WO2015181626A1 - Système et procédé pour optimiser dynamiquement des opérations sismiques à cuves multiples - Google Patents

Système et procédé pour optimiser dynamiquement des opérations sismiques à cuves multiples Download PDF

Info

Publication number
WO2015181626A1
WO2015181626A1 PCT/IB2015/001190 IB2015001190W WO2015181626A1 WO 2015181626 A1 WO2015181626 A1 WO 2015181626A1 IB 2015001190 W IB2015001190 W IB 2015001190W WO 2015181626 A1 WO2015181626 A1 WO 2015181626A1
Authority
WO
WIPO (PCT)
Prior art keywords
survey
data acquisition
acquisition systems
plans
survey plans
Prior art date
Application number
PCT/IB2015/001190
Other languages
English (en)
Inventor
Thomas Elboth
Leif Morten BY
Inger VIKAN
Original Assignee
Cgg Services Sa
Priority date (The priority date is an assumption and is not a legal conclusion. Google has not performed a legal analysis and makes no representation as to the accuracy of the date listed.)
Filing date
Publication date
Application filed by Cgg Services Sa filed Critical Cgg Services Sa
Publication of WO2015181626A1 publication Critical patent/WO2015181626A1/fr

Links

Classifications

    • G—PHYSICS
    • G01—MEASURING; TESTING
    • G01V—GEOPHYSICS; GRAVITATIONAL MEASUREMENTS; DETECTING MASSES OR OBJECTS; TAGS
    • G01V1/00—Seismology; Seismic or acoustic prospecting or detecting
    • G01V1/38—Seismology; Seismic or acoustic prospecting or detecting specially adapted for water-covered areas
    • G01V1/3808—Seismic data acquisition, e.g. survey design
    • G—PHYSICS
    • G05—CONTROLLING; REGULATING
    • G05D—SYSTEMS FOR CONTROLLING OR REGULATING NON-ELECTRIC VARIABLES
    • G05D1/00—Control of position, course, altitude or attitude of land, water, air or space vehicles, e.g. using automatic pilots
    • G05D1/02—Control of position or course in two dimensions
    • G05D1/0206—Control of position or course in two dimensions specially adapted to water vehicles
    • G—PHYSICS
    • G01—MEASURING; TESTING
    • G01V—GEOPHYSICS; GRAVITATIONAL MEASUREMENTS; DETECTING MASSES OR OBJECTS; TAGS
    • G01V2210/00—Details of seismic processing or analysis
    • G01V2210/30—Noise handling
    • G01V2210/32—Noise reduction

