US5050131A
Expired / Lapsed
US
⏱️ 0.0 years remaining
Quantitative method for evaluating velocity model quality
Assignee: ConocoPhillips Co
•
Filing: 1991-01-17
•
Granted: 1991-09-17
•
Expires: 2011-01-17
Abstract
Abstract A method for quantitatively determining an accurate subsurface velocity prior to data migration includes steps whereby the accuracy of the velocity can be defined by measuring the deviation in depth as a function of offset in the common reflection point (CRP) gather. A point on reflector is selected and the CRP gather is formed. If the image is not flat, the velocity is adjusted until it is flat. The velocity is decreased and the far offset end of the image will be imaged to shallower depth than the near offset end. The velocity is increased and the image will tilt down at the far offset end. An error is defined which is the theoretical accuracy limit for the determination of velocity using the CRP method. A factor is defined that indicates the reliability of the image for a reflector.
Inventors
- 👤 Shein S. Wang
- 👤 Douglas W. Hanson
- 👤 Thomas D. Cavanaugh
Bibliographic Details
Application Number
—
Jurisdiction
US
Data Source
google_patents
Last Synchronized
2026-11-02 05:36
CPC Classifications
G; G01; G01V; G01V1/00; G01V1/28; G01V1/30; G01V1/303
Claims Analysis
Total Claims: 12
Claim 1
Independent Claim
135 words
A method for quantitatively evaluating the quality of a velocity model comprising the steps of: receiving a seismic model having at least one reflector; selecting a point on said reflector; forming a common reflection point gather; choosing a first velocity; adjusting said first velocity to flatten said common reflection point gather; decreasing said first velocity to calculate a second velocity so that the center of the far offset wavelet is a predetermined distance shallower than the near offset wavelet; increasing said first velocity to calculate a third velocity so that the center of the far offset wavelet is said predetermined distance deeper than the near offset wavelet; determining an error value; calculating a relative error value using said error value; and determining an image quality factor indicating the reliability of the image for said reflector.
Claim 2
Independent Claim
135 words
A method for quantitatively evaluating the quality of a velocity model comprising the steps of: receiving a seismic model having at least one reflector; selecting a point on said reflector; forming a common reflection point gather; choosing a first velocity; adjusting said first velocity to flatten said common reflection point gather; decreasing said first velocity to calculate a second velocity so that the center of the far offset wavelet is a predetermined distance shallower than the near offset wavelet; increasing said first velocity to calculate a third velocity so that the center of the far offset wavelet is said predetermined distance deeper than the near offset wavelet; determining an error value; calculating a relative error value using said error value; and determining an image quality factor indicating the reliability of the image for said reflector.
Claim 3
Dependent Claim
41 words
The method according to claim 1 wherein said step of determining an error value includes the step of: calculating said error value using the formula ERR=(V.sub.2 -V.sub.1) where V 1 is said second velocity and V 2 is said third velocity.
Claim 4
Dependent Claim
33 words
The method according to claim 2 wherein said calculating a relative error value includes the step of: computing said relative error value using the formula RE=ERR/V.sub.L where V L is said first velocity.
Claim 5
Dependent Claim
36 words
The method according to claim 3 wherein said step of determining an image quality factor the reliability of the image for said reflector includes the step of: calculating said image quality factor using the formula IQ=(1-RE).
Claim 6
Independent Claim
186 words
A method for quantitatively evaluating the quality of a velocity model comprising the steps of: receiving a seismic model having at least one reflector; selecting a point on said reflector; forming a common reflection point gather; choosing a first velocity; adjusting said first velocity to flatten said common reflection point gather; decreasing said first velocity to calculate a second velocity so that the center of the far offset wavelet is a predetermined distance shallower than the near offset wavelet; increasing said first velocity to calculate a third velocity so that the center of the far offset wavelet is said predetermined distance deeper than the near offset wavelet; determining an error value by calculating said error value using the formula ERR=(V.sub.2 -V.sub.1) where V 1 is said second velocity and V 2 is said third velocity; calculating a relative error value using said error value by computing said relative error value using the formula RE=ERR/V.sub.L where V L is said first velocity; and determining an image quality factor indicating the reliability of the image for said reflector by calculating said image quality factor using the formula IQ=(1-RE).
