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

Abstract

The recording of raw or streamed data, as done by CGG during MEGATEM and HELITEM surveys, allows for the extraction of passive EM responses, inadvertently recorded during AEM surveys. These include powerline responses in data sets acquired in the vicinity of strong powerlines, VLF responses in data sets recorded with sufficiently high sampling frequencies and potentially AFMAG responses in the frequency range 25-600 Hz.

The recording of the three-component AEM data allows for the vector processing of these passive EM responses, including the derivation and modelling of the tipper data. Conductivity information can be derived from the tipper data with an apparent conductivity transformation and, more rigorously, with 2D and 3D inversions that take into account the terrain’s topography.

The extraction of passive EM responses is demonstrated on a number of data sets. A powerline apparent-conductivity grid derived from a MEGATEM survey near Timmins, Canada indicates conductivity structures not evident in the corresponding active-source EM data. VLF responses derived from South American MEGATEM and North American HELITEM data show a strong correlation to topography. The former were successfully modelled with 2D and 3D inversions, and the derived shallow conductivity structures confirm and complement the information extracted from the active-source EM data.

Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.1071/ASEG2018abT7_4F
2018-12-01
2026-01-25
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

References

  1. Bastani, M., and L.B. Pedersen, 1997, The reliability of aeroplane attitude determination using the main geomagnetic field with application to tensor VLF data analysis: Geophysical Prospecting, 45, 831-841.
  2. Becken, M., and L.B. Pedersen, 2003, Transformation of VLF anomaly maps into apparent resistivity and phase: Geophysics, 68, 497-505.
  3. Bosch, F.P., and I. Muller, 2005, Improved karst exploration by VLF-EM-gradient survey: comparison with other geophysical methods: Near Surface Geophysics, 3, 299-310.
  4. DeGroot-Hedlin, C., and S. Constable, 1990, Occam’s inversion to generate smooth two-dimensional models from magnetotelluric data: Geophysics, 55, 1613-1624.
  5. DeLugao, P.P., and P. Wannamaker, 1996, Calculating the two-dimensional magnetotelluric Jacobian in finite elements using reciprocity: Geophysical Journal International, 127, 806-810.
  6. Golkowski, M., and U.S. Inan, 2008, Multistation observations of ELF/VLF whistler mode chorus: Journal of Geophysical Research, 113, A08210.
  7. Haber, E., E. Holtham, J. Granek, D. Marchant, D. Oldenburg, C. Schwarzbach, and R. Shekhtman, 2012, An adaptive mesh method for electromagnetic inverse problems: SEG conference, expanded abstracts.
  8. Holtham, E., and D.W. Oldenburg, 2010, Three-dimensional inversion of ZTEM data: Geophysical Journal International, 182, 168182.
  9. Kamm, J., and L.B. Pedersen, 2014, Inversion of airborne tensor VLF data using integral equations: Geophysical Journal International, 198, 775-794.
  10. Labson, V.F., and H.G. Medberry, 1989, Airborne resistivity mapping using powerline sources: 59th Annual Meeting, SEG, Expanded
  11. Abstracts, 138-140.
  12. Labson, V.F., A. Becker, H.F. Morrison and U. Conti, 1985, Geophysical exploration with audiofrequency natural magnetic fields: Geophysics, 50, 656-664.
  13. Legault, J.M., 2012, Ten years of passive airborne AFMAG EM development for mineral exploration: 82nd International Exposition and Annual Meeting, SEG, Expanded Abstracts.
  14. Legault, J.M., S. Lombardo, S. Zhao, J. Clavero, I. Aguirre, R. Arcos and E. Lira, 2012, ZTEM airborne AFMAG EM and ground geophysical survey comparisons over the Pampa Lirima geothermal field in northern Chile: Geotech website.
  15. Lane, R., C. Plunkett, A. Price, A. Green and Y. Hu, 1998, Streamed data - a source of insight and improvement for time domain airborne EM: Exploration Geophysics, 29, 16-23.
  16. Lo, B., J. Legault, P. Kuzmin and M. Combrinck, 2009, Z-TEM (airborne AFMAG) tests over unconformity uranium deposits: ASEG conference, extended abstracts.
  17. Macnae, J., 2015, Stripping very low frequency communication signals with minimum shift keying encoding from streamed time-domain electromagnetic data: Geophysics, 80, E343-E353.
  18. Macnae, J., 1984, Survey design for multicomponent electromagnetic systems: Geophysics 49, 265-273.
  19. Nabighian, M.N., 1984, Toward a three-dimensional automatic interpretation of potential field data via generalized Hilbert transforms: Fundamental relations: Geophysics 49, 780-786.
  20. Nyboe, N.S and S.S. Mai, 2017, Recent advances in Skytem receiver system technologies: EAGE Near Surface Geoscience conference, Extended Abstracts.
  21. Pedersen, L.B., W. Qian W., L. Dynesius and P. Zhang, 1994, An airborne tensor VLF system. From concept to realization: Geophysical Prospecting, 42, 863-883.
  22. Rasmussen S., N.S. Nyboe, S.S. Mai and J.J. Larsen, 2017, A robust framework for cancellation of MSK interference in TEM data: EAGE Near Surface Geoscience conference, Extended Abstracts.
  23. Sattel, D., and E. Battig, 2018, Square-wave processing of MEGATEM data: AEGC conference, Extended Abstracts.
  24. Sattel, D., and E. Battig, 2016, Reprocessing streaming MEGATEM data for square-wave EM, VLF and AFMAG responses: 86th Annual Meeting, SEG, Expanded Abstracts, 2144-2148.
  25. Sattel, D., and K. Witherly, 2012, An overview of ZTEM interpretation tools, In R.J.L. Lane (editor), Natural Fields EM Forum 2012: Abstracts from the ASEG Natural Fields EM Forum 2012: Published by Geoscience Australia, Geoscience Australia Record 2012/04.
  26. Spies, B., 1989, Depth of investigation in electromagnetic sounding methods: Geophysics 46, 1137-1147.
  27. Vallee M.A., R.S. Smith and P. Keating, 2010, Case history of combined airborne time-domain electromagnetics and power-line field survey in Chibougamau, Canada: Geophysics, 75, B67-B72.
  28. Vozoff K., 1972, The magnetotelluric method in the exploration of sedimentary basins: Geophysics, 37, 98-141.
  29. Ward, S.H., J.O. O’Donnell, R. Rivera, G.H. Ware and D.C. Fraser, 1966, AFMAG - applications and limitations: Geophysics 31, 576-605.
/content/journals/10.1071/ASEG2018abT7_4F
Loading
  • Article Type: Research Article
Keyword(s): AFMAG; airborne electromagnetics; data processing; inversion; VLF
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