Field Data

I also tested the method on a portion of a real 3-D marine data set. The test is very small, because I have not yet done the necessary software engineering to make the code work quickly on a large data set. A portion of the input data is shown in Figure 6, and the corresponding part of the output Figure 7. The output have been rotated in time to make comparison with the input easier.

What is encouraging about the results is that most of the reflectors are easily visible in the output, have not been damaged by aliasing, and in some cases are more coherent than in the input (in particular the reflector at approx. 1.55 s). What is discouraging is that certain reflectors, especially those in the neighborhood of 1.3 s, which are somewhat less consistent from input gather to input gather, have been strongly attenuated in the output. I am hopeful that it will turn out this is an artifact of the input data set's size and the necessarily small aperture. I am encouraged that events such as the one at 1.25 s die out as they approach zero inline offset. Also discouraging is the glaring artifact at 1.3 to 1.4 s, in the steep moveout traces. For the most part this artifact is in the mute zone of the traces where it appears, but that isn't true everywhere. It looks disturbingly like a replication of the event at 1.8 s. The code is not well tested, I suspect some technical problem.

 

fieldIn
Figure 6 Inlines from input 3-D marine data.

 

fieldOut
Figure 7 3-D marine data after upward continuation.