The Forrestania and Nepean electromagnetic test ranges, Western Australia – a comparison of airborne systems

Karen Gilgallon, Anne Tomlinson, R. Mortimer
{"title":"The Forrestania and Nepean electromagnetic test ranges, Western Australia – a comparison of airborne systems","authors":"Karen Gilgallon, Anne Tomlinson, R. Mortimer","doi":"10.1080/22020586.2019.12073208","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Summary Electromagnetic (EM) systems are often described with varying technical specifications and standards, making it difficult to directly compare and assess their application to practical field examples. Exemplar case studies provided by contractors, whilst highlighting system capabilities, do not necessarily help to refine the suitability of the system across different geological targets and environments. Test ranges provide an opportunity for direct and consistent comparison of multiple systems for objective assessment. The Forrestania and Nepean EM test ranges in Western Australia consist of readily accessible land, openly available for testing by airborne, ground and downhole EM systems. Multiple conductors at varying depths beneath 10-20 Siemens (S) conductive overburden provide challenging, real-world conductive targets. Surveying using different EM systems allows for a direct comparison of system detection and resolution capabilities in a conductive regolith environment. The conductors have been well defined by drilling and provide a large range of metrics available for measurement, varying from 60-400 m in depth, 5,000-10,000 S in conductance, and with variable lateral profiles and depth extents. Multiple airborne, ground and downhole EM systems have utilised these test ranges, and several have made their data freely available for review. These include ground methods such as moving loop EM, fixed loop EM, SAMSON, downhole EM, and helicopter systems including HeliSAM FLEM, SkyTEM, VTEM, HELITEM, HeliGEOTEM, XTEM, HoistEM and AeroTEM. The SPECTREM, and Xcite airborne systems plan to fly the test range in the near future. Comparison of the airborne results, show that most of the post-2007 systems have been adequate to good at detecting the shallow IR2 conductor at Forrestania under conductive regolith. Only the hybrid grounded loop HeliSAM system has successfully detected the deep IR4 conductor at Forrestania.","PeriodicalId":8502,"journal":{"name":"ASEG Extended Abstracts","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2019-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"ASEG Extended Abstracts","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/22020586.2019.12073208","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Summary Electromagnetic (EM) systems are often described with varying technical specifications and standards, making it difficult to directly compare and assess their application to practical field examples. Exemplar case studies provided by contractors, whilst highlighting system capabilities, do not necessarily help to refine the suitability of the system across different geological targets and environments. Test ranges provide an opportunity for direct and consistent comparison of multiple systems for objective assessment. The Forrestania and Nepean EM test ranges in Western Australia consist of readily accessible land, openly available for testing by airborne, ground and downhole EM systems. Multiple conductors at varying depths beneath 10-20 Siemens (S) conductive overburden provide challenging, real-world conductive targets. Surveying using different EM systems allows for a direct comparison of system detection and resolution capabilities in a conductive regolith environment. The conductors have been well defined by drilling and provide a large range of metrics available for measurement, varying from 60-400 m in depth, 5,000-10,000 S in conductance, and with variable lateral profiles and depth extents. Multiple airborne, ground and downhole EM systems have utilised these test ranges, and several have made their data freely available for review. These include ground methods such as moving loop EM, fixed loop EM, SAMSON, downhole EM, and helicopter systems including HeliSAM FLEM, SkyTEM, VTEM, HELITEM, HeliGEOTEM, XTEM, HoistEM and AeroTEM. The SPECTREM, and Xcite airborne systems plan to fly the test range in the near future. Comparison of the airborne results, show that most of the post-2007 systems have been adequate to good at detecting the shallow IR2 conductor at Forrestania under conductive regolith. Only the hybrid grounded loop HeliSAM system has successfully detected the deep IR4 conductor at Forrestania.
澳大利亚西部的福雷斯塔尼亚和尼皮安电磁测试场——机载系统的比较
电磁(EM)系统通常用不同的技术规范和标准来描述,这使得很难直接比较和评估它们在实际现场实例中的应用。承包商提供的范例案例研究虽然强调了系统的能力,但并不一定有助于改进系统在不同地质目标和环境中的适用性。测试范围为多个系统的客观评估提供了直接和一致的比较机会。位于西澳大利亚的Forrestania和Nepean电磁测试范围由易于接近的陆地组成,可供空中、地面和井下电磁系统进行测试。在10-20西门子(S)导电覆盖层下不同深度的多个导体提供了具有挑战性的真实导电目标。使用不同的电磁系统进行测量,可以直接比较系统在导电风化层环境中的检测和分辨率能力。通过钻井,这些导体已经被很好地定义,并提供了大范围的测量指标,从60-400米的深度,5000 - 10000 S的电导,以及可变的横向剖面和深度范围。多个机载、地面和井下电磁系统已经使用了这些测试范围,其中一些已经免费提供了他们的数据供审查。这些方法包括地面方法,如移动回路电磁、固定回路电磁、SAMSON、井下电磁,以及直升机系统,包括HeliSAM FLEM、SkyTEM、VTEM、HELITEM、HeliGEOTEM、XTEM、HoistEM和AeroTEM。SPECTREM和Xcite机载系统计划在不久的将来飞行测试范围。与机载结果比较表明,大多数2007年后的系统已经足够好地探测福雷斯塔尼亚导电层下的浅层IR2导体。只有混合接地回路HeliSAM系统在福雷斯塔尼亚成功探测到深部IR4导体。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信