Definitions

  • Embodiments of the subject matter disclosed herein generally relate to methods and systems for seismic data acquisition and, more particularly, to adjusting survey plans for a multi-vessel seismic survey to optimize dynamically operations by avoiding seismic interference and minimizing time loss.
  • Seismic surveys used in exploration, field development, and/or production monitoring are employed to identify or to monitor hydrocarbon deposits under the seafloor. Reflections of energy waves from the geological structures under the seafloor carry information about the location and/or nature of features causing reflections. Time intervals from energy's emission until reflections are detected, and characteristics of the reflections, are recorded as seismic data. Seismic data
  • processing techniques may be used to generate images of the geological structures.
  • FIG. 1 illustrates a marine data acquisition system.
  • a vessel 102 tows a source 104 and streamers 106 along a sail line S. While acquiring seismic data, the source and the streamers are towed at various depths (or streamers may have a variable depth profile) and at a speed of about 5 knots. Cables 108 known as "lead-ins" connect the streamers to the vessel.
  • Seismic sensors 1 10 (only some labeled), which are distributed along the streamers, detect reflections of the energy emitted by seismic source 104 (i.e., a pressure source including air guns, vibrators, etc.).
  • Streamers 106 are typically several kilometers long and carry hundreds of seismic sensors.
  • Streamers may also be equipped with compasses, acoustic pingers (e.g., 1 12), depth sensors and other auxiliary units that provide location information about heading, position and depth. Additionally, each streamer is typically equipped with position control units 1 14 (known as "birds") which are configured to adjust the lateral position and depth of the streamers.
  • position control units 1 14 known as "birds"
  • a survey plan is a sequence of sail lines (simply called "lines"
  • a survey plan including plural lines L1 -L6 is illustrated in Figure 2.
  • the seismic source towed by the vessel following the trajectory (L1 , turn, L2, turn, etc.) illustrated in Figure 2 is activated within the surveyed area 200, for example, between a start 210 of line L1 and an end 215 of line L1.
  • the towing vessel turns after the end of the line to enter another line (e.g., L2). For example, for a vessel towing a streamer about 8 km long, a turn is a semi-circle with about a 4 km radius.
  • a data acquisition system includes at least one vessel.
  • the data acquisition may include more vessels, for example, if the data acquisition system is configured to acquire wide-azimuth seismic data.
  • a data acquisition system is assumed to include a single vessel towing both a seismic source and streamers as in Figure 1 .
  • Seismic interference noise is a type of noise that occurs when independently operating data acquisition systems emit energy and record reflections thereof while being too close to one another. Due to their proximity, energy emitted by a source of one data acquisition system is unintentionally detected by sensors on a streamer of another data acquisition system. Seismic interference is mostly due to the energy that propagates directly through the water-column (i.e., not emerging from the geological formation under the seafloor). The corrupting energy's amplitude mainly depends on the amount of energy emitted by the noise-causing source and the distance between this source and the other data acquisition systems' sensors. However, the water depth, the sea-surface and sea-bottom reflection coefficients may also be significant.
  • Time-sharing means operating the data acquisition systems such that only one system is active at any given time. Time-sharing is of course inefficient and costly, and therefore operators try to avoid it.
  • the data acquisition systems are often operated in time-sharing mode when they are at distances less than 100 km from one another. As a rough guideline, seismic interference noise becomes a problem when vessels are closer than 40 km, which is often the case in busy summer seasons in places such as offshore Northern Europe and in the Gulf of Mexico.
  • methods and controllers enable exchanging survey plans periodically or whenever they are significantly altered. Up-to-date knowledge of the survey plans makes it possible to check whether a spatial constraint (such as exceeding a minimum distance and or direction between survey vessels) is met throughout a forthcoming period. If the spatial constraint is not met throughout the forthcoming period, the survey plans are adjusted.
  • a spatial constraint such as exceeding a minimum distance and or direction between survey vessels
  • the method includes gathering current information on survey plans of data acquisition systems, at predetermined time intervals and/or when a survey plan alteration occurs.
  • the method further includes checking whether, according to the survey plans, an applied spatial constraint is met throughout a foreseeable future period.
  • a controller for optimizing dynamically multi-vessel seismic operations having a communication interface and a processing unit.
  • the communication interface is configured to receive information on survey plans at predetermined time intervals and/or when one of the survey plans is altered.
