10.11.2014 Views

Frequency domain seismic forward modelling: A tool for waveform ...

Frequency domain seismic forward modelling: A tool for waveform ...

Frequency domain seismic forward modelling: A tool for waveform ...

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

Create successful ePaper yourself

Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.

elds by explicitly dening each back scattered event, but reverberations and surface<br />

waves travelling perpendicular to the paraxial direction cannot be modelled at all.<br />

Even with this serious disadvantage, the approach has been very popular as a migration<br />

algorithm (Claerbout and Doherty, 1972; Loewenthal et al., 1976; Berkhout<br />

and Van Wulten Palthe, 1979; Berkhout, 1985), since in post-stack migration the<br />

propagation is required in only one direction (down), and the computational costs<br />

are much lower than full wave equation <strong>modelling</strong>. Full wave equation methods,<br />

however have been used extensively in migration from the late 70's (Hemon, 1978;<br />

Beysal et al., 1983; Loewenthal and Mufti, 1983).<br />

In many disciplines the nite element <strong>for</strong>mulation is the primary choice of<br />

numerical method. However, <strong>seismic</strong> <strong>modelling</strong> the nite element method has never<br />

taken over from nite dierences as a main stream technique. Although the earliest<br />

papers on <strong>seismic</strong> <strong>modelling</strong> used the nite element method, (Smith, 1974),<br />

the essential diculty remains with us today: The lack of a mesh generator which<br />

will utilise the full advantage of nite elements, distorting the grid where possible<br />

and still providing a sucient number of node points <strong>for</strong> accurate wave equation<br />

<strong>modelling</strong>. There is another reason why nite element <strong>seismic</strong> <strong>modelling</strong> is not used<br />

more often: Since wave propagation problems demand that the model be sampled<br />

at a very ne scale, using exact, irregular boundaries will not signicantly aect the<br />

result. In most practical cases the knowledge of the model itself is only known at a<br />

relatively long scale length, much coarser than the model parametrization, so that<br />

exact boundaries cannot be dened. Finite elements may have certain advantages<br />

in the case of theoretical, simple models in which only a limited number of homogenous<br />

regions represent the model and an exact solution is required, but in applied<br />

cases where the model is highly heterogeneous and the shape of the \homogeneous"<br />

elements is not known the main advantages of nite elements appear to be of little<br />

use. The main nite element work is still on square (rectangular) grids. In this<br />

case there is no particular advantage of using either the nite dierence or the nite<br />

21

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!