GRAVITY AND MAGNETIC METHODS

Ogunmola Kehinde James

B.Tech, Geology (ATBU), MSc, Mineral Exploration (Unijos), MSc, Geophysics (Leeds)

PhD (Exploration Geophysics, Unilag)

2022

1
 Table of Contents

SECTION ONE: GRAVITY AND MAGNETIC METHODS AND THEIR RELATED ROCK PROPERTIES .......... 4
1.1 Potential field theory .................................................................................................................... 7
1.2 Role of Gravity/Magnetic Methods in Oil Exploration................................................................ 10
1.3 Role of Gravity/Magnetic methods in mineral exploration ........................................................ 11
1.4 Scaling Properties of Gravity and Magnetic Data ....................................................................... 11
1.5 Geological Context ...................................................................................................................... 12
SECTION TWO: GRAVITY & MAGNETIC PROPERTIES .......................................................................... 13
2.1 Gravity Units ............................................................................................................................... 13
2.2 Magnetic Units ............................................................................................................................ 15
2.3 Rock magnetism .......................................................................................................................... 18
2.4 Poisson’s relation between gravity and magnetic potential ...................................................... 26
SECTION THREE: LAND GRAVITY DATA ACQUISITION & PROCESSING .............................................. 29
3.1 Gravity (g) dependence ............................................................................................................... 29
3.2 Free Air Anomaly (FAA) ............................................................................................................... 29
3.3 Bouguer Anomaly (BA) ................................................................................................................ 30
3.4 Isostatic Anomaly ........................................................................................................................ 31
3.5 Decompensative Anomaly .......................................................................................................... 34
SECTION FOUR: PRACTICAL DETAILS ON AQUISITION AND PROCESSING .......................................... 36
4.1 Land gravity data......................................................................................................................... 36
4.2: MARINE GRAVITY ACQUISITION & PROCESSING ....................................................................... 49
4.3: AIRBORNE GRAVITY ................................................................................................................... 56
4.4 Gravity Gradiometers.................................................................................................................. 59
4.5 SATELLITE DERIVED GRAVITY (MARINE AREAS ONLY) ................................................................ 60
4.6 MAGNETICS ................................................................................................................................. 64
4.6.1 Time variations of the geomagnetic field ........................................................................... 64
4.7: Magnetometers ......................................................................................................................... 70
4.8 Magnetic Data Processing (Ground) ........................................................................................... 76
4.9: Aeromagnetic surveying ............................................................................................................ 77
SECTION FIVE. ANOMALY CHARACTERISTICS AND DEPTH RULES ...................................................... 81
5.1 Overview of anomaly characteristics and depth rules................................................................ 81
5.2 Estimating depths ....................................................................................................................... 84
5.3 Gravity and magnetic effects of some simple models ............................................................... 93

2
SECTION SIX. INTERPRETATION TECHNIQUES ................................................................................... 100
6.1 Data enhancement.................................................................................................................... 100
6.1.1 Filters.................................................................................................................................. 100
Regional-Residual Separation and Filtering .................................................................................... 103
6.1.2 Reduction to the Pole (RTP) or Reduction to the Equator (RTE) ....................................... 105
6.1.3 Derivatives ......................................................................................................................... 106
6.2 Qualitative interpretation ......................................................................................................... 108
6.3 Quantitative Interpretation ...................................................................................................... 109
SECTION SEVEN: CASE STUDIES ......................................................................................................... 112
References .......................................................................................................................................... 132

3
 LIST OF FIGURES
SECTION ONE

Figure 1.1: Field of a monopole (Gravity) ............................................................................................... 7

Figure 1.2 Magnetic dipoles .................................................................................................................... 9
Figure 1.3 Scaling relations. ................................................................................................................. 12

SECTION TWO

Figure 2.1.Range in bulk densities for various rock types .................................................................... 15

Figure 2.2. Poisson’s relation for a body with uniform density.. .......................................................... 28

SECTION THREE

Figure 3.1 Airy-Heiskanen Model.......................................................................................................... 32

Figure 3.2. The Pratt Isostatic model ................................................................................................... 33
Figure 3.3. 40 km upward continued Isostatic residual anomaly for Western Australia (left)
Decompensative Anomaly (right). ....................................................................................................... 35

SECTION FOUR

Figure 4.1. Zero length spring ............................................................................................................... 37

