In saturated porous media, seismic compressional waves can generate electric and electromagnetic signals of observable amplitudes. These signals can be recorded with dipoles consisting of two electrodes each. As the generation of seismoelectric signals is connected with properties, such as hydraulic permeability, porosity, and fluid salinity, it is possible that the seismoelectric method could be used in hydrogeophysics for determining these parameters. However, the seismoelectric method still remains in the experimental stage. This is mainly due to the difficulties involved in seismoelectric measurements.
We present repeatable seismoelectric field data with exceptionally high signal-to-noise ratios and prove that the assumed seismoelectric signals are not artefacts but the desired signal converted from seismic compressional waves at subsurface boundaries. Their amplitude distribution, arrival times and slownesses, as well as their polarisations, are checked against theoretical predictions and comparisons
with other methods, such as refraction seismics, borehole logging data and downhole seismics and seismoelectrics. Conventional velocity filters in the frequency–wavenumber domain accentuate the seismoelectric signals converted at subsurface boundaries from incident seismic compressional waves, differentiating them from the usually less informative seismoelectric waves travelling inside compressional waves and being confined to these waves.
The recording of three-component seismoelectric data enabled us to perform a polarisation study showing that the polarisations of the seismoelectric signals encountered are mainly found on the radial and the vertical components and thus follow the predictions. The three-component data suggest
the existence of a composite signal from a thin layer which would have remained undetected with one-component measurements. Repeatable signals were also encountered on the transverse component which we interpret as 3D effects of a layer dipping in the transverse direction.
[1]
A. H. Thompson,et al.
Geophysical applications of electrokinetic conversion
,
1993
.
[2]
M. Nafi Toksöz,et al.
Seismoelectric and seismomagnetic measurements in fractured borehole models
,
2005
.
[3]
A. Nur,et al.
The squirt-flow mechanism: Macroscopic description
,
1994
.
[4]
Steven R. Pride,et al.
Electroseismic wave properties
,
1996
.
[5]
Pride,et al.
Governing equations for the coupled electromagnetics and acoustics of porous media.
,
1994,
Physical review. B, Condensed matter.
[6]
M. Nafi Toksöz,et al.
Using borehole electroseismic measurements to detect and characterize fractured (permeable) zones
,
2000
.
[7]
Stéphane Garambois,et al.
First laboratory measurements of seismo‐magnetic conversions in fluid‐filled Fontainebleau sand
,
2006
.
[8]
Karl E. Butler,et al.
Cancellation of multiple harmonic noise series in geophysical records
,
2003
.
[9]
D. Beamish.
Characteristics of near-surface electrokinetic coupling
,
1999
.
[10]
Steven R. Pride,et al.
Electroseismic waves from point sources in layered media
,
1997
.
[11]
Stéphane Garambois,et al.
Full waveform numerical simulations of seismoelectromagnetic wave conversions in fluid‐saturated stratified porous media
,
2002
.
[12]
R. R. Thompson.
The seismic electric effect
,
1936
.
[13]
Karl E. Butler,et al.
Measurement of the seismoelectric response from a shallow boundary
,
1996
.
[14]
Beamish,et al.
Electrokinetic geophysics — a review
,
1998
.
[15]
Stéphane Garambois,et al.
Seismoelectric wave conversions in porous media: Field measurements and transfer function analysis
,
2001
.