TECHNICAL FOCUS

What is Wave Equation Pre-stack Depth Migration? An Overview

Andrew Long, PGS Technology (Perth), andrew.long@pgs.com
Note: This is based upon the Best Petroleum Paper, recently presented at the ASEG/PESA Conference in Sydney (An efficient 3D explicit depth migration, by Ren et al., 2004). Basic seismic processing makes the simplifying flat Earth assumption that reflection points lie mid-way between each source and receiver, and that the interval velocities in the Earth are laterally very smoothly-varying. Seismic time migration attempts to re-position all points on a seismic stacked section into their (reasonably) correct geometrical configuration, where the vertical axis is units of two-way time, as recorded. Whenever localised (rapidly-varying) lateral velocity variations occur, then migration to output each point in its correct lateral position and depth is required prior to the stacking operation (pre-stack depth migration). In the most challenging situations to migration quality, or when the most precise result possible is required, then the ultimate migration, known as wave equation depth migration, is required. The basic principles involved are described below. being used for PSDM. However, several advances have been made during recent years in the area of data regularisation, thereby allowing the successful implementations of non-Kirchhoff methods to PSDM. Furthermore, new Wave Equation (WE) PSDM algorithms are being developed which can tolerate irregular acquisition geometry, without any requirement for expensive preprocessing (e.g. regularisation). Pre-stack depth migration processing is riddled with techno-jargon. Anyone daring to investigate the various options for pursuing wave equation depth migration will be exposed to terms such as explicit solutions, implicit solutions, finite-difference, split-step Fourier, delayed shot, etc. Simply put, each flavour represents the means by which we attempt to obtain numerical stability whilst pursuing maximum speed when performing the migration. Migration can easily throw out junk (artifacts), contaminating the final image of our geology with false events. In the case of WE PSDM, we try to find a method that is accurate, whilst minimising unnecessary cost. This simply represents the and the number of shots being migrated at any given time is simply the number of available nodes (this could typically be several thousand). As such, WE PSDM can in principle be pursued with a project turnaround comparable to an expensive PSTM project common today! Industry experience says that WE PSDM is advantageous wherever we have very strong lateral velocity variations, but has often historically struggled to image very steep dips (where Kirchhoff has generally been more successful). Rapid velocity contrasts are of course typical for salt environments, but they are also associated with carbonate environments (e.g. near-surface North West Shelf, Australia), basaltic layers (mainly vertical contrasts), and igneous terrains. Figure 1 (Ren et al., 2004) demonstrates that in comparison to Kirchhoff PSDM Explicit Finite Difference WE PSDM can in fact yield superior imaging of very steep dips, and superior amplitude coherency and resolution below thin fast layers, in areas unaffected by salt. This example therefore encourages consideration for Asia-Pacific applications.

Introduction

ll migration methods provide a solution to the wave equation, which should come as no surprise because the wave equation is a description (in truth, an assumption) of where each seismic wave was at any given time. However, every migration method and flavour invokes different simplifying assumptions about how crudely we can describe the Earth (the subsurface velocity model) without unacceptably compromising the quality of the final image.

Historically, despite its inherent assumptions about smoothly-varying velocity fields, Kirchhoff migration has proven to be a remarkably robust method. Primarily because irregular acquisition geometry is an acceptable input, Kirchhoff has been the overwhelming historical pre-stack depth migration (PSDM) method of choice. From a marine perspective, vessels always have irregular speed, streamers have feathering, currents and waves are at work, and the grid of (surface) midpoints for every possible source and receiver combination is in fact a scatter of points. As such, any 3D pre-stack processing involving Fourier transforms (data moves from the space and time domain to the wavenumber and frequency domain, where many processing operations are easiest to implement) cannot work properly (creates artifacts and instabilities), unless very expensive implementations of the Fourier transformation are used. This has historically discounted most alternatives to Kirchhoff from

Fig. 1. WE PSDM vs. Kirchhoff PSDM example from the southern North Sea. Note the better steep dip imaging, and the better imaging below the fast flat layer on the left.

next level in the migration trade-off having established that WE PSDM is the migration method necessary to satisfy our target imaging objectives, we must now decide what image quality penalty is reasonable in the pursuit of acceptable cost. In short, the current industry consensus is that shot profile WE PSDM is the benchmark for accuracy whilst maintaining reasonable cost constraints. This method is computationally attractive, as large PC cluster configurations can be used for efficient parallel processing. Each shot is allocated to a single CPU node,