Figure 4.2.Sketch of the mechanism of the LaCoste and Romberg gravity meter ............................... 38
Figure 4.3 .LaCoste and Romberg gravity meters ................................................................................. 38
Figure 4.4. Infinite flat slab approximation........................................................................................... 42
Figure 4.5. Terrain corrections .............................................................................................................. 43
Figure 4.6. Inner zone terrain corrections ............................................................................................ 43
Figure 4.7.Intermediate terrain corrections ......................................................................................... 44
Figure 4.8.Density determination used relation between gravity variation over a topographical
feature................................................................................................................................................... 45
Figure 4.9.Regression Analysis .............................................................................................................. 45
Figure 4.10. Nettleton’s Method .......................................................................................................... 46
Figure 4.11.Correlation coefficient ....................................................................................................... 47
Figure 4.12.Land gravity survey ............................................................................................................ 48
Figure 4.13. Modified L &R system installed in ship's instrument room .............................................. 52
Figure 4.14. The new LaCoste Romberg Air Sea System II .................................................................... 52
Figure 4.15. High-resolution marine gravity survey . ........................................................................... 55
Figure 4.16. Modern rotating gravity gradiometer system made by Lockheed Martin ....................... 60
Figure 4.17.The Slopes to Geoid method ............................................................................................. 62
Figure 4 18.The Geoid to Gravity method ............................................................................................ 63
Figure 4.19.The geomagnetic dipole field ............................................................................................ 65
Figure 4.20. Torsion Magnetometer without its tripod ....................................................................... 71
Figure 4.21.Basic concept of Fluxgate instrument................................................................................ 72
Figure 4.22.The Proton Magnetometer as either a single or gradiometer system ............................. 74

4
SECTION FIVE

Figure 5.1. Vertical and horizontal components profiles across a monopole ...................................... 81
Figure 5.2. Magnetic response of dyke with horizontal magnetisation (close to equator).................. 82
Figure 5.3.Magnetic response of dyke with vertical down magnetisation (close to N Pole) ............... 82
Figure 5.4.Magnetic response of dyke with inclined down magnetisation (European area/North
America) ................................................................................................................................................ 83
Figure 5.5. Vertical magnetic response of dyke with vertical up magnetisation (close to S Pole). ...... 83
Figure 5.6. Magnetic response of dyke with inclined up magnetisation (Southern Africa /Australia). 84
Figure 5.7: Diverge of magnetic field with distance ............................................................................. 85
Figure 5.8: Monopole case.................................................................................................................... 86
Figure 5.9: Dipoles ................................................................................................................................ 86
Figure 5.10. Half Maximum Width ‘W’ ................................................................................................ 87
Figure 5.11: Horizontal Slope Distance ................................................................................................ 88
Figure 5.12: Sokolov ‘S’ method .......................................................................................................... 88
Figure 5.13: Simple model types........................................................................................................... 93
Figure 5.14: Step model ........................................................................................................................ 93
Figure 5.15: Characteristic estimators for step model ......................................................................... 94
Figure 5 16: Profiles of the total field anomaly across a step .............................................................. 94
Figure 5 17: The Ribbon Model ............................................................................................................. 95
Figure 5 18: Profiles of the gravity effect across a ribbon model of infinite length ............................. 96
Figure 5.19:Gravity characteristic estimators for the ribbon model .................................................... 96
Figure 5.20: Magnetic vertical intensity across a two dimensional ribbon model for various dips,
depths and directions of magnetization. .............................................................................................. 97
Figure 5.21: Magnetic estimators for the ribbon model ...................................................................... 97
Figure 5.22: Prism model ...................................................................................................................... 98
Figure 5.23: Prism model parameters .................................................................................................. 99
Figure 5.24: Profile across anomaly showing estimators ..................................................................... 99

SECTION SIX

Figure 6.1: The energy spectrum in the wavenumber domain and spectral analysis for regional-
residual separation ............................................................................................................................. 104

SECTION SEVEN

Figure 7.1: Map of Nigeria showing the major divisions of the Benue Trough ................................. 112
Figure 7.2: Original TMI grid (a) and TMI grid (b) at azimuth of 185 degrees .................................... 114
Figure 7.3: Grid showing the output of a RTP (a) and RTE (b) from the TMI data ............................. 123
Figure 7.4: Regional-Residual separation of (left) RTP grid and (right) RTE grid of the magnetic data
............................................................................................................................................................ 124
Figure 7.5: Total horizontal derivative of the (a) RTP field and (b) RTE magnetic data. .................... 124
Figure 7.6: The image on the left is the RTP grid which shows lineament directions in NE-SW
direction similar to the strike of the dike in the Landsat imagery (right). .......................................... 125
Figure 7.7: Basement faults derived from the total horizontal derivative of the RTP magnetics ...... 126

