ResearchSession: Recent Advances and the Road Ahead
Monday Afternoon, September 24th
Downloaded 01/01/15 to 190.180.5.169. Redistribution subject to SEG license or copyright; see Terms of Use at http://library.seg.org/
Identifying,Quantifying,and Suppressing
Backscattered
SeismicNoise
Carl .J Regone and Gerald L. Rethford, Amoco Petroleum ResearchCenter
SUMMARY
Poor seismicdata quality is often due to the presenceof backscatteredsels
mic energythat travelson or near the surfaceand encountersthe recording
spreadat levelshigherthan the desiredsignal. Becausethis unwantedseis.
mic energy arrivesfrom all directions,it is often poorly attenuated by thr
inline processes comprisingnormal 2D seismicmethods. Adding an area
dimensionto the acquisitionprocedureis often effectiveat improving thf
data quality, but it is difficult to determinewhen theseareal schemesmusl
be usedand what form they must take to ensurethat the desiredsigna
level is adequatefor the exploration objective. A successfulseismicfielc
program requiresnot only that we identify this backscatterednoise, bui
that we quantify its strength relative to the desiredsignal. An economical
test procedureis describedthat utilizesa 3D grid of independentlyrecorded
receiversto facilitate both the identificationof backscatteredseismicnoise
and the formation of a nestedseriesof synthesized,high performance,areal
arrays through which we can quantify the levelof this noiserelative to the
desiredsignal.
INTRODUCTION
Multi-fold 2-D seismiclines with inline sourceand receiver arrays have
proven to be adequatefor mapping subsurfacestructure in the majority
of areaswhere they have been acquired. However,in areas wheresource-
generatedsurfaceand/or headwavesare reflectedby off-linescatterersback
into the recordingspreadat high amplitudesrelative to the desiredsignal,
this method usually yields poor results. Most field tests usedto messure
source-generatedcoherentnoise are designedprimarily for direct-arrival
eventsand thereforeusea recordingspreadthat haslittle, or no, crossline
extent. Backscatteredseismicnoiseeventsthat encountersucha recording
spreadfrom the crosslinedirection are not easily recognizedbecausethey
have hyperbolicmoveoutand often create a complexinterferencepattern
that appearsas a coneof seeminglyrandom noise. Often, this noisecone
preventsus from observingeventhe inline backscatteredevents,which nor-
mally would be easily recognizedby their linear moveout. In many areas
of poor signal quality, the desiredreflectioneventsare buried somewhere
in thii noise. However,with standard field testswe usually can’t tell just
how deeplythey are buried. Therefore,a test is neededthat will allow us
to identify any backscatterednoiseeventsthat might be presentand to
measuretheir strength relative to desiredsignal.
DISCUSSION
In many problemareas,test recordsexhibit only noiseevents and without
discerniblesignalwe can not measurethe signal-to-noiseratio directly. The
approachwe havetaken to solvethis problemis to infer the strengthof the
noise,relative to the desiredsignal,by forming a seriesof areal arrays with
graduated attenuation levels. By passingthe data through this seriesof
arraysand observingthe attenuation levelat which we begin to seesignal,
we obtain an indication of the signal-to-noiselevel. We have found that
the processes of identifying and quantifying the backscatterednoisewaves
we often coupled, in that it is not until someof these noiseevents are
attenuatedthat the presenceof othersis revealed.Let us considernow the
designof our arrays.
As indicated in Figure 1, an array with elementspacing d attenuates
wavelengthsfrom somemaximum Lmaz to someminimum Lmin and im-
wsea a usablefrequencybandwidth on the data. For frequenciesabove
fmoz, signal is lost and noiseis passed,while for frequenciesbelow&in,
IO& is passed. We may remove the noise below fmin and abovefmoa
