Abstract
Since the precision of spatial derivative of wavefield calculated by staggered difference is superior to that by central difference, the formula of second-order staggered differential coefficient with 2N-order precision is constructed via mathematical deduction on combination of first-order differential coefficient on each grid point, and its validity is verified by numerical simulation in constant velocity media. With the staggered mesh, the maximum peak frequency of Ricker wavelet which does not generate numerical dispersion may be increased by 10–15 Hz, thus the vertical resolution of simulated seismograms may be enhanced. In order to eliminate the boundary reflection which is characterized as high frequency, the absorbing boundary condition of perfectly matched layer with staggered mesh is utilized in numerical simulation of scalar-wave equation, and the suppression effect is superior to that of the central difference. The precision of simulated records may be improved when staggered mesh is adopted in calculation of the second-order spatial derivative, and the ringing phenomena appeared before the first break may be avoided. The computational cost of second-order staggered difference increased by only 25% on 3.60 GHz Intel Core i7–4790 processor when the precision of simulated records is same as that simulated by second-order central difference.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Aki K, Richards PG (1980) Quantitative seismology: theory and methods. WH Freeman & Co, San Francisco
Alford RM, Kelly KR, Boore DM (1974) Accuracy of finite-difference modeling of the acoustic wave equation. Geophysics 39(6):834–842. https://doi.org/10.1190/1.1440470
Alterman Z, Karal FC (1968) Propagation of elastic waves in layered media by finite difference methods. Bull Seismol Soc Am 58(1):367–398
Angus DA, Kendall JM, Fisher QJ, Segura JM, Skachkov S, Crook AJL, Dutko M (2010) Modelling microseismicity of a producing reservoir from coupled fluid-flow and geomechanical simulation. Geophys Prospect 58(5):901–914. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2478.2010.00913.x
Bansal R, Sen MK (2008) Finite-difference modelling of S-wave splitting in anisotropic media. Geophys Prospect 56(3):293–312. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2478.2007.00693.x
Berenger JP (1994) A perfectly matched layer for the absorption of electro-magnetic waves. J Comput Phys 114(2):185–200. https://doi.org/10.1006/jcph.1994.1159
Bohlen T, Wittkamp F (2016) Three-dimensional viscoelastic time-domain finite-difference seismic modelling using the staggered Adams-Bashforth time integrator. Geophys J Int 204(3):1781–1788. https://doi.org/10.1093/gji/ggv546
Carcione JM (1999) Staggered mesh for the anisotropic and viscoelastic wave equation. Geophysics 64(6):1863–1866. https://doi.org/10.1190/1.1444692
Carcione JM, Herman GC, ten Kroode APE (2002) Seismic modeling. Geophysics 67(4):1304–1325. https://doi.org/10.1190/1.1500393
Cerjan C, Kosloff D, Kosloff R, Reshef M (1985) A nonreflecting boundary condition for discrete acoustic and elastic wave equations. Geophysics 50(5):705–708. https://doi.org/10.1190/1.1441945
Claerbout JF, Green I (2008) Basic earth imaging. Stanford University, San Francisco
Collino F, Monk PB (1998) Optimizing the perfectly matched layer. Comput Methods Appl Mech Eng 164(1):157–171. https://doi.org/10.1002/sim.6602
Collino F, Tsogka C (2001) Application of the perfectly matched absorbing layer model to the linear elastodynamic problem in anisotropic heterogeneous media. Geophysics 66(1):294–307. https://doi.org/10.1190/1.1444908
Corrêa GJP, Spiegelman M, Carbotte S, Mutter JC (2002) Centered and staggered Fourier derivatives and Hilbert transforms. Geophysics 67(5):1558–1563. https://doi.org/10.1190/1.1512801
Crase E (1990) High order (space and time) finite-difference modeling of the elastic wave equation. In: 1990 SEG Annual Meeting, San Francisco, 23–27 September 1990. https://doi.org/10.1190/1.1890407
Dablain MA (1986) The application of high-order differencing to the scalar wave equation. Geophysics 51(1):54–66. https://doi.org/10.1190/1.1442040
Engquist B, Majda A (1977) Absorbing boundary conditions for numerical simulation of waves. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 74(5):1765–1766
Falk J, Tessmer E, Gajewski D (1996) Tube wave modeling by the finite-difference method with varying grid spacing. Pure Appl Geophys 148(1–2):77–93. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00882055
Figliuzzi B, Jeulin D, Faessel M, Willot F, Koishi M, Kowatari N (2016) Modelling the microstructure and the viscoelastic behaviour of carbon black filled rubber materials from 3D simulations. Tech Mech 32(1–2):32–56
Fletcher R, Du X, Fowler PJ (2008) A new pseudo-acoustic wave equation for TI media. In: 2008 SEG Annual Meeting, Las Vegas, 9–14 November 2008. https://doi.org/10.1190/1.3059301
Fornberg B (1987) The pseudospectral method: comparisons with finite differences for the elastic wave equation. Geophysics 52(4):483–501. https://doi.org/10.1190/1.1442319
