Comparison of surface-wave techniques to estimate S- and P-wave velocity models from active seismic data
<p>The acquisition of seismic exploration data in remote locations presents several logistical and economic criticalities. The irregular distribution of sources and/or receivers facilitates seismic acquisition operations in these areas. A convenient approach is to deploy nodal receivers on a r...
| Main Authors: | , , |
|---|---|
| Format: | Article |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
Copernicus Publications
2024-03-01
|
| Series: | Solid Earth |
| Online Access: | https://se.copernicus.org/articles/15/367/2024/se-15-367-2024.pdf |
| _version_ | 1797262610132893696 |
|---|---|
| author | F. Khosro Anjom F. Adler L. V. Socco |
| author_facet | F. Khosro Anjom F. Adler L. V. Socco |
| author_sort | F. Khosro Anjom |
| collection | DOAJ |
| description | <p>The acquisition of seismic exploration data in remote locations presents several logistical and economic criticalities. The irregular distribution of sources and/or receivers facilitates seismic acquisition operations in these areas. A convenient approach is to deploy nodal receivers on a regular grid and to use sources only in accessible locations, creating an irregular source–receiver layout. It is essential to evaluate, adapt, and verify processing workflows, specifically for near-surface velocity model estimation using surface-wave analysis, when working with these types of datasets. In this study, we applied three surface-wave techniques (i.e., wavelength–depth (W/D) method, laterally constrained inversion (LCI), and surface-wave tomography (SWT)) to a large-scale 3D dataset obtained from a hard-rock site using the irregular source–receiver acquisition method. The methods were fine-tuned for the data obtained from hard-rock sites, which typically exhibit a low signal-to-noise ratio. The wavelength–depth method is a data transformation method that is based on a relationship between skin depth and surface-wave wavelength and provides both S- and P-wave velocity (<span class="inline-formula"><i>V</i><sub>s</sub></span> and <span class="inline-formula"><i>V</i><sub>p</sub></span>) models. We used Poisson's ratios estimated through the wavelength–depth method to constrain the laterally constrained inversion and surface-wave tomography and to retrieve both <span class="inline-formula"><i>V</i><sub>s</sub></span> and <span class="inline-formula"><i>V</i><sub>p</sub></span> also from these methods. The pseudo-3D <span class="inline-formula"><i>V</i><sub>s</sub></span> and <span class="inline-formula"><i>V</i><sub>p</sub></span> models were obtained down to 140 <span class="inline-formula">m</span> depth over an area of approximately 900 <span class="inline-formula">×</span> 1500 <span class="inline-formula">m</span><span class="inline-formula"><sup>2</sup></span>. The estimated models from the methods matched the geological information available for the site. A difference of less than 6 % was observed between the estimated <span class="inline-formula"><i>V</i><sub>s</sub></span> models from the three methods, whereas this value was 7.1 % for the retrieved <span class="inline-formula"><i>V</i><sub>p</sub></span> models. The methods were critically compared in terms of resolution and efficiency, which provides valuable insights into the potential of surface-wave analysis for estimating near-surface models at hard-rock sites.</p> |
| first_indexed | 2024-04-24T23:59:51Z |
| format | Article |
| id | doaj.art-e6ed2d8cb72c4a0fb31fb155260f638e |
| institution | Directory Open Access Journal |
| issn | 1869-9510 1869-9529 |
| language | English |
| last_indexed | 2024-04-24T23:59:51Z |
| publishDate | 2024-03-01 |
| publisher | Copernicus Publications |
| record_format | Article |
| series | Solid Earth |