,y applying a bandpassfilter to the recordeddata. To removethe noise
setweenfiin and fmnz, we must rely on the attenuation providedby the
vray.
748
RE1.1
Fig. 1. An array imposesa usablebandwidthon seismicdata.
If the attenuation levelsachievedby a given array far exceedthoa
.ttained by a unit-weightedarray, we will refer to that array as a high
berformancearray. We may constructa high-performancearray by corn
lining weightedelementsin the field beforerecording,or we may recorc
ach elementindividually and synthesizethe array in processing.A prob
srncommonto all high-performancearrays is the sensitivityof thesearray:
o variations in element spacing and weighting. Becauseearth-coupliq
ffects may causegeophone-to-geophone amplitude variationswithin tb
.rray, and physicalobjectssuch as trees or large bushesoften get in tht
ray, the desiredweightsand elementspacing,and therefore,the desire<
.ttenuation levels, are usually not achievedfor field-implementedarray!
Newman and Mahoney, 1973).
If subarraysof unit-weightedgeophones are placedcloselyenoughin the
.eld so that the recordedoutput of each subarray can be treated as on,
lement of a larger synthesizedarray, and the numberof geophonesin tht
ubarray is large enough,variationsin the locationof individual geophonel
n the subarraywill averagestatisticallysothat the centroidof the subarrq
Jill be very closeto the desiredlocation. Becausethe subarrayoutput ii
recordedseismictrace, amplitude variations due to earth couplingma]
e eliminatedduring data processing.Synthesizedhigh-performancearrayi
hushavea muchbetter chanceof succeedingthan their field-implementer
ounterparts;and, therefore,we havechosensynthesizedarraysfor our tesl
rocedure.
Although high-performancearrays may be constructedin a numbero:
rays,we find the useof Chebychevweightsparticularly attractive for ow
urposes.Becausethe width of the rejectzoneand the levelof attenuatior
re easily controlledby changingthe elementweights,Chebychevarrays
How great designflexibility (Holzman, 1963; Parr and Mayne, 1955). Ar
hownby Holzman(1963), the minimumattenuationattained in the rejecl
3ne of a Chebychevarray is a function of the numberof elementsin the
rray and the effectivewidth of the reject zone. If we hold the width of the
ejectzoneconstant,the usablefrequencybandwidthfor the array remains
anstant;and changesin the numberof elementsin the array merely raise
r lowerthe attenuationlevel achieved.
DesigningR high-performancearray for our test procedurerequiresa
:lectionof the range of noisevelocitiesto be analyzed, the desiredfre-
lency band over which to view the data, and the maximum attenuation
vel to be attained during the analysis.Thesechoicesdeterminethe width
the reject zone, the maximum numberof elementsR to usein the array
 2 Suppressing Backscattered Seismic Noise
synthesis,and the elementspacingd. Once I and dare determined,we can
make an area1array by placing an n x n grid on the ground. We find it
convenientto orient the grid as indicated in Figure 2. The elementspac-
ing d in this exampleis 75 feet in both the inline and crosslinedirections.
Each of the 169 elementsin this 13 x 13 grid is an individually recorded,
areal subarraywith an effectivearray lengthin both the inline and crossline
Downloaded 01/01/15 to 190.180.5.169. Redistribution subject to SEG license or copyright; see Terms of Use at http://library.seg.org/
directionsequal to the elementspacingof the grid.
k 0000000000000
14 I5 IS 17 111 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26
Fig. 2. Typical grid geometry. Each elementof the grid is individ-
ually recordedfor eachsourcepoint.
In addition to the n2 channelsrequiredto record the grid, we usually
devotesomeextra recordingchannelsto a seriesof additional arrays all
:enteredwithin the grid. Theseextra arrays might be varioustrial field ar-
raysfor a production-linescheme,or arrays of three-componentgeophones
