Enhancement of Depth Estimation Techniques With Amplitude Analysis

Depth estimation has been used widely as a tool for rapid interpretion of large-scale potential-field data in applications such as mapping basement relief. Nearly all of these techniques rely on the analysis of the local shape of the anomalous field in determining the depth and location of the subsurface sources. These methods focus on the phase information at the expense of the amplitude of the data. Consequently, these methods often produce a large number of solutions and interpretation of the result is difficult. We develop a method for enhancing these techniques by incorporating amplitude information back into the depth estimation process. The method statistically identifies significant source solutions from the estimation based on their relative source strengths, and discards false solutions due to noise and spray effects. The result is a subset of solutions that is more amenable for direct interpretation. We illustrate this new approach by applying it to the solution of the Euler and extended Euler deconvolutions. We demonstrate the improvement using magnetic data from the Bishop model, and present a field dataset from petroleum exploration.

[1]  Richard S. Smith,et al.  Automatic conversion of magnetic data to depth, dip, and susceptibility contrast using the SPI (TM) method , 1997 .

[2]  M. Nabighian.  Toward a three‐dimensional automatic interpretation of potential field data via generalized Hilbert transforms: Fundamental relations , 1984 .

[3]  R. O. Hansen,et al.  Unification of Euler and Werner deconvolution in three dimensions via the generalized Hilbert transform , 2001 .

[4]  João B. C. Silva,et al.  3D Euler deconvolution: Theoretical basis for automatically selecting good solutions , 2003 .

[5]  Matthias Holschneider,et al.  Identification of sources of potential fields with the continuous wavelet transform: Basic theory , 1999 .

[6]  Xiong Li.  On the use of different methods for estimating magnetic depth , 2003 .

[7]  I. W. Somerton,et al.  Magnetic interpretation in three dimensions using Euler deconvolution , 1990 .

[8]  Misac N. Nabighian,et al.  The analytic signal of two-dimensional magnetic bodies with polygonal cross-section; its properties and use for automated anomaly interpretation , 1972 .

[9]  Desmond FitzGerald,et al.  New discrimination techniques for Euler deconvolution , 2004, Comput. Geosci..

[10]  James Derek Fairhead,et al.  Magnetic source parameters of two-dimensional structures using extended Euler deconvolution , 2001 .

[11]  D. T. Thompson,et al.  EULDPH: A new technique for making computer-assisted depth estimates from magnetic data , 1982 .

[12]  H. Naudy.  AUTOMATIC DETERMINATION OF DEPTH ON AEROMAGNETIC PROFILES , 1971 .

[13]  J. Fairhead,et al.  Magnetic Imaging using Extended Euler Deconvolution , 1999 .

[14]  Maurizio Fedi,et al.  On the application of Euler deconvolution to the analytic signal , 2005 .

[15]  P. Hood.  Gradient measurements in aeromagnetic surveying , 1965 .

[16]  Armand Galdeano,et al.  Application of artificial intelligence for Euler solutions clustering , 2003 .

[17]  R. Blakely.  Potential theory in gravity and magnetic applications , 1996 .

[18]  Ahmed Salem,et al.  A combined analytic signal and Euler method (AN-EUL) for automatic interpretation of magnetic data , 2003 .

[19]  Daniela Gerovska,et al.  Magnetic field transforms with low sensitivity to the direction of source magnetization and high centricity , 2000 .