GEOPHYSICS. VOL. 50, NO, 4 (APRIL 1985); P. 609-614, 8 FIGS., 7, TABLES.

A simplification of the Zoeppritz equations

R. T. Shuey*

ABSTRACT

The compressional wave reflection coefficient R(B)

ences about the elastic parameters from observation of reflec-
given by the Zoeppritz equations is simplified to the
tion amplitude as a function of angle.
following: This problem was fairly definitively investigated in the pio-
Ao neering work of Koefoed (1955). His method was laborious
R(B) = R, + A,R, + (1 _ o)z sin’
8 computation of reflection coefficient versus angle out to 30
1 degrees for 17 different sets of elastic properties. Koefoed took
+ 59 (tan’ 8 - sin’ 0).
the three elastic parameters for each medium to be longitudinal
velocity VP density p, and Poisson’s ratio o. He gave his con-
P
clusions as follows.
The first term gives the amplitude at normal incidence
(0 = 0), the second term characterizes R(O) at intermedi-
(a) ‘When the underlying medium has the greater longi-
ate angles, and the third term describes the approach to
tudinal velocity and other relevant properties of the
critical angle. The coefficient of the second term is that
two strata are equal to each other, an increase of
combination of elastic properties which can be deter-
Poisson’s ratio for the underlying medium causes an
mined by analyzing the offset dependence of event am-
increase of the reflection coefficient at the larger
plitude in conventional multichannel reflection data. If
angles of incidence.
the event amplitude is normalized to its value for
normal incidence, then the quantity determined is
(b) When, in the above case, Poisson’s ratio for the inci-
dent medium is increased, the reflection coefficient at
1 A0 the larger angles of incidence is thereby decreased.
A=A0+(1-_ (4 When, in the above case, Poisson’s ratios for both
media are increased and kept equal to each other, the
A, specifies the normal, gradual decrease of amplitude reflection coefficient at the larger angles of incidence
with offset; its value is constrained well enough that the is thereby increased.
main information conveyed is do/R,, where Ao is the (4 The effect mentioned in (a) becomes more pro-
contrast in Poisson’s ratio at the reflecting interface and nounced as the velocity contrast becomes smaller.
R, is the amplitude at normal incidence. This simplified (4 Interchange of the incident and the underlying
formula for R(B) accounts for all of the relations be- medium affects the shape of the curves only slightly,
tween R(8) and elastic properties first described by Koe- at least up to values of the angle of incidence of about
foed in 1955. 30”.’

The precise meaning of some of these five rules may be

INTRODUCTION unclear without Koefoed’s figures or subsequent similar para-
metric studies. I give my understanding of each rule in a later
Recently the dependence of seismic reflection amplitude section of this paper.
upon the offset between source and receiver has been intensely While various authors have presented approximations to the
investigated (Ostrander, 1984; Sherwood et al., 1983; Gas- Zoeppritz equations (e.g., Bortfeld, 1961), to my knowledge
saway and Richgels, 1983). At the core of the matter are the they have not been simpliticd to the point where both (I)
Zoeppritz equations, which give the reflection and transmission Koefoed’s rules are displayed analytically and (2) the inverse
coefficients for plane waves as a function of angle of incidence problem--elastic properties from curve shape-is done analyti-
and six independent elastic parameters, three on each side of cally. This paper presents such a simplification. The work was
the reflecting interface. The inverse problem is to make infer- done before I became aware of Koefoed’s paper.

Manuscriptreceived by the Editor May 29, 1984; revised manuscript received October 15, 1984.
*P. 0. Box 37048, Houston, TX 77236
3,) 1985 Society of Exploration Geophysicists. All rights reserved.