  • the processing unit is connected to the communication interface and is configured to check whether an applied spatial constraint is met according to the survey plans, during a foreseeable future period, and to adjust the survey plans if checking reveals a conflict caused by the applied spatial constraint not being met throughout the foreseeable future period.
  • a computer-readable recording medium non-transitorily storing executable codes which, when executed by a computer, make the computer perform a method for optimizing dynamically multi-vessel seismic operations.
  • the method includes gathering current information on survey plans of data acquisition systems, at predetermined time intervals and/or when a survey plan alteration occurs.
  • the method further includes checking whether, according to the survey plans, an applied spatial constraint is met throughout a foreseeable future period.
  • Figure 1 illustrates a marine seismic data acquisition system
  • Figure 2 illustrates a survey plan
  • Figure 3 illustrates a survey area
  • Figure 4 is a diagram of a process according to an embodiment
  • Figure 5 is a diagram of a process according to another embodiment
  • Figure 6 is a flowchart of a method according to an embodiment.
  • Figure 7 is a schematic diagram of a controller according to an
  • methods and controllers are configured to dynamically optimize multi-vessel seismic operations. That is, the embodiments check whether contemporaneous survey plans of data acquisition systems meet a spatial constraint during a forthcoming period.
  • the spatial constraint may be a predetermined spatial constraint or an updated version of the predetermined spatial constraint.
  • applied spatial constraint which is used from now on, covers both cases. For example, if online processing of seismic data yields a good separation of the seismic-reflection signal from seismic interference noise, the predetermined spatial constraint may be relaxed. Conversely, if online processing of seismic data shows an unsatisfactory separation of the signal from seismic interference noise, the predetermined spatial constraint may be strengthened.
  • the predetermined constraint may be updated depending on factors like azimuth towards interfering source, relative speed and heading of the data acquisition systems, marine currents, etc.
  • the survey plans are adjusted to avoid this conflict.
  • the embodiments allow two or more data acquisition systems to operate independently and simultaneously in the same survey area (e.g., while less than 100 km from one another) without significantly compromising the quality of the acquired data (with the adjusted plans being designed to limit seismic interference, SI) and minimize time loss.
  • Figure 3 illustrates two adjacent rectangular survey areas 310 and 320 covering approximately 4,600 km 2 . If two data acquisition systems operate independently and simultanoiusly in these adjacent areas, a distance of at least 40 km has to be maintained there-between to avoid unacceptable SI. Although maintaining this distance may be one prong of the applied spatial constraint, the applied spatial constraint may consist of multiple prongs and embedded conditions. For example, another prong may be: if the two data acquisition systems sail along parallel lines, they should have different speeds or opposite headings. This latest prong may be added because, if the active data acquisition systems travel at the same speed, seismic interference noise arrives at the same time from shot to shot, making it difficult to attenuate seismic interference noise during seismic data processing.
  • a data acquisition system includes at least one vessel, one source and streamers.
  • data acquisition systems may have multiple vessels, multiple sources and/or multiple streamer spreads and may sail in parallel according to essentially same basic survey plan.
  • the physical distances relevant for seismic interference are the shortest distances between a source of one data acquisition system and sensors of another data acquisition system. These distances (which may be slightly different depending on which of the two data acquisitions the source and the sensor pertain to) are referred to as "the distance or separation between vessels" in the following description, for the sake of simplicity.
  • This terminology obscures the actual complexity of the data acquisition systems behind a model of data acquisition systems towed and represented by a single vessel. However, this simplified description does not preclude or disclaim complex data acquisition systems (i.e., multi-vessel, multi-source and/or multi-streamer spreads).
  • complex data acquisition systems i.e., multi-vessel, multi-source and/or multi-streamer spreads.
  • optimal dynamically multi-vessel operations means optimizing data acquisition resources' usage (e.g., minimizing delays), while maintaining quality of the acquired seismic data by limiting seismic interference noise.
  • the seismic interference noise may be limited by observing a certain distance between data acquisition systems collecting seismic data.
  • two data acquisition system survey areas 310 and 320 respectively, while moving along east-to-west and west-to-east lines with a speed of about 5 knots. Sailing a line in area 310 (i.e., about 100 km) takes about 1 1 hours and sailing a line in area 320 (i.e., 40 km) takes about 4.5 hours. During a line- change (i.e., turn), which may take around 3 hours, the data acquisition systems do not emit energy waves and do not acquire data. Therefore, while one of the systems executes a turn, the distance between the systems may become less then 40 km without a negative impact.
