An examination of the linearity and reliability of the electromyographic amplitude versus dynamic constant external resistance relationships using monopolar and bipolar recording methods

2010 ◽  
Vol 194 (1) ◽  
pp. 94-101 ◽  
Author(s):  
Matt S. Stock ◽  
Travis W. Beck ◽  
Jason M. DeFreitas ◽  
Michael A. Dillon
Geophysics ◽  
2003 ◽  
Vol 68 (6) ◽  
pp. 2082-2091 ◽  
Author(s):  
Bjørn Ursin ◽  
Ketil Hokstad

Compensation for geometrical spreading is important in prestack Kirchhoff migration and in amplitude versus offset/amplitude versus angle (AVO/AVA) analysis of seismic data. We present equations for the relative geometrical spreading of reflected and transmitted P‐ and S‐wave in horizontally layered transversely isotropic media with vertical symmetry axis (VTI). We show that relatively simple expressions are obtained when the geometrical spreading is expressed in terms of group velocities. In weakly anisotropic media, we obtain simple expressions also in terms of phase velocities. Also, we derive analytical equations for geometrical spreading based on the nonhyperbolic traveltime formula of Tsvankin and Thomsen, such that the geometrical spreading can be expressed in terms of the parameters used in time processing of seismic data. Comparison with numerical ray tracing demonstrates that the weak anisotropy approximation to geometrical spreading is accurate for P‐waves. It is less accurate for SV‐waves, but has qualitatively the correct form. For P waves, the nonhyperbolic equation for geometrical spreading compares favorably with ray‐tracing results for offset‐depth ratios less than five. For SV‐waves, the analytical approximation is accurate only at small offsets, and breaks down at offset‐depth ratios less than unity. The numerical results are in agreement with the range of validity for the nonhyperbolic traveltime equations.


Geophysics ◽  
1992 ◽  
Vol 57 (4) ◽  
pp. 543-553 ◽  
Author(s):  
Christopher P. Ross

Amplitude versus offset (AVO) measurements for deep hydrocarbon‐bearing sands can be compromised when made in close proximity to a shallow salt piercement structure. Anomalous responses are observed, particularly on low acoustic impedance bright spots. CMP data from key seismic profiles traversing the bright spots do not show the expected Class 3 offset responses. On these CMPs, significant decrease of far trace energy is observed. CMP data from other seismic profiles off‐structure do exhibit the Class 3 offset responses, implying that structural complications may be interfering with the offset response. A synthetic AVO gather was generated using well log data, which supports the off‐structure Class 3 responses, further reinforcing the concept of structurally‐biased AVO responses. Acoustic, pseudo‐spectral modeling of the structure substantiates the misleading AVO response. Pseudo‐spectral modeling results suggest that signal degradation observed on the far offsets is caused by wavefield refraction—a shadow zone, where the known hydrocarbon‐bearing sands are not completely illuminated. Such shadow zones obscure the correct AVO response, which may have bearing on exploration and development.


2021 ◽  
Vol 14 (12) ◽  
Author(s):  
Ronghuo Dai ◽  
Fanchang Zhang ◽  
Cheng Yin ◽  
Xiang Xiao

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document