Seismic Wave Propagation in Stratified Media
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Load more
Recommended publications
-
STRUCTURE of EARTH S-Wave Shadow P-Wave Shadow P-Wave
STRUCTURE OF EARTH Earthquake Focus P-wave P-wave shadow shadow S-wave shadow P waves = Primary waves = Pressure waves S waves = Secondary waves = Shear waves (Don't penetrate liquids) CRUST < 50-70 km thick MANTLE = 2900 km thick OUTER CORE (Liquid) = 3200 km thick INNER CORE (Solid) = 1300 km radius. STRUCTURE OF EARTH Low Velocity Crust Zone Whole Mantle Convection Lithosphere Upper Mantle Transition Zone Layered Mantle Convection Lower Mantle S-wave P-wave CRUST : Conrad discontinuity = upper / lower crust boundary Mohorovicic discontinuity = base of Continental Crust (35-50 km continents; 6-8 km oceans) MANTLE: Lithosphere = Rigid Mantle < 100 km depth Asthenosphere = Plastic Mantle > 150 km depth Low Velocity Zone = Partially Melted, 100-150 km depth Upper Mantle < 410 km Transition Zone = 400-600 km --> Velocity increases rapidly Lower Mantle = 600 - 2900 km Outer Core (Liquid) 2900-5100 km Inner Core (Solid) 5100-6400 km Center = 6400 km UPPER MANTLE AND MAGMA GENERATION A. Composition of Earth Density of the Bulk Earth (Uncompressed) = 5.45 gm/cm3 Densities of Common Rocks: Granite = 2.55 gm/cm3 Peridotite, Eclogite = 3.2 to 3.4 gm/cm3 Basalt = 2.85 gm/cm3 Density of the CORE (estimated) = 7.2 gm/cm3 Fe-metal = 8.0 gm/cm3, Ni-metal = 8.5 gm/cm3 EARTH must contain a mix of Rock and Metal . Stony meteorites Remains of broken planets Planetary Interior Rock=Stony Meteorites ÒChondritesÓ = Olivine, Pyroxene, Metal (Fe-Ni) Metal = Fe-Ni Meteorites Core density = 7.2 gm/cm3 -- Too Light for Pure Fe-Ni Light elements = O2 (FeO) or S (FeS) B. -
Seismic Wavefield Imaging of Earth's Interior Across Scales
TECHNICAL REVIEWS Seismic wavefield imaging of Earth’s interior across scales Jeroen Tromp Abstract | Seismic full- waveform inversion (FWI) for imaging Earth’s interior was introduced in the late 1970s. Its ultimate goal is to use all of the information in a seismogram to understand the structure and dynamics of Earth, such as hydrocarbon reservoirs, the nature of hotspots and the forces behind plate motions and earthquakes. Thanks to developments in high- performance computing and advances in modern numerical methods in the past 10 years, 3D FWI has become feasible for a wide range of applications and is currently used across nine orders of magnitude in frequency and wavelength. A typical FWI workflow includes selecting seismic sources and a starting model, conducting forward simulations, calculating and evaluating the misfit, and optimizing the simulated model until the observed and modelled seismograms converge on a single model. This method has revealed Pleistocene ice scrapes beneath a gas cloud in the Valhall oil field, overthrusted Iberian crust in the western Pyrenees mountains, deep slabs in subduction zones throughout the world and the shape of the African superplume. The increased use of multi- parameter inversions, improved computational and algorithmic efficiency , and the inclusion of Bayesian statistics in the optimization process all stand to substantially improve FWI, overcoming current computational or data- quality constraints. In this Technical Review, FWI methods and applications in controlled- source and earthquake seismology are discussed, followed by a perspective on the future of FWI, which will ultimately result in increased insight into the physics and chemistry of Earth’s interior. -
Characteristics of Foreshocks and Short Term Deformation in the Source Area of Major Earthquakes
Characteristics of Foreshocks and Short Term Deformation in the Source Area of Major Earthquakes Peter Molnar Massachusetts Institute of Technology 77 Massachusetts Avenue Cambridge, Massachusetts 02139 USGS CONTRACT NO. 14-08-0001-17759 Supported by the EARTHQUAKE HAZARDS REDUCTION PROGRAM OPEN-FILE NO.81-287 U.S. Geological Survey OPEN FILE REPORT This report was prepared under contract to the U.S. Geological Survey and has not been reviewed for conformity with USGS editorial standards and stratigraphic nomenclature. Opinions and conclusions expressed herein do not necessarily represent those of the USGS. Any use of trade names is for descriptive purposes only and does not imply endorsement by the USGS. Appendix A A Study of the Haicheng Foreshock Sequence By Lucile Jones, Wang Biquan and Xu Shaoxie (English