  • the shapes and dimensions of areas 310 and 320 are merely exemplary and are not intended to be limiting.
  • the initial survey plans may be designed to meet the applied spatial constraint (e.g., maintain minimum vessel separation while the systems acquire data).
  • the applied spatial constraint e.g., maintain minimum vessel separation while the systems acquire data.
  • Conventional tools are not able to deal efficiently with such inevitable changes.
  • Some of the improved tools according to various embodiments are flexible and able to handle various acquisition features and situations.
  • the term "tool” is used for method, controller and system embodiments in order to make the description more compact and clear by skipping repetitions of features present in more than one type of embodiments.
  • a tool gathers survey plans of independently operating data acquisition systems (two or more) in a survey area.
  • a plan may include characterization of the area intended to be surveyed (e.g., shape, dimensions and actual physical location), the sail lines and turns there-between.
  • the tool may correlate a current position of the vessel, with the survey plan.
  • later gatherings may only include contemporaneous position and status of the vessel, if the lines have not changed.
  • later updates may provide a completely new sequence of lines for the surveyed area or may signal that the data acquisition system has suspended its survey plan execution.
  • the tool may passively receive contemporaneous information related to the survey plans from the vessels. However, the tool may also (alternatively or additionally) actively inquire about the contemporaneous survey plans. Yet alternatively or additionally, the system may receive initial survey plans and be informed when significant departures from the initial plans occur, or when a data acquisition system restarts acquiring data after a planned (e.g., turn) or unplanned interruption. A combination of the above-described alternative manners of acquiring information about the survey plans may be employed.
  • the tool uses this information to identify potential conflicts between simultaneously operating data acquisition systems.
  • the tool may propose, require and/or signal the need to adjust at least one of the survey plans and/or the vessels speed. That is, the tool may illustrate the conflict, may provide a solution to the conflict, may order the change of a specific survey plan (e.g., issue a command), and/or may merely signal the spatio-temporal coordinates of the potential conflict.
  • the tool's action relative to plan adjustment to differ from one vessel to the other in an analyzed pair of vessels.
  • An analyzed pair of vessels means that data acquisition systems acquire data close enough from one another (e.g., vessels whose current distance is less than 100 km) so that seismic interference noise is a concern.
  • conflicts may be avoided if a tool generates a graphical view of the scheduled lines according to current survey plans.
  • This graphical view may also be extended to encompass planned activities of other vessels (such as tankers docking at offshore loading buoys, rig moves, installation vessels, cable-laying vessels, dredging operations, hydrographic survey vessels, etc.).
  • This tool enables an operator to identify potential conflicts during an ongoing survey.
  • Information about the planned activities e.g., a survey plan
  • Information about the planned activities can be received automatically from a navigation system onboard a vessel and/or via a Web application or other standalone software.
  • Such a tool is thus configured (1 ) to gather survey plans of data acquisition systems (i.e., vessels) operating in a survey area; (2) to check for potential conflicts (e.g., if vessels may get closer than a minimum required separation while they are active); and (3) to enable navigators to control which one(s) of the survey plans and how to adjust it/them to avoid potential conflicts.
  • data acquisition systems i.e., vessels
  • potential conflicts e.g., if vessels may get closer than a minimum required separation while they are active
  • navigators to control which one(s) of the survey plans and how to adjust it/them to avoid potential conflicts.
  • FIG. 4 is a diagram of a process according to an embodiment.
  • Vessels 410 and 420 are configured to inform all vessels in the same area (e.g., at less than 100 km from one another) when they update their survey plan(s). This information exchange may occur via a survey controller or by broadcasting the information at 430. If no potential conflict is identified at 440 and 450, respectively, the vessels 410 and 420 continue their surveys according to their most recent survey plans as suggested by boxes 460 and 470, respectively.
  • the tool may be a controller configured to perform steps 430 and at least one of steps 440 and 450 onboard one of the ships. However, the tool may also be configured to perform steps 430 and one of 440 onboard one of the vessels and step 450 onboard the other one of the vessels.
