1887
Volume 62, Issue 3
  • E-ISSN: 1365-2478

Abstract

ABSTRACT

In order to couple spatial data from frequency‐domain helicopter‐borne electromagnetics with electromagnetic measurements from ground geophysics (transient electromagnetics and radiomagnetotellurics), a common 1D weighted joint inversion algorithm for helicopter‐borne electromagnetics, transient electromagnetics and radiomagnetotellurics data has been developed. The depth of investigation of helicopter‐borne electromagnetics data is rather limited compared to time‐domain electromagnetics sounding methods on the ground. In order to improve the accuracy of model parameters of shallow depth as well as of greater depth, the helicopter‐borne electromagnetics, transient electromagnetics, and radiomagnetotellurics measurements can be combined by using a joint inversion methodology. The 1D joint inversion algorithm is tested for synthetic data of helicopter‐borne electromagnetics, transient electromagnetics and radiomagnetotellurics. The proposed concept of the joint inversion takes advantage of each method, thus providing the capability to resolve near surface (radiomagnetotellurics) and deeper electrical conductivity structures (transient electromagnetics) in combination with valuable spatial information (helicopter‐borne electromagnetics). Furthermore, the joint inversion has been applied on the field data (helicopter‐borne electromagnetics and transient electromagnetics) measured in the Cuxhaven area, Germany.

In order to avoid the lessening of the resolution capacities of one data type, and thus balancing the use of inherent and ideally complementary information content, a parameter reweighting scheme that is based on the exploration depth ranges of the specific methods is proposed. A comparison of the conventional joint inversion algorithm, proposed by Jupp and Vozoff (1975), and of the newly developed algorithm is presented. The new algorithm employs the weighting on different model parameters differently. It is inferred from the synthetic and field data examples that the weighted joint inversion is more successful in explaining the subsurface than the classical joint inversion approach. In addition to this, the data fittings in weighted joint inversion are also improved.

Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.1111/1365-2478.12091
2014-01-13
2024-04-18
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

