Recorder-2012-09

12

37V O L U M E S e p t e m b e r 2 0 1 2

N U M B E R 7

RECORDERC a n a d i a n S o c i e t y o f E x p l o r a t i o n G e o p h y s i c i s t s

40

4824

25

Geophysics is a great opportunity forcurious people

An interview with Tooney Fink

An introduction to this special section:Seismic acquisition

R. Malcolm Lansley

The Hussar low-frequency experiment Gary F. Margrave, Larry Mewhort,

Tom Phillips, Mike Hall, Malcolm B.Bertram, Don C. Lawton, Kris Innanen,Kevin W. Hall, and Kevin Bertram

BroadSeis: Enhancing interpretation andinversion with broadband marine seismic

R. Soubaras, R. Dowle, and R. Sablon

The Benefits of Receiver Infill Stations: A Technical Case Study

Keith Millis and Andrea Crook

REPORTS8 Open Letter from Perry Kotkas,

Chair of the CSEG Foundation

57 CSEGs Geophysical Industry Field TripTyler MacFarlane, Daniel Loas, and Alishah Nayani

Seismic Acquisition

Launches FundraisingCampaign! (Details inside!)

A new dimension in measurement for a new category of seismic

www.slb.com/isometrix

MARINE ISOMETRICSEISMIC TECHNOLOGY

IsoMetrix

IsoMetrix

SEISMIC

GYOLNOHTECSEISMIC MARINE ISOMETRIC

in 3D for the first time.individual streamers to fully capture the returning wavefieldremoves the conventional measurement gaps betweenIsoMetrix* marine isometric seismic technology effectivelyBy sampling in both crossline and inline directions,

new category of seismicfor aA new dimension in measurement

in 3D for the first time.individual streamers to fully capture the returning wavefieldremoves the conventional measurement gaps betweenIsoMetrix* marine isometric seismic technology effectivelyBy sampling in both crossline and inline directions,

new category of seismicA new dimension in measurement

individual streamers to fully capture the returning wavefieldremoves the conventional measurement gaps betweenIsoMetrix* marine isometric seismic technology effectivelyBy sampling in both crossline and inline directions,

new category of seismicA new dimension in measurement


of the subsurface ever recorded.The result is the clearest, most accurate image


of the subsurface ever recorded.The result is the clearest, most accurate image

The result is the clearest, most accurate image

September 2012 CSEG RECORDER 1

Canadian Society of Exploration Geophysicists

Official Publication of CSEG

is published ten times per year (July and Augustbeing the exceptions) by the Canadian Society ofExploration Geophysicists (CSEG), Calgary.

is provided free to members of the CSEG. Allrights reserved. Single copies can be purchasedfrom CSEG Office for $5.00.

Letters to the Editor: All your written comments are read by theeditor. We reserve the right to edit all submissions; letters mustinclude your name and address. Direct all correspondence to theEditor, CSEG, 600, 640 - 8th Avenue SW, Calgary, Alberta T2P 1G7.

Reprints: Address all requests for reprint orders and permission touse editorial material to the CSEG office.

Advertisers need to contact the Managing Director or the CSEG officefor relevant information. CSEG, as publisher, reserves the right to reject advertising which is not in keeping with the publication standards.

All submissions, advertisements and articles must be received by theCSEG office no later than 30 days prior to publication month.

CSEG OFFICE ADDRESS

570, 400 5th Avenue SW,Roslyn Building, Calgary, Alberta T2P 0L6

Office Hours: 8:30-11:30, 12:00-4:00 Monday-FridayManaging Director: Jim Racette email: [email protected]

Phone: (403) 262-0015 Fax: (403) 262-7383email: [email protected]

Canada Post Publication Number 40831541

[email protected]

DirectorPatrick Tutty

Earth Signal Processing Ltd.1600, 715 5th Avenue SWCalgary, AB T2P 2X6

Phone: 403-264-8722

September 2012

Volume 37, Number 7

Executive Committee2011-2012

Organized to promote the science of geophysics and topromote fellowship and co-operation among our members

CSEG HOME PAGEwww.cseg.ca

[email protected]

Vice PresidentRon Larson

RPS Boyd PetroSearch1200, 800 6th Ave SWCalgary, AB T2P 3G3

Phone: 403-233-2455

[email protected]

PresidentRob Kendall

Kendall Geophysics Ltd.Calgary, AB

Phone: 403-200-8181

[email protected]

Past PresidentLarry Herd

RPS Boyd Petrosearch1200, 800 6th Avenue SWCalgary, AB T2P 3G3

Phone: 403-543-5362

Educational Services

[email protected]

Director Glenn Malcolm

Pengrowth EnergyCorporation2100, 222 3rd Avenue SWCalgary, AB T2P 0B4

Phone: 403-508-8929

Member Services

Finance

[email protected]

Director Jason Noble

Edge Technologies Inc.1720, 510 5th Street SWCalgary, AB T2P 3S2

Phone: 403-770-0440 Ext:227

Communications

[email protected]

Managing DirectorJim Racette

Canadian Society ofExploration Geophysicists570, 400 5th Avenue SWRoslyn BuildingCalgary, AB T2P 0L6

Phone: 403-262-0015

[email protected]

Director Hugh Geiger

Talisman Energy2000, 888 3rd Street SWCalgary, AB T2P 5C5

Phone: 403-231-2856

[email protected]

Assistant DirectorKim Nevada

Pulse Seismic2400, 639 5th Avenue SWCalgary, AB T2P 0M9

Phone: 403-531-0201

[email protected]

Assistant Director Jason Schweigert

BJV Exploration Partnership1680, 700 6th Avenue SWCalgary, AB T2P 0T8

Phone: 403-266-4004

[email protected]

Assistant Director Shawn Maxwell

Schlumberger2300, 645 7th Avenue SWCalgary, AB T2P 4G8

Phone: 403-808-7061

[email protected]

Assistant Director Wade Brillon

Divestco400, 520 3rd Avenue SWCalgary, AB T2P 0R3

WHEN CAPABILITY COUNTS...

...COUNT ON FUGROt Seismic Data Processing t Reservoir Characterization Software & Servicest Marine Surveying & Mappingt Integrated Navigation & Positioning Servicest Marine Seismic Data Acquisition t Data Managementt Aeromagnetic & Gravity Surveyst Gravity & Magnetic Servicest Aerial Sensing & Mappingt Geotechnical Engineering & Consulting t Geographic Information Systems (GIS)

www.fugro.com/offices

Calgary Toronto Ottawa Dartmouth St. Johns

Celebrating 50 Years

Celebrating 50 Y

earsg 50 Y Years

WHEN

A CAP PABILITY WHEN

COUNTS...ABILITY

COUNTS...

...COUNT

FUGRO ON

O

Gravity & Magnetic Servicestomagnetic & Gravity Surveys Aert

Data Managementt Marine Seismic Data Acquisition t Integrated Navigation & Positioning Servicest Marine Surveying & Mappingt Reservoir Characterization Softwart

ocessing Seismic Data Prt

Gravity & Magnetic Services

omagnetic & Gravity Surveys

Data Management

Marine Seismic Data Acquisition

Integrated Navigation & Positioning Services

Marine Surveying & Mapping

e & Services Reservoir Characterization Softwar

ocessing

Integrated Navigation & Positioning Services

e & Services

Calgary T

onto Ottawa Dartmouth St. Johnorgary T Tor

onto Ottawa Dartmouth St. John

Geographic Information Systems (GIS) t Geotechnical Engineering & Consulting t Aerial Sensing & Mappingt Gravity & Magnetic Servicest

s onto Ottawa Dartmouth St. John

Geographic Information Systems (GIS)

Geotechnical Engineering & Consulting

Aerial Sensing & Mapping

Gravity & Magnetic Services

s

www

ficeso.com/offi.fugrwww

St. John

St. John


Canadian Society of Exploration Geophysicists

Official Publication of CSEG

(Photos provided by the CSEG Foundation.)

September 2012

Volume 37, Number 7

RECORDER Committee

The material published in RECORDER doesnot necessarily represent the opinions or theviews of the CSEG. The articles are the opinionof the writers only. CSEG does not endorsethe information printed.

CSEG HOME PAGEwww.cseg.ca

Chief EditorJohn Fernando

S.A.I.T.

Phone: 403-210-4481email: [email protected]

Associate EditorDavid Cho

University of Calgary


I N T H I S I S S U E

Geophysics is a great opportunity for curious people An interview with Tooney Fink . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12

An introduction to this special section: Seismic acquisition R. Malcolm Lansley . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24

The Hussar low-frequency experiment Gary F. Margrave, Larry Mewhort, Tom Phillips, Mike Hall,

Malcolm B. Bertram, Don C. Lawton, Kris Innanen, Kevin W. Hall, and Kevin Bertram . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25

BroadSeis: Enhancing interpretation and inversion

with broadband marine seismic R. Soubaras, R. Dowle, and R. Sablon . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 40

The Benefits of Receiver Infill Stations: A Technical Case Study Keith Millis and Andrea Crook . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 48

REPORTS

Open Letter from Perry Kotkas, Chair of the CSEG Foundation . . . . . . 8

CSEGs Geophysical Industry Field TripTyler MacFarlane, Daniel Loas, and Alishah Nayani . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 57

R E G U L A R F E A T U R E S

Presidential Column . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4

Chief Editors Report . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6

CAGC Column . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10

CSEG Foundation Outreach . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 58

Tracing the Industry. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 62

Through the Eyes of a Student . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 65

Grapevine . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 66

F O C U S A R T I C L E S

Assistant EditorCarson Yarham

WesternGeco Canada


Assistant EditorMohammed Al-Ibrahim


Assistant EditorMeghan Brown

Talisman Energy


Past Chief EditorSatinder Chopra

ARCIS Corporation


Well, as I write this, its the Monday after the 100th anniversary of the Calgary Stampede and the city is shock-ingly back to normal. There were many excellent industry functions during this years Stampede and hopefullymany of you were able to participate. By the time you read this article, it will be early to mid-September and thesummer will be over. With any luck we will be having another great September. More often than not, this is thebest month for outdoor activities.

