1887
Volume 65 Number 1
  • E-ISSN: 1365-2478

Abstract

ABSTRACT

Modern regional airborne magnetic datasets, when acquired in populated areas, are inevitably degraded by cultural interference. In the United Kingdom context, the spatial densities of interfering structures and their complex spatial form severely limit our ability to successfully process and interpret the data. Deculturing procedures previously adopted have used semi‐automatic methods that incorporate additional geographical databases that guide manual assessment and refinement of the acquired database. Here we present an improved component of that procedure that guides the detection of localized responses associated with non‐geological perturbations. The procedure derives from a well‐established technique for the detection of kimberlite pipes and is a form of moving‐window correlation using grid‐based data. The procedure lends itself to automatic removal of perturbed data, although manual intervention to accept/reject outputs of the procedure is wise. The technique is evaluated using recently acquired regional United Kingdom survey data, which benefits from having an offshore component and areas of largely non‐magnetic granitic response. The methodology is effective at identifying (and hence removing) the isolated perturbations that form a persistent spatial noise background to the entire dataset. Probably in common with all such methods, the technique fails to isolate and remove amalgamated responses due to complex superimposed effects. The procedure forms an improved component of partial automation in the context of a wider deculturing procedure applied to United Kingdom aeromagnetic data.

Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.1111/1365-2478.12394
2016-06-13
2024-04-16
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

References

  1. BeamishD. and WhiteJ.C.2011. Aeromagnetic data in the UK: A study of the information content of baseline and modern surveys across Anglesey, North Wales. Geophysical Journal International184, 171–190.
    [Google Scholar]
  2. BeamishD. and WhiteJ.2014. TellusSW: Airborne geophysical data and processing report. British Geological Survey Open Report, OR/14/014.
  3. BeamishD. and YoungM.2009. The geophysics of Northern Island: The Tellus effect. First Break27, 43–49.
    [Google Scholar]
  4. CussR.J.2003. The removal of cultural noise from high‐resolution aeromagnetic data acquired over highly developed areas; manual approaches to data cleansing from the HiRES‐1 survey. First Break21, 12–18.
    [Google Scholar]
  5. DinesH.G.1956. The metalliferous mining region of south‐west England. Memoirs of the Geological Survey of Great Britain, HMSO, London.
    [Google Scholar]
  6. EnglishHeritage. 2013. Marine geophysics data acquisition, processing and interpretation. Guidance notes.
  7. GayS.P.Jr. 1986. The effects of cathodically protected pipelines on aeromagnetic surveys. Geophysics51, 973–976.
    [Google Scholar]
  8. GharibiM. and PedersenL.P.2000. Removal of DC power line magnetic field effects from airborne total magnetic field measurements. Geophysical Prospecting48, 617–628.
    [Google Scholar]
  9. HassanH.H. and PeirceJ.W.2005. SAUCE: A new technique to remove cultural noise from HRAM data. The Leading Edge24, 246–250.
    [Google Scholar]
  10. HassanH.H., PeirceJ.W., PearsonW.C. and PearsonM.J.1998. Cultural editing of HRAM data: Comparison of techniques. Canadian Journal of Exploration Geophysics34, 16–22.
    [Google Scholar]
  11. KeatingP.1995. A simple technique to identify magnetic anomalies due to kimberlite pipes. Exploration and Mining Geology4, 121–125.
    [Google Scholar]
  12. KeatingP. and SailhacP.2004. Use of the analytic signal to identify magnetic anomalies due to kimberlite pipes. Geophysics69, 180–190.
    [Google Scholar]
  13. LahtiM., BeamishD., CussR.J. and WilliamsJ.2007. Deculturing of the Northern Ireland Tellus magnetic data. British Geological Survey Technical Report, IR/07/147.
  14. LeblancG.E. and MorrisW.A.2001. Denoising of aeromagnetic data via the wavelet transform. Geophysics66, 1793–1864.
    [Google Scholar]
  15. LeeM.K., PeartR.J., JonesD.G., BeamishD. and VironmakiJ.2001. Applications and challenges for high resolution airborne surveys in populated areas. 63rd EAGE Conference, Amsterdam, The Netherlands, Extended Abstracts, Paper IA‐1.
    [Google Scholar]
  16. MuszalaS., StoffaP.L. and LawverL.A.2001. An application for removing cultural noise from aeromagnetic data. Geophysics66, 213–219.
    [Google Scholar]
  17. NabighianM.N., GrauchV.J.S., HansenR.O., LaFehrT.R., LiY., PeirceJ.W.et al. 2005. The historical development of the magnetic method in exploration. Geophysics70, 33–61
    [Google Scholar]
  18. SalemA., LeiK.X., GreenC., FairheadJ.D. and StanleyG.2010. Removal of cultural noise from high‐resolution aeromagnetic data using a two stage equivalent source approach. Exploration Geophysics41, 163–169.
    [Google Scholar]
  19. WhiteJ.C. and BeamishD.2010. The HiRES airborne geophysical survey of Anglesey: Processing report. British Geological Survey Open Report, OR/10/002.
  20. WhiteJ.C. and BeamishD.2011. Magnetic structural information obtained from the HiRES airborne survey of the Isle of Wight. Proceedings of the Geologists' Association122, 781–786.
    [Google Scholar]
  21. WilsonC.R.1997. A high precision aeromagnetic survey near the Glen Hummel Field in Texas; Identification of cultural and sedimentary sources. The Leading Edge16, 37–42.
    [Google Scholar]
http://instance.metastore.ingenta.com/content/journals/10.1111/1365-2478.12394
Loading
/content/journals/10.1111/1365-2478.12394
Loading

Data & Media loading...

  • Article Type: Research Article
Keyword(s): Data processing; Magnetics; Noise

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