roarparticle-motionanalysisor polarizationfiltering tests.
Sincethe meansby which we hope to measurethe strengthof the noise
relative to desiredsignal yields, for each sourcepoint, one output trace
per array type, it is important that the sourceinterval be small enough
ro that the slowestsignal event is not spatially aliased in the common-
receiverdomain. Then, if thesesourcepoints are spacedalong a line that
extendsa normal production spread length or so away from the grid, a
wiea of common-receiverrecordsmay be constructedand comparedfor
signalquality.
For any singlesourcelocation, the traceswithin the grid form a small
3-D data volume that may be studied to identify the direction of travel
and true propagationvelocityof any noisewave. The tracesmay be loaded
mto a work station for viewingtime-slicemovies,or simplyplotted in both
the inline and crosslinedirectionsso that the true propagationvelocityof
Pnoiseevent can be calculatedfrom measurements of its apparentvelocity
n orthogonaldirections.
Once we know the identity, propagationvelocity,and strength (relative
.o desiredsignal) of our problemnoiseevents,we can selectan appropriate
requisitionschemefor our productiondata.
749
DATA EXAMPLE
The grid geometry shown in Figure 2 was used in an actual field exper-
iment. The surfacegeologyconsistedlargely of a massivelimestone unit
that was eroded in placesinto a complexsystemof mesasand canyons.
The dominantnoisewavewasa non-dispersive surfacewavepropagatingat
approximately6750 ft/s.
A choicefor fmin of 15 Hz, set the effectivearray length Lmaz at
6750/15 = 450 feet. All of the arrays shownin the followingfigureshave
that effectivearray length, and all ofthe seismicrecordshavebeenbandpass
filteredfrom 15 to 30 Hz.
In addition to the 169 elementsof the grid, we recordeda fairly large
numberof trial field arrays. Somewere quite large. One of those field
arrayswas a unit-weightedareal array comprisingfour parallel arms. This
array had an effectivelength of 450 feet in both the inline and crossline
directions.By extracting the trace correspondingto that array from each
sourcerecord, we get the seismicrecord shown in Figure 3. Numerous
Inline backscatteredsurface wavesare readily apparent becauseof their
linear moveout;however,the two hyperboliceventsclearly visiblebetween
1.5 and 1.8 secondsneedfurther investigationbeforewe can identify them.
Fig. 3. The seismicrecordobtainedby extractingfrom eachsource
recordthe trace correspondingto an areal, field-implemented,unit-
weightedarray with effectivelength of 450 feet in both the inline
and crosslinedirections.
One way of distinguishingbetweeninline and crosslinetravelingevents
s to synthesizea high-performancearray in just the inline direction,and
.ben in just the crosslinedirection. The seismicrecordsshownin Figures
4and 5 representthis procedure. In eachrecord,only one row or column
)f the grid was usedin forming the Chebychev-weighted array. Thus, the
,ecordin Figure 4 is the resultof strongsuppression
of the surfacewavesin
,he inline direction and almostnonein the crosslinedirection. It is readily
apparentthat the noiseeventshaving linear moveoutare mostly absent
‘mm this record, and that hyperboliceventsare more numerousherethan
n Figure3 The recordshownin Figure 5 is the resultof strongsuppression
)f the surfacewavesin the crosslinedirectionand almostnonein the inline
lirection. Although we now see many events with linear moveout, the
lyperboliceventsseenin Figures3 and 4 have beenremoved.Becausethe
ynthesizedarrays used here had effectivearray lengths that were much
mailer than any signal wavelengthin the 15 to 30 Hz bandwidth, we can
eel certain that those hyperbolic events were merely crossline-traveling
urface wares
 Suppressing Backscattered Seismic Noise 3
Downloaded 01/01/15 to 190.180.5.169. Redistribution subject to SEG license or copyright; see Terms of Use at http://library.seg.org/

