Marine Geophysical Researches

, Volume 28, Issue 2, pp 153–164 | Cite as

Strategies for waveform processing in sparker data

  • Mathieu J. Duchesne
  • Gilles Bellefleur
  • Mike Galbraith
  • Randy Kolesar
  • Rick Kuzmiski
Original Research Paper


A sparker is a marine seismic impulsive source used for high-resolution seismic surveys. Sparker sources were very popular during the late 1960s and 1970s before being supplanted by small volume airguns. However, in the last 10 years there has been renewed interest in sparker technology because (1) it can be easily deployed at relatively low costs and (2) in certain areas the use of small airguns is restricted for environmental purposes. In this study a sparker source was used to assess the seismic stratigraphy of Quaternary deposits and to image the sediment/bedrock interface. Three different inverse filtering methods were tested (i.e., spiking deconvolution, match-filtering and vertical seismic profile (VSP) deconvolution) to correct the poor shot-to-shot repeatability of the source and to compress its reverberations. Results show that the matched-filter and VSP deconvolution methods, which design and apply one operator for each shot, produced comparable results, whereas the spiking deconvolution that used the same operator on all traces failed to compress the source signature properly.


Marine seismic reflection Waveform Attenuation Deconvolution Matched-filter Sparker 



Brian Roberts (Geological Survey of Canada-Central), Peter Clift (University of Aberdeen) and three anonymous reviewers are acknowledged for the critical review of the paper. Bernard Long from the Institut National de la Recherche Scientifique/Eau-Terre-Environnement (INRS-ETE) provided the seismic acquisition system. Jacques Labrie (INRS-ETE) and Fred Learning (IKB-Technology) are thanked for their technical support. Authors are in debt to crew members and officers of RV Coriolis II. Hydro-Québec Pétrole et Gaz is acknowledged for its financial participation in the seismic surveys. This research paper has been realized within the framework of the Hydrocarbon Potential of the Gulf of St. Lawrence and the Surrounding Area Project of Geological Survey of Canada. This is contribution # 20060229 of the Geological Survey of Canada.


