Article Sidebar

Submitted
Apr 25, 2017
Published
Jun 1, 2007
Download
PDF
Statistic
Read Counter : 336 Download : 292

Main Article Content

Abstract

The novel method named slope half slope for depth estimation of the causative magnetic field proposed by Peters (1949) has been investigated to determine the possible percent errors in depth estimation to magnetic sources situated at different latitudes. A sequence of models represented by thick dykes with various depths and with different values of field inclination (0 to 90°) has been used to estimate the percentage errors for the different inclination values. A procedure to correct the errors in depth estimate has been discussed. The calculated percent errors range between positive and negative values for the same angle of inclination at various depths. This raises difficulties to use a formula concerning the factor to adjust the estimated depths and to overcome this problem. Therefore, a new approach has been adopted to correct the estimated depth values. A relationship between the horizontal distance at the tangential point and center of the maximum slope with the actual and estimated depths is found. Two straight lines are plotted from this relation and they are intersected at a certain point for each inclination value. The location of this point defines whether the difference between the actual and the estimated depth values will be added to or subtracted from the estimated depth to get the actual depth. In real depth determination, the correct value is determined by defining the intersect point between the estimated depth and the horizontal distance and then calculating the difference from the actual slope line for the assigned inclination angle. Each inclination angle has its own relation and intersected point that can be used to determine the actual depth.

 

 

Keywords

Magnetic depth estimation slope method correction procedure percent errors in depth estimation percent errors with inclinations.

Article Details

References

  1. ATCHUTA, RAO, D, RAM BABU, H.V. and SANKOR NARAYAN, P.V. 1981. Interpretation of magnetic anomalies due to dikes: The complex gradient method. Geophy. 46: 1572-1578.
  2. BEAN, R.J. 1966. A rapid graphical solution for the aeromagnetic anomaly of the two- dimensional tabular body. Geophy. 3l: 963-970.
  3. BHATTACHARYA, B. 1971. Analysis of a vertical dyke infinitely deep, striking north by Fourier transform. Pure and Appl. Geophys. 89: 963-970.
  4. BREINER, S. 1994. Applications for portable magnetometers. Practical Gcophysics II tor the Exploration Geologist. Compiled by Richard Van Blaricom. Northwest Mining Association. p. 313-345.
  5. GAY, S.P. 1963. Standard curves for interpretation of long tabular bodies. Geophys. 28: 161-200. Geophysical Software Solutions Pty.Ltd. (http://www.geoss.com.au).
  6. KARA. I., OZDEMIR, M. and KANLI, A.I. 2003. Magnetic interpretation of horizontal cylinders using displacement of the maximum and minimum by upward continuation. Jour. of the Balkan Geophysical Society. 6: 16-20.
  7. KU, C.C. and SHARP, J.A. 1983. Werner deconvolution for automated magnetic interpretation and its refinement using Marquardt's inverse modeling. Geophys. 48: 754-774.
  8. LI XIONG, 2003. On the use of different methods for estimating magnetic depth. The Leading edge. P1090-1099.
  9. NAUDY, H. 1971. Automatic determination of depth on aeromagnetic profiles. Geophys. 36: 717-722.
  10. PETERS, L.J. 1949. The direct approach to magnetic interpretation and its practical application. Geophys. 14: 290-320.
  11. REYNOLDS, J.M. 1998. An introduction to applied and environmental geophysics. Wiley and Sons.
  12. RIDDELL, P.A. 1975. Magnetic observations at the Dayton iron deposit, Lyon County, Nevada. Soc. of Exploration Geophysics' Mining Geophysics. I, Case Histories, p.418-428.
  13. ROEST, W.E. and VERHOEF, J. 1992. Magnetic interpretation using 3-D analytic signal. Geophys. 57: 116-125.
  14. SHERIFF, R.E. 1980. Encyclopedic dictionary of exploration geophysics. Soc. of Exploration Geophysicists, 4th ed. 266p.
  15. SPECTOR, A. and GRANT, F.S. 1970. Statistical models for interpreting aeromagnetic data. Geophys. 35: 293-302.
  16. STANLEY, J.M. 1977. Simplified magnetic interpretation of the geologic contact and thin dike. Geophys. 42: 1236-1240.
  17. TELFORD, W.M., GELDART, L.P. and SHERIFF, R.E. 1990. Applied Geophysics. Cambridge Uni. Press.
  18. THOMPSON, D.T. 1982. EULDPH – A new technique for making computer-assisted depth estimates from magnetic data. Geophys. 47: 3l-37.