| spelling | doaj.art-e6ed2d8cb72c4a0fb31fb155260f638e2024-03-14T08:13:26ZengCopernicus PublicationsSolid Earth1869-95101869-95292024-03-011536738610.5194/se-15-367-2024Comparison of surface-wave techniques to estimate S- and P-wave velocity models from active seismic dataF. Khosro Anjom0F. Adler1L. V. Socco2Department of Environment, Land and Infrastructure Engineering, Politecnico di Torino, Turin, 10128, ItalyCSTJF, TotalEnergies, Pau, 64000, FranceDepartment of Environment, Land and Infrastructure Engineering, Politecnico di Torino, Turin, 10128, Italy<p>The acquisition of seismic exploration data in remote locations presents several logistical and economic criticalities. The irregular distribution of sources and/or receivers facilitates seismic acquisition operations in these areas. A convenient approach is to deploy nodal receivers on a regular grid and to use sources only in accessible locations, creating an irregular source–receiver layout. It is essential to evaluate, adapt, and verify processing workflows, specifically for near-surface velocity model estimation using surface-wave analysis, when working with these types of datasets. In this study, we applied three surface-wave techniques (i.e., wavelength–depth (W/D) method, laterally constrained inversion (LCI), and surface-wave tomography (SWT)) to a large-scale 3D dataset obtained from a hard-rock site using the irregular source–receiver acquisition method. The methods were fine-tuned for the data obtained from hard-rock sites, which typically exhibit a low signal-to-noise ratio. The wavelength–depth method is a data transformation method that is based on a relationship between skin depth and surface-wave wavelength and provides both S- and P-wave velocity (<span class="inline-formula"><i>V</i><sub>s</sub></span> and <span class="inline-formula"><i>V</i><sub>p</sub></span>) models. We used Poisson's ratios estimated through the wavelength–depth method to constrain the laterally constrained inversion and surface-wave tomography and to retrieve both <span class="inline-formula"><i>V</i><sub>s</sub></span> and <span class="inline-formula"><i>V</i><sub>p</sub></span> also from these methods. The pseudo-3D <span class="inline-formula"><i>V</i><sub>s</sub></span> and <span class="inline-formula"><i>V</i><sub>p</sub></span> models were obtained down to 140 <span class="inline-formula">m</span> depth over an area of approximately 900 <span class="inline-formula">×</span> 1500 <span class="inline-formula">m</span><span class="inline-formula"><sup>2</sup></span>. The estimated models from the methods matched the geological information available for the site. A difference of less than 6 % was observed between the estimated <span class="inline-formula"><i>V</i><sub>s</sub></span> models from the three methods, whereas this value was 7.1 % for the retrieved <span class="inline-formula"><i>V</i><sub>p</sub></span> models. The methods were critically compared in terms of resolution and efficiency, which provides valuable insights into the potential of surface-wave analysis for estimating near-surface models at hard-rock sites.</p>https://se.copernicus.org/articles/15/367/2024/se-15-367-2024.pdf |
| spellingShingle | F. Khosro Anjom F. Adler L. V. Socco Comparison of surface-wave techniques to estimate S- and P-wave velocity models from active seismic data Solid Earth |
| title | Comparison of surface-wave techniques to estimate S- and P-wave velocity models from active seismic data |
| title_full | Comparison of surface-wave techniques to estimate S- and P-wave velocity models from active seismic data |
| title_fullStr | Comparison of surface-wave techniques to estimate S- and P-wave velocity models from active seismic data |
| title_full_unstemmed | Comparison of surface-wave techniques to estimate S- and P-wave velocity models from active seismic data |
| title_short | Comparison of surface-wave techniques to estimate S- and P-wave velocity models from active seismic data |
| title_sort | comparison of surface wave techniques to estimate s and p wave velocity models from active seismic data |
| url | https://se.copernicus.org/articles/15/367/2024/se-15-367-2024.pdf |
| work_keys_str_mv | AT fkhosroanjom comparisonofsurfacewavetechniquestoestimatesandpwavevelocitymodelsfromactiveseismicdata AT fadler comparisonofsurfacewavetechniquestoestimatesandpwavevelocitymodelsfromactiveseismicdata AT lvsocco comparisonofsurfacewavetechniquestoestimatesandpwavevelocitymodelsfromactiveseismicdata |