609
Downloaded 09 Apr 2009 to 41.237.133.50. Redistribution subject to SEG license or copyright; see Terms of Use at http://segdl.org/
610 Shuey

DERIVATION 1 ho
A=A,+p- (‘1)
(1 - 0)’ R,’
Provided the percentage changes in elastic properties are
small, the f-wave reflection amplitude R(O) is given approxi- I - 20
A, = 5 - 2(1 + B) I-o. (‘2)
mately by Aki and Richards (1980, p. 153) as

R(B) = ; 1_ 4 3 sin28! 9 sec2 0 AVp - 4V1

+ -- Av, and
sin2flv.
“; P 2 v, “; s AVJV’
B= (13)
(1) AV,/Vp + APIP’
The elastic properties in equation (I) are related as follows to Equation (9) displays which combinations of elastic proper-
those on each side of the inter face : ties are effective in successiveranges of angle 8. The third term
vanishes as 04. so it does not normally contribute for 0 < 30
AVp = VP2- Vp,L
(2) degrees. However, at large angles it dominates. For consider-
VP = VP2+ Vpll/2> ation of absolute instead of relative amplitude, equation (9)
should be multiplied through by R,, i.e.,
Av,= K2 - v,,)?
(3) A0
v,= v,, + v,,)/2, R(O)=R,+

I AVp
[AoR,+-
(1 - 0)2 1 sin’ 0

and + j v (tan’ 0 - sin’ Cl). (14)

(4)
P
P = (P2 + Pi)/23
DISCUSSION
where the incident and reflected waves are on side 1 and the
transmitted wave is on side 2. The angle 0 is the average of Equation (14) has some similarity to the approximation of
incidence and transmission angles, R(O) given in Bortfeld (1961) and discussed recently in numer-
0 = (Cl, + 0,)/2. (5) ous unpublished lectures by Hilterman (1983). The Bortfeld
approximation has about the same accuracy as equation (1) or
These two angles are related by Snell’s law, equation (14), but the three expressions differ in the philosophy
9 sin 0, of grouping terms. Equation (14) displays which combinations
P= (6) of elastic properties are effective in successiveranges of angle 8.
v, =- Vz Equation (1) is arranged to separate the effects of the three
I modified equation (I) by eliminating the properties V,, A V, variables Ap, A V,, and AV,, The Bortfeld arrangement is de-
in favor of o, Ao. The latter are defined as above by signed to contrast elastic and acoustic reflection coefficients. It
separates two terms, the first of which (fluid factor) involves
ho = (02 - o,),
only velocity and density and is the same as R(O) for a fluid-
and (7) fluid contact. The linearization of this fluid factor is

o = (cr2 + 0,)/2
R,(8) z R, + i F tan’ 0
The substitution is effected by the equation ”

t-20 which corresponds to the first term and part of the third term in
“f ZZ V2 ~
p 2(1 - a) equation (14).
Equations (9) and (14) diagonalize the relationship between
and also by the differential of this equation. This change of
elastic properties and R(8) in the sense that certain features are
variable was motivated by the general perception [embodied in
related to certain combinations of elastic properties without
Koefoed’s rules (a), (b), and (c)] that Poisson’s ratio is the elastic
significant coupling between the variables. As is apparent from
property most directly related to angular dependence of reflec-
Figure 1, the dimensionless parameter A controls whether the
tion coefficient.
amplitude initially increases (A > 0) or decreases (A < 0), while
A further modification was to factor out R,, the amplitude at
the dimensionless parameter B controls the sign at large angles.
normal incidence. Because the practical problems in recovering
From equations (9) through (14) I perceive three quasi-
absolute reflection amplitude seem more severe than the prob-
independent connections between R(8) and elastic properties:
lems of recovering the relative variation of reflection amplitude
with offset, it is appropriate to consider the information content
(I) Normal incidence.---The magnitude R, is the average of
of the relative curve R(O)/R,. The result of these manipulations
fractional changes in V, and p [cf., equation (lo)]. Alternatively,
is
R, is half the change in natural logarithm of impedance pVp
RWR, Z= 1 + A sin’ 0 + B (tan’ 0 - sin2 O), (9) since the approximation

where 5 ’ APIG_ j1 A
R0 _ ln (PV,) (16)
2 PVP
(‘0)
is also valid to first order in change of elastic properties.