References

  1. AukenE., PellerinL., ChristensenN.B. and SørensenK.2006. A survey of current trends in near‐surface electrical and electromagnetic methods. Geophysics71(5), G249–G260.
    [Google Scholar]
  2. BastaniM., HübertJ., KalscheuerT., PedersenL.B., GodioA. and BernardJ.2012. 2D joint inversion of RMT and ERT data versus individual 3D inversion of full tensor RMT data: An example from a Trecate site in Italy. Geophysics77(4), WB233–WB243.
    [Google Scholar]
  3. BhattacharyaP.K. and PatraH.P.1968. Direct Current Geoelectric Sounding. Elsevier Publishing Company, Amsterdam.
    [Google Scholar]
  4. CandansayarM.E. and TezkanB.2008. Two‐dimensional joint inversion of radiomagnetotelluric and direct current resistivity data. Geophysical Prospecting56, 737–749.
    [Google Scholar]
  5. CommerM. and NewmanG. A.2009. Three‐dimensional controlled‐source electromagnetic and magnetotelluric joint inversion. Geophysical Journal International178, 1305–1316.
    [Google Scholar]
  6. ConstableS.C., ParkerR.L. and ConstableC.G.1987. Occam's inversion: A practical algorithm for generating smooth models from electromagnetic sounding data. Geophysics52(3), 289–300.
    [Google Scholar]
  7. FittermanD.V. and Deszcz‐PanM.2001. Using airborne and ground electromagnetic data to map hydrologic features in everglades national park. In: Proceedings of the Symposium on the Application of Geophysics to Engineering and Environmental Problems SAGEEP 2001, Denver (Colorado), Environmental and Engineering Geophysical Society.
    [Google Scholar]
  8. Gómez‐TreviñoE. and EdwardsR.N.1983. Electromagnetic soundings in the sedimentary basin of southern Ontario – A case history. Geophysics4(8), 311–312.
    [Google Scholar]
  9. HarinarayanaT.1999. Combination of EM and DC measurements for upper crustal studies. Surveys in Geophysics20(3–4), 257–278.
    [Google Scholar]
  10. JørgensenF., JohnsenR., PedersenJ., ChristensenJ.F. and SandersenP.B.E.2006. Tyrsting valley, in Groundwater Resources in Buried Valleys – a Challenge for Geosciences. Edited by R.Kirsch , H.‐M.Rumpel , W.Scheer and H.Wiederhold , Chapter 5.2, 181–190, Leibniz Institute for Applied Geophysics (LIAG), Hannover, Germany.
    [Google Scholar]
  11. JuppD.L.B. and VozoffK.1975. Stable iterative methods for the inversion of Geophysical data. Geophysical Journal of Royal and Astrnomical Society42, 957–976.
    [Google Scholar]
  12. KaikkonenP. and SharmaS.P.1998. 2‐D nonlinear joint inversion of VLF and VLF‐R data using simulated annealing. Journal of Applied Geophysics39, 155–176.
    [Google Scholar]
  13. KalscheuerT., JuanateyM., De LosÁngeles García JuanateyM., MeqbelN. and PedersenL.B.2010. Non‐linear model error and resolution properties from two‐dimensional single and joint inversions of direct current resistivity and radiomagnetotelluric data. Geophysical Journal International182, 1174–1188.
    [Google Scholar]
  14. KjærstrupM. and ErfurtP.2006. Bording valley, in Groundwater Resources in Buried Valleys a Challenge for Geosciences. Edited by R.Kirsch , H.M.Rumpel , W.Scheer and H.Wiederhold . Leibniz Institute for Applied Geophysics (LIAG), Hannover, Germany, 171–179.
    [Google Scholar]
  15. LangeJ.2003. Joint Inversion von Central‐Loop‐TEM und Long‐Offset‐TEM Transienten am Beispiel von Messdaten aus Israel 2002. Master's thesis, Institute of Geophysics and Meteorology, University of Cologne, Germany.
    [Google Scholar]
  16. LevenbergK.1944. A method for the solution of certain non‐linear problems in least squares. Quarterly of Applied Mathematics2, 164–168.
    [Google Scholar]
  17. LinesL.R. and TreitelS.1984. A review of least‐squares inversion and its application to geophysical problems, Geophysical Prospecting32, 159–186.
    [Google Scholar]
  18. MarquardtD.W.1963. An algorithm for least‐squares estimation of non‐linear parameters. SIAM Journal on Applied Mathematics11, 431–441.
    [Google Scholar]
  19. MatiasM.S., Marques da SilvaM., FerreiraP. and RamalhoE.1994. A geophysical and hydrogeological study of aquifers contamination by landfill. Journal of Applied Geophysics32, 155–162.
    [Google Scholar]
  20. MejuM.A., FontesS.L., OliveiraM.F.B., LimaJ.P.R., UlugergerliE.U. and CarrasquillaA.A.1999. Regional aquifer mapping using combined VES‐TEM‐AMT/ EMAP methods in the semiarid eastern margin of Parnaiba, Brazil. Geophysics64(2), 337–356.
    [Google Scholar]
  21. NabighianM.N. and MacnaeJ.C.1991. Time domain electromagnetic prospecting methods. In: Electromagnetic Methods in Applied Geophysics, Vol. 2A, (ed.) M.N.Nabighian . Society of Exploration Geophysicists, Tulsa.
    [Google Scholar]
  22. NobesD.C.1996. Troubled water: Environmental applications of electrical and electromagnetic methods. Surveys in Geophysics17393–454.