Doodletrain Update (By Doug Uffen)

The 2012 CSEG DoodleTrain is scheduled for November 12th -16th this year, which is the week immediately following the SEGConvention. This year, the DoodleTrain committee moved up the deadline for Early Bird registration to June 30th in order toalleviate the October time crunch. The committee is proud to report that Early Bird Registration has already surpassed overallregistration for 2011 and the numbers are still climbing. At the time of writing this article, three (3) courses are already sold outand others were nearing attendance thresholds induced by the size of the donated venue space. The 2012 DoodleTrain isoffering twelve (12) new courses this year, in addition to twelve (12) more that were brought back by popular demand.DoodleTrain 2012 features a new step as a webinar will be offered for the very first time. Fred Hilterman will be the keynoteluncheon speaker. DoodleTrain 2012 is shaping up to be a premiere event once again this season. All those interested are invitedto register and hop on board the DoodleTrain. Registration closes September 30th, 2012.

2013 Convention Update (By Shauna Carson)

I have a very short Convention update: All key positions have been filled, many by returning committee members, which gives anice headstart to the planning. Speaking of which, the Technical Committee has already started meeting, and last week sat downwith our web developer to go over the abstract submission website. We have mapped out the timeline for the technical program

and hope to move abstract submission up so that we may reach our goal of having a fully-populated technical program online in time for registration opening in mid-March. To thatend, abstract submissions will open in early November. Ads pertaining to this will appearin the September and October issues of all society magazines as well as in emails to 2012delegates. Other than that, the summer will be spent developing the website, looking intothe development of an app for the convention and getting quotes on different registrationsystems, just to ensure we are working with the best team.

Just let me know if you are looking for information on anything else most everyoneseems to be away for August so things should really start going in September!

September Technical Luncheon

The next technical luncheon after our summer break will be Wednesday September 12,and Kurt Wikel will be presenting an extended version of his GeoConvention oral pres-entation entitled 4D study of secondary recovery utilizing THAI from a Saskatchewanheavy oil reservoir.

Also at the September luncheon, we will be recognizing members of the CSEG who havebeen active members for at least 10 years. We will recognizing individuals as follows:

Years of Service Awards will be presented at the September Technical Luncheon.

10 year members framed certificate 126 20 year members framed certificate 90 30 year members plaque + letter 94 40 year members desk clock +letter 22 50 year members pen set + letter 3 60 year members watch + letter 3 40, 50, 60 year members will receive a formal invitation to the September luncheon. 50, 60 year members will be asked to bring a guest if they choose. We will have 2 poster boards with all 10-60 year member names listed, to be

displayed in lobby before lunch.

And finally just a reminder that one of the longest standing and most popular events,the CSEG Doodlebug Golf Tournament takes place on August 23-25, 2012.

So enjoy the rest of the summer and I look forward to seeing all of you in the fall. R

Cheers,

Rob KendallCSEG President

4 CSEG RECORDER September 2012

PRES

IDEN

TIAL

COL

UMN

4VUKH`5V]:V\[OLYU(SILY[H1\IPSLL(\KP[VYP\T*HSNHY`()

+VVYZ!WTc;HSRZ!WT

>6258':':/54:56258':':/54:5

]V5`HKUV4H[YLIS(UYLO[\V: LLSPI\1

)(`YHNSH*T\PYV[PK\(cTW!ZYVV+ TW!ZRSH;;H

?4

T

The end of classes at SAIT in April and thetime off during July and August was theperfect opportunity for me to work on gettinga head start in delivering the next 10 issues ofthe RECORDER.

First, I have to express my sincere gratitude toSatinder Chopra for his patient mentoring in

my duties as the chief editor of the RECORDER. I am sure Ihad flirted a few times with the line between troubling andpestering with regards to RECORDER issues. However, it isbetter to ask rather than making mistakes on account of notwanting to trouble Satinder who has amassed a great deal ofexperience in the past 11 years as the Chief Editor of theRECORDER.

Second, a sincere thank you to the RECORDER committeemembers: Kurt Wikel, David Close, David Cho, Carson Yarham,Meghan Brown, and Mohammed Al-Ibrahim, as well CarmenSwalwell, Kristy Manchul, Penny Colton, Jason Noble, andJason Schweigert who attend the RECORDER meetings on aregular basis.

Third, the RECORDER besides providing an excellent oppor-tunity for CSEG members and non-members to read technicalarticles about geophysical issues; it is also the means bywhich the multitude of CSEG events and networking oppor-tunities are conveyed through the columns written by theCSEG president, executive members, and others. Thank youall for the timely contribution of your articles.

Most importantly, I would like to thank all the authors fortheir contribution of focus articles which really makes theRECORDER an excellent geophysics magazine.

A final word of thanks to Jim Racette, Sheryl Meggeson,Lawrence and Bonnie Luft (The Printman) for their countlesstasks done behind the scene in order to ensure the productionand delivery of a quality technical geophysics magazine.

The success of the RECORDER depends on our valued andreliable advertisers who keep our industry engaged withtheir advertising. My number one priority for the next tenRECORDER issues will be the delivery of the RECORDER atthe beginning of each month so as to provide companies anopportunity to advertise in a time sensitive manner.

In addition, the RECORDER articles will be available in theirentirety on the CSEG website for those who prefer an elec-tronic version of the magazine, while at the same time thehard copy is delivered to those die-hard readers/collectors.In the near future the advertisers of the RECORDER will beprovided with the option for a live link to their websites.

My sincere hope is that this year will be a year of even greatersuccess in terms of delivery of the RECORDER issues as wellas increase the readership and advertising which will enablethe RECORDER committee to expand the technical quality ofthe magazine.

To all who have done their best in enabling me to do myduties in this first year as the chief editor of the RECORDER,THANK YOU! R

John FernandoChief Editor, The RECORDER


CHIE

F ED

ITOR

S R

EPOR

T

The 2012-2013 CSEG Distinguished Lecture Tour

The CSEG Foundation is pleased to announce that Dr. Don Lawton from the University ofCalgary has accepted the nomination to be the 2013 CSEG Canadian Distinguished Lecturer.He will be travelling to locations across Canada and making presentations about his work onreflection seismic profiling in and around the city of Christchurch, New Zealand, following adevastating earthquake there in February, 2011.

Lectures will take place during the academic year approximately the third week ofSeptember to the end of November, then again from January to the end of March.

If youd like more information on this program, please check the CSEG CDL webpage underthe Education menu option. Call the CSEG office at 403-262-0015 or email [email protected] if youhave any questions.

Dr. Don Lawton, 2013 CSEGCanadian Distinguished Lecturer.


SEPTEMBERLUNCHEON

DATE: Wednesday,September 12, 2012

TIME: 11:30 A.M. Lunch

LOCATION: Hyatt RegencyHotel, Calgary

TICKETS: Contact CSEG office

PHONE: 403-262-0015

FAX: 403-262-7383

CSEGSeptember Luncheon

sponsored by:

E X P L O R AT I O N S E R V I C E S F O R T H E O I L A N D G A S I N D U S T R Y

3D SE ISMIC DES IGN

PROJECT MANAGEMENT

APPROVAL SERVICES

GIS AND MAPPING

LAND AND PERMITT ING

S U I T E 3 0 4 , 2 2 1 - 1 0 T H AV E N U E S E

C A L G A R Y, A L B E R TA T 2 G 0 V 9

4 0 3 . 2 1 6 . 1 6 3 0

WWW.SYNTERRATECH .COM

I N I T I AT I V E s I N S I G H T s I N N O V AT I O N

T I O N S E RE X P L O R A

V I C E S F O R T H E O I L A N D G A S I N D U S T RT I O N S E R

YV I C E S F O R T H E O I L A N D G A S I N D U S T R

T I V EI N I T I A

AI N N O VsI N S I G H TsT I V E

T I O NA

CSEG FoundationLaunches FundraisingCampaignJohn Boyd and Brian Russell, Co-chairs of the CSEG FoundationFundraising Campaign, would like to announce the launch of thefirst-ever campaign in September, 2012. John and Brian, bothpast presidents of the CSEG and highly-recognized members, arevery enthusiastic about the campaign and their volunteers.

Brian states: I feel lucky to have had such a rich and diversified careerin exploration geophysics. I could not have asked for a more interestingand rewarding professional life. I have also been very involved with theCSEG over my career. In order to give back to the profession and societythat have meant so much to us, a group of us founded the CSEGFoundation several years ago. By giving to the Foundation, I feel that my contributions will be helping successive new generations of younggeophysicists get a head start on a wonderful career: from scholarships during their university years, through attendance at geophysicalconferences, and to programs that allow them to network with their peers and with more experienced geoscientists. I urge those of you who,like me, have experienced so much out of their geoscience career, to find a program that suits you and support it.

CSEG Foundation website: http://www.cseg.ca/foundation/index.cfm

John Boyd, Co-chair of the CSEGFoundation FundraisingCampaign.