  • vessels may be assigned priorities and, the higher the priority, the longer the delay in changing the survey plan (i.e., waiting for the lower priority vessel's plan to be altered and overcome the conflict).
  • vessels may be assigned random delays before proceeding to adjust their plans, thus "breaking" the potentially destructive simultaneity of plan changes.
  • the plan exchange (i.e., 430) may occur regularly at predetermined time intervals (e.g., every hour) and may be executed via electronic data transfers.
  • information exchange/replication can take place in near real time after a survey plan alteration occurs. This information exchange may occur automatically, without human intervention. If a navigator manually alters a survey plan of a vessel (e.g., by changing the sail lines' pre-plot line(s), selected start and end time(s) or selected speed(s)), the new plan may be announced by specifying the changes. An automatic update may also occur if the vessel gets significantly ahead of or behind schedule according to the initial plan (e.g., due to variations in the speed of the vessel).
  • Satellite communication may then be used instead of radio communication.
  • information may be sent through VSAT (Very Small Aperture Terminal)/Ethernet/Web) or similar systems that already exist on nearly all vessels.
  • the survey plans may then be imported into the INS (Integrated Navigation System) used by seismic vessels.
  • the minimum amount of information that a vessel needs to provide for exchange is: identifiers of the next few lines to be sailed according to the plan, and planned start/end time of shooting for these lines.
  • identifiers of the next few lines to be sailed according to the plan and planned start/end time of shooting for these lines.
  • speed on line, in turn and other planned speeds
  • bottom speed water speed
  • vessel's current information such as a timestamp for the information, shot- point, currents, vessel's position
  • a tool may be characterized by the following features: (1 ) survey plans are regularly exchanged between vessels operating in a survey area; (2) the plans are graphically jointly displayed, and checks are performed to identify potential conflicts within a predetermined period of time; and (3) a solution is provided (i.e., which and how one of the survey plans is to be adjusted, e.g., by scheduling alternative sail lines) to avoid the conflict. These alternative lines may be chosen so that extending data acquisition time is minimized. The adjustments may be performed such that vessel(s) preferably do not have to go on standby and/or according to solutions which make the vessels to become further apart. When jointly displaying the plans, a few lines of two or more survey plans are illustrated on the same display.
  • Such images enable an operator to visually identify potential conflicts and find alternatives to avoid a potential conflict.
  • the complexity of the graphical techniques employed may vary from simply using 2D displays of the next few lines, to animations of the planned vessel motions showing evolution of vessel separation.
  • Each vessel may be displayed within an envelope, which might be circular, elliptical or have any other shape.
  • An envelope means a graphical object larger than a target (e.g., the vessel) because the envelope represents plural possible locations of the target.
  • Various types of color-coding may also be used to provide additional visual clues to an observer.
  • a tool may be characterized by the following features: (1 ) survey plans are regularly exchanged between vessels operating in a survey area, (2) potential conflicts (e.g., vessels get closer than a minimum required separation when they are shooting) are identified, and (3) based on a priority list, a lower priority vessel among the vessels involved in the potential conflict must adjust its survey plan to avoid conflict with a higher priority vessel.
  • FIG. 5 A diagram of such a process is illustrated in Figure 5.
  • Vessels 510 and 520 are at a distance less than typically around 100 km.
  • the tool starts gathering the survey plans at 530.
  • the tool then time-correlates the plans; that is, based on the vessels' current positions, the tool calculates projected positions and separation for a predetermined upcoming period of time (e.g., 48-72 hours or a few lines of vessel 510). Based on this time correlation, the tool checks whether the applied spatial condition (e.g., separation remaining larger than a predetermined threshold while the vessels actively acquire data) is met for the predetermined upcoming period of time. In other words, potential conflicts are identified.
  • Vessels 510 and 520 have Priority 1 and Priority 2, respectively.
  • Vessel 510's priority is higher than vessel 520's priority and, therefore, if a potential conflict is identified at 540, the tool prompts vessel 520 to modify its survey plan at 545. If no potential conflict is identified at 540, the vessels continue to sail according to the current survey plans as suggested by boxes 550 and 560.
  • the tool may be physically located and executed on vessel 510, vessel 520 or another ship in the area.
  • the applied spatial constraint may include not having the vessels travel on parallel lines with exactly the same speed.
  • one of the vessels might have to change its speed or shot point interval (temporal or spatial) slightly to avoid recording seismic interference noise at the same time after a shot.
