Advertisement

Studia Geophysica et Geodaetica

, Volume 46, Issue 2, pp 293–320 | Cite as

Comparison of Seismic Dispersion and Attenuation Models

  • Björn Ursin
  • Tommy Toverud
Article

Abstract

The frequency-dependent attenuation of seismic waves causes decreased resolution of seismic images with depth, and the difference in transmission losses induces amplitude variations with offset. Transmission losses may occur due to friction or fluid movement, or may result from scattering in thin-layer. Whatever the physical mechanism, they can often be conveniently described using an empirical formulation wherein the elastic moduli and propagation velocity are complex functions of frequency.

We have compiled and compared algebraically and numerically eight different models involving complex velocity: the Kolsky-Futterman model, the power-law model, Kjartansson's model, Müller's model, Azimi's second and third model, the Cole-Cole model, and the standard linear-solid model.

For two different parameter sets, the attenuation and phase velocity are computed in the seismic frequency band, and the plane-wave propagation of a Ricker wavelet for the other models is compared with that for the Kolsky-Futterman model. The first parameter set consists of parameters for each of the models calculated from expressions given in the appendix. These expressions make the different models behave similarly to the KF model. The second parameter set consists of model parameters that are numerically adapted to the KF model.

By selecting proper parameters, all models, except the standard linear-solid model, show behavior similar to that of the Kolsky-Futterman model. The SLS model behaves differently from the other models as the frequency goes to zero or infinity. Broadband measurement data is needed to select a specific model for a given seismic experiment.