Translation of a Paper Published in Di Zhen Xue Bao (Journal of Seismology), 1980.) Abstract We have examined the locations and radiation patterns of the foreshocks to the 4 February 1978 Haicheng earthquake. Using four stations, the foreshocks were located relative to a master event. They occurred very close together, no more than 6 kilo meters apart. Nevertheless, there appear to have been too clusters of foreshock activity. The majority of events seem to have occurred in a cluster to the east of the master event along a NNE-SSW trend. Moreover, all eight foreshocks that we could locate and with a magnitude greater than 3.0 occurred in this group. The're also "appears to be a second cluster of foresfiocks located to the northwest of the first. Thus it seems possible that the majority of foreshocks did not occur on the rupture plane of the mainshock, which trends WNW, but on another plane nearly perpendicualr to the mainshock. -
Chapter 2 the Evolution of Seismic Monitoring Systems at the Hawaiian Volcano Observatory
Characteristics of Hawaiian Volcanoes Editors: Michael P. Poland, Taeko Jane Takahashi, and Claire M. Landowski U.S. Geological Survey Professional Paper 1801, 2014 Chapter 2 The Evolution of Seismic Monitoring Systems at the Hawaiian Volcano Observatory By Paul G. Okubo1, Jennifer S. Nakata1, and Robert Y. Koyanagi1 Abstract the Island of Hawai‘i. Over the past century, thousands of sci- entific reports and articles have been published in connection In the century since the Hawaiian Volcano Observatory with Hawaiian volcanism, and an extensive bibliography has (HVO) put its first seismographs into operation at the edge of accumulated, including numerous discussions of the history of Kīlauea Volcano’s summit caldera, seismic monitoring at HVO HVO and its seismic monitoring operations, as well as research (now administered by the U.S. Geological Survey [USGS]) has results. From among these references, we point to Klein and evolved considerably. The HVO seismic network extends across Koyanagi (1980), Apple (1987), Eaton (1996), and Klein and the entire Island of Hawai‘i and is complemented by stations Wright (2000) for details of the early growth of HVO’s seismic installed and operated by monitoring partners in both the USGS network. In particular, the work of Klein and Wright stands and the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration. The out because their compilation uses newspaper accounts and seismic data stream that is available to HVO for its monitoring other reports of the effects of historical earthquakes to extend of volcanic and seismic activity in Hawai‘i, therefore, is built Hawai‘i’s detailed seismic history to nearly a century before from hundreds of data channels from a diverse collection of instrumental monitoring began at HVO. -
Imaging Through Gas Clouds: a Case History in the Gulf of Mexico S
Imaging Through Gas Clouds: A Case History In The Gulf Of Mexico S. Knapp1, N. Payne1, and T. Johns2, Seitel Data1, Houston, Texas: WesternGeco2, Houston, Texas Summary Results from the worlds largest 3D four component OBC seismic survey will be presented. Located in the West Cameron area, offshore Gulf of Mexico, the survey operation totaled over 1000 square kilometers and covered more than 46 OCS blocks. The area contains numerous gas invaded zones and shallow gas anomalies that disturb the image on conventional 3D seismic, which only records compressional data. Converted shear wave data allows images to be obtained that are unobstructed by the gas and/or fluids. This reduces the risk for interpretation and subsequent appraisal and development drilling in complex areas which are clearly petroleum rich. In addition, rock properties can be uniquely determined from the compressional and shear data, allowing for improved reservoir characterization and lithologic prediction. Data acquisition and processing of multicomponent 3D datasets involves both similarities and differences when compared to conventional techniques. Processing for the compressional data is the same as for a conventional OBC survey, however, asymmetric raypaths for the converted waves and the resultant effects on fold-offset-azimuth distribution, binning and velocity determination require radically different processing methodologies. These issues together with methods for determining the optimal parameters of the Vp/Vs ratio (γ) will be discussed. Finally, images from both the compressional (P and Z components summed) and converted shear waves will be shown to illuminate details that were not present on previous 3D datasets. Introduction Multicomponent 3D surveys have become one of the leading areas where state of the art technology is being applied to areas where the exploitation potential has not been fulfilled due to difficulties in obtaining an interpretable seismic image (MacLeod et al 1999, Rognoe et al 1999). -