  • a minimum ⁇ -range, where ⁇ is the difference in shot-point interval between the two vessels, may be
  • the minimum separation may depend on the vessels' azimuth determined by their relative positions and traveling directions.
  • Azimuth means the direction (vector) from one vessel to the other vessel.
  • Some noise removal algorithms can better remove seismic interference noise that comes from certain azimuths. Therefore, if these algorithms are used, more seismic interference noise arriving from certain azimuths may be tolerated. For example, more seismic interference noise arriving from astern may be tolerated than from the front or sides. Allowing more seismic interference noise translates into allowing the vessels to be closer. On a graphical display, this feature may be illustrated by having an envelope asymmetric relative to the vessel's location or more envelopes around a vessel.
  • the minimum separation may also depend on source volumes. A vessel with a smaller source volume may be allowed be get closer than if the source had a larger volume.
  • other activities in the survey area are taken into consideration. For example, drilling operations on a platform cause a lot of noise.
  • the distance between the vessels acquiring data is larger than when drilling stops.
  • the tool gathers not only the survey plans, but also the platform's current and planned schedule. Plural platforms or other conditions may be taken into consideration.
  • re-checking the applied spatial condition may reveal another conflict that has occurred for the vessel whose plan has been modified and another vessel.
  • the plan of the other vessel may then be modified.
  • the chain of plan changes may continue until either the spatial separation condition has been satisfied or until a predetermined number of changes have occurred.
  • the tool may generate an operator alarm, prompting the operator to propose a solution to overcome the current situation.
  • Figure 6 is a flowchart of a method 600 according to an embodiment.
  • Method 600 includes gathering current information on survey plans at predetermined time intervals or when a survey plan alteration is signaled, at 610, and checking whether the applied spatial constraint is met throughout a foreseeable future based on the survey plans, at 620. Method 600 then includes adjusting at least one of the survey plans to avoid a conflict (i.e., the applied spatial constraint is not met throughout the forthcoming period) identified during the checking, at 630.
  • Various embodiments including method 600's operations may also include one or more of the features described above using the generic term of "tool.”
  • FIG. 7 is a block diagram of a controller 700 for optimizing dynamically multi-vessel seismic operations.
  • Controller 700 includes a communication interface 710 configured to receive contemporaneous survey plans at predetermined time intervals and/or when a survey plan alteration is signaled.
  • the controller further includes a processing unit 720 connected to interface 710.
  • Communication unit 720 is configured to check whether an applied spatial constraint is met throughout a survey according to the contemporaneous survey plans, and to adjust the survey plans if a conflict caused by the applied spatial constraint is not met throughout the foreseeable future period.
  • Various embodiments including controller 700's basic structure may also include other components enabling the features described above using the generic term of "tool.” In one
  • the processing unit is configured to update the applied constraint based on current survey conditions (e.g., azimuth towards interfering source, relative speed and heading of the data acquisition systems, marine currents, etc.) and/or results of online (i.e., shortly after being acquired) seismic data processing.
  • current survey conditions e.g., azimuth towards interfering source, relative speed and heading of the data acquisition systems, marine currents, etc.
  • results of online i.e., shortly after being acquired
  • the controller may further include a memory 730 to store historical data related to the survey, or executable codes implementing method 600 or other
  • the controller may also include a display 740 connected to the processing unit and configured to display current positions of at least a subset of the vessels.
  • the controller may also include an operator command interface (not shown) connected to the processing unit and configured to receive and transmit operator commands to the processing unit.
  • the operator command interface may be part of the interface 710.
  • the processing unit is configured to adjust one or more survey plans according to the operator commands.
  • the disclosed exemplary embodiments provide tools for dynamically optimizing operations during multi-vessel data acquisition. It should be understood that this description is not intended to limit the invention. On the contrary, the exemplary embodiments are intended to cover alternatives, modifications and equivalents, which are included in the spirit and scope of the invention. Further, in the detailed description of the exemplary embodiments, numerous specific details are set forth in order to provide a comprehensive understanding of the invention. However, one skilled in the art would understand that various embodiments may be practiced without such specific details.

