Q-factor estimation through optimization approach to near-offset VSP data

E. Blias, VSFusion

Summary:

A new method for interval Q-factor estimation using near-
offset VSP data is presented. This method is based on
objective function minimization of the difference between
actual layered Q estimates and those calculated through
interval Qs. To calculate interval Qs, we use Q estimates
for all receiver pairs that provide reasonable Q values. To
estimate layered Q between two receiver levels, we utilize
an exponent approach that provides more accurate Q values
than the spectral ratio method. Application of this method
to real data demonstrates good correspondence between Q
estimates and vertical velocity changes.

I ntroduction

Inelastic absorption is a transformation of seismic energy
into heat. It can be described by the seismic quality factor
Q or the absorption coefficient . Inelastic attenuation,
quantified by Q, the seismic quality factor, has a
considerable impact on surface seismic reflection data.
High-frequency attenuation increases the dominant signal
period and degrades resolution. Quantitative analysis of
amplitude variation with offset (AVO) is complicated by Q
analysis.

Q is a useful parameter because it is sensitive to parameters
such as lithology, porosity, permeability and pore fluid
characteristics. Knowledge of Q is desirable, yet it is quite
rarely measured. If a well has been drilled, core/laboratory
and vertical seismic profiling (VSP) methods can be used.
Each method has its advantages and limitations. Many
laboratory-based and field measurements of Q and its
dependence on parameters such as lithology and gas
saturation have been made on core samples, (Hamilton
1972; Toksoz et al., 1979; Badri and Mooney, 1987; Hauge
1981, Zhang and Stewart, 2008).

Theory and Method

Vertical (zero-offset) VSP provides the best data for
estimation of Q in seismic frequencies. However, even in
VSP data, the conventional spectral ratio method normally
provides low vertical resolution and quite often low
accuracy, so the question of reliable Q-estimates remains.
Here I describe a new method for interval Q determination
from near-offset VSP data, based on an exponent (not
spectral ratio) approach to layered Q estimates and fitting
calculated layered Qs for all possible receiver pairs.

Let us consider a set of receivers at depths z
k
, k=1, 2, ..., N.
Each horizontal layer is characterized by vertical time t
k

and interval Q-factor q
k
.


Figure 1: Model with interval Q-factor (q
k
).
S
k
(f) amplitude spectrumat depth z
k
.



Q-estimation fromzero-offset VSP data is based on a linear
absorption dependence on frequency (constant Q). Due of
this linear dependence with frequency, we can describe the
attenuation process as (for example, Torn, 1981):

f t
e f S C f S
2 , 1 2 , 1
) ( ) (
1 2

= (1)

Here S
1
(f) and S
2
(f) are amplitude spectra of downgoing
wave at the levels z
1
and z
2
; coefficient C describes
frequency independent attenuation, t
1,2
is one-way time, f is
frequency in Hertz. Parameter
1,2
is an absorption
coefficient for the depth interval [z
1
, z
2
], connected with a
layered Q-factor:


2 , 1 2 , 1
= Q (2)

Formula (1) is used in the spectral ratio method to estimate
Q from zero-offset VSP data. Normally (Zhang and
Stewart, 2008), the cumulative/average Q-factor is
estimated for the well interval from shallow to deep
receivers, and after that interval Qs are calculated. As
opposed to using only the direct arrival wavelet, as is
generally done using spectral ratio methods, we utilize as
much of the downgoing wave-train as possible to compute
2011 SEG
SEG San Antonio 2011 Annual Meeting 4278 4278
Downloaded 12 Jun 2012 to 110.137.125.106. Redistribution subject to SEG license or copyright; see Terms of Use at http://segdl.org/
Q-factor estimation

the amplitude spectra for Q estimation. As each individual
amplitude spectrumcan vary non-systematically froman
adjacent receiver, to stabilize the computations, adjacent
receiver spectra may be averaged. Equation (1) implies:

( ) f t b f S f S
2 , 1 2 , 1 1 2
) ( ) ( log = (3)

where b = Log(C). To estimate absorption coefficient , the
least-squared method is used to minimize quadratic
objective function F(,b):

2
2 , 1
1
2
2
1
) (
) (
log ) , (

=
(

|
|
.
|

\
|
=
F
F f
f t b
f S
f S
b F
(4)

Function log(x/y) is strongly non-linear, and changes
dramatically for minor absolute changes in x, y when x and
y are small. Instead of minimizing function (4), I minimize
function G:

| |
2
1 2
2
1
2 , 1
) ( ) ( ) , (

=

=
F
F f
f t
e f S C f S C G

(5)

Constant C is determined from the linear equation
0 = C G :

| | 0 ) ( ) ( ) ( 2
) , (
2
1
2 , 1 2 , 1
1 1 2
= =

=

F
F f
f t f t
e f S e f S C f S
C
C G

Fromthis equation we find C:

=
=

=
=

=
2
1
2 , 1
2
1
2 , 1
2 2
1
1 1
) (
) ( ) (
) (
F f
F f
f t
F f
F f
f t
e f S
e f S f S
C

(6)

Substituting C into equation (5), we obtain the objective
function G(,C()) with respect to one unknown :

| |
2
1 2
2
1
2 , 1
) ( ) ( ) ( )) ( , (

=

=
F
F f
f t
e f S C f S C G





For this, we scan absorption coefficient within given
range and determine , which minimizes to function (5).

