Search

Air guns and air-gun arrays of different volumes are used for scientific seismic surveys with R/V Polarstern in polar regions. To assess the potential risk of these research activities on marine mammal populations, knowledge of the sound pressure field of the seismic sources is essential. Therefore, a broad-band (0–80 kHz) calibration study was conducted at the Heggernes Acoustic Range, Norway. A GI (2.4 l), a G (8.5 l) and a Bolt gun (32.8 l) were deployed as single sources, 3 GI (7.4 l), 3 G (25.6 l) and 8 VLF™ Prakla-Seismos air guns (24.0 l) as arrays. Each configuration was fired along a line of 3–4 km length running between two hydrophone chains with receivers in 35, 100, 198 and 263 m depth. Peak-to-peak, zero-to-peak, rms and sound exposure levels (SEL) were analysed as functions of range. They show the typical dipole-like directivity of marine seismic sources with amplitude cancellation close to the sea surface, higher amplitudes in greater depths, and sound pressure levels which continuously decrease with range. Levels recorded during the approach are lower than during the departure indicating a shadowing effect of Polarsterns's hull. Backcalculated zero-to-peak source levels range from 224–240 dB re 1 μPa @ 1 m. Spectral source levels are highest below 100 Hz and amount to 182–194 dB re 1 μPa Hz–1. They drop off continuously with range and frequency. At 1 kHz they are ∼30 dB, at 80 kHz ∼60 dB lower than the peak level. Above 1 kHz amplitude spectra are dominated by Polarstern's self-noise. From the rms and sound exposure levels of the deepest hydrophone radii for different thresholds are derived. For a 180 dB rms-level threshold radii maximally vary between 200 and 600 m, for a 186 dB SEL threshold between 50 and 300 m. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Very high-frequency marine multichannel seismic reflection data generated by small-volume air- or waterguns allow detailed, high-resolution studies of sedimentary structures of the order of one to few metres wavelength. The high-frequency content, however, requires (1) a very exact knowledge of the source and receiver positions, and (2) the development of data processing methods which take this exact geometry into account. Static corrections are crucial for the quality of very high-frequency stacked data because static shifts caused by variations of the source and streamer depths are of the order of half to one dominant wavelength, so that they can lead to destructive interference during stacking of CDP sorted traces. As common surface-consistent residual static correction methods developed for land seismic data require fixed shot and receiver locations two simple and fast techniques have been developed for marine seismic data with moving sources and receivers to correct such static shifts. The first method – called CDP static correction method – is based on a simultaneous recording of Parasound sediment echosounder and multichannel seismic reflection data. It compares the depth information derived from the first arrivals of both data sets to calculate static correction time shifts for each seismic channel relative to the Parasound water depths. The second method – called average static correction method – utilises the fact that the streamer depth is mainly controlled by bird units, which keep the streamer in a predefined depth at certain increments but do not prevent the streamer from being slightly buoyant in-between. In case of calm weather conditions these streamer bendings mainly contribute to the overall static time shifts, whereas depth variations of the source are negligible. Hence, mean static correction time shifts are calculated for each channel by averaging the depth values determined at each geophone group position for several subsequent shots. Application of both methods to data of a high-resolution seismic survey of channel-levee systems on the Bengal Fan shows that the quality of the stacked section can be improved significantly compared to stacking results achieved without preceding static corrections. The optimised records show sedimentary features in great detail, that are not visible without static corrections. Limitations only result from the sea floor topography. The CDP static correction method generally provides more coherent reflections than the average static correction method but can only be applied in areas with rather flat sea floor, where no diffraction hyperbolae occur. In contrast, the average static correction method can also be used in regions with rough morphology, but the coherency of reflections is slightly reduced compared to the results of the CDP static correction method. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Abstract: Three pockmarks named “Hydrate Hole”, “Black Hole”, and “Worm Hole” were studied in the northern Congo Fan area at water depths around 3100 m. The cross-disciplinary investigations include seafloor observations by TV-sled, sampling by TV-guided grab and multicorer as well as gravity coring, in addition to hydroacoustic mapping by a swath system, a parametric sediment echosounder and a deep-towed sidescan sonar. The pockmarks are morphologically complex features consisting of one or more up to 1000 m wide and 10–15 m deep depressions revealed by swath-mapping. High reflection amplitudes in the sediment echosounder records indicate the presence of a 25–30 m thick shallow sediment section with gas hydrates, which have been recovered by gravity corer. Hydrates, chemosynthetic communities, and authigenic carbonates clearly indicate fluid flow from depths, which we propose to be mainly in the form of ascending gas bubbles rather than advection of methane-rich porewater. Evidence for seepage at the seafloor is confined to small areas within the seafloor depressions and was revealed by characteristic backscatter facies. Small meter-scale sized depressions signified as “pits” exist in or close to the pockmarks but seafloor observations did not reveal evidence for the presence of typical seep organisms or authigenic carbonates. Areas of intermediate backscatter were inhabited by vesicomyid clams in soft sediments. High backscatter was associated with vestimentiferan tubeworms (Siboglinidae) and authigenic carbonates. We discuss the three different environments “pits”, “vesicomyid clams”, “vestimentifera/carbonate” in the light of differences in the geochemical setting. Pits are probably formed by escaping gas bubbles but seepage is too transient to sustain chemosynthetic life. Vesicomyid clams are present in sediments with gas hydrate deposits. However, the hydrates occur several meters below the surface indicating a lower flux compared to the vestimentifera/carbonate environment. In the latter environment, accumulated carbonates and clam shells indicate that fine grained particles have been eroded away. Gas hydrates were found in this environment at depths below about 50 cm suggesting the highest supply with methane compared to the other environments. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]