Landscapes

  • Life Sciences & Earth Sciences (AREA)
  • Engineering & Computer Science (AREA)
  • Physics & Mathematics (AREA)
  • General Physics & Mathematics (AREA)
  • Remote Sensing (AREA)
  • Automation & Control Theory (AREA)
  • Radar, Positioning & Navigation (AREA)
  • Aviation & Aerospace Engineering (AREA)
  • Oceanography (AREA)
  • Acoustics & Sound (AREA)
  • Environmental & Geological Engineering (AREA)
  • Geology (AREA)
  • General Life Sciences & Earth Sciences (AREA)
  • Geophysics (AREA)
  • Geophysics And Detection Of Objects (AREA)

Abstract

La présente invention concerne des contrôleurs et des procédés permettant d'optimiser dynamiquement des opérations sismiques à cuves multiples. Des informations actuelles concernant des plans de sondage de systèmes d'acquisition de données sont collectées à des intervalles de temps prédéterminés et/ou en cas de modification de plan de sondage. Pour identifier des conflits potentiels, une contrainte spatiale appliquée est vérifiée afin de voir si, selon les plans de sondage, elle sera satisfaite tout au long d'une période future prévisible. Si la vérification révèle un conflit, au moins l'un des plans de sondage est ajusté pour éviter le conflit.
PCT/IB2015/001190 2014-05-28 2015-05-27 Système et procédé pour optimiser dynamiquement des opérations sismiques à cuves multiples WO2015181626A1 (fr)

Applications Claiming Priority (2)

Application Number Priority Date Filing Date Title
US201462003558P 2014-05-28 2014-05-28
US62/003,558 2014-05-28

Publications (1)

Publication Number Publication Date
WO2015181626A1 true WO2015181626A1 (fr) 2015-12-03

Family

ID=54147241

Family Applications (1)

Application Number Title Priority Date Filing Date
PCT/IB2015/001190 WO2015181626A1 (fr) 2014-05-28 2015-05-27 Système et procédé pour optimiser dynamiquement des opérations sismiques à cuves multiples

Country Status (1)

Country Link
WO (1) WO2015181626A1 (fr)

Cited By (2)

* Cited by examiner, † Cited by third party
Publication number Priority date Publication date Assignee Title
NO20171950A1 (en) * 2017-12-07 2019-06-10 Rolls Royce Marine As Interface unit
RU2738592C1 (ru) * 2017-06-08 2020-12-14 Тоталь Са Способ сбора массива сейсмических данных на исследуемом участке и соответствующая система

Citations (5)

* Cited by examiner, † Cited by third party
Publication number Priority date Publication date Assignee Title
WO2004053814A1 (fr) * 2002-12-10 2004-06-24 Defence Science & Technology Agency Systeme anticollision adaptatif de consultation
AU2002235665B2 (en) * 2001-03-09 2007-04-05 Ronald Stephen Fleming Marine seismic surveys
US20070165486A1 (en) * 2006-01-19 2007-07-19 Nicolae Moldoveanu Methods and systems for efficiently acquiring towed streamer seismic surveys
WO2012162310A1 (fr) * 2011-05-23 2012-11-29 Ion Geophysical Corporation Système de surveillance et de défense contre les menaces maritimes
WO2012162433A2 (fr) * 2011-05-23 2012-11-29 Ion Geophysical Corporation Procédé et appareil de détermination d'un lieu pour acquérir des données géophysiques

Patent Citations (5)

* Cited by examiner, † Cited by third party
Publication number Priority date Publication date Assignee Title
AU2002235665B2 (en) * 2001-03-09 2007-04-05 Ronald Stephen Fleming Marine seismic surveys
WO2004053814A1 (fr) * 2002-12-10 2004-06-24 Defence Science & Technology Agency Systeme anticollision adaptatif de consultation
US20070165486A1 (en) * 2006-01-19 2007-07-19 Nicolae Moldoveanu Methods and systems for efficiently acquiring towed streamer seismic surveys
WO2012162310A1 (fr) * 2011-05-23 2012-11-29 Ion Geophysical Corporation Système de surveillance et de défense contre les menaces maritimes
WO2012162433A2 (fr) * 2011-05-23 2012-11-29 Ion Geophysical Corporation Procédé et appareil de détermination d'un lieu pour acquérir des données géophysiques

