Journal of Geophysics and Engineering

Journal of Geophysics and Engineering (2019) 16, 16–29 doi:10.1093/jge/gxy002

Integrating a microtremor survey and time reverse

modeling over a hydrocarbon reservoir: a case study
of Majalengka field, West Java Basin, Indonesia

Downloaded from https://academic.oup.com/jge/article-abstract/16/1/16/5289708 by guest on 03 June 2019

Abdul Haris1, *, Agus Riyanto1 , Reza Syahputra1 , Awan Gunawan2 , Muharam J Panguriseng3 ,
Surya Nuratmaja3 and Adriansyah3
1
Geology and Geophysics Study Program, FMIPA Universitas Indonesia, Kampus UI Depok, Indonesia
2
MIT-ivel, Bandung, Jawa Barat, Indonesia
3
PT Pertamina EP, Jakarta, Indonesia
*
Corresponding author: Abdul Haris. E-mail: abdulharis@sci.ui.ac.id

Received 4 July 2018, revised 4 September 2018

Accepted for publication 1 October 2018

Abstract
A microtremor survey was carried out over a hydrocarbon reservoir in Majalengka field, West Java
Basin, Indonesia, using a three-channel broadband seismometer. The objectives of this survey
were to delineate the lateral distribution of the hydrocarbon potential and to localize microtremor
sources, which are associated with the hydrocarbon reservoir. The microtremor survey was
conducted by microtremor signal recording, which was divided into two types, namely
independent and simultaneous recording. Simultaneous recording is intended for conducting
two-dimensional time reverse modeling (2D TRM), which is proposed to localize microtremor
sources. In addition, a parameter test was performed to define a reference for the microtremor
responses in terms of amplitude spectrum anomalies of the vertical component, which is
associated with the reservoir content. The parameter test was performed on the 10 wellbores,
where seven productive wells showed amplitude spectrum anomalies with the increasing
amplitude spectrum reaching its peak in the frequency range of 2–3 Hz and then decreasing to a
frequency range of 3–4 Hz. Further, delineation of hydrocarbon potential distribution is based
on the vertical–horizontal spectral ratio (VHSR) map, which is used to distinguish the amplitude
spectrum anomalies stemming from the reservoir signal and horizontal noise. The VHSR map
showed that the eastern part of the study area was identified as a potential zone. In addition, by
referring to the TRM result, the depth location of the microtremor source, which is associated
with the hydrocarbon reservoir, was predicted to be in a depth range of 1062–1091 meters.
Keywords: microtremor survey, parameter test, time reverse modeling, Majalengka West Java,
Indonesia