5
Figure 7.8: SRTM data of the study area showing some of the faults that controlled the formation of
the Enugu Escarpment. ....................................................................................................................... 126
Figure 7.9: Depth estimates using the Tilt-depth method using a color angle of 22 degrees............ 127
Figure 7.10: Models derived from 2 profiles across the study area ................................................... 128
Figure 7.11: Depth to Basement Map structure map of the Anambra Basin ..................................... 129
Figure 7.12: Geological map of the Study Area showing the faults derived from the study. ............. 130

LIST OF TABLES

Table 1: Susceptibilities of non-iron-bearing minerals ........................................................................ 21

Table 2. Susceptibilities of some paramagnetic minerals .................................................................... 23
Table 3: Examples of structural index values for several magnetic sources ........................................ 91

6
 SECTION ONE: GRAVITY AND MAGNETIC METHODS AND THEIR
RELATED ROCK PROPERTIES

1.1 Potential field theory

Potential field theory can be applied to a broad class of force fields in which no dissipative
losses of energy occur when a body moves from one point to another. Such fields are
conservative and the potential energy of the body depends only on its position and not on
the path along which the body moved. Potential energy is associated with a set of forces
that act on a body in a way that depends only on the body's position in space. This allows
the set of forces to be considered as having a specified vector at every point in space
forming what is known as a vector field of forces, or a force field. If the work of forces of this
type acting on a body that moves from a start to an end position is defined only by these
two positions and does not depend on the trajectory of the body between the two, then
there is a function known as a potential that can be evaluated at the two positions to
determine this work. Furthermore, the force field is defined by this potential function, also
called potential energy.

For simplicity considering a Field of a monopole (Gravity): The force between two
monopolies of strength (mass) m1 & m2 situated at distance r apart (figure 1.1) is

Figure 1.1: Field of a monopole (Gravity)

F = Gm1 m2/r2
let m1 go to 1 and m2 go to m
The unit pole moves distance dr against field of m
External work dU = -Fdr (force x distance)
where U = Potential Energy
dU/dr = -F = -Gm/r2
Integrating
U = Gm/r + constant

7
To make constant = 0 we define work done in bringing the unit pole from infinity to the
point i.e. when m is at infinity with respect to unit mass

So Potential Energy U = Gm/r

In vector notation F = grad U = dU/dr =∇ U
where grad is short for gradient
dU/dr = F
= Fx + Fy + Fz

Where i, j & k are unit vectors in the x, y & z directions

Magnetic fields have pairs of “opposite charges” – magnetic dipoles. Therefore, any line of
flux starting at one magnetic pole, returns to its sister pole and there is no net flux out of
the box shown in Figure 1.2; the magnetic field has no divergence This property of magnetic
fields is another of Maxwell’s equations: ∇⋅ B = 0.

A magnetic dipole moment in a magnetic field will possess potential energy which depends
upon its orientation with respect to the magnetic field. Since magnetic sources are
inherently dipole sources which can be visualized as a current loop with current I and area
A, the energy is usually expressed in terms of the magnetic dipole moment.

where

B= Magnetic induction

8
 Figure 1.2 Magnetic dipoles

The energy is expressed as a scalar product, and implies that the energy is lowest when the
magnetic moment is aligned with the magnetic field. The difference in energy between
aligned and anti-aligned is

Gravity Method : determines the sub-surface spatial distribution of rock density, ρ, which
causes small changes in the earth's gravitational field strength. Here the object is to
determine the spatial variation in the acceleration due to gravity (small g) which depends on
the mass (density and volume) of the rocks underlying the survey area. The force of
attraction F between the gravity meter mass M and a body of mass m depends on-

F = G mM/r2

where G is the Gravitational constant and r is distance between masses m and M

since F = Mg then g = G m/r2

g is proportional to mass m and proportional to density ρ

Density is a scalar quantity (has only magnitude, not direction).This makes the shape of
gravity anomalies simpler and generally easier to interpret than magnetic anomalies.
Density boundaries tend to be associated with: porosity changes, faults, unconformities,

9
basin edges or basin floor, limestones, dolomite or evaporite occurrences, salt occurrences
and major lithologic boundaries.

Magnetics Method : determines the sub-surface spatial distribution of rock magnetisation

properties, J, (or susceptibility and remanence) which cause small changes in the earth's
magnetic (Geomagnetic) field strength and direction. Here the object is to determine the
spatial variation of the geomagnetic field within the survey area and use these magnetic
field variations to say something about the geometry, depth and magnetic properties of
subsurface rock structures. The magnetisation of rocks has both direction and magnitude
(thus magnetisation is a vector quantity) and can be a combination of both Remnant and
Induced magnetisation. The induced magnetisation depends on the rocks susceptibility
while the remanent magnetisation (remanence) depends on the history of the rock. These
factors tend to make the shape of the magnetic anomalies complex and in general more
difficult to interpret than gravity anomalies.

