Three-dimensional Marchenko internal multiple attenuation on narrow azimuth streamer data of the Santos Basin, Brazil.
Myrna StaringKees WapenaarPublished in: Geophysical prospecting (2020)
In recent years, a variety of Marchenko methods for the attenuation of internal multiples has been developed. These methods have been extensively tested on two-dimensional synthetic data and applied to two-dimensional field data, but only little is known about their behaviour on three-dimensional synthetic data and three-dimensional field data. Particularly, it is not known whether Marchenko methods are sufficiently robust for sparse acquisition geometries that are found in practice. Therefore, we start by performing a series of synthetic tests to identify the key acquisition parameters and limitations that affect the result of three-dimensional Marchenko internal multiple prediction and subtraction using an adaptive double-focusing method. Based on these tests, we define an interpolation strategy and use it for the field data application. Starting from a wide azimuth dense grid of sources and receivers, a series of decimation tests are performed until a narrow azimuth streamer geometry remains. We evaluate the effect of the removal of sail lines, near offsets, far offsets and outer cables on the result of the adaptive double-focusing method. These tests show that our method is most sensitive to the limited aperture in the crossline direction and the sail line spacing when applying it to synthetic narrow azimuth streamer data. The sail line spacing can be interpolated, but the aperture in the crossline direction is a limitation of the acquisition. Next, we apply the adaptive Marchenko double-focusing method to the narrow azimuth streamer field data from the Santos Basin, Brazil. Internal multiples are predicted and adaptively subtracted, thereby improving the geological interpretation of the target area. These results imply that our adaptive double-focusing method is sufficiently robust for the application to three-dimensional field data, although the key acquisition parameters and limitations will naturally differ in other geological settings and for other types of acquisition.