1. Introduction Indonesia. The geological setting of this study area is re-

garded as an intra-arc basin, which is located in the mid-
Oil and gas exploration of the Majalengka field was carried
dle part of West Java and belongs to the Bogor Trough.
out by a Dutch company in 1871 in the eastern part of the
This trough is interpreted as a sedimentary basin, which
Majalengka sub-basin. The presence of oil was indicated by
was dominated by turbidity facies and generated by a mag-
the discovery of oil seepage on the fracture zone; this discov-
matic and thrust-fault belt. An exploration phase has been
ery is recognized as the starting point of the oil industry in
© The Author(s) 2019. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the Sinopec Geophysical Research Institute. This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of
16 the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted reuse, distribution, and reproduction in any medium,
provided the original work is properly cited.
Journal of Geophysics and Engineering (2019) 16, 16–29
ongoing to develop the field. One exploration activity in-
volves microtremor surveys.
Many developments of the microtremor amplitude spec-
trum were used for the application of soil properties charac-
terization including soil resonant frequency, which is useful
for defining site vulnerability, and microzonation to seismic
activities (Lermo & Chavez-Garcia 1993; Gitterman et al.
1996; Pamuk et al. 2017; Tuncel et al. 2017; Pamuk et al.
2018). The other application of the microtremor amplitude
spectrum has been widely conducted to accomplish objec-
tives in oil and gas exploration, including investigation of
frontier areas, development of the exploration field, mini-
mization of drilling risk and reservoir monitoring (Holzner
et al. 2005; Schmalholz et al. 2006; Saenger et al. 2007).
A further application has suggested that microtremor am-
plitude anomalies are associated with resonant scattering and
amplification by porous phase reservoir rock, which is use-
ful for delineating the oil and gas reservoir distribution (Graf
et al. 2007; Holzner et al. 2009). Microtremor amplitude
spectrum anomalies are represented by a high vertical com-
ponent in the microtremor measurement over a hydrocarbon
reservoir. These phenomena are understood to be a conse-
quence of the distorted microtremor of the subsurface caused
by the nonlinear interaction of the microtremor with hydro-
carbon fluid, water and the pore rock in the reservoir.
The development and application of the microtremor
technique for oil and gas exploration have been under sci-
entific debate, particularly with regard to whether the mi-
crotremor source really originates from a hydrocarbon reser-
voir. Some publications concluded that microtremor signals
do not originate from hydrocarbon reservoirs (Ali et al. 2013;
Martini et al. 2013; Vesnaver et al. 2014). In contrast, the
measured microtremor amplitude spectrum has been used
to directly detect the reservoir of oil- and gas-bearing layers
in many cases in the Middle East field (Dangel et al. 2003;
Bloch & Akrawi 2006).
Despite all the debates and controversies, it is well under-
stood that signals in the frequency range of 1–10 Hz are a
combination of body and surface waves in the surface layer
(Green & Greenhalg 2010). In addition, some noise appears
in the microtremor data from, for example, human activity,
ocean waves and geological structure. Therefore, many fac-
tors must be considered before confidently concluding that
the microtremor signal originates from the reservoir.
In this work, we propose an integrated study of a mi-
crotremor survey over a hydrocarbon reservoir in the Ma-
jalengka field, West Java Basin, Indonesia. This study in-
cludes the acquisition, processing, interpretation and TRM
of microtremor data. Prior to the acquisition of microtremor
data, we perform a parameter test over productive and
nonproductive wells to determine the characteristics of the
microtremor spectrum, which are used as a reference. In
the processing phase, we produced the time-frequency and
17
Haris et al.
vertical–horizontal ratio (V/H) to analyze the recorded mi-
crotremor signal, which is combined with the well informa-
tion to support our interpretation. Following previous re-
search (Walker 2008; Frehner et al. 2009; Lambert et al.
2009a), the aims of this study were to delineate the lateral dis-
tribution of the hydrocarbon potential and predict the depth
of the reservoir by localizing the microtremor sources based
on the microtremor spectrum anomalies.
2. Survey area
The survey area of this study is located in Majalengka, West
Downloaded from https://academic.oup.com/jge/article-abstract/16/1/16/5289708 by guest on 03 June 2019
Java, Indonesia, about 205 km southwest of Jakarta City,
which covers an area of 136 km2 . A map of the study area is
given in figure 1. The topography of the survey area is gener-
ally dominated by lowlands in its north, center and east, while
in its west and south there are moderate to steep hills and veg-
etation cover provided by plantations, such as paddies, com-
munity gardens and teak forests.
The locations of existing wells, where the parameter test
was applied, are distributed in the different administrative
regions. These administrative regions include the District
of Cirebon (four wells), Indramayu (two wells), Majalengka
(two wells) and Brebes (two wells).
2.1. Geological framework
In terms of regional structures and stratigraphy, the geologi-
cal framework of West Java consists of four zones: the north
one is the Jakarta Coastal Plain; the middle zone is the Bo-
gor zone; the southern part of West Java is the Bandung zone
and the Southern Mountain is the final zone (van Bemmelen
1970; Muljana & Watanabe 2012).
The Jakarta Coastal Plain, which extended from east to
west, lay in the northwest part of Java Basin, particularly the
onshore area (Patmosukismo & Yahya 1974). The sediment
layer of this plain was dominated by Quaternary volcanic ma-
terial that was part of the prolific zone of oil and gas reservoirs
in West Java (Muljana & Watanabe 2012).
West Java included the shelf edge that covered the Ban-
dung zone and the deepest part of the trough that covered the
Bogor zone. The sedimentary layer of the Bogor Trough was
dominated by tertiary turbidities that had undergone geolog-
ical processes on the shelf sediment (Muljana & Watanabe
2012). The study area is part of the Majalengka basin, which
is located in the western part of the Bogor zone. The sedi-
mentation process of this basin occurred during the middle
to late Miocene and was definitely controlled by the geolog-
ical provenance. The formations were laid out from the top
to the bottom; that is, Cantayan, Cinambo and Cisaar forma-
tions formed the lower stratigraphic layer of this basin. In ad-
dition, the upper stratigraphic layer was controlled by trans-
gressive deposits (Muljana & Watanabe 2012). In terms of
Journal of Geophysics and Engineering (2019) 16, 16–29
Figure 1. Map of West Java Province; the area under study is indicated by the red square.
the petroleum system, the first two formations of the lower
stratigraphic layer were considered as a source rock and reser-
voir, and the last formation of the upper stratigraphic layer
was interpreted as a trap layer.
The southern part of West Java is known as Southern
Mountain; it consists of the Jampang formation. This zone is
dominated by lithic volcanic breccia extending from west to
east. This mountain is considered to have been generated by
the first magmatic activities that took place during the Oligo-
Miocene related to the subduction process.
2.2. Microtremor response of vertical to horizontal
spectral ratio
Low-frequency anomalies of microtremor response, which
are indicated by a frequency of less than 8 Hz, have recently
been used for oil and gas exploration. Some applications have
been conducted to delineate the hydrocarbon reservoir in the
subsurface for the frontier and production field. Dangel et al.
(2003) conducted an experiment on the microtremor re-
sponse over a hydrocarbon production field and showed the
correlation between low-frequency spectral anomalies and
the hydrocarbon reservoir. Many publications have also re-