Brian Russell, Co-chair of theCSEG Foundation FundraisingCampaign.

Dear Ken,

I have a new job. Its really interesting. It doesnt pay much at all (well, nothing actually) but it is exciting and allows us a small armyof us to do things that are amazing helping students and CSEG members all across Canada!

So, you may ask what is this job? My new job is Chair of the CSEG Foundation (CSEGF for short). Yes, I knowanother acronym. Weare basically the charitable arm of the CSEG. We have well over 200 volunteer members thats like 10% of the entire CSEG membership!

So, why am I writing to you? The main reason is, as they say, to raise awareness about the CSEG Foundation. Did you know that wehave John Boyd and Brian Russell to co-chair our brand new CSEG Foundation Fundraising Campaign!?

Who makes donations? The CSEGFs main financial supporter historically has been the CSEG, since the inception of the Foundation.Did you see the headline that this spring the CSEG donated a whopping $250,000 to us!? Amazing! Many scholarship donor companiesand individuals have been solid and consistent donors. In addition, private individuals have donated amounts from $5 to over $50,000.Yesthat is correct over $50,000!

Would people like you donate to the Foundation? Id surely hope so. I guarantee that the effect it will have, not only on others but onyourself, will be very powerful. That pay it forward feeling ispriceless. In addition, you will get a healthy tax credit for your dona-tion, and as an Albertan that means 50% of your donation back at tax time. So its a pretty good thing, no? Read on and Ill tell you whyyou should become involved and donate. You can also always read about the Foundation on our website:

http://www.cseg.ca/foundation/index.cfm

What do we actually do with your donation? Ah our mission I actually dont have enough space to do this topic justice here, yet Iworry that I need to give you something concrete. Heres a list of our key programs:


OPEN

LET

TER

Perry Kotkas, P.Geoph., is well-known in the CSEG for his role as President in 2000 (the CSEGs 50th anniversary)and his long service as a volunteer on many CSEG committees. Perry received the Meritorious Service award in 2002and in 2006 was awarded Honorary Membership. His 35 year career advanced from seismic data processing to inter-preting, to Chief Geophysicist, to Exploration Manager, then President & General Manager of a Canadian seismicacquisition company. He retired early in 2003 but continues his role as an active CSEG volunteer.

Scholarships Canadian Distinguished Lecture Tour Travel Grants & Learning Subsidies Outreach University Student Outreach Mentorship

Challenge Bowl Geophysical Industry Field Trip (GIFT) Student Conferences Ambassadors Program Career Fairs & Events Schools & Public Outreach

Seismic in Motion for Students (SIMS) Earth Science for Society (ESfS) Honorary Address EdGeo & WHERE Challenge support

As you can see, those programs are why we have over 200 volunteers! Its quite an operation. I know youll want to know more abouteach of these projects and Ill be sharing our success stories and those of students and professionals in future issues of the RECORDER.We are proud to be a volunteer driven organization.

Bottom Line? If youve read this far youve figured out that this actually is a letter to you. Hey give me a call and well havecoffee. Really! By the time were done coffee, youll be so enthused about our programs, youll be ready to write a cheque.

Seriously, the CSEG Foundation does some very worthwhile things. We encourage and empower kids, students and members fromcoast to coast to (almost) coast. Many of you have received our CSEG scholarships or awards and have participated in our programs.And a lot of us in fact all of us have had pretty great careers and lives due to our geophysical community and the enjoyment, cama-raderie, support and education weve gained from being part of the CSEG.

Now heres a chance for you to help out, leave a legacy, be a part of a great cause. I hope to have the honour of sending you a thank-youletter (and a tax receipt) for your generous donation. Well be in touch. R

Perry Kotkas, Chair of the CSEG Foundation

Solving challenges.TM

STIMULATION MONITORING

To get the most out of every frac, real-time near- and far-field monitoring is a winning combination.

Solving challenges

2012 Halliburton. All rights reserved.

TM.Solving challenges


By

Mik

e D

oyle

CAGC

COL

UMN The past two winters were busy with the amount of seismicactivity in Canada. Despite the jittery world economy in 2012,

companies report booking up already with winter comingup. With just ten land seismic companies left in Canada(depending upon how you count them) and the usual chal-lenges with a seasonal industry and its human resources as itrelates to peaks and valleys it is unlikely crew counts willsurpass last winters. This may mean that some programs donot get shot in the winter and push into other seasons. Withthe ever increasing regulatory burden in Canada and limitednumber of crews going forward PLAN AHEAD.

In Alberta we are holding our Annual Geophysical Seminarin Red Deer on Sept 19 and 20. See our website for furtherinformation and the full agenda.

October marks our Annual Seismic in Motion (SIM) field trip.Participants spend the day in the field observing the variousaspects of seismic and have the opportunity to hear and seecontractors performing seismic work. It is being offeredOctober 2, 3 or 4, 2012. Location: outside of Calgary, AB Cost:$250 + GST per participant. Pick-up: Westin Hotel, down-town Calgary - 7:00 to 7:30 am. The day finishes at approxi-mately 6:00 pm in the same spot. A hot lunch is provided.Good walking gear is required as there is some uphill anddownhill walking. The CAGC will provide safety equipment,safety coordinator and a tour guide for each group. Thisevent fills up quickly so book spots early. It is open both toindustry and members of the public.

Once again we have teamed up with CSEG OutreachCommittee, APEGA and the CAPP GEO committee to host150 students from the Calgary Board of Education (CBE)system. We have broadened this to include students fromSAIT, MRU and from U of C. This is an exciting partnershipthat produces an excellent opportunity for youth to see some-thing of the Energy business and understand some of its intri-cacies. In addition we have hosted Industry folks, OilCompany Staff, Regulators, Interested Stakeholders, and theMedia. The reviews have continued to be outstanding. Ourefforts over the years have seen the SIM partnership win theMayors Award for Excellence for Educational Partnershipsand CBEs highest honour, The Lighthouse Award.

This event has been hosted in Alberta from 2004 through 2011with the 2005 event in BC. It features all aspects of seismic from surveying to line cutting, from drilling to recording, andfeatures special demonstrations of shooting seismic andobserving a helicopter long line rescue operation. This eventis put on by the contractors and is supported by the OilCompanies in a truly cooperative manner. Such an eventtakes a great deal of time, effort and resources to put together.

Over the years we have put together a DVD and CD of theevent running about 15 minutes. One was fashioned after aSeismic 101 while the other was set up to highlight our various

occupations and training through Enform. Another wasgeared towards the youth attending the event. The DVD or CDare offered free of charge through the Association in case youmight have interest in viewing the activity. We have distrib-uted this product amongst the industry, regulators and also tomany educational outlets. A number of our members haveused this footage in their public stakeholder engagements.

The event is characterized as a day out in the field. Seismichas become increasingly linear with various aspects sepa-rated by time and distance. Gone are the days when the officestaff and/or even the geophysicists get out to the field tospend time observing operations. This opportunity presentsitself as a benign version of seismic bringing all aspects to onelocation. In a safe and organized manner, individuals are ableto spend the day on the ground viewing demonstrations,interacting with contractors who do the work and have thefield expertise and gaining a valuable understanding of thechallenges involved in the operations themselves.

Seismic in Motion (SIM) is the type of field trip that holdsinterest for any type of personality. The demonstrations arequick and move along seamlessly thus ensuring they keepthe participants attention. As we have as many as two dozencontractors involved, participants have the opportunity tosee many different aspects, many different equipment typesand hear from many different individuals. The flavour of theday is variety. Whether the individuals interest is piqued byhands on learning, by visual learning or by listening topresenters, this field trip has them all.

We limit the number of participants on each day for reasonsof transportation and safety.

The event is generally fully subscribed so if you have interestwe encourage you to register soon. Information and registra-tion is available on our website www.cagc.ca

Hope to see you out there. R

From the Thursday Files

As a civilization deteriorates, the intrinsic valueof what they have decreases. The coinage gets debased

and then eliminated.

Sid Belzberg, a Canadian coin collector(re: the elimination of the penny in Canada)

Mike Doyle is the President of theCAGC the Canadian Association ofGeophysical Contractors representingthe business interests of the seismicindustry within Canada. The CAGCwebsite may be found at www.cagc.ca

THE 3D MERGE EXPERTS.

From 2 small 3Ds to one of Canadas largest mergesinvolving 100 3Ds, 375,000 shots, 7 million bins...

One seamless volume, every time.

s4ALENTEDTEAMOFGEOPHYSICISTSPROGRAMMERSANDSUPPORTSTAFFs4RACKRECORDOFSOFSUCCESSFULMERGEPROJECTSs3TATEOFTHEARTHARDWARETOHANDLEANYSIZEOFJOBsPROPRIETARY3EIS2IGHTSOFTWARE

www.earthsignal.com403-264-8722

P R O C E S S I N G LT D

sOETAT3sERKCAR4sMAETDETNELA44As

403-264-8722.earthsignal.comwww

THGI2SIE3YRATEIRPORPELDNAHOTERAWDRAHTRAEHTFOLUFSSECCUSFOSFODROCEMMARGORPSTSICISYHPOEGFOM

.earthsignal.com

ERAWTFOSBOJFOEZISYNAESTCEJORPEGREM

FFATSTROPPUSDNASREM

403-264-8722

P R O C E S S I N G

DLTP R O C E S S I N G


Continued on Page 13

Tooney Fink is a well-respected name in theCanadian oil patch and ageophysicist with a broadrange of experience fromseismic data acquisition,processing, interpretation,to economic analysis, busi-ness planning, interna-tional projects, embracingnew technologies andmentoring.

