Introduction to Seismic Inversion Methods Brtan Russell

PART
2 - THECONVOLUTIONAL
MODEL

Part 2 - The Convolutional Model Page 2 -

Introduction to Seismic Inversion Methods Brian Russell

Part 2 - The Convolutional Mooel

2.1 Th'e Sei smic Model

The mostbasic and commonly

used one-Oimensionalmoael for the seismic
trace is referreU to as the convolutional moOel, which states that the seismic
trace is simplythe convolutionof the earth's reflectivity with a seismic
source function with the adUltion of a noise component. In equation form,
where * implies convolution,
s(t) : w(t) * r(t) + n(t)s

where

s (t) = the sei smic trace,

w(t) : a seismic wavelet,
r (t) : earth refl ecti vi ty,
and n(t) : additive noise.

An even simpler assumptionis to consiUerthe noise component

to be zero,
in which case the seismic tr•½e is simply the convolution of a seismic wavelet
with t•e earth ' s refl ecti vi ty,
s(t) = w{t) * r(t).

In seismic processingwe deal exclusively with digital data, that is,

data sampled
at a constanttime interval. If weconsiUerthe relectivity to
consist of a reflection coefficient at each time sample(som• of which can be
zero), and the wavelet to be a smooth function in time, convolutioncan be
thoughtof as "replacing"eachreflection. coefficient with a scaledversion of
the waveletandsumming the result. The result of this processis illustrated
in Figures 2.1 and2.Z for botha "sparse"anda "dense"set of reflection
coefficients. Notice that convolution with the wavelet tends to "smear" the
reflection coefficients. That is, there is a total loss of resolution,which
is the ability to resolve closely spacedreflectors.

Part 2 - The Convolutional Model Page

 Introduction to Seismic Inversion Nethods Brian Russell

WAVELET:

(a) '*• • : -' ':'

REFLECTIVITY

TRACE:

Figure 2.1 Convolutionof a wavelet with a sparse"reflectivity.

(a) •avelet. (b) Reflectivit.y. (c) Resu1ting Seismic Trace.

(a) !

: !

(b')
! : :
i
ß ,
i

: i

! i i

'?t *

c
o o o o o

Fi õure 2.2 Convolution of a wavelet with a sonic-derived "dense"

reflectivity. (a) Wavelet. (b) Reflectivity. (c) SeismicTrace
, i , ß .... ! , m i i L_ - '

Par• 2 - The Convolutional Model Page 2 - 3

Introduction to Seismic Inver'sion Methods Brian Russell

An alternate, but equivalent, way of looking at the seismic trace is in

the frequency domain.
ß
If we take the Fourier transform of the previous
equati on, we may write
S(f) = W(f) x R(f),

where S(f) = Fouriertransform

of s(t),
W(f) = Fourier transform of w(t),
R(f) = Fourier transform of r(t), ana f = frequency.

In the above equation we see that convolution becomesmultiplication in

the frequency domain. However, the Fourier transform is a complex function,
and it is normal to consiUer the amplitude and phase spectra of the individual
components. The spectra of S(f) may then be simply expressed

esCf)= ew(f) + er(f),

where
I •ndicates
amplitude
spectrum,
and
0 indicates phase spectrum. .

In other words, convolution involves multiplying the amplitude spectra

and adding the phase spectra. Figure 2.3 illustrates the convolutional model
in the frequency domain. Notice that the time Oomainproblem of loss of
resolution becomesone of loss of frequency content in the frequency domain.
Both the high and low frequencies of the reflectivity have been severely
reOuceo by the effects of the seismic wavelet.

Part 2 - The Convolutional Mooel Page ?. - 4

 Introduction to Seismic Inversion Methods Brian Russell

AMPLITUDE SPECTRA PHASE SPECTRA

w (f)

I I

-t-

R (f)

i i , I ! loo
i. iit |11

s (f)

i i
I i!

Figure 2.3 Convolution in the frequency domain for

the time series shown in Figure 2.1.

