1887
Volume 68 Number 1
  • E-ISSN: 1365-2478
PDF

Abstract

ABSTRACT

Recent advancements in geophysical exploration have been realized through reliably integrating unmanned aerial vehicle platforms with lightweight, high‐resolution magnetometer payloads. Unmanned aerial vehicle aeromagnetic surveys can provide a contemporary data product between the two end‐members of coverage and resolution attained using manned airborne and terrestrial magnetic surveys. This new data product is achievable because unmanned aerial vehicle platforms can safely traverse with magnetometer payloads at flight elevations closer to ground targets than manned airborne surveys, while also delivering an increased coverage rate compared to walking conventional terrestrial surveys. This is a promising new development for geophysical and mineral exploration applications, especially in variable terrains. A three‐dimensional unmanned aerial vehicle aeromagnetic survey was conducted within the Shebandowan Greenstone Belt, northwest of Thunder Bay, Ontario, Canada, in July 2017. A series of two‐dimensional grids (∼500 m × 700 m) were flown at approximate elevations of 35, 45 and 70 m above ground level using a Dà‐Jiāng Innovations multi‐rotor unmanned aerial vehicle (S900) and a GEM Systems, Inc., Potassium Vapour Magnetometer (GSMP‐35U). In total, over 48 line‐km of unmanned aerial vehicle aeromagnetic data were flown with a line spacing of 25 m. The collected aeromagnetic data were compared to a regional heliborne aeromagnetic survey flown at an elevation of approximately 85 m above the terrain, with a line spacing of 100 m, as well as a follow‐up terrestrial magnetic survey. The first vertical derivative of the gathered unmanned aerial vehicle total magnetic field data was calculated both directly between each of the different flight elevations, and indirectly by calculating the values predicted using upward continuation. This case study demonstrates that low flight elevation unmanned aerial vehicle aeromagnetic surveys can reliably collect industry standard total magnetic field measurements at an increased resolution when compared to manned airborne magnetic surveys. The enhanced interpretation potential provided by this approach also aided in delineating structural controls and hydrothermal fluid migration pathways (a pair of adjacent shear zones) related to gold mineralization on site. These structural features were not clearly resolved in the regional manned airborne magnetic data alone, further demonstrating the utility of applying high‐resolution unmanned aerial vehicle aeromagnetic surveys to mineral exploration applications. The conclusions and interpretations drawn from the unmanned aerial vehicle aeromagnetic data, coupled with historical data, were applied to make a new gold mineralization discovery on the site, assayed at 15.7 g/t.

Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.1111/1365-2478.12914
2019-12-30
2024-03-28
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

/deliver/fulltext/gpr/68/1/gpr12914.html?itemId=/content/journals/10.1111/1365-2478.12914&mimeType=html&fmt=ahah