ported the application of low-frequency anomaly analysis for
direct hydrocarbon analysis. Most of these analyses are based
on the spectral ratio.
Lambert et al. (2007) suggest that hydrocarbon reservoirs
are indicated by the dominant peak of the vertical to horizon-
tal spectral ratio (VHSR), which is greater than one. This is
because a reservoir containing hydrocarbons emits a specific
pressure wave that causes an increased vertical polarization
of ambient noise on the surface (Ali et al. 2010). This finding
led to the hypothesis that a VHSR value greater than one can
18
Haris et al.
Downloaded from https://academic.oup.com/jge/article-abstract/16/1/16/5289708 by guest on 03 June 2019
be used to identify the hydrocarbon indication (Goertz et al.
2009; Lambert et al. 2009a,b; Ali et al. 2010). The VHSR is
expressed mathematically by Equation 1:
Z( f)
VHSR ( f ) = (1)
H ( f)
where Z(f) is specrum of the vertical component and H(f)
is the horizontal component spectrum consisting of a north–
south component and an east–west component. The result
for the horizontal component is expressed by Equation 2,
where NS(f) is the north–south component spectrum and
EW(f) is the east–west component spectrum:
√
NS2 ( f ) + EW 2 ( f )
H ( f) = (2)
2
Motivated by the previous literature, this paper analyzes
the microtremor responses in terms of the amplitude spec-
trum of microtremor responses with respect to the hydro-
carbon reservoir in the West Java basin. Further, these mi-
crotremor response anomalies are specifically intended for
delineating hydrocarbon reservoirs, as they are associated
with the presence of hydrocarbons. The anomalies appear in
the frequency range of 2–6 Hz, indicated by an increasing
spectrum amplitude.
On the other hand, direct analysis of amplitude spectrum
is very risky due to the noise content of the recorded mi-
crotremor signal. This risk is caused by noise such as human
activities and wind with frequencies higher than 1 Hz. These
frequencies overlap with the frequency of microtremor re-
sponses with respect to the hydrocarbon reservoir, even the
natural movement of oceanic crust throughout the hemi-
sphere has a frequency range of 0.05–2 Hz (Saenger et al.
2009). Therefore, to minimize this risk, we propose the use of
Journal of Geophysics and Engineering (2019) 16, 16–29
Figure 2. The array of microtremor data acquisitions illustrates the independent (blue dots) and simultaneous recordings (red triangles) (a) overlaid
with the geological map, modified from Djuri (1973), (b) schematic illustration of the seismometer deployment and (c) real implementation in the field.
the VHSR to analyze the microtremor response that is asso-
ciated with the hydrocarbon reservoir (Lambert et al. 2007).
3. Data acquisition
A microtremor survey, also known as passive seismic data ac-
quisition, was successfully carried out in the Majalengka oil
field. The acquisition was performed using six seismometers
Guralp CMG-3ESP, which recorded ground velocity in the
period from June to July 2012. All seismometers recorded the
data with a sampling rate of 100 samples per second. Prior
to the data recording, a parameter test was carried out on
the surface of 10 wells to identify productive and dry wells.
This parameter test was intended to define a reference for
the microtremor response correlated to the reservoir con-
tent.
The data acquisition was carried out over 148 stations,
which were regularly distributed throughout the study area.
In general, the data recording was carried out according to
19
Haris et al.
Downloaded from https://academic.oup.com/jge/article-abstract/16/1/16/5289708 by guest on 03 June 2019
two schemes, namely independent and simultaneous record-
ing. Independent recording was applied to 148 recording
stations that recorded the data for 3 hours. To perform
the TRM, we acquired the simultaneous recordings of mi-
crotremor response, which used six seismometer stations ar-
ranged in a line, with intervals of 1250 m between stations.
The six seismometers (STA-S1 to STA-S6) were operated si-
multaneously to record microtremor responses at the same
time.
Figure 2a shows the station array that was deployed in the
study area. The blue dots illustrate independent recording
and the red triangles indicate simultaneous recording. The
data recording was performed by placing the seismometer in
a hole with a depth of 50 cm and width of 40 cm. To reduce
noise and create a proper coupling between the ground and
seismometer, we placed ceramic padding in the base of the
hole. An illustration of the seismometer deployment scheme
is shown in figure 2b, and the real implementation in the field
is shown in figure 2c.
Journal of Geophysics and Engineering (2019) 16, 16–29
Figure 3. Location map of the wellbores for the parameter test.
3.1. Parameter test
A parameter test was carried out to evaluate and define a refer-
ence for the microtremor responses associated with the reser-
voir content. This parameter test was also important for eval-
uating the characteristics of the microtremor signal, which
are significant in making decisions about the continuation of
the microtremor survey. The parameter test was applied to
over 10 wells. The location map for the 10 wells is shown in
figure 3. For this parameter test, two microtremor responses
illustrating productive and dry wells are shown in figures 4
and 5, respectively. The detailed recording times for all wells
are listed in Table 1.
Figure 4 shows the microtremor responses of the three
components recorded over the RDG-38 well. The right panel
of figure 4 illustrates the well location (top), the spectrum
of vertical components (middle) and the VHSR (bottom).
The left panel of figure 4 presents the microtremor signal of
Figure 4. The microtremor response of the three components recorded over the RDG-38 well. The right panel illustrates (top) the well location, (mid-
dle) the spectrum of the three components and(bottom) the VHSR. The left panel presents the microtremor signal of (top) the vertical component,
(middle) easting-horizontal component and (bottom) northing-horizontal component.
20
Haris et al.
the vertical component (top), easting-horizontal component
(middle) and northing-horizontal component (bottom). In
general, the amplitude spectrum of the three components
indicated amplitude spectrum anomalies represented by in-
creasing amplitude spectrum in the frequency range of 1–
4 Hz. The same anomaly was also shown in the VHSR, in-
dicated by a VHSR value greater than one. This anomaly
was correlated with the productivity of this well. In contrast,
no microtremor response anomaly appears for the dry wells.
The RCI-1 well, which is known as a dry well, exhibited no
microtremor response anomaly for either the spectrum of
vertical components or the VHSR (less than 1).
Downloaded from https://academic.oup.com/jge/article-abstract/16/1/16/5289708 by guest on 03 June 2019
Figure 5 shows the recorded microtremor response of the
RCI-1 well. The right panel of figure 5 illustrates the well
location (top), the spectrum of vertical components (mid-
dle) and the VHSR, which showed a flat amplitude (bottom).
The left panel of figure 5 presents the microtremor signal of
the vertical component (top), easting-horizontal component
(middle) and northing-horizontal component (bottom).
The detailed microtremor responses at all well locations,
which indicate the productive and dry wells, are listed in
the right column of Table 1. The plus sign represents hydro-
carbon indication, which is associated with the microtremor
response anomalies. Hydrocarbon indication was character-
ized by the appearance of microtremor response anoma-
lies for specrum of the vertical component, which was indi-
cated by the increasing amplitude spectrum in the frequency
range of 1–4 Hz. Seven of 10 wells showed a hydrocarbon
indication; these were RDG-38, AJW-1, KPT-1, SIN-2,
RBG-1, RDM-1 and JBG-1. The minus sign means that no
microtremor response anomalies were observed. The ap-
pearance of the amplitude spectrum of the vertical compo-
nent was constant and the VHSR was less than 1. The peak of
the amplitude spectrum of vertical components, which had a
Journal of Geophysics and Engineering (2019) 16, 16–29 Haris et al.