PEAT8002 - SEISMOLOGY Lecture 13: Earthquake Magnitudes and Moment
PEAT8002 - SEISMOLOGY Lecture 13: Earthquake magnitudes and moment Nick Rawlinson Research School of Earth Sciences Australian National University Earthquake magnitudes and moment Introduction In the last two lectures, the effects of the source rupture process on the pattern of radiated seismic energy was discussed. However, even before earthquake mechanisms were studied, the priority of seismologists, after locating an earthquake, was to quantify their size, both for scientific purposes and hazard assessment. The first measure introduced was the magnitude, which is based on the amplitude of the emanating waves recorded on a seismogram. The idea is that the wave amplitude reflects the earthquake size once the amplitudes are corrected for the decrease with distance due to geometric spreading and attenuation. Earthquake magnitudes and moment Introduction Magnitude scales thus have the general form: A M = log + F(h, ∆) + C T where A is the amplitude of the signal, T is its dominant period, F is a correction for the variation of amplitude with the earthquake’s depth h and angular distance ∆ from the seismometer, and C is a regional scaling factor. Magnitude scales are logarithmic, so an increase in one unit e.g. from 5 to 6, indicates a ten-fold increase in seismic wave amplitude. Note that since a log10 scale is used, magnitudes can be negative for very small displacements. For example, a magnitude -1 earthquake might correspond to a hammer blow. Earthquake magnitudes and moment Richter magnitude The concept of earthquake magnitude was introduced by Charles Richter in 1935 for southern California earthquakes. He originally defined earthquake magnitude as the logarithm (to the base 10) of maximum amplitude measured in microns on the record of a standard torsion seismograph with a pendulum period of 0.8 s, magnification of 2800, and damping factor 0.8, located at a distance of 100 km from the epicenter. -
Seismic Reflection and Refraction Methods
Seismic Reflection and Refraction Methods A. K. Chaubey National Institute of Oceanography, Dona Paula, Goa-403 004. [email protected] Introduction and radar systems. Whereas, in seismic refraction Seismic reflection and refraction is the principal method, principal portion of the wave-path is along the seismic method by which the petroleum industry explores interface between the two layers and hence hydrocarbon-trapping structures in sedimentary basins. approximately horizontal. The travel times of the Its extension to deep crustal studies began in the 1960s, refracted wave paths are then interpreted in terms of the and since the late 1970s these methods have become depths to subsurface interfaces and the speeds at which the principal techniques for detailed studies of the deep wave travels through the subsurface within each layer. crust. These methods are by far the most important For both types of paths the travel time depends upon the geophysical methods and the predominance of these physical property, called elastic parameters, of the methods over other geophysical methods is due to layered Earth and the attitudes of the beds. The various factors such as the higher accuracy, higher objective of the seismic exploration is to deduce resolution and greater penetration. Further, the information about such beds especially about their importance of the seismic methods lies in the fact that attitudes from the observed arrival times and from the data, if properly handled, yield an almost unique and variations in amplitude, frequency and wave form. unambiguous interpretation. These methods utilize the principle of elastic waves travelling with different Both the seismic techniques have specific velocities in different layer formations of the Earth. -
Paper 4: Seismic Methods for Determining Earthquake Source
