Want to see what JMI can do with your data? Please feel free to contact us.
JMI was developed based on FWM and FWI for efficient use in the industry. It works on a cycle: 1) updating the velocity model (FWI), 2) updating the migration (FWI) and 3) repeat. Allows linear scaling of resource costs and desired frequencies.
Cloud computing allows us to complete the task in a reasonable time with the necessary cost. Average cost for JMI can be compared to conventional processing. The process is not as accurate as FWM and RTM, however, it allows to calculate for all frequencies, and not just limit to low ones, as FWI and RTM are mostly in use today. The technology also avoids the entire seismic processing steps, which depends on the hands of a direct specialist. Allows seismic processing in one step. Accurate seismic imaging of geological environment with significant lateral velocity changing requires depth migration process. It can be formations with huge salt diapers having steep flanges, thick granites or basalt rocks, or any other high-impedance rocks that masks rock layers beneath and/or occur next to low-impedance rocks. A preferable true migration method to imaging is RTM, and FWI for velocity estimation. Compared to other algorithms, FWI and RTM have theoretical advantages of two-way wave-equation approaches that intend to produce more accurate reflector amplitudes with superior imaging of steep flanks. However, both processes are highly resource-extensive, and their use should be justified.
Practical use of RTM on real data suffers stability, requires muting and filtering like a “post- migration cosmetics” that brings compatible imaging result to one-way wave-equation approaches. W. A. Moulder and R.‐E. Plessix (2004) showed it by comparing one-way and two-way wave-equations migration approaches in the frequency domain. They pointed that migration with a two-way wave-equation is sensitive to diving waves, leading to low- frequency artefacts. If cleaning one’s, the image becomes comparable to a one-way wave- equation approach which requires twice less resources. Theoretically, one-way wave-
equation migration has clear limitation for the complex geological models (Moulder and Plessix, 2004). On the simple models, both “one-way” and “two-way” give comparable results. There are several approaches proposed to decrease resources when using two-way wave-equation, mainly using different domains. However, required resources are still essential to set the process for efficient industrial production.
Over the last 15 years, the developed complicity of the operator used in the “one-way” allows catching up the “two-way” approaches imaging. One-way wave-equation migration also allows working with steep flanges, and if wave energy has not been scattered fully, it is possible to image beneath the salt or high-impedance layers. Thus, if there is no salt diapers or salt alike objects and low project budget the choice of FWI and RTM at low frequency is unjustified.
Running the processes until 15-30Hz will not allow to resolve thin layers, faults and build a broad picture e.g. for stratigraphy and basin understanding. Running process until e.g. 125Hz can give a reasonable geological picture but resource wise can be comparable with a well drilling.