Numerical simulation of azimuthal acoustic logging in a borehole penetrating a rock formation boundary

Geophysics ◽  
2016 ◽  
Vol 81 (3) ◽  
pp. D283-D291 ◽  
Author(s):  
Peng Liu ◽  
Wenxiao Qiao ◽  
Xiaohua Che ◽  
Xiaodong Ju ◽  
Junqiang Lu ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Domain Model ◽  
P Wave ◽  
S Wave ◽  
Angle Variation ◽  
P Waves ◽  
Acoustic Logging ◽  
S Waves ◽  
Rock Formation ◽  
Logging Tool ◽  
Difference Time

We have developed a new 3D acoustic logging tool (3DAC). To examine the azimuthal resolution of 3DAC, we have evaluated a 3D finite-difference time-domain model to simulate a case in which the borehole penetrated a rock formation boundary when the tool worked at the azimuthal-transmitting-azimuthal-receiving mode. The results indicated that there were two types of P-waves with different slowness in waveforms: the P-wave of the harder rock (P1) and the P-wave of the softer rock (P2). The P1-wave can be observed in each azimuthal receiver, but the P2-wave appears only in the azimuthal receivers toward the softer rock. When these two types of rock are both fast formations, two types of S-waves also exist, and they have better azimuthal sensitivity compared with P-waves. The S-wave of the harder rock (S1) appears only in receivers toward the harder rock, and the S-wave of the softer rock (S2) appears only in receivers toward the softer rock. A model was simulated in which the boundary between shale and sand penetrated the borehole but not the borehole axis. The P-wave of shale and the S-wave of sand are azimuthally sensitive to the azimuth angle variation of two formations. In addition, waveforms obtained from 3DAC working at the monopole-transmitting-azimuthal-receiving mode indicate that the corresponding P-waves and S-waves are azimuthally sensitive, too. Finally, we have developed a field example of 3DAC to support our simulation results: The azimuthal variation of the P-wave slowness was observed and can thus be used to reflect the azimuthal heterogeneity of formations.

The effect of the invaded zone on full wavetrain acoustic logging

Geophysics ◽  
1984 ◽  
Vol 49 (6) ◽  
pp. 796-809 ◽  
Author(s):  
L. J. Baker
Keyword(s):  
The Body ◽  
P Wave ◽  
Physical Parameters ◽  
S Wave ◽  
Acoustic Logging ◽  
S Waves ◽  
Sophisticated Model ◽  
Invaded Zone ◽  
Logging Tool ◽  
Depth Of Investigation

Most theoretical studies of acoustic borehole logging have employed the simple model of a fluid borehole in an infinite solid. This work attempts to account for the invaded zone using a more sophisticated model that additionally includes finite concentric shells surrounding the borehole. By appropriately choosing the physical parameters of these cylindrical shells, one can study the effect of the invaded zone, mudcake, or a cased hole on acoustic wavetrain components. The model accounts for geometric attenuation, but it assumes the formation is perfectly elastic. A key consideration is the distance that the acoustic log “sees” into the formation. The body of this report is devoted to studying the effect of the invaded zone, mudcake, or steel casing on the components of the full wavetrain (P-wave, S-wave, reflected modes, and Stoneley mode). I conclude that a sonic logging tool has a very shallow depth of investigation. This depth, for P- and S-waves, depends upon the spacing between the source and receiver. An approximate rule of thumb is that if the source‐to‐receiver separation is n feet, the logging tool sees n inches into the formation. Thus, a conventional logging tool sees less than 6 inches into the surrounding formation. Since attenuation of the P- and S-wave arrivals places a practical constraint on realistic source‐to‐receiver separations, the depth of investigation is limited to a maximum of about 2 ft. Therefore, an acoustic logging tool is usually capable of measuring properties of the invaded zone only. For the reader interested in the mathematical details of this work, the method of computation is described in Appendix A.

scholarly journals Numeric Simulation of Acoustic-Logging of Cave Formations

Energies ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 13 (15) ◽  
pp. 3908
Author(s):  
Fanghui Xu ◽  
Zhuwen Wang
Keyword(s):  
Excitation Frequency ◽  
Scattered Wave ◽  
P Wave ◽  
Borehole Wall ◽  
Stoneley Wave ◽  
S Wave ◽  
P Waves ◽  
Acoustic Logging ◽  
Source Distance ◽  
First Arrival

