4.1 Article

Seismic imaging for an ocean drilling site survey and its verification in the Izu rear arc

期刊

EXPLORATION GEOPHYSICS
卷 49, 期 1, 页码 1-10

出版社

CSIRO PUBLISHING
DOI: 10.1071/EG16142

关键词

grid site survey; multi-channel seismic reflection survey; ocean drilling; refraction survey

向作者/读者索取更多资源

To evaluate the crustal structure of a site proposed for International Ocean Discovery Program drilling, the Japan Agency for Marine-Earth Science and Technology carried out seismic surveys in the Izu rear arc between 2006 and 2008, using research vessels Kaiyo and Kairei. High-resolution dense grid surveys, consisting of three kinds of reflection surveys, generated clear seismic profiles, together with a seismic velocity image obtained from a seismic refraction survey. In this paper, we compare the seismic profiles with the geological column obtained from the drilling. Five volcaniclastic sedimentary units were identified in seismic reflection profiles above the 5 km/ s and 6 km/ s contours of P-wave velocity obtained from the velocity image from the seismic refraction survey. However, some of the unit boundaries interpreted from the seismic images were not recognised in the drilling core, highlighting the difficulties of geological target identification in volcanic regions from seismic images alone. The geological core derived from drilling consisted of seven lithological units (labelled I to VII). Units I to V were aged at 0-9 Ma, and units VI and VII, from 1320-1806.5m below seafloor (mbsf) had ages from 9 to similar to 15 Ma. The strong heterogeneity of volcanic sediments beneath the drilling site U1437 was also identified from coherence, calculated using cross-spectral analysis between grid survey lines. Our results suggest that use of a dense grid configuration is important in site surveys for ocean drilling in volcanic rear-arc situations, in order to recognise heterogeneous crustal structure, such as sediments from different origins.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.1
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据