  1. Aarseth I (1997) Western Norwegian fjord sediments: age, volume, stratigraphy, and role as temporary depository during glacial cycles. Marine Geol 143:39–53CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Alessandrini B, Gasperini M (1989) The deconvolution of marine seismic source: an iterative approach. Geophysics 54:780–784CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Applied Acoustics Engineering Limited (2005) Fundamentals of high resolution surveying. Applied Acoustics Engineering Limited, NorfolkGoogle Scholar
  4. Bellefleur G, Duchesne MJ, Hunter J et al (2006) Comparison and processing of single and multi-channel high-resolution seismic data for shallow stratigraphy mapping in the St. Lawrence Estuary. Current Research of the Geological Survey of Canada D2: 1–10Google Scholar
  5. Bickel SH, Martinez DR (1983) Resolution performance of Wiener filters. Geophysics 48:887–899CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Buogo S, Cannelli GB (2002) Implosion of an underwater spark-generated bubble and acoustic energy evaluation using the Rayleigh model. J Acoust Soc Am 6:2594–2600CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Cannelli GB, D’Ottavi E (1991) High-power acoustic-wave system for marine environment surveying. Oceans 1:482–487CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Cannelli GB, D’Ottavi E, Properetti A (1990) Bubble activity induced by high-power marine sources. Oceans Conference Record (IEEE): 533–537Google Scholar
  9. Cardimona S (1991) Waveform inversion and digital filtering theory. Geophysics 36:534–536CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Ceramicola S, Rebesco M, De Batist M et al (2002) Seismic evidence of small-scale lacustrine drifts in Lake Baikal (Russia). Mar Geophys Res 22:445–464CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Clarke GKC (1968) Time-varying deconvolution filters. Geophysics 33:936–944CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Dragoset WH (1990) Air-gun array specs: a tutorial. The Leading Edge 9:24–32CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Ford WT (1978) Optimum mixed delay spiking filters. Geophysics 43:125–132CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Gibson B, Larner L (1984) Predictive deconvolution and the zero-phase source. Geophysics 49:379–397CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Gosh SK (2000) Deconvolving the ghost effect of the water surface in marine seismics. Geophysics 65:1831–1836CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Kennett P, Ireson RL, Conn PJ (1980) Vertical seismic profiles: their applications in seismic exploration geophysics. Geophys Prospect 28:676–699CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Knudsen WC (1961) Elimination of secondary pressure pulses in offshore exploration. Geophysics 26:425–436CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Kragh E, Laws R, Özbek A (2000) Source signature estimation – attenuation of the sea-bottom reflection error from near-field measurements. First Break 18:260–264CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Labaune C, Jouet G, Berné S et al (2005) Seismic stratigraphy of the deglacial deposits of the Rhône prodelta and adjacent shelf. Mar Geol 222–223:299–311CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Lee M W, Balch AH (1983) Computer processing of vertical seismic profile data. Geophysics 48:272–287CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Leinbach J (1995) Wiener spiking deconvolution and minimum – A tutorial. The Leading Edge 14:189–192CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Linville AF (1994) Single-channel digital filter design for seismic applications. Geophysics 59:1584–1592CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Llave E, Schönfeld J, Hernandez-Molina FJ et al (2006) High-resolution stratigraphy of the Mediterranean outflow contourite system in the Gulf of Cadiz during the late Pleistocene: the impact of Heinrich events. Mar Geol 227:241–262CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Lu W, Mao F (2005) Adaptative multiple subtraction using independent component analysis. The Leading Edge 24:282–284CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Mosher DC, Simpkin PG (1999) Status and trends of marine high-resolution seismic reflection profiling: data acquisition. Geosci Can 26:174–188Google Scholar
  26. Newman BJ (1986) Deconvolution of noisy seismic data – A method for prestack wavelet extraction. Geophysics 51:34–44CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Pichevin L, Mulder T, Savoye B et al (2003) The Golo submarine turbidite systems (east Corsica margin): morphology and processes of terrace formation from high-resolution seismic profiles. Geo-Mar Lett 23:117–124CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Porsani MJ, Ursin B (1998) Mixed-phase deconvolution. Geophysics 63:637–647CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Robinson EA (1954) Predictive deconvolution of time series with applications to seismic exploration. Dissertation, Massachusset Institute of TechnologyGoogle Scholar
  30. Ross WS, Shah PM (1987) Vertical seismic profile reflectivity: ups over downs. Geophysics 52:1149–1154CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Scheuer T, Oldenberg, DW (1988) Aspects of time-variant filtering. Geophysics 53:1399–1409CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Sheriff RE (2005) Encyclopedic dictionary of applied geophysics. Society of Exploration Geophysicists, TulsaGoogle Scholar
  33. Sicking CJ (1982) Windowing and estimation variance in deconvolution. Geophysics 47:1022–1034CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Simmons JL, Backus MM (1996) A matched-filter approach to impedance estimation. Geophysics 61:484–495CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Sun L, Wang Y, Chen S (1990) High energy sparkers and their acoustic efficiency. Acoust Lett 13:117–120Google Scholar
  36. Taner MT (1980) Long period sea-floor multiples and their suppression. Geophys Prospect 28:30–48CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Trabant PK (1984) Applied high-resolution geophysical methods: offshore geoengineering hazards. International Human Resources Development Corporation, BostonGoogle Scholar
  38. Treitel S (1970) Principles of digital multichannel filtering. Geophysics 35:785–811CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Verbeek NH, McGee TM (1995) Characteristics of high-resolution marine reflection profiling sources. J Appl Geophys 33:251–269CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Wang Y (2003) Multiple subtraction using an expanded multichannel matching filter. Geophysics 68:346–354CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Widess MB (1973) How thin is a thin bed? Geophysics 38:1176–1180CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Wiener N (1949) Extrapolation, interpolation and smoothing of stationary time series with engineering applications. Wiley, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  43. Wood LC, Heiser RC, Treitel S et al (1978) The debubbling of marine source signatures. Geophysics 43:715–729CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2007

Authors and Affiliations

  • Mathieu J. Duchesne
    • 1
  • Gilles Bellefleur
    • 2
  • Mike Galbraith
    • 3
  • Randy Kolesar
    • 3
  • Rick Kuzmiski
    • 3
  1. 1.Geological Survey of Canada-QuébecQuebecCanada
  2. 2.Geological Survey of Canada-CentralOttawaCanada
  3. 3.Geophysical Exploration and Development CorporationCalgaryCanada

Personalised recommendations