result is then migrated along the "crosslines" to complete the process.
A conventional 2D migration can be used for each pass but the results are not absolutely correct (they
rely on the assumption that [1+a]2 = 1+a2 when "a" is very small).
Full 3D migrations are now commonplace but even now some of these "cheat" by using wave
equation migrations over thin layers in the "X" direction and then in the "Y" direction. One advantage
of the older two-step processes was the opportunity to examine the data after the first pass - it's quite
easy to spot positioning or acquisition errors on data that has only been migrated in one direction, the
"crosslines" can show all kinds of problems.
We'll look at some examples of fully migrated 3D data in a couple of pages, after we've examined
some additional post-stack/post-migration processes and more conventional displays!
355
Other Post-Stack Processes / Display
Other Post-Stack Processes

We're almost at the end of the processing sequence, but let's look once again at the tail end of our
processing sequence - the post-stack processes:-
15 CMP Stack Summation of all data from one common mid-point.
16 Datum Correction Final static correction to the final datum.
17 Final Gain Recovery Adjustment of the initial gain recovery to compensate for velocity changes.
18 Multichannel Filtering Additional coherency enhancement (spatially).
19 Deconvolution Final frequency balancing.
20 Migration Re-positioning of dipping events to their correct spatial position.
21 Spectral Shaping Adjustments to the final amplitude / phase spectrum.
22 Bandpass filter Limiting of frequencies to the useful signal range.
Final Display
We've discussed most of these processes before, but I'll just go through them briefly to
highlight the post-stack parameters that we might use.
Our final datum correction is simply a static correction to move the data to a fixed datum.
For marine data this is simply a static to finally correct (to Mean Sea Level) for the depth
of the shot and streamer ([shot depth + streamer depth]/1500 m/s - typically about 8 ms).
For land data this step normally requires correcting the floating datum used in the
processing to a fixed datum. This final datum could, of course, be either above or
(unusually) below sea level.
The final gain recovery step usually removes the Time-Squared scaling applied at the
beginning of the sequence, replacing it with a "Velocity-Squared times Time" scalar which
is a better approximation - we can't do this until we have our final velocities.
356
The Multichannel Filtering step shown above typically includes any of the spatial filtering
techniques mentioned in Chapter 8. This may be used to remove any remaining diffracted
noise, or simply to improve the coherency of the data. Even a simple running mix of traces
is a multichannel filter.
Deconvolution, Migration, Filtering & Equalisation we have already discussed in some

detail. The Spectral Shaping stage may include some kind of phase correction (which will
be discussed in the next Chapter), or simply a band-limited deconvolution. This corrects
the spectrum to a "smooth" shape, usually using frequency domain techniques that assume
that the data is minimum-phase.
There are, of course, numerous proprietary techniques applied by different processing

software either before or after stack. All of these depend on the particular software being
used. In all cases, however, we have to finally display the data and we're now close off the
basic processing sequence by looking at types of seismic displays.
Display
Despite the fact that most processed data is now supplied to the interpreter on tape, we still need to
make paper or film displays for QC purposes and for a final record of our processing. Although
modern display screens can display in excess of 1000 or more "dots" across the screen, a 400 dpi (dots
per inch) paper plotter output of a 10 km seismic line will use literally billions of dots. We often
cannot "see" enough data on one display screen.
Let's examine some of the types of display used for seismic data ...
Seismic data is still displayed in black & white in

the majority of cases. This has the advantage of
being cheap to plot and reproduce and
generally takes one of three forms:-
A) Wiggle-trace (WT) - the original method

used to display seismic data and still used
when we want to examine the precise
details of a trace or wavelet.
B) Variable Area (VA or VAR) - the first "high-

tech" display used where the peaks within
the data are shaded black. This highlights
any events running across the data.
C) Variable Area / Wiggle Trace (VAWT or

VARWT or WTVAR etc.) - now the most
357
common type of display combining the
advantages of both those listed above.
Variable Area displays can be enhanced by the

addition of a "bias" to the traces:-
A) The original VA section shown above.
B) A bias of -10% - each trace is effectively

shifted 10% of its space to the left. This
will highlight just the strongest events in
the section.
C) A bias of +10% - each trace is effectively

shifted 10% of its space to the right. This
will enhance the weaker events (but lose
some detail on the strong events).
The same technique can be applied to VARWT

displays:-
A) The original display from the top of this

section.
B) VAWT with a -10% bias.
C) VAWT with a +10% bias.
We can, of course, change the "gain" of the

display:-
A) The gain used above less 6dB (x 0.5).
B) The gain used above less 3dB (x 0.7).
C) The gain used above.
D) The gain used above plus 3dB (x 1.4).
E) The gain used above plus 6dB (x 2.0).
Note how some of the traces are "clipped"

by the display system and/or quantised by
the "dots" on the screen.
We can achieve a little more detail by displaying
358
the troughs in a different shade - this is
sometimes called a "dual-polarity" display:-
A) We can display in black and white..
B) Or in any disgusting colour scheme!
When we move on to full colour or Variable

Density displays (unfortunately sometimes
called "VD"), we have lots of options:-
A) We can use a "grey-scale" display going

from black to white.
B) We can effectively lower the gain by

changing the colour table.
C) Or raise the gain by moving the black and

white extremes further into the table.
D) We can use a Blue-White-Red colour

scheme ...
E) ... or anything else we fancy.
One other option we have on Variable Density

or colour displays is how we interpolate:-
A) We can either use a continuos scheme that

"fills-in" the colour between traces.
B) Or we can simply display the colours

associated with each trace position. This is
sometimes useful if you are looking for
trace-to-trace anomalies.
359
Finally we can change the appearance of the
whole display by the judicious (or otherwise)
use of timing lines.
We, of course, need these lines to calibrate

our display but should be careful when
displaying data on low density devices (like
a VDU screen) that the timing lines don't
obscure the data.
Before finally producing our final section, let's look at some 3D displays.
Display (2)
360
3D Displays
After stack and migration a 3D dataset
represents a continuous volume of data
sampled in 3 dimensions.
The dataset shown here is from a very

high-resolution low-fold survey in deep
water - you can see the water bottom
reflection on the top of the "cube".
(I've stripped some of the water layer off of

these displays - you can, if you really want
to, calculate the true zero position by
spotting the very obvious water bottom
multiple on some of the later displays!)
We can display data in almost any direction

thorough this volume, usually referring to the
orthogonal displays as:-
Inlines - those lines that are parallel to the

original direction of shooting, in this volume left
to right.
Crosslines - those lines perpendicular to the

direction of shooting (front to back).
Timeslices - horizontal slices produced by

taking all of the samples from every trace at a
particular time.
Many other types of display are possible. For example we can interpolate a "random line"
running on any path through the volume (sometimes called an Arbitary 3D line), or we can
display "horizon-slices" - timeslices that follow an event picked though the volume.
During data processing it's usually the three orthogonal displays we concentrate on - in
each of the following examples use the buttons to switch between examples of inlines,
crosslines and timeslices:-
INLINES
361
CROSSLINES
TIMESLICES
Note that the first and last inlines and crosslines are relatively weak. There is no data
beyond these lines to migrate into their position, this reduces their overall amplitude.
Note also the level of detail on the timeslices. At times a timeslice can look like a satellite
photograph, or a microscope slide taken from a rock sample! In general very small details
(smaller than the time sample period) can be seen to "line-up" on timeslices.
The Final Display