Geophysics is agreat opportunity

for curiouspeople

Aninterview

withTooney Fink

S: Tooney, please tell us about youreducational background and yourwork experience?

T: I grew up on my familys ranch/farmnear Merritt, B.C., and then attendedUniversity at UBC, graduating with aB.Sc. in combined honours Geologyand Geophysics in 1974. I was sogreen that it still embarrasses mewhen I think about showing up inCalgary for my first day with GulfCanada!

S: After graduation you startedworking for Gulf Canada in 1974and remained with that companyeven when it becameConocoPhillips. What is themain advantage of remainingwith one company all yourprofessional life?

T: I would dispute that this was onecompany like most oilpatchcompanies, Gulf Canadaconstantly re-invented itself; first(in my career) as a partly owned,integrated affiliate of one of theSeven Sisters, then as an inde-pendent upstream companycontrolled by the Reichman familywhich morphed Gulf Canada intoa global conglomerate includingAbitibi-Price and Hiram Walker;then spun off as an independentupstream oil & gas entity (withcash flow problems); then as anaggressive upstream O&Gacquirer under the influence ofTorch Energy (JP Bryan); then amore humble Canadian-based

global independent upstream corpora-tion; then as a piece of the ConocoO&G global integrated company, thenas a piece of the larger global inte-grated entity of ConocoPhillips; andfinally as a piece of the newly formedglobal upstream company ofConocoPhillips.

During these years my employer alsocreated new entities such as Beaudril(the Arctic drilling company), andKomiArcticOil (the Russian productioncompany) for some spice. Now addto this all the acquisitions along theway (some 120 companies under ourcorporate umbrella at last count, I

Yes, we are open and processing seismic data.

(403) 444-8181 [email protected] www.geo-x.ca


Interview ContdGeophysics is a great opportunityContinued from Page 12

Having joined Gulf Canada in 1974, Tooney stayed on with the same company in a variety of roles till thecompany was taken over and became ConocoPhillips in 2001. Thereafter, again Tooney continued atConocoPhillips as Chief Geophysicist and presently works as Supervisor, Geophysical Services.

In the last 38 years, Tooney has spanned a wide expanse of ventures within Canada at MacKenzie Delta, NEBC and NWT, Alberta Foothills and Plains, Deep Plains, Peace River Arch, Labrador, Bay of Fundy, GrandBanks, as well as foreign lands comprising Gabon, Indonesia, Malaysia, Australia, Russia and Algeria. Armedwith all of this experience, Tooney remains enthusiastic and looks forward to acquiring and championing theintroduction of new technologies for ConocoPhillips, the latest one being microseismic monitoring.

Tooney was responsive to our request for an interview which led to an engaging conversation. Following areexcerpts from the interview.

(Photos courtesy: Tyler MacFarlane)


believe) including more notablecompanies such as Asamera, MannvilleO&G, Archer, Clyde Petroleum,Stampeder, Pennzoil Canada, Crestar,and Burlington. Talk about ways tochange the make-up and culture inone company, and, I certainly gotsome experience going into datarooms of companies in play!

One constant, for me, was staying inGulf Canada Square since 1979 whenwe moved into the new building, andfor most of those years having thesame phone number 233-4135 unbe-lievable! From a professional view-point, staying with one companygave me the opportunity to experiencethe life cycles of some of our mega-projects (e.g. Parsons Lake,Amauligak, Surmont, etc.), and tounderstand from a survivor perspec-tive, the massive shifts that ourindustry experienced. Staying at GulfCanada, then ConocoPhillips, has alsogiven me the enjoyment of formingand nurturing some long lastingfriendships with my colleagues.

S: Some people think to move up theladder it is important to switchcompanies at shorter intervals. Yourcomment?

T: I dont believe that switching compa-nies is a requirement, as long as one

has passion for what they are doingand where they are going, and arewilling to work with many differentpersonalities. Many times, professionalgrowth at one company seems tooslow for personal expectations; othertimes, inter-personal conflict precipi-tates a move. I believe that if one is apositive beacon of energy in our busi-ness, people will always be attracted toyou, and there will always be stimu-lating positions to work in, inside oroutside of ones current company.Matter of fact, I tell people that Idhave to be brain dead if I couldnt finda challenging project to work on in ourbusiness. Given all that, if you start atConocoPhillips Canada, but yourhearts desire is to run a start-up oiland gas company, I think youll bemoving around a bit.

S: So you started off by basically doingseismic interpretation. Please tell usabout your early experiences whattype of seismic data you were inter-preting at the time and about the inter-pretation aspects as well.

T: I started at Gulf Canada on a teamdoing interpretation in the MackenzieDelta around Parsons Lake, a newdiscovery at that time (1974). This waschallenging 2D seismic data withpermafrost statics, ice breaks, lots oflakes, short offsets (24 and 48 channel

shot records) and limited bandwidth. Iwasted some time arguing with a geol-ogist who had identified a fault in awell-bore, trying to convince him thatthere was no fault on seismic itturned out that there was a fault, andthe throw on the fault was exactly onecycle in vertical displacement, oops. Ialso interpreted projects in theAnderson Plains/Horton River area tothe east of the Delta.

After some stints in some servicegroups I joined another interpretationteam focused on the East Coast, whereI mapped the Hibernia structure priorto Chevron drilling the discovery wellin 1979 (Gulf Canada was a 25% partic-ipant) this was marine 2D data withbad sea floor multiples, but our earlyseis-strat analysis proved to beinsightful. I also evaluated an earlyproposal for a salt storage proposal inCanso Straits, where I speculated a lotabout how much anhydrite might flow(and in what geometry), along with thesalt, into a diapir. This was importantin the dissolution design for thestorage cavern to be created. I alsointerpreted some shallow marine datain Gabon, where Gulf had an interestin an offshore permit.

By this time I had been promoted to anarea supervisor, with my vast 5-6years of experience, and from that


Geophysics is a great opportunityContinued from Page 13


Interview Contd

point on had to live seismic interpreta-tion vicariously through othergeophysicists on the teams. As aworking supervisor in subsequentteams, I also interpreted data in theBay of Fundy and then the AlbertaFoothills. I remember that we alwayslamented how much time it took us toprepare our data for interpretationby the time we got proper shot pointmaps, the right wells with theright synthetics, the rightprocessed version of the seismicprofiles, the right land picture,and the right geological frame-work, we groused that we wereleft with only 20% of our time toactually interpret the data.Ironically, I hear that samelament today, but the 80% of thedata preparation time isfocused on digital data bases,data sources, gathers, attributegeneration, copious amounts ofwell tops & curves and soft-ware; leaving only 20% of thetime for actual interpretationthe big difference is that todaysinterpretation projects haveseveral orders of magnitudemore data.

S: You have done seismic dataacquisition, processing andinterpretation in your career,maybe not in that order. Whileall three are required for doingexploration and development,which area has interested youthe most?

T: All of these components inter-ested me, and contributed tomy competency in my career, Ibelieve. I was blessed at GulfCanada to have the opportu-nity to get solid experience inthese various areas, and toreceive this training fromfantastic mentors. My acquisi-tion experience was under thetutelage of Ray Prudholme,Carl Nyberg (Gulfs ChiefGeophysicist) and Bill Elder (inall 3 western provinces and theNWT); my processing waslearned (at our in-houseprocessing centre) at the feet ofpeople like GordonHollingshead, Phil Greenaway,Tom Balaski, Dean Provins and

Dave Cooper. My early interpetationswere influenced by the likes of DaveBaer, Dave Richert, Phil Pelletier, CarlNyberg, and T. Gordon Houston,among many others My earlygeology lessons were gleaned fromfolks like Dick Cote, Roger Rector,Walter Wegmuller, Gerry Macey andGene Van Dyck. Many of mymentors were explorationists with

3-4 years experience, which madethem experts for that place and time!Many of my mentors were also veryexperienced.

I had innumerable mentors for land &regulatory rules, drilling practices,completion practices, production engi-neering, economics, etc. I still havementors in every aspect of my career





(most of them younger than me, now).So, its not really one area or anotherthat I found the most interesting, butthe integration of all the various facets(have you heard that before?)! If I hadto pick one area, it would be interpre-tation, cause the feeling I get whenlooking at a new seismic volume forthe first time is something like theworlds best author (the Great One)has just written a awesome book, andIm the first person who gets to openthe cover and read it!

S: Besides these three facets of seismic,you have been involved in special proj-ects, onshore/offshore, the foothills,frontier areas, the business aspects ofexploration, international projects, etc.

How do you look back on your life andcareer? Is it with a sense of satisfac-tion, fulfillment, or something else?

T: Ive kind of been like a kid in a candystore. I describe our energy business asthe game of 100,000 rules

The first rule is, The more rulesyou know, the better you play thegame

The second rule is, No matterhow smart you are, you can neverlearn more than 25,000 to 40,000rules in your career; but thatswhy we have teams, becausecollectively we can get closer

The third rule is, The rules arealways changing

I have always found my life and careerto be immensely challenging, fulfillingand rewarding. Think about it whereelse in this universe could you possiblyfind a similar situation, where you getto work with well-educated peoplewho are usually compassionate andethical; working in progressive compa-nies with really great compensation(comparatively speaking); utilizing thenewest, most recent technology: onprojects and mega-projects that costmore than most countries annualbudgets; and occasional failure is evenaccepted as a valuable learning experi-ence? I mean, really! It cant be much

better, at least for a farm boy fromMerritt, B.C.