Paper 4: Seismic methods for determining earthquake source parameters and lithospheric structure WALTER D. MOONEY U.S. Geological Survey, MS 977, 345 Middlefield Road, Menlo Park, California 94025 For referring to this paper: Mooney, W. D., 1989, Seismic methods for determining earthquake source parameters and lithospheric structure, in Pakiser, L. C., and Mooney, W. D., Geophysical framework of the continental United States: Boulder, Colorado, Geological Society of America Memoir 172. ABSTRACT The seismologic methods most commonly used in studies of earthquakes and the structure of the continental lithosphere are reviewed in three main sections: earthquake source parameter determinations, the determination of earth structure using natural sources, and controlled-source seismology. The emphasis in each section is on a description of data, the principles behind the analysis techniques, and the assumptions and uncertainties in interpretation. Rather than focusing on future directions in seismology, the goal here is to summarize past and current practice as a companion to the review papers in this volume. Reliable earthquake hypocenters and focal mechanisms require seismograph locations with a broad distribution in azimuth and distance from the earthquakes; a recording within one focal depth of the epicenter provides excellent hypocentral depth control. For earthquakes of magnitude greater than 4.5, waveform modeling methods may be used to determine source parameters. The seismic moment tensor provides the most complete and accurate measure of earthquake source parameters, and offers a dynamic picture of the faulting process. Methods for determining the Earth's structure from natural sources exist for local, regional, and teleseismic sources. One-dimensional models of structure are obtained from body and surface waves using both forward and inverse modeling. -
Modelling Seismic Wave Propagation for Geophysical Imaging J
Modelling Seismic Wave Propagation for Geophysical Imaging J. Virieux, V. Etienne, V. Cruz-Atienza, R. Brossier, E. Chaljub, O. Coutant, S. Garambois, D. Mercerat, V. Prieux, S. Operto, et al. To cite this version: J. Virieux, V. Etienne, V. Cruz-Atienza, R. Brossier, E. Chaljub, et al.. Modelling Seismic Wave Propagation for Geophysical Imaging. Seismic Waves - Research and Analysis, Masaki Kanao, 253- 304, Chap.13, 2012, 978-953-307-944-8. hal-00682707 HAL Id: hal-00682707 https://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/hal-00682707 Submitted on 5 Apr 2012 HAL is a multi-disciplinary open access L’archive ouverte pluridisciplinaire HAL, est archive for the deposit and dissemination of sci- destinée au dépôt et à la diffusion de documents entific research documents, whether they are pub- scientifiques de niveau recherche, publiés ou non, lished or not. The documents may come from émanant des établissements d’enseignement et de teaching and research institutions in France or recherche français ou étrangers, des laboratoires abroad, or from public or private research centers. publics ou privés. 130 Modelling Seismic Wave Propagation for Geophysical Imaging Jean Virieux et al.1,* Vincent Etienne et al.2†and Victor Cruz-Atienza et al.3‡ 1ISTerre, Université Joseph Fourier, Grenoble 2GeoAzur, Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique, Institut de Recherche pour le développement 3Instituto de Geofisica, Departamento de Sismologia, Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México 1,2France 3Mexico 1. Introduction − The Earth is an heterogeneous complex media from -
Extended Abstracts
CONJUGATE MARGINS CONFERENCE 2018 Celebrating 10 years of the CMC: Pushing the Boundaries of Knowledge Extended Abstracts Dalhousie University, Halifax, Nova Scotia, August 19–22, 2018 ISBN: 0-9810595-8 CONJUGATE MARGINS CONFERENCE 2018 Celebrating 10 years of the CMC: Pushing the Boundaries of Knowledge 2 Dalhousie University, Halifax, Nova Scotia, August 19–22, 2018 CONJUGATE MARGINS CONFERENCE 2018 Celebrating 10 years of the CMC: Pushing the Boundaries of Knowledge CONJUGATE MARGINS CONFERENCE 2018 Celebrating 10 years of the CMC: Pushing the Boundaries of Knowledge Extended Abstracts 19-22 August 2018 Dalhousie University Halifax, Nova Scotia, Canada Editors: Ricardo L. Silva, David E. Brown, and Paul J. Post ISBN: 0-9810595-8 Dalhousie University, Halifax, Nova Scotia, August 19–22, 2018 3 CONJUGATE MARGINS CONFERENCE 2018 Celebrating 10 years of the CMC: Pushing the Boundaries of Knowledge 4 Dalhousie University, Halifax, Nova Scotia, August 19–22, 2018 CONJUGATE MARGINS CONFERENCE 2018 Celebrating 10 years of the CMC: Pushing the Boundaries of Knowledge