Final sections, plotted on film or paper, almost always follow a standard pattern.
There will be a side label containing information on the acquisition and processing, plots
and annotation above and below the section, and, of course, the seismic data itself.
Click on the "Key" button and examine the following explanation on the various parts of
the display.
Key On Label
Red Basic line Company names, the line name and area details.
details
Yellow Field Hopefully, all of the geometry information from the field. For marine data (this
Parameters is a "land" line) this normally includes a boat diagram showing the overall
layout.
Green Processing Full details of the processing. This may include an enormous amount of detail,
Parameters or may simply list the processes applied without going into too much detail.
Many processing systems now include automatic labelling so that you can be
362
sure that the information on the label is correct.
Light Display details The scale used for the display. Normally the horizontal scale is expressed in
Blue both "true" scale terms (i.e. 1:25,000) and in terms of the parameters used to
plot the traces (10 traces per cm, 10 cms per second).
Dark Map Sometimes a location map is included (typically on 2D data) showing the
Blue position of the line on the surface.
Key On Section
Red Basic line A repeat of the line name at the other end of the section, possibly also showing
details the direction of the line (either in degrees or as, for example, "NNE").
Yellow Statics For land processing the elevations, field statics and residual statics are usually
plotted on top of the section, and the floating datum is often plotted on top of
the seismic data. For marine data, the water depths are usually just annotated
with the Shotpoint numbers.
Green Velocities The final velocities used to process this section are usually annotated along the
line. If this is a stacked section then we normally annotate the final stacking
velocities, if migrated then, of course, the migration velocities.
Light Line For 2D seismic data we mark the position of every other intersecting (or
Blue Intersections crossing) 2D line.
Dark SP/CDP The Shotpoint, Station and/or CDP numbers are annotated on either the top or
Blue numbers bottom of the section.
Pink CDP fold In many cases (particularly for land data) the CDP fold is also plotted.
There are no hard and fast rules as to "what goes where" on the section, but most modern
sections are something like the above example. Before closing the "normal" processing
route, we'll examine four major display parameters that still cause problems.
Display Parameters
There are four key areas where problems still occur in plotting seismic data - here's a brief summary!
DISPLAY SCALES
We're generally supplied with information regarding display scales in the form of "1:xxxx"
horizontal scale, and "zzz cms (or inches) per second. The second item usually relates
363
directly to a plotting parameter - we ask for "zzz cms per second". The first can, however,
cause problems.
Assume that you have a seismic line with a CDP interval of "cdpi" metres. In order to plot
this at a 1:xxxx horizontal scale we need to plot (xxxx)/(100*cdpi) traces per cm. For
example, with a 12.5 CDP spacing, and a 1:25,000 scale we need 25000/1250 or 20 traces
per cm.
So far, so good but, if we are plotting on a relatively low resolution plotter, we may need to
adjust this scale slightly so as to get an exact number of dots per trace to avoid nasty
looking aberrations in the display. For example, if we have a 400 dot per inch plotter, each
trace from the above example will need 7.87 dots! If we change this to "8", we'll get the
wrong scale (1:24,606 instead of 1:25,000) but a better looking display.
POLARITY
This is one subject that causes a lot of problems! The SEG (Society of Exploration
Geophysicists) definition of standard polarity ("SEG standard") is:-
"The onset of a compressional wave from an explosive source is recorded as a negative number, and
plotted on the final seismic section as a white trough."
This may seem a little odd, but is based on historical data and is the convention adopted for most
seismic data in the USA. Other countries (and companies) adopt the opposite convention so please
ensure that you know what you should be using and PUT IT ON THE SECTION LABEL!
PLOTTING DIRECTION
Again, a binary choice! We can either plot our sections from left-to-right or from right-to-
left. The convention here is that North and East are always on the right of the display -
roughly parallel lines should be plotted in the same direction regardless of the direction in
which they were shot. Traditionally anything shot from 0 (North) to 179 (almost South) is
plotted left-to-right, everything else from right-to-left but the overriding criteria should be
to keep roughly parallel lines plotted in the same (geographical) direction. If in doubt once
again, check with the person you're doing it for!
SHOTPOINT LABELLING
This only really applies to 2D Marine data. Our navigation data is stored using Shotpoint
numbers, and our seismic data is stored by CDP number. How do we relate these two
together?
We need to be sure just how our navigation data was recorded. Does it show the position of
each shot? The position of the recording antenna? The position of the mid-point between
shot and 1st receiver?
All of these are possible and require some adjustment to our labelling. For example, for
240 channel, 120 fold seismic data we will have two CDPs (at say 12.5 m) for every
Shotpoint (at 25m). The mid-point between the first shot and receiver corresponds to the
364
240th CDP on our section and, if the navigation data gives the position of this mid-point,
then we should mark our first SP on the 240th CDP. If the navigation data shows some
other position then we must offset our labelling by the corresponding amount AND PUT IT
ON THE SECTION LABEL!
Well, I guess that we've finally finished the basic processing sequence!
Before we move on to some more esoteric processes, it might be useful to have

a quick look at what happens to our seismic data once we've finished with it!
What happens next?
365
Once we've finished the processing (and plotted the data) we usually need to archive the
data on tape for the next stage - the interpretation of the seismic data. We normally run
several archives of the data for posterity - almost always in the SEGY format covered fully
in Chapter 5.
Although, traditionally, archives are made of the unfiltered data after both stack and
migration (so that we can change the deconvolution and filtering if necessary) we also need
to archive the final fully processed data set (that which we normally plot) for loading onto
the computer system used by the interpreter.
Until quite
recently, most
seismic data
was interpreted
with the aid of
a pencil and
(hopefully)
some geological
knowledge of
the area being
studied.
This not only necessitated the manual checking of every intersection in a 2D survey to
make sure that the interpretations "tied", but also required manual digitisation of the final
results - reading the picked time of events at small intervals along the line and hand-posting
these on a map for hand contouring.
366
The advent of large volumes of 3D data
pushed the development of CAI - Computer
Aided Interpretation.
Although the initial workstations were

relatively slow (and difficult) to use, the
advances over the last decade now provide a
total environment for the analysis of seismic
(and associated) data. The seismic data is
loaded onto the workstation, together with all
of the necessary navigation data, and the
interpreter can select lines directly from a
map, pick his reflections and map them.
All kinds of displays can be viewed including,

on some of the latest systems, the most
advanced forms of 3D visualisation (often
involving the wearing of strange headsets!).
367
Workstations can then be used for the complex tasks
involved with drilling, testing and prospect evaluation.
These tasks are traditionally left to the "Production"

side of the Oil Companies staff - the initial work,
including the seismic processing and analysis, being
handled by the "Exploration" staff.
The boundaries between "E&P" within companies are

now much less rigid than they once were with the
result that many of the latest interactive workstations
cover absolutely all of the work involved in turning the
seismic data into a viable production field.
Although we've reached the end of what is

currently the "standard" processing
sequence for seismic data, we'll go on in
the last Chapter to discuss some of the
more advanced techniques (which will
probably soon be part of the "standard"
sequence).
Before that, of course, we have our usual

end of Chapter questions!
368
Chapter 12 - Advanced Processing
To conclude the course, some more advanced topics, and yet more questions!
Page 12.02 - Complex Trace Analysis
Using complex numbers to represent the seismic trace, and displaying other "attributes"
extracted from the data.
Page 12.03 - Well Log Processing
Handling the data recorded by instruments lowered down a borehole. Which curves are
useful to the processing Geophysicist?
Page 12.04 - Data Matching
Matching well logs to seismic data, or matching one seismic survey to another.
Page 12.05 - Zero Phasing
Once we've matched our seismic to a well log, we can produce a "true" zero-phase section.
Page 12.06 - Seismic Inversion
With the addition of the processing velocities (and a lot of complications) we can convert
our zero-phased seismic data into Acoustic Impedance.
Page 12.07 - AVO (1)
The variation of amplitude with offset - how we can extract additional information from
our seismic data ...
Page 12.08 - AVO (2)
... and calibrate it using the physical parameters of the rocks.
369
Page 12.09 - Scanning & Reprocessing
Making use of our old data. Either scanning old paper sections or reprocessing old digital
data.
Page 12.10 - QC - Trials and Tribulations
Some thoughts on parameter trials and the things that can (and do) go wrong with seismic
processing.
Page 12.11 - Yesterday, Today and Tomorrow
A bit of history, and a brief look ahead (including all of the things not mentioned
elsewhere).
Some questions on advanced processing ...
Page 12.13 - Final Questions
... and some final questions that require your input!
370
Complex Trace Analysis
There is one method of displaying seismic sections that is useful for finding small changes
in the character of the data or for improving the continuity of the display. Although of
particular use to the interpreter, and common on the workstations used for interpretation,
we sometimes use this technique to enhance our data display during the processing
sequence.
To understand this technique, we need to go back to clock watching!
Long, long ago, on a page far, far away in this course (actually in Chapter 6) I showed an
animation of a rotating clock, with the height of the hand plotted to give a simple cosine
wave.
If, as shown here, we imagine the same clock but this time with a variable rotation speed,
and a variable hand length, the resultant trace (at the top of this picture) is more
complicated and begins to look a little like a seismic trace.
If we assume that we can always represent our seismic trace by some sort of rotating vector
like this then we can also examine an alternate version of the trace - the quadrature trace
formed by plotting the "width" of the hand at any time.
We can obtain this quadrature trace from the original trace by a 90 degree phase shift or,
as it is sometimes known, a Hilbert transform (name dropping again - David Hilbert was a
German mathematician).
371
Another way of looking at
this is shown here. Imagine
a thin wire rotating about
an axis and spiralling off
into space.
If we shine two lights on this