Downloaded from https://academic.oup.com/jge/article-abstract/16/1/16/5289708 by guest on 03 June 2019

Figure 5. Similar to figure 4 but for a RCI-1 well.

Table 1. List of wells for parameter tests.

No Well Name Recording Time Result

1 AGW-1 19 July 2012 −

2 RDG-38 20 July 2012 +
3 AJW-1 21 July 2012 +
4 RBG-1 22 July 2012 +
5 KPT-1 23 July 2012 +
6 SIN-2 24 July 2012 +
7 ABG-1 25 July 2012 −
8 RDM-1 10 Sep 2012 +
9 JBG-1 11 Sep 2012 +
10 RCI-1 1212 Sep 2012 − Figure 6. The spectrum of the microtremor of the vertical component
recorded for 30 minutes with a frequency range of 1–14 Hz, with raw data
− sign indicates a dry well. showing the presence of transient noise at the times of 300, 1100 and 1200
+ sign indicates a productive well.
seconds.

frequency of less than 0.5 Hz, was suspected to be back-
ground noise. Three wells showed no microtremor response
anomalies; these were AGW-1, ABG-1 and RCI-1.
4. Data processing
The interpretation of microtremor response was applied to
the noise-free data and was performed in the frequency do-
main. Thus, data processing must be applied to the raw data
to make the microtremor response interpretable. The data
processing included the following steps: (i) transforming mi-
crotremor data into a spectrogram to separate signal and
noise, (ii) temporal normalization to reduce local transient
noise, (iii) filtering by applying a bandpass filter (1–6 Hz),
(iv) calculating the VHSR and, finally, (v) mapping the lateral
distribution of the VHSR. Recorded microtremor data from
148 stations were applied with the same processing schemes.
During the analysis of the microtremor response, a type of
local transient noise was observed on the vertical component
spectrogram, as shown in figure 6. The spectrogram was gen-
erated by applying short-time Fourier transform to the mi-
crotremor record for 30 minutes. The amplitude spectrum
calculation was carried out with a window length of 20 sec-
onds and time shift of 1 second. Four high-amplitudes were
observed at the times of 280, 300, 1050 and 1200 seconds, in-
dicating the presence of local transient noise. In addition, an-
thropogenic noise was also observed at the times of 180 and
1440 seconds, emerging outside the frequency range of in-
terest of 0.2–6 Hz. This anthropogenic noise was suppressed
by a bandpass filter. The frequency range of interest of 0.2–
6 Hz was hypothetically dominated by microseismic oceanic
wave (Cessaro 1994), whereas frequencies over 6 Hz were
dominated by anthropogenic noise (Bonnefoy-Claudet et al.
2006).
4.1. Temporal normalization
To eliminate local transient noise that is characterized by a
very strong amplitude compared to the surrounding ampli-
tude, we applied the temporal normalization method adapted

21
Journal of Geophysics and Engineering (2019) 16, 16–29 Haris et al.

Downloaded from https://academic.oup.com/jge/article-abstract/16/1/16/5289708 by guest on 03 June 2019

Figure 7. The sequence steps of data processing, with (a) raw data containing noise, (b) the microtremor signal filtered by the bandpass filter with a
frequency range of 0.5–6.5 Hz, still containing transient noise, (c) the weighted moving average to remove transient noise, (d) the microtremor signal
free from noise and (e) the microtremor spectrum free from local transient noise.

from Lambert et al. (2011). The algorithm of temporal nor-
malization was applied by first applying the bandpass filter to
the raw data, which is shown in figure 7a. Figure 7b shows
the microtremor signal that was filtered by the bandpass
filter. Further, the absolute amplitude of filtered amplitude
(figure 7b) was then averaged for each window length of 20
seconds with a time shift of 1 second. Figure 7c shows the
averaged absolute amplitude that presented local transient
noise by a strong amplitude at a given time.
This averaged absolute amplitude significantly controlled
the determination of the amplitude threshold, which was
then used to normalize the local transient noise. In the
next step, we eliminated the strong amplitude of local tran-
sient noise by applying a normalization operator. Figure 7d
presents a microtremor amplitude that was free from lo-
cal transient noise after temporal normalization. The mi-
crotremor spectrum free from local transient noise is shown
in figure 7e.
4.2. Bandpass filter
In this study, we focused on the low-frequency range; thus,
we applied a lower cut-off (LF) of 1 Hz and a high cut-off
(HF) of 6 Hz. This frequency range (1–6 Hz) was applied to
eliminate low and high signals of less than 1 Hz and greater
than 6 Hz. A very low signal is commonly caused by ocean
waves and the tidal action of the earth (Cessaro 1994). A high
signal that is greater than 6 Hz is normally produced by daily
activities, wind and traffic (Bonnefoy-Claudet et al. 2006).
This signal may interfere with or cause ambiguity in the mi-
crotremor signal from the hydrocarbon reservoir.
Figure 8 shows the processed microtremor response of
the three components recorded at STA-88. The right panel
of figure 8 illustrates the well location (top), the spectrum
of the three components (middle) and the VHSR (bot-
tom). The left panel of figure 8 presents the microtremor
signal of the vertical component (top), easting-horizontal

22
Journal of Geophysics and Engineering (2019) 16, 16–29 Haris et al.

Downloaded from https://academic.oup.com/jge/article-abstract/16/1/16/5289708 by guest on 03 June 2019

Figure 8. Similiar to figure 4 but for the processed microtremor at STA 88.

component (middle) and northing-horizontal component

(bottom). Referring to the amplitude spectrum and VHSR,
the microtremor response of this station shows the anomaly
associated with a hydrocarbon indication.