Sponsors The organizers of the Conjugate Margins Conference sincerely thank our sponsors, partners, and supporters who contributed financially and/or in-kind to the Conference’s success. Diamond $15,000+ Platinum $10,000 – $14,999 Gold $6,000 – $9,999 and In-Kind Bronze $2,000 – $3,999 and In-Kind Patrons and Supporters $1,000 – $1,999 and In-Kind Dalhousie University, Halifax, Nova Scotia, August 19–22, 2018 5 CONJUGATE MARGINS CONFERENCE 2018 Celebrating 10 years of the CMC: Pushing the Boundaries of Knowledge 6 Dalhousie University, Halifax, Nova Scotia, August 19–22, 2018 CONJUGATE MARGINS CONFERENCE 2018 Celebrating 10 years of the CMC: Pushing the Boundaries of Knowledge Halifax 2018 Organization Organizing Committee David E. -
Fault Deformation, Seismic Amplitude and Unsupervised Fault Facies Analysis: Snøhvit Field, Barents Sea
Accepted Manuscript Fault deformation, seismic amplitude and unsupervised fault facies analysis: Snøhvit Field, Barents Sea Jennifer Cunningham, Nestor Cardozo, Christopher Townsend, David Iacopini, Gard Ole Wærum PII: S0191-8141(18)30328-6 DOI: 10.1016/j.jsg.2018.10.010 Reference: SG 3761 To appear in: Journal of Structural Geology Received Date: 10 June 2018 Revised Date: 11 October 2018 Accepted Date: 11 October 2018 Please cite this article as: Cunningham, J., Cardozo, N., Townsend, C., Iacopini, D., Wærum, G.O., Fault deformation, seismic amplitude and unsupervised fault facies analysis: Snøhvit Field, Barents Sea, Journal of Structural Geology (2018), doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jsg.2018.10.010. This is a PDF file of an unedited manuscript that has been accepted for publication. As a service to our customers we are providing this early version of the manuscript. The manuscript will undergo copyediting, typesetting, and review of the resulting proof before it is published in its final form. Please note that during the production process errors may be discovered which could affect the content, and all legal disclaimers that apply to the journal pertain. ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT 1 Fault deformation, seismic amplitude and unsupervised fault facies 2 analysis: Snøhvit field, Barents Sea 3 Jennifer CUNNINGHAM * A, Nestor CARDOZO A, Christopher TOWNSEND A, David 4 IACOPINI B and Gard Ole WÆRUM C 5 A Department of Energy Resources, University of Stavanger, 4036 Stavanger, Norway 6 *[email protected] , +47 461 84 478 7 [email protected] , [email protected] 8 9 BGeology and Petroleum Geology, School of Geosciences, University of Aberdeen, Meston 10 Building, AB24 FX, UK 11 [email protected] 12 C Equinor ASA, Margrete Jørgensens Veg 4, 9406 Harstad, Norway 13 [email protected] 14 15 Keywords: faults, dip distortion, seismic attributes, seismic amplitude, fault facies. -
Annual Report 2019 Annual Report SM Approved by the SEG Council, 17 June 2020 Connecting the World of Applied Geophysics
2019 Annual Report 2019 Annual Report SM Approved by the SEG Council, 17 June 2020 Connecting the World of Applied Geophysics REPORTS OF Second vice Director at large REPORTS OF Books Editorial Distinguished GEOPHYSICS SEG BOARD OF president Maria A. Capello COMMITTEES Board Instructor Valentina Socco, editor DIRECTORS Manika Prasad 13 Mauricio Sacchi, chair Short Course 31 10 AGU–SEG 24 Adel El-Emam, chair President Director at large Collaboration 27 Geoscientists Robert R. Stewart Treasurer and Paul S. Cunningham Chi Zhang, cochair Committee on Without Borders® 5 Finance Committee 14 20 University and Distinguished Robert Merrill, chair Dan Ebrom and Lee Student Programs Lecturer 34 President-elect Bell Director at large Annual Meeting Joan Marie Blanco, Gerard Schuster, chair Rick Miller 11 David E. Lumley Steering chair 28 Global Advisory 7 15 Glenn Winters, chair 25 George Buzan, chair Vice president, 20 Emerging 36 Past president Publications Director at large Continuing Professionals Nancy House Sergey Fomel Ruben D. Martinez Annual Meeting Education International Gravity and 8 12 16 Technical Program Malcolm Lansley, chair Johannes Douma, chair Magnetics Dimitri Bevc, chair 25 30 Luise Sander, chair First vice president Chair of the Council Director at large Olga Nedorub, cochair 36 Alexander Mihai Gustavo Jose Carstens Kenneth M. Tubman 22 Development and EVOLVE Popovici 12 16 Production Michael C. Forrest, Health, Safety, 9 Audit Andrew Royle, chair interim chair Security, and Director at large Executive director Bob Brook, chair