Non-Patent Citations (1)

* Cited by examiner, † Cited by third party
Title
OZDOGAN YILMAZ: "Seismic Data Processing", 1987, SOCIETY OF EXPLORATION GEOPHYSICISTS, pages: 9 - 79

Cited By (4)

* Cited by examiner, † Cited by third party
Publication number Priority date Publication date Assignee Title
RU2738592C1 (ru) * 2017-06-08 2020-12-14 Тоталь Са Способ сбора массива сейсмических данных на исследуемом участке и соответствующая система
NO20171950A1 (en) * 2017-12-07 2019-06-10 Rolls Royce Marine As Interface unit
NO344178B1 (en) * 2017-12-07 2019-09-30 Rolls Royce Marine As Interface unit
US11738847B2 (en) 2017-12-07 2023-08-29 Kongsberg Maritime As Interface unit

Similar Documents

Publication Publication Date Title
EP3107806B1 (fr) Procédé et véhicule sous-marin autonome pouvant garder un agencement planifié
AU2009286883B2 (en) Determining seismic streamer array geometry and seismic sensor response using dual sensor seismic streamer arrays
EP3143435B1 (fr) Procédés de réalisation de prospections sismiques marines de reconnaissance
EP2748626B1 (fr) Procédé de détermination d'une distance entre des dispositifs acoustiques sous l'eau
US8351293B2 (en) Multi-vessel communication system
NO20101808A1 (no) Innhenting av undersokelsesdata med naer-null-forskyvning
EP2372401A1 (fr) Procédé de flûtes de capteur marines traînant
EP3123207B1 (fr) Rayon de virage variable pour navires de marine
WO2015187312A1 (fr) Mesure de champ magnétique par l'intermédiaire de câbles de flûte
MX2013008884A (es) Dispositivo y metodo para adquisicion marina sincronizada con ruido de interferencia reducido.
CN105527651B (zh) 具有被识别元件的地震检测线和方法
WO2015181626A1 (fr) Système et procédé pour optimiser dynamiquement des opérations sismiques à cuves multiples
US20160195626A1 (en) Method and System for Determining the Position of Control Devices on a Seismic Instrumented Towed Cable
EP3136134A1 (fr) Retrait de cible d'encrassement biologique
EP3436853A1 (fr) Prospections de reconnaissance sismiques marines ayant une densité réduite de lignes de navigation
US20190233070A1 (en) Catenary modeling for a plurality of deployment lines for an offshore seismic system
US20150309198A1 (en) Method for managing a master vessel change in a multi-vessel seismic system
CA2854891C (fr) Flutes evasees oscillantes
WO2012082596A2 (fr) Détermination de profondeur de flûte sismique et de profil de surface marine
CN104049277A (zh) 地震拖缆的自动化横向控制
US20170248723A1 (en) Positioning along a streamer using surface references
US9632196B2 (en) Method and device for estimating a relative position between towed acoustic linear antennas
WO2016011502A1 (fr) Procédé et appareil de levé marin
Morvan et al. Positioning for Ocean Bottom Systems (OBS) applications: A case study
WO2016193825A1 (fr) Procédé, système et dispositif de commande d'étalonnage pour source à niveau multiple

Legal Events

Date Code Title Description
121 Ep: the epo has been informed by wipo that ep was designated in this application

Ref document number: 15766241

Country of ref document: EP

Kind code of ref document: A1

NENP Non-entry into the national phase

Ref country code: DE

122 Ep: pct application non-entry in european phase

Ref document number: 15766241

Country of ref document: EP

Kind code of ref document: A1