Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Research on combined processing techniques of air gun and sparker source towed streamer seismic data

  • Original Research Paper
  • Published:
Marine Geophysical Research Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

In recent years, sparker source has gradually been applied for high-resolution seismic surveys. But the air gun is still the most commonly used seismic sources in marine seismic exploration. The seismic data frequency range of the air gun sources is below 200 Hz. On the contrary, the seismic data frequency range of the sparker sources is about 50–500 Hz. The low and high frequency components of the seismic data are both important for high resolution seismic exploration. Usually the energy produced by the air gun sources is stronger than that of the sparker sources, so the exploration depth of the air gun sources is bigger than that of the sparker sources. How to make full use of the two kinds of source to carry out high-resolution seismic exploration is a particularly meaningful work. Here the combined processing idea of the two kinds of sources’ towed streamer seismic data were presented and we designed a complete data processing workflow. The amplitude matching of air gun and sparker source seismic data is a very key technique in this combined processing. The main processing steps include conventional processing such as noise attenuation, amplitude compensation, wavelet processing, velocity analysis, pre-stack time migration and so on. But also, there are some special processing techniques such as the residual static corrections, CDP trim statics corrections and post-stack predictive deconvolution which are applied to the sparker source data. The results show that the migration section of the combined processing is better than those of the separately processing.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7
Fig. 8
Fig. 9
Fig. 10
Fig. 11
Fig. 12
Fig. 13
Fig. 14
Fig. 15
Fig. 16
Fig. 17
Fig. 18
Fig. 19
Fig. 20
Fig. 21
Fig. 22
Fig. 23

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Cahyaningtyas MB (2018) Broadband seismic: case study modeling and data processing. IOP Conference Series Earth and Environmental Science, 132(1), 012001

  • Canales, L. L. (1984). Random noise reduction. In SEG Technical Program Expanded Abstracts 1984 (pp. 525-527). Society of Exploration Geophysicists.

  • Caporal M, Blacquière G, Davydenko M (2018) Broadband imaging via direct inversion of blended dispersed source array data. Geophys Prospect 66(5):942–953. https://doi.org/10.1111/1365-2478.12584

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dondurur D (2018) Acquisition and processing of marine seismic data. Elsevier

  • Duchesne MJ, Bellefleur G, Galbraith M, Kolesar R, Kuzmiski R (2007) Strategies for waveform processing in sparker data. Mar Geophys Res 28(2):153–164. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11001-007-9023-8

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Elboth T, Presterud IV, Hermansen D (2010) Time-frequency seismic data de‐noising. Geophysical Prospecting, 58

  • Fulton TK (1985) Some interesting seismic noise. Leading Edge, 4

  • Gao X, Gong X, Gao S (2016) Scale factor estimation for OBC dual-sensor seismic data. Oil Geophys Prospect 51(1):49–53

    Google Scholar 

  • Henriet J, Monjoie A, Schroeder C (1986) Shallow seismic investigations in engineering practice in Belgium. First Break, 4(5)

  • Herman M, Hashim HS, Latif AHA, Ghosh DP (2017) Application of FK Filtering for Coherent Noise Removal in High Frequency Shallow Marine Data. IOP Conference Series: Earth and Environmental Science

  • Hlebnikov, V., Elboth, T., Vinje, V., & Gelius, L. J. (2021). Noise types and their attenuation in towed marine seismic: A tutorial. Geophysics, 86(2), W1-W19.

  • Chen, K., & Sacchi, M. D. (2015). Robust reduced-rank filtering for erratic seismic noise attenuation. Geophysics, 80(1), V1-V11.

  • Kluesner J, Brothers D, Hart P, Miller N, Hatcher G (2018) Practical approaches to maximizing the resolution of sparker seismic reflection data. Marine Geophysical Research

  • Kong F, He T, Spence GD (2012) Application of deep-towed multichannel seismic system for gas hydrate on mid-slope of northern Cascadia margin. Sci China Earth Sci 55(5):758–769

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kragh E, Muyzert E, Curtis T, Svendsen M, Kapadia D (2010) Efficient broadband marine acquisition and processing for improved resolution and deep imaging. Lead Edge 29(4):464–469

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Liu MY, Guo T, Shen MC, Dun-Shi WU, Shang-Wei WU, Yang N (2010) Using Multi-track Statistical Method for Extracting Wavelet and Its Application. Journal of Oil and Gas Technology

  • Luo G-C, Ge H-K, Wang B-S, Hu P, Mu H-W, Chen Y (2008) Fired Models of Air-gun Source and Its Application. Earthq Res China 22(2):112–120

    Google Scholar 

  • Martin J (1999) Acquisition of marine point receiver seismic data with a towed streamer. SEG Tech Program Expanded Abstracts 19(1):2484

    Google Scholar 

  • Parkes G (1986) The Marine Seismic Source. The Marine Seismic Source

  • Pascouet A (1991) Something new under the water: The bubbleless air gun. Lead Edge 10(11):79–81

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Roeck D (1998) Very high resolution 3D marine seismic data processing for geotechnical applications. Geophys Prospect 46(2):105–120

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Soubaras R (2011) Broadband Marine Seismic – Breaking the Limits

  • Vaezi Y, Kazemi N (2016) Attenuation of swell noise in marine streamer data via nonnegative matrix factorization. SEG Technical Program Expanded Abstracts 2016

  • Vassallo M, Eggenberger K, van Manen D-J, Özbek A, Watterson P (2013) Broadband and beyond with marine towed streamers. Lead Edge 32(11):1356–1365

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wang X, Qi B, Zhao Q, Wang W, Yu K (2019) Feasibility of sparker source in marine seismic exploration: data analysis and processing. Acta Geophys 67(5):1413–1418

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Yilmaz Ö (2001) Seismic data analysis: Processing, inversion, and interpretation of seismic data. Society of exploration geophysicists

  • Zhao X, Lu P, Zhang Y, Chen J, Li X (2019) Swell-noise attenuation: A deep learning approach. Lead Edge 38(12):934–942

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

This research was funded by the National Natural Science Foundation of China (No. 41874131) and the National Key Research and Development Program of China (2017YFC0307405).

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. School of Geophysics and Information Technology, China University of Geosciences (Beijing), 100083, Beijing, China

    Zhu Yang, Xiangchun Wang, Hongfei Qian & Xuelei Chen

  2. Guangzhou Marine Geological Survey of China Geological Survey, 510760, Guangzhou, China

    Xiaozhu Hao

Authors
  1. Zhu Yang
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Xiangchun Wang
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Xiaozhu Hao
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Hongfei Qian
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Xuelei Chen
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Xiangchun Wang.

Additional information

Publisher’s note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Yang, Z., Wang, X., Hao, X. et al. Research on combined processing techniques of air gun and sparker source towed streamer seismic data. Mar Geophys Res 43, 18 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11001-022-09484-y

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11001-022-09484-y

Keywords

Search

Navigation