5. Result and discussion

The microtremor data successfully proceeded to reduce
noise and generate the VHSR map, which was used to dis-
tinguish the amplitude spectrum anomalies stemming from
the reservoir signal. Thus we interpreted the amplitude spec-
trum of the vertical component and VHSR of all recording
Figure 9. The distribution map of the amplitude spectrum of the vertical
stations to delineate the lateral distribution of the spectrum component for all recording stations overlaid with the amplitude spectrum
anomalies. The interpretated data was then validated by per- of recorded microtremor responses over eight wells. The contour presents
forming TRM. the time structure at the top of the Baturaja formation.

5.1. Data interpretation

The microtremor data interpretation was performed by map-
ping the amplitude spectrum of the vertical component and
VHSR of all recording stations to delineate the lateral distri-
bution of the spectrum anomalies, which are associated with
hydrocarbon indication. Figure 9 shows the distribution map
of the amplitude spectrum of the vertical component for all
recording stations overlaid with the time structure of top Bat-
uraja formation and the amplitude spectrum of recorded mi-
crotremor responses over eight well locations. The area that
Figure 10. The VHSR map for all recording stations overlaid with the am-
has great potential to contain hydrocarbons is indicated by
plitude spectrum ratio of recorded microtremor responses over eight wells.
the high amplitude spectrum of vertical components (yellow
to red area). In contrast, the area that has less potential to
contain hydrocarbons is indicated by the low amplitude spec- study area. The western part of the study area has less hydro-
trum of vertical components (blue area). Referring to the dis- carbon potential.
tribution map of the amplitude spectrum of the vertical com- To reduce the effect of noisy data and to optimize our
ponent for all recording stations, the hydrocarbon reservoir interpretation, we analyzed the VHSR map. Figure 10 illus-
zone is predominantly distributed in the eastern part of the trates the distribution of the VHSR map from all recording

23
Journal of Geophysics and Engineering (2019) 16, 16–29
stations, which is overlaid with the amplitude spectrum ra-
tio of recorded microtremor responses over eight wells. We
observed that the hydrocarbon indication is represented by
a VHSR value that is greater than one (green to red colors).
This means that the amplitude spectrum of the vertical com-
ponent is more dominant than the horizontal component.
The area indicated by green to red colors has great potential
for containing hydrocarbons. The area indicated by VHSR
less than one has less potential for containing hydrocarbons.
Referring to the VHSR map for all recording stations, hydro-
carbon indication is predominantly distributed in the east-
ern part of the study area. In contrast, the western part of the
study area has less hydrocarbon potential.
These two maps show conclusive results regarding poten-
tial hydrocarbons located in the eastern part of the study area.
Furthermore, this result was also confirmed by the time struc-
ture of the Baturaja formation, which shows the eastern re-
gion as a height and has potential as a hydrocarbon trap. Re-
ferring to the geological surface, the potential area, which is
located in the eastern part, is also identified close to the fault
plane. This geological condition might be possible for a hy-
drocarbon migration path. In addition, the eastern part of the
study area lies in a volcanic layer that is difficult to image using
a conventional seismic reflection method. This situation en-
courages the use of geophysical methods other than seismic
reflection as a breakthrough for hydrocarbon exploration in
the Majalengka region.
5.2. TRM
The analysis of amplitude spectrum of the vertical compo-
nent and VHSR provides only the hydrocarbon reservoir dis-
tribution on the surface but gives no information about the
depth location in the subsurface. To predict the depth lo-
cation of the microtremor sources in the subsurface, which
is associated with the hydrocarbon reservoir, we performed
TRM. The TRM was applied based on a two-dimensional ve-
locity structural model that was based on simultaneous mi-
crotremor recording. The simultaneous recording was con-
ducted by deploying six seismometers (STA-S1, STA-S2,
STA-S3, STA-S4, STA-S5 and STA-S6) over the potential hy-
drocarbon indication.
The TRM algorithm is based on finite difference mod-
eling of acoustic wave propagation using a specific velocity
model. In principle, this algorithm estimates the location of
microtremor sources by localizing the maximum value of
particle velocity. Prior to performing the TRM on the real
dataset, we applied the algorithm to the synthetic data to ver-
ify that the algorithm worked properly.
5.2.1. Synthetic data. The synthetic dataset was generated by
applying forward modeling of the finite difference algorithm
to the geological model that was represented by the velocity
24
Haris et al.
Figure 11. Velocity section of the geological model with a relatively flat
layer but vertically strong velocity variation.
Downloaded from https://academic.oup.com/jge/article-abstract/16/1/16/5289708 by guest on 03 June 2019
model. Figure 11 shows the velocity section of the geologi-
cal model with a relatively flat layer, but the model has ver-
tically strong velocity variation. The dimensions of the geo-
logical model are a width of 5000 m and depth of 3000 m,
which is approached with the field acquisition for simultane-
ous recording. In this forward modeling, we recorded the ar-
tificial wave propagation of the microtremor source located in
the center of the subsurface (depth of 1500 m and distance of
2500 m). The microtremor source was generated by a signa-
ture of a minimum phase wavelet with a dominant frequency
of 3 Hz, as shown in figure 12. Microtremor recording was
simulated for a period of 5 seconds. The selection of the min-
imum phase is intended to have the characteristics of a real
microtremor signature.
Figure 13 illustrates a snapshot of microtremor wave prop-
agation from the microtremor source, which was located in
the center of the geological model. The early stage of wave
propagation is presented in the upper left of figure 13 for a
time lapse of 0.05 seconds and continues for time lapses of
0.25 seconds (lower left part of figure 13), 0.5 of a second
(upper right part of figure 13) and 1 seccond (lower right
part of figure 13). In the time lapse of 1 second, the artificial
microtremor was already reached and reflected back by the
boundary of the geological model. The artificial microtremor
was recorded by the three-component seismometer and its
synthetic seismograms are illustrated in figure 14.
Prior to employing the TRM algorithm, we reversed the
recorded synthetic seismogram, which was prepared as an
TRM input. Figure 15 presents the reversed synthetic seis-
mogram in time. This means that we were propagating the
recorded wave back from the seismometers to the subsurface.
Figure 16 illustrates a snapshot of the TRM of the recorded
microtremor from the seismometers in the subsurface. Sim-
ilar to forward modeling in the time lapse of 1 second, the
source on the surface began to emit a microtremor (upper
left part of figure 16). In the time lapse of 2 seconds, the
microtremor had already been distributed around the model
(lower left part of figure 16) and continued in the time lapse
of 3 seconds, when the microtremors began to interfere with
Journal of Geophysics and Engineering (2019) 16, 16–29 Haris et al.