Part 2 - The Convolutional Model Page 2 -

Introduction to Seismic Inversion Methods Brian Russell

2.g The Reflection

l_ _ ,m i _ _ , _ _
Coefficient
m_ _,• , _ _
Series
ß _ el

'The reflection coefficient series (or reflectivity, as it is also called)

describedin theprevious
sectionis oneof thefundamental
physical
concepts
in the seismic method. Basically, each reflection coefficient maybe thought
of as the res ponse of the seismic wavelet to an acoustic impeUance change
within the ear th, where acoustic impedance is defined as the proUuct of
compressi onal velocity and Uensity. Mathematically, converting from acoustic
i ropedanceto re flectivity involves dividing the difference in the acoustic
impedances by the sum of the acoustic impeaances. This gives t•e reflection
coefficient at the boundary between the two layers. The equation is as
fo11 aws:

•i+lVi+l- iVi Zi+l- Zi

i • i+1

where r = reflection coefficient,

/o__density,
V -- compressional velocity,
Z -- acoustic impeUance,
and Layer i overlies Layer i+1.

Wemust also convert from depth to time by integrating the sonic log
transit times. Figure •.4 showsa schematicsonic log, density log, anU
resulting acoustic impedancefor a simplifieU earth moael. Figure 2.$ shows
the resultof converting
to thereflection
coefficient
seriesandintegrating
to time.

It should be pointed out that this formula is true only for the normal
incidence case, that is, for a seismic wave striking the reflecting interface
at right angles to the beds. Later in this course, we shall consider the case
of nonnormal inciaence.

Part 2 - The Convolutional Model Page 2 - 6

Introduction to Seismic Inversion Methods Brian Russell

OENSITY LOG.
STRATIGRAPHIC SONICLOG
SECTION •T (•usec./mette)
4OO 30O 200 loo 2.0 ,
3.0
ß •
I
3600 m/s
SHALE ..... DEPTH
_

ß ß ß ß ß ß
SANOSTONE . . - .. ,
'I
UMESTONEI I I ! I ! I 1
! !_1 ! ! !
v--I
V--3600
J

LIMESTONE V= 6QO0
2000111
I

Fig. 2.4. BoreholeLogMeasurements.

REFLECTWrrY
ACOUSTIC
IMPED,M•CE (2• VS TWO.WAY
(Y•ocrrv x OEaSn• V$ OEPTH TIME

20K -.25 O Q.2S -.25 O + .2S

mm mm rome m .am
I I v ' I
,mm mm m ----- mm

SHALE ..... OEPTH

•--------'-[
SANDSTONE . . ... ,

! I !11 I1
UMESTONE
I I 1 I I I II
i ! I 1 i I i 1000m - 1000 m -- NO
SHALE •.--._--.---- • •.'•

,• , ..

LIMESTONE - 20o0 m I SECOND

2000 m

Fig. 2.5. Creation of Reflectivity Sequence.

Part g - The Convolutional Model Page 2 - 7

IntroductJ on 1:o Sei stoic Inversion Herhods Bri an Russell

Our best method of observing seJsm•c impedance and reflectivity is •o

derlye them from well log curves. Thus, we maycreate an impedancecurve by
multiplying together •he sonic and density logs from a well. Wemay•hen
computethe reflectivlty by using •he formula shownearlier. Often, we do not
have the density log available• to us and must makedo with only the sonJc. The
approxJmatJonof velocJty to •mpedance
1s a reasonable approxjmation, and
seemsto holdwell for clas;cics and carbonates(not evaporltes, however).
Figure 2.6 showsthe sonic and reflectJv•ty traces from a typJcal Alberta well
after they have been Jntegrated to two-way tlme.

As we shall see later, the type of aleconvolution and inversion used is

dependent on the statistical assumptionswhich are made about the seismic
reflectivity and wavelet. Therefore, howcan we describe the reflectivity seen
in a well? The traditional answer has always been that we consider the
reflectivity to be a perfectly random sequence and, from Figure •.6, this
appears to be a good assumption. A ranUomsequencehas the property that its
autocorrelation is a spike at zero-lag. That is, all the componentsof the
autocorrelation are zero except the zero-lag value, as shownin the following
equati on-

t(Drt = ( 1 , 0 , 0 , ......... )
t
zero-lag.

