You are here

Home » Content

ANALİTİK SİNYAL YÖNTEMLERİNİN MANYETİK MODEL VERİLERİ ÜZERİNDE KARŞILAŞTIRILMASI VE ARAZİ ÖRNEĞİ

COMPARISION OF ANALYTIC SIGNAL METHODS ON MAGNETIC MODEL DATA AND FIELD EXAMPLE

Journal Name:

  • İstanbul Yerbilimleri Dergisi

Publication Year:

  • 2005

Key Words:

Keywords (Original Language):

Author NameUniversity of AuthorFaculty of Author
Abstract (2. Language): 
The analytic signal method is based on the horizontal and vertical derivatives of magnetic field anomalies in order to determine the boundary locations of the causative sources. This method is not much influenced from the direction of magnetization. In recent years, the method was further devoloped and used in several different ways. In this article, three devoloped analytic signal methods (the vertical gradient analytic signal (DTAS), the horizontal gradient analytic signal (YTAS) and the horizontal derivative (YT)) have been investigated. These methods were compared with synthetic models and applied to field data.
Bookmark/Search this post with
Abstract (Original Language): 
Manyetik alan anomalilerinden, bu anomaliyi oluşturan yapıyı saptayabilmek için en çok kullanılan yöntemlerden biri, yatay ve düşey türev kullanımına dayalı analitik sinyal (AS) yöntemidir. Bu yöntem mıknatıslanma yönünden çok fazla etkilenmez. Son yıllarda yöntem çok geliştirilmiş ve değişik şekillerde uygulanmaya başlanmıştır. Bu makalede, geliştirilen üç analitik sinyal yöntem (düşey türev analitik sinyal (DTAS), yatay türev analitik sinyal (YTAS) ve yatay türev (YT)) incelenmiştir. Yöntemler, sentetik modeller üzerinde karşılaştırılmış ve arazi verisine uygulanmıştır.
FULL TEXT (PDF): 
PDF icon arastirmax-analitik-sinyal-yontemlerinin-manyetik-model-verileri-uzerinde-karsilastirilmasi-arazi-ornegi.pdf
  • 2
151-162
  • Turkish

REFERENCES

References: 

Baldwin, R.T., and Langel, R., 1993, Tables and Maps of the DGRF 1985 and IGRF 1990, Internat Union of Geodesy and Geophysical Assoc. of Geomagnetic and Aeronomy, IAGA Bulletin, 54, 158.

Bilim, F. And Ates, A., 2003, Analytic signal inferred from reduced to the pole data, J.of the Balkan Geophysical Society, 6, 66-74.

Bingöl, E., 1989, Türkiye jeoloji haritası, 1/2000000, MTA yayını, Ankara.

Blakely, R.J. and Simpson, R.W., 1986, Approximating edges of source bodies from magnetic or gravity anomalies, Gephysics 51, 14941498.

Blakely, R., 1995, Potential theory in gravity and magnetic applications. Camb. Univ. P. New York.

Bournas ,N. and Baker, H.A., 2001, Interpretation of magnetic anomalies using the horizontal gradient analytic signal, Annali Di Geofisica 44, 505-526.
Fedi, M. and Florio, G., 2001, Detection of potential fields source boundaries by enhanced horizontal derivative method, Geophysical Prospecting, 49, 4058.

Goodacre, A.K., 1973, Some comments on the Calculation of the gravitational and magnetic attraction of a homogeneous rectangular prism, Geophys. Prosp. 21, 66-69. Hsu, S-K., Sibuet, J-C. and Shyu, C-T., 1996, Highresolution detection of geologic boundaries from potential-field anomalies: An enhanced analytic signal technique, Geophysics, 61, 373-389. Jeng, Y., Lee Y-L., Chen, C-Y. and Lin, M-J., 2003, Integrated signal enhancements in magnetic investigation in archaeology, J. of Appl. Geop. 53, 31-48.

Kadioglu, Y.K., Ates, A. and Gülec, N., 1998,

Structural interpretation of gabbroic rocks in Agaçören Granitoid, Central Turkey: field observations and aeromagnetic data. Geol. Mag., 135, 245-254.

Kearey, P., 1977, Computer program "prism" to compute gravity and magnetic anomalies of right rectangular prism. University of Bristol, England (yayınlanmadı).

Mohan N.L. and Anand Babu, L., 1995, An analysis of 3-D analytic signal, Geophysics, 60, 531-536.Nabighian, M.N., 1972, The analytic signal of two-dimensional magnetic bodies with polygonal cross-section: its properties and use for automated anomaly interpretation, Geophysics, 37, 507-517.

Nabighian, M.N., 1974, Additional comments on the analytic signal of two dimensional magnetic bodies with polygonal cross-section, Geophysics, 39, 85-92.

Nabighian, M.N. 1984, Toward a three-dimensional automatic interpretation of potential field data via generalized Hilbert transforms: Fundamental relations, Geophysics, 49, 780-786.

Reid, A.B., Allsop, J.M., Granser, H., Millett, A.J. and Somerton, I.W., 1990, Magnetic interpretation
in three dimensions using Euler deconvolution, Geophysics, 55, 80-91.

Roest, W.R., Verhoef, J. and Pilkington, M. 1992, Magnetic interpretation using 3D analytic signal, Geophysics, 57, 116-125.

Spector, A. and Grant, F.S. 1970, Statistical models for interpretation aeromagnetic data, Geophysics, 22, 359-383.

Thompson, D.T. 1982, EULDPH: A new tecnique for making computer-assisted depth estimates from magnetic data, Geophysics, 47, 31-3

Thank you for copying data from http://www.arastirmax.com