scholarly journals Comparing Higher-dimensional Velocity Models for Seismic Location Accuracy using a Consistent Travel Time Framework

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Michael Begnaud ◽  
Sanford Ballard ◽  
Andrea Conley ◽  
Patrick Hammond ◽  
Christopher Young
2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Michael Begnaud ◽  
Sanford Ballard ◽  
Andrea Conley ◽  
Patrick Hammond ◽  
Christopher Young

<p>Historically, location algorithms have relied on simple, one-dimensional (1D, with depth) velocity models for fast, seismic event locations. The speed of these 1D models made them the preferred type of velocity model for operational needs, mainly due to computational requirements. Higher-dimensional (2D-3D) seismic velocity models are becoming more readily available from the scientific community and can provide significantly more accurate event locations over 1D models. The computational requirements of these higher-dimensional models tend to make their operational use prohibitive. The benefit of a 1D model is that it is generally used as travel-time lookup tables, one for each seismic phase, with travel-time predictions pre-calculated for event distance and depth. This simple, lookup structure makes the travel-time computation extremely fast.</p><p>Comparing location accuracy for 2D and 3D seismic velocity models tends to be problematic because each model is usually determined using different inversion parameters and ray-tracing algorithms. Attempting to use a different ray-tracing algorithm than used to develop a model almost always results in poor travel-time prediction compared to the algorithm used when developing the model.</p><p>We will demonstrate that using an open-source framework (GeoTess, www.sandia.gov/geotess) that can easily store 3D travel-time data can overcome the ray-tracing algorithm hurdle. Travel-time lookup tables (one for each station and phase) can be generated using the exact ray-tracing algorithm that is preferred for a specified model. The lookup surfaces are generally applied as corrections to a simple 1D model and also include variations in event depth, as opposed to legacy source-specific station corrections (SSSCs), as well as estimates of path-specific travel-time uncertainty. Having a common travel-time framework used for a location algorithm allows individual 2D and 3D velocity models to be compared in a fair, consistent manner.</p>


2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Michael Begnaud ◽  
Christine Gammans ◽  
Ellen Syracuse ◽  
Jonathan MacCarthy

2020 ◽  
Vol 10 (19) ◽  
pp. 6763
Author(s):  
Pingan Peng ◽  
Yuanjian Jiang ◽  
Liguan Wang ◽  
Zhengxiang He ◽  
Siyu Tu

The accurate localization of mining-induced seismicity is crucial to underground mines. However, the constant velocity model is used by traditional location methods without considering the great difference in wave velocity between rock mass and underground voids. In this paper, to improve the microseismicity location accuracy in mines, we present a fast ray-tracing method to calculate the ray path and travel time from source to receiver considering underground voids. First, we divide the microseismic monitoring area into two categories of mediums—voids and non-voids—using a flexible triangular patch to model the surface model of voids, which can accurately describe any complicated three-dimensional (3D) shape. Second, the nodes are divided into two categories. The first category of the nodes is the vertex of the model, and the second category of the nodes is arranged at a certain step length on each edge of the 3D surface model to improve the accuracy of ray tracing. Finally, the set of adjacent nodes of each node is calculated, and then we obtain the shortest travel time from the source to the receiver based on the Dijkstra algorithm. The performance of the proposed method is tested by numerical simulation. Results show that the proposed method is faster and more accurate than the traditional ray-tracing methods. Besides, the proposed ray-tracing method is applied to the microseismic source localization in the Huangtupo Copper and Zinc Mine. The location accuracy is significantly improved compared with the traditional method using the constant velocity model and the FMM-based location method.


1990 ◽  
Vol 80 (2) ◽  
pp. 395-410 ◽  
Author(s):  
Glenn D. Nelson ◽  
John E. Vidale

Abstract We present a new method for locating earthquakes in a region with arbitrarily complex three-dimensional velocity structure, called QUAKE3D. Our method searches a gridded volume and finds the global minimum travel-time residual location within the volume. Any minimization criterion may be employed. The L1 criterion, which minimizes the sum of the absolute values of travel-time residuals, is especially useful when the station coverage is sparse and is more robust than the L2 criterion (which minimizes the RMS sum) employed by most earthquake location programs. On a UNIX workstation with 8 Mbytes memory, travel-time grids of size 150 by 150 by 50 are reasonably employed, with the actual geographic coverage dependent on the grid spacing. Location precision is finer than the grid spacing. Earthquake recordings at six stations in Bear Valley are located as an example, using various layered and laterally varying velocity models. Locations with QUAKE3D are nearly identical to HYPOINVERSE locations when the same flat-layered velocity model is used. For the examples presented, the computation time per event is approximately 4 times slower than HYPOINVERSE, but the computation time for QUAKE3D is dependent only on the grid size and number of stations, and independent of the velocity model complexity. Using QUAKE3D with a laterally varying velocity model results in locations that are physically more plausible and statistically more precise. Compared to flat-layered solutions, the earthquakes are more closely aligned with the surface fault trace, are more uniform in depth distribution, and the event and station travel-time residuals are much smaller. Hypocentral error bars computed by QUAKE3D are more realistic in that the trade-off of depth versus origin time is implicit in our error estimation, but ignored by HYPOINVERSE.


2013 ◽  
Vol 84 (2) ◽  
pp. 225-232 ◽  
Author(s):  
A. Giuntini ◽  
V. Materni ◽  
S. Chiappini ◽  
R. Carluccio ◽  
R. Console ◽  
...  

Geophysics ◽  
2009 ◽  
Vol 74 (5) ◽  
pp. U13-U33 ◽  
Author(s):  
Alexey Stovas

A proposed power-gradient velocity model incorporates several well-known velocity models as special cases. The model covers a wide range of possible velocity distributions and has four parameters, giving more flexibility in velocity-model manipulation. For this nonlinear model, the kinematic characteristics — offset-traveltime parameteric equations, traveltime parameters, relative geometric spreading, and propagator phase — are computed. The characteristics are investigated with respect to a parameter responsible for nonlinearity of velocity distribution. The inversion of travel-time parameters was studied in three- and four-parameter frameworks.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document