This website uses cookies to improve your experience. If you continue without changing your settings, you consent to our use of cookies in accordance with our cookie policy. You can disable cookies at any time.

×

One-dimensional Laterally Constrained Joint Anisotropic Inversion of CSRMT and ERT Data

Authors:

In this paper, we discuss several approaches for a joint inversion of controlled source radiomagnetotelluric (CSRMT) and electrical resistivity tomography (ERT) data observed over anisotropic media. We compare results of 2D isotropic joint inversion with results of a newly developed joint 1D anisotropic inversion algorithm. The developed algorithm involves the full controlled source high frequency forward and inversion formulations without the plane wave assumption. We demonstrate that for measurements on an anisotropic subsurface the isotropic joint inversion cannot fit both datasets properly due to a high anisotropy of shallow horizons of quaternary sands and loams. The joint anisotropic inversion helps to solve this problem and highlights the advantages of a joint inversion of CSRMT and ERT data. We also demonstrate application of the laterally constrain algorithm for the anisotropic inversion. Results of the joint 1D anisotropic inversion of CSRMT and ERT data were successfully compared with existing borehole data.

References

  • Auken, E., Christiansen, A.V., Jacobsen B.H., Foged N., and Sorensen K.I., 2005, Piecewise 1D laterally constrained inversion of resistivity data: Geophysical Prospecting, 53, 497– 506. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • Bastani, M, Hübert, J., Kalscheuer, T., Pedersen, L.B., Godio, A., and Bernard, J., 2012, 2D joint inversion of RMT and ERT data versus individual 3D inversion of full tensor RMT data: An example from Trecate site in Italy: Geophysics, 77, WB233– WB243. AbstractGoogle Scholar
  • Berdichevsky, M.N., and Dmitriev, V.I., 2008, Models and Methods of Magnetotellurics: Springer, Berlin, 563 pp. Google Scholar
  • Candansayar, M.E., and Tezkan, B., 2008, Two-dimensional joint inversion of radiomagnetotelluric and direct current resistivity data: Geophysical Prospecting, 56, 737– 749. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • Christensen, N.B., 2000, Difficulties in determining electrical anisotropy in subsurface investigations: Geophysical Prospecting, 48, 1– 19. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • Demirci, I., Candasayar, E.M., Vadidis, A., and Soupios, P., 2017, Two-dimensional joint inversion of direct current resistivity, radio-magnetotelluric and seismic refraction data: An application from Bafra Plain, Turkey: Journal of Applied Geophysics, 139, 316– 330. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • Devi, A., Israil, M., Singh, A., Gupta, P.K., Yogeshwar, P., and Tezkan, B., 2020, Imaging of groundwater contamination using 3D joint inversion of electrical resistivity tomography and radio magnetotelluric data: A case study from Northern India: Near Surface Geophysics, 18, 261– 274. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • Egbert, G.D., and Booker, J.R., 1986, Robust estimation of geomagnetic transfer functions: Geophysical Journal of the Royal Astronomical Society, 87, 173– 194. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • Jupp, D.L.B., and Vozoff, K., 1977, Resolving anisotropy in layered media by joint inversion: Geophysical Prospecting, 25, 460– 470. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • Kalscheuer, T., García, M., Meqbel, N., and Pedersen, L.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 International, 182, 1174– 1188. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • Kaminsky, A.E., Erokhin, S.A., and Shlykov, A.A., 2015, Joint 2D Inversion of Electrical Resistivity Tomography and Radio/Audio Magnetotelluric data: Russian Geophysics, 4, 32– 39. Google Scholar
  • Key, K., 2009, 1D inversion of multicomponent, multifrequency marine CSEM data: Methodology and synthetic studies for resolving thin resistive layers: Geophysics, 74, F9– F20. AbstractGoogle Scholar
  • Koefoed, O., 1979, Geosounding principles resistivity sounding measurements 14A: Amsterdam, Elsevier, 276 pp. Google Scholar
