1887
Volume 67, Issue 2
  • E-ISSN: 1365-2478

Abstract

ABSTRACT

Potential field datasets are commonly broken down in the space domain into amplitude (total gradient, or analytic signal amplitude) and phase (tilt angle) components as part of the data processing and interpretation procedure. However, it is possible to reconstruct the data again in the space domain from the amplitude and phase, and if they have been modified then a filtered dataset will be produced. For example, modified derivatives and filters which are based on them (such as the tilt angle and the theta map) can be produced. In addition, the modification of the data amplitude prior to the reconstruction of the signal allows controllable automatic gain control filters to be designed. The procedures are demonstrated on aeromagnetic and gravity data from Southern Africa.

Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.1111/1365-2478.12722
2018-12-04
2024-03-29
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

References

  1. Blakely, R.J.1995. Potential Theory in Gravity and Magnetic Applications. Cambridge University Press, 441 pp.
    [Google Scholar]
  2. BuchmannJ.P.1960. Exploration of a geophysical anomaly at Trompsburg, Orange Free State, South Africa. Transactions of the Geological Society of South Africa63, 1–10.
    [Google Scholar]
  3. CooperG.R.J.2016. The downward continuation of the tilt‐angle. Near Surface Geophysics14, 385–390.
    [Google Scholar]
  4. CooperG.R.J. and Cowan, D.R.2006. Enhancing potential field data using filters based on the local phase. Computers & Geosciences32, 1585–1591.
    [Google Scholar]
  5. HsuS‐K., SibuetJ‐C. and ShyuC‐T.1996. High‐resolution detection of geologic boundaries from potential‐field anomalies: An enhanced analytic signal technique. Geophysics61, 373–386.
    [Google Scholar]
  6. MillerH.G. and SinghV.1994. Potential field tilt—A new concept for location of potential field sources. Journal of Applied Geophysics32, 213–217.
    [Google Scholar]
  7. ReidA.B., AllsopJ‐M., GranserH., MilletA.J. and SomertonI.W.1990. Magnetic interpretation in three dimensions using Euler deconvolution. Geophysics55, 80–91.
    [Google Scholar]
  8. TanerM.T., Koehler, F. and Sheriff, R.E.1979. Complex seismic trace analysis. Geophysics44, 1041–1063.
    [Google Scholar]
  9. ThompsonD.T.1982. Euldph: A new technique for making computer assisted depth estimates from magnetic data. Geophysics47, 31–37.
    [Google Scholar]
  10. ThurstonJ.B. and SmithR.S.1997. Automatic conversion of magnetic data to depth, dip, and susceptibility contrast using the SPI method. Geophysics62, 807–813.
    [Google Scholar]
  11. WijnsC.Perez, C. and Kowalczyk, P.2005. Theta map: Edge detection in magnetic data. Geophysics70(4), L39–L43.
    [Google Scholar]
http://instance.metastore.ingenta.com/content/journals/10.1111/1365-2478.12722
Loading
/content/journals/10.1111/1365-2478.12722
Loading

Data & Media loading...

  • Article Type: Research Article
Keyword(s): Gravity; Magnetics; Tilt angle

Most Cited This Month Most Cited RSS feed

This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address
Approval was a Success
Invalid data
An Error Occurred
Approval was partially successful, following selected items could not be processed due to error