Downloaded 09 Apr 2009 to 41.237.133.50. Redistribution subject to SEG license or copyright; see Terms of Use at http://segdl.org/
 Simplified Zoeppritz Equations 611

(2) Intermediate angles (0 c 0 < 30 degrees).-The reflec-

tion amplitude at intermediate angles relative to that at normal
incidence connects to the parameter A, which is the sum of two
terms [equation (1 l)]. I argue in Appendix A that the first term
A,, can be accurately predicted just from an approximate value
of average Poisson’s ratio o, provided only that the parameter
B is in its normal range. The real information in A is in the ratio
Ao/R,. In Appendix B I consider the degenerate case R, = 0.
- EXACT
(3) Wide angles.-The reflection amplitude at wide angles
- EQUATION 14
relates only to the change in velocity. At sufficiently large
angles where the third term in equation (14) dominates the first -- Et,. 14 WITH 6=6,

two, it becomes --- EQUATION 16

R(Q)+l$t an’ 8 - sin’ 0). (17)

P
Analysis of wide-angle seismic records for velocity is a highly
developed subject to which equation (17) probably contributes
nothing. However, its derivation does indicate the relation to
analysis of amplitude at intermediate angles.

IiuClCENT A-NGCE !-DEGREES!

The basis of the derivation of equations (1) and (9) from the
exact Zoeppritz equations is that the percentage change in
elastic properties is small, i.e., AV,/V’, AV,,/V,, and Ap/p are all Frc;. 2. Approximations in an instance with AV < 0. The elastic
properties correspond to an actual gas sand in the Gulf of
small compared to unity. For the vast majority of exploration
Mexico: VP, = 7 570 ft/s. p, = 2.15, and o, = 0.40 for the
overlying shale and VP, = 6 400 h/s, pz = 1.95. and oz = 0.10
for the gas sand.

EXACT

EQUATION 14
I
Ea.14 WITH 6:6, / ::
t1.0
EQUATION 16

o1 i / i i i 1 y‘ .,, 1 i i ! i i ; j i ] o

O0 3o” 60” so0

INCIDENT ANGLE (DEGREES)

FIG. 3. Approximations in an instance with AV > 0. The elastic

properties on the upper side are the same as for Figure 2, while
the underlying medium has I ;+ = 11 350 ft/s, p2 = 2.20, o2 =
FIG. 1. The four possible variations of amplitude with angle. 0.30. These values are approprtate to a chalk with 30 percent
Plotted are curves R(O)/R, according to equation (9) for the porosity. Beyond critical angle (42 degrees) the reflection coef-
four possible combinations of A = Ifr3, B = k2. As discussed ficient becomes complex and the absolute value is shown for the
in Appendix A, the case B < 0 is rare. exact solution and for equation (14).

Downloaded 09 Apr 2009 to 41.237.133.50. Redistribution subject to SEG license or copyright; see Terms of Use at http://segdl.org/
612 Shuey

ANGLE FROM NORMAL lating transmitted angle 0, by equation (6) and then averaging
by equation (5). The resulting curve has the right shape but rises
too soon in the case of a velocity decrease (AF’ < 0, Figure 2)
and too late in the case of a velocity increase (AL’ > 0, Figure
3). The error is not significant in the intermediate angles 0 <
0, < 30 degrees.
A further approximation is to omit entirely the third term in
equation (9) or equation (14). I argued above that the third term
was unnecessary for incident angles less than 30 degrees. One
caution is that in the case A < 0, B > 0 omission of the third
term may lead to false prediction of a zero crossing at wide
angles. Figures 1.3,5, and 6 all illustrate this situation.
A final approximation is to replace sin 8, by Or, which is
accurate for 0, < 30 degrees. The concatenation of all these
approximations is
-Ro -
R = R,( I + A@;). (18)
100 300 400 Figure 4 shows this parabolic form of variation in more detail
for a range of values of parameter A. Figures 5 and 6 compare
the parabolic approximation to the exact solution of the Zoep-
FIG. 4. Parabolic approximation to R(8) for different values of
pritz equations for a range of Ao and both signs of AV. These
the dimensionless parameter A [equation (1 S)].
figures do not include an instance with B < 0, but that is rare as
discussedin Appendix A.