Downloaded from https://academic.oup.com/jge/article-abstract/16/1/16/5289708 by guest on 03 June 2019

Figure 12. Signature of the minimum phase wavelet with a dominant frequency of (top) 3 Hz and (bottom) its amplitude spectrum.

Figure 13. Snapshot of wave propagation as a function of time for a time lapse of (upper left) 0.05 of a second, (upper right) 0.25 second, (lower left)
0.5 second and (lower right) 1 second.

each other (upper right part of figure 16). Finally, in the time
lapse of 3.02 seconds, we found the superposition of the max-
imum particle velocity (lower right part of figure 16), which
was associated with the microtremor source.
The experimental sequence was carried out successfully,
including the generation of synthetic data from the geological
model, time reversal of the synthetic seismogram and TRM
to estimate the origin of the microtremor source. The exper-
iment on the synthetic dataset showed that the TRM algo-
rithm can predict the origin of the microtremor source and
was confirmed to be accurate for the artificial microtremor
source location.
5.2.2. Real data. Having validated the TRM algorithm, we
applied the algorithm to the real dataset. The real dataset was
acquired by simultaneous recording, which was carried out

25
Journal of Geophysics and Engineering (2019) 16, 16–29
Figure 14. Recorded synthetic seismograms from the artificial forward modeling for the three components.
Figure 15. Time-reversed synthetic seismograms prepared for TRM.
in the survey line over the potential hydrocarbon reservoir.
In this case, the simultaneous recording was divided into two
sessions by applying three seismometers sequentially; thus,
TRM was performed by considering the first three recorded
seismograms (STA-S1 to STA-S3) and continued with the
last three recorded seismograms (STA-S4 to STA-S6).
The upper part of figure 17 illustrates the seismograms
recorded by the first three seismometers, indicated by red
(STA-S1), green (STA-S2) and blue (STA-S3). In addition,
the reversed-time seismogram is shown in the lower part of
figure 15. The displayed seismogram is the selected record for
a time window of 100 seconds. The last three seismometers,
indicated by red (STA-S4), green (STA-S5) and blue (STA-
S6), are shown in the upper part of figure 18. The reversed-
time seismogram is shown in the lower part of figure 18. The
seismogram was also selected for time windows of 100 sec-
onds.
The crucial component in applying TRM is the accuracy
of the velocity model. In this case, we used the velocity that
was extracted from seismic data. The velocity model used for
TRM for the first three seismometers (STA-S1 to STA-S3) is
shown in figure 19. In addition, the velocity model used for
26
Haris et al.
Downloaded from https://academic.oup.com/jge/article-abstract/16/1/16/5289708 by guest on 03 June 2019
TRM for the last three seismometers (STA-S4 to STA-S6) is
shown in figure 20. In general, these two velocities were simi-
lar in terms of the velocity contrast, but there was a slight dif-
ference in the layer strata. The TRM algorithm depends on
these two velocity models. In the next step, the velocity mod-
els were used to propagate the recorded seismogram from the
surface into the subsurface covering the velocity model.
Our experiment on the real dataset was performed suc-
cessfully, including the prediction of the microtremor source
as indicated by the superposition of the maximum particle
velocity. Figure 21 shows a snapshot of TRM for a time lapse
of 3.35 seconds from the simultaneous propagation from the
first three seismometers (STA-S1 to STA-S3). The maximum
particle velocity, which is associated with the microtremor
source, was identified at a distance of 5500 m and depth
of 1.048 seconds two-way time (TWT) (or 1062 m) under
STA-S3. The snapshot of TRM from the simultaneous prop-
agation from the last three seismometers (STA-S4 to STA-
S6) for a time lapse of 9.07 seconds is shown in figure 22. The
predicted microtremor source is indicated by the maximum
particle velocity, found at a distance of 6500 m and depth of
1.076 seconds TWT (or 1091 m) under STA-S4.
Journal of Geophysics and Engineering (2019) 16, 16–29 Haris et al.

Downloaded from https://academic.oup.com/jge/article-abstract/16/1/16/5289708 by guest on 03 June 2019

Figure 16. Simulation of TRM. The source on the surface begins to emit at a time lapse of (upper left) 1 second, (lower left) 2 seconds and (upper
right) 3 seconds. The localized source is indicated by the maximum particle velocity, which was obtained after 3.02 seconds, marked by a black rectangle
(lower right).