Let us test this idea on a theoretical random sequence, shownin Figure

2.7. ß
Notice that the autocorrelation of this sequence has a large spike at
the zeroth lag, but that there is a significant noise component at nonzero
lags. To have a truly random sequence, it must be infinite in extent. Also
on this figure is shown the autocorrelation of a well log •erived
reflectivity. Wesee that it is even less "random"than the randomspike
sequence. Wewill discuss this in more detail on the next page.

Part 2 - The Convolutional Model Page 2 - 8

IntroductJon to Se•.s=•c Inversion Methods Br•an Russell

RFC

F•g. 2.6. Reflectivitysequence

derivedfromsonJc
.log.

RANDOM SPIKE SEQUENCE

WELL LOG DERIVED REFLECT1vrrY

AUTOCORRE•JATION
OF RANDOMSEQUENCE AUTOCORRELATION OF REFLECTIVITY

Fig. 2.7. Autocorrelat4ons of random and well log

der4vedspike sequences.

Part 2 - The Convolutional Model Page 2-

Introductlon to Sei smic Inversion Methods Brian Russel 1

Therefore, the true earth reflectivity cannot be consideredas being

truly random. For a typical Alberta well we see a numberof large spikes
(co•responding to majorlithol ogic change)sticking up abovethe crowd.A good
way to describethis statistically is as a Bernoulli-Gaussian sequence. The
Bernoulli part of this term implies a sparsenessin the positions of the
spikes and the Gaussianimplies a randomness in their amplitudes. Whenwe
generatesuch a sequence,there is a term, lambda, which controls the
sparsenessof the spikes. For a lambdaof 0 there are no spikes, and for a
lambdaof 1, the sequence
is perfectly Gaussian in distribution. Figure 2.8
shows a number of such series for different values of lambda. Notice that a
typical Alberta well log reflectivity wouldhavea lambdavalue in the 0.1 to
0.5 range.

Part 2 - The Convolutional Model Page 2 - 10

 I ntroducti on to Sei smic I nversi on Methods Brian Russell

It

tl I I I i I I

•11 I 511 t •tl I

LAMBD^•0.01 (VERY SPARSE)

11

311 I 4# I 511 I #1 I

TZIIE (KS !

LAMBDA--O. 1

1,1

::.•"• •'•;'"' "";'•'l•'

"••'r'• -• "(11
I
TX#E (HS)

LAMBDAI0.5

LAMBDA-- 1.0 (GAUSSIAN:]

EXAMPLESOF REFLECTIVITIES

Fig. 2.8. Examplesof reflectivities using lambda

factor to be discussed in Part 6.

, , m i ß i

Part 2 - The Convolutional Model Page 2 - 11

Introduction to Seismic Inversion ,Methods Brian Russell

2.3 The Seismic

-- _ ß
Wavelet • ,

Zero Phase and Constant Phase Wavelets

m _ m _ m ß m u , L m _ J

The assumptiontha.t there is a single, well-defined wavelet which is

convolved with the reflectivity to producethe seismic trace is overly
simplistic. Morerealistically, the wavelet is both time-varying and complex
in shape. However,the assumptionof a simple wavelet is reasonable, and in
this section we shall consider several types of wavelets and their
characteristics.

First, let us consider the Ricker wavelet, which consists of a peak and
two troughs, or side lobes. The Ricker wavelet is dependentonly on its
dominant frequency, that is, the peak frequencyof its a•litude spectrum or
the inverse of the dominantperiod in the time domain(the dominantperiod is
found by measuringthe time from troughto trough). TwoRicker wave'lets are
shownin Figures 2.9 and 2.10 of frequencies 20 and 40 Hz. Notice that as the
anq•litude spectrumof a wavelet .is broadened,the wavelet gets narrower in the
timedomain,
indicatingan increase
of resolution.Ourultimatewaveletwould
be a spike, with a flat amplitude spectrum. Sucha wavelet is an unrealistic
goal in seismic processing, but one that is aimedfor.