The finite difference (FD) method of monopole source is used to simulate the response of full-wave acoustic-logging in cave formations. The effect of the cave in the formation of borehole full-waves was studied. The results show that the radius of cave is not only linearly related to the first arrival of the compressional wave (P-wave), but also to the energy of the shear wave (S-wave). The converted S (S–S wave) and P-waves (S–P wave) are formed when the S-wave encounters the cave. If the source distance is small, the S–S and S–P waves are not separated, and the attenuation of the S-wave is not large, due to superposition of the converted waves. The S–P wave has been separated from the S-wave when the source distance is large, so the attenuation of the S-wave increases. The amplitude of the P and S–waves changes most when the distance of the cave to the borehole wall reaches a certain value; this value is related to the excitation frequency. The amplitude of the Stoneley wave (ST wave) varies directly with the radius of cave. If the radius of the cave is large, the energy of ST wave is weak. The scattered wave is determined by the radius and position of the cave. The investigation depth of a monopole source is limited. When the distance of the cave to the borehole wall exceeds the maximum investigation depth, the borehole acoustic wave is little affected by the cave. In actual logging, the development of the cave can be evaluated by using the first arrival of the P-wave and the energy of the S and ST waves.

scholarly journals Comparison of recent S-wave indicating methods

2018 ◽  
Vol 29 ◽  
pp. 00019
Author(s):  
Katarzyna Hubicka ◽  
Jakub Sokolowski
Keyword(s):  
Real Data ◽  
The Body ◽  
Body Waves ◽  
Identification Accuracy ◽  
P Wave ◽  
S Wave ◽  
P Waves ◽  
S Waves ◽  
Mode Decomposition ◽  
Wave Arrival

Seismic event consists of surface waves and body waves. Due to the fact that the body waves are faster (P-waves) and more energetic (S-waves) in literature the problem of their analysis is taken more often. The most universal information that is received from the recorded wave is its moment of arrival. When this information is obtained from at least four seismometers in different locations, the epicentre of the particular event can be estimated [1]. Since the recorded body waves may overlap in signal, the problem of wave onset moment is considered more often for faster P-wave than S-wave. This however does not mean that the issue of S-wave arrival time is not taken at all. As the process of manual picking is time-consuming, methods of automatic detection are recommended (these however may be less accurate). In this paper four recently developed methods estimating S-wave arrival are compared: the method operating on empirical mode decomposition and Teager-Kaiser operator [2], the modification of STA/LTA algorithm [3], the method using a nearest neighbour-based approach [4] and the algorithm operating on characteristic of signals’ second moments. The methods will be also compared to wellknown algorithm based on the autoregressive model [5]. The algorithms will be tested in terms of their S-wave arrival identification accuracy on real data originating from International Research Institutions for Seismology (IRIS) database.

Relation between P- and S-wave corner frequencies in the seismic spectrum

1974 ◽  
Vol 64 (6) ◽  
pp. 1621-1627 ◽  
Author(s):  
J. C. Savage
Keyword(s):  
High Frequency ◽  
Body Wave ◽  
Fault Model ◽  
P Wave ◽  
Corner Frequency ◽  
Rupture Propagation ◽  
S Wave ◽  
P Waves ◽  
Fault Surface ◽  
S Waves

abstract A comprehensive set of body-wave spectra has been calculated for the Haskell fault model generalized to a circular fault surface. These spectra are used to show that in practice the P-wave corner frequency (ƒp) may exceed the S-wave corner frequency (ƒs) when near-sonic or transonic rupture propagation obtains. The explanation appears to be that in such cases ƒs is so large that it is not identified within the recorded band, but rather a secondary corner is mistaken for ƒs. As a consequence of failing to detect the true asymptotic trend, the high-frequency falloff of the spectrum with frequency is substantially less for S waves than for P waves. This explanation appears to be consistent with the demonstration by Molnar, Tucker, and Brune (1973) that ƒp may exceed ƒs.

A comparison of some S-wave studies of earthquake mechanisms

1961 ◽  
Vol 51 (2) ◽  
pp. 277-292
Author(s):  
William Stauder ◽  
Adams W. M.
Keyword(s):  
Fault Plane ◽  
Analytical Techniques ◽  
P Wave ◽  
Graphical Methods ◽  
S Wave ◽  
Fault Plane Solutions ◽  
P Waves ◽  
S Waves ◽  
Analytical Technique ◽  
Direction Of Polarization

Abstract Graphical and analytical techniques for using S-waves in focal mechanism studies are compared. In previous applications the analytical technique has shown little or no agreement with the results of fault-plane solutions from P-waves, whereas for other groups of earthquakes the graphical methods have shown good agreement between the S-waves and the P-wave solutions. It is shown that the graphical and analytical techniques are identical in principle and that when the graphical methods are applied to the same three earthquakes to which the analytical technique had been applied the identical results are obtained. Closer examination of the graphical presentation of the data, however, shows that the disagreement between the S-waves and the fault plane solutions from P is largely apparent. The discrepancy follows upon the peculiar scatter in the S-wave data and the chance occurrence of observations of S at stations located along closely parallel planes of polarization of S. Once this is understood, it is seen that the direction of polarization of S-waves is in substantial agreement with the methods of analysis of focal mechanisms from P-waves, and that the data are consistent with a simple dipole as the point model of the earthquake focus.