1.2 Role of Gravity/Magnetic Methods in Oil Exploration

• Pre-seismic stage: Grav/Mag surveys will help to evaluate depth to basement, structural
and basin configuration mapping, and thus provide major input to seismic survey design.

• During seismic exploration stage: Gravity collected along and between seismic reflection
lines to allow interpolation/extrapolation of structures between and away from seismic
lines. (Ground magnetic data rarely collected)

• During seismic processing stage: Since gravity data can be processed rapidly, they can be
used to define structures, particularly faults which can help seismic processing decisions.
Gravity can be used with seismic data to improve velocity models of the near surface which
will allow better imaging of deeper structures.

• Post-seismic stage: Checks via model studies on whether seismic interpretation is correct
and helps model deeper parts of sedimentary basins not imaged by seismics.

10
1.3 Role of Gravity/Magnetic methods in mineral exploration

• Aeromagnetic surveys used to assist in basic mapping, and to identify target areas for
follow up studies. Since about 2000 airborne gravity surveys are becoming more common to
identify geological structures and targets. Combined airborne gravity and magnetics can be
a powerful means of differentiating rock types.

• Follow up high resolution aeromagnetic survey or ground magnetic profiling to identify

targets better.

• Grav/Mag modelling with drilling to identify size and subsurface shape of ore body

1.4 Scaling Properties of Gravity and Magnetic Data

Gravity Field: Due to its monopole source nature, the amplitude of g is proportional to scale
change. That is, if a structure is double the size of another (or the density contrast doubles)
then the gravity effects will also double. This can be viewed as a doubling of the mass. Thus
gravity maps are therefore often dominated by the gravitational effects of large regional
density structures and the gravity effects due to shallow small scale structures, that are of
interest, may only represent a small percentage of the gravity signal (often less than 10%).

Magnetic Field: due to the dipole source nature the magnetic field scales differently. The
amplitude of a magnetic anomaly is unaffected by physical scale change. This in part is due
to the magnetic effect not arising from the bulk volume of the magnetic material but from
the surface area of the magnetic interface and that magnetic fields decay more rapidly with
distance. This causes magnetic maps to appear to favour the effects of shallow sources over
deep ones. This can be a problem when volcanics (generally strongly magnetic) occur
within the sedimentary section of a basin, since their magnetic signal will tend to dominate
and make it difficult or impossible to determine depth of the basin from the magnetic signal
arising from the crystalline basement interface. If no shallow volcanics are present , the
effects of the crystalline basement can usually be seen in magnetic maps. Figure 1/1
illustrates this over a simple 2D body.

11
Figure 1.3 Scaling relations. Solid anomaly lines relate to effects of larger body and the dashed lines the effect
of the smaller body

1.5 Geological Context

Rocks tend to be more uniform in their density than in their magnetisation. Different rock
types tend to have different densities and magnetisations.
In General,

High density(3.0g/cc) .....................………...>. Low (1.8g/cc)

Ultra basics > Basic > Metamorphic > Acid Intrusive > Sediments
Strong magnetisation. ............……..>Weak magnetisation

General trend in density and magnetisation properties of rocks is similar with high density
rocks (e.g. Gabbro) having strong magnetisation and low density rocks (e.g. sediments)
having weak magnetisation. Thus it is to be expected that gravity and magnetic anomaly
maps will show some degree of correlation.

12
 SECTION TWO: GRAVITY & MAGNETIC PROPERTIES

2.1 Gravity Units

i. Acceleration g

Working formula: F = G m1 m2/r2

where F = gm1, g = acceleration due to gravity
m1 = mass in measuring system (gravity meter)
m2 = mass of Earth and is function of rock density
r = radius of Earth - this is not a constant since there is topography and latitude effects,
G = gravitational constant

Small g is the pull of, or acceleration due to, gravity and is measured as follows-

1 cm/s2 = 1 Gal = 0.01 m/s2

1 mGal = 10-3 Gal = 10-5 m/s2
SI unit is 1 GU. = 10-1 mGal = 10-6 m/s2

where Gal is named after Galileo (1564 - 1642) and GU. is gravity unit The mGal is the
Practical unit in common use, whereas the GU. is the SI Unit (Systeme International d'
Unites)

(SI for g is m/s2 , 10-3 milli, 10-6 micro and 10-9 nano)

Earth’s Gravity Field:

g mean for Earth ≈ 981000 mGal

so 1 mGal ˜ 10-6 of g for Earth

gravity meters can read to 10-9 (≈ 0.001 scale divisions for a LaCoste & Romberg meter).