There have been hard times as well (atleast they felt hard in the moment),particularly associated with organiza-tional down-sizing. I know that this isbecause my personal relationshipsmean everything to me, and the stressrelated to down-sizing feels awful.Having said that, Ive come to realizethat there is life after any one job forpeople in our profession, and manytimes change is quite positive.

S: At this stage in your life, what are youlooking forward to?

T: More of the same constantlylearning, getting more mentoring andgiving more mentoring, playing thegame of 100,000 rules. Retirement canwait for a while.

S: When you look back on your illus-trious career, what were some of thesuccessful landmarks?

T: My proudest landmark would be myfamily: my wife Sylvia, son Alex anddaughter Leah. They inspire meconstantly with their view on life andtheir unique insights. At work, theFrontier Exploration era (~1974-1986)at Gulf Canada was heady, with astring of discoveries both in easternCanada (Hibernia et al), and the Arctic



CSEG Donates $250,000!The CSEG Foundation announces a donation of $250,000 received from the CSEG during the 2nd quarter of 2012. This dona-tion brings the CSEG Foundations current assets to a total of $1,000,000. The CSEGs donations, Members and Corporatedonations, and a Fundraising campaign commencing in September 2012, will allow for continuation and possible expansionof the outstanding activities of the CSEG Foundation across Canada, supporting students and the geophysical community.

According to CSEG Foundation Board Chairman Perry Kotkas, the CSEG Executive Committee has always been extremelysupportive of our efforts we are very, very thankful for their support, and this amazing recent donation. We always endeavour to actin the best interests of the CSEG. We have a fully-engaged Board and host of wonderful volunteers to carry out our mandate. We hopeto solidify our financial position in the near future, thus continue and possibly even expand some of our programs and the excellent workof our volunteers.


(Amauligak and Beaufort discoveries,and Sverdrup Basin discoveries). InWCSB the activity surrounding the W.Pembina Nisku madness (Niskupinnacles) and Leduc madness(Rumsey pinnacle et al) was veryeducational and entertaining Icoined it the Reefer Madness stage ofmy career. Gulf Canada had a verysuccessful run in the Alberta foothillsas well. I was involved periph-erally with many of thesediscoveries.

The transition years at Gulfwere interesting to experiencewith constant corporate re-organizations, ownershipchanges and down-sizings. Myrecollections are of continuingfiscal crisis (at least thats whatit felt like), laser-like focus onoperations, and an imperativeto deliver production. We hadto divest or surrender manylarge assets in order to survive;fortunately we were able tohang on to a few gems likeSurmont and Amauligak which,when Conoco came into thepicture, went from desperatestates to happy states with anew mandate on mega-projectssuch as these. Another highlightoccurred in 2008 with the verysuccessful execution of theBack To Exploration C3GEOConvention, where I washonoured to serve as a generalco-chair. The organizingcommittee was on pins andneedles for at least 18 months,not knowing if the conventionwas going to be a success or amonumental bust; fortunately(and with huge personal relief)it went great!

S: Tell us about three qualitiesthat would describe Tooney, theperson. Also, tell us about onepersonal trait that no one elseis aware of.

T: Curiousity, Compassion,Service. Im anal about being ontime (but I think I hide it well).

S: With more than 38 years ofexperience under your belt,please tell us how you viewed

the changes in our industry, like digitalprocessing, interactive interpretationworkstations, 3D seismic, and thepower of the Internet. We would liketo hear some stories that you mayhave treasured.

T: Even though Ive mentioned previ-ously that the 80/20 rule hasntchanged (80% of ones time to prepare

a project, 20% to interpret) what haschanged is the massive volume of datathat one geophysicist can workthrough on his/her workstation (onceits all good to go). And speaking ofhis/her, one change over time has beenthe proportion of females in ourgeophysical graduating classes to theextent that in the last few yearsConocoPhillips Canada has reached



Permanent reservoir monitoring (PRM) thats reliable.Repeatable. Relevant. With richer 4C seismic. In otherwords, remarkable.Its OptoSeis. And its only from PGS.

Can you afford not to OptoSeis your reservoir?

A Clearer Image www.pgs.com

Recover more from your reservoirOptoSeisTM

Better Data

Better Recovery

Better Economic Outcome

OsloTel: +47 67 526400Fax:+47 67 526464

LondonTel: +44 1932 376000Fax:+44 1932 376100

HoustonTel: +1 281 509 8000Fax:+1 281 509 8500

SingaporeTel: +65 6735 6411Fax:+65 6735 6413

seismic data gathering technology and services and hydrocarbons reservoir monitoring


about a 50/50 split in new hire gender.It wasnt always like that.

The increase in computing power hascreated a ground shift in processingQC capability over the years; now wecan spontaneously create processingdisplays with different parameters toassess the impact of various velocities,say, on gather move-out, stack ormigrations; or the impact of differentweathering solutions, for example.Along with the increased hardwarespeed has come an incredible suite ofsoftware programs, which for the firsttime, can actually discriminate signalfrom noise as efficiently (or evenbetter) than the human eye-brain. Isaw a recent example of a microseismicevent on a surface seismic array whereI would have to say that no event wasvisible; but wave the wand of modelmatching and stacking, and voila, anevent is wrung out of the noise.

Sometimes I see 5D interpolationresults that are so good, I almostbelieve in magic. The question todayshould not be, Should we do 5D inter-polation?, but, Why arent we doing5D interpolation? And for thosepeople who dont like 5D regularizedseismic data, we now have a schoolcampaigning for irregular, pseudo-random geometry, utilizing pointsources, point receivers and ditheringsource timing.

Another huge change has been thenumber of seismic attributes availablefor the interpreter, both post-stack andpre-stack, but Im preaching to the choirhere! The challenge is for the interpreterto decide which attributes (and why)are most valuable for the interpretation.

Lets not even get started on micro-seismic data, except to acknowledgethat its a new world out there.

Seismic land acquisition has seenmuch change as well, with the intro-duction of large channel counts, widearrays, digital phones, and morerecently, cableless systems. Marineseismic has undergone a sea change(pardon the pun) as well, with widetowed arrays, long streamers, de-ghosting technology, coil shooting,etc. Land 3D seismic has evolvedfrom a patchwork quilt of tiny (1.5square miles) proprietary surveysover each section we wanted to drill,to large portions of the basin beingcovered by a quilt of large (multi-township) surveys. In WCSB this hasbeen greatly facilitated by speculative3D seismic surveys, where the busi-ness model brought down the costssufficiently that regional 3D seismiccoverage can be obtained by an E&Pcompany; the benefits are fantastic,particularly for interpreting regionaldepositional or structural trends thatdefine ones play fairway.

New challenges in seismic acquisitionhave sprung up on the regulatory,social and environmental sidehowever. Although many of the newregulations and processes are based ingood intentions, they sometimescombine to appear impractical. My(somewhat absurd) vision of the futureis flying over your project in anaircraft, opening the door and kickingout thousands of point receivers (GPS-enabled, and biodegradable) which fallrandomly down and jam into thesurface. Leave them for a few weeks(no sources required sourcelessseismic, dont you know), then fly backover with your plane to remotelyupload the data, and leave the detec-tors to decompose!

In my opinion, the Internet has revo-lutionized our geophysical workflowsas well. When I think about howhumans solve problems, access to theinternet for both data and communi-cation has released many of ourshackles. Consider: whether problemsolving using trial and error (usingintuition); repetition (until patternsbecome apparent); brainstorming(individually or collectively); usingdecomposition (or decimation); using

analogs (bingbingbing, big one forthe Internet); approximating; or usingserendipity all are greatly enhancedusing the power of the web. You beginto understand why people like MattHall are so ardent about open sourceinformation. I have a very chaoticlooking messy desk with thousands ofpapers in various piles and I tellpeople (when they finish scolding mefor my messiness) that this enhancesthe probability of random associa-tion to create new solutions e.g.,when pile A tips over onto pile C, andIm picking them up, all of a sudden Isee one idea randomly juxtaposedagainst another completely differentidea, and a new solution is bornand Im only half kidding!

S: I notice that your (published?) tech-nical communication has remainedrather limited. Is that correct? I wouldlike to hear your take on this please.

T: It bothers me too. And I cant tell youwhy specifically, other than it feels likea combination of factors such as beinga supervisor most of my career, so notreally owning a project; working for acompany that in many time periodsdid not support publication; businesscommitments that took precedent;personal commitments that took prece-dent; and, whatever the excuse, justnot making it a high enough priority.Matt Hall finally coaxed me to write acontribution for his recent 52 thingsYou should Know About Geophysics.

S: Please permit me to ask you this.What differences did you notice whenyou turned 30 years, 40 years and 50years old? As an example, some peoplethink the 30s allowed them to experi-ment with options, the 40s gave themtime for self-introspection, and someget naughty at forty. Your comments?

T: I noticed theyre each ten years apart! Istarted in the business when I was 20,and when I look back every decadefeels like maybe 3 years of elapsedtime at the most it all just goes sofast! If I had to identify any tendencies,they would be learned wisdomaround things such as nothing is everas good, or as bad, as it first seems; ordont take it personally; or askyourself, do you really think thatperson got up this morning and




thought, What can I do to piss offTooney today? To me aging has beena continuum, not discrete stages. Ilove the energy of youth and I valuethe cynicism of experience. Now thatIm more mature it tickles me thatwhen I misbehave socially, people justthink its cute (or at least I think so)!