The Rtcker wavelets of Figures 2.9 and 2.10 are also zero-phase, or
perfectly symmetrical. This is a desirable character.tstic of wavelets since
the energy is then concentrated at a positive peak, and the convol'ution of the
wavelet with a reflection coefficient will better resolve that reflection. To
get an idea of non-zero-phase wavelets, consider Figure 2.11, where a Ricker
wavelet has been rotated by 90 degree increments, and Figure 2.12, where the
samewavelet has been shifted by 30 degree increments. Notice that the 90
degree rotation displays perfect antis•nmnetry, whereas a 180 degree shift
simply inverts the wavelet. The 30 degree rotations are asymetric.

Part 2 - The Convolutional Model Page 2- •2

Introduction to Seismic Inversion Methods Brian Russell

Fig. 2.9. 20 Hz Ricker Wavelet'.

Fig. •.10. 40 Hz Ricker wavelet.

Fig. 2.11. Ricker wavelet rotated

by 90 degree increments

Fig. 2.12. Ricker wavelet rotated

by 30 degree increments

Part 2 - The Convolutional Model Page 2 - 13

Introduction to Seismic Inversion Methods Brian Russell

Of course, a typical seismic wavelet contains a larger range of

frequencies than that shownon the Ricker wavelet. Consider the banapass
fil•er shownin Figure 2.13, where we have passed a banaof frequencies
between15 and 60 Hz. The filter has also had cosine tapers applied between 5
and 15 Hz, and between60 and 80 Hz. The taper reduces the "ringing" effect
that would be noticeable if the wavelet amplitude spectrum was a simple
box-car. The wavelet of Figure 2.13 is zero-phase, and would be excellent as
a stratigraphic wavelet. It is often referred to as an Ormsbywavelet.

Minimum Phase Wavelets

The concept of minimum-phaseis one that is vital to aleconvolution, but

is also a concept that is poorly understood. The reason for this lack of
understanding is that most discussions of the concept stress the mathematics
at the expense of the physical interpretation. The definition we
use of minimum-phaseis adapted from Treitel and Robinson (1966):

For a given set of wavelets, all with the sameamplitude spectrum,

the minimum-phase
waveletis the onewhichhasthe sharpest
leading
edge. That is, only wavelets which have positive time values.

The reason that minimum-phase concept is important to us is that a

typical wavelet in dynamite work is close to minimum-phase. Also, the wavelet
from the seismic instruments is also minimum-phase. The minimum-phase
equivalent of the 5/15-60/80 zero-phase wavelet is shownin Figure 2.14. As
in the aefinition used, notice that the minimum-phasewavelet has no component
prior to time zero and has its energy concentrated as close to the origin as
possible. The phase spectrum of the minimum-waveletis also shown.

Part 2 - The Convolutional Model Pa.qe 2 - 14

I•troduct•on to Seistoic!nversionNethods. Br•anRussell

ql Re• R Zero Phase I•auel•t 5/15-68Y88 {•

f1.38 - Trace 1

0.6 iii

- e.3e ...... , • ..... ' 2be

Fig. 2.13. Zero-phase bandpass
wavelet.
1 Trace I

Reg 1) min,l• wavelet •/15-68/88 hz

18.00 p Trace I

Fig. 2.14. Minim•-phase equivalent

RegE wayel Speetnm
of zero-phase wavelet
shownin Fig. 2.13.
'188.88• Trace1

0.8

188

! m,m, i m i

Part 2 -Th 'e Convolutional Model Page 2- 15

Introduction to Seismic Inversion Methods Brian Russell

Let us nowlook at the effect of different waveletson the reflectivity

function itself. Figure 2.15 a anU b shows a numberof different wavelets
conv6lved with the reflectivity (Trace 1) from the simple blocky model shown
in Figure Z.5. The following wavelets have been used- high frequency
zero-phase (Trace •), low frequencyzero-phase(Trace ½), high frequency
minimumphase (Trace 3), low frequency minimum phase (Trace 5). From the

figure, we can make the fol 1owing observations:

(1) Low freq. zero-phase wavelet: (Trace 4)

- Resolution of reflections is poor.
- Identification of onset of reflection is good.