This exponential approach was tested on a model data. A
homogeneous model with Q =100 is used. The traveltime
between two receivers was 30 ms. The amplitude spectrum
for the first receiver was calculated for a real VSP
downgoing trace and shown in Figure 1. Randomnoise of
0.5% of average spectrum amplitude was added to the
spectrumat the second trace; for high frequencies (80 -
100Hz), this amounts to about 30% of the amplitude
spectrum, which distorts the logarithmof the ratio for these
frequencies. Figure 2 shows the distorted spectral ratio
logarithm(curve 1). Line 2 shows the linear approximation
of a no-noise spectra ratio (corresponds to Q =100). Line 3
is the linear approximation of the noise-added spectra ratio;
Q =61. Line 4 corresponds to our new exponent estimate
of the noise-added spectra and gives Q =87, which is much
closer to model Q =100.














Figure 2. Amplitude spectrum.
















Figure 3: Logarithm spectral ratio and its linear
approximations.

If A
k,m
is effective/cumulative absorption coefficient
between depths z
k
and z
m
then we can write:

) (
,
) ( ) (
k m m k
T T fA
k m
e f S Const f S

= (7)

2011 SEG
SEG San Antonio 2011 Annual Meeting 4279 4279
Downloaded 12 Jun 2012 to 110.137.125.106. Redistribution subject to SEG license or copyright; see Terms of Use at http://segdl.org/
Q-factor estimation

where T
m
is the time fromthe surface to the depth z
m
. On
the other hand, applying (1) to the levels z
k
, z
k+1
, , z
k+m
,
we obtain

) exp( ) ( ) (
1

+ =
=
m
k j
j j k m
t f f S Const f S
(8)

where t
j
is an interval time between the levels z
j-1
and z
j
.

From(7) and (8), we come to two formulas:

+ =

=
m
k j
j j
k m
m k
t
T T
A
1
,
1

(8)

k m
k k m m
m k
T T
T A T A
A

=
,
(9)

where T
k
is traveltime fromthe surface to the depth z
k
:

=
=
k
j
j k
t T
1
(10)
Equation (8) connects interval and layered absorption
coefficients. Equation (9) provides value for layered
(effective, cumulative) absorption coefficient A
k,m
using
effective coefficient A
k
fromthe surface to the top z
k
and
effective coefficient A
m
fromthe surface to the bottomz
m
of
the layer.

Optimization method

We apply the least-square method to determine the interval
absorption coefficients
k
. Equation (8) leads to objective
function F minimization with respect to
j
:

+
(

=

= >

+ =
N
k m
j j
m
k j
j
k m
m k km
T T
T T
u F
1
2
1
1
,
) (
1
) (

=
+
N
j
j j j
w
2
2
) (
(11)

where
j
are initial approximations for
j
; A
k,m
and T
j
are
known. In equation (20), weights u
j
depend on quality of
Q
k,m
estimates and are determined by the formula:

m k m k
u
, ,
1 = (12)

where
k,n
is a standard deviation of Q estimate for the layer
[z
k
, z
m
]. Weights w
j
are used to keep solutions within given
range. We use optimization function F() iteratively: at the
first iteration, all the weights w
j
are the same. After
minimization, we check
j
and for those
j
, which are
outside given range, we increase the weights w
j
for those
j
.
At the second iteration we apply optimization to function
(20) with new weights w
j
and again check the output
absorption coefficients
j
. If some are outside the range, we
increased corresponding weights and continue iterations till
all
j
are within a given range.

To minimize function (11), we solve linear systemof
equations:


j= 2, , N. (13)

In function (11), we keep only those A
k,m
that are within
given range. If all Q
km
were within reasonable range, we
would have N(N-1)/2 values. Normally, we have about of
this number, that is, about 0.25N
2
. For N=200 traces we
will have about 10000 values of input Qs to estimate 199
unknown interval q
j
. This provides a good statistics for a
stable Q estimation. Resolution of Q estimation depends on
the length of intervals [z
k
, z
m
] that provide reasonable Q
values. Normally, it is about from100 to 200 m.

I nitial approximation

Lets consider a spatial window defined as a receiver set
between two receivers at depths z
k
and z
m
. If we analyze
amplitude spectra at these two receivers at the depths z
k
and
z
m
, it is possible to determine average/layered A
k,m
in this
window, using formula (9). Moving the window along the
well by one receiver position, we again calculate A over
this new range, retaining all a-priori computed values. We
use different moving windows, normally from5 to 15
receiver positions. We then average all these overlapping
values and calculate interval between each consecutive
receivers.