S: Complete the following with one lineanswers:

a. If not a geophysicist, youwould be a prospectorwith a pack-mule!

b. If you could go back in time,Id actually like to goforward in time, to the firsttime we migrate from oursolar system, then when wemigrate from our galaxy.

c. In your scheme of joy, serviceto others is the exercise,gratitude is the meal, andjoy is the dessert.

d. In your opinion, a retirementdream would be, being aprospector with a pack-mule (or with unlimitedfunds for a helicopter).

e. You have faith in, first,human ingenuity wemay be the source of manyof the worlds problems,but sure as heck were theonly source for solutions(then I have faith in ourinherent compassion).

f. The best technical paper (thatIve read) is Bally, A.W.,Gordy, P.L., and Stewart,G.A. 1966. Structure,seismic data and orogenicevolution of the southernCanadian Rockies. Bulletinof Canadian PetroleumGeology, v. 14, p. 337-381;combined with C. D. A.DAHLSTROM. ChevronBalanced Cross SectionsCanadian Journal of EarthSciences, 6, 743 (1969); tocreate the bible ofCanadian foothills struc-tural geology/geophysics.

S: You have been instrumental inbringing new technology to

Gulf/ConocoPhillips. Tell us about allyou have done over the years and whyyou think that was a significantcontribution.

T: I dont think I really did anything,except support other people whoseemed to have good ideas. Icertainly dont think Ive been aleading edge technology type,

hardly even a fast follower. Calgaryis blessed to be a hotbed of innova-tion and entrepreneurial endeavour(particularly in the service industries);so sitting in Gulf Canada Square, onecould basically pick and choose themost effective technology of themoment. Having said that everyproject is unique and there are incre-mental technologies that we can



Creating a

that is


employ to improve the operation (beit geophysical, geological, drilling,completion or production).

I think its important to keep a line ofsight between the technology we wantto employ and getting our wells drilledand completed in the optimal place, inthe optimal time. I tell explorationiststhat any time we get over all thehurdles to finally drill a new well, theangels sing.

Seismic acquisition over the years atGulf Canada and ConocoPhillipsCanada benefited from innovativeleaders in our acquisition group (suchas Ray Prudholme and Rick Edwards),who were intimate with the challengesin the field but not afraid to trydifferent technology when required(e.g. mini-marine equipment forshooting in Parsons Lake, smallcustom augers for shallow holepatterns when it wasnt possible todrill deep shot-holes; sonic drills fordrilling in gravel, LIDAR for programplanning and survey, very low envi-ronmental footprint 3D utilizingslashers and mulchers).

One step change in our businessunit came when we obtained andaggregated a continuous quilt of 3Dseismic coverage over the Deep Basin

(at least the northern portion span-ning AB & BC thank you Frank VanHumbeck), then re-processed the datain mega-merges of AVO compliantdatasets (thank you, Pat Kong andLarry Matthews), allowing the gener-ation, on a regional basis, of consis-tent seismic attributes, correlated tolarge numbers of wells, with morepredictive power than ever beforepossible. Not high tech or leadingedge, but massively effective.

Another one of the most under-appre-ciated technologies is that of communi-cation technology. Communicationdisasters have a negative value that faroutweighs the positive value of manyapplied incremental technical innova-tions keep people in the loop, theymay keep you from falling off thatapproaching cliff. Conversely, thepositive value of good communicationtechnology (dare I say collaboration)can be huge e.g. at ConocoPhillipswe have a global, internal, web-basedAsk and Discuss tool (named anNOE Network of Excellence) segre-gated by various disciplines. Ourgeophysical NOE brings the power of~330 ConocoPhillips geophysicists tobear on any issue asked on theNOE response is fast andnumerous and it works because its agrassroots tool that the geophysicists

want to work. To boot, any of the 800+members of the geology NOEs canweigh in on the discussion as well!

S: Is ConocoPhillips involved in thepursuit of unconventional resources?Please elaborate.

T: ConocoPhillips Canada is deeplyinvolved with unconventionalresources. With the acquisition ofBurlington, we gained an incredibleownership position in large parts of theDeep Basin, and with the advent ofhorizontal drilling mixed with multi-frac completions, many of the formerlysub-economic Triassic-Mesozoic tightclastic reservoirs in the Deep Basin



CSEG Foundation Awards over 750 Scholarships

Matt Klukas, Chair of the CSEG Foundations Scholarship committee, has announced that since its inception, the CSEG hasawarded more than 750 scholarships to university students across Canada. In 2012, the Scholarship Committee re-estab-lished scholarships to support geoscience technology students. Matt states, We believe it is important to expand our footprintto not only universities in Canada but also to institutes focusing on progressing geoscience technology; this will benefit both studentsand donors alike. Tiffany Piercey states, While I was an undergrad and a graduate student at Memorial University, I was fortunateenough to be a two-time recipient of CSEG Foundation scholarships. It goes without saying that financial awards and grants are whathelped me through my many years of university and led me where I am today as a geoscientist at Imperial Oil. Sitting on the other sideof the table, as full-time geoscientists, we often forget the difficulties we faced as post-secondary students and the great significance ofreceiving such student awards. The value of the CSEG Foundation scholarships can, most often, only truly be quantified by the recipi-ents of these awards and it most certainly instills the Pay it Forward attitude with many of us. And yes, I am now a fully-engagedCSEG Foundation volunteer!


became ideal horizontal targets butthe gas price hurts. Fortunately, quite afew of these reservoirs have rich gasliquids associated with them. On themore classic shale front we seem tolike the Devonian, be it Muskwa,Duvernay, or Canol; I cant say muchmore or Id have to shoot you. Thegrand-daddy of the unconventionalresource plays is the oil sands wherewe have incredible exposure throughour ownership in Surmont, FosterCreek, Christina Lake, Thornbury,Clyden and Saleski SAGD properties.These oil sands projects are massive,requiring billions of dollars of capitalinvestment, and utilizing constantlyevolving new technologies. Our timelapse seismic data from Surmont is atextbook example of the effective appli-cation of 4D.

S: Do you think geophysics has an effec-tive role to play in shale gas explo-ration?

T: Any time someone starts the mantraabout resource plays being a uniformcarpet bombing range (why do weneed seismic?), I just push the mapover to them and say, Okay, you goahead and pick the target for our nextwell, then, and dont forget, its ahorizontal well, so youll not only needa target where we want to land theheel, but we also need a good azimuthand horizontal elevation for that,then, and by the way, try to avoid anydrilling hazards on the way down,would you! And thats before we tryto position the development pads (orpilots) in the best quality reservoirrock (be it the optimally predicted brit-tleness, TOC, or facies in the reservoir).Yes, I believe geophysics has an effec-tive role to play.

S: Tooney, you have been associatedwith the CSEG for quite some time,having been on various committeesincluding the DoodleSpiel, theconvention committees, etc. TheCSEG has conferred the MeritoriousService Award on you in recognitionof your services to the Society andthe industry, and to the discipline assuch. Please tell us why you do thisand how does it feel on receiving therecognition that you have got?

T: I feel humbled and almost humiliatedby the recognition Ive received fromthe CSEG, because Ive done nothingcompared to geo-warriors like you,Satinder! I believe the CSEG is whatdifferentiates our geophysical commu-nity from most other societies. This isbecause we have an incredibly strongtechnical sharing program; an unbe-lievable social program; and we remaininclusive to all facets of our industry.There is no similar experience,anywhere, like going to theDoodlespiel and being surrounded bycat-skinners, camp caterers, surveyors,slashers, dynamite salesmen, shot-holedrillers, acquisition folks, regulatorypeople, processing people, seismicbrokers, interpreters and geologists;rookies and seniors. Its a comediclove-in on ice (well, most games,anyways)!

S: You have played a significant role asmentor for the younger geoscientists atyour company. Please tell us aboutthis.

T: I was treated so well by the people atGulf Canada when I entered the oilpatch (I felt like part of a family), and Iwant to return the favour to ourcurrent new employees; as Ivementioned previously, I love theenergy that they bring into the organi-zation. How do I achieve this? Bybeing involved in the recruitingprocess; by being available for adiscussion (at Tim Hortons!) at anytime for any issue; and by being acheerleader for the efforts of all myfellow geos, who put themselves outthere on a daily basis.

S: Apart from the science that you prac-tice, what other interests do you have?

T: I love collecting rocks, minerals andsome fossils. For instance Ive gotexamples of copper ores from aroundthe Guichon Batholith, the heart ofcopper country near my home town ofMerritt; Ive got a collection of blackminerals which I administer as theblack rock test for any unfortunateearth scientist who happens to showinterest (based on an infamous blackrock mineralogy final test at UBC);Ive got a bit of an opal collection,amber collection, etc.; I have some

great Ammonite fragments; and Imalso proud of the Buzzard Couleemeteorite fragments that I personallycollected (with encouragement fromDon Hladiuk and Alan Hildebrand)then went back and purchased fromthe farmer who owned the strewnfield. I like spending time at our cabin,west of Cochrane, where there isalways stuff to tinker on; but feels likeit is a thousand kilometers away, not 70kilometers away.

S: What would be your message foryoung entrants to geophysics? Whatare most rewarding aspects of takingup a career in geophysics?

T: Geophysics is a great opportunity forcurious people, particularly thosewho have both a love ofmath/physics as well as earthsciences and who want to pursueboth in their career. In my view it canbe one of the most rewarding careers,from a professional and economicaspect, on the planet. And you get achance to participate in the CSEG!

S: One last question. Did I miss out onany aspect of your professional lifethat you expected me ask a questionabout and I didnt?

T: Not that I can think of.

S: Tooney, thank you very much forgiving this opportunity of sittingdown with you and chatting.

