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

Abstract

Three-dimensional (3D) geological models describe geological information in a 3D space using structural data and topological rules as inputs. They are necessary in any project focused on / studying the properties of the subsurface as they express our understanding of geometries at depth. These models, however, are fraught with uncertainties originating from the inherent flaws of the modelling engines combined with input uncertainty. Because 3D geological models are often used for impactful decision making it is critical that all 3D geological models provide reliable estimates of uncertainty.

This research focusses on the effect of various structural input data uncertainty propagation in 3D geological modelling. This aim is achieved using Monte Carlo simulation uncertainty estimation (MCUE), a stochastic method which samples from predefined probability distributions that are estimates of the uncertainty of the original input data set.

MCUE is used to produce a series of altered unique data sets. The altered data sets are used as inputs to produce a range of plausible 3D models. These models are then combined into a series of probabilistic models to propagate uncertainty from the input data to a probabilistic model.

The present paper presents an innovative way to improve MCUE by using model clustering based on topological signatures and sensitivity analysis.

Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.1071/ASEG2018abW10_2D
2018-12-01
2026-01-18
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

References

  1. Aldiss, D. T., Black, M. G., Entwisle, D. C., Page, D. P., & R.L., T. (2012). Benefits of a 3D geological model for major tunnelling works: an example from Farringdon, east-central London, UK Quarterly Journal of Engineering Geology and Hydrogeology, 45(4), 22. doi:10.1144/qjegh2011-066
  2. Bardossy, G., & Fodor, J. (2001). Traditional and NewWays to Handle Uncertainty in Geology. Natural Ressources Research, 10(3), 9.
  3. Beven, K., & Binley, A. (1992). The future of distributed models: model calibration and uncertainty prediction. Hydrological processes, 6(3), 279-298.
  4. Camacho, R. A., Martin, J. L., McAnally, W., Diaz-Ramirez, J., Rodriguez, H., Sucsy, P., & Zhang, S. (2015). A comparison of Bayesian methods for uncertainty analysis in hydraulic and hydrodynamic modeling. JAWRA Journal of the American Water Resources Association, 51(5), 1372-1393.
  5. Cammack, R. (2016). Developing an engineering geological model in the fractured and brecciated rocks of a copper porphyry deposit. Geological Society, London, Engineering Geology Special Publications, 27(1), 93-100. doi: 10.1144/egsp27.8
  6. de la Varga, M., & Wellmann, J. F. (2016). Structural geologic modeling as an inference problem: A Bayesian perspective. Interpretation, 4(3), SM1-SM16.
  7. Delgado Marchal, J., Garrido Manrique, J., Lenti, L., Lopez Casado, C., Martino, S., & Sierra, F. J. (2015). Unconventional pseudostatic stability analysis of the Diezma landslide (Granada, Spain) based on a high-resolution engineering-geological model. doi:10.1016/j.enggeo.2014.11.002
  8. Dominy, S. C. N., Mark A.;Annels,Alwyn E. (2002). Errors and Uncertainty in Mineral Resource and Ore Reserve Estimation: The Importance of Getting it Right. Explor. Mining Geology, 11(1), 22.
  9. Ennis-King, J., & Paterson, L. (2002). Engineering Aspects of Geological Sequestration of Carbon Dioxide. Paper presented at the Asia Pacific Oil and Gas Conference and Exhibition Melbourne, Australia.
  10. Ester, M., Kriegel, H.-P., Sander, J., & Xiaowei, X. (1996). A Density-Based Algorithm for Discovering Clusters in Large Spatia Databases with Noise. Paper presented at the 2nd International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining (KDD-96).
  11. Giraud, J., Pakyuz-Charrier, E., Jessell, M., Lindsay, M., Martin, R., & Ogarko, V. (2017). Uncertainty reduction through geologically conditioned petrophysical constraints in joint inversion Geophysics.
  12. Jairo, N. (2013). Estimation and propagation of parameter uncertainty in lumped hydrological models: A case study of HSPF model applied to luxapallila creek watershed in southeast USA. Journal of Hydrogeology and Hydrologic Engineering.
  13. Jessell, M., Ailleres, L., de Kemp, E. A., Lindsay, M. D., Wellmann, J. F., Hillier, M., . . . Martin, R. (2014). Next Generation Three-Dimensional Geologic Modeling and Inversion Society of Economic Geologists Special Publication 18 (pp. 12): Society of Economic Geologists.
  14. Lindsay, M. D., Ailleres, L., Jessell, M., de Kemp, E. A., & Betts, P. G. (2012). Locating and quantifying geological uncertainty in three-dimensional models: Analysis of the Gippsland Basin, southeastern Australia. Tectonophysics, 546-547, 10-27. doi:10.1016/j.tecto.2012.04.007
  15. Moeck, I. S. (2014). Catalog of geothermal play types based on geologic controls. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 37, 867-882. doi:10.1016/j.rser.2014.05.032
  16. Nordahl, K., & Ringrose, P. S. (2008). Identifying the representative elementary volume for permeability in heterolithic deposits using numerical rock models. Mathematical Geosciences, 40(7), 753-771.
  17. Novakova, L., & Pavlis, T. L. (2017). Assessment of the precision of smart phones and tablets for measurement of planar orientations: A case study. Journal of Structural Geology, 97, 93-103.
  18. Prada, S., Cruz, J. V., & Figueira, C. (2016). Using stable isotopes to characterize groundwater recharge sources in the volcanic island of Madeira, Portugal. Journal of Hydrology, 536, 409-425. doi:10.1016/j.jhydrol.2016.03.009
  19. Shannon, C. E. (1948). A Mathematical Theory of Communication. The Bell System Technical Journal, 27, 55.
  20. Thiele, S. T., Jessell, M. W., Lindsay, M., Ogarko, V., Wellmann, J. F., & Pakyuz-Charrier, E. (2016). The topology of geology 1: Topological analysis. Journal of Structural Geology, 91, 27-38.
  21. Thiele, S. T., Jessell, M. W., Lindsay, M., Wellmann, J. F., & Pakyuz-Charrier, E. (2016). The topology of geology 2: Topological uncertainty. Journal of Structural Geology, 91, 74-87.
  22. Vos, P. C., Bunnik, F. P. M., Cohen, K. M., & Cremer, H. (2015). A staged geogenetic approach to underwater archaeological prospection in the Port of Rotterdam (Yangtzehaven, Maasvlakte, The Netherlands): A geological and palaeoenvironmental case study for local mapping of Mesolithic lowland landscapes. Quaternary International, 367, 4-31. doi:10.1016/j.quaint.2014.11.056
  23. Wellmann, J. F. (2013). Information Theory for Correlation Analysis and Estimation of Uncertainty Reduction in Maps and Models. Entropy, 15(4), 1464-1485. doi:10.3390/e15041464
  24. Wellmann, J. F., & Regenauer-Lieb, K. (2012). Uncertainties have a meaning: Information entropy as a quality measure for 3-D geological models. Tectonophysics, 526-529, 207-216. doi:10.1016/j.tecto.2011.05.001
/content/journals/10.1071/ASEG2018abW10_2D
Loading
  • Article Type: Research Article
Keyword(s): 3D modelling; Monte-Carlo simulations
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