Frequency-dependent time correction

For linear dependence Q on frequency, velocity also
depends on frequency (velocity dispersion):

(14)

Using formula ln(1+x) x, equation (14) yields to:
0
) (
=

j
F

|
|
.
|

\
|
+ =
ref ref
f
f
Q f V
f V
ln
1
1
) (
) (

2011 SEG
SEG San Antonio 2011 Annual Meeting 4280 4280
Downloaded 12 Jun 2012 to 110.137.125.106. Redistribution subject to SEG license or copyright; see Terms of Use at http://segdl.org/
Q-factor estimation


|
|
.
|

\
|
=
|
|
.
|

\
|
+ =
|
|
.
|

\
|
ref ref ref ref
f
f
Q f V
f V
f V
f V
f V
f V
ln
1
1
) (
) (
1
) (
) (
1 ln
) (
) (
ln

and finally



If Q >100 and frequency band is [0.5f
ref
, 2.0f
ref
] then


and

Fromlast inequality



It implies that for Q >100, velocity dispersion correction is
less than 0.22% and can be neglected in most cases.

Real data example

Let us consider an example of Q estimation using recorded
VSP data. Figure 3 shows the vertical component of a near-
offset VSP data after applying amplitude gain. VSP
receivers cover the interval from 400mto 4000 mat 10-m
increments. The downgoing wavefield was extracted using
a wave-by-wave separation approach (Blias, 2007).
Amplitude spectra were calculated over 1000 ms time
interval in the 15 100 Hz frequency range. Before Q
estimation, the picked first arrival times were improved
using an approach in the frequency domain. To improve
first break accuracy, I use time shift determination in the
frequency domain, Blias (2007). Figure 4 demonstrates that
the improved first arrival times have smoothed the shot-to-
shot high-velocity jitter caused by inconsistencies in the
original time picking. The computed interval velocity data
better matches the acoustic log velocity.
Figure 5 demonstrates good correlation between estimated
interval Q and log data.




Figure 3. Z-component of the VSP data.






Figure 4. Interval velocity, calculated from1: First breaks,
picked manually; 2: using equation (15); 3 fromacoustic,
averaged with 10 minterval







Figure 5. Q-factor, acoustic velocity, GGK and GK curves

Conclusions

A new method for Q determination fromnear-offset VSP
data was presented. It uses an exponential approach to
estimate cumulative Q for all pairs of receivers that provide
Q within given range. Interval Q is estimated through
iterative objective function minimizing, taking into account
a priori range for possible Q values. This function describes
misfits between the estimated layered Q and those
calculated through interval Qs. To keep Q within given
range, an iterative process with variable regularization
weights is applied. Its application to real data shows the
reliability of interval Q estimates.

The real data example demonstrates the correlation
between interval Q and log data, which confirms the
reliability of this approach.
Q
ref ref
f
f
f V
f V

1
) (
) (
|
|
.
|

\
|
=
0 . 2 5 . 0 < <
ref
f
f
7 . 0 ln <
ref
f
f
. 0022 . 0 ln
1
<
|
|
.
|

\
|
ref
f
f
Q
2011 SEG
SEG San Antonio 2011 Annual Meeting 4281 4281
Downloaded 12 Jun 2012 to 110.137.125.106. Redistribution subject to SEG license or copyright; see Terms of Use at http://segdl.org/
EDITED REFERENCES
Note: This reference list is a copy-edited version of the reference list submitted by the author. Reference lists for the 2011
SEG Technical Program Expanded Abstracts have been copy edited so that references provided with the online metadata for
each paper will achieve a high degree of linking to cited sources that appear on the Web.

REFERENCES
Badri, M., and H. M. Mooney, 1987, Q measurements from compressional seismic waves in
unconsolidated sediments: Geophysics, 52, 772784, doi:10.1190/1.1442344.
Blias, E., 2007, VSP wavefield separation: Wave-by-wave optimization approach: Geophysics, 72, no. 4,
T47T55, doi:10.1190/1.2744124.
Hamilton, E. L., 1972, Compressional-wave attenuation in marine sediments: Geophysics, 37, 620646,
doi:10.1190/1.1440287.
Hauge, P. S., 1981, Measurements of attenuation from vertical seismic profiles: Geophysics, 46, 1548
1558, doi:10.1190/1.1441161.
Stainsby, S. D., and M. H. Worthington, 1985, Q estimation from vertical seismic profile data and
anomalous variations in the central North Sea: Geophysics, 50, 615626, doi:10.1190/1.1441937.
Toksz, M. N., D. H. Johnston, and A. Timur, 1979, Attenuation of seismic waves in dry and saturated
rocks: 1. Laboratory measurements: Geophysics, 44, 681690, doi:10.1190/1.1440969.
Tonn, R., 1991, The determination of the seismic quality factor Q from VSP data: A comparison of
different computational methods: Geophysical Prospecting, 39, 127, doi:10.1111/j.1365-
2478.1991.tb00298.x.
Zhang, Z., and R. R. Stewart, 2008, Well log analysis and seismic attenuation in a heavy oilfield: Ross
Lake, Saskatchewan: CSEG National Convention, Extended Abstracts, 383-387.

2011 SEG
SEG San Antonio 2011 Annual Meeting 4282 4282
Downloaded 12 Jun 2012 to 110.137.125.106. Redistribution subject to SEG license or copyright; see Terms of Use at http://segdl.org/