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 Google Scholar Articles by Zeng, H. GeoRef GeoRef Citation

How thin is a thin bed? An alternative perspective

Bureau of Economic Geology

Corresponding author: hongliu.zeng{at}beg.utexas.edu

Abstract

The resolution limit of seismic data is a complex issue that involves not only wavelet frequency, phase characters, and data quality (S/N), but also criteria on how to measure resolvability. In his classic 1973 paper "How thin is a thin bed?," Widess discussed the effect of bed thickness on re-flection character and timing using a symmetrical wavelet and suggested that /8 be the resolution limit, or the minimum distance at which a composite waveform stabilized as the derivative of the waveform from an individual reflection. However, this definition has more theoretical than practical impact because of the difficulties in judging waveform stabilization. A more workable and widely accepted definition of resolution limit corresponds to Rayleigh's criterion of peak-to-trough separation at /4 (Kallweit and Wood, 1982). This point is also a "tuning point," at which composite amplitude reaches a maximum if an opposite-polarity (at top and bottom) thin bed is involved.