1887
  1. Home
  2. A-Z Publications
  3. Near Surface Geophysics
  4. Volume 7, Issue 1
  5. Article
Volume 7 Number 1
  • ISSN: 1569-4445
  • E-ISSN: 1873-0604

Abstract

We have developed a least‐squares method to determine simultaneously the depth and the horizontal position (origin) of a buried thin dike that extends in both strike direction and down dip (2D) and in which the depth is much greater than the thickness from horizontal gradients obtained numerically from magnetic data using filters of successive window lengths. The method involves using a relationship between the depth and the horizontal position of the source and a combination of windowed observations. The method is based on computing the standard deviation of the depths determined from all horizontal gradient anomalies for each horizontal position. The standard deviation may generally be considered as a criterion for determining the correct depth and the horizontal position of the buried dike. When the correct horizontal position value is used, the standard deviation of the depths is less than the standard deviation using incorrect horizontal position values. This method can be applied to residuals as well as to the observed magnetic data. The method is applied to synthetic examples with and without random errors. The present method was able to provide both the depth and horizontal position of the source accurately. The practical utility of the method is tested on an outcropping dike in Canada.

© European Association of Geoscientists and Engineers © 2009 European Association of Geoscientists and Engineers
Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.3997/1873-0604.2008032
2008-10-01
2024-04-19

  • From This Site

    /content/journals/10.3997/1873-0604.2008032
    dcterms_title,dcterms_subject,pub_keyword
    -contentType:Journal -contentType:Contributor -contentType:Concept -contentType:Institution
    10
    5
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

References

  1. AbdelrahmanE.M. and Abo‐EzzE.R.2001. Higher derivatives analysis of 2–D magnetic data. Geophysics66, 205–212.
     [Google Scholar]
  2. AbdelrahmanE.M., El‐ArabyH.M., El‐ArabyT.M. and EssaK.S.2003a. A least‐squares minimization approach to depth determination from magnetic data. Pure and Applied Geophysics160, 1259–1271.
     [Google Scholar]
  3. AbdelrahmanE.M., El‐ArabyT.M. and EssaK.S.2003b. A least‐squares minimization approach to depth, index parameter, and amplitude coefficient determination from magnetic anomalies due to thin dykes. Exploration Geophysics34, 147–154.
     [Google Scholar]
  4. AbdelrahmanE.M. and SalemA.2005. A least‐squares minimization approach to depth determination from numerical horizontal magnetic gradients. Kuwait Journal of Science and Engineering22, 103–118.
     [Google Scholar]
  5. AbdelrahmanE.M. and SharafeldinM.S.1996. An iterative least‐squares approach to depth determination from residual anomalies due to thin dikes. Journal of Applied Geophysics34, 213–220.
     [Google Scholar]
  6. Atchuta RaoD.A., Ram BabuH.V.R. and Sanker NarayanP.V.S.1981. Interpretation of magnetic anomalies due to dikes: The complex gradient method. Geophysics46, 1572–1578.
     [Google Scholar]
  7. BruckshawJ.M. and KunaratnamK.1963. The interpretation of magnetic anomalies due to dykes. Geophysical Prospecting11, 509–522. doi:10.1111/j.1365‐2478.1963.tb02049.x
     [Google Scholar]
  8. GayS.P.1963. Standard curves for interpretation of magnetic anomalies over long tabular bodies. Geophysics28, 161–200.
     [Google Scholar]
  9. HartmanR.R., TeskeyD.J. and FriedbergJ.L.1971. A system for rapid digital aeromagnetic interpretation. Geophysics36, 891–918.
     [Google Scholar]
  10. HutchisonR.D.1958. Magnetic analysis by logarithmic curves. Geophysics23, 749–767.
     [Google Scholar]
  11. JainS.1976. An automatic method of direct interpretation of magnetic profiles. Geophysics41, 531–541.
     [Google Scholar]
  12. KoulomzineTh., LamontagneY. and NadeauA.1970. New methods for the direct interpretation of magnetic anomalies caused by inclined dikes of infinite length. Geophysics35, 812–830.
     [Google Scholar]
  13. KuC.C. and SharpJ.A.1983. Werner deconvolution for automated magnetic interpretation and its refinement using Marquardt’s inverse modeling. Geophysics48, 754–774.
     [Google Scholar]
  14. McGrathP.H. and HoodP.J.1970. The dipping dike case: A computer curve‐matching method of magnetic interpretation. Geophysics35, 831–848.
     [Google Scholar]
  15. MushayandebvuM.F., van DrielzP., ReidA.B. and FairheadJ.D.2001. Magnetic source parameters of two‐dimensional structures using extended Euler deconvolution. Geophysics66, 814–823.
     [Google Scholar]
  16. PressW.H., TeukolskyS.A., VetterlingW.T. and FlanneryB.P.1992. Numerical Recipes in C. The Art of Scientific Computing. Cambridge University Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  17. Radhakrishna MurthyI.V.1985. The midpoint method: Magnetic interpretation of dikes and faults. Geophysics50, 834–839.
     [Google Scholar]
  18. RaoB.S.R., Radhakrishna MurthyI.V. and Visweswara RaoC.1973. Two methods for computer interpretation of magnetic anomalies of dikes. Geophysics38, 710–718.
     [Google Scholar]
  19. ReidA.B., AllsopJ.M., GrnserH., MillettA.J. and SomertonI.W.1990. Magnetic interpretation in three dimensional using Euler deconvolution. Geophysics55, 80–91.
     [Google Scholar]
  20. SilvaJ.B.C.1989. Transformation of nonlinear problems into linear ones applied to the magnetic field of a two‐dimensional prism. Geophysics54, 114–121.
     [Google Scholar]
  21. StanleyJ.M.1977. Simplified magnetic interpretation of the geologic contact and thin dike. Geophysics42, 1236–1240.
     [Google Scholar]
  22. SteenlandN.C.1968. Discussion on “The geomagnetic gradiometer” by H.A.Slack, V.M.Lynch, and L.Langan (Geophysics, October 1967, p. 877–892). Geophysics33, 681–684.
     [Google Scholar]
  23. ThompsonD.T.1982. EULDPH a new technique for making computer‐assisted depth estimates from magnetic data. Geophysics47, 31–37.
     [Google Scholar]
  24. WonI.J.1981. Application of Gauss’s method to magnetic anomalies of dipping dikes. Geophysics46, 211–215.
     [Google Scholar]
http://instance.metastore.ingenta.com/content/journals/10.3997/1873-0604.2008032
Loading
A least‐squares standard deviation method to interpret magnetic anomalies due to thin dikes
Near Surface Geophysics 7, 41 (2009); https://doi.org/10.3997/1873-0604.2008032
/content/journals/10.3997/1873-0604.2008032
/content/journals/10.3997/1873-0604.2008032
Loading

Data & Media loading...

  • Article Type: Research Article

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