1887
Volume 51, Issue 4
  • ISSN: 0812-3985
  • E-ISSN: 1834-7533
PDF

Abstract

ABSTRACT

The phase tensor of magnetotellurics is analysed in terms of its invariants with regard to axes rotation. These invariants are displayed as conic sections (ellipses), eigenvectors, and as Mohr diagrams. Attention is drawn to a supplementary ellipse which may be constructed to complement the usual phase tensor ellipse. The two ellipses together help convey the full information available from phase tensor analysis. For the cases of 1D and 2D regional structure, the ellipses, eigenvectors and Mohr diagrams show distinctive features, such as no preferred strike direction in the case of 1D, and a consistent strike (or across-strike) direction in the case of 2D. In the general case of 3D regional structure a “closest 2D strike” direction may be apparent, though there is a range of possibilities for this quantity. The range includes Bahr's regional strike estimates, which are shown to be given by the eigenvectors of the phase tensor. Generally in this paper, the phase tensor will be referred to as the CBB tensor, in recognition of its discoverers Caldwell, Bibby and Brown.

© 2020 The Author(s). Published by Informa UK Limited, trading as Taylor & Francis Group
Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.1080/08123985.2020.1717333
2020-07-03
2026-01-19

  • From This Site

    /content/journals/10.1080/08123985.2020.1717333
    dcterms_title,dcterms_subject,pub_keyword
    -contentType:Journal -contentType:Contributor -contentType:Concept -contentType:Institution
    10
    5
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

/deliver/fulltext/texg20/51/4/08123985.2020.1717333.html?itemId=/content/journals/10.1080/08123985.2020.1717333&mimeType=html&fmt=ahah