Figure 17. Recorded seismograms from (top) the first three seismometers, indicated by red (STA-S1), green (STA-S2) and blue (STA-S3), and (bot-
tom) the pair of reversed-time seismograms.

6. Conclusions cal component and VHSR. The anomalies were indicated by

the increasing amplitude spectrum in the frequency range of
The integrated microtremor survey, including acquisition,
2–4 Hz and a VHSR greater than one (VHSR > 1). Car-
processing, interpretation and TRM, was successfully carried
rying out a parameter test is the best strategy prior to con-
out over a hydrocarbon reservoir in Majalengka field, West
ducting microtremor analysis. Our parameter test on 10 wells
Java Basin, Indonesia, using three-channel broadband seis-
confirmed the real conditions of the wells and seven wells
mometers. The main purpose was to delineate the poten-
(RDG-38, AJW-1, KPT-1, SIN-2, RBG-1, RDM-1 and JBG-
tial hydrocarbon indication covering the study area and the
1) were found to be productive. Based on the amplitude
objective was achieved. Our experiment showed that hydro-
spectrum of the vertical component and the VHSR maps
carbon indication is characterized by microtremor response
for all recording stations, we concluded that the potential
anomalies in terms of the amplitude spectrum of the verti-
hydrocarbon indication is predominantly distributed in the

27
Journal of Geophysics and Engineering (2019) 16, 16–29 Haris et al.

Downloaded from https://academic.oup.com/jge/article-abstract/16/1/16/5289708 by guest on 03 June 2019

Figure 18. Similar to figure 17 but for the last three seismometers; STA-S4, STA-S5 and STA-S6.

Figure 19. Velocity model used to perform TRM for the first three seis-
Figure 21. Snapshot of TRM from the simultaneous propagation for the
mometers (STA-S1 to STA-S3).
first three seismometers (STA-S1 to STA-S3).

Figure 20. Velocity model used to perform TRM for the last three seis-
mometers (STA-S4 to STA-S6).

Figure 22. Snapshot of TRM from the simultaneous propagation for the
last three seismometers (STA-S4 to STA-S6).
eastern part of the study area. In contrast, the western part of
the study area has less of a potential hydrocarbon indication.
In addition, by referring to the TRM analysis, we identified
that the depth of the microtremor source, which is associated
Acknowledgements
with the depth of hydrocarbon indication, is in the range of
1062–1091 m under the simultaneous recording stations of We thank PT Pertamina EP for supporting this research and giving
STA-S3 and STA-S4. permission for publication.

