Preprints
https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2022-279
https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2022-279
 
13 May 2022
13 May 2022

A comparison of straight-ray and curved-ray surface wave tomography approaches at near-surface studies

Mohammadkarim Karimpour1, Evert Slob2, and Laura Valentina Socco1 Mohammadkarim Karimpour et al.
  • 1Politecnico di Torino, Turin, 10129, Italy
  • 2Delft University of Technology, Delft, 2628 CN, Netherlands

Abstract. Surface waves are widely used to model shear-wave velocity of the subsurface. Surface wave tomography (SWT) has recently gained popularity for near-surface studies. Some researchers have used straight-ray SWT in which it is assumed that surface waves propagate along the straight line between receiver pairs. Alternatively, curved-ray SWT can be employed by computing the exact paths between the receiver pairs. SWT is a well-established method in seismology and has been employed in numerous seismological studies. However, it is important to make a comparison between these two SWT approaches for near-surface applications since the amount of information and the level of complexity in near-surface are different from seismological studies. We apply straight-ray and curved-ray SWT to four near-surface examples and compare the results in terms of the quality of the final model and the computational cost.

Mohammadkarim Karimpour et al.

Status: closed

Comment types: AC – author | RC – referee | CC – community | EC – editor | CEC – chief editor | : Report abuse
  • RC1: 'Comment on egusphere-2022-279', Anonymous Referee #1, 09 Jun 2022
    • RC3: 'Reply on RC1', Emanuel Kästle, 10 Jun 2022
      • AC4: 'Reply on RC3', Mohammadkarim Karimpour, 03 Aug 2022
    • AC1: 'Reply on RC1', Mohammadkarim Karimpour, 03 Aug 2022
  • RC2: 'Comment on egusphere-2022-279', Emanuel Kästle, 10 Jun 2022
    • AC2: 'Reply on RC2', Mohammadkarim Karimpour, 03 Aug 2022
  • RC4: 'Comment on egusphere-2022-279', Fabrizio Magrini, 27 Jun 2022
    • AC3: 'Reply on RC4', Mohammadkarim Karimpour, 03 Aug 2022

Status: closed

Comment types: AC – author | RC – referee | CC – community | EC – editor | CEC – chief editor | : Report abuse
  • RC1: 'Comment on egusphere-2022-279', Anonymous Referee #1, 09 Jun 2022
    • RC3: 'Reply on RC1', Emanuel Kästle, 10 Jun 2022
      • AC4: 'Reply on RC3', Mohammadkarim Karimpour, 03 Aug 2022
    • AC1: 'Reply on RC1', Mohammadkarim Karimpour, 03 Aug 2022
  • RC2: 'Comment on egusphere-2022-279', Emanuel Kästle, 10 Jun 2022
    • AC2: 'Reply on RC2', Mohammadkarim Karimpour, 03 Aug 2022
  • RC4: 'Comment on egusphere-2022-279', Fabrizio Magrini, 27 Jun 2022
    • AC3: 'Reply on RC4', Mohammadkarim Karimpour, 03 Aug 2022

Mohammadkarim Karimpour et al.

Mohammadkarim Karimpour et al.

Viewed

Total article views: 340 (including HTML, PDF, and XML)
HTML PDF XML Total BibTeX EndNote
237 87 16 340 5 4
  • HTML: 237
  • PDF: 87
  • XML: 16
  • Total: 340
  • BibTeX: 5
  • EndNote: 4
Views and downloads (calculated since 13 May 2022)
Cumulative views and downloads (calculated since 13 May 2022)

Viewed (geographical distribution)

Total article views: 310 (including HTML, PDF, and XML) Thereof 310 with geography defined and 0 with unknown origin.
Country # Views %
  • 1
1
 
 
 
 
Latest update: 28 Sep 2022
Download
Short summary
Near-surface characterization is of great importance. Surface wave tomography (SWT) is a powerful tool to model the subsurface. In this work, we compare straight-ray and curved-ray SWT at near-surface scale. We apply both approaches on four datasets and compare the results in terms of the quality of the final model and the computational cost. We show that in case of high data coverage, straight-ray SWT can produce similar results as curved-ray SWT, but with less computational cost.