Quick Search:    advanced search

GSW Home   GeoRef Home   My GSW Alerts   Contact GSW   About GSW   Journals List   Help

This Article Figures Only Full Text Full Text (PDF) Submit a response Alert me when this article is cited Alert me when eLetters are posted Alert me if a correction is posted Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Alert me to new issues of the journal Download to citation manager Citing Articles Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Taner, M. T. Articles by Kelamis, P. G. Search for Related Content GeoRef GeoRef Citation

The dynamics of statics

Rock Solid Images, Houston, USA

A. J. Berkhout

Technical University of Delft, The Netherlands

Sven Treitel

TriDekon, Tulsa, Oklahoma, USA

Panos G. Kelamis

Saudi Aramco, Dhahran, Saudi Arabia

Corresponding author: Sven Treitel, streitel{at}tridekon.net

Abstract

The statics problem, whether short wavelength, long wavelength, residual, or trim, has always been one of the more time-consuming and problematic steps in seismic data processing. We routinely struggle with issues such as poor signal-to-noise (S/N) ratio, cycle skipping, truncated refractors, wavelets with ambiguous first arrival times, etc. Elevation variations create their own problems and impact the choice of datum—floating, phantom or recourse to a zero-velocity layer. Even if we can overcome some of these problems, we still have a "catch 22" situation in which accurate velocity estimation requires good statics, while good statics estimation requires accurate velocities. To characterize these ambiguities, we have come up the oxymoron "time-varying statics."