28
Journal of Geophysics and Engineering (2019) 16, 16–29
References
Ali, M.Y., Barkat, B., Berteussen, K.A. & Small, J., 2013. A low-frequency
passive seismic array experiment over an onshore oil field in Abu Dhabi,
United Arab Emirates, Geophysics, 78, B159–B176.
Ali, M.Y., Berteussen, K.A., Small, J. & Barkat, B., 2010. Low-frequency pas-
sive seismic experiments in Abu Dhabi, United Arab Emirates: Implica-
tions for hydrocarbon detection, Geophysical Prospecting, 58, 875–899.
Bloch, G. & Akrawi, K., 2006. Application of passive seismic (IPDS)
surveys in Arabian Peninsula, in First EAGE Passive Seismic Workshop-
Exploration and Monitoring Applications. European Association of Geo-
scientists and Engineers, 3990 DB Houten, Netherlands, A28.
Bonnefoy-Claudet, S., Cotton, F. & Bard, P.Y., 2006. The nature of noise
wavefield and its applications for site effects studies: A literature review,
Earth-Science Reviews, 79, 205–227.
Cessaro, R.K., 1994. Sources of primary and secondary microseisms, Bul-
letin of the Seismological Society of America, 84, 142–148.
Dangel, S., Schaepman, M.E., Stoll, E.P., Carniel, R., Barzandji, O., Rode,
E.D. & Singer, J.M., 2003. Phenomenology of tremor-like signals ob-
served over hydrocarbon reservoirs, Journal of Volcanology and Geother-
mal Research, 128, 135–158.
Djuri, H.M.D., 1973. Peta Geologi Lembar Arjawinangun, Jawa Skala
1:1000.000. Direktorat Geologi Bandung.
Frehner, M., Schmalholz, S.M. & Podladchikov, Y., 2009. Spectral modi-
fication of seismic waves propagating through solids exhibiting a reso-
nance frequency: a 1-D coupled wave propagation–oscillation model,
Geophysical Journal International, 176, 589–600.
Gitterman, Y., Zaslavsky, Y., Shapira, A. & Shtivelman, V., 1996. Empirical
site response evaluations: case studies in Israel, Soil Dynamic and Earth-
quake Engineering, 15, 447–463.
Goertz, A.V., Schechinger, B., Koerbe, M. & Krajewski, P., 2009. A low-
frequency passive seismic survey in an urban setting in Germany, in 71st
EAGE Conference and Exhibition incorporating SPE EUROPEC 2009. Eu-
ropean Association of Geoscientists and Engineers, 3990 DB Houten,
Netherlands, S039.
Graf, R., Schmalholz, S.M., Podladchikov, Y. & Saenger, E.H., 2007. Pas-
sive low frequency spectral analysis: Exploring a new field in geophysics,
World Oil, January 2017, 47–52.
Green, A.G. & Greenhalgh, S., 2010. Comment on ‘Low-frequency mi-
crotremor anomalies at an oil and gas field in Voitsdorf, Austria’ by
Marc-André Lambert, Stefan Schmalholz, Erik H. Saenger and Brian
Steiner, Geophysical Prospecting, 57, 393–411, Geophysical Prospecting,
58, 335–339.
Holzner, R., Eschle, P., Dangel, S., Frehner, M., Narayanan, C. & Lakehal,
D., 2009. Hydrocarbon microtremors interpreted as nonlinear oscilla-
tions driven by oceanic background waves, Communications in Nonlinear
Science and Numerical Simulation, 14, 160–173.
Holzner, R., Eschle, P., Zürcher, H., Lambert, M., Graf, R., Dangel, S. &
Meier, P.F., 2005. Applying microtremor analysis to identify hydrocar-
bon reservoirs, First Break, 23, 41–48.
Lambert, M.A., Nguyen, T., Saenger, E.H. & Schmalholz, S.M., 2011. Spec-
tral analysis of ambient ground-motion—Noise reduction techniques
and a methodology for mapping horizontal inhomogeneity, Journal of
Applied Geophysics, 74, 100–113.
Lambert, M.A., Schmalholz, S.M., Saenger, E.H. & Podladchikov, Y.Y.,
2007. Low-frequency anomalies in spectral ratios of single-station mi-
crotremor measurements: Observations across an oil and gas field in
Austria, in SEG Technical Program Expanded Abstracts 2007, Society of
Exploration Geophysicists, Tulsa, OK, USA, pp. 1352–1356.
29
Haris et al.
Lambert, M.A., Schmalholz, S.M., Saenger, E.H. & Steiner, B., 2009a. Low-
frequency microtremor anomalies at an oil and gas field in Voitsdorf,
Austria, Geophysical Prospecting, 57, 393–411.
Lambert, M.A., Schmalholz, S.M., Saenger, E.H. & Steiner, B., 2009b. Pas-
sive seismic study at an oil and gas field in Voitsdorf, Austria, In EAGE
Passive Seismic Workshop − Exploration and Monitoring Applications, Li-
massol, Cyprus. In Expanded Abstracts A (Vol. 34). European Associa-
tion of Geoscientists and Engineers, 3990 DB Houten, Netherlands,
A34.
Lermo, J. & Chavez-Garcia, F.J., 1993. Site effect evaluation using spectral
ratios with only one station, Bulletin of the Seismological Society of Amer-
ica, 83, 1574–1594.
Martini, F. et al., 2013. A passive low-frequency seismic experiment in the
Albertine Graben, Uganda, Geophysical Prospecting, 61, 39–61.
Downloaded from https://academic.oup.com/jge/article-abstract/16/1/16/5289708 by guest on 03 June 2019
Muljana, B. & Watanabe, K., 2012. Modal and sandstone composition of
the representative turbidite from the Majalengka sub-Basin, West Java
Indonesia, Journal of Geography and Geology, 4, 3–17.
Pamuk, E., Özdağ, Ö.C., Özyalın, Ş. & Akgün, M., 2017. Soil character-
ization of Tınaztepe region (İzmir/Turkey) using surface wave meth-
ods and Nakamura (HVSR) technique, Earthquake Engineering and En-
gineering Vibration, 16, 447–458.
Pamuk, E., Özdağ, Ö.C., Tunçel, A., Özyalın, Ş. & Akgün, M., 2018. Local
site effects evaluation for Aliağa/İzmir using HVSR (Nakamura tech-
nique) and MASW methods, Natural Hazards, 90, 887–899.
Patmosukismo, S. & Yahya, I., 1974. The basement configuration of the
north west Java area, in Indonesian Petroleum Association, Proceedings 3rd
Annual Convention, pp. 129–152.
Saenger, E.H., Schmalholz, S.M., Lambert, M.A., Nguyen, T.T., Torres, A.,
Metzger, S. & Méndez-Hernández, E., 2009. A passive seismic survey
over a gas field: analysis of low-frequency anomalies, Geophysics, 74,
O29–O40.
Saenger, E.H., Schmalholz, S.M., Podladchikov, Y.Y., Holzner, R., Lambert,
M., Steiner, B. & Frehner, M., 2007. Scientific strategy to explain ob-
served spectral anomalies over hydrocarbon reservoirs generated by mi-
crotremors, in 69th EAGE Conference and Exhibition incorporating SPE
EUROPEC 2007. European Association of Geoscientists and Engineers,
3990 DB Houten, Netherlands, p. A033.
Schmalholz, S.M., Podladchikov, Y.Y., Holzner, R. & Saenger, E.H., 2006.
Scientific strategy to explain observed spectral anomalies over hydrocar-
bon reservoirs generated by microtremors, in First EAGE Passive Seismic
Workshop-Exploration and Monitoring Applications. European Associa-
tion of Geoscientists and Engineers, 3990 DB Houten, Netherlands, p.
A06.
Tuncel, A., Özdag, Ö.C., Pamuk, E. & Akgün, M., 2017. Comparison of
the soil dynamic amplification factor and soil amplification by using mi-
crotremor and MASW methods respectively, in IOP Conference Series:
Earth and Environmental Science (Vol. 95, No. 3, p. 032006). IOP Pub-
lishing.
van Bemmelen, R.W., 1970. The geology of Indonesia. 1, A. General geol-
ogy of Indonesia and adjacent archipelagoes: the East Indies, inclusive of
the British part of Borneo, the Malay Peninsula, the Philippine Islands,
Eastern New Guinea, Christmas Island, and the Andaman-and Nicobar
Islands. Nijhoff.
Vesnaver, A., Da Col, F., Jervis, M., Kaka, S.I. & Nieto, D., 2014. On the use
of microtremors for hydrocarbon detection, Geophysical Prospecting, 62,
897–909.
Walker, D., 2008. Recent developments in low frequency spectral analysis
of passive seismic data, First Break, 26, 69–77.