1887

Abstract

Summary

In recent years, Gravity Gradient Tensor (GGT) has been successfully used in applied and environmental geophysics, also in light of the development of gradiometers. In this paper, we aim at analysing the inversion, either joint or separate, of different GGT components and of the sole gravity field vertical component. We perform our analysis by inspection of the Picard Plot, a well-known Singular Value Decomposition tool, and employ both synthetic data and gradiometer measurements carried out at the Vredefort structure, South Africa. We show that the main factors controlling the quality of the inversion are algebraic ambiguity and signal-to-noise ratio. Provided that algebraic ambiguity is kept low — by different combinations of GGT components and/or only gravity field data — the choice of components involved in the inversion is non-crucial to the quality of the reconstructions. Nonetheless, the use gradiometers allows a quicker and more effective way, with respect to the sole gravity field, to improve algebraic ambiguity.

Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/papers/10.3997/2214-4609.201413798
2015-09-06
2020-03-31
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

References

  1. Beiki, M.
    [2010] Analytic signals of gravity gradient tensor and their application to estimate source location. Geophysics, 75, I59–I74.
    [Google Scholar]
  2. Capriotti, J. and Li, Y.
    [2014] Gravity and gravity gradient data: Understanding their information content through joint inversions. 84th SEG Ann. Internat. Mtg., 1329–1333.
    [Google Scholar]
  3. Dransfeld, M.H.
    [2010] Conforming Falcon gravity and the global gravity anomaly. Geophysical Prospecting, 58, 469–483.
    [Google Scholar]
  4. Gibson, R.L. and Reimold, W.U.
    [2001] The Vredefort impact structure, South Africa (the scientific evidence and a two-day excursion guide), Counc. Geosci., Pretoria, Mem, 92, 111 pp.
    [Google Scholar]
  5. Ialongo, S., Fedi, M. and Florio, G.
    [2014] Invariant models in the inversion of gravity and magnetic fields and their derivatives. Journal of Applied Geophysics, 110, 51–62.
    [Google Scholar]
  6. Li, Y.
    [2001] 3-D inversion of gravity gradiometer data. 71st SEG Ann. Internat. Mtg., 1470–1473.
    [Google Scholar]
  7. Martinez, C., Li, Y., Krahenbuhl, R. & Braga, M.
    [2013] 3D inversion of airborne gravity gradiometry data in mineral exploration: A case study in the Quadrilátero Ferrífero, Brazil. Geophysics, 78, B1–B11.
    [Google Scholar]
  8. Paoletti, V., Hansen, P.C., Hansen, M.F. and Fedi, M.
    [2014] A Computationally Efficient Tool for Assessing the Depth Resolution in Potential-Field Inversion. Geophysics, 79, A33–A38.
    [Google Scholar]
  9. Pilkington, M.
    [2012] Analysis of gravity gradiometer inverse problems using optimal design measures. Geophysics, 77, G25–G31.
    [Google Scholar]
  10. [2014] Evaluating the utility of gravity gradient tensor components. Geophysics, 79, G1–G14.
    [Google Scholar]
  11. Zhdanov, M.S., Ellis, R. and Mukherjee, S.
    [2004] Three-dimensional regularized focusing inversion of gravity gradient tensor component data, Geophysics, 69, 925–937.
    [Google Scholar]
http://instance.metastore.ingenta.com/content/papers/10.3997/2214-4609.201413798
Loading
/content/papers/10.3997/2214-4609.201413798
Loading

Data & Media loading...

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