  • Kong, F.N., 2007, Hankel transform filters for dipole antenna radiation in a conductive medium: Geophysical Prospecting, 55, 83– 89. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • Kulikov, V.A., Kaminskii, A.E., and Yakovlev, A.G., 2017, Combined 2D inversion of electrotomographic and audio-magnetotellurgic sounding data to solve mining problems: Journal of Mining Institute, Geology, 223, 9– 19. Google Scholar
  • Maillet, R., 1947, The fundamental equations of electrical prospecting: Geophysics, 12, 529– 556. AbstractGoogle Scholar
  • Marquardt D.W., 1963, An algorithm for least-squares estimation of non-linear parameters: SIAM Journal on Applied Mathematics, 11, 431– 441. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • Niwas, S., and Upadhyay, S.K., 1974, Theoretical resistivity sounding results over a transition layer model: Geophysical Prospecting, 22, 279– 296. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • Oldenburg, D.W., and Li Y., 1999, Estimating depth of investigation in dc resistivity and IP surveys: Geophysics, 64, 403– 416. AbstractGoogle Scholar
  • Papen, M. von, Tezkan, B., and Israil, M., 2013, Characterization of an aquifer in Roorkee, India using the spatially constrained inversion of in-loop TEM data: Near Surface Geophysics 11, 85– 94. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • Pavlova, A.M., and Shevnin, V.A., 2013, 3D Electrical Resistivity Tomography in Glacial Sediments' Research. Conference Proceedings: Near Surface Geoscience - 19th EAGE European Meeting of Environmental and Engineering Geophysics, Sep 2013, 354. Google Scholar
  • Saraev, A., Simakov, A., Shlykov, A., and Tezkan, B., 2017, Controlled source radiomagnetotellurics: A tool for near surface investigations in remote regions: Journal of Applied Geophysics, 146, 228– 237. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • Schlumberger, C., Schlumberger, M., and Leonardon, E.G., 1933, Some observations concerning electrical measurements: AIMME Trans. 110, 150– 182. Google Scholar
  • Shlykov, A.A., and Saraev, A.K., 2014, Wave effects in the field of a high-frequency horizontal electric dipole: Izvestiya, Physics of the Solid Earth, 50, 249– 262. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • Shlykov, A.A., and Saraev, A.K., 2015, Estimating the macroanisotropy of a horizontally layered section from controlled-source radiomagnetotelluric soundings: Izvestiya, Physics of the Solid Earth, 51, 583– 601. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • Shlykov, A., Saraev, A., and Agrahari, S., 2019, Studying vertical anisotropy of a horizontally layered section using the controlled source radiomagnetotellurics: an example from the North-Western region of Russia: Geophysica, 54, 3– 21. Google Scholar
  • Streich, R., and Becken, M., 2011, Electromagnetic field generated by finite-length wire sources: comparison with point dipole solution. Geophysical Prospecting, 59, 361– 374. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • Swift, C.M., 1967, A magnetotelluric in vestigation of an electrical conductivity anomaly in the southwestem United States: Ph.D. thesis, MIT, Cambridge. Google Scholar
  • Turchkov, A., Dubrovin, I., Korotkov, I, Solomatynikov, V, Serov, A., and Zinovyev, A., 2019, Experience of deploying cable-free telemetric seismic system for fulfilment of 4C-3D seismic operations on shear waves: Conference Proceedings, Engineering and Mining Geophysics 15th Conference and Exhibition, Apr 2019, 1– 7. Google Scholar
  • Varentsov, Iv.M., Kovachikova, S., Kulikov, V.A., Logvinov, I.M., Tregubenko, V.I., and Yakovlev, A.G., KIROVOGRAD WG, 2012, Simultaneous MT and MV soundings at the western slope of the Voronezh Massif (in Russian): Ukraine Geophysical Journal, 34, 90– 107. Google Scholar
  • Yogeshwar, P., Tezkan, B., Israil, M., and Candansayar, M.E., 2012, Groundwater contamination in the Roorkee area, India: 2D joint inversion of radiomagnetotelluric and direct current resistivity data: Journal of Applied Geophysics, 76, 127– 135. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • Zonge, K.L., and Hughes, L.J., 1991, Controlled source audio-frequency magnetotellurics: in Nabighian, M.N., ed., Electromagnetic Methods in Applied Geophysics, v. 2, Society of Exploration Geophysicists, Tulsa, Okla., 713– 809. Google Scholar