1887
  1. Home
  2. A-Z Publications
  3. Geophysical Prospecting
  4. Volume 62, Issue 2
  5. Article
Volume 62, Issue 2
  • E-ISSN: 1365-2478

Abstract

ABSTRACT

Potential field interpretation can be carried out using multiscale methods. This class of methods analyses a multiscale data set, which is built by upward continuation of the original data to a number of altitudes conveniently chosen. Euler deconvolution can be cast into this multiscale environment by analysing data along ridges of potential fields, e.g., at those points along lines across scales where the field or its horizontal or vertical derivative respectively is zero. Previous work has shown that Euler equations are notably simplified along any of these ridges. Since a given anomaly may generate one or more ridges we describe in this paper how Euler deconvolution may be used to jointly invert data along all of them, so performing a multiridge Euler deconvolution. The method enjoys the stable and high‐resolution properties of multiscale methods, due to the composite upward continuation/vertical differentiation filter used. Such a physically‐based field transformation can have a positive effect on reducing both high‐wavenumber noise and interference or regional field effects. Multiridge Euler deconvolution can also be applied to the modulus of an analytic signal, gravity/magnetic gradient tensor components or Hilbert transform components. The advantages of using multiridge Euler deconvolution compared to single ridge Euler deconvolution include improved solution clustering, increased number of solutions, improvement of accuracy of the results obtainable from some types of ridges and greater ease in the selection of ridges to invert. The multiscale approach is particularly well suited to deal with non‐ideal sources. In these cases, our strategy is to find the optimal combination of upward continuation altitude range and data differentiation order, such that the field could be sensed as approximately homogeneous and then characterized by a structural index close to an integer value. This allows us to estimate depths related to the top or the centre of the structure.

Copyright © 2014 European Association of Geoscientists & Engineers © 2013 European Association of Geoscientists & Engineers
Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.1111/1365-2478.12078
2013-10-11
2024-04-28

  • From This Site

    /content/journals/10.1111/1365-2478.12078
    dcterms_title,dcterms_subject,pub_keyword
    -contentType:Journal -contentType:Contributor -contentType:Concept -contentType:Institution
    10
    5
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

