Abstract
The conventional Euler deconvolution methodology requires the user to choose appropriate structural index (SI) in order to compute the source parameters, and this makes the operation tedious and time consuming. To solve the mentioned problem, a method based on Euler’s homogeneity relation for full automation of magnetic data interpretation is presented in this paper. The technique uses multiple linear regression (MLR) methodology to estimate background, horizontal coordinate (x0 and y0), depth and structural index (SI) simultaneously is prepared and used for this task. The technique involves the use of first-order derivatives, independent of analytic signal (AS) and the derivatives are computed directly from the total field grid. It is fast means of magnetic data interpretation and easy to implement.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution.
Buying options
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Learn about institutional subscriptionsReferences
Barbosa, V. C., & Silva, J. B. (2011). Reconstruction of geologic bodies in depth associated with a sedimentary basin using gravity and magnetic data. Geophysical Prospecting, 59(6), 1021–1034.
Bhattacharyya, B. K. (1964). Magnetic anomalies due to prism-shaped bodies with arbitrary polarization. Geophysics, 29(4), 517–531.
Breiner, S., (1973). Applications manual for portable magnetometers.
Chambers, J., Ogilvy, R., Kuras, O., Cripps, J., & Meldrum, P. (2002). 3D electrical imaging of known targets at a controlled environmental test site. Environmental Geology, 41(6), 690–704.
Chen, Q., Dong, Y., Cheng, G. S., Han, L., Xu, H. H., & Chen, H. (2014). Interpretation of fault system in the Tana Sag, Kenya, using edge recognition techniques and Euler deconvolution. Journal of Applied Geophysics, 109, 150–161.
Cooper, G. R. (2014). Using the analytic signal amplitude to determine the location and depth of thin dikes from magnetic data. Geophysics, 80(1), J1–J6.
Cooper, G. R., & Whitehead, R. C. (2016). Determining the distance to magnetic sources. Geophysics, 81(2), J25–J34.
Gerovska, D., & Araúzo-Bravo, M. J. (2003). Automatic interpretation of magnetic data based on Euler deconvolution with un-prescribed structural index. Computers & Geosciences, 29(8), 949–960.
Gerovska, D., Araúzo-Bravo, M. J., Stavrev, P., & Whaler, K. (2010). MaGSoundDST—3D automatic inversion of magnetic and gravity data based on the differential similarity transform. Geophysics, 75(1), L25–L38.
Hsu, S. K., Sibuet, J. C., & Shyu, C. T. (1996). High-resolution detection of geologic boundaries from potential-field anomalies: An enhanced analytic signal technique. Geophysics, 61(2), 373–386.
Keating, P., & Pilkington, M. (2004). Euler deconvolution of the analytic signal and its application to magnetic interpretation. Geophysical Prospecting, 52(3), 165–182.
Levine, D. M., Ramsey, P. P., & Smidt, R. K. (2001). Applied statistics for engineers and scientists: Using Microsoft Excel and Minitab. London: Pearson.
Loke, M. H., Chambers, J. E., Rucker, D. F., Kuras, O., & Wilkinson, P. B. (2013). New developments in the direct-current geoelectrical imaging method. Journal of Applied Geophysics, 95, 135–156.
Mushayandebvu, M. F., Lesur, V., Reid, A. B., & Fairhead, J. D. (2004). Grid Euler deconvolution with constraints for 2D structures. Geophysics, 69(2), 489–496.
Nouraliee, J., Porkhial, S., Mohammadzadeh-Moghaddam, M., Mirzaei, S., Ebrahimi, D., & Rahmani, M. R. (2015). Investigation of density contrasts and geologic structures of hot springs in the Markazi Province of Iran using the gravity method. Russian Geology and Geophysics, 56(12), 1791–1800.
Oruc, B., & Selim, H. (2011). Interpretation of magnetic data in the Sinop area of Mid Black Sea, Turkey, using tilt derivative, Euler deconvolution, and discrete wavelet transform. Journal of Applied Geophysics, 74, 194–204.
Reid, A. B., Allsop, J. M., Granser, H., Millett, A. T., & Somerton, I. W. (1990). Magnetic interpretation in three dimensions using Euler deconvolution. Geophysics, 55(1), 80–91.
Salem, A., Williams, S., Fairhead, D., Smith, R., & Ravat, D. (2007). Interpretation of magnetic data using tilt-angle derivatives. Geophysics, 73(1), L1–L10.
Stavrev, P. Y. (1997). Euler deconvolution using differential similarity transformations of gravity or magnetic anomalies. Geophysical Prospecting, 45(2), 207–246.
Thompson, D. T. (1982). EULDPH: A new technique for making computer-assisted depth estimates from magnetic data. Geophysics, 47(1), 31–37.
Ugalde, H., & Morris, W. A. (2010). Cluster analysis of Euler deconvolution solutions: New filtering techniques and geologic strike determination. Geophysics, 75, L61–L70.
Yang, J., Agterberg, F. P., & Cheng, Q. (2015). A novel filtering technique for enhancing mineralization associated geochemical and geophysical anomalies. Computers & Geosciences, 79, 94–104.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2018 Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd.
About this paper
Cite this paper
Usman, N., Abdullah, K., Nawawi, M. (2018). A Method for the Full Automation of Euler Deconvolution for the Interpretation of Magnetic Data. In: Saian, R., Abbas, M. (eds) Proceedings of the Second International Conference on the Future of ASEAN (ICoFA) 2017 – Volume 2. Springer, Singapore. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-10-8471-3_80
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-10-8471-3_80
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Singapore
Print ISBN: 978-981-10-8470-6
Online ISBN: 978-981-10-8471-3
eBook Packages: Social SciencesSocial Sciences (R0)