T: It has been a pleasure. R


3 Ways To Advance Register:1. Online: http://meeting.seg.org/register/

2. Fax: +1-918-497-5565 or +1-918-497-5557

3. Mail: SEG/Las Vegas 2012 Registration P.O. Box 702740, Tulsa, OK 74170-2740

Housing Reservations can be made by visiting:http://meeting.seg.org/housing

www.seg.org/amregister

2:02 PM


Coo

rdin

ated

by

John

Fer

nand

o / C

arm

en S

wal

wel

lFO

CUS

ARTI

CLE Special Section: Seismic Acquisition

An introduction to this specialsection: Seismic acquisitionR. Malcolm LansleySercel, Houston, TX, USA

This section on seismic acquisition is based on the papers thatwere presented under the Data Acquisition Session at theCSEG GeoConvention 2012: Vision in May, 2012. Of the fivepapers that were presented, the authors of three agreed topublish their material in a more complete format in TheRECORDER. Unlike many special sections we do not havea particular theme on which the authors were requested towrite, such as land acquisition, marine acquisition or simul-taneous sources, etc., and therefore we have quite a diverserange of subjects.

In recent years in the geophysical industry we have seen aconsiderable increase in interest in the acquisition and use offrequencies that are lower than what has typically beenrecorded over the last several decades. Some of this interesthas been a result of an increase in exploration for and devel-opment of reservoirs below salt or basalt. The other primaryreason for the interest has been for seismic inversion where,if the low frequency content of the velocity model could beevaluated directly from the seismic data, the inversion resultswould be significantly better than when using velocitiesinterpolated from wells. Although much of the publishedwork has been in offshore environments such as the Gulf ofMexico and offshore Brasil, there has also been an interest forland acquisition.

The first paper The Hussar low-frequency experiment(Margrave, et al) gives a preliminary report on an interestingonshore field test to evaluate the low-frequency signalcontent that can be generated by both vibroseis and explo-sives. Different vibroseis types are compared as well as theuse of specially designed non-linear sweeps that were specif-ically targeted to enhance the low frequencies. The test alsocompares the use of different types of recording sensor(MEMS digital sensors, together with different types ofgeophones with differing resonant frequencies.) Although, asstated, this is a preliminary report some conclusions canalready be deduced and I am looking forward to seeingfuture publications on the subsequent data processing andanalysis of the data and the final conclusions.

In the pursuit of low frequencies in the offshore environmentthere have been a number of recent developments. The majorissue that affects the frequency bandwidth that can berecorded in marine acquisition is the ghosting effect thatimpacts both the downgoing energy from the source array(s)and that which arrives back at the streamers. The ghost reflec-tions attenuate the low frequencies in addition to the high

frequencies and result in severely diminished bandwidth.These innovations have included the use of motion sensors inthe streamers, such as geophones in PGSs Geostreamer thatmeasure the vertical motion component of the wavefield andWesternGecos IsoMetrix system that utilizes 3C MEMSsensors to measure and record the vertical and crosslineacceleration. On the source side there have also been anumber of improvements in source deployment technologyto improve the frequency bandwidth.

Sablon et al, in their paper Broadseis: Enhancing interpreta-tion and inversion with broadband marine seismic, give avery brief overview of the Broadseis system, while most of thepaper discusses the benefits that can be seen after the dataacquisition has been completed. CGGVeritass Broadseismethod uses an innovative variable depth streamer deploy-ment to provide ghost notch diversity in the spectralcontent of the data. This technology, combined with veryspecifically matched data processing algorithms result ingreatly enhanced bandwidth at both the low and highfrequency ends of the spectrum. This bandwidth expansionresults in benefits that can be realized in various stages of dataprocessing, seismic inversion and the final interpretation.

In the last decade the industry has seen the introduction ofmore than a dozen different cable-less systems, and therehave been many papers on the relative benefits of cabled vs.cable-less recording systems presented at numerous work-shops and conventions. Most of these papers have beenrelated to the differences in operational methodologies,power consumption of the electronics and battery mainte-nance, HSE with regards to the weight of cables and batteries,and whether we need to have good QC of the data quality inreal time during the data acquisition or whether we can rele-gate this until acquisition is complete.

Keith Millis and Andrea Crook in their paper The Benefits ofReceiver Infill Stations, A Technical Case Study look at thecabled vs. cable-free question from a different perspective.They show the benefits of a cable-free acquisition systemfrom the geophysical standpoint with their educationalanalysis of cmp fold, offset and azimuth distributions fordifferent layout geometries.

As Special Coordinator for this special section I would like tothank all of the authors for their contributions and the timethey have spent preparing the articles. R

FOCUS ARTICLESpecial Section: Seismic Acquisition

The Hussar low-frequency experimentGary F. Margrave1, Larry Mewhort3, Tom Phillips4, Mike Hall2, Malcolm B. Bertram1, Don C. Lawton1, Kris Innanen1, Kevin W. Hall1, and Kevin Bertram11CREWES/University of Calgary; 2Geokinetics; 3Husky Energy; 4INOVA; Calgary, Alberta, Canada

Summary

In early September of 2011, CREWES (Consortium forResearch in Elastic-Wave Exploration Seismology) collabo-rated with Husky Energy, Geokinetics, and INOVA, toconduct a seismic experiment designed to study the initiationand recording of very low frequency seismic reflections. Themotivation was to collect a dataset that will be useful to testinversion methods. The site chosen was a 4.5km line, nearHussar, Alberta, that passes through 3 wells owned by Huskyand near two others, all with good logging suites. Both dyna-mite and Vibroseis sources were tested along with 5 differentreceiver types. A specially modified low-frequency vibrator,the INOVA AHV-IV (model 364), was brought to the experi-ment by INOVA and a more conventional Failing (Y2400) wasrented. Both vibrators were programmed with speciallydesigned low-dwell sweeps which spend extra time in thelow -frequency range. The receiver used were Vectorseis 3C(MEMS) accelerometers, 10Hz SM-7 (ION-Sensor) 3Cgeophones, 4.5Hz Sunfull 1C geophones, 10 Hz SM-24 high-sensitivity geophones, and Nanometrics Trillium seismome-ters. The first 3 types were planted densely along the entireline while the last two were only available in limited quanti-ties. A total of 12 P-P and 8 P-S lines were recorded and arepresently being processed. Spectral analysis of raw records

shows that in large part the various instruments performedas expected. There was significant low frequency energyexcited by all four sources with dynamite being the strongest,followed by the INOVA 364 low-dwell, the Failing low-dwell,and the INOVA 364 linear, in order of the strength of lowfrequency energy. The Vectorseis receivers seem to recordstrongly down below 1 Hz; however the response is higherthan the corresponding geophones. The 10 Hz SM-7 and 4.5Hz geophones performed well down to their resonantfrequencies. After application of the inverse filters for theirinstrument response, it appears that signal was recovereddown to perhaps 1.5 Hz. We qualify these remarks with acautionary note as these measurements are based on raw datanot final processed images.

Introduction

In early September of 2011, CREWES (Consortium forResearch in Elastic-Wave Exploration Seismology, a researchproject at the University of Calgary) collaborated with HuskyEnergy, Geokinetics, and INOVA to conduct a unique seismicexperiment near Hussar Alberta. The goal of this experimentwas to use modern source and receiver instrumentation toextend the seismic bandwidth as far into the low-frequencyrange as possible without sacrificing the higher frequencies.

A major driver for this research isthe understanding that seismicinversion methods, both post-stack impedance inversion andfull-waveform inversion, requirelow-frequency information aboutthe desired earth model. It hasbeen common practice for manyyears to supply this low-frequency information from welllogs in the course of impedanceinversion. While this has been areasonable solution, well logs areusually only available at a fewlocations while seismic data isdensely sampled spatially. If itwere possible to get this informa-tion from seismic data, thatwould ultimately be preferable.

Most modern land seismic dataare recorded with either 10 Hzgeophones or MEMs accelerome-ters, with the former being themost common. The 10 Hzgeophone performs very well inthe band 10-250 Hz but below the10Hz resonance, amplitude



Coordinated by M

alcolm Lansley / John Fernando / C

armen Sw

alwell

Figure 1. Location map showing the 4.5 km seismic line in relation to the village of Hussar and the city of Calgary. 2012 Cnes/Spot Image, Image 2012 DigitalGlobe, Image GeoEye, 2012 Google, 2010 Canada-Maps.org.(Google, 2012a; Canada-maps, 2012).


Focus Article Contd


The Hussar low-frequency experimentContinued from Page 25

attenuates and phase rotations occur. This circumstance has beenacceptable for many years and seismic signal bandwidths in finalimages, obtained on land, typically begin near 10 Hz. Now, withgrowing emphasis being placed on accurate inversion for rockproperties, the 10 Hz low-end is becoming increasingly unsatis-factory. In truth, a 10 Hz geophone records data well below 10Hz but its recovery requires applying an inverse filter for thegeophone response (Bertram et al, 2011). From these observa-tions a number of questions arise such as

How low can 10 Hz geophone data be pushed?

How low can MEMs accelerometer data be pushed?

What are the issues related to geophones with lower reso-nance frequencies?

What are the best seismic sources to generate low frequen-cies?

How low must the bandwidth be pushed to see a significantbenefit in inversion?

Can low-frequency surface waves and reflection informa-tion be reliably separated?

Can the lowest frequencies be recorded with sparser spatialsampling than the conventional band? If so, how should the tworecordings be merged?

