Layer | Fill | Outline |
---|
Map layers
Theme | Visible | Selectable | Appearance | Zoom Range (now: 0) |
---|
Fill | Stroke |
---|---|
Collaborating Authors
Results
For a variety of well-known reasons, velocity information derived in this way may not accurately indicate Accuracy in migration of seismic data depends both on the the true subsurface velocity. While numerous methods have fidelity of the migration method employed and the accuracy been developed for better estimation of migration velocity of the migration velocity. In recent years, numerous (see for example Fowler, 1984, Gonzalez-Serrano and Chon, advances have been made in improving the accuracy and 1984; Shurtleff, 1984, Yilmaz and Chambers, 1984; Fayes efficiency of migration algorithms, but for the most part, and Jeannot, 1986, Kim and Gonzalez, 1991), many have methods for deriving the migration velocity field are too computational demands that preclude their widespread use, computationally intensive to be used routinely.
- Geophysics > Seismic Surveying > Seismic Processing > Seismic Migration (1.00)
- Geophysics > Seismic Surveying > Seismic Modeling > Velocity Modeling (1.00)
Modified Residual Migration
Beasley, Craig J. (Western Atlas International) | Klotz, Rolf (Western Atlas International)
The increasing resolution requirements in seismic exploration Multi-step algorithms have become popular because, by fitting has brought about a demand for efficient and accurate the algorithm to particular circumstances, it is possible migration of seismic data. A wide variety of algorithms for to take advantage of the strengths of an algorithm, while both time and depth migration have evolved in recent years avoiding its inherent weaknesses. For example, when migrations to address the need. Modern techniques often employ multiple are cascaded, the migration velocity for each stage stages and two or more different algorithms to accomplish becomes lower than the true migration velocity.