wire, the rear shadow (in
green) gives us the
"normal" seismic trace,
whilst the bottom shadow
(red) gives us the
quadrature component.
We can imagine that every

seismic trace is the "green
shadow" for a 3
dimensional function - a
complex trace.
So what's the point of all this? Well, it gives us four other parameters (and variations
thereof) that we can plot in place of the regular seismic trace.
Firstly we can plot the quadrature trace itself. This is just a 90 phase-shifted version of
the original trace - peaks and troughs now become zero-crossings, and what were zero-
crossings become peaks and troughs.
Secondly, and more importantly, we can plot some of the complex attributes of this pseudo
3D trace. The "length" of the rotating vector (the clock hand) can be plotted, and this is
usually known as the trace envelope. It contains the same amplitude information as the
original trace, but without any phase information.
Here's the envelope, or reflection strength, of a simple wavelet plotted (in red) as both
positive and negative values (the actual computed envelope is always positive).
The wavelet shown here is zero-phase, but, as you flick through the buttons the phase of
the wavelet changes. The envelope, however, always remains the same and always
completely "surrounds" the wavelet - regardless of phase.
The envelope gives us an overall picture of the "amplitude" of a reflection.
372
We can also plot the "speed" of the rotating vector. This is known as the instantaneous
frequency of the trace, and provides useful information on the actual peak frequencies
within the trace at each time sample. The position of the vector around the "clock" is
known as the instantaneous phase. This removes all amplitude information from the trace,
allowing us to see the weaker events.
Here's the full set of complex attributes for a small piece of seismic data. These are:-
1. The original traces.
2. The Hilbert transform.
3. The trace envelope.
4. The instantaneous frequency.
5. The instantaneous phase.
Note how the different events appear in each display. The envelope shows the overall event
amplitude (combining the peaks and troughs together into distinct "events"). The
instantaneous frequency highlights some bursts of high (and low) frequency in the data,
and the instantaneous phase removes all amplitude information - all events appear in the
same colours.
Although useful for improving the correlation of events across the section, these displays
don't actually add anything to the data - it's just another way of looking at our seismic
section. If we really want to add more information to the seismic then we have to look for
other sources of information. We'll start by looking at how we can integrate information
from holes in the ground!
373
Well Log Processing
Except when we're dealing with reconnaissance data in a new
area, much of the seismic data that we process runs close to a point
of absolute calibration - a well.
In established areas new seismic lines are often deliberately shot

close to wells, and, of course, wells are often drilled at a position
determined from seismic data so we have many instances of well
information being available during the processing of the data.
374
How is useful "geophysical" information obtained from a
well?
As well as the physical information obtained from core

samples extracted during the drilling, it's common to run a
set of measurements from tools lowered down the well after
drilling.
These Wireline Logs are obtained from complex sensors

contained inside a "sonde" which is lowered down the hole
and then pulled back as it records numerous physical
parameters from the surrounding rocks.
These can include acoustic measurements (the velocities in

the rocks), electrical measurements (for example, resitivity),
nuclear measurements (gamma ray emissions, etc.) and
other measurements.
The techniques used are similar to those used on space

missions - 3000 metres into the earth is just as hostile an
environment as the surface of Mars!
This table shows some DEPTH CALI DT GR RT NPHI RHOB

measurements from a typical 5000 12.2901 132.249 62.0218 0.7551 0.4025 2.209
well-log. There is always a
wonderful mixture of units used 5000.5 12.2908 132.824 63.8549 0.7526 0.4065 2.1983
in these measurements, the depth 5001 12.2917 133.745 63.3572 0.7581 0.4362 2.1836
here is in feet (values are "read" 5001.5 12.2502 133.568 65.776 0.7574 0.4246 2.1738
every six inches) and some of the 5002 12.2779 133.136 63.8274 0.7463 0.4058 2.1745
other values are in SI or
5002.5 12.2877 134.676 68.8113 0.7258 0.409 2.1825
"English" or API (American
Petroleum Institute) units. Here's 5003 12.3005 135.45 67.916 0.7163 0.4197 2.1877
what part of the curves look like:- 5003.5 12.3277 134.326 71.0099 0.7134 0.4358 2.1832
5004 12.3564 134.282 68.054 0.7114 0.445 2.1773
5004.5 12.3439 134.645 67.9841 0.7125 0.4468 2.1746
... ... ... ... ... ... ...
I don't propose to go into a detailed discussion of all these curves - for that please consult
your local well-log analyst or petrophysicist! For simple calibration of our final migrated
seismic data, just two curves are necessary - the "DT" curve giving the reciprocal of the
velocity (sometimes called the sonic curve), and the curve labelled "RHOB" - the density.
I've taken the DT and RHOB values DEPTH DT RHOB VEL AI RC

from the table above, and converted the 1524 132.249 2.209 2304.75 5091.19 -0.00460
375
depths to metres (we now have a
reading roughly every 15 cms). As the
DT curve gives us slowness (in
microseconds per foot), we can convert
this into a velocity by dividing it into
304800 - this gives us the column
labelled "VEL". 1524.16 132.824 2.1983 2294.76 5044.58 -0.00681
1524.31 133.745 2.1836 2278.96 4976.34 -0.00158
If we compute the acoustic impedance 1524.46 133.568 2.1738 2282.00 4960.61 0.00178
for each layer as the product of velocity 1524.61 133.136 2.1745 2289.40 4978.29 -0.00391
and density, we can compute the
1524.77 134.676 2.1825 2263.22 4939.47 -0.00168
reflection coefficient at the interface
between each 6-inch layer using the 1524.92 135.45 2.1877 2250.28 4922.93 0.00314
equation derived way back in Chapter 1525.07 134.326 2.1832 2269.11 4953.92 -0.00119
3. A slight rearrangement of that 1525.22 134.282 2.1773 2269.86 4942.16 -0.00197
equation, using AI's, gives us:- 1525.38 134.645 2.1746 2263.73 4922.72 ...
AI2 - AI1 ... ... ... ... ...
RC =
AI2 + AI1
The reflection coefficient (the end
column) is simply the difference of
impedances divided by the sum.
Here then is a plot of these computed values for a 700 metre section of the well-logs:-
376
We now have a set of idealised reflection
coefficients for every depth interval in our
well, and we need to convert these to time.
We can assume that the sonic curve

measures the P-wave interval velocities
within each 6-inch layer, and use this to
convert the depths from the well-log into
time. As this involves effectively
integrating the log values (and
compounding any errors) we usually
precisely calibrate this using another set of
information from the well - check shots
measured by placing geophones down the
hole and shooting into them from the
surface.
We can now plot our reflection coefficients as a function of time (the left
hand scale is now in milliseconds) and produce an ideal synthetic
seismogram showing how our seismic trace would look if we could record
the very high frequencies represented by this "six-inch" depth sample
rate.
If we consider the strong reflection shown at about 1780 ms, this

corresponds to a depth of about 1740 metres, or an average velocity of 1955
metres per second. Our six-inch depth sample rate corresponds to a time
interval of about 0.15 ms - about 25 times smaller than our actual 4ms
recording rate! This implies a frequency of about 3000 Hertz!
In order to more accurately predict how this synthetic trace will look in the "real" world
(sorry, but 3000 Hertz signals won't penetrate to 1740 metres - try 30 Hz!), this display
shows the effects of high-cut filters on the synthetic.
You can see that, below about 40 Hz, even the very strong event disappears!
Other events interfere with it at this low frequency.
So we have to filter the synthetic down to the expected bandwidth of our