(Z) High freq. zero-phase wavelet: (Trace Z)

- Resolution of reflections is good.
- Identification of onset of reflection is good.

(3) Lowfreq. min. p•ase wavelet- (Trace 5)

- Resolution of reflections i s poor.
- Identification of onset of reflection is poor.

(4) High freq. min. phase wavelet: (Trace 3)

- Resolution of refl ec tions is good.
- Identification of onset of reflection is poor.

Based on the aboveobservations, we wouldhave to consider the high

frequency,zero-phase
waveletthe best, andthe low-frequency,
minimum
phase
wavelet the worst.

Part 2 - The Convolutional Model Page 2 - 16

 Introduction to Seismic Inversion Methods Brian Russell

!ql RegR Zer• PhaseUa•elet •,'1G-•1• 14z q2 RegC ZeroPhase

14aue16('
' •'le-3•4B Hz
e
F

- •.• [' '

•,3 RecjB miniilium
phue ' ' q• Reg1) 'minimum
phase " •,leJ3e/4eh• '
17 .• 8

e.e •/••/'•-•"v--,._,,
-r
(a)

e.•' ' "s•e'',m ,,

Tr'oce

[b)

700

Fig. 2.15. Convolution of four different wavelets shown

in (a) with trace I of (b). The results are
shown on traces 2 to 5 of (b).

Part 2 - The Convolutional Model Page 2 - 17

Introduction to Seismic Inversion Methods Brian Russell

g.4 Th•N.oi se.Co.mp.o•ne

nt-

The situation
.
that has been discussed so far is the ideal case. That is,
we have interpreted every reflection wavelet on a seismic trace as being an
actual reflection from a lithological boundary. Actually, many of the
"wiggles"on a trace are not true reflections, but are actually the result of
seismic noise. Seismic noise can be grouped under two categories-

(i) Random
Noise - noise which is uncorrelated from trace to trace and is
•ue mainly to environmental factors.

(ii) CoherentNoise - noise which is predictable on the seismic trace but

is unwanted. An exampleis multiple reflection interference.

Randomnoise can be thought of as the additive componentn(t) which was

seen in the equationon page 2-g. Correcting for this term is the primary
reason for stackingour •ata. Stackingactually uoesan excellent job of
removing ranUomnoise.

Multiples, one of the major sources of coherent noise, are causedby

multiple "bounces" of the seismic signal within the earth, as shownin Figure
2.16. They may be straightforward, as in multiple seafloor bouncesor
"ringing", or extremelycomplex,as typified by interbed multiples. Multiples
cannot be thoughtof as additive noise andmustbe modeledas a convolution
with the reflecti vi ty.

Figure 2.17 shows the theoretical multiple sequence which would be

generatedby the simple blocky modelshown on Figure •. 5. If we are to invert

this data, it is important that the multiples be effectively removed.

Multiples maybe partially removed by stacking, but often require a more
powerful elimination technique. Such techniques include predictive
aleconvolution, f-k filter.ing, and inverse velocity stacking. These techniques
wil 1 be consi alered in Part 4.

Part 2 - The Convolutional Model Page 2 - 18

Introduction to Seismic Inversion Methods Brian Russell

Fig. 2.16. Several multiple generating mechanisms.

TIME TIME
[sec) [sec)

0.7 0.7

REFLECTION R.C.S.
COEFFICIENT WITH ALL
SERIES MULTIPLES

Fig. 2.17. Reflectivi ty sequenceof Fig. 2.5. with

and without multipl es.
.

Part 2 - The ConvolutionalModel Page 2 - 19