Seismic vertical transversely isotropic parameter inversion from P- and S-wave cross-borehole measurements in an aquifer environment

Geophysics ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 84 (3) ◽  
pp. D101-D116
Author(s):  
Julius K. von Ketelhodt ◽  
Musa S. D. Manzi ◽  
Raymond J. Durrheim ◽  
Thomas Fechner
Keyword(s):  
Transversely Isotropic ◽  
P Wave ◽  
Perturbation Equation ◽  
S Wave ◽  
P Waves ◽  
Data Set ◽  
Near Surface ◽  
S Waves ◽  
Wave Measurements ◽  
Wave Splitting

Joint P- and S-wave measurements for tomographic cross-borehole analysis can offer more reliable interpretational insight concerning lithologic and geotechnical parameter variations compared with P-wave measurements on their own. However, anisotropy can have a large influence on S-wave measurements, with the S-wave splitting into two modes. We have developed an inversion for parameters of transversely isotropic with a vertical symmetry axis (VTI) media. Our inversion is based on the traveltime perturbation equation, using cross-gradient constraints to ensure structural similarity for the resulting VTI parameters. We first determine the inversion on a synthetic data set consisting of P-waves and vertically and horizontally polarized S-waves. Subsequently, we evaluate inversion results for a data set comprising jointly measured P-waves and vertically and horizontally polarized S-waves that were acquired in a near-surface ([Formula: see text]) aquifer environment (the Safira research site, Germany). The inverted models indicate that the anisotropy parameters [Formula: see text] and [Formula: see text] are close to zero, with no P-wave anisotropy present. A high [Formula: see text] ratio of up to nine causes considerable SV-wave anisotropy despite the low magnitudes for [Formula: see text] and [Formula: see text]. The SH-wave anisotropy parameter [Formula: see text] is estimated to be between 0.05 and 0.15 in the clay and lignite seams. The S-wave splitting is confirmed by polarization analysis prior to the inversion. The results suggest that S-wave anisotropy may be more severe than P-wave anisotropy in near-surface environments and should be taken into account when interpreting cross-borehole S-wave data.

Compressional and shear‐wave logging in open and cased holes using a multipole tool

Geophysics ◽  
1991 ◽  
Vol 56 (4) ◽  
pp. 550-557 ◽  
Author(s):  
S. T. Chen ◽  
E. A. Eriksen
Keyword(s):  
P Wave ◽  
Log P ◽  
S Wave ◽  
S Waves ◽  
System P ◽  
Receiver System ◽  
Wide Range ◽  
Before And After ◽  
Sonic Logging ◽  
Logging Tool

We have found in field observations that the multipole sonic logging tool can effectively measure formation P‐wave and S‐wave data in a cased hole. The multipole tool, containing both monopole and quadrupole source‐receiver systems, was originally designed to log P‐ and S‐waves directly, in all lithologies, for an open borehole. The monopole source‐receiver system (P‐wave) operates at 7–10 kHz, as compared with 15–25 kHz for a conventional sonic tool, while the quadrupole source‐receiver system (S‐wave) operates at 3–7 kHz. These lower operating frequencies enable the signals to penetrate the well casing and cement more effectively than signals from a conventional sonic tool. As a result, the formation P‐ and S‐waves recorded by the multipole tool are generally much stronger than the unwanted waves which travel along the well casing and cement. Formation arrivals can be easily identified and separated from the casing arrivals for a wide range of lithologies. Logs run before and after the wells were cased show remarkable agreement even in severely washed out zones.

scholarly journals PHASE SHIFTS AND RESONANCES IN THE DIRAC EQUATION

2004 ◽  
Vol 19 (21) ◽  
pp. 3557-3581 ◽  
Author(s):  
PIERS KENNEDY ◽  
NORMAN DOMBEY ◽  
RICHARD L. HALL
Keyword(s):  
Dirac Equation ◽  
Wave Scattering ◽  
Numerical Procedure ◽  
Phase Shifts ◽  
P Wave ◽  
S Wave ◽  
P Waves ◽  
Gaussian Potential ◽  
S Waves ◽  
Relativistic Scattering