seismic data before we can make any valid comparisons between them.
We'll see how we can use this synthetic to precisely zero-phase our data, but
first let's look at the more general case of comparing one trace with another -
data matching!
377
Data Matching
The matching of well synthetics to seismic data is part of the much more general problem
of data matching.
Imagine a Transition Zone survey shot as follows:-
378
We have a combination of Airguns and Vibrators as sources, and land and marine
geophones for recording. All of these have their own characteristics which lead to
problems in matching the final data set. Before examining some examples from this
transition zone survey, let's look at some of the reasons why the data doesn't tie.
POSITIONING of the data can be a problem. With 2D data (as shown at

the top), we need to be sure that the relationship we've determined to relate
the CDP numbers on our stacked data with the Shotpoint numbers on the
map is correct. For older vintages of data, the navigation systems
themselves might be dubious! We should, whenever possible, try to match
the stacks rather than the migrations. 2D migrations are (by definition)
incorrect, and we should get a better tie using the stacks.
For 3D data the enormous amount of data that overlaps can be a problem -
we need to use some fairly sophisticated techniques to "check" the
navigation data. We'll look at solutions to this on the next page.
STATIC differences between two (or more) surveys or source/receiver

combinations can also be a problem. In the example shown above, the
Vibroseis data must be properly correct to sea level to tie with the marine
data.
If a static problem is all that we have, then a simple cross-correlation

technique can be used to measure the time differences at a number of 2D or
3D line intersections and an "average" static correction (a fixed value)
applied to one survey.
379
PHASE differences can be slightly more difficult to quantify. We can
determine (as we'll see on the next page) a complex phase operator to
convert one dataset to another, but this can introduce dispersion (some
frequencies "shift" relative to others spreading out our events).
If it's possible, a simple phase shift (of "X" degrees) is the nicest correction
to determine - its simple to apply and reversible! Once again we'll look at
this on the next page.
BANDWIDTH differences are almost impossible to correct. If one survey

has much lower frequencies than another, we generally can't do much
about it (you can't invent what ain't there!).
Bandwidth problems can be minimised by the careful selection of

deconvolution parameters for both surveys, but may be something we just
have to live with.
AMPLITUDE differences are probably the easiest to solve.
We can measure the RMS amplitude in one or more time gates at each
intersection and generate either a constant correction or a gain-curve
adjustment to apply to one survey.
Remember that the actual numbers on tape don't necessarily mean very
much - there may be enormous amplitude differences between surveys.
Here's the processed (stacked) data from the transition zone survey shown at the top of the
page.
The three sections here are colour coded and correspond to:-
1. The marine data - airguns shooting into a marine streamer.
2. The data recorded by the land geophones - shot using both airguns and Vibroseis.
3. The Vibroseis data recorded at the top of the cliffs.
The final merged stacks both before and after phase correction (my apologies for the
quality of the displays - but this is very old data!).
Note particularly the "join" between the airgun and Vibroseis data (Yellow to Green). The
phase differences between the two different data sets are very obvious here.
Here's a much clearer example - the intersection between two different vintages of marine
380
data before and after correction.
For matching like this to work well, we need to use as much information as possible from
the two datasets. For 2D data we should use all intersections to determine the "best"
match between the surveys. We may need to make some adjustments to the navigation
data to optimise the "fit", but these corrections should be consistent (for example "move"
survey "X" 50 metres to the NW).
If we're matching multiple surveys, we need to use one survey as a "master" and match all
others to it. Once we have established to necessary corrections to match survey "B" to
survey "A", we can use both of these surveys to determine the corrections for survey "C",
and so on.
We'll now look at some of the techniques used for data matching, starting with the simplest
problem - matching the synthetic data from a well to one seismic line.
Zero Phasing
What do we mean when we talk about zero-phasing a seismic section?
381
We mean that we are attempting to make
every reflection on our section into a
symmetrical zero-phase wavelet.
Any increase in acoustic impedance

(velocity times density) across a reflecting
boundary should produce a perfect
positive zero-phase reflection.
As usual, we have two polarity

conventions. "Normal" polarity for zero-
phased sections plots a positive reflection
coefficient as a positive peak - "Reverse" is
obviously the opposite. Once again it
doesn't really matter which you use - just
make sure that it's noted on all displays!
The ideal way of zero-phasing our data is by comparison with synthetic seismograms
produced from well data (as mentioned a couple of pages back). This type of "data-
matching" is identical to that used to match different surveys and/or source/receiver
combinations together, which we'll come back to at the bottom of this page.
Data matching, whether it be matching a well synthetic to a seismic line, or matching two
seismic lines together always comes down to just one basic question. Can we find an
optimum filter that will consistently transform one trace into another?
(You can click on the animation to stop it!)
The three black "traces" shown on the right are three CDPs from a 2D
migrated line close to the nominal position of a well (determined from the
navigation data). The red trace is a synthetic produced from the well data,
filtered down to the same bandwidth as the seismic data (with a zero-phase)
filter. It's not obvious which of the traces on the left "best-fit" the well data!
382
We can mathematically
determine the position of
"best-fit" by the use of a
technique known as cross-
coherency.
This effectively designs a

filter to match each trace
to the synthetic, applies
that filter, and then
compares the result with
the desired output. The
value of this comparison
gives as some clue as to
the optimal positioning of
the data on our line.
Here's a plot showing the cross-coherency

calculations for a well synthetic against
200 CDPs on our line.
The red curve (with the axis on the left)

shows the cross-coherency comparison
value - the peak at 35% represents quite a
good match (this is close to the nominal
CDP which is at 1251).
The blue curve shows the time shift

associated with the optimum filter - at the
peak CDP it's about -4ms, very close when
matching wells to seismic!
When we're trying to "fit" a well to a 3D survey, or trying to

find the best fit between two 2D lines, we can use the sort of
spatial plot shown here.
For well vs. 3D this will indicate (in red) the best 3D line and
CDP position for matching.
When comparing two 2D lines, this type of plot can show us

how much "shift" we need to apply to each line to optimise
the match. Remember that we should be comparing stacks
for 2D lines to avoid migration problems. If we're
comparing 2 3D surveys (and all the bins that overlap) then
the migrations are probably better (3D migration is, after
383
all, supposed to be "correct").
Once we've determined the optimum position for the match, we can then go on to
determine the actual filters.
The three sections shown here are:-
1. The synthetic data from the well

(repeated 12 times) with a fairly high
filter applied.
2. The same synthetic filtered down to

about 30 Hz. (which roughly matches
the seismic bandwidth).
3. A group of fully processed CDPs from

the seismic line - the centre one being
the "optimum" position derived by our
cross-coherency calculations.
1 2 3
All we need to do now is find the filter!
These two plots show
variations on the
matching process.
The traces on each
plot are (from left-to-
right):-
The wideband
synthetic
trace.
A filter
designed to
match this to
the seismic
data.
The seismic
data from our
"best" CDP
(repeated 5
384
times).
The results of
filtering the
synthetic with
the filter - the
well data
filtered to
match the
seismic.
The left hand plot

shows the original
data, the right hand
one after we've
applied a -147 phase
shift and a -2.2ms
time shift to the
seismic data - this
gives a fairly "zero-
phase" filter.
Why try to match the well to the seismic when we're really trying to match the seismic to
the well?
It's all a question of bandwidth. The well synthetic contains very high frequencies
(equivalent to the original 6-inch sampling of the well log). If we try to design a filter to
convert the seismic data into this synthetic, the filter will "go mad" trying to boost
frequencies that just are not present in the seismic. By designing the filter the other way
we're reducing the bandwidth and get a stable result. Always try to make your filter
reduce the bandwidth rather than increase it.
The filter from the left-hand panel above was analysed (by Fourier Transform) and
appeared to be pretty much a +147 phase shift and +2.2ms time shift filter. By applying
the inverse of this to the seismic data (as numerical values) we can achieve a fairly good
zero-phasing of our seismic.
385
Here's the final phase/static corrected seismic line on the left,
with a "spliced" display on the right showing some
duplicated synthetic traces spliced into the section (I've
dropped the gain on this to show more detail).
You can see that the match is not perfect - it's a sort of "best-
fit" over the whole window. How could we improve this?
We could use smaller time windows for the matching. This is

sometimes difficult because we don't always have a lot of well
data to start with - well logs are sometimes very short when
converted to time. If we use a very small window we risk
matching everything (I can quote more than one example
where the wrong well was tied quite successfully to the wrong
seismic!).
Most of the time there is no perfect solution.