A brief technical description of the algorithm used here (skip if you really cant stand the jargon) As schematically illustrated in Figure 2, finite differencing is a means by which seismic energy can be migrated. Using a grid-based description of the 3D velocity model, the full frequency bandwidth of the input data is migrated in incremental frequency steps, one frequency at a time. In order to output each pre-stack depth migrated depth slice, the seismic wavefield at each grid location below the input depth, , at depth

32

October/November 2004

TECHNICAL FOCUS

Figure 2. Basic principle of explicit finite-difference extrapolation. The wavefield values at several grid locations on a given depth layer are collectively used to output one value on a grid location below the centre of the input values, and at depth below the input depth. This approach can be used for both forward modelling and migration. Refer to Figure 3 for an example of the operator, which dictates how each input value is used in the extrapolation process.

is computed (or extrapolated) by combining the input values of the wavefield at many locations on the depth surface at depth . To use the appropriate language, the output wavefield is extrapolated in three dimensions via a two dimensional convolution of the operator in frequency-wavenumber space with the input wavefield, incrementing one depth step down at a time. Figure 3 shows a finite difference operator that has been specially designed to extrapolate several input grid points. The design of this operator varies for every wavenumber and every output grid point, on every depth interval (for details, refer to Ren et al., 2004). Consequently, it is easy to appreciate that wave equation migration using finite differencing is expensive in comparison to historically more conventional algorithms (such as Kirchhoff migration). However, several characteristics of this particular implementation are attractive. In terms of flexibility, the algorithm can handle rectangular CMP bins (typical of marine 3D data, but an historical impediment to finite difference implementations by Hale-McClellan transformations), uses the velocity model to automatically adjust the depth step increment (to the largest allowable size, without incurring aliasing effects), and allows the operator size to vary for different wavenumbers (thereby avoiding unnecessarily expensive computations). In terms of efficiency, the operator is designed so

that the coefficients in the Figure 3. An explicit finite difference operator, as described by Ren et al. (2004). outer area are constant This figure only shows one quadrant of the complete operator. The axes are the inline within circular bands, as and cross-line directions for a given depth level. As the operator size increases, the illustrated in Figure 3. maximum dip that can be migrated increases, however, the computational cost also A complex optimisation correspondingly increases. In order to reduce computational cost, the operator design process ensures that in this example imposes equal coefficient values within each circular band. This design process is pursued prior to the actual migration, and ensures that migration accuracy is very high precision still extremely high. Based upon Mittet (2002). is retained in terms of operator accuracy (as illustrated in Figure 1), layers. This example therefore encourages but the advantage is that computational speed consideration for Asia-Pacific applications is increased, by decreasing the number of such as carbonate and basaltic challenges to operations applied within each band. As high-quality imaging. The algorithm presented described earlier, because the algorithm is pursues a sophisticated design process prior applied to individual shot gathers, the wave to the actual migration, so that very high equation migration process can be parallelised accuracy in the wavefield extrapolation is very efficiently across large PC clusters. preserved, whilst simultaneously enabling several computational cost saving measures, Conclusions and flexibility in both design and application. Wave equation migration is a term given to the most exact pursuit of pre-stack depth migration References (PSDM). It has historically been impossibly Mittet, R., 2002, Explicit 3D depth migration with a expensive to pursue at the production 3D constrained operator: 72nd Annual International scale, but the combination of fast PC clusters Meeting, SEG, Salt Lake City, Expanded Abstracts, and better algorithms have enabled wave 1148-1151. equation methods to start competing with older methods such as Kirchhoff PSDM. In Ren, J., Gerrard, C., McClean, J., Orlovich, M., and the explicit finite difference implementation Long, A., 2004, An efficient 3D explicit depth presented here, it is demonstrated that wave migration: 17th Annual ASEG Meeting, Sydney, equation PSDM can yield superior imaging Extended Abstracts. of very steep dips, and superior amplitude coherency and resolution below thin fast

GW Marine Consultants
Safety Management Systems Development Health, Safety & Environment Audits & Reviews Vessel Charter Assurance & Inspections Seismic Programme Management Project Risk Management Analysis

Larry Williams Larry.Williams@GWMarine.com.au 040-243-0345 Capt. Chris Grubba Chris.Grubba@GWMarine.com.au 042-745-4633 Dave Brown Dave.Brown@GWMarine.com.au 040-312-2106

October/November 2004

33