We report here on the description and conduct of the Hussarexperiment and present a few initial results from data analysis ofthe raw records. The answers to the above questions will requiremuch more time and space than that available here. Elements ofthis work also appear in Archer et al. (2012).

Description of the experiment

This experiment was designed by researchers at CREWES inconsultation with geophysicists at Husky Energy, Geokinetics,and INOVA. A site near Hussar, Alberta (Figure 1) was chosenprimarily because of easy access from Calgary and excellentnearby well control (Figure 2).

Husky Energy managed all aspects of the survey including landaccess and subcontracting. INOVA mobilized one of their model364 low-frequency vibrators from Houston just for this experi-ment. This vibrator has a specially designed and strengthenedbaseplate and other enhancements designed specifically toimprove its low-frequency performance. Geokinetics supplied aprofessional seismic crew, recorder, and sufficient Vectorseis 3CMEMs accelerometers for the experiment.

The line location (Figure 2) directly ties 3 wells (12-17, 14-27, and14-35) while two more are nearby. All wells have p-wave sonics,density, and gamma ray logs while 12-27 has an s-wave sonic.The logs in 12-27 extend from 200m to 1600m depth. Initially theline was designed to be 6 km long to extend 1.5 km SW past well12-27 (to the bottom left of Figure 2). However, we were unableto get land access and the line had to be terminated as shownwith a final length of 4.5 km. Topographic variation along theline is significant (about 70m) but caused no major difficulties.

Figure 2. The 4.5 km Hussar seismic line is shown together with the locations of 5wells with good logging suites, shotpoint locations, and the location of the recorders. 2012 Cnes/Spot Image, 2012 Google (Google, 2012b).

Figure 3. The elevation profile along the Hussar line shows about 84m of topo-graphic variation over the 4.5km line length. The locations of the three wells that tiethe line are also shown. Compare with Figure 2.

Figure 4. The four receiver lines and the source point locations are indicated fora representative section of the Hussar line. Receiver lines 1, 2, and 3 were fullypopulated for the entire 4.5 km line. Receiver line 4 was limited as only 50 high-sensitivity geophones were available and only 15 seismometers.


Focus Article Contd


Receiver layout

A wide variety of receivers was used and deployed in four sepa-rate lines, one meter apart as shown in Figure 4. The source loca-tions are also indicated. The receiver spacing on lines 1 and 2 was10 m while on line 3 it was 20 m. Line 1 was populated with 3CVectorseis MEMs devices, line 2 had 3C 10Hz geophones, andline 3 had 1C 4.5 Hz geophones. All three lines were fully popu-lated with receivers. Line 4 had a mixture of devices mostnotably 15 broadband Trillium seismometers deployed at 200 mintervals and 50 (ION-Sensor) high-sensitivity 1C geophonesdeployed at 20 m intervals around well 12-27.

While it would have been nice to have some 2 Hz geophones orperhaps 3C 4.5 Hz geophones, it proved impossible to obtainthese in the available time frame. We are confident that theassortment of receivers used should allow us to push the band-width to the 1-2 Hz range. The seismometers should allow us toestablish the actual signal at low frequencies for comparisonwith the other receivers.

Recording systems

Two different recording systems were used. ARAM/Ariesrecorded the 10 Hz and 4.5 Hz geophones and ION/Scorpionrecorded the Vectorseis units. Both systems have built-in low-cutfilters that were explicitly turned off for this experiment. At this

time, there is some residual doubt aboutwhether or not the ION/Scorpion low-cut filter was truly off but we can see noevidence of it in the spectra. TheARAM/Aries filter was definitely off.

Source effort

The source locations were all occupied 4times so effectively there were 4 sourcelines and all the receivers were live foreach shot. It is not clear from the outsetwhat source configuration or type willprove most effective at low frequenciesso we simply made some informedguesses.

Dynamite was the first and obviouschoice and a blast is expected to approx-imate an impulse and hence radiatesignificant power at all frequencies. Acommon rule of thumb is that the largerthe charge the lower the frequency.However, avoiding blow-outs requireslarger charges to be buried at greaterdepths and this tends to move the ghostnotch into the signal band. Previously atBlackfoot field in 1995, where thegeology is very similar to Hussar, a 6kgcharge placed at 18m depth was used(Gallant et al., 1995). Alternatively,current lines shot in the Hussar area byHusky tend to use a charge of 2kg at15m. We decided to go with currentpractice and chose 2kg at 15m. Our deci-

sion was shaped by both economic concerns (e.g. the cost ofdynamite and shot-hole drilling) and by the understanding that2kg has produced sufficient bandwidth for exploration purposesin this area.

Vibroseis used at low frequencies is much more problematic thandynamite, but also potentially much more deterministic andcontrollable. The key limiting factors at low frequencies are thereaction mass stroke and the peak de-coupling force with theformer being dominant at the lowest frequencies (Wei andPhillips, 2011). An additional limit of many vibrators is imposedby the total pump capacity and flow limitations of the servovalve and actuator combination (Lansley, 2012). Due primarily tothe physical limits on reaction mass stroke, there is a12db/octave ground force roll-off at low frequencies (Maxwell etal, 2010; Wei et al., 2010). As an additional concern is the fact thatthe far-field particle velocity is equal to the time-derivative of theground force, causing an additional 6 db/octave loss (e.g Baetenet al, 2010). At CREWES, we have experience with ourEnvirovibe running at frequencies near 5 Hz and below (see Hallet al., 2010) and found that, even at greatly reduced power, thevibrator performs poorly. For example, a 5 Hz monochromaticsweep actually was found to radiate at many other frequencieswith a dominant power near 15 Hz.

With these difficulties in mind, we approached INOVA with arequest to support our experiment by allowing us to use their

Figure 5. a) The 62,000 lb INOVA 364 low-frequency vibrator in action at Hussar. b) A close-up of the specially stiff-ened baseplate.

Figure 6. a) The 47,000lb Failing Y-2400 production vibrator. b) A close-up of the baseplate assembly.

The Hussar low-frequency experimentContinued from Page 26


A Record 184 Members Volunteerfor Outreach!

The CSEG Foundation announces a record number of volunteers 184 CSEG members are dedicating their time and efforts inservice to CSEG Foundation Outreach. Activities supporting CSEG students and regular members across Canada, andpromoting the science of geophysics and the CSEG to schools and the public have reached an all-time high. According toCSEG Foundation director Annette Milbradt, the dedication and efforts of our volunteers is absolutely amazing! We are so lucky tohave such an energetic and enthusiastic group.

newly designed AHV-IV Commander (with a PLS-364) actuatorlow-frequency vibrator (described in Wei and Phillips, 2011).This vehicle (Figure 5) was specially built to radiate cleanly (i.e.with minimal distortion) at low frequencies. One of the impor-tant modifications is a specially stiffened baseplate (Figure 5b).INOVA generously agreed to help and mobilized an AHV-IVCommander (which we will hereafter refer to as the INOVA 364),with a 62,000 lb hold-down weight, directly from Houstonspecifically for our experiment.

As a comparison vehicle, we also arranged, through partnerHusky Energy, for a standard production vibrator, which was a47,000 lb Failing (model Y-2400) vibrator (Figure 6).

Sweep design becomes increasingly important at lower frequenciesbecause the total sweep power must be reduced to avoid destruc-tively large displacements of the reaction mass. We were aided inthis by Tom Phillips of INOVA (Houston) who was present for theexperiment and designed custom low-dwell sweeps for eachvibrator. Figure 7 shows the low-dwell sweep used on the INOVA364. In panel a) the sweep in the time domain can be seen to moveslowly through the low frequencies at reduced power for the first10 seconds, where normal linear sweeping begins at about 8 Hz.The reduced power is precisely compensated by the extendedsweep time so that the Fourier amplitude spectrum (Figure 7b) ofthe sweep is essentially flat from 1 to 100 Hz. The Gabor spectrumof the sweep (Figure 7c) gives the complete story, showing a slow,linear trend from 1 to 7 Hz linked to a fast linear trend from 9 to 100Hz. The sweep is designed to keep the INOVA 364 comfortablywithin its performance limits.

Source Interval Parameters

Dynamite 20m 2kg at 15m in a single hole

INOVA 364 20m 1-100Hz low-dwell sweep (Figure 7)

INOVA 364 20m 1-100Hz linear sweep (Figure 9)

Failing 20m 1-100Hz low-dwell sweep (Figure 8)

Dynamite 3 locations Test holes: 4kg @ 18m, 2kg @ 18m, 2kg @ 12m

Table 1: Summary of source effort at Hussar.

A similar low-dwell sweep was designed for the Failing Vibratorand is shown in Figure 8. The sweep shows a much longer low-dwell and a corresponding reduction in the time spent in the 8-100 Hz range. For comparison, a standard linear sweep from 1 to100Hz is shown in Figure 9. This sweep was also run on theINOVA 364. Figure 10 shows a true relative amplitude compar-ison of the three sweeps in the Fourier domain. It is apparent thatthe linear sweep shows greater overall power, a consequence ofthe fact that it spend more time over the conventional frequencyrange of 10-100 Hz. Also, all three sweeps had the same secondstart and end tapers. The effects of these tapers are present in allof the spectral plots.

Table 1 shows a summary of the source effort. In addition to thesources discussed, there were also additional dynamite test holesat 3 locations along the line. Similarly, on the receiver side, receiverline 4 contains isolated special purpose instruments that are not


Focus Article Contd


The Hussar low-frequency experimen

Date post:	22-Nov-2015
Category:	Documents
Upload:	dody-pratama-ginting
View:	37 times
Download:	2 times

Recorder-2012-09

Documents