13
In oil exploration, gravity variations of the order of 0.2 mGal (and less) can be important
locally over a structure with variations of 10's of mGals being more common over
sedimentary basins.

ii Gravity Gradients
Because practical units of acceleration for exploration gravity surveys is the mGal, it makes
sense to use gradient units that are easily related to our unit of convenience. For historical
and practical reasons the Eotvos is defined in terms of the Gravity Unit (GU)
1 E = 1 GU/km = 10-9 s-2
or 1 E = 0.1 microGal / m
or 1 E = 1 nGal / cm = 1 nanoGal / cm

iii. Density, ρ

Density, ρ, is a scalar quantity (has only magnitude and no direction)

1 gram/cubic centimetre = 1 g/cc = 1000 kg/m3
The SI unit is the kg/m3
Practical unit is g/cc or g/cm3 or g.cm-3
Density of Sea Water is a fuction of salinity and temperature but generally taken as 1.03
g/cc (Practical unit) or 1030 kg/m3 (SI unit).
Density can be measured in a number of different ways e.g. Dry, Saturated, Grain and Bulk
density. Density of sediments increases with depth due to: (i) compaction (ii) lithification (iii)
metamorphism. Range in bulk densities for various rock types is shown in figure 2.1.

14
 Figure 2.1.Range in bulk densities for various rock types

2.2 Magnetic Units

These are more complex than gravity and have various ways of defining them. There are
four fundamental terms that can be used to describe how “magnetised” a material (or a
region) is. These are-

B the magnetic induction;

H the magnetic field;
J the magnetic polarisation (or simply, the magnetisation);
M the magnetic dipole moment per unit volume

These quantities are related in different ways in the two systems (cgs and SI units) by the
following equations:

cgs,
B = H + 4πJ
J=M
SI,
B = μH +J
J = μM

15
where μ = 4π x 10-7 H/m is the permeability of free space. The above equations show that
all four fundamental terms have the same units in the cgs system. In the cgs system,
however, it has been customary to designate B in terms of Gauss (G), H in Oersteds (Oe),
and J and M in electromagnetic units (emu) per cubic centimetre. Incidentally, it has also
been customary in the cgs system to express the magnetisation of materials in terms of the
magnetic polarisation J and to call this quantity the “intensity of magnetisation,” the “
magnetisation per unit volume” or simply the “ magnetisation”. Because J and M are the
same in the cgs system, this introduces no ambiguity. In SI units, B and J are expressed in
Tesla (T), while M and H are expressed in amperes (A) per metre. The conversion factors for
the four terms are-

(B) 1 T = 104 G
(H) 1 A/m = 4π x 10-3 Oe
(J) 1 T = 104/4π emu/cm3
(M) 1 A/m = 10-3 emu/cm3

Note that the conversions for B and M involve only powers of 10, while those for H and J
involve factors of 4π. A fifth important term is used to describe how magnetised an object
may become under the influence of a field. This is called the magnetic susceptibility (k), for
which the defining equations are-

cgs,
M = J = kH
SI,
M = J/μ = kH

In both systems, susceptibility is a pure number. It follows from the conversions given above
that 1 cgs unit of susceptibility equals 4π SI units of susceptibility. For these study notes the
following units and terminology are generally used in exploration.

16
i. Geomagnetic Field Strength , T

Measured in terms of geomagnetic flux density B – all exploration instruments measure this.
Gauss gamma nanoTesla Weber/m2
1 G = 10 γ = 10 nT = 10-4Wb/m2
The SI unit is nT ≡ γ
You may be more familiar with magnetic field given in units of the Oersted (Oe) which is the
magnetic intensity H. Russian aeromagnetic maps were commonly contoured in intervals of

1 mOe = 100nT
where 1 Oe = 103/ 4 π A/m

H is computed in same way as B but is different in that B is dependent on the permeability

μ0 of the material

where B α μ0
Relation between B & H is
B = μ0 H + kH

where μ0 is permeability and k is susceptibility

for space (vacuum)
B =μ H since k = 0
in air
B = H since μ = 1 & k = 0

ii. Magnetisation J- (or magnetic moment/unit volume): This is a vector magnetic property
of a rock. Magnetisation J is often quoted in electromagnetic units per unit volume (emu
cm-3) where
1 emu/cm-3 = 103 A/m = 4π 10-4Wb/m2
There are two components of Magnetisation:

17
Remanent Magnetisation- This is a natural property of some rocks, independent of T, and is
the magnetisation that remains if T is removed. Jr direction is often the Earth's field
direction at the time of rock formation. Since rock deform and/or continental movements
may have occurred since the time of formation the direction of magnetisation need not be
the same as the present direction of T.