For zero-phasing to work properly, the seismic data must:-
Have a wide bandwidth - particularly at the low end.
Be true amplitude.
Be accurately imaged
Be free of side swipe, or properly 3D migrated.
Be free of multiples.
Have a high signal to noise ratio.
The well data must also be of good quality and free of

environmental problems and local anomalies.
As all of this is pretty much unobtainable we must compromise!

When we do this (by using either "optimum" filters or, as above,
numerical phase and static corrections) we can get a fairly
accurate zero-phasing of our data.
When well data is not available, we can achieve an approximate zero-phasing of the data
from the data itself. We make an estimate of the amplitude spectrum of the signal within
our data, assume that this has been recorded and processed as minimum-phase and then
correct this to zero-phase. Depending on the type of spectral estimation used this can
386
correct the data to within about 30 of "true" zero-phase.
To extend the example shown above to general data matching, replace the well synthetic
with a trace from another survey and repeat the whole process for every intersection
between surveys!
If we can estimate phase, static and amplitude corrections at each intersection (after
correcting for positioning errors) we can average these to provide a consistent set of
parameters to "convert" one survey to another.
Some words of warning on averaging! If you average together a whole bunch of random
filters, the result almost always comes out close to zero-phase - do check that the individual
filters are consistent before averaging them. Even averaging numeric phase corrections
can be difficult - what is the average of 350 and 10 - it could be either 180 or 0!
Now to move on beyond zero-phasing, to see how much additional information we can
extract from our seismic data!
Seismic Inversion
387
Once we've successfully converted our seismic data to zero-phase, by matching it to a well
synthetic, is there any additional information that we can extract from the seismic?
As usual, the answer's yes, we can use the information from the well log to attempt to
convert our whole section back from its seismic "reflection coefficients" into the detailed
acoustic impedences (or even velocities) present in our well data. This process is known as
inversion or, perhaps more correctly, seismic inversion.
Let's start by reviewing the processes we

got through to produce the synthetic
seismic data from the well logs - our
synthetic seismogram.
We multiply the velocities and densities

together to give the Acoustic Impedance.
We (effectively) differentiate this to give
our idealised reflection coefficients, and
then filter this down to our seismic
bandwidth.
All we need to do is to reverse this process!
So, we take our seismic data, apply an

inverse filter to this to zero-phase it (so
that it now represents reflection
coefficients). We integrate this result (into
Acoustic Impedance), and then divide this
up into velocities and densities to simulate
a series of well logs running along the
whole section.
Sounds good in theory doesn't it! There

are of course some problems involved in
this!
The first problem is that the seismic data doesn't contain anything like the same frequency
content as the well logs. We've seen before how the seismic data lacks the very fine detail
present in a well log. As well as this it's also usually very poor at the low frequency end of
the spectrum - we don't usually process data much below 3 or 5 Hz because of the noise this
introduces. Unfortunately these very low frequencies contain some very useful velocity
388
information in the well logs that is missing from our seismic data. Can we use any source
of low frequency velocity information?
Well, we do have the velocities used to stack and/or migrate the data. Although these are
only approximations to the true RMS velocities in the earth, we can use these to provide the
low frequency velocity "trend" in our data set and, with appropriate scaling, add these to
the results produced by integrating the zero-phase seismic data.
The second problem is that the processes used in the production of the synthetic
seismogram (multiplication, differentiation & convolution) and inherently more stable than
their inverses (division, integration & deconvolution). For this reason, considerable care is
needed during the inversion process to prevent errors creeping in, and our seismic data
needs to be as "clean" as possible. Inversion is a classic "GIGO" process - garbage in
garbage out!
Here's a (believe it or not)

simplified diagram showing a
full sequence necessary to
invert seismic data to
approximate acoustic
impedance (AAI).
Note that the "A", "B", "C"

and "D" points should be
connected together!
Most of the work involves

ensuring that the correct
scaling is applied to both the
velocity functions and seismic
so that when they are
combined together the results
are consistent.
We can estimate the densities

from the interval velocities by
the use of the Gardner
equation (named after G H F
Gardner - still an active
geophysicist). This equation
is based on an empirical
relationship (derived from
lots of well logs) and states
that the density is
proportional to the 4th root
389
of the velocity. In other
words:-
density=K.Velocity0.25
Where K is 0.31 for velocities

measured in metres per
second, or 0.23 for velocities
measured in feet per second.
The density is in grams per
cc.
We can finally move on to an example of seismic inversion. The small piece of section
shown here has been through a similar route to that shown above, and the five sections
show:-
1. The original migrated seismic data.
2. The integrated seismic data.
3. The seismic converted (by the appropriate scaling) into "seismic-band" acoustic
impedance.
4. The interval velocities derived from the processing, converted to impedance and
low-pass filtered.
5. The seismic+velocities - the AAI (Approximate Acoustic Impedance) section.
Another example of the original seismic

data, and a "wideband" inversion
(seismic + velocities).
The "wiggles" overlaid on each section

show the original seismic data and you
can clearly see an acoustic anomaly (the
dark red strip) running through the
centre of the dark blue background.
If we can identify this as, for example, an

oil-filled sand in our well, we can use the
inverted seismic data to delineate the
extent of this sand and hence estimate
our oil reserves!
390
Finally, a very detailed inversion from some high resolution data. The well position is
clearly marked and the quality of the match between this and the inverted seismic data is
phenomenal (and quite unusual!).
We can, of course, extract even more information from the seismic data, perhaps even some
physical parameters associated with different rock types. Let's move on to AVO!
391
AVO (1)
Amplitude versus Offset or Amplitude Variation with Offset are both names for what is
now known as AVO analysis.
What is AVO? Robert Sheriff's formal definition of AVO, as taken from the 1991 edition of
his Encyclopedic Dictionary of Exploration Geophysics is:-
"The variation in the amplitude of a seismic reflection with source-geophone distance.
Depends on the velocity, density and Poisson ratio contrast. Used as a hydrocarbon indicator
for gas because a large change in Poisson's ratio (as may occur when the pore fluid is a gas)
tends to produce an increase in amplitude with offset."
In other words, an analysis of the variation of the reflection amplitudes across the offsets
within one CDP gather can give us some valuable insights into the precise physical
parameters of the rocks at that interface. Let's digress for a moment and try to explain
how AVO effects come about.
392
If, as most processing geophysicists, you spend a lot of time banging
your head against a brick wall, you may like to consider just what
your violence is actually doing to the wall! If you hit the wall exactly
perpendicular to the wall, then all your energy will be converted into
a P-wave that will pass through the wall. If, as is likely, you hit the
wall some kind of "glancing" blow, then some of the energy will be
converted into S-waves, causing the wall to move up and down or
left to right.
This is precisely what happens at every reflection in our section - P-

waves that are not exactly at right-angles to a reflector partially
convert into S-waves which continue on down the section reflecting
and refracting.
You may like to review an early discussion we had on P and S waves in

