Comparison of surface seismic sources at the CO2 SINK site, Ketzin, Germany
In 2004 three seismic surface sources (VIBSIST, accelerated weight drop and MiniVib) were tested in a pilot study at the Ketzin test site, Germany, a study site for geological storage of CO2 (EU project CO2 SINK). The main objectives of this pilot study were to 1) evaluate the response of the Ketzin...
| Main Authors: | , , , , |
|---|---|
| Format: | Journal Article |
| Published: |
Wiley-Blackwell
2009
|
| Online Access: | http://hdl.handle.net/20.500.11937/33541 |
| _version_ | 1848753975292067840 |
|---|---|
| author | Yordkayhun, S. Ivanova, A. Giese, R. Juhlin, Christopher Cosma, C. |
| author_facet | Yordkayhun, S. Ivanova, A. Giese, R. Juhlin, Christopher Cosma, C. |
| author_sort | Yordkayhun, S. |
| building | Curtin Institutional Repository |
| collection | Online Access |
| description | In 2004 three seismic surface sources (VIBSIST, accelerated weight drop and MiniVib) were tested in a pilot study at the Ketzin test site, Germany, a study site for geological storage of CO2 (EU project CO2 SINK). The main objectives of this pilot study were to 1) evaluate the response of the Ketzin site to reflection seismics, especially at the planned injection depth, 2) test different acquisition parameters and 3) use the results to guide the planning of the 3D survey. As part of these objectives, we emphasize the source performance comparison in this study. The sources were tested along two perpendicular lines of 2.4 km length each. Data were acquired by shooting at all stations (source and receiver spacing of 20 m) on both lines, allowing common-midpoint stacked sections to be produced. The sources' signal characteristics based on signal-to-noise ratio, signal penetration and frequency content of raw shot records were analysed and stacked sections were compared. The results show that all three surface sources are suitable for reflection seismic studies down to a depth of about 1 km and provide enough bandwidth for resolving the geological targets at the site, i.e., the Weser and Stuttgart Formations. Near surface conditions, especially a thick weathering layer present in this particular area, strongly influence the data quality, as indicated by the difference in reflectivity and signal-to-noise ratio of the two common-midpoint lines. The stacked sections of the MiniVib source show the highest frequency signals down to about 500 ms traveltime (approximately 500 m depth) but also the shallowest signal penetration depth. The VIBSIST source generates signals with the highest signal-to-noise ratio and greatest signal penetration depth of the tested sources. In particular, reflections below 900 ms (approximately 1 km depth) are best imaged by the VIBSIST source. The weight drop performance lies in between these two sources and might be recommended as an appropriate source for a 3D survey at this site because of the shorter production time compared to the VIBSIST and MiniVib sources. © 2009 European Association of Geoscientists & Engineers. |
| first_indexed | 2025-11-14T08:33:03Z |
| format | Journal Article |
| id | curtin-20.500.11937-33541 |
| institution | Curtin University Malaysia |
| institution_category | Local University |
| last_indexed | 2025-11-14T08:33:03Z |
| publishDate | 2009 |
| publisher | Wiley-Blackwell |
| recordtype | eprints |
| repository_type | Digital Repository |
| spelling | curtin-20.500.11937-335412023-08-02T06:39:08Z Comparison of surface seismic sources at the CO2 SINK site, Ketzin, Germany Yordkayhun, S. Ivanova, A. Giese, R. Juhlin, Christopher Cosma, C. In 2004 three seismic surface sources (VIBSIST, accelerated weight drop and MiniVib) were tested in a pilot study at the Ketzin test site, Germany, a study site for geological storage of CO2 (EU project CO2 SINK). The main objectives of this pilot study were to 1) evaluate the response of the Ketzin site to reflection seismics, especially at the planned injection depth, 2) test different acquisition parameters and 3) use the results to guide the planning of the 3D survey. As part of these objectives, we emphasize the source performance comparison in this study. The sources were tested along two perpendicular lines of 2.4 km length each. Data were acquired by shooting at all stations (source and receiver spacing of 20 m) on both lines, allowing common-midpoint stacked sections to be produced. The sources' signal characteristics based on signal-to-noise ratio, signal penetration and frequency content of raw shot records were analysed and stacked sections were compared. The results show that all three surface sources are suitable for reflection seismic studies down to a depth of about 1 km and provide enough bandwidth for resolving the geological targets at the site, i.e., the Weser and Stuttgart Formations. Near surface conditions, especially a thick weathering layer present in this particular area, strongly influence the data quality, as indicated by the difference in reflectivity and signal-to-noise ratio of the two common-midpoint lines. The stacked sections of the MiniVib source show the highest frequency signals down to about 500 ms traveltime (approximately 500 m depth) but also the shallowest signal penetration depth. The VIBSIST source generates signals with the highest signal-to-noise ratio and greatest signal penetration depth of the tested sources. In particular, reflections below 900 ms (approximately 1 km depth) are best imaged by the VIBSIST source. The weight drop performance lies in between these two sources and might be recommended as an appropriate source for a 3D survey at this site because of the shorter production time compared to the VIBSIST and MiniVib sources. © 2009 European Association of Geoscientists & Engineers. 2009 Journal Article http://hdl.handle.net/20.500.11937/33541 10.1111/j.1365-2478.2008.00737.x Wiley-Blackwell restricted |
| spellingShingle | Yordkayhun, S. Ivanova, A. Giese, R. Juhlin, Christopher Cosma, C. Comparison of surface seismic sources at the CO2 SINK site, Ketzin, Germany |
| title | Comparison of surface seismic sources at the CO2 SINK site, Ketzin, Germany |
| title_full | Comparison of surface seismic sources at the CO2 SINK site, Ketzin, Germany |
| title_fullStr | Comparison of surface seismic sources at the CO2 SINK site, Ketzin, Germany |
| title_full_unstemmed | Comparison of surface seismic sources at the CO2 SINK site, Ketzin, Germany |
| title_short | Comparison of surface seismic sources at the CO2 SINK site, Ketzin, Germany |
| title_sort | comparison of surface seismic sources at the co2 sink site, ketzin, germany |
| url | http://hdl.handle.net/20.500.11937/33541 |