In SEP-60, the technique I used was to downward continue the wavefields, then sum power in the images at each depth, looking for the large power values that would result when energy is focused to a point in space, the source location. While that method is reasonable, I decided to backtrack and try to do the same imaging with a conceptually simpler scheme, used by Nikolaev (1987) to image scatterers using teleseismic data and ambient noise data with the NORSAR array.
In Nikolaev's scheme, we create a 3-D grid of possible scatterer locations in the subsurface. For each location, we find the moveout trajectory for energy coming from that point, and compute semblance over time along this trajectory in our data. We can then look at the average semblance over time, or the maximum semblance observed over all times, to get an idea of the scatterers that may lie in the subsurface.
An important first question is, given the size of our array, how
far away can scatterers be identified as such?
The limited size of the array will make it impossible
to see any moveout for events coming from scatterers beyond a
certain distance. Beyond this distance, scattered energy will be
indistinguishable from plane waves. Nikolaev was using the NORSAR
array, 110 km across, and was therefore theoretically able to image
very deep structures. Our array is only 500 meters across, so our
scattering analysis will be more localized. Figure
shows the moveout across the array for a scattered event versus
distance of the scatterer from the array. This figure assumes a
constant velocity of 2000 meters/sec, a very favorable choice. For
higher velocities the dropoff will be sharper. The time difference
drops to less than four milliseconds at around 5 kilometers from the
array, so our scattering analysis definitely cannot go beyond that
point. I have chosen one kilometer as an upper bound in the analysis
that follows, to avoid coming too close to the limit.
Figure
shows the image that is obtained for the z=0 depth
level when this scattering algorithm is applied to
portions of several different
nighttime and daytime records.
The x and y dimensions of the grid of scattering locations shown are
three times the size of the survey. Thus points up to 750 meters
from the array center are shown in this plot. The dominant features
in this plot are the radial streaks. These are due to the fact that as
we get further from the array center, our summation path becomes flatter
and flatter. Eventually we reach the point where we are summing along
a plane wave path, and from there out we would just get a radial streak.
Figures
and
show the results for depths of 500 and 1000 meters.
A feature worth noting in all of these is the general agreement among the
daytime blast records, and among the nighttime records, but
not between the two groups.
The reason for
this is that what we are seeing when we sum along these hyperbolic paths
is, predominantly, plane wave energy, which was quite different
during day and night recording periods.
In Figure
, I've
performed the same computation as for Figure
, but I've
summed along plane wave paths rather than hyperbolic paths. The fact
that these two plots are quite similar is disappointing; it means that
the algorithm is seeing mainly plane wave energy imperfectly stacked
along hyperbolic paths, rather than scattered energy.
If we are to see scattered energy, probably it is necessary to filter out the strong plane waves present throughout our dataset.