22.11.2012 Views

Airborne Gravity 2010 - Geoscience Australia

Airborne Gravity 2010 - Geoscience Australia

Airborne Gravity 2010 - Geoscience Australia

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

Create successful ePaper yourself

Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.

<strong>Airborne</strong> <strong>Gravity</strong> <strong>2010</strong><br />

Sensitivity to the near-surface is a mixed blessing. On the one hand, it accentuates the influence of<br />

topography, at the expense of geology, as illustrated at Red Dog, Alaska. Consequently, “terrain<br />

correction” is normally applied prior to interpretation of gravity gradient data. Sensitivity to the nearsurface<br />

can be equated to a loss of sensitivity at depth. This was illustrated by examining the<br />

detectability of a hypothetical 50 Mt orebody as its depth was increased from 0 to 400 m. When<br />

superimposed on real FALCON data from Broken Hill, <strong>Australia</strong>, the synthetic orebody response was<br />

unrecognisable as a target of interest when buried to 200 m.<br />

Sensitivity to the near-surface is advantageous for definition of outcropping or sub-cropping targets.<br />

This has been illustrated in the context of kimberlite exploration in the vicinity of Ekati, Canada. The<br />

lakes in the area can complicate the Gzz response. The apparent bathymetry of lakes was derived via<br />

geometry inversion. Several of the known kimberlites coincide with depth anomalies. This provided a<br />

means for ranking other Gzz anomalies as potential kimberlite targets.<br />

One consequence of the extremely small magnitude of gravity gradients is that the data are lowpassed<br />

filtered along flight lines. Therefore for quantitative modelling, it is important to apply an<br />

equivalent low-pass filter to calculated gravity gradients, and thereby avoid introducing short<br />

wavelength contributions which are absent from the measured data. This was illustrated using<br />

synthetic data in the context of terrain correction at Red Dog.<br />

Depending on the acquisition system, the interpreter may have a choice between a number of different<br />

“gradient quantities” for interpretation. For quantitative interpretation, our experience suggests that<br />

there appears to be little benefit in looking beyond Gzz or perhaps the full tensor amplitude, ||G ~ ||, if<br />

this is available.<br />

Acknowledgments<br />

Geological data from Red Dog were compiled during the cited CAMIRO project, and are included by<br />

kind permission of Teck Corporation. FALCON data from Ekati are published by kind permission of<br />

BHP Billiton Canada. We are grateful to Jon Carlson and Greg Walker of BHP Billiton for their support<br />

and technical input in relation to the Ekati example. The Broken Hill <strong>Airborne</strong> <strong>Gravity</strong> Gradiometry<br />

Survey was a joint project between the NSW Department of Mineral Resources, pmd*CRC,<br />

<strong>Geoscience</strong> <strong>Australia</strong>, <strong>Gravity</strong> Capital and BHP Billiton. The partners in this project have kindly made<br />

the data available to the public.<br />

References<br />

Fitzgerald, D., Argast, D., and Holstein, H., 2009, Further developments with full tensor gradiometer<br />

data sets: Expanded Abstract, ASEG 20th International Geophysical Conference and Exhibition,<br />

Adelaide.<br />

Fugro <strong>Airborne</strong> Surveys, 2003, Acquisition and Processing Report, Job 1572, Broken Hill, NSW,<br />

<strong>Airborne</strong> <strong>Gravity</strong> Gradiometer and Magnetic Geophysical Survey for BHPBilliton.<br />

Fullagar, P. K., Hughes, N., and Paine, J., 2000, Drilling-constrained 3D gravity interpretation:<br />

Exploration Geophysics, 31, 17-23.<br />

Fullagar, P. K., Pears, G. A., Hutton, D., and Thompson, A, 2004, 3D gravity and aeromagnetic<br />

inversion, Pillara region, W.A.: Exploration Geophysics, 35, 142-146.<br />

Fullagar, P. K. and Pears, G. A., 2007, Towards geologically realistic inversion: In B. Milkereit, ed.,<br />

Exploration in the new millenium: Proceedings of 5th Decennial International Conference on<br />

Mineral Exploration, 444-460.<br />

Fullagar, P. K., Pears, G. A., and McMonnies, B., 2008, Constrained inversion of geological surfaces -<br />

pushing the boundaries: The Leading Edge, 27(1), 98-105.<br />

Hensley, C., 2003, Data Processing Report, <strong>Airborne</strong> <strong>Gravity</strong> Gradiometer Survey, Broken Hill, NSW,<br />

<strong>Australia</strong>: BHPBilliton FALCON Operations Report CR 10657 for Survey USN 142911122002.<br />

Jackson, J., Pears, G., and Fullagar, P., 2004, Minimisation of the gravity response from mine<br />

infrastructure – an example from Sons of Gwalia mine, WA: Expanded Abstract, ASEG 17th<br />

International Geophysical Conference and Exhibition, Sydney.<br />

Kass, M. A., and Li, Y., 2007, Practical aspects of terrain correction in airborne gravity gradiometry:<br />

SEG 77th International Meeting & Exhibition, San Antonio, Expanded Abstracts, 755-759.<br />

85

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!