Fornberg B (1990) High-order finite differences and the pseudospectral method on staggered grids. SIAM J Numer Anal 27(4):904–918. https://doi.org/10.1137/0727052
Galis M, Moczo P, Kristek J (2008) A 3-D hybrid finite-difference–finite-element viscoelastic modelling of seismic wave motion. Geophys J Int 175(1):153–184. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-246X.2010.04775.x
Hestholm S (2009) Acoustic VTI modeling using high-order finite-differences. Geophysics 74(5):T67–T73. https://doi.org/10.1190/1.3157242
Hestholm S, Ruud B (2002) 3D free-boundary conditions for coordinate-transform finite-difference seismic modelling. Geophys Prospect 50(5):463–474. https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1365-2478.2002.00327.x
Hustedt B, Operto S, Virieux J (2004) Mixed-grid and staggered-grid finite-difference methods for frequency-domain acoustic wave modelling. Geophys J Int 157(3):1269–1296. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-246X.2004.02289.x
Jo CH, Shin C, Suh JH (1996) An optimal 9-point, finite-difference, frequency-space, 2-D scalar wave extrapolator. Geophysics 61(2):529–537. https://doi.org/10.1190/1.1443979
Kakar R, Kakar S (2015) Modelling of SH-waves in a fiber-reinforced anisotropic layer over a pre-stressed heterogeneous half-space. J Theor Appl Mech 54(2):463–475. https://doi.org/10.15632/jtam-pl.54.2.463
Komatitsch D, Tromp J (2003) A perfectly matched layer absorbing boundary condition for the second-order seismic wave equation. Geophys J Int 154(1):146–153. https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1365-246X.2003.01950.x
Kosloff DD, Baysal E (1982) Forward modeling by a Fourier method. Geophysics 47(10):1402–1412. https://doi.org/10.1190/1.1441288
Levander AR (1988) Fourth-order finite-difference P-SV seismograms. Geophysics 53(11):1425–1436. https://doi.org/10.1190/1.1442422
Liu Y, Sen MK (2012) A hybrid absorbing boundary condition for elastic staggered-grid modelling. Geophys Prospect 60(6):1114–1132. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2478.2011.01051.x
de Magnier S, Mora P, Tarantola A (1994) Finite differences on minimal grids. Geophysics 59(9):1435–1443. https://doi.org/10.1190/1.1443700
Marfurt KJ (1984) Accuracy of finite-difference and finite-element modeling of the scalar and elastic wave equations. Geophysics 49(5):533–549. https://doi.org/10.1190/1.1441689
Moczo P, Robertsson JOA, Eisner L (2007) The finite-difference time-domain method for modeling of seismic wave propagation. Adv Geophys 48:421–516. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0065-2687(06)48008-0
Nayfeh AH, Chimenti DE (1991) Elastic wave propagation in fluid-loaded multiaxial anisotropic media. J Acoust Soc Am 89(2):542–549. https://doi.org/10.1121/1.400378
Ohminato T, Chouet BA (1997) A free-surface boundary condition for including 3D topography in the finite-difference method. Bull Seismol Soc Am 87(2):494–515
Padovani E, Priolo R, Seriani G (1994) Low and high order finite element method: experience in seismic modeling. J Comput Acoust 2(4):371–422
Pitarka A (1999) 3D elastic finite-difference modeling of seismic motion using staggered grids with nonuniform spacing. Bull Seismol Soc Am 89(1):54–68. https://doi.org/10.1144/GSL.SP.1991.058.01.09
Remis RF (2007) Explicit stability conditions for FDTD on nonuniform tensor-product grids. In: International Conference on Electromagnetics in Advanced Applications IEEE, 2007. https://doi.org/10.1109/ICEAA.2007.4387315
Reshef M, Kosloff D, Edwards M, Hsiung C (1988) Three-dimensional elastic modeling by the Fourier method. Geophysics 53(9):1184–1193. https://doi.org/10.1190/1.1442558
Sacks ZS, Kingsland DM, Lee R, Lee JF (1995) A perfectly matched anisotropic absorber for use as an absorbing boundary condition. IEEE Trans Antennas Propag 43(12):1460–1463. https://doi.org/10.1109/8.477075
Sarma GS, Mallick K, Gadhinglajkar VR (1998) Nonreflecting boundary condition in finite-element formulation for an elastic wave equation. Geophysics 63(3):1006–1016
Serón FJ, Sanz FJ, Kindelán M, Badal JI (1990) Finite element method for elastic wave propagation. Commun Appl Numerical Methods 6:359–368
Shamasundar R, Mulder WA (2017) An improved source term for finite-element modelling with the stress-velocity formulation of the wave equation. In: 79th Eage Conference and Exhibition 2017, Paris, France, 12–15 June 2017
Tessmer E (2000) Seismic finite-difference modeling with spatially varying time steps. Geophysics 65(4):1290–1293. https://doi.org/10.1190/1.1444820
Virieux J (1984) SH-wave propagation in heterogeneous media: velocity-stress finite-difference method. Geophysics 49(11):1933–1942. https://doi.org/10.1190/1.1441605
Funding
This study is financially supported by National Science and Technology Major Project (Grant No. 2011ZX05049).
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Du, Z., Liu, J., Liu, J. et al. High-precision acoustic modeling with second-order staggered difference. Arab J Geosci 10, 473 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12517-017-3268-6
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12517-017-3268-6