Offset Footprint Analysis for Seismic Survey Line Selection
Find Innovative SolutionsGenerate Solutions
Solution Overview
Problem
Conventional seismic surveys face challenges in ensuring data quality and efficiency due to factors like sea currents, weather, and equipment issues, leading to costly repeat trips to fill data gaps, especially in marine environments where large areas need to be covered quickly.
Innovation Solution
A method and system for seismic surveying that predict and compare candidate footprints with existing data footprints, using metrics such as RMS and noise levels, to determine optimal acquisition locations, allowing for real-time adjustments and improved data quality while reducing costs by prioritizing data acquisition based on predicted conditions and modeled attributes.
Engineering Contradictions & Design Principles
Engineering Contradiction Analysis
1Productivity
If seismic data is acquired along straight sail lines to cover large areas quickly, then productivity is improved, but data quality deteriorates due to sea currents, weather, and equipment issues causing holes and noise
Solution Approach 1:
The system performs preliminary prediction of footprint overlap and data quality metrics before the vessel actually acquires data along a sail line. By calculating expected footprint coverage and identifying potential holes or noise issues in advance, the system allows operators to adjust the sail line proactively to avoid poor-quality data acquisition, rather than reacting after problems occur.
Solution Approach 2:
The system continuously monitors actual footprint overlap against predicted footprint overlap during data acquisition and provides real-time feedback to operators. This feedback loop enables dynamic adjustment of sail lines to maintain optimal data quality while preserving productivity, as operators can see the impact of their routing decisions on footprint coverage and make immediate corrections.
2Reliability
If repeat trips are conducted to infill data holes and improve data quality, then data quality is improved, but loss of time and operational cost increase
Solution Approach 1:
The system predicts footprint overlap and identifies potential data holes before the survey is executed, allowing operators to plan sail lines that proactively avoid areas likely to produce poor-quality data or gaps. This preliminary analysis prevents the formation of data holes that would require costly repeat trips to infill.
Solution Approach 2:
The system acts as an intermediary between the vessel's sail line planning and the final data quality outcome. By introducing footprint overlap prediction and analysis as an intermediate step in the workflow, the system enables operators to make informed routing decisions that directly improve data quality without requiring additional repeat trips.
3Reliability
If sail lines are adjusted to account for predicted footprint overlap and data quality metrics, then data quality is improved, but device complexity increases
Solution Approach 1:
The system creates a virtual copy or model of the expected footprint overlap and data quality metrics before the actual survey. By working with this predicted model rather than directly modifying complex acquisition systems, the solution simplifies the interface with operators while still achieving improved data quality through informed sail line selection.
4Productivity
If conventional racetrack surveying is used to cover large areas efficiently, then productivity is improved, but loss of information occurs due to incomplete or poor-quality data in certain coordinates
Solution Approach 1:
The system performs preliminary prediction of footprint coverage and identifies coordinates likely to have incomplete or poor-quality data before acquisition. This allows operators to adjust sail lines proactively to ensure complete coverage of all coordinates, preventing information loss that would otherwise require costly repeat trips to infill.
Data Source
Figure 1A~1B
Figure 2
Figure 3
AI summary
An analysis is proved to determine a candidate line for at least one vessel to traverse in a 3D seismic survey to achieve desired coverage either along a planned line or a new infill line. The analysis can also be used in a 4-D survey to determine the coverage of a candidate line relative to the baseline survey previously conducted. The analysis determines a coverage footprint of the common midpoint lines, at given offsets, so the user or automated system can select a candidate line to achieve the best coverage.