15Hz 30Hz

Fig. 4. The seismicrecord obtained by a Chebychev-weighted Fig. 5. The seismicrecord obtained by a Chebychev-weighted
stack of the shadedelementsof the grid. Each trace in this record stackof the shadedelementsof the grid. Each trace in this record
comesfrom a different sourcerecord. There is approximately50 comesfrom a differentsowce record. There is approximately50
dB of inline attenuation, but there is no crosslineattenuation. dB of crosslineattenuation,but there is no inline attenuation.

750
 4 Suppressing Backscattered Seismic Noise

From the presenceof so muchbackscatterednoiseon the seismicrecord

of Figure 3, it is apparent that the amplitudeof this noiseis morethan 13
to 20 dB above the desiredsignal. If we form an area1Chebychevarray
by using all the elementsof the grid, we get the seismicrecordshown in
Figure 6. The attenuation of the surfacewave is approximately56 dB in
both the inline and crosslinedirections.Most of the surfacenoisehasbeen
removed,and primary reflectionscan now be seen. If we wish to find the
Downloaded 01/01/15 to 190.180.5.169. Redistribution subject to SEG license or copyright; see Terms of Use at http://library.seg.org/

minimum level of attenuation neededin order to reveal desiredsignal, we

can form a seriesof nestedarrays with graduatedattenuationlevelsas was
discussedearlier. For our choiceof d = 75 feet and fmin = 15 As, the
grid of Figure2 allowsus to form areal arrays with the followinginliue and
crosslineattenuation levels.
1 5 1 6 1 7 1 8 1 9 I10 1 11 I 12 I13
A ;dB) I 13 I 18 123 127 132 I 37 142 I 47 151
For this example,we found that attenuation levelsgreater than 32 dEl
were requiredto make the signal visible. We alsofound that no noticeable
improvementsin data quality were achievedfor attenuation levelshigher
than 42 dB. To achieveon the order of 40 dB attenuationin all directions
with a productionschemeis not easy. However,by usinghigh-performance
arrays of the synthesisedtype, we believethat it is possible.
In the majority of the areaswherepoor data quality has compelledus
to run thesetests, we have found that areal arrays of the appropriatesize
have allowedus to achieveadequatesignal levels. Fortunately,in most of
thesearess,the required attenuation level has not been ss high ss in the
aboveexample,and heroicmeasureswerenot needed.
In some areas, usually where our desiredsignal is being maskedby
backscatteredheadwaves,the necessaryarrays are very large;and in order
to preservesignal, we have implementedproductionschemesthat record
thesearrays in segments.A form of wideline profile, which allows us to
synthesizethe largearrays in processingwithout sacrificingsignal,hasoften
been usedto accomplishthis.
In other aress,we havefoundno evidenceof a backscattered-noise prob-
lem; and we have had to look elsewherefor the causeof our poor data.
In general,we havefoundthat the test describedin this paper is a useful
addition to our diagnostictool kit, and that it helpsus determine,during
the earlieststagesof acquisition,the level of effort that will be necessary
for success.

CONCLUSION

We have cometo believethat backscattered seismic noiseis a problem to

somedegreenearly everywhere. To have a successfulfield technique,we
must be able to identify this noiseand measureits strengthrelative to the
desiredsignal. Standard field tests, designedto analyzedirect-arrival noia
events, are inadequatefor backscatterednoise. An economical3-D test
procedurehas been describedthat has proveneffectivein the analysisoi
thii type of noisein many area9 around the world.

REFERENCES

Holzman, M. ,1963, Chebyshevoptimized geophonearrays: Geophysics,

Vol.28,145-156.

Newman,P. and Mahoney,J. T., 1973, Patterns with a pinchof salt: Geo-
physicalProspecting,Vol.21, 197-219.

Parr, J. 0. and Mayne, W. H., 1955, A new method of pattern shooting:

Geophysics,Vol.20,539-564.

Fig. 6. The seismicrecordobtainedby a Chebychev-weighted stack

of all elementsof the grid. Each trace in this recordcomesfrom a
differentsourcerecord. There is approximately50 dB attenuation
in both the inline and crosslinedirections.
 This article has been cited by:

1. Christof StorkSeismic acquisition is moving from a “ CMP Fold” perspective to a “ Wavefield Recording” perspective
which has significant implications on acquisition design 157-162. [Abstract] [References] [PDF] [PDF w/Links]
Downloaded 01/01/15 to 190.180.5.169. Redistribution subject to SEG license or copyright; see Terms of Use at http://library.seg.org/