Abstract

We present results of applying prestack wavepath migration (WM) to 2‐D synthetic and field crosswell data, and the migration images are compared to those from a constrained prestack Kirchhoff migration (KM). In contrast to KM which needs to separate the data into up‐going and down‐going waves prior to migration, WM automatically separate the wavefields during the migration process. Synthetic tests show that WM can effectively locate the fault boundary, and generates good image resolution similar to the KM method. Both the KM and WM images are suitable for interpretation. The results with field data show that the WM images look similar to the KM image, all of which roughly correlate with the P‐wave sonic logs.

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call

Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.