Chapter 3.
So, now we have a whole mass of things

happening at each reflection (as usual,
we've greatly simplified this in the rest
of this course).
When an incoming P-wave strikes an

interface at some angle other than 90,
some of the energy is converted into an
S-wave which is reflected and
transmitted in the same way as the P-
wave. The angles in the diagram are
related by Snell's law:-
Where VP and VS are the P and S wave

velocities in each layer.
Up until now we've assumed that the reflection coefficient at each interface is simply the
difference of the acoustic impedances divided by their sum. Way back in 1899, Knott
derived formulae for reflection coefficients based on Snell's law and the continuity of
displacement and stress across the interface. These were formalised into amplitude
coefficients by Zoeppritz in 1919 to produce what are known as the Zoeppritz Equations. As
they say on TV sports programs - if you don't want to see the result, look away now!
393
ARP, ARS, ATP & ATS are the P-wave and S-wave reflection and transmission coefficients, VP,
VS and p are the P-wave and S-wave velocities and the density in each layer.
Can we make any useful predictions from the Zoeppritz Equations? We can simplify their
calculation a bit by bringing in another parameter, an elastic constant associated with the
rock - its Poisson's ratio.
In terms of pure physics, Poisson's ratio is simply a measure of how much the cross-section
of a rod changes when it is stretched. In a fluid, doubling the length halves the width (the
volume is retained) which yields a Poisson's ratio of 0.5. A rod which never got any thinner,
regardless of the amount of stretching applied, would have a Poisson's ratio of zero. There
is a simple relationship between the P-wave velocity, the S-wave velocity and Poisson's
ratio...
394
... and here's some typical P-wave
velocities and Poisson's ratio for some
specific rocks.
Note particularly how the inclusion of Oil

or Gas in the rock lowers its Poisson's
ratio. If we can measure this on our
seismic data we may have a direct
hydrocarbon indicator!
You'll note from the diagram above that

Poisson's ratio is always between 0 and 0.5,
and that the S-wave velocity can never
exceed about 70% of the P-wave velocity.
These plots show the variations in velocity

and Poisson's ratio for some particular
scenarios. We need to define a few
petrophysical terms before continuing!
The porosity of a particular rock is measured

as the ratio of the pore (space) volume to the
total volume. In other words, how much of
the rock matrix is available to hold a fluid
(like Oil or Gas). A porosity of 50% would be
like a sponge, whilst a very low porosity
would be a totally "solid" rock.
The saturation (or more properly water

saturation) is the percentage of water present
in the pores. It can vary from 0% (implying
that all spaces are filled with Gas or Oil) to
100% (all filled with water).
On these first two charts note how any Gas

presence (less than 100% water saturation) in
the sand causes an abrupt change in the P-
395
wave velocity and hence the Poisson's ratio.
The other two (lower) charts show the

variations in velocities and Poisson's ratio as
the porosity changes.
The differences here are slightly more subtle

but low porosity is associated with a low
Poisson's ratio.
From results like these we can throw all the

numbers into the Zoeppritz equations and
(using a computer) solve for various incident
angles. Here's an example, showing just the
computer P-wave reflection amplitude (ARP)
for a water-filled sand over an Oil or Gas
filled sand:-
How can we quantify the "slope" of the AVO response curves shown above?
Approximations of the Zoeppritz Equations (boy, do they need it!) by Shuey and others led
to an elegant method of reducing these curves to just two parameters.
396
If we plot the AVO response curves as a
function of the "Sine of the incident angle
squared", they (at least out to about 30)
approximate a straight line. In other
words:-
R(angle) = R0 + G * Sin(angle)2
Since 30 corresponds quite nicely with the

maximum angle we encounter in "normal"
seismic recording, we can use this
approximation to determine R0 and G (the
intercept and gradient) from both well logs
and seismic data.
Of course, it isn't quite as simple as that - let's now move on to look at the problems we
may encounter, and at some real examples!
AVO (2)
397
For most AVO analysis projects, the first thing we need to look at are the
well logs. To estimate the theoretical AVO response we need accurate VP,
VS and density curves.
Direct S-wave velocities are not normally obtained from well data
(though becoming more generally available through full waveform
logging and 3-component VSP's etc.), but they can be estimated from a
precise knowledge of the lithology associated with a particular layer.
Petrophysical analysis of many of the mysterious curves we discussed a

few pages back can provide enough information for a synthesis of the S-
wave velocities from the other curves.
Once we have all of the curves, we can plug all of the values into the dreaded Zoeppritz
equation, and calculate the theoretical AVO response for a CDP recorded at our well
position. We can even "adjust" the well curves to remove or add different materials to the
curves (for example Gas or Oil) and recompute the synthetic data for these new scenarios.
The seismic data itself needs very careful preparation. It must be very well matched to the
well data (perfectly(!) zero-phased) and must be free of any "non-geological" anomalies.
Here's just some of the problems that may effect our seismic data, and their (possible)
solution:-
Data Problem Solution

Source Timing Shot Alignment
Streamer Depths Long gate Amplitude Correction
(Sensitivity)
Random Noise FX Deconvolution, Common Offset Filtering, Radon Filtering
Coherent Noise Radon Filtering, FK Filtering, preferably on Common Offsets
Multiples Radon De-Multiple, Tau-P
Static corrections Accurate Field Statics (including Tidal corrections) and Residual
Statics
Dynamic corrections Precision Velocity Analysis, Residual Velocity Corrections
Non-hyperbolic NMO DMO, Pre-Stack Migration, Mute
Wavelet stability Statistical Estimates vs. Time/Space/Offset, Surface Consistent
Deconvolution
Positioning Pre-Stack Migration
Near surface changes Surface Consistent Amplitude Corrections, Replacement Statics
Shallow Gas Channels Amplitude correction using a deep reference event
ALL pre-stack processes MUST maintain the relative offset dependent trace amplitudes
398
(Note - nobody said that this was going to be easy!)
We can compute the angles necessary for our AVO

calculations directly from the velocity field used to process
the data (ideally the velocity field used to "correctly"
migrate the data).
Various methods can be used, the simplest being a

"horizontal-layer" model where the angular changes in each
small layer are computed (for different starting angles) and
summed to give a time vs. offset vs. angle plot.
The black lines shown here are in steps of 10 degrees.

Because this data has a very large offset, most of the seismic
traces are muted-out beyond about 30 degrees.
Once we have computed the angles (and fully processed the

seismic data to remove any "noise"), we can "pick" the
amplitudes across the spread and effectively plot these as a
function of the "sine of the incident angle squared".
Note here that the trough at about 1.6 seconds gets gradually
stronger across the spread, and the following peak gets
weaker. Remember that we keep just two values for each
sample - the R0 value, or zero-offset intercept, and "G" the
gradient of the amplitudes against "Sin(i)2".
We can only calibrate these results (and understand them) by

comparison with the results from the well synthetic.
This shows a very small piece of data processed through AVO analysis. The displays are:-
1. The original migrated seismic data.
2. R0.
3. R0+G.
4. Sign(R0) time G.
5. R0 times G.
399
Note that the "R0" section represents the amplitudes extrapolated back to zero-offset -
equivalent to having our geophones on top of our shots! The coloured displays show some
typical combinations of R0 and G - in this case the final display really highlights this
shallow gas anomaly. Not the kind of place to drill (unless, of course, it's a productive
field!).
These displays show two records ready for

input to our AVO analysis.
The record on the left is a synthetic gather

produced from the log data, whilst that on the
right is a "real" gather from the same position.
There's still some multiple interference on the

real gather, but some of the AVO effects on the
synthetic are (almost) visible on the real data.
Note particularly the strong "noise" on the

synthetic near its end. This is where the angle
calculations imply that the incoming P-wave is
at a critical angle, and will not reflect. You can
see this noise on the real gather (would we
normally have muted this out?).
AVO analysis is, at best, difficult, and, at worst, impossible! We need very good quality
seismic and well data for meaningful calibrated results but, when it does work, it can reveal
much more information than that (apparently) present in the migrated section.
To close our AVO discussion, here's your chance to play with the Zoeppritz equations.
Enter P-wave velocities for each layer (you should use metres/second for the density
calculation to work), either S-wave velocities (numbers greater than 0.5) or (in the VS
space) a Poisson's ratio (0 to 0.5). If you submit the density as zero, the program will use
the Gardner relationship to estimate one.
As before, ARP, ARS, ATP & ATS are the P-wave and S-wave reflection and transmission
coefficients - if the curves stop, it's because you've reached a critical angle. The black line
shows the computed R0 and G.
Time to get back to paper!
Scanning & Reprocessing