References

  1. AvdeevaA., MoorkampM., AvdeevD., JegenM., and MiensopustM.2015. Three-dimensional inversion of magnetotelluric impedance tensor data and full distortion matrix. Geophysical Journal International202: 464–81. doi: 10.1093/gji/ggv144
     https://doi.org/10.1093/gji/ggv144 [Google Scholar]
  2. BahrK.1988. Interpretation of the magnetotelluric impedance tensor: Regional induction and local telluric distortion. Journal of Geophysics62: 119–27.
     [Google Scholar]
  3. BibbyH.M.1986. Analysis of multi-source bipole-quadrupole resistivity surveys using the apparent resistivity tensor. Geophysics51: 972–83. doi: 10.1190/1.1442155
     https://doi.org/10.1190/1.1442155 [Google Scholar]
  4. BibbyH.M., CaldwellT.G., and BrownC.2005. Determinable and non-determinable parameters of galvanic distortion in magnetotellurics. Geophysical Journal International163: 915–30. doi: 10.1111/j.1365‑246X.2005.02779.x
     https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-246X.2005.02779.x [Google Scholar]
  5. BookerJ.R.2014. The magnetotelluric phase tensor: A critical review. Surveys in Geophysics35: 7–40. doi: 10.1007/s10712‑013‑9234‑2
     https://doi.org/10.1007/s10712-013-9234-2 [Google Scholar]
  6. CaldwellT.G., BibbyH.M., and BrownC.2004. The magnetotelluric phase tensor. Geophysical Journal International158: 457–69. doi: 10.1111/j.1365‑246X.2004.02281.x
     https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-246X.2004.02281.x [Google Scholar]
  7. CaldwellT.G., BibbyH.M., and BrownC.2007. Comment on “The magnetotelluric phase tensor” by T. Grant Caldwell, Hugh M. Bibby and Colin Brown – reply. Geophysical Journal International171: 567. doi: 10.1111/j.1365‑246X.2007.03491.x
     https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-246X.2007.03491.x [Google Scholar]
  8. ChaveA.D., and JonesA.G., eds. 2012. The magnetotelluric method: Theory and practice. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
  9. FrazerR.A., DuncanW.J., and CollarA.R.1963. Elementary matrices. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
  10. HeiseW., CaldwellT.G., BibbyH.M., and BrownC.2006. Anisotropy and phase splits in magnetotellurics. Physics of the Earth and Planetary Interiors158: 107–21. doi: 10.1016/j.pepi.2006.03.021
     https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pepi.2006.03.021 [Google Scholar]
  11. KelbertA., MeqbelN., EgbertG.D., and TandonK.2014. ModEM: A modular system for inversion of electromagnetic geophysical data. Computers and Geosciences66: 40–53. doi: 10.1016/j.cageo.2014.01.010
     https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cageo.2014.01.010 [Google Scholar]
  12. KeyK., and ConstableS.2011. Coast effect distortion of marine magnetotelluric data: Insights from a pilot study offshore northeastern Japan. Physics of the Earth and Planetary Interiors184: 194–207. doi: 10.1016/j.pepi.2010.11.008
     https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pepi.2010.11.008 [Google Scholar]
  13. LilleyF.E.M.1976. Diagrams for magnetotelluric data. Geophysics41: 766–70. doi: 10.1190/1.1440648
     https://doi.org/10.1190/1.1440648 [Google Scholar]
  14. LilleyF.E.M.1998a. Magnetotelluric tensor decomposition: Part I, Theory for a basic procedure. Geophysics63: 1885–97. doi: 10.1190/1.1444481
     https://doi.org/10.1190/1.1444481 [Google Scholar]
  15. LilleyF.E.M.1998b. Magnetotelluric tensor decomposition: Part II, Examples of a basic procedure. Geophysics63: 1898–1907. doi: 10.1190/1.1444482
     https://doi.org/10.1190/1.1444482 [Google Scholar]
  16. LilleyF.E.M.2012. Magnetotelluric tensor decomposition: Insights from linear algebra and Mohr diagrams. In New achievements in geoscience, ed. H.S. Lim, chap. 4, 81–106. London: InTech Open Science.
  17. LilleyF.E.M.2016. The distortion tensor of magnetotellurics: A tutorial on some properties. Exploration Geophysics47, no. 2: 85–99. doi: 10.1071/EG14093
     https://doi.org/10.1071/EG14093 [Google Scholar]
  18. LilleyF.E.M.2018. The magnetotelluric tensor: Improved invariants for its decomposition, especially ‘the 7th’. Exploration Geophysics49: 622–36. doi: 10.1071/EG17053
     https://doi.org/10.1071/EG17053 [Google Scholar]
  19. LilleyF.E.M., and PhillipsC.J.E.2018. A property of the determinant of a $2\times 2 $2×2 tensor relevant to magnetotellurics. Geophysics83: A59–A64. doi: 10.1190/geo2017‑0315.1
     https://doi.org/10.1190/geo2017-0315.1 [Google Scholar]
  20. LilleyF.E.M., and WeaverJ.T.2010. Phases greater than $90^\circ $90∘ in MT data: Analysis using dimensionality tools. Journal of Applied Geophysics70: 9–16. doi: 10.1016/j.jappgeo.2009.08.007
     https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jappgeo.2009.08.007 [Google Scholar]
  21. MoorkampM.2007. Comment on “The magnetotelluric phase tensor” by T. Grant Caldwell, Hugh M. Bibby and Colin Brown. Geophysical Journal International171: 565–6. doi: 10.1111/j.1365‑246X.2007.03490.x
     https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-246X.2007.03490.x [Google Scholar]
  22. NyeJ.F.1957. Physical properties of crystals. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
  23. RobertsonK.E., HeinsonG.S., TaylorD.H., and ThielS.2017. The lithospheric transition between the Delamerian and Lachlan orogens in western Victoria: New insights from 3D magnetotelluric imaging. Australian Journal of Earth Sciences64: 385–99. doi: 10.1080/08120099.2017.1292953
     https://doi.org/10.1080/08120099.2017.1292953 [Google Scholar]
  24. SelwayK., ThielS., and KeyK.2012. A simple 2-D explanation for negative phases in TE magnetotelluric data. Geophysical Journal International188: 945–58. doi: 10.1111/j.1365‑246X.2011.05312.x
     https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-246X.2011.05312.x [Google Scholar]
  25. StrangG.2006. Linear algebra and its applications. 4th ed. San Francisco: Cengage–Brooks/Cole.
  26. TietzeK., RitterO., and EgbertG.D.2015. 3-D joint inversion of the magnetotelluric phase tensor and vertical magnetic transfer functions. Geophysical Journal International203: 1128–48. doi: 10.1093/gji/ggv347
     https://doi.org/10.1093/gji/ggv347 [Google Scholar]
  27. WeaverJ.T., and LilleyF.E.M.2004. Using Mohr Circles to identify regional dimensionality and strike angle from distorted magnetotelluric data. Exploration Geophysics35: 251–4. doi: 10.1071/EG04251
     https://doi.org/10.1071/EG04251 [Google Scholar]
  28. WeaverJ.T., AgarwalA K., and LilleyF.E.M.2000. Characterization of the magnetotelluric tensor in terms of its invariants. Geophysical Journal International141: 321–36. doi: 10.1046/j.1365‑246x.2000.00089.x
     https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1365-246x.2000.00089.x [Google Scholar]
  29. WeaverJ.T., AgarwalA.K., and LilleyF.E.M.2003. The relationship between the magnetotelluric tensor invariants and the phase tensor of Caldwell, Bibby and Brown. In Three-dimensional electromagnetics III, ed. J. Macnae and G. Liu, no. 43 in Paper, 1–8. Sydney: ASEG.
  30. WeaverJ.T., AgarwalA.K., and LilleyF.E.M.2006. The relationship between the magnetotelluric tensor invariants and the phase tensor of Caldwell, Bibby and Brown. Exploration Geophysics37: 261–7. doi: 10.1071/EG06261
     https://doi.org/10.1071/EG06261 [Google Scholar]
  31. WeideltP., and ChaveA.D.2012. The magnetotelluric response function. In The magnetotelluric method: Theory and practice, ed. A.D. Chave and A.G. Jones, 122–164. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
  32. WesselP., and SmithW.H.F.1998. New, improved version of generic mapping tools released. Eos, Transactions American Geophysical Union79: 579. doi: 10.1029/98EO00426
     https://doi.org/10.1029/98EO00426 [Google Scholar]
/content/journals/10.1080/08123985.2020.1717333
Loading
Magnetotellurics: the CBB or phase tensor and Bahr's 1988 analysis
Exploration Geophysics 51, 401 (2020); https://doi.org/10.1080/08123985.2020.1717333
/content/journals/10.1080/08123985.2020.1717333
/content/journals/10.1080/08123985.2020.1717333
Loading

Data & Media loading...

  • Article Type: Research Article
Keyword(s): Decomposition; electromagnetism; geomagnetism; geophysics; magnetotellurics; tensor

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