References

  1. FediM.2007. DEXP: A fast method to determine the depth and the structural index of potential fields sources. Geophysics72(1), I1–I11.
     [Google Scholar]
  2. FediM., CellaF., QuartaT. and VillaniA.2010. 2D Continuous Wavelet Transform of potential fields due to extended source distributions. Applied and Computational Harmonic Analysis28(3), 320–337.
     [Google Scholar]
  3. FediM., FlorioG. and CasconeL.2012. Multiscale analysis of potential fields by a ridge consistency criterion: The reconstruction of the Bishop basement. Geophysical Journal International188(1), 103–114. doi: 10.1111/j.1365‐246X.2011.05259.x
     [Google Scholar]
  4. FediM., FlorioG. and QuartaT.2009. Multiridge analysis of potential fields: Geometrical method and reduced Euler deconvolution. Geophysics74, L53–L65.
     [Google Scholar]
  5. FitzGeraldD., ReidA. and McInerneyP.2004. New discrimination techniques for Euler deconvolution. Computers and Geosciences30, 461–469.
     [Google Scholar]
  6. FlorioG. and FediM.2006. Euler deconvolution of vertical profiles of potential field data. 76th Annual International Meeting, SEG, Expanded Abstracts, 958–962.
  7. FlorioG., FediM. and PastekaR.2006. On the application of Euler deconvolution to the analytic signal. Geophysics71(6), L87–L93.
     [Google Scholar]
  8. FlorioG., FediM. and RapollaA.2009. Interpretation of regional aeromagnetic data by multiscale methods: The case of Southern Apennines (Italy). Geophysical Prospecting57, 479–489.
     [Google Scholar]
  9. GerovskaD., StavrevP. and Arauzo‐BravoM.J.2005. Finite difference Euler deconvolution algorithm applied to the interpretation of magnetic data from Northern Bulgaria. Pure and Applied Geophysics162, 591–608.
     [Google Scholar]
  10. KeatingP. and PilkingtonM.2004. Euler deconvolution of the analytic signal and its application to magnetic interpretation. Geophysical Prospecting52, 165–182.
     [Google Scholar]
  11. MauriG., Williams‐JonesG. and SaraccoG.2010. Depth determinations of shallow hydrothermal systems by self‐potential and multi‐scale wavelet tomography. Journal of Volcanology and Geothermal Research191, 233–244.
     [Google Scholar]
  12. MenkeW.1989. Geophysical Data Analysis: Discrete Inverse Theory. Academic Press, San Diego, CA. 285 pp.
     [Google Scholar]
  13. MoreauF., GibertD., SaraccoG. and HolschneiderM.1999. Identification of sources of potential fields with the continuous wavelet transform – Basic theory. Journal of Geophysical Research, 104(B3), 5003–5013.
     [Google Scholar]
  14. NabighianM.N. and HansenR.O.2001. Unification of Euler and Werner deconvolution in three dimensions via the generalized Hilbert transform. Geophysics66, 1805–1810.
     [Google Scholar]
  15. Ontario Geological Survey
    Ontario Geological Survey2003. Ontario airborne geophysical surveys, magnetic and electromagnetic data, Matheson area. Ontario Geological Survey, Geophysical Data Set 1101 –Revised.
  16. QuartaT.A.M.2009. Euler homogeneity equation along ridges for a rapid estimation of potential field source properties. Geophysical Prospecting57, 527–542.
     [Google Scholar]
  17. RefordM.S. and SumnerJ.S.1964. Aeromagnetics. Geophysics29, 482–516.
     [Google Scholar]
  18. ReidA.B., AllsopJ.M., GranserH., MillettA.J. and SomertonI.W.1990. Magnetic interpretation in three dimensions using Euler deconvolution. Geophysics55, 80–91.
     [Google Scholar]
  19. SailhacP., GaldeanoA., GibertD., MoreauF. and DelorC.2000. Identification of sources of potential fields with the continuous wavelet transform: Complex wavelets and application to aeromagnetic profiles in French Guiana. Journal of Geophysical Research105, 19 455–19 475.
     [Google Scholar]
  20. SailhacP. and GibertD.2003. Identification of sources of potential fields with the continuous wavelet transform: Two dimensional wavelets and multipolar approximations. Journal of Geophysical Research108, B5, 2262.
     [Google Scholar]
  21. SalemA., RavatD., SmithR. and UshijimaK.2005. Interpretation of magnetic data using an enhanced local wavenumber (ELW) method. Geophysics70(2), L7–L12.
     [Google Scholar]
  22. StavrevP. and ReidA.B.2007. Degrees of homogeneity of potential fields and structural indices of Euler deconvolution. Geophysics72, L1–L12.
     [Google Scholar]
  23. StavrevP. and ReidA.B.2010. Euler deconvolution of gravity anomalies from thick contact/fault structures with extended negative structural index. Geophysics75, I51–I58.
     [Google Scholar]
  24. SteenlandN.C.1968. Discussion on ‘The geomagnetic gradiometer’ by H.A. Slack, V.M. Lynch, and L. Langan (Geophysics, 1967, 877– 892). Geophysics33, 680–683.
     [Google Scholar]
  25. ThompsonD.T.1982. EULDPH: A new technique for making computer‐assisted depth estimates from magnetic data. Geophysics47, 31–37.
     [Google Scholar]
  26. ThurstonJ. 2010. Euler deconvolution in the presence of sheets with finite widths. Geophysics75(3), L71–L78.
     [Google Scholar]
  27. VallèeM.A., KeatingP., SmithR.S. and St‐HilaireC.2004. Estimating depth and model type using the continuous wavelet transform of magnetic data. Geophysics69, 191–199.
     [Google Scholar]
  28. ZhangC., MushayandebvuM.F., ReidA.B., FairheadD. and OdegardM.E.2000. Euler deconvolution of gravity tensor gradient data. Geophysics65, 512–520.
     [Google Scholar]
http://instance.metastore.ingenta.com/content/journals/10.1111/1365-2478.12078
Loading
Multiridge Euler deconvolution
Geophysical Prospecting 62, 333 (2014); https://doi.org/10.1111/1365-2478.12078
/content/journals/10.1111/1365-2478.12078
/content/journals/10.1111/1365-2478.12078
Loading

Data & Media loading...

  • Article Type: Research Article
Keyword(s): Euler deconvolution; Multiscale methods; Potential fields

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