Selecting Suitable Land Seismic Geometries

 

Course Description

The first step in accurately imaging the subsurface with seismic is to acquire a well-sampled dataset, but what happens if the seismic acquisition geometry is modified for surface, economic, and ecological constraints?

In this course participants will review seismic acquisition design theory and implementation with a focus on how seismic acquisition parameters affect seismic processing and geophysical interpretation, including inversion. Real world examples of 2D and 3D seismic datasets will be used to illustrate the impact of seismic geometries on subsurface resolution. Additionally, the course will provide an overview of modern techniques such as high-density acquisition, compressive sensing, alternative sources, and low-impact geometries designed to reduce the overall environmental footprint of acquiring seismic data. Upon completion of the course, participants will be able to assess and compare different seismic acquisition parameters, determine whether the parameters meet subsurface imaging objectives, and recommend optimal parameters for accurate processing and quantitative interpretation.

Course Objectives

Upon completion of the course, participants will be able to:

1. Understand how various seismic sampling schemes effect the quality of subsurface images 
2. Learn how to accurately compare land seismic geometries with different parameters utilizing specific seismic acquisition statistics 
3. Evaluate seismic acquisition geometries based on processing and AVO attribute requirements 
4. Select optimal geometries for balancing technical, economic, and environmental constraints

Course Outline

This course will cover the following topics:

1. Design

Understanding Design Inputs  

• Existing Data Reviews  
• Determining Target Parameters

Sampling Theorem  
• Spatial & Temporal  
• Key Geometry Parameter Calculations      
     Bin Size & Resolution      
     S/N, Trace Density, & Line Intervals      
     Offset / Azimuth Distribution & Recording Patch Size    
     Migration Apron & Survey Area  
• Discussion: Designing for Processing and Quantitative Interpretation

2. Field Layouts & Equipment   

Designing for efficient field operations      
• Recording Scripts      
• Merging Surveys      
• Considerations for large channel counts   

Receivers      
• Geophone Types      
• Geophone Parameters  

Sources      
• Explosive      
• Vibroseis      
• Alternative   

Recording Systems      
• Parameters   

3. Case Studies  

• Transition to High Density Vibroseis  
• Simultaneous Source Comparison  
• Miniaturized Sources  
• EcoSeis Geometries and impact on processing and inversion  

Participants’ Profile

The course is designed for...

• Seismic Acquisition/Operations Geophysicists interested in learning new techniques for evaluating geometries
• Processors interested in how seismic geometries affect processing results and which geometries may be most appropriate for specific processing algorithms
• Interpreters interested in understanding why fold and trace density are insufficient metrics for determining survey quality when comparing different designs
• All participants interested in learning new methods to acquire more efficient and lower impact seismic surveys

Prerequisites

No prerequisites are required, but students would benefit from having a basic understanding of traditional orthogonal seismic surveys and methods of evaluation such as offset limited fold and trace density.

Recommended reading

Any basic seismic acquisition textbook.

Example: 

Chapters 1-5 of Cordsen, A., Galbraith, M., Peirce, J., and Hardage, B. A. [2000]. Planning land 3-D seismic surveys. Geophysical Developments Series No. 9. Society of Exploration Geophysicists.

Chapters 2 & 4 of Vermeer, G. J. O. [2002]. 3-D seismic survey design. Geophysical Reference Series No. 12. Society of Exploration Geophysicists. 

Articles on comparing regular and non-orthogonal geometries Examples: Naghizadeh, M., Vermeulen, P., Crook, A., Birce, A., Ross, S., Stanton, A., Rodriguez, M., and Cookson, W. [2023]. EcoSeis: A novel acquisition method for optimizing seismic resolution while minimizing environmental footprint. The Leading Edge, 42(1), 61–68. 

Ourabah, A., Bradley, J., Hance, T., Kowalczyk-Kedzierska, M., Grimshaw, M., and Murray, E. [2015]. Impact of acquisition geometry on AVO/AVOA attributes quality - A decimation study onshore Jordan. Proceedings of the 77th EAGE Conference & Exhibition, Extended Abstracts. 

About the Instructor

Mostafa Naghizadeh, PH.D., P.GEO. Mostafa is the Director of Research and Development at OptiSeis where he is developing creative new ways to process uniquely designed seismic surveys by considering the subsurface imaging requirements as well as minimizing the environmental footprints. OptiSeis’ latest proprietary technology, EcoSeis, helps to enable the new energy economy by providing low carbon, high resolution subsurface images for critical mineral mining, geothermal energy, and carbon sequestration projects and traditional energy projects. He graduated from the University of Alberta with a Ph.D. in Geophysics, specializing in complex seismic interpolation algorithms with spatial aliasing removed. Mostafa built upon his Ph.D. research while working as a postdoc researcher in CREWES and SAIG and later put his research to work as a Processing Geophysicist at Shell Canada. He then went on to share his passion for geophysics at Laurentian University as Assistant Professor, where he taught Exploration Seismology as part of the Metal Earth project until 2021. Mostafa is the proud recipient of the J. Clarence Karcher Award from the SEG in 2011.