1887
ASEG2013 - 23rd Geophysical Conference
  • ISSN: 2202-0586
  • E-ISSN:

Abstract

Gravity gradiometry offers multiple single components and possible combinations of components to be used in interpretation. Knowledge of the information content of components and their combinations is therefore crucial to their effectiveness and so a quantitative rating of information level is needed to guide the choice. To this end we use linear inverse theory to examine the relationship between the different tensor components and combinations thereof and the model parameters to be determined. The model used is a simple prism, characterized by seven parameters: the prism location, , , its width and breadth , the density , the depth to top , and thickness . Varying these values allows a wide variety of body shapes, e.g. blocks, plates, dykes, rods, to be considered. The Jacobian matrix, which relates parameters and their associated gravity response, clarifies the importance and stability of model parameters in the presence of data errors. In general, for single tensor components and combinations, the progression from well- to poorly-determined parameters follows the trend of , , , , , to . Ranking the estimated model errors from a range of models shows that data sets consisting of concatenated components produce the smallest parameter errors. For data sets comprising combined tensor components, the invariants and produce the smallest model errors. Of the single tensor components, gives the best performance overall, but those single components with strong directional sensitivity can produce some individual parameters with smaller estimated errors (e.g., and estimated from ).

Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.1071/ASEG2013ab104
2013-12-01
2026-01-13
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

References

  1. Barnes, G. and Lumley, J., 2011, Processing gravity gradient data: Geophysics, 72, I33-I47.
  2. Christensen, N. B. and Lawrie, K. C., 2012, Resolution analysis for selecting an appropriate airborne electromagnetic (AEM) system: Exploration Geophysics, 43, 213-227.
  3. Glenn, W. E., Ryu, J., Ward, S. H., Peeples, W. J., and Phillips, R. J., 1973, The inversion of vertical magnetic dipole sounding data: Geophysics, 38, 1109-1129.
  4. Inman, J. R., 1975, Resistivity inversion with ridge regression: Geophysics, 40,798-817.
  5. Li, Y., 2001, Processing gravity gradiometer data using an equivalent source technique: 71st Meeting, SEG, Expanded Abstracts, 1466-1469.
  6. Martinez, C. Y., and Y. Li, 2011, Inversion of regional gravity gradient data over the Vredefort Impact Structure, South Africa: 81st Meeting, SEG, Expanded Abstracts, 841-845.
  7. Martinez, C., Li, Y., Krahenbuhl, R., and Braga, M., 2013, 3D inversion of airborne gravity gradiometry data in mineral exploration: A case study in the Quadrilátero Ferrífero, Brazil: Geophysics, 78, B1-B11.
  8. Mellor, J. W., 1954, Higher mathematics for students of chemistry and physics: Dover Publications.
  9. Oldenburg, D. W. and Li, Y., 2005, Inversion for Applied Geophysics: A Tutorial, in D. K. Butler, ed., Near Surface Geophysics: SEG, 89-150.
  10. Pilkington, M., 2012, Analysis of gravity gradiometer inverse problems using optimal design measures: Geophysics, 77, G25-31.
  11. Zhdanov, M. S., Ellis, R., and Mukherjee, S., 2004, Three- dimensional regularized focusing inversion of gravity gradient tensor component data: Geophysics, 69, 925-93
/content/journals/10.1071/ASEG2013ab104
Loading
  • Article Type: Research Article
Keyword(s): gradiometer; gravity; inversion
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