We review the analytic results for the phase shifts δl(k) in nonrelativistic scattering from a spherical well. The conditions for the existence of resonances are established in terms of time-delays. Resonances are shown to exist for p-waves (and higher angular momenta) but not for s-waves. These resonances occur when the potential is not quite strong enough to support a bound p-wave of zero energy. We then examine relativistic scattering by spherical wells and barriers in the Dirac equation. In contrast to the nonrelativistic situation, s-waves are now seen to possess resonances in scattering from both wells and barriers. When s-wave resonances occur for scattering from a well, the potential is not quite strong enough to support a zero momentum s-wave solution at E=m. Resonances resulting from scattering from a barrier can be explained in terms of the "crossing" theorem linking s-wave scattering from barriers to p-wave scattering from wells. A numerical procedure to extract phase shifts for general short range potentials is introduced and illustrated by considering relativistic scattering from a Gaussian potential well and barrier.

A simple method for resolving large converted‐wave (P-SV) statics

Geophysics ◽  
1993 ◽  
Vol 58 (3) ◽  
pp. 429-433 ◽  
Author(s):  
Peter W. Cary ◽  
David W. S. Eaton
Keyword(s):  
P Wave ◽  
S Wave ◽  
Converted Wave ◽  
P Waves ◽  
Simple Method ◽  
Near Surface ◽  
S Waves ◽  
Static Solutions ◽  
Surface Fluctuations

The processing of converted‐wave (P-SV) seismic data requires certain special considerations, such as commonconversion‐point (CCP) binning techniques (Tessmer and Behle, 1988) and a modified normal moveout formula (Slotboom, 1990), that makes it different for processing conventional P-P data. However, from the processor’s perspective, the most problematic step is often the determination of residual S‐wave statics, which are commonly two to ten times greater than the P‐wave statics for the same location (Tatham and McCormack, 1991). Conventional residualstatics algorithms often produce numerous cycle skips when attempting to resolve very large statics. Unlike P‐waves, the velocity of S‐waves is virtually unaffected by near‐surface fluctuations in the water table (Figure 1). Hence, the P‐wave and S‐wave static solutions are largely unrelated to each other, so it is generally not feasible to approximate the S‐wave statics by simply scaling the known P‐wave static values (Anno, 1986).

scholarly journals Three-component amplitude versus offset analysis

1989 ◽  
Vol 20 (2) ◽  
pp. 257
Author(s):  
D.R. Miles ◽  
G. Gassaway ◽  
L. Bennett ◽  
R. Brown
Keyword(s):  
Seismic Data ◽  
P Wave ◽  
S Wave ◽  
Converted Wave ◽  
P Waves ◽  
S Waves ◽  
Avo Analysis ◽  
Avo Inversion ◽  
Amplitude Versus Offset ◽  
Converted Waves

Three-component (3-C) amplitude versus offset (AVO) inversion is the AVO analysis of the three major energies in the seismic data, P-waves, S-waves and converted waves. For each type of energy the reflection coefficients at the boundary are a function of the contrast across the boundary in velocity, density and Poisson's ratio, and of the angle of incidence of the incoming wave. 3-C AVO analysis exploits these relationships to analyse the AVO changes in the P, S, and converted waves. 3-C AVO analysis is generally done on P, S, and converted wave data collected from a single source on 3-C geophones. Since most seismic sources generate both P and S-waves, it follows that most 3-C seismic data may be used in 3-C AVO inversion. Processing of the P-wave, S-wave and converted wave gathers is nearly the same as for single-component P-wave gathers. In split-spread shooting, the P-wave and S-wave energy on the radial component is one polarity on the forward shot and the opposite polarity on the back shot. Therefore to use both sides of the shot, the back shot must be rotated 180 degrees before it can be stacked with the forward shot. The amplitude of the returning energy is a function of all three components, not just the vertical or radial, so all three components must be stacked for P-waves, then for S-waves, and finally for converted waves. After the gathers are processed, reflectors are picked and the amplitudes are corrected for free-surface effects, spherical divergence and the shot and geophone array geometries. Next the P and S-wave interval velocities are calculated from the P and S-wave moveouts. Then the amplitude response of the P and S-wave reflections are analysed to give Poisson's ratio. The two solutions are then compared and adjusted until they match each other and the data. Three-component AVO inversion not only yields information about the lithologies and pore-fluids at a specific location; it also provides the interpreter with good correlations between the P-waves and the S-waves, and between the P and converted waves, thus greatly expanding the value of 3-C seismic data.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document