Migration Deconvolution vs Least Squares Migration
description
Transcript of Migration Deconvolution vs Least Squares Migration
Migration Deconvolution vs Least Squares Migration
Jianhua Yu, Gerard T. Schuster
University of Utah
OutlineOutline• MotivationMotivation
• MD vs. LSMMD vs. LSM
• Numerical TestsNumerical Tests
• ConclusionsConclusions
Migration Noise ProblemsMigration Noise Problems
Footprint
Migration noise and artifacts
Tim
e
Migration ProblemsMigration Problems
Recording footprintsRecording footprints
AliasingAliasing
Limited resolutionLimited resolution
Amplitude distortionAmplitude distortion
MotivationMotivation
Investigate MD and LSM:
Improve resolution
Suppress migration noiseComputational cost
Robustness
OutlineOutline• MotivationMotivation
• MD vs. LSMMD vs. LSM
• Numerical TestsNumerical Tests
• ConclusionsConclusions
m = (m = (L L L L )) L L ddTTTT -1
Least Squares Migration
Reflectivity
Modeling operator
Seismic data
Migration operator
m = (m = (L L L L )) L L ddTTTT -1
Migration Deconvolution
Reflectivity
Modeling operator
Migrated data
m’m’
Solutions of MD Vs. LSMSolutions of MD Vs. LSM
m = (m = (L L L L )) L L ddTTTT -1LSM:
TTmm = ( = (L LL L ) ) mm’’
-1-1 MD:
Migrated image
Data
I/O of 3-D MD Vs. LSMI/O of 3-D MD Vs. LSM
Huge volumeHuge volume LSM:
Relative samll cubeRelative samll cube MD:
OutlineOutline• MotivationMotivation
• MD Vs. LSMMD Vs. LSM
• Numerical TestsNumerical Tests
• ConclusionsConclusions
Numerical TestsNumerical Tests
• Point Scatterer ModelPoint Scatterer Model
• 2-D SEG/EAGE overthrust model 2-D SEG/EAGE overthrust model poststack MD and LSMpoststack MD and LSM
Scatterer Model Krichhoff MigrationD
epth
(k
m)
1.8
01.00 1.00
MD LSM Iter=10D
epth
(k
m)
1.8
01.00 1.00
Dep
th (
km
)
1.8
01.00
LSM Iter=151.00
LSM Iter=20
• Point Scatterer ModelPoint Scatterer Model
• 2-D SEG/EAGE Overthrust Model 2-D SEG/EAGE Overthrust Model Poststack MD and LSMPoststack MD and LSM
Numerical TestsNumerical Tests
KM
Dep
th (
km
)
4.5
00 7.0
0 7.0
X (km)
X (km)
4.5
0
LSM 15
KM
Dep
th (
km
)
4.5
00 7.0
0 7.0
X (km)
X (km)
4.5
0
MD
Dep
th (
km
)
4.5
00 7.0
0 7.0
X (km)
X (km)
4.5
0
MD
LSM 15
LSM 15
MD
KM2
3.5
Dep
th (
km
)
LSM 192
3.5
Dep
th (
km
)Zoom View
Dep
th (
km
)
4.5
00 7.0
Why does MD perform better than LSM ?
4.5 MD
LSM 19
0
X (km)
OutlineOutline• MotivationMotivation
• MD Vs. LSMMD Vs. LSM
• Numerical TestsNumerical Tests
• ConclusionsConclusions
ConclusionsConclusions
Efficiency MD >> LSM
FunctionFunction PerformancPerformanceeResolutionResolution MD < LSM (?)MD < LSM (?)
Suppressing noise MD = LSM (?)
Robustness MD < LSM
AcknowledgmentsAcknowledgments
• Thanks UTAM (Thanks UTAM (http://utam.gg.utah.edu) sponsors for the financial support