1887
Volume 14 Number 3
  • ISSN: 1569-4445
  • E-ISSN: 1873-0604

Abstract

ABSTRACT

For the surface nuclear magnetic resonance sounding method, we investigate the tradeoff between stacking and the number of different pulse moments by analyzing the model covariance matrix. It is shown that a better determination of the model parameters is obtained by increasing the number of pulse moments compared with increasing the stack size until a certain point. From this point, the determination does not change. A distribution of pulse moments based on the resolution of the surface nuclear magnetic resonance sounding kernel is calculated and compared with a standard logarithmic distribution. Our results show that the resolution‐derived distribution performs better overall, and the logarithmic distribution is only slightly better for very shallow layers. Finally, we use gating of the free induction decays in order to suppress noise, and we show that, by using a logarithmic distribution of gates, we obtain maximum resolution of the models by only seven gates per decay.

Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.3997/1873-0604.2016004
2015-08-01
2020-07-12
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

References

  1. Akcai., GüntherT., Müller‐PetkeM., BasokurA.T. and YaramanciU.2004. Joint parameter estimation from magnetic resonance and vertical electric soundings using a multi‐objective genetic algorithm. Geophysical Prospecting62 (2), 364–376.
    [Google Scholar]
  2. AsterR.C., BorchersB. and ThurberC.H.2005. Parameter Estimation and Inverse Problems. Elsevier Academic Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  3. AukenE. and ChristiansenA.V.2004. Layered and laterally constrained 2D inversion of resistivity data. Geophysics69, 752–761.
    [Google Scholar]
  4. BehroozmandA.A., AukenE., FiandacaG., ChristiansenA.V. and ChristensenN.B.2012. Efficient full decay inversion of MRS data with a stretched‐exponential approximation of the T2* distribution. Geophysical Journal International190, 900–912.
    [Google Scholar]
  5. BehroozmandA.A., DalgaardE., ChristiansenA.V and AukenE.2013. A comprehensive study of the parameter determination in a joint MRS and TEM data analysis scheme. Near Surface Geophysics11, 557–567.
    [Google Scholar]
  6. ChristensenN.B. and DoddsK.2007. 1D inversion and resolution analysis of marine. CSEM data 72, WA27–WA38.
    [Google Scholar]
  7. ChristensenN.B. and LawrieK.C.2012. Resolution analyses for selecting an appropriate airborne electromagnetic (AEM) system. Exploration Geophysics43, 213–227.
    [Google Scholar]
  8. DalgaardE., AukenE. and LarsenJ.J.2012. Adaptive noise cancelling of multichannel magnetic resonance sounding signals. Geophysical Journal International191, 88–100.
    [Google Scholar]
  9. FriedelS.2003. Resolution, stability and efficiency of resistivity tomography estimated from a generalized inverse approach. Geophysical Journal International153, 305–316.
    [Google Scholar]
  10. HertrichM., BraunM., GüntherT., GreenA.G. and YaramanciU.2007. Surface nuclear magnetic resonance tomography. IEEE Transactions on Geoscience and Remote Sensing45(11), 3752–3759.
    [Google Scholar]
  11. LarsenJ.J., DalgaardE. and AukenE.2013. Noise cancelling of MRS signals combining model‐based removal of powerline harmonics and multichannel Wiener filtering. Geophysical Journal International196(2), 828–836.
    [Google Scholar]
  12. LegchenkoA. and ShushakovO.A.1998. Inversion of surface NMR data. Geophysics63(1), 75–84.
    [Google Scholar]
  13. LegchenkoA., BaltassatJ.M., BeauceA. and BernardJ.2002. Nuclear magnetic resonance as a geophysical tool for hydrogeologists. Journal of Applied Geophysics50, 21–46.
    [Google Scholar]
  14. LegchenkoA., BaltassatJ.‐M., BobachevA., MartinC., RobainH. and VouillamozJ.‐M.2004. Magnetic resonance sounding applied to aquifer characterization. Groundwater42, 363–373.
    [Google Scholar]
