ACKNOWLEDGMENT

:I am profound by grateful and indebted to

Prof. Dr. Abdel Nasser helal
Prof. of geophysics, geophysics department, Faculty of Science and
Ain Shams University, for suggesting the research point, continuous
.help, supervising the work, goodness and encouragement

Thanks are due to Department of Geophysics, Faculty of Science, Ain

shams university, headed by Prof. Dr. Abdel Mokteder El Said for
. their kind help and encouragement

Finally, I would like to express my deepest gratitude, and

indebtedness to my family for their moral support throughout my
.life
:CONTENT

CHAPTER I: PRE-PROCESSING

 1.1……………………...…………..………… exploration seismic

 1.2 …………………………………………..…………data format

 1.2.1 ………………………………………..………..…….SEG-D

 1.2.2……………………………………………..…..……. SEG-Y

 1.3 …………….……Surveying information and field geometry

 1.4 …………….…wave propagation versus signal to noise ratio

 1.5 …………………...…………………...sorting of seismic data

 1.5.1 ………………...common shot or common receiver gathers

 1.5.2 ………………………….common mid point gather (CMP)

 1.6 …………………………………...trace editing and balancing

 1.7 ………………………………….……………...……case study

CHAPTER 2: DECONVOLUTION

 2.1………………………………………………….. Introduction

 2.2……………………………………………… The convolution

 2.3 …………………………………….Earth convolution model

 2.4……………………………………….The convolution model

 2.5……………………………………………… Inverse filtering

  2.6………………………………………………… Type of phase

 2.7…………………………….. The minimum phase properties

 2.8………………………………………………... Deconvolution

 2.9…………………………………………… The effect of noise

 2.10……………………………………………….. Type of noise

 2.11…………………………………. The type of deconvolution

 2.12………………………………. Deterministic deconvolution

 2.13…………………………………... Statistical deconvolution

 2.14……………….…………………….. Spiking deconvolution

 2.15 …………………………………………..The prewhitening

 2.16…………………………………... predictive deconvolution

 2.17…... The two approached of thee predictive deconvolution

 2.18……….………………………………..……Operator length

 2.19……………………………………………….. Prediction lag

 2.20………………………………………………... The summary

 2.21…………………………………………… Practical example

CHAPTER 3: VELOCITY ANALYSIS AND (NMO)

 3.1……………………………………..NMO corrections

 3.2………………………………………NMO stretching

 3.3……………………………..NMO for dipping layers

  3.4……………………………………...Velocity analysis

 3.5………………………….Method of velocity analysis

 3.6……………………………………Velocity spectrum

 3.7……………….Factors affecting velocity Estimation

 3.8…………………………….Horizon velocity analysis

 3.9……………………………………………..Summery

CHAPTER 4: DIP MOVEOUT AND PRE-STACK

MIGRATION

 4.1-…………………………………...……Introduction

 4.2-……………….Dip Moveout optimization ( DMO )

 4.3-………………………………Summary of ( DMO )

 4.4-……………………….Exercise of DMO correction

 4.5-……….....Migration Before stack V.S After stack

 4.6-…………………Summary of Pre-stack Migration

 4.7-………………...Case study of pre-stack Migration

 4.8-…………………………………………….Velocities

 4.9-……………....Seismic Amplitude and Wave forms

 CHAPTER 5: MIGRATION

5.1………………………………………………………………Abstract
5.2…...…………………………….Objectives of seismic migration
5.3…...………………………………. Types, schemes of migration
5.4……..……………………………The seismic reflection process
5.5……………………...…………Seismic migration fundamentals
Anticlines, Synclines and Diffraction Points .………………5.5.1

Diffraction: Faults & Pinch outs………………………………5.5.2

The Point Reflector..……………………………………………5.5.3

Early Methods—Geometric Migration.………………………5.4..5

Current Methods.…………………………………………………5.5.5

5.5.6………………………………………………The Wave Equation

Time migration……………………………………………………5.5.7

5.5.8………………………………………………Kirchhoff Migration

5.5.9…………………………………………………...Aperture Width

5.5.10…………………………………………………………..Velocity

Depth Migration…………………………………………………5.5.11

Time Migration vs. Depth Migration ...………………………5.5.12

Other Depth Migration Schemes……………………………13..5.5

Ray-Theoretical Depth Migration ……………………………5.5.14

Three-Dimensional Migration..………………………………5.5.15
Methodology..……………………………………………………5.5.16