400
What happens to all of the old seismic data lying around in offices around the world either
on paper or tape?
One solution is to reprocess it!
Data that only survives as paper copy must first be

scanned (using a similar device to that attached to
many home computer systems) and then converted
back into (digital) seismic traces for reprocessing.
Images courtesy of It's a non-trivial task to convert old paper data into digital traces.
Phoenix Data Solutions
Ltd. Firstly the scanned image must be corrected for any distortion
present in the original and then any superfluous information must
be removed.
This display shows the semi-automatic removal of the timing lines

from an old scanned section - the part highlighted in blue is
enlarged on the right.
Then the baseline

position of every trace
must be determined, and
the trace itself extracted
from the original image
and interpolated through
regions where either the
trace is missing, or the
variable area display of
traces are overlapped.
All of this is done with

some form of "human-
controlled" automatic
picking, with the final
401
"traces" being filtered to
remove any anomalies
caused by the original
display "dots".
Once all of that is complete the seismic traces can be output to tape Images courtesy of
in a standard format and reprocessed to yield a "modern" seismic Phoenix Data
section. Solutions Ltd.
The reprocessed "after" section shown here has been processed

through some relatively simple post-stack processes - those that are
now commonly applied to all data.
Once we have our data in a digital form (usually just post-stack or even post-migration) we
can reprocess it, just as we can be asked to reprocess any previous processed data on tape
(usually the field tapes).
Why reprocess seismic data? Well, there are many reasons for reprocessing older seismic
data. The most common being:-
1. Dissatisfaction with the original processing
2. New objectives - a change of target
3. New technology
We should generally always be able to "improve" previously processed data, if nothing else,
we should have an original section to work from which we can at least aim to improve.
Aside from the continual improvements in computer hardware, and the introduction of
new processing techniques, a simple reappraisal of the parameters used in the original
processing, together with some new parameter trials (possibly based around the original
parameters) should lead to some improvement. Always remember that following the same
processing route, with different software and/or personnel, may not produce the same
results as the original section!
Before finally winding-up this entire course, let's have a quick look at some thoughts on
parameter trials, and some of the possible problems that we may encounter in processing.
402
QC - Trials and Tribulations
We've discussed (and demonstrated) "trials" at various points in the 1 Transcription
processing sequence described in the previous Chapters. Here's that S.O.D
sequence once again, with the places where trials are generally required 2 Correction
marked in green. I've marked the NMO correction stage in red
because we need to "test" our velocity functions at numerous points Signature
3
along each line (the same applies to the residual static corrections on Deconvolution
403
land data). How often should we run parameter trials, and how many Initial Gain
trials? 4
Recovery
5 Resample
Too many trials certainly leads
6 Edit
to confusion! I was once
involved in some deconvolution Multichannel
7
trials for a large 2D survey Filtering
where the client wanted 4 8 CMP Gather
deconvolutions before stack 9 De-Multiple
tested with 4 after at 7 different
10 Dip Moveout
locations. Allowing for the "no-
decon" panels this totalled 175 11 Deconvolution
separate displays with very NMO
12
minor differences! The Correction
parameters originally selected 13 Mute
by the processing geophysicist 14 Equalisation
(on the basis of a few trials at
15 CMP Stack
one location) were eventually
used! Datum
16
Correction
Here's a few tips on running parameter trials:- Final Gain
17
Recovery
Use the data itself to determine the initial parameter ranges (for Multichannel
18
example, on marine data, you should be able to estimate the Filtering
length of deconvolution operator necessary to attenuate the 19 Deconvolution
water bottom multiple).
20 Migration
In areas of complex geology or large structures it will be Spectral
21
necessary to repeat parameter trials in several areas - select Shaping
these areas with the interpreter. 22 Bandpass filter
23 Equalisation
Attempt to choose a consistent set of parameters, if results vary
considerably, a compromise is necessary.
If in doubt, use a committee decision, or at least get a second or

third opinion.
If one trial is obviously "better" - use it!
If all trials are very similar - it probably doesn't matter!
If parameters vary wildly across the area:-
1. Establish the controlling criteria and map it.
404
2. Choose less sensitive parameters.
3. Modify the processing route.
Despite our best efforts,

sooner or later a sick
computer, a sick
program, or a bad
parameter choice will
produce a "bad" section.
Finding the cause can be

difficult, but the
following table gives a
list of why we do each
process, and (some of)
what can happen if it
goes wrong!
PROCESS WHY DO IT? WHEN IT GOES

WRONG
Transcription / Demultiplex. To put the data into a standard Poor amplitude balance.
(demultiplexed) format. No data -(random noise!).
Signature Deconvolution / To standardise the "seismic Poor resolution.
Wavelet Deconvolution. wavelet" within the data. Bad timing.
Noise.
Amplitude Compensation. To correct for the spherical Quantisation.
spreading of the seismic Poor amplitude control at
wavefront. section top / bottom.
Datum (Static) Corrections. To correct the timing of the data Bad timing.
to a standard reference. Poor continuity.
Bad structure.
Residual Statics. To correct for near-surface Bad timing.
variations. Poor continuity.
Bad structure.
Resample. To reduce the total volume (and Low frequencies.
bandwidth) of the data. Aliasing.
High cost.
CDP (CMP) Gather. To collect together the traces from No data.
one common mid-point. Strange patterning in the
near-surface.
3D Binning. To collect together the traces from No data.
405
one 3D "bin". Strange patterning in the
near-surface.
Poor offset distribution.
DMO (Dip Moveout). To make a Common Mid-Point a Spatial aliasing.
Common Depth-Point. Poor structural resolution.
Deconvolution. To widen the bandwidth of the High noise content.
data. Poor continuity.
To remove short-period multiples. Introduction of pseudo-
multiples.
De-Multiple. To remove long-period multiples. High noise content.
Poor continuity.
Introduction of pseudo-
multiples.
Spatial aliasing.
NMO. To dynamically correct for time / Poor continuity.
space variant velocities. Poor stack response.
No data.
Mute. To remove the far-trace noise Noise.
bands. Removal of signal.
Poor stack response.
Poor multiple attenuation.
CMP Stack. To sum the data within one Poor continuity.
Common Mid-Point. No data.
Strange patterning in the
near-surface.
FK Filtering (& Mixing). To remove (dipping) noise or Dipping noise bands.
multiples. Spatial smearing.
Migration. To move the stacked data to its Spatial aliasing.
correct position. Bad structure.
Bandpass Filtering. To improve the signal-to-noise Removal of signal.
ratio of the data. High noise content.
Equalisation / AGC. To normalise the amplitudes in Shadow zones of low
both space and time. amplitude.
No amplitude
discrimination between
events.
Seismic Inversion. To convert the seismic data to Meaningless results.
(e.g.) Acoustic Impedance. Random noise.
AVO Analysis. To establish physical parameters Meaningless results.
from the seismic data.
The Final Display. To present the data to the All previous stages are
"client". wasted.
406
Yesterday, Today and Tomorrow
As we've now reached the last page of this course (aside from the questions), I thought that
407
it would be useful to examine the past, present and future of seismic processing.
Acquisition techniques have changed a

little bit in the last thirty years!
This picture shows the stern of a marine

vessel circa 1968, with the cylinders
containing 50lbs of explosive ready to be
throw over the side. The orange plastic
bags were used as "balloons", tied by 6
feet of string to the charge to keep it at the
"correct" depth!
A separate vessel recorded each shot on 21-

track 1" digital tape.
The late 1990's, and we now have multi-

streamer vessels capable of shooting
numerous 3D lines at once.
The source is now almost always some

form of Airgun, and 24-hour operation is
commonplace. Data is now recorded (by
the same vessel) onto the latest digital tape
format (usually some form of cartridge).
(Aside from the recording techniques, and

better positioning, little has changed for
Land operations - explosives are still the
most common source).
Computer operations have changed even

more!
This 1960's operator's console has

numerous switches for each register, and
neon lights (unlike LED's, bulb
replacement was common). On the right is
a large CRT display.
This computer (roughly the size of a

football field) had about 2K of memory,
with a loop of tape used for temporary
storage. About as powerful as the first
pocket calculators!
408
Today it's far more boring!
Operator's consoles are just another