References

  1. AiroM.L.2015. Geophysical signatures of mineral deposit types – synopsis. Special paper 58, pp. 9–70. Geological Survey of Finland.
  2. BayneA.S.1984. Report on ground magnetic survey, pp. 1–24. Belore Mines Limited, Moss Township, Thunder Bay, Ontario, Canada.
  3. ChorltonL.B.1987. Geological setting of gold mineralization in the eastern part of the Shebandowan Greenstone Belt, district of Thunder Bay, Northwestern Ontario. Open file 5636, pp. 1–348. Ontario Geological Survey.
  4. CoyleM., DumontR., KeatingP., KissF. and MilesW.2014. Geological Survey of Canada aeromagnetic surveys: design, quality assurance, and data dissemination. Open File 7660, pp. 1–48. Geological Survey of Canada.
  5. CunninghamM.2016. Aeromagnetic surveying with unmanned aircraft systems. Master of Science thesis, pp. 1–156. Department of Earth Sciences, Carleton University, Ottawa, Canada.
  6. CunninghamM., SamsonC., WoodA. and CookI.2018. Aeromagnetic surveying with a rotary‐wing unmanned aircraft system: a case study from a zinc deposit in Nash Creek, New Brunswick, Canada. Pure and Applied Geophysics175, 3145–3158.
    [Google Scholar]
  7. EverettM.2013. Near‐Surface Applied Geophysics. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
    [Google Scholar]
  8. ForresterR.2011. Magnetic signature control strategies for an unmanned aircraft system. Master of Applied Science thesis, pp. 1–212. Mechanical and Aerospace Engineering, Carleton University, Ottawa, Canada.
  9. Government of Canada . 2018. – Historical data. The Government of Canada, Ottawa, Canada.
  10. HarrisF.R.1970. Geology of the Moss Lake area, District of Thunder Bay. Geological report 85, pp. 1–61. Ontario Department of Mines.
  11. International Geomagnetic Reference Field . 2017. National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, Boulder, CO.
  12. MalehmirA., DynesiusL., PaulussonK., PaulussonA., JohanssonH., BastaniM.et al. 2017. The potential of rotary‐wing UAV‐based magnetic surveys for mineral exploration: a case study from central Sweden. The Leading Edge36, 552–557.
    [Google Scholar]
  13. Ontario Geological Survey . 2014. Ontario airborne geophysical surveys, magnetic and electromagnetic data, Burchell Lake area. Geophysical data set 1241, pp. 1–24. Ontario Geological Survey, Sudbury, Ontario, Canada.
  14. OsmaniI.A.1993. Geology and mineral potential of Moss Township, District of Thunder Bay. Open file 5865, pp. 1–55. Ontario Geological Survey.
  15. OsmaniI.A.1997. Geology and mineral potential of the Greenwater Lake area, West‐Central Shebandowan Greenstone Belt. Report 296, pp. 1–157. Ontario Geological Survey.
  16. ParvarK.2016. Development and evaluation of unmanned aerial vehicle (UAV) magnetometry systems. Master of Applied Science thesis, pp. 1–141. Department of Geological Sciences and Geological Engineering, Queen's University, Kingston, Ontario, Canada.
  17. ParvarK., BraunA., Layton‐MatthewsD. and BurnsM.2018. UAV magnetometry for chromite exploration in the Samail ophiolite sequence, Oman. Journal of Unmanned Vehicle Systems6, 57–69.
    [Google Scholar]
  18. TuckL., SamsonC., LalibertéJ., WellsM. and BélangerF.2018. Magnetic interference testing method for an electric fixed‐wing unmanned aircraft system (UAS). Journal of Unmanned Vehicle Systems6, 177–194.
    [Google Scholar]
  19. WalterC., BraunA. and FotopoulosG.2017. Integrating a potassium vapour UAV magnetometer with a multi‐rotor UAV towards industry standard airborne 3‐D magnetic gradiometry. Extended Abstract Presented at Canadian Exploration Geophysical Society (KEGS) Symposium, Innovation and New Methods in Geophysics, Mar 2017, Toronto, Ontario, Canada, pp. 5–6.
  20. WalterC., BraunA. and FotopoulosG.2019. Impact of 3‐D attitude variations of a UAV magnetometry system on magnetic data quality. Geophysical Prospecting67, 465–479.
    [Google Scholar]
  21. WatsonR.J.1929. Huronian Gold Mine, Moss Township, District of Thunder Bay. Annual report for 1928, Vol. 37, pp. 109–127. Ontario Department of Mines.
  22. WellsM.2008. Attenuating magnetic interference in a UAV system. Master of Science thesis, pp. 1–128. Department of Earth Sciences, Carleton University, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada.
  23. WoodA., CookI., DoyleB., CunninghamM. and SamsonC.2016. Experimental aeromagnetic survey using an unmanned air system. Leading Edge35, 270–273.
    [Google Scholar]
http://instance.metastore.ingenta.com/content/journals/10.1111/1365-2478.12914
Loading
/content/journals/10.1111/1365-2478.12914
Loading

Data & Media 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