5.5.17……………………...Two-Pass and One-Pass Techniques

List of figures

Figure 1.1 - shows two raw seismic recordings, made on land

and at sea.
Figure 1.2 - raw seismic measurments

Figure 1.3 - reflection in time (a) and depth (b)

Figure 1.4 - shot gathers measurments

Figure 1.5 - mid point definition in between sources and

receivers
Figure 1.6 - common mid point gathers

Figure 1.7 - relation between different sorting of seismic data

Figure (1.1-p) - plot between shot-point position intervals versus

receiver spacing as: [Common-shot or receiver
]gather or panel

Figure (1.2-p) - plot between commen mid-point position intervals

versus receiver spacing as: [Common-mid point]

Figure (1.3-p) - illustrating the reverse polarity at trace21

Figure (1.4-p) - illustrate the section after the correction

Figure (1.5-p) - shows the geophone that record the trace 71 has
a high noises and mask the recording and this
happened due to error inside the geophone itself

Figure (1.6-p ) - illustrating the section after we remove the

.geophone reading from the section
Figure 2-1 - Comparison of land seismic data with and without
deconvolution

Figure 2-2 - Definition of delta function and impulse response. The

delta function is a normalized impulse

.Figure 2-3 - How convolution is used in DSP

Figure 2-4 - low pass filter

Figure 2-5 - high pass filter

Figure 2-6 - earth convolution

Figure 2-7 - the convolution model

Figure 2-8 - the convolution

Figure 2-9 - the wavelet decay

Figure 2-10 - the model

Figure 2-11 - the convolution

Figure 2-12 - flow chart of the inverse filter

Figure 2-13 - type of phases

Figure 2-14 - deconvolution model

Figure 2-15 - two s.c befor (at left) and after (at right)
deconvolution

Figure 2-16 - deconvolved gather befor (a) and after (b)

Figure 2-17 - section obtained undeconvolved gather (a) and

deconvolved gather (b(

Figure 2-18 - synthetic seismograms with additive noise and

 synthetic ground roll

Figure 2-19 - two shots a)from land survey and b)from marine

Figure 2-20 - effect of diffraction noise on seismic trace

survey with noise

Figure 2-21 - example of deconvolution

Figure 2-22 - deconvolution

Figure 2-23 - The images of the measured data after

deconvolution with (a) zero- and (b) 42 time
samples time delay spiking deconvolution operators

Figure 2-24 - The traces plots (from 40 to 80) of the measured

data after spiking deconvolution with (a) zero- and
(b) 42 time samples time delay spiking
deconvolution operators

Figure 2-25 - flow chart of wiener filter design and its application

Figure 2-26 - the auto correlation after spiking deconvolution

Figure 2-27 - the shape of the section after spiking deconvolution

Figure 2-28 - the prewitening process

Figure 2-29 - the prewhitining

Figure 2-30 - a)minimum phase b) band-pass filtering

c)deconvolved
Figure 2-31 - the first approached of the predictive deconvolution

Figure 2-32 - thesecond approached of predictive deconvolution

Figure 2-33 - the operator length

Figure 2-34 - The result of using the trace filter rather than the
wavelet

Figure 2-35 - the prediction lag

Figure 2-36 - the out put of the predictive deconvolution

Figure 2-37 - the covvolution model summary

Figure 2-38 - the type of phase summary

Figure 2-39 - the section befor and after deconvolution

Figure 2-40 - the shape of the section after spiking deconvolution

the summary

Figure 2-41 - the deconvolution summary

Figure 2-(1-P) - the shape of the wave

Figure 2-(2-P) - the reflectivity

figure 2-(3-P) - the minimum phase generated wavelet

Figure 2-(4-P) - the trace formed witout noise (Trace=refl*wav)