display screen, with all of the internal
workings of the machine hidden away
under layers of operating system.
With the distributed systems now in use,

operators themselves are a dying breed,
with most of the input & output now being
handled by the geophysicist.
Computing power is still, of course,

changing at an exponential rate.
Processing speeds are now measured in

Megaflops - millions of instructions per
second, and the latest machines use
multiple processors to implement parallel
processing.
The "box" shown at the top is an array

processor from the 1970's, attached to your
"normal" computer to rapidly process the
floating-point numbers used in seismic
processing.
Although very fast for its time (and very

expensive), it could achieve about 8
Megaflops, compared with the 4 processors
each performing at about 750 Megaflops in
the lower (1990's) machine. Computing
"power" (however you measure it) is still
doubling every one or two years.
409
Tape storage has
also changed.
The old 21 and
9-track tapes,
holding just
kilobytes of data,
have given way
to modern
cartridges
holding several
gigabytes of
data.
The story on disk storage is

the same! On the left is a
late 1970's suite of 470
Megabyte disks in their
cabinet. On the right, a
modern "box" containing
some 2 Terabytes of storage
(that's 2,000,000,000,000
bytes - enough to hold the
entire text of the
Encyclopaedia Britannica
over 50,000 times, or over
500 times the storage shown
on the left!).
The latest news, on the use of

single atoms to store binary
information, seems to imply
that we may "soon" be
reaching the absolute limit
on data storage!
410
The output "plotting" of seismic data hasn't changed in
principle, only in the resolutions now available.
Early plotters used digital-to-analogue converters to convert

the numeric values into a continuous waveform, and used
optical methods to "project" this onto film.
Modern plotters plot the trace directly from its digital

representation, usually at anything up to 1200 dots per inch.
Unfortunately, there's still a lot of paper to look at!
The actual mechanics of data processing

has also changed quite a lot.
In the early days it was necessary to

prepare "jobs" on either punched tape or
punched cards, and submit them to the
computer room for processing. Depending
on the urgency of the job (or your
relationship with the computer operators),
you could wait several weeks to see the
output from one stage of the processing. It
was then that you discovered that you'd
applied your trace mute backwards, and
had to re-submit the whole job (and wait
another two weeks).
Nowadays almost all processing is done via

workstations. These not only provide
instant access to your data for display, they
also control much of the overall data
management associated with data
processing.
411
It's interesting to note that some things
have not changed. When I took these
photographs (in Robertson's Swanley
processing centre), almost all of the Land
processing personnel were picking first-
breaks, whilst almost all of those involved
in Marine 2D or 3D processing were either
Where is processing likely to go from here? Well, we've already seen an increase in the use
of more sophisticated techniques on a routine basis - pre-stack migration is now very
commonplace whereas, at one time, the running times would have made it prohibitively
expensive.
There is always hope that improvements in machine "intelligence" will alleviate the need to
pick either first-breaks or velocities, but it will be some time before geophysicists will fully
"trust" their computers to do all of the work.
I'll close this section now with a look at some of the things that I haven't specifically
mentioned elsewhere in this course - just to tidy things up!
3C Processing 3-component processing. By using special geophones designed to record

the three orthogonal components of particle velocity, it's possible to
extract both P and S waves and their directions. This technique (which
requires Ocean-Bottom cables for Marine data) enables the geophysicist
to produce both P and S wave sections.
Depth With an appropriate velocity field, it is possible (by simple stretching) to
conversion convert our seismic time-section into a depth-section. The process is
totally dependent on the velocity field being "correct" and, as such, is best
performed as part of a more complex ray-tracing process such as pre-
stack depth migration.
Inverse "Q" A technique that attempts to correct for the energy losses (and phase
deconvolution changes) that occur as a function of frequency. Compensation requires
time-variant filters of a specified phase (usually minimum-phase) that
apply a "lift" to the higher frequencies (usually specified as dBs/octave).
RAP Relative Amplitude Processed - processing that retains the trace-to-trace
412
and sample-to-sample relative amplitude. Essential for any advanced
processing (AVO & Inversion) that relies on accurate amplitude
information. Sometimes called True Amplitude Processing.
VSP Vertical Seismic Profiling. Geophones are placed down a borehole and
then normal surface sources are fired into these geophones. These provide
valuable additional information from the well, and can also be used to
provide P and S wave sections.
O.K., on to the questions!
Final Questions
The following three questions are 1) quite hard, and 2) don't include the answers! Have a
quick look at them, and then send your answer to us as shown below. We'll try and get
back to you ASAP with the correct answers!
Question 1:
We have occasionally mentioned 4D processing in this course. Assuming that we could

display it correctly (it needs a 5-dimensional display system), what would (normally) be the
scales associated with each dimension?
Question 2:
Here's a very old seismic section (migrated, and partially interpreted). What, if anything,
is wrong with it?
413
Question 3:
Here's three stacked sections from the same 2D line. Which one ("A", "B" or "C") is
correct, and which single process is missing from the processing sequence for the other two
sections (just one process is missing in each case).
To send us your answers, you might be able to Email them to us by clicking here (this, I'm
afraid, depends on your Browser set-up), or you can Email them manually to us at
"training@geo.robresint.co.uk".
If you need to send them in writing, either fax them to (+44) (0)1322-613650, for the
attention of the Training Department, or write them on a piece of paper and mail them to:-
The Training Department

Robertson Research International Ltd.
Horizon House
Azalea Drive
Swanley
Kent BR8 8JR
England
Please include your name and company name and Email address (if applicable).
414
Thank you for you patience! If you've got this far and read every single word then I can
only congratulate you!
I would like to close by thanking those people without whom this course would not have
been completed, particularly those at Robertson's in Swanley who checked and commented
on it's content (you know who you are, so I won't mention you!).
All that remains now is to wish you many years of successful data processing, as this is
really ...
415

Uo JNLM

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Uo JNLM

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Seismic Processing - Table of Contents

01.01 Chapter 1 - In the beginning ...

03.01 Chapter 3 - Waves and Raypaths

03.03 P and S Waves

03.05 Ray Paths

03.06 More Ray Paths

03.08 Multiple Reflections

03.10 Chapter 3 - Questions

04.01 Chapter 4 - Geometry

04.02 Marine 2D Geometry

04.03 Multi-Fold Geometry

04.04 Calculating the fold

04.05 Land Geometry

04.06 Elevations and shot depths

04.07 Field Statics

04.08 Crooked Lines

04.09 The problems with 2D

04.12 Chapter 4 - Questions

05.01 Chapter 5 - Recording the data

05.02 Number systems

05.03 Binary numbers

05.04 Binary arithmetic

05.08 Recording filters

05.09 Tape Formats

05.10 Field Tape Formats

05.13 Chapter 5 - Questions

06.01 Chapter 6 - Frequencies

06.02 Complex Numbers

06.04 Combining different frequencies

06.05 The Fourier Transform

06.06 The Forward Transform

06.07 The Inverse Transform

06.08 Example FFT's

06.09 Digital Filtering

06.11 The frequency content of the seismic trace

06.13 Chapter 6 - Questions

07.01 Chapter 7 - Processing Flows (1)

07.02 A typical processing flow

07.04 Vibroseis data & correlation

07.05 Shot summing

07.06 Initial Statics

07.07 Signature Deconvolution (1)

07.08 Signature Deconvolution (2)

07.09 Signature Deconvolution (3)

07.10 Signature Deconvolution (4)

07.11 Gain Recovery

07.12 Trace editing

07.13 Chapter 7 - Questions

08.01 Chapter 8 - Processing Flows (2)

08.03 Spatial Resampling

08.04 Spatial Frequencies

08.05 Spatial filtering

08.07 Linear Tau-P filtering

08.09 Spatial Filtering Examples (1)

08.10 Spatial Filtering Examples (2)

08.11 Spatial interpolation

08.12 Sorting & Gathering

09.01 Chapter 9 - Processing Flows (3)

09.02 Dynamic corrections

09.03 NMO and Velocities

09.04 Seismic Velocities

09.05 Picking Velocities (1)

09.06 Picking Velocities (2)