TY - JOUR
T1 - Combined interpretation of SkyTEM and high-resolution seismic data
AU - Høyer, Anne-Sophie
AU - Lykke-Andersen, Holger
AU - Jørgensen, Flemming
AU - Auken, Esben
N1 - Funding Information:
The project is funded by The Geological Survey for Denmark and Greenland (GEUS), the Faculty of Science at the University of Aarhus, and Environmental Center Ribe. We would like to thank Steen Thomsen and Clea Schneider from Environmental Center Ribe for helpful cooperation, Per Lynnerup Trinhammer for seismic engineering, Egon Nørmark for help with seismic processing, Christian Dylmer, Sune Colding and Daniel Heubeck for field assistance, Nikolaj Foged and Bjarke Roth for many fruitful discussions concerning SkyTEM data processing, Claus Heilman-Clausen for dating sedimentary samples, Thomas Vangkilde-Pedersen and Jan Piotrowski for discussions on data interpretation and Richard Wilson for his careful improvement of the English language of this paper. Reviews and comments from two anonymous reviewers are greatly appreciated. Finally we would also like to thank Halliburton and Seismic Micro-Technology for allowing us to use their ‘Promax’ and ‘Kingdom Suite’ software during this project.
PY - 2011
Y1 - 2011
N2 - Airborne electromagnetic methods (AEM) are used extensively in groundwater investigations, often in combination with high-resolution seismic data. Despite the frequent use of this mapping strategy, only a few cases are found in the literature. In this study, comparisons and interpretations were made based on AEM (SkyTEM) and high-resolution seismic data from an area covering 10km
2 in the western part of Denmark. As support for the interpretations, an exploration well was drilled to provide lithological and logging information in the form of resistivity and vertical seismic profiling. Based on the resistivity log, synthetic SkyTEM responses were calculated with a varying number of gate-times in order to illustrate the effect of the noise-level. At the exploration well geophysical data were compared to the lithological log; in general there is good agreement. The same tendency was recognised when SkyTEM results from the area were superposed onto seismic sections. Comprehensive geological knowledge is necessary in order to introduce layer boundaries from one method interactively in the data handling of the other. However, in cases where resistivity transitions are positively correlated to reflections, SkyTEM data supports the interpretation of weak reflections, and can also support the correlation of reflections both internally and between seismic lines. Besides contributing lithological information, the AEM survey provides gross three-dimensional structural information, whereas seismic data contributes with more detailed structural information in two dimensions.
AB - Airborne electromagnetic methods (AEM) are used extensively in groundwater investigations, often in combination with high-resolution seismic data. Despite the frequent use of this mapping strategy, only a few cases are found in the literature. In this study, comparisons and interpretations were made based on AEM (SkyTEM) and high-resolution seismic data from an area covering 10km
2 in the western part of Denmark. As support for the interpretations, an exploration well was drilled to provide lithological and logging information in the form of resistivity and vertical seismic profiling. Based on the resistivity log, synthetic SkyTEM responses were calculated with a varying number of gate-times in order to illustrate the effect of the noise-level. At the exploration well geophysical data were compared to the lithological log; in general there is good agreement. The same tendency was recognised when SkyTEM results from the area were superposed onto seismic sections. Comprehensive geological knowledge is necessary in order to introduce layer boundaries from one method interactively in the data handling of the other. However, in cases where resistivity transitions are positively correlated to reflections, SkyTEM data supports the interpretation of weak reflections, and can also support the correlation of reflections both internally and between seismic lines. Besides contributing lithological information, the AEM survey provides gross three-dimensional structural information, whereas seismic data contributes with more detailed structural information in two dimensions.
KW - Co-interpretation
KW - Geological mapping
KW - Reflection seismic
KW - TEM
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=83555172429&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1016/j.pce.2011.01.001
DO - 10.1016/j.pce.2011.01.001
M3 - Article
SN - 1474-7065
VL - 36
SP - 1386
EP - 1397
JO - Physics and Chemistry of the Earth
JF - Physics and Chemistry of the Earth
IS - 16
ER -