Induced Magnetisation Ji (where Ji = kT)- Since Ji & T are in nT then k (the susceptibility) is
dimensionless. The magnetic susceptibility of rocks is normally almost entirely dependent
on the volume percentage of magnetite ( Fe3O4 ) in the rock.

2.3 Rock magnetism

This is the study of the magnetic properties of rocks, sediments and soils. The field arose out
of the need in paleomagnetism to understand how rocks record the Earth's magnetic field.
This remanence is carried by minerals, particularly certain strongly magnetic minerals
like magnetite (the main source of magnetism in lodestone). An understanding
of remanence helps paleomagnetists to develop methods for measuring the ancient
magnetic field and correct for effects like sediment compaction and metamorphism. Rock
magnetic methods are used to get a more detailed picture of the source of distinctive
striped pattern in marine magnetic anomalies that provides important information on plate
tectonics.

Types of magnetic order

The contribution of a mineral to the total magnetism of a rock depends strongly on the type
of magnetic order or disorder. Magnetically disordered minerals
(diamagnets and paramagnets) contribute a weak magnetism and have no remanence. The
more important minerals for rock magnetism are the minerals that can be magnetically
ordered, at least at some temperatures. These are the ferromagnets, ferrimagnets and
certain kinds of antiferromagnets. These minerals have a much stronger response to the
field and can have a remanence.

18
Diamagnetism

Diamagnetism is a magnetic response shared by all substances. In response to an applied

magnetic field, electrons precess , and by Lenz's law they act to shield the interior of a body
from the magnetic field. Thus, the moment produced is in the opposite direction to the field
and the susceptibility is negative. This effect is weak but independent of temperature. A
substance whose only magnetic response is diamagnetism is called a diamagnet.

Paramagnetism

Paramagnetism is a weak positive response to a magnetic field due to rotation of

electron spins. Paramagnetism occurs in certain kinds of iron-bearing minerals because the
iron contains an unpaired electron in one of their shells . Some are paramagnetic down to
absolute zero and their susceptibility is inversely proportional to the temperature ; others
are magnetically ordered below a critical temperature and the susceptibility increases as it
approaches that temperature.

Ferromagnetism

Collectively, strongly magnetic materials are often referred to as ferromagnets. However,

this magnetism can arise as the result of more than one kind of magnetic order. In the strict
sense,ferromagnetism refers to magnetic ordering where neighboring electron spins are
aligned by the exchange interaction. The classic ferromagnet is iron. Below a critical
temperature called the Curie temperature, ferromagnets have a spontaneous
magnetization and there is hysteresis in their response to a changing magnetic field. Most
importantly for rock magnetism, they have remanence, so they can record the Earth's field.

Iron does not occur widely in its pure form. It is usually incorporated into iron
oxides, oxyhydroxides and sulfides. In these compounds, the iron atoms are not close
enough for direct exchange, so they are coupled by indirect exchange or superexchange.
The result is that the crystal lattice is divided into two or more sublattices with different
moments (Dunlop and Özdemir, 1997).

Ferrimagnetism

Ferrimagnets have two sublattices with opposing moments. One sublattice has a larger
moment, so there is a net unbalance. Magnetite, the most important of the magnetic

19
minerals, is a ferrimagnet. Ferrimagnets often behave like ferromagnets, but the
temperature dependence of their spontaneous magnetization can be quite different.

Antiferromagnetism

Antiferromagnets, like ferrimagnets, have two sublattices with opposing moments, but now
the moments are equal in magnitude. If the moments are exactly opposed, the magnet has
noremanence. However, the moments can be tilted (spin canting), resulting in a moment
nearly at right angles to the moments of the sublattices. Hematite has this kind of
magnetism.

Magnetic mineralogy

This is the study of the magnetic properties of minerals. The contribution of a mineral to the
total magnetism of a rock depends strongly on the type of magnetic order or disorder.
Magnetically disordered minerals (diamagnets and paramagnets) contribute a weak
magnetism and have no remanence. The more important minerals for rock magnetism are
the minerals that can be magnetically ordered, at least at some temperatures. These are
the ferromagnets, ferrimagnets and certain kinds of antiferromagnets. These minerals have
a much stronger response to the field and can have a remanence.

