1887
Volume 32, Issue 1
  • ISSN: 0812-3985
  • E-ISSN: 1834-7533

Abstract

With the advent of wideband three-component airborne electromagnetic (AEM) systems, the primary-field components at the sensor (bird) can be determined with a high degree of accuracy. Using all three components of the primary-field information, it is possible to determine the vertical, longitudinal and transverse offsets of the bird from the transmitting loop.

At altitudes high above the ground surface, the primary-field values will be unaffected by any response from the ground, so the estimated offsets should be fairly accurate. This has been confirmed by independent measurements from a laser range finder. At survey altitudes, laser range finders are not practical, so the primary-field method has been used to dynamically estimate the bird position. In two examples presented, the estimated positions are not affected significantly by ground response, and therefore appear to be reasonable estimates. For a typical flight using a bird and tow cable with reasonably high drag coefficients, the bird position is confined to within a few metres of the mean position.

The dynamic bird position was used as one of the inputs to a conductivity/depth estimation algorithm and the conductivity/depth results are compared with the results obtained when the nominal bird position was used. In this particular example, using the estimated position rather than the nominal position resulted in minimal improvement of the conductivity/depth section.

Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.1071/EG01014
2001-03-01
2026-01-15
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

References

  1. Annan, A.P., 1983, Effect of differential transmitter/receiver motion on airborne transient EM interpretation: Presented at the 53rd Ann. Internat. Mtg., Soc. Expl. Geophys., Expanded Abstract, 622-623.
  2. Annan, A.P., 1984, Compensation of towed bird AEM system data for differential transmitter-receiver motion: Presented at the 54th Ann. Internat. Mtg., Soc. Expl. Geophys., Expanded Abstract, 80-81.
  3. Green, A., 1998, Altitude correction of time domain AEM data for image display and geological mapping using the apparent dipole depth (ADD) method: Exploration Geophysics, 29, 87-91.
  4. Jupp, D. L. B., and Vozoff, K., 1975, Stable iterative methods for the inversion of geophysical data: Geophys. J. R. Astr. Soc., 42, 957-976.
  5. King, A., and Macnae, J., 2001, Modeling the EM inductive limit using surface currents, Geophysics (in press).
  6. Macnae, J.C., Smith, R., Polzer, B.D., Lamontagne, Y., and Klinkert, P.S., 1991, Conductivity-depth imaging of airborne electromagnetic step-response data: Geophysics, 56, 102-114.
  7. Palacky, G.J., andWest, G.F., 1991, Airborne electromagnetic methods: in Nabighian, M.N., Ed., Electromagnetic methods in applied geophysics - volume 2, application, part B: Soc. Expl. Geophys., Inv. in Geophys. 3, 811-879.
  8. Press, W.H., Teukolsky, S.A., Vetterling, W.T., and Flannery, B.P., 1992, Numerical Recipes in C: the art of scientific computing: Cambridge University Press.
  9. Smith, R.S., 1999, On the airborne transient EM response of a magnetic anomaly: Exploration Geophysics, 30, 157-159.
  10. Smith, R.S., 2000, The realizable resistive limit: a new concept for mapping geological features spanning a broad range of conductances: Geophysics, 65, 1124-1127.
  11. Stolz, E.M., and Macnae, J., 1998, Evaluating EM waveforms by singular-value decomposition of exponential basis functions: Geophysics, 63, 64-74.
  12. Wolfgram, P., and Karlik, G., 1995, Conductivity-depth transform of GEOTEM data: Exploration Geophysics, 26, 179-185.
/content/journals/10.1071/EG01014
Loading

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