attenuation dispersion numerical comparison 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Aki K. and Richards P.G., 1980. Quantitative Seismology, I. W.H. Freeman and Co., San Fransisco.Google Scholar
  2. Azimi S.A., Kalinin A.V., Kalinin V.V. and Pivovarov B.L., 1968. Impulse and transient characteristics of media with linear and quadratic absorption laws. Izv. Earth Physics, 42-54.Google Scholar
  3. Backus G.E., 1962. Long-wave elastic anisotropy produced by horizontal layering. J. Geophys. Res., 67, 4427-4440.Google Scholar
  4. Ben-Menahem A. and Singh S.J., 1981. Seismic Waves and Sources. Springer-Verlag, New York.Google Scholar
  5. Biot M.A., 1962. Mechanics of deformation and acoustic propagation in porous media. J. Appl. Phys., 33, 1482-1498.Google Scholar
  6. Carcione J.M., Gurevich B. and Cavallini F., 2000. A generalized Biot-Gassmann model for the acoustic properties of shaley sandstones. Geophys. Prospect., 48, 539-557.Google Scholar
  7. Carcione J.M., 1992. Anisotropic Q and velocity dispersion of finely layered media. Geophys. Prospect., 57, 761-783.Google Scholar
  8. Carcione J.M., 2001. Wave Fields in Real Media: Wave Propagation in Anisotropic, Anelastic and Porous Media. Pergamon, Amsterdam.Google Scholar
  9. Casula G. and Carcione J.M., 1992. Generalized mechanical model analogies of viscoelastic behaviour. Bolletina di Geofisica Teorica ed Applicata, 34, 235-256.Google Scholar
  10. Causse E. and Ursin B., 2000. Viscoacoustic reverse time migration. J. Seism. Explor., 9, 165-184.Google Scholar
  11. Cole K.S. and Cole R.H., 1941. Dispersion and absorption in dielectrics; I Alternating current characteristics. J. Chem. Phys, 9, 342-351.Google Scholar
  12. Emmerich H. and Korn M., 1987. Incorporation of attenuation into time-domain computations of seismic wave fields. Geophysics, 50, 1426-1439.Google Scholar
  13. Fabrizio M. and Morro A., 1992. Mathematical problems in linear viscoelasticity. SIAM Studies in Applied Mathemetics, 12, SIAM, Philadephia.Google Scholar
  14. Futterman W.I., 1962. Dispersive body waves. J. Geophys. Res., 67, 5279-5291.Google Scholar
  15. Gurtin M.E. and Herrera I., 1965. On dissipation inequalities and linear viscoelasticity. Quart. Appl. Math., 23, 235-245.Google Scholar
  16. Hanyga A. and Seredynska M., 1999. Some effects of the memory kernel singularity on wave propagation and inversion in poroelastic media — I. Forward problems. Geophys. J. Int., 137, 319-335.Google Scholar
  17. Hargreaves N.D., 1992. Similarity and the inverse Q filter. Some simple algorithms for inverse Q filtering. Geophysics, 57, 944-947.Google Scholar
  18. Jacobsen R.S., 1987. An investigation into the fundamental relationship between attenuation, phase dispersion, and frequency using seismic refraction profiles over sedimentary structures. Geophysics, 52, 72-87.Google Scholar
  19. Jones T.D., 1986. Pore fluids and frequency-dependent wave propagation in rocks. Geophysics, 51, 1939-1953.Google Scholar
  20. Kan T.K., Batzle M.L. and Gaiser J.E., 1983. Attenuation measurement from VSP. Evidence of frequency-dependent Q. Expanded Abstracts of the Technical Program, SEG, Las Vegas, 589-590.Google Scholar
  21. Kang I.B. and McMechan G.A., 1993. Viscoelastic seismic responses of 2D reservoir models. Geophys. Prospect., 41, 149-163.Google Scholar
  22. Kjartansson E., 1979. Constant Q-wave propagation and attenuation. J. Geophys. Res., 84, 4737-4748.Google Scholar
  23. Klimentos T., 1995. Attenuation of P-and S-waves as a method of distinguishing gas and condensate from oil and water. Geophysics, 60, 447-458.Google Scholar
  24. Kolsky H., 1956. The propagation of stress pulses in viscoelastic solids. Phil. Mag., 1, 693-710.Google Scholar
  25. Leurer K.C., 1997. Attenuation in fine-grained marine sediments. Extension of the Biot-Stoll model by the ‘effective grain model’ (EGM). Geophysics, 62, 1465-1479.Google Scholar
  26. Liu H.-P., Anderson D.L. and Kanamori H., 1976. Velocity dispersion due to anelasticity; implications for seismology and mantle composition. Geophys. J. Roy. Astr. Soc., 47, 41-58.Google Scholar
  27. Lomnitz C., 1956. Creep measurements in igneous rocks. J. Geology, 64, 473-479.Google Scholar
  28. Müller G., 1983. Rheological properties and velocity dispersion of a medium with power-law dependence of Q on frequency. J. Geophysics, 54, 20-29.Google Scholar
  29. O'Doherty R.F. and Anstey N.A., 1971. Reflections on amplitudes. Geophys. Prospect., 19, 430-458.Google Scholar
  30. Prassad M. and Meissner R., 1992. Attenuation mechanism in sands: Laboratory versus theoretical (Biot) data. Geophysics, 57, 710-719.Google Scholar
  31. Pujol J.M., Luschen E. and Hu Y., 1998. Seismic wave attenuation in metamorphic rocks from VSP data recorded in Germany's continental super-deep borehole. Geophysics, 63, 354-365.Google Scholar
  32. Shapiro S.A., Hubral P.N. and Ursin B., 1996. Reflectivity/transmissivity for one-dimensional inhomogeneous random elastic media: dynamic equivalent-medium approach. Geophys. J. Int., 126, 184-196.Google Scholar
  33. Strick E., 1967. The determination of Q, dynamic viscosity and transient creep curves from wave propagation measurements. Geophys. J. Roy. Astr. Soc., 13, 197-218.Google Scholar
  34. Toverud T. and Ursin B., 1999. Estimation of viscoelastic parameters from zero-offset VSP data. Expanded Abstracts, 61st EAGE Conference, Helsinki, Session 4.29.Google Scholar
  35. Ursin B. and Stovas A., 2002. Reflection and transmission responses of a layered isotropic visco-elastic medium. Geophysics, 67, 307-323.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© StudiaGeo s.r.o. 2002

Authors and Affiliations

  • Björn Ursin
    • 1
  • Tommy Toverud
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Petroleum Engineering and Applied GeophysicsNorwegian University of Science and TechnologyTrondheimNorway

Personalised recommendations