Figure 2-(5-P) - the trace with noise

Figure 2-(6-P) - Decon trace without noise

Figure 2-(7-P) - trace deterministic decon with noise

Figure 2-(8-P) - statistical deconvolution without noise

Figure 2-(9-P) - statistical deconvolution with noise

Figure 2-(10-P) - Predictive decon statistical without noise

Figure 2-(11-P) - Predict decon with noise

Figure 2-(12-P) - Raw

Figure 2-(13-P) - Spike

Figure 2-(14-P) - Predictive

Fig.(3.1),(3.2) - show increasing of Vp and Vs with increase of

confining pressure
Figure .3.3 - synthetic cmp gather “travel time curve for a flat
reflector as hyperbola
Fig.3.4 - shows nmo correction involves mapping of non zero t(x)
.offset onto zero offset travel time t(0)

Fig.3.5 - (a) CMP gather for a single event with a move out
velocity,(b) NMO corrected gather using appropriate
move out velocity,(c) Over corrected

Fig.3.6 - shows gather in (a) and (b) shows the same gather but
,after move out correction using RMS velocity function
and (d) after muting using a threshold stretch limits of )c(
50and 100 % respectively

Fig.3.7 - shows signal (a) with period T is stretched to signal (b)

with a period T/ after NMO correction

Fig.3.8 - shows nmo correction and muting of stretched zones as

cmp gather (b) nmo correction (c) mute )a(

.Fig.3.9 - show geometry of nmo for a single dipping reflector

Levin in 1971 using the previous

Fig.3.11- graphic representation of 3-d moveout equation derived

Fig.3.12 - graphic representation of 3-d moveout equation derived

.Fig.3.13 - show (t2-x2) velocity analysis applied to synthetic gather

Fig.3.14 - show (t2-x2) velocity analysis applied to synthetic gather

and triangles in the centre of the velocity spectrum
represent velocity values derived from slopes of lines in
.the right graph

Fig .3.15 - shows constant velocity moveout applied corrections to

cmp gather(5000 to 8900ft/sec

Fig.3.16 - shows constant velocity moveout applied corrections to

cmp gather (9200 to 13600 ft/sec

Fig.3.17 - shows constant velocity stacks of 24 cmp gathers

)to 13600 ft/sec 5000(
Fig.3.18 - stacked amplitude. Amplitudes of w i,t (i)

Fig.3.19 - shows 2 ways to display velocity spectrum derives from

cmp gather (a) , (b) gated raw plot , (c) contour plot

Fig.3.20 - shows effect of spread length on velocity.lack of long off

sets causes loss of resolution, especially at later times

Fig.3.21 - show missing long offsets traces causes loss of

resolution on the velocity spectra , especially at later
times

Fig.3.22 - lack of near offset traces can degrade the velocity

spectrum
Fig.3.23 - shows partial stacking can save money (8 fold partial
stacking is too much).do not use partial stacking if it
could degrade the velocity spectrum

Fig.3.24 - shows s/n ratio numbers on top , as s/n decrease as

distortion increaseFig.3.25 velocity spectrum as gated
raw plotted derived from the last

Fig.3.26 - velocity spectrum derived from fig.24 in the form of

contour plotted

Fig.3.27 - shows muting effect on correlation values,(a)cmp gather

mute compensated, (c)no compensation)b(,

Fig.3.28 - shows too small correlation gate length is much cost

while too large value can lower resolution

Fig.3.29 - shows velocity spectrum in form of contour display for

fig.28 to make a comparison

Fig.3.30 - shows cmp gathers associated with six neighboring

midpoint locations. Reflectors have gentle down dip
from left to right

Fig.3.31 - shows (a) velocity spectrum derived from the cmp 1 in

fig(30) ,(b)shows velocity spectrum from the sum of the
cmp gathers 6
Fig.3.32 - save computation ,velocity spectrum can be estimated
within a velocity corridor dictated by the dominant
.velocity trend

Fig.3.33 - shows stacked section with 5 markers horizons as

.indicated

Fig.3.34 - shows horizon velocity analysis along the previous 5

marker horizons , vertical axis is stacking velocity and
horizontal axis is cmp

Fig.3.35 - shows cmp stack section on the top , and by HVA in the
bottom , HVA for horizon A under the salt dome S is
shown in the centre

Figure 4.1 - Point response of dip moveout (left) compared to

constant-offset migration (right). (Hale)

Figure 4.2 - common midpoint geometry

Figure 4.3 - common depth point geometry

Figure 4.4 - The impulse responses of DM0 operator at offset

h=1.6km. (a) Impulses in the NMO corrected common
offset section. (b) The impulse responses of Hale's
operator. (c) The impulse responses of the new
operator. (d)-(c)-(b).

