1887
Volume 47, Issue 1
  • ISSN: 0812-3985
  • E-ISSN: 1834-7533

Abstract

A novel automatic data interpretation algorithm is presented for modelling airborne electromagnetic (AEM) data acquired over resistive environments, using a single-component (vertical) transmitter, where the position and orientation of a dipole conductor is allowed to vary in three dimensions. The algorithm assumes that the magnetic fields produced from compact vortex currents are expressed as a linear combinations of the fields arising from dipoles in the subsurface oriented parallel to the [1, 0, 0], [0, 1, 0], and [0, 0, 1], unit vectors. In this manner, AEM responses can be represented as 12 terms. The relative size of each term in the decomposition can be used to determine geometrical information about the orientation of the subsurface conductivity structure. The geometrical parameters of the dipole (location, depth, dip, strike) are estimated using a combination of a look-up table and a matrix inverted in a least-squares sense.

Tests on 703 synthetic models show that the algorithm is capable of extracting most of the correct geometrical parameters of a dipole conductor when three-component receiver data is included in the interpretation procedure. The algorithm is unstable when the target is perfectly horizontal, as the strike is undefined. Ambiguities may occur in predicting the orientation of the dipole conductor if -component data is excluded from the analysis.

Application of our approach to an anomaly on line 15 of the Reid Mahaffy test site yields geometrical parameters in reasonable agreement with previous authors. However, our algorithm provides additional information on the strike and offset from the traverse line of the conductor. Disparities in the values of predicted dip and depth are within the range of numerical precision. The index of fit was better when strike and offset were included in the interpretation procedure. Tests on the data from line 15701 of the Chibougamau MEGATEM survey shows that the algorithm is applicable to situations where three-component AEM data is available.

ASEG
Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.1071/EG14070
2016-03-01
2026-01-13

  • From This Site

    /content/journals/10.1071/EG14070
    dcterms_title,dcterms_subject,pub_keyword
    -contentType:Journal -contentType:Contributor -contentType:Concept -contentType:Institution
    10
    5
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