Weakly magnetic minerals

Non-iron-bearing minerals

Most minerals with no iron content are diamagnetic (Dunlop and Özdemir, 1997). Some
such minerals may have a significant positive susceptibility, for example serpentine ( Hunt et
al 1995) but this is because the minerals have inclusions containing strongly magnetic
minerals such as magnetite. The magnetic susceptibility of such minerals is negative and
small (Table 1).

20
Table 1: Susceptibilities of non-iron-bearing minerals ( Hunt et al, 1995)

[hide]Mineral Volume susceptibility at room temperature (SI)

graphite -80 to -200

calcite -7.5 to -39

anhydrite -14 to -60

gypsum -13 to -29

ice -9

orthoclase -13 to -17

magnesite -15

forsterite -12

halite -10 to -16

galena -33

quartz -13 to -17

celestine -16 to -18

21
Iron-bearing paramagnetic minerals

Most iron-bearing carbonates and silicates are paramagnetic at all temperatures (Dunlop
and Özdemir, 1997). Some sulfides are paramagnetic, but some are strongly magnetic (see
below). In addition, many of the strongly magnetic minerals discussed below are
paramagnetic above a critical temperature (the Curie temperature or Neel temperature). In
Table 2 are given susceptibilities for some iron-bearing minerals. The susceptibilities are
positive and an order of magnitude or more larger than diamagnetic susceptibilities.

22
 Table 2. Susceptibilities of some paramagnetic minerals (after Hunt et al,1995)

[hide]Mineral Volume susceptibility (SI)

garnet 2,700

illite 410

montmorillonite 330-350

biotite 1,500-2,900

siderite 1,300-11,000

chromite 3,000-120,000

orthopyroxene 1,500-1,800

fayalite 5,500

olivine 1,600

jacobsite 25,000

franklinite 450,000

23
Strongly magnetic minerals

Iron-titanium oxides

Many of the most important magnetic minerals on Earth are oxides of iron and titanium.
Their compositions are conveniently represented on a ternary diagram with axes
corresponding to the proportions of Ti4+, Fe2+, and Fe3+. Important regions on the diagram
include the titanomagnetites, which form a line of compositions Fe3-xTixO4 for x between 0
and 1. At the end is magnetite, while the composition is ulvöspinel. The titanomagnetites
have an inverse spinel crystal structure and at high temperatures are a solid solution series.
Crystals formed from titanomagnetites by cation-deficient oxidation are
called titanomaghemites, an important example of which is maghemite. Another series,
the titanohematites, have hematite and ilmenite as their end members, and so are also
called hemoilmenites.[1] The crystal structure of hematite is trigonal-hexagonal. It has the
same composition as maghemite; to distinguish between them, their chemical formulae are
generally given as γFe2O3 for hematite and αFe2O3 for maghemite.

Iron sulfides

The other important class of strongly magnetic minerals is the iron sulfides,
particularly greigite and pyrrhotite.

Magnetic remanence

Magnetic remanence is often identified with a particular kind of remanence that is obtained
after exposing a magnet to a field at room temperature. However, the Earth's field is not
large, and this kind of remanence would be weak and easily overwritten by later fields. A
central part of rock magnetism is the study of magnetic remanence, both as natural
remanent magnetization (NRM) in rocks obtained from the field and remanence induced in
the laboratory. Below are listed the important natural remanences and some artificially
induced kinds.

Thermoremanent magnetization (TRM)

When an igneous rock cools, it acquires a thermoremanent magnetization (TRM) from the
Earth's field. TRM can be much larger than it would be if exposed to the same field at room
temperature (see isothermal remanence). This remanence can also be very stable, lasting
without significant change for millions of years. TRM is the main reason

24
that paleomagnetists are able to deduce the direction and magnitude of the ancient Earth's
field (Stacey and Barnajee, 1974). If a rock is later re-heated (as a result of burial, for
example), part or all of the TRM can be replaced by a new remanence. If it is only part of the
remanence, it is known as partial thermoremanent magnetization (pTRM). Because
numerous experiments have been done modeling different ways of acquiring remanence,
pTRM can have other meanings. For example, it can also be acquired in the laboratory by

cooling in zero field to a temperature (below the Curie temperature), applying a

magnetic field and cooling to a temperature , then cooling the rest of the way to room
temperature in zero field. The standard model for TRM is as follows. When a mineral such
as magnetite cools below the Curie temperature, it becomes ferromagnetic but is not
immediately capable of carrying a remanence. Instead, it is superparamagnetic, responding
reversibly to changes in the magnetic field. For remanence to be possible there must be a
strong enough magnetic anisotropy to keep the magnetization near a stable state;
otherwise, thermal fluctuations make the magnetic moment wander randomly. As the rock
continues to cool, there is a critical temperature at which the magnetic anisotropy becomes
large enough to keep the moment from wandering: this temperature is called the blocking
temperature and referred to by the symbol . The magnetization remains in the same
state as the rock is cooled to room temperature and becomes a thermoremanent
magnetization.