    [Google Scholar]
  23. von PapenM., TezkanB. and IsrailM.2013. Characterization of an aquifer in Roorkee, India using the spatially constrained inversion of in‐loop TEM data. Near Surface Geophysics11, 85–94.
    [Google Scholar]
  24. PassalacquaH.1983. Electromagnetic fields due to thin resistive layer. Geophysical Prospecting31, 945–976.
    [Google Scholar]
  25. PellerinL.2002. Applications of electrical and electromagnetic methods for environmental and geotechnical investigations. Surveys in Geophysics23, 101–132.
    [Google Scholar]
  26. RaicheA.P., JuppD.L.B. and VozoffK.1985. The joint use of coincident loop transient electromagnetic and Schlumberger sounding to resolve resistive layers. Geophysics50, 1618–1627.
    [Google Scholar]
  27. ScheerW., KrögerJ., KirschR. and ZarthM.2006. Ellerbeker Rinne, in Groundwater Resources in Buried Valleys – a Challenge for Geosciences. Edited by R.Kirsch , H.M.Rumpel , W.Scheer and H.Wiederhold , Leibniz Institute for Applied Geophysics (LIAG), Hannover, Germany, 205–226.
    [Google Scholar]
  28. SchollC.2005. The influence of multidimensional structures on the interpretation of LOTEM data with one‐dimensional models and the application to data from Israel. Ph. D. Thesis, Institute of Geophysics and Meteorology, University of Cologne, Germany.
    [Google Scholar]
  29. SchwinnW. and TezkanB.1997. 1D‐Joint‐Inversion of Radiomagnetotelluric (RMT) and Transient‐Electromagnetic (TEM) data: an application for ground‐water prospection in Grundfør, Denmark. In: Environmental and Engineering Geophysics, 3rdmeeting, Aarhus, 221–224.
    [Google Scholar]
  30. SiemonB.2012. Accurate 1D forward and inverse modeling of high‐frequency helicopter‐borne electromagnetic data. Geophysics77(4), WB71–WB87.
    [Google Scholar]
  31. SiemonB., ChristiansenA.V. and AukenE.2009. A review of helicopter‐borne electromagnetic methods for groundwater exploration. Near Surface Geophysics7, 629–646.
    [Google Scholar]
  32. SiemonB., EberleD. and BinotF.2004. Helicopter‐borne electromagnetic investigation of coastal aquifers in North‐West Germany. Zeitschrift für Geologische Wissenschaften32(5/6) 385–395.
    [Google Scholar]
  33. SiemonB., SteuerA., MeyerU. and RehliH.J.2007. HELP ACEH – a post‐tsunami helicopter‐borne groundwater project along the coasts of Aceh, Northern Sumatra. Near Surface Geophysics5, 231–240.
    [Google Scholar]
  34. SiemonB., KernerT., KrauseY. and NoellU.2012. Airborne and ground geophysical investigation of the abandoned salt mine environment along the Strassfurt‐Egeln Anticline, Germany. First Break30(2), 43–53.
    [Google Scholar]
  35. SpiesB.R.1989. Depth of investigation in electromagnetic sounding methods. Geophysics54, 872–888.
    [Google Scholar]
  36. StadtlerC., FielitzF., RöttgerB., SchildknechtF., SiemonB. and VoßW.2004. Hubschrauber‐ (HEM) und Transientelektromagnetische (TEM) Messungen zur Grundwassererkundung in Namibia. In: Abstract Book of the 64th Annual Meeting of the German Geophysical Association, (DGG 2004), Berlin, HGP09.
    [Google Scholar]
  37. SteuerA.2008. Joint application of ground‐based transient electromagnetics and airborne electromagnetics. Ph.D. Thesis, Institute of Geophysics and Meteorology, University of Cologne, 2008.
    [Google Scholar]
  38. SteuerA., SiemonB. and AukenE.2009. A comparison of helicopter‐borne electromagnetics in frequency‐ and time‐domain at the Cuxhaven valley in Northern Germany. Journal of Applied Geophysics67(3), 194–205.
    [Google Scholar]
  39. SteuerA., SiemonB. and EberleD.2008. Airborne and Ground‐based Electromagnetic Investigations of the Fresh‐water Potential in the Tsunami‐hit Area Sigli, Northern Sumatra. Journal of Environmental and Engineering Geophysics13(1), 39–48.
    [Google Scholar]
  40. Sudha, TezkanB., IsrailM., SinghalD.C. and RaiJ.2010. Geoelectrical mapping of aquifer contamination: a case study from Roorkee, India. Near Surface Geophysics8, 33–42.
    [Google Scholar]
  41. TezkanB.1999. A review of environmental applications of quasistationary electromagnetic techniques. Surveys in Geophysics20, 279–308.
    [Google Scholar]
  42. VermaR.K.1980. Equivalence in electromagnetic frequency sounding. Geophysical Prospecting28, 776–791.
    [Google Scholar]
  43. VozoffK. and JuppD.L.B.1975. Joint inversion of Geophysical data. Geophysical Journal of Royal and Astronomical Society42, 977–991.
    [Google Scholar]
  44. WaitJ.R.1953. Propagation of radio waves over a stratified ground. Geophysics18(2), 416–422.
    [Google Scholar]
http://instance.metastore.ingenta.com/content/journals/10.1111/1365-2478.12091
Loading
/content/journals/10.1111/1365-2478.12091
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