  15. Lehmann‐HornJ.A., HertrichM., GreenhalghS.A. and GreenA.G.2011. Three‐Dimensional Magnetic Field and NMR Sensitivity Computations Incorporating Conductivity Anomalies and Variable‐ Surface Topography. IEEE Transactions on Geoscience and Remote Sensing49(10), 3878–3891.
    [Google Scholar]
  16. LubczynskiM.W. and RoyJ.2007. Use of MRS for hydrogeological system parameterization and modeling. Boletín Geológico y Minero118(3), 509–530.
    [Google Scholar]
  17. MacnaeJ.C., LamontagneY. and WestG.F.1984. Noise processing techniques for time‐domain EM systems. Geophysics49, 934–948.
    [Google Scholar]
  18. MenkeW.1989. Geophysical Data Analysis: Discrete Inverse Theory. Academic Press, San Diego.
  19. Müller‐PetkeM. and CostabelS.2013. Comparison and optimal parameter setting of reference‐based harmonic noise cancellation in time and frequency domain for surface‐NMR. Near Surface Geophysics12, 199–210.
    [Google Scholar]
  20. Müller‐PetkeM., WalbreckerJ.O. and KnightR.J.2013. The inversion of surface‐NMR T1 data for improved aquifer characterization. Geophysics78(6), EN83–EN94.
    [Google Scholar]
  21. Müller‐PetkeM. and YaramanciU.2010. QT inversion ‐ Comprehensive use of the complete surface NMR data set. Geophysics75, WA199–WA209.
    [Google Scholar]
  22. NyboeN.S. and SØrensenK.I.2012. Noise reduction in TEM: Presenting a bandwidth‐ and sensitivity‐optimized parallel recording setup and methods for adaptive synchronous detection. Geophysics77, E203–E212.
    [Google Scholar]
  23. Ryom NielsenM., HagensenT.F., ChalikakisK. and LegchenkoA.2011. Comparison of transmissivities from MRS and pumping tests in Denmark. Near Surface Geophysics9, 211–223.
    [Google Scholar]
  24. SemenovA.G.1987. NMR Hydroscope for water prospecting. Proceedings of the seminar on Geotomography, Indian Geophysical Union,66–67.
    [Google Scholar]
  25. StoffaP.L. and SenM.K.1991. Nonlinear multiparameter optimization using genetic algorithms: Inversion of plane‐wave seismograms. Geophysics56, 1794–1810.
    [Google Scholar]
  26. TarantolaA. and ValetteB.1982. Generalized nonlinear inverse problems solved using a least squares criterion. Reviews of Geophysics and Space Physics20, 219–232.
    [Google Scholar]
  27. VallaP. and LegchenkoA.2002. One‐dimensional modelling for proton magnetic resonance sounding measurements over an electrically conductive medium. Journal of Applied Geophysics50, 217–229.
    [Google Scholar]
  28. VouillamozJ.M., LegchenkoA. and NandagiriL.2011. Characterizing aquifers when using magnetic resonance sounding in a heterogeneous geomagnetic field. Near Surface Geophysics9, 135–144.
    [Google Scholar]
  29. WalbreckerJ.O., HertrichM., Lehmann‐HornJ.A. and GreenA.G.2011. Estimating the longitudinal relaxation time T1 in surface NMR. Geophysics76(2), F111–F122.
    [Google Scholar]
  30. WalshD.O.2008. Multi‐channel surface NMR instrumentation and software for 1D/2D groundwater investigations. Journal of Applied Geophysics66, 140–150.
    [Google Scholar]
  31. WeichmanP.B., LavelyE.M. and RitzwollerM.H.2000. Theory of surface nuclear magnetic resonance with applications to geophysical imaging problems. Physical Review E ‐ Statistical Physics, Plasmas, Fluids, and Related Interdisciplinary Topics62, 1290–1312.
    [Google Scholar]
  32. WhittallK.P., BronskillM.J. and HenkelmanR.M.1991. Investigation of analysis techniques for complicated NMR relaxation data. Journal of Magnetic Resonance (1969)95(2), 221–234.
    [Google Scholar]
  33. YinL., YangR., GabboujM. and NeuvoY.1996. Weighted median filters: A tutorial. IEEE Transactions on Circuits and Systems II. Analog and Digital Signal Processing43, 157–192.
    [Google Scholar]
http://instance.metastore.ingenta.com/content/journals/10.3997/1873-0604.2016004
Loading
/content/journals/10.3997/1873-0604.2016004
Loading

Data & Media loading...

  • Article Type: Research Article
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