Figure 4.5 - The impulse responses of DM0 operator at offset

h=3.2km. (a) Impulses in the NMO corrected common
offset section. (b) The impulse responses of Hale's
operator. (c) The impulse responses of the new
operator. (d)-(c)-(b).

Figure 4.6 - The stacked results after the DM0 operation. The
synthetic section contains one horizontal reflector and
one dipping reflector

Figure 4.7 - A model to derive the (DMO) term.

Figure 4.8 - A model of two reflectors, showing the problem of
conflicting dip

Figure 4.9 - The DMO operator : An ellipse in the common offset

domain

Figure 4.10 - from (Yilmaz, 1987)

Figure 4.11 -The Effect of conflicting dips (Schoot,1989)

Figure.4.12 - The better-resolved dipping fault using DMO

Figure 4.13, Figure 4.14, Figure 4.15, and Figure 4.16: show two
pairs of seismic sections, one without DMO and one with DMO.

Figure 4.17: Processing with dip moveout. (Hale)

Figure 4.18 and Figure 4.19 enable us to compare the results of

time migration after stack versus before stack on steeply dipping
data.

Figure 4.20 and Figure 4.21 provide another comparison of time

migration after stack versus before stack of data

Figure 4.22, Figure 4.23 and Figure 4.24 show three migrated
versions of the same seismic section in which the velocities are
equal to 90 percent, 100 percent and 110 percent of the expected
values

Figure.5.A - cmp stack before and after migration

Figure 5.B - cmp stack before and after time migration adequate
for salt

Figure 5.C - some examples of prospective hydrocarbon-bearing

structures.

Figure5.1 - compare an isolated non-migrated anticline to a

migrated

Figure 5.2 - compare if the flanks of the anticline become flat

Figure 5.3 - unmigrated version of the same seismic section

Figure 5.4 - a migrated version of the same seismic section

Figure 5.5 - compare between non migrated, migrated syncline

section

Figure 5.6 - syncline on an unmigrated seismic section

Figure 5.7 - syncline on an migrated seismic section

Figure 5.8 - show a narrow syncline on an unmigrated seismic

section

Figure 5.9 - show a narrow syncline on a migrated seismic section

Figure 5.10 - the seismic response caused by a formation pinchout

Figure 5.11 - Spherical wavefronts in a homogeneous medium

Figure 5.12A - circular wave front reflected off an interface

Figure 5.13 - the point reflector for the ZSR4 location

Figure 5.14 - the wavefront arrives at angles other than 90 degrees

to the interface

Figure 5.15 - the image ray for the dipping-interface model

Figure 5.16 - shortest travel time path perpendicular to the reflector

interface

Figure 5.17 - the graphical method of migration

Figure 5.18 - Diffraction curve is produced by a point reflector in

subsurface

Figure 5.19 - the steeply dipping interface of the unmigrated

sections.

Figure 5.20 - the steeply dipping interface of the migrated sections

Figure 5.21 - An unmigrated seismic section

Figure 5.22 - migrated seismic section

Figure 5.23 - An unmigrated seismic section, showing many

diffractions due to point diffractors at the fault planes

Figure 5.24 - Application of a time migration scheme

Figure 5.25 - The energy from a point reflector arrives at the

receivers at different angles

Figure 5.26 - hypothetical changes in diffraction curve shape

Figure 5.27 - Illustrates the problems inherent in the aperture width

limitation

Figure 5.28 - downward continuation results in collapsing the

diffraction curves

Figure 5.29 - Kirchhoff migration

Figure 5.30 - the effects of too low a velocity and the resulting
under migration

Figure 5.31 - see the simplest earth model in which the effects of
lateral velocity variations

Figure 5.32 - the travel times for this model

Figure 5.33 - set of all image rays for a given receiver array and
earth model

Figure 5.34 - two-dimensional migrated seismic section

Figure 5.35 - three-dimensional migrated section

Figure 5.36 - Unmigrated section

Figure 5.37 - Migrated using Kirchhoff time migration with correct

velocity 1600 m/s

Figure 5.38 - Migrated stack with wrong velocity 2000 m/sec