1887
1st Australasian Exploration Geoscience Conference – Exploration Innovation Integration
  • ISSN: 2202-0586
  • E-ISSN:
PDF

Abstract

Ground Magnetotelluric (MT) data acquired today are typically broadband, covering 0.001 to >1000 Hz with inter-site spacing typically at 500 to 1000 m. Airborne Z-axis tipper data (ZTEM) are sampled at higher spatial density but usually band-limited to frequencies >30Hz. We analyze a pair of overlapping 3D surveys to examine lateral and vertical spatial sensitivity.

The MT data include a 2D line and a 3D survey. The line data also has magnetic tipper data that allows for a direct comparison with ZTEM; in the overlapping frequency range the agreement between the two magnetic data sets is good, with ZTEM showing higher lateral smoothness.

CGG’s RLM-3D non-linear conjugate gradient MT-CSEM inversion engine was extended to accurately model the ZTEM data, using measured sensor altimetry data and detailed 3D topography. Both single domain and joint inversions of the ZTEM and MT data were carried out. A suite of inversions were run to test the influence of starting resistivity and regularization parameters on output models, equally for MT, ZTEM, and joint MT+ZTEM inversions to allow for direct comparison.

ZTEM single domain inversion results depend strongly on the starting resistivity value, confirming that the method maps relative variations rather than absolute resistivity values, as expected for magnetics-only measurements. Shallower lateral structure shows qualitative agreement with the MT, but at depth resistivity from ZTEM inversion is driven by model regularization only. Joint inversion improved the relatively shallow section, calibrating the ZTEM resistivities and adding continuity between the MT sites. Below around 1000m depth, the 3D resistivity model is controlled by the MT data alone. Our overall conclusion is that today’s 3D broadband MT only benefits from joint MT-ZTEM acquisition and inversion workflows in the case of sparse MT station spacing.

© 2018 ASEG
Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.1071/ASEG2018abT5_2F
2018-12-01
2026-01-23

  • From This Site

    /content/journals/10.1071/ASEG2018abT5_2F
    dcterms_title,dcterms_subject,pub_keyword
    -contentType:Journal -contentType:Contributor -contentType:Concept -contentType:Institution
    10
    5
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

References

  1. Alumbaugh, D., Huang, H., Livermore, J., and Velasco, M.S., 2016, Resistivity imaging in a fold and thrust belt using ZTEM and sparse MT data: First Break, 34, 65-72.
  2. Caldwell, T.G., Bibby, H.M., and Brown, C., 2004, The magnetotelluric phase tensor: Geophysical Journal International, 158, 2, 457-469.
  3. Holtham, E., and Oldenburg, D.W., 2010, Three-dimensional inversion of MT and ZTEM data: Society of Exploration Geophysicists Annual Meeting, Denver, 655-659.
  4. Hubert, J., Lee, B.M., Liu, L., Unsworth, M.J., Richards, J.P., Abbassi, B., Cheng, L.Z., Oldenburg, D.W., Legault, J.M., and Rebagliati, M., 2016, Three-dimensional imaging of a Ag-Au-rich epithermal system in British Columbia, Canada, using airborne z -axis tipper electromagnetic and ground-based magnetotelluric data: Geophysics ,81(1), B1-B12.
  5. Lee, B., Unsworth, M.J., Hubert, J., Richards, J., Legault, J.M., 2017, 3-D Joint Z-axis Tipper Electromagnetic and Magnetotelluric Inversion: A case study from the Morrison porphyry Cu-Au-Mo deposit, British 2 Columbia, Canada: Accepted for publication in Geophysical Prospecting.
  6. Legault, J.M., Lombardo, S., Zhao, S., Clavero, J., Aguirre, I., Arcos, R., and Lira, E., 2012, ZTEM airborne AFMAG EM and ground geophysical survey comparisons over the Pampa Lirima Geothermal Field in Northern Chile: Geothermal Research Council Annual Meeting, Reno (NV), Transactions, 36, 1001-1008.
  7. Sasaki, Y., Yi, M.-J., and Choi, J., 2014, 2D and 3D separate and joint inversion of airborne ZTEM and ground AMT data: Synthetic model studies: Journal of Applied Geophysics, 104, 149-155.
  8. Sattel, D., and Witherly, K., 2015, The 3D joint inversion of MT and ZTEM data: 24th International Geophysical Conference and Exhibition, Perth, Western Australia.
  9. Soyer, W., Mackie, R., Hallinan, S., Pavesi, A., Nordquist, G., Suminar, A., Intani, R., and Nelson, C., 2017, Multi-Physics Imaging of the Darajat Field: Accepted for presentation at the Geothermal Research Council Annual Meeting, Salt Lake City (UT), Transactions, 41.
  10. Soyer, W., 2002, Analysis of geomagnetic variations in the Central and Southern Andes: PhD thesis, Free University Berlin.
  11. Stark, M.A., Soyer, W., Hallinan, S., and Watts, M.D., 2013, Distortion effects on magnetotelluric sounding data investigated by 3D Modeling of high-resolution topography: Geothermal Research Council Annual Meeting, Las Vegas (NV), Transactions, 37, 521-527.
  12. Legault, J.M., Lombardo, S., Zhao, S., Clavero, J., Aguirre, I., Arcos, R., and Lira, E., 2012, ZTEM airborne AFMAG EM and ground geophysical survey comparisons over the Pampa Lirima Geothermal Field in Northern Chile: Geothermal Research Council Annual Meeting, Reno (NV), Transactions, 36, 1001-1008.
  13. Wannamaker, P.E., and Legault, J.M., 2014, Two-dimensional joint inversion of ZTEM and MT plane-wave EM data for near surface applications: Symposium on the Application of Geophysics to Engineering and Environmental Problems, Boston, Expanded Abstracts, 18-23.
  14. Watts, M.D. and Mackie, R., 2012, Detectability of 3-D sulphide targets with AFMAG: SEG Technical Program Expanded Abstracts, 1-4.
/content/journals/10.1071/ASEG2018abT5_2F
Loading
  • Article Type: Research Article
Keyword(s): 3D joint inversion; MT; ZTEM

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