Claim 7
Independent Claim
186 words
A method for quantitatively evaluating the quality of a velocity model comprising the steps of: receiving a seismic model having at least one reflector; selecting a point on said reflector; forming a common reflection point gather; choosing a first velocity; adjusting said first velocity to flatten said common reflection point gather; decreasing said first velocity to calculate a second velocity so that the center of the far offset wavelet is a predetermined distance shallower than the near offset wavelet; increasing said first velocity to calculate a third velocity so that the center of the far offset wavelet is said predetermined distance deeper than the near offset wavelet; determining an error value by calculating said error value using the formula ERR=(V.sub.2 -V.sub.1) where V 1 is said second velocity and V 2 is said third velocity; calculating a relative error value using said error value by computing said relative error value using the formula RE=ERR/V.sub.L where V L is said first velocity; and determining an image quality factor indicating the reliability of the image for said reflector by calculating said image quality factor using the formula IQ=(1-RE).
Claim 8
Independent Claim
152 words
An apparatus for quantitatively evaluating the quality of a velocity model comprising: means for receiving a seismic model having at least one reflector; means for selecting a point on said reflector; means for forming a common reflection point gather; means for choosing a first velocity; means for adjusting said first velocity to flatten said common reflection point gather; means for decreasing said first velocity to calculate a second velocity so that the center of the far offset wavelet is a predetermined distance shallower than the near offset wavelet; means for increasing said first velocity to calculate a third velocity so that the center of the far offset wavelet is said predetermined distance deeper than the near offset wavelet; means for determining an error value; means for calculating a relative error value using said error value; and means for determining an image quality factor indicating the reliability of the image for said reflector.
Claim 9
Independent Claim
152 words
An apparatus for quantitatively evaluating the quality of a velocity model comprising: means for receiving a seismic model having at least one reflector; means for selecting a point on said reflector; means for forming a common reflection point gather; means for choosing a first velocity; means for adjusting said first velocity to flatten said common reflection point gather; means for decreasing said first velocity to calculate a second velocity so that the center of the far offset wavelet is a predetermined distance shallower than the near offset wavelet; means for increasing said first velocity to calculate a third velocity so that the center of the far offset wavelet is said predetermined distance deeper than the near offset wavelet; means for determining an error value; means for calculating a relative error value using said error value; and means for determining an image quality factor indicating the reliability of the image for said reflector.
Claim 10
Dependent Claim
40 words
The apparatus according to claim 6 wherein said means for determining an error value includes: means for calculating said error value using the formula ERR=(V.sub.2 -V.sub.1) where V 1 is said second velocity and V 2 is said third velocity.
Claim 11
Dependent Claim
34 words
The apparatus according to claim 7 wherein said means for calculating a relative error value includes: means for computing said relative error value using the formula RE=ERR/V.sub.L where V L is said first velocity.
Claim 12
Dependent Claim
35 words
The apparatus according to claim 8 wherein said means for determining an image quality factor the reliability of the image for said reflector includes: means for calculating said image quality factor using the formula IQ=(1-RE).
References Cited (Backward Citations)
US4241429A
Cited
US4736347A
Cited
US4802146A
Cited
US4813027A
Cited
US4982382A
Cited
US4953140A
Cited
USPTO Annuity & Maintenance Windows
| Annuity Stage | Window Opens | Payment Deadline | Surcharge Period Until | Estimated Fee | Status |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 3.5 Years (Year 4) | 1994-09-16 | 1995-03-18 | 1995-09-17 | $2000.00 | Window Closed / Lapsed |
| 7.5 Years (Year 8) | 1998-09-16 | 1999-03-18 | 1999-09-17 | $3760.00 | Window Closed / Lapsed |
| 11.5 Years (Year 12) | 2002-09-16 | 2003-03-18 | 2003-09-17 | $7700.00 | Window Closed / Lapsed |