References

  1. Cooper G. R. J. 2004 A semi-automatic procedure for the interpretation of geophysical data: Exploration Geophysics 35 182 187 10.1071/EG04182
    https://doi.org/10.1071/EG04182 [Google Scholar]
  2. Cox L. H. Wilson G. A. Zhdanov M. S. 2010 3D inversion of airborne electromagnetic data using a moving footprint: Exploration Geophysics 41 250 259
    [Google Scholar]
  3. Hallof, P. G., 1992, Electrical IP and resistivity: grounded electrical methods in geophysical exploration, in R. Van Blaricom, ed., Practical Geophysics II: Northwest Mining Association, 39–138.
  4. Hartman R. R. Teskey D. J. Friedberg J. L. 1971 A system for rapid digital aeromagnetic interpretation: Geophysics 36 891 918 10.1190/1.1440223
    https://doi.org/10.1190/1.1440223 [Google Scholar]
  5. Liu G. Asten M. W. 1993 Fast approximate solutions of transient EM response to a target buried beneath a conductive overburden: Geophysics 58 810 817 10.1190/1.1443466
    https://doi.org/10.1190/1.1443466 [Google Scholar]
  6. Lodha G. S. West G. F. 1976 Practical airborne EM (AEM) interpretation using a sphere model: Geophysics 41 1157 1169 10.1190/1.2035910
    https://doi.org/10.1190/1.2035910 [Google Scholar]
  7. Macnae J. Lamontagne Y. 1987 Imaging quasi-layered conductive structures by simple processing of transient electromagnetic data: Geophysics 52 545 554 10.1190/1.1442323
    https://doi.org/10.1190/1.1442323 [Google Scholar]
  8. Macnae J. C. Smith R. Polzer B. D. Lamontagne Y. Klinkert P. S. 1991 Conductivity-depth imaging of airborne electromagnetic step-response data: Geophysics 56 102 114 10.1190/1.1442945
    https://doi.org/10.1190/1.1442945 [Google Scholar]
  9. Naudy H. 1971 Automatic determination of depth on aeromagnetic profiles: Geophysics 36 717 722 10.1190/1.1440207
    https://doi.org/10.1190/1.1440207 [Google Scholar]
  10. Paradis, S. J., 2010, Surficial geology, Chibougamau, Quebec/Geologie des formations superficielles, Chibougamau, Quebec: Geological Survey of Canada, Open File 6064, scale 1 : 250 000.
  11. Reid J. Fitzpatrick A. Godber K. 2010 An overview of the SkyTEM airborne EM system with Australian examples: Preview 145 27 37
    [Google Scholar]
  12. Sattel D. Reid J. 2006 Modelling airborne EM anomalies with magnetic and electric dipoles buried inside a layered earth: Exploration Geophysics 37 254 260 10.1071/EG06254
    https://doi.org/10.1071/EG06254 [Google Scholar]
  13. Smith R. S. Chouteau M. C. 2006 Combining airborne electromagnetic data from alternate flight directions to improve data interpretability: the virtual symmetric array: Geophysics 71 G35 G41 10.1190/1.2187745
    https://doi.org/10.1190/1.2187745 [Google Scholar]
  14. Smith R. S. Lee T. J. 2001 The impulse-response moments of a conductive sphere in a uniform field, a versatile and efficient electromagnetic model: Exploration Geophysics 32 113 118 10.1071/EG01113
    https://doi.org/10.1071/EG01113 [Google Scholar]
  15. Smith R. S. Lee T. J. 2002 The moments of the impulse response: a new paradigm for the interpretation of transient electromagnetic data: Geophysics 67 1095 1103 10.1190/1.1500370
    https://doi.org/10.1190/1.1500370 [Google Scholar]
  16. Smith R. S. Salem A. S. 2007 A discrete conductor transformation of airborne electromagnetic data: Near Surface Geophysics 5 87 95
    [Google Scholar]
  17. Thompson D. T. 1982 EULDPH - a new technique for making computer-assisted depth estimates from magnetic data: Geophysics 47 31 37 10.1190/1.1441278
    https://doi.org/10.1190/1.1441278 [Google Scholar]
  18. Wolfgram P. Karlik G. 1995 Conductivity-depth transform of GEOTEM data: Exploration Geophysics 26 179 185 10.1071/EG995179
    https://doi.org/10.1071/EG995179 [Google Scholar]
  19. Wolfgram P. Hyde M. Thompson S. 1998 How to find localised conductors in GEOTEM data: Exploration Geophysics 29 665 670 10.1071/EG998665
    https://doi.org/10.1071/EG998665 [Google Scholar]
  20. Yang D. Oldenburg D. W. Haber E. 2014 3-D inversion of airborne electromagnetic data parallelized and accelerated by local mesh and adaptive soundings: Geophysical Journal International 196 1492 1507 10.1093/gji/ggt465
    https://doi.org/10.1093/gji/ggt465 [Google Scholar]
  21. Zhdanov, M. S., 2002, Geophysical inverse theory and regularization problems (Methods in Geochemistry and Geophysics Series, Vol. 36): Elsevier, 62–69.
  22. Zhdanov, M. S., 2009, Geophysical electromagnetic theory and methods (Methods in Geochemistry and Geophysics Series, Vol. 43): Elsevier, 643.
/content/journals/10.1071/EG14070
Loading
Decomposing the electromagnetic response of magnetic dipoles to determine the geometric parameters of a dipole conductor
Exploration Geophysics 47, 13 (2016); https://doi.org/10.1071/EG14070
/content/journals/10.1071/EG14070
/content/journals/10.1071/EG14070
Loading

Data & Media loading...

  • Article Type: Research Article
Keyword(s): airborne electromagnetic; conductor; dipole; discrete; interpretation

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