DERIVATION OF KOEFOED’S RULES

v, /v, =0..945

pp /PI =c!936 The five observations made numerically by Koefoed can be

a,=o.3 established analytically using equations (9) through (14). Equa-
tion (14) states that an increase (decrease) of Poisson’s ratio for
the underlying medium produces an increase (decrease) in the
reflection coefficient at larger angles of incidence. This agrees
with Koefoed’s rules (a) and (b) but without the qualification
that “the underlying medium has the greater longitudinal ve-
locity and other relevant properties of the two strata are equal
to each other.”
When the Poisson’s ratios for the two media are equal
(Ao = O),then this Poisson’s ratio enters into R(B) only through
A,. Koefoed’s rule (c) is equivalent to saying A, increases as o
increases.The derivative of equation (I 2) is

iA
,_2(f +B)
_p (19)
40 60 60 70 60 60 io (1 -cry
INCIDENT ANGLE (DEGREES)
so we see rule (c) is true except for E < - I. Figure 8 illustrates
the increase of A, with o for the normal range of B. Koefoed
FIG. 5. Comparison of exact reflection coefficients (solid line) only considered the case B = 1.
with the parabolic approximation [equation (18)] in a case of Koefocd’s rule (d) is derived from equation (11). The smaller
velocitydecrease. is R,); the larger is the effect of a given ACJupon A. This is
apparently what Koefoed meant by rule(d).
Rule (e) follows from the observation that equation (14) [or
equation (9)] is linear in the three differences AV’ Ao, and Ap.
situations, in which the reflection coefficient R, does not exceed Therefore R(O) simply changes sign when the two sets of elastic
0.2, this is no problem. However, the derivation also assumes properties “1” and “2” are interchanged. Rule (e) breaks down
that both 8, and 8, are real and less than 90 degrees. This at large angles when the difference between 8, and 0 [equation
means that the approximation is good only to about 8, = 80 (5)] cannot be neglected.
degrees in the case of a velocity decrease (Figure 2) and to O1
about 10 degrees less than critical in the case of a velocity INVERSION FOR ELASTIC PROPERTIES
increase (Figure 3). It is not necessary that As/a be small;
indeed, it has the value 1.2 for Figure 2. A current problem is inversion of the reflection coefficient
At intermediate angles further simplifications are possible R(8) to obtain information about elastic properties (Gassaway
(Figures 2 and 3). The incident angle 8, can be used instead of and Richgels, 1983; Rosa. 1976). The diagonalization accom-
average angle t3in equation (14). This saves the work of calcu- plished in equation (9) or equation (14) can simplify this inver-

Downloaded 09 Apr 2009 to 41.237.133.50. Redistribution subject to SEG license or copyright; see Terms of Use at http://segdl.org/
 Simplified Zoeppritz Equations 613

