Distributed Acoustic Sensing in Geophysics. Группа авторов

Figure 4.5 Time domain and STFT spectrogram of sweeping frequency signal.

Figure 4.6 Amplitude response curve of PGC‐DAS system.

4.4. FIELD TRIAL OF NEAR‐SURFACE SEISMIC EXPERIMENT WITH PGC‐DAS SYSTEM

A near‐surface seismic experiment based on fiber optic cables and PGC‐DAS system was conducted in Hebei Province, China. On the site, a 7 mm diameter fiber optic cable (Figure 4.7d) of about 430 m was buried in an approximate L shape at 0.4 m depth with a 230 m cable in Line 1 and a 200 m cable in Line 2 (Figures 4.7a and 4.7b). PGC‐DAS system was connected at one end of the fiber optic cable to record multichannel seismic data at a sampling rate of 2 kHz with a spatial sampling interval of 1 m. For comparison, 80 conventional three‐component (3C) geophones (Figure 4.7c) were buried along the cable with an interval of around 5 m. A vibroseis truck was employed as an active source at seven designed positions (P1, P2, P3, P4, P5, P6, and P7) around the fiber optic cable to investigate directivity, since optical fiber is mostly sensitive to axial strain along the fiber and lacks broadside sensitivity due to its silica glass nature.

Figure 4.8 shows multichannel seismic recordings of PGC‐DAS system and geophone array in Line 1 at active source position #1. Since axial is the most sensitive direction of the fiber, the data of a 3C geophone for x‐component were used. Both 40 channels’ recordings for DAS system and geophones’ array with the same interval of 5 m at similar positions were selected. Difference of seismic first arrivals’ time between those two systems is due to trigger unsynchronization. DAS data were qualitatively similar to the signals observed on the geophones. Both direct wave and surface were clearly presented. However, there was apparently isolated noise in DAS data before the first arrivals (e.g., in Channels of 11, 151, and 161) due to interference fading. Simple contrast shows that this PGC‐DAS system can provide reliable information to image and explore the shallow subsurface under this fiber cable.

4.5. CONCLUSIONS

      We propose a real‐time DAS system based on PGC demodulation algorithm. Compared with the previous work (Fang et al., 2015), it brings a 15.6 dB improvement in phase noise. The average noise could reach ~5 × 10^‐4 rad/√Hz, and the strain sensitivity is as small as 8.5 pε/√Hz for a 10 m spatial resolution. This PGC‐DAS system could measure the dynamic vibration signal from 2 Hz to 1 kHz over a 10 km long optical fiber, with a linear coefficient R² of 0.99941 and a minimum spatial interval of 0.4 m. The near‐surface seismic experimental results show that DAS data are qualitatively similar to the signals observed on the geophones. These facts suggest that DAS technology provides a novel and highly valuable tool for geophysical science in a wider sense. Moreover, PGC‐DAS system has potential advantages in reducing size and power consumption due to simple structure and efficient phase demodulation algorithm, and a mini‐PGC‐DAS module is under development, with a size of 150 mm × 300 mm × 110 mm (width × depth × height) and a power consumption of 25 W, which could work at the bottom for submarine application.

Figure 4.7 Field trial of near‐surface seismic experiment. (a) Plan view of experimental layout, (b) photo of the buried fiber optic cable, (c) photo of a 3C geophone, and (d) structure of the fiber optic cable.

Figure 4.8 Initial data of DAS system and geophone array for x‐component at P1 in Line 1.

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

      This work was funded by the National Natural Science Foundation of China (Grant Nos. 61875184 and 61775210), the National Key Research and Development Program of China (Grant No. 2017YFB0405500), the Strategic Priority Research Program of the Chinese Academy of Sciences (Grant Nos. XDC02040500 and XDA22040105), and State Key Laboratory of Geodesy and Earth’s Dynamics, Institute of Geodesy and Geophysics, Chinese Academy of Sciences (Grant No. SKLGED2019‐5‐4‐E).

REFERENCES

      1 Alekseev, A. E., Vdovenko, V. S., Gorshkov, B. G., Potapov, V. T., & Sergachev, I. A. (2014a). A phase‐sensitive optical time‐domain reflectometer with dual‐pulse phase modulated probe signal. Laser Physics, 24(5).

      2 Alekseev, A. E., Vdovenko, V. S., Gorshkov, B. G., Potapov, V. T., & Sergachev, I. A. (2014b). Phase‐sensitive optical coherence reflectometer with differential phase‐shift keying of probe pulses. Quantum Electronics, 44(10), 965–969.

      3 Alekseev, A. E., Vdovenko, V. S., Gorshkov, B. G., Potapov, V. T., & Simikin, D. E. (2015). A phase‐sensitive optical time‐domain reflectometer with dual‐pulse diverse frequency probe signal. Laser Physics, 25(6), 065101.

      4 Bao, X., Zhou, D., Baker, C., & Chen L. (2017). Recent development in the distributed fiber optic acoustic and ultrasonic detection. Journal of Lightwave Technology, 35(16), 3256–3267.

      5 Dandridge, A., Tveten, A. B., & Giallorenzi, T. G. (1982). Homodyne demodulation scheme for fiber optic sensors using phase generated carrier. IEEE Journal of Quantum Electronics, 18(10), 1647–1653.

      6 Fang, G., Xu, T. W., Feng, S. W., & Li, F. (2015). Phase‐sensitive optical time domain reflectometer based on phase generated carrier algorithm. Journal of Lightwave Technology, 33(13), 2811–2816.

      7 Feng, S., Xu, T., Huang, J., Yang, Y., Ma, L., & Li, F. (2018). Sub‐meter spatial resolution phase‐sensitive optical time‐domain reflectometry system using double interferometers. Applied Sciences, 8(10), 1899.

      8 Hartog, A. (2017). An introduction to distributed optical fiber sensors. CRC Press, Taylor & Francis Group.

      9 He, X., Liu, F., Qin, M., Cao, S., Gu, L., Zheng, X., & Zhang, M. (2017). Phase‐sensitive optical time‐domain reflectometry with heterodyne demodulation. 2017 25th Optical Fiber Sensors Conference (OFS) (pp. 1–4).

      10 Huang, S., Lin, W., Chen M., Hung, S., & Chao, H. (1996). Crosstalk analysis and system design of time‐division multiplexing of polarization‐insensitive fiber optic Michelson interferometric sensors. Journal of Lightwave Technology, 14(6), 1488–1500.

      11 Juarez, J. C., Maier, E. W., Choi, K. N., & Taylor, H. F. (2005). Distributed fiber‐optic intrusion sensor system. Journal of Lightwave Technology, 23(6), 2081–2087.

      12 Lu, Y., Zhu, T., Chen, L., & Bao, X. (2010). Distributed vibration sensor based on coherent detection of phase‐OTDR. Journal of Lightwave Technology, 28(22), 3243–3249.

      13 Masoudi, A., Belal, M., & Newson, T. P. (2013). A distributed optical fibre dynamic strain sensor based on phase‐OTDR. Measurement Science and Technology, 24(8), 085204.

      14 Park, J., Lee, W., & Taylor, H. F. (1998). Fiber optic intrusion sensor with the configuration of an optical time‐domain