sion and clarify which combinations of elastic properties are approach to critical angle. Thus I have approximately diago-
well determined and which are poorly determined. nalized the multivariate relationship between elastic properties
Because the practical problems in recovering absolute reflec- and curve features, The coefficient for intermediate angles also
tion amplitude differ from the problems of recovering the rela- has two terms: one term is proportional to Ao, the contrast in
tive variation of reflection amplitude with offset, it is appropri- Poisson’s ratio; and the other term is A,,, which describes the
ate to consider the information content of the relative curve bland decrease of R(B) in the absence of contrast in Poisson’s
R(O)/R,. If reflections are not recorded much past 30 degrees ratio. When angles approaching critical are not included, R(8)
then equation (I 8) or Figure 4 could be used to extract a value may be adequately approximated by a parabola [equation
of A from the input R(O)/R,. If wider angles are involved, then (18)]. The approximation provides an analytic basis for the
R(O)/R, could be fit to the trigonometric series in equation (9). systematics first described by Koefoed, and also for a simple
In either case, the dimensionless parameter A is the only infor- inversion of R(0) to Ao.
mation to be extracted other than critical-angle behavior.
Figure 7 shows that A can be transformed to AojR, provided ACKNOWUEDGMENTS
very approximate information is available or hypothesized
about average Poisson’s ratio (J and velocity/impedance ratio This work benefited from collaboration with many col-
E. In brief, the single piece of information about elastic proper- leagues: N. C. Banik and P. I.. Love helped with the original
ties available from analysis of relative change of reflection algebra, R. J. Meyer pointed out the need for a higher approxi-
amplitude with offset is Ao/R,. The multidimensional, nonlin- mation than equation (18), E. M. Himsworth and M. T. Kramer
ear inversion problem discussed previously (Rosa, 1976: Gas- demonstrated the applicability to problems of data interpreta-
saway and Richgels, 1982) is reduced to a one-dimensional tion, and J. R. Resnick helped with the final revision.
linear problem.
As I pointed out, R, is half the change in natural logarithm of
impedance [equation (16)]. Thus the information AaiR, is REFERENCES
equivalent to slope on a crossplot of Poisson’s ratio versus Aki. K. I.. and Richards, P. G., lY80, Quantitative seismology: W. H.
Freeman and Co.
impedance pVpon a logarithmic scale. This could be the basis of
Bortfeld, R., 1961, Approximation to the reflection and transmission
a graphic procedure to relate information about R(B) to infor- coefficients of plane longitudinal and transverse waves: Geophys.
mation about lithology. Prosp., 9,4855502.
Gardner, G. H. F.. Gardner, L. W., and Gregory, A. R., 1974, Forma-
tion velocity and density-The diagnostic basis for stratigraphic
SUMMARY traps: Geophysics, 39,77C-780.
Gassaway, G. S., and Richgels, H. J., 1983, SAMPLE: Seismic ampli-
tude measurement for primary lithology estimation: Presented at the
I took the known linearization of the P-wave reflection coef- 53rd Annual International SEC; Meeting, September, Las Vegas;
ficient R(O) [equation (l)] and transformed variables from V, to abstr. book. 61&613.
Gregory, A. R., 1976, Fluid saturation effects on dynamic elastic
cr to display analytically the effect of Ao, the contrast in Pois- properties of sedimentary rocks: Geophysics, 41,8955921.
son’s ratio. The result [equations (9) or (14)] was arranged into Hamilton, E. L.. 1979, V/V, and Poisson’s ratios in marine sediments
three terms which contribute to three distinct features of the and rocks: 3. Acoust. S&, Amer., 66, 109331101.
Hilterman, F. J., 1983, Seismic lithology: Presented as a continuing
R(O) curve: (1) the normal-incidence magnitude, (2) the behav- education course at the 53rd Annual International SEG Meeting,
ior at intermediate angles of about 30 degrees, and (3) the September, Las Vegas.

1.0 I I I I I

V, / V, = I. 183
P,/P, = I. 067
u*=a3

!i
w
3 0.5-

.‘ -.
E _ . 3‘ =0.3
.
\
\
\
\
u
‘, =0.4

FIG. 7. Linear dependence of amplitude curvature A on the

FIG. 6. As in Figure 5 but incident on the opposite side of the ratio AoiR,. according to equation (1 I). The intercept A, is
interface. computed using B = 213 in equation (I 2).

Downloaded 09 Apr 2009 to 41.237.133.50. Redistribution subject to SEG license or copyright; see Terms of Use at http://segdl.org/
614 Shuey

Koefoed.O., 1955.On the effectof Poisson’sratio of rock strata on the

reflectioncoefficientsof planewaves:Geophys.Prosp.,3,38 l-387.
Muskat, M., and Meres, M. W.. 1940. Reflection and transmission
coefficientsfor plane waves in elastic media: Geophysics, 5, 115-155.
Ostrandcr, W. J.. 1984, Plane-wave reflection coefficients for gas sands
at nonnormal angles of incidence: Geophysics, 49, 1637-1648.
Rosa, A. L. R., 1976, Extraction of elastic parameters using seismic
reflection amplitude with offset variations: M.Sc. thesis, Univ. of
Houston.
Sherwood, J. W. C.. Hilterman, F. J., Neale, R. N., and Chen, K. C.,
1983, Synthetic seismograms with offset for a layered elastic
medium: Presented at the 1983 Offshore Technology Conference.

AVERAGE POISSON’S RATIO ~7

APPENDIX A
NO CONTRAST IN POISSON’S RATIO FIG;. A-l. Contours of A, [equation (12)] as a function of
average Poisson’s ratio o and velocity/impedance ratio B.

The quantity A,, given by equation (1 I), specifies the vari- APPENDIX B
ation of R(0) in the approximate range 0 < 0 < 30 degrees for REFLECTIONS WHICH VANISH AT NORMAL INCIDENCE
the case of no contrast in Poisson’s ratio. It depends upon
average Poisson’s ratio (J and the ratio B [equation (13)].
Previous investigations, by Muskat and Meres (1940) found
1R(0) 1 to be slowly decreasing in this case, i.e., A, is negative
and small in magnitude. Study of equation (12) confirms this is This paper focuses on R(O)/R,, the PP reflection amplitude at
usually but not always true. intermediate angles relative to that at normal incidence. A
Parameter B is the ratio of the fractional change in velocity separate analysis applies in the degenerate case R, = 0, i.e., PP
to the fractional change in impedance [equation (13)]. When reflections which vanish at normal incidence. Equation (14) for
the velocity change and density change have the same sign, the absolute amplitude should be used instead of equation (9) for
ratio B is in the range 0 < B < 1, the limit B = 0 corresponding relative amplitude. The first term of equation (14) vanishes in
to no velocity change and the limit B = 1 corresponding to no the degenerate case being considered, while the third is negligi-
density change. The density-velocity correlation introduced in ble for 0 < 30 degrees. After multiplying the product A, R,
Gardner ct al. (1974) corresponds to B = 0.8. Frequency distri- using equations (I 0), (12),and (13), I get
butions (histograms) for B can be derived from well logs. Typi- AV 30-l A0
cally they peak near B = 0.7 and have only slight tails outside
the range 0 < B < 1. Figure A-l shows that for values of B in
this range, A,, is more dependent on (J than on B, ranging from
R(O) z - ~
I/ 2(1 -a)
~
+ (I - c$ 1sin’ 0.

The brackets in equation (B-l) give the combination of elastic

(B-1)

about 0.0 for very high o to -2.0 for very low CY.At the properties connected to the absolute amplitude of a degenerate
intermediate value (T = l/3, A, is ~ 1.0 for all values of B. PP reflection. Converted PS reflections have the same offset
Average Poisson’s ratio crcan be estimated from a hypothesis dependence, but they might be distinguished by finding the PP
about the lithologies involved and from published laboratory reflection from the same interface and possibly by use of shear-
work such as Gregory (1976). For consolidated rocks the value wave detectors.
o = 0.25 has long been a standard. Unconsolidated, water- I suggest that degenerate PP reflections are rare but not
saturated elastics have a higher Poisson’s ratio, approaching nonexistent. Two casescome to mind of lithologic interfaces for
0.5 for ocean-floor sediments (Hamilton. 1979). Qualitative which R,, [equation (lo)] could be much smaller than the
knowledge of average lithology allows estimation of o with an bracketed quantity in equation (B-l): (1) dense limestone
uncertainty of iO.05. for instance. Then, provided B is in its against chert, e.g., in the Paleozoic of the western United States,
normal range 0 < H < 1, Figure A- 1 shows A, can be estimated and (2) salt against consolidated elastics in the deep Gulf of
with an uncertainty of +0.4. Mexico.

Downloaded 09 Apr 2009 to 41.237.133.50. Redistribution subject to SEG license or copyright; see Terms of Use at http://segdl.org/