Chemical (or crystallization) remanent magnetization (CRM)

Magnetic grains may precipitate from a circulating solution, or be formed during chemical
reactions, and may record the direction of the magnetic field at the time of mineral
formation. The field is said to be recorded by chemical remanent magnetization (CRM). The
mineral recording the field commonly is hematite, another iron oxide. Redbeds, clastic
sedimentary rocks (such as sandstones) that are red primarily because of hematite
formation during or after sedimentary diagenesis, may have useful CRM signatures, and
magnetostratigraphy can be based on such signatures.

25
Depositional remanent magnetization (DRM)

Magnetic grains in sediments may align with the magnetic field during or soon after
deposition; this is known as detrital remnant magnetization (DRM). If the magnetization is
acquired as the grains are deposited, the result is a depositional detrital remanent
magnetization (dDRM); if it is acquired soon after deposition, it is a post-depositional
detrital remanent magnetization (pDRM).

Viscous remanent magnetization

Viscous remanent magnetization (VRM), also known as viscous magnetization,

is remanence that is acquired by ferromagnetic minerals by sitting in a magnetic field for
some time. The natural remanent magnetization of an igneous rock can be altered by this
process. To remove this component, some form of stepwise demagnetization must be used.

Applications of rock magmatism

 magnetic anomalies
 magnetostratigraphy
 Paleomagnetic secular variation
 paleointensity
 plate tectonics
 biomagnetism
 environmental magnetism
 magnetic fabrics

2.4 Poisson’s relation between gravity and magnetic potential

The magnetic scalar potential of an element of a magnetic material and the gravitational
attraction of an element of mass have some similarities, for example, they both have
magnitudes that are inversely proportional to the squared distance to their respective point

26
sources (Blakely, 1986). Considering a body with uniform magnetization M and uniform
density ᵨ, the magnetic scalar potential is given by-

the gravitational potential is written as-

Therefore,

Equation 1

whre gm is the component gravity in the direction of magnetization. Equation 1 is called

poisson relation. It states that, if [a] the boundary of gravitational and magnetic sources are
the same and [b] the magnetization and density are uniform, then the magnetic potential is
propotional to the component of gravitational attraction in the direction of magnetization
fig 2.2.

27
Figure 2.2. Poisson’s relation for a body with uniform density. The magnetic potential at any point is
proportional to the component of gravity in the direction of magnetization (after Blakely, 1986) .

In a situation where the density and magnetization are not uniform, the gravity and
magnetic sources can be viewed as composed of elemental volumes. If the magnetization
and density distributions are sufficiently well behaved, the density and magnetization within
each elemental volume will approach a constant as the volume becomes arbitrarily small.
Poisson’s relation holds for each elemental volume, and by superposition must hold for the
entire body. Hence Poisson’s relation is appropriate for any gravity and magnetic source
where the intensity of magnetization is everywhere proportional to the density and where
the direction of magnetization is uniform.

Using Poisson’s relation, the magnetic field can be calculated directly from the gravity field
without knowledge about the shape of the body or how density and magnetization are
distributed within the body. In other words, Poisson’s relation can be used to transform a
magnetic anomaly into pseudogravity, i.e, the gravity anomaly that would be observed if the
magnetization were replaced by density distribution of exact proportions. Poisson’s relation
can also be used to derive expressions for the magnetic induction of simple bodies when the
expression for gravitational attraction is known.

28
 SECTION THREE: LAND GRAVITY DATA ACQUISITION &
PROCESSING

3.1 Gravity (g) dependence

The observed pull of gravity g is a function of

g =function ( ρ , r, V, lat, ht, topo , time)

Geology controls,
- ρ , r density & distance of subsurface mass distribution from point of measurement
- V rock volume of the mass distribution
Other controls,
- Latitude - position on Earth's surface
- height - height above or below sea level which is used as reference height
-topo -topography surrounding measurement site
- time e.g. lunar

If we did not correct for items lat, ht, topo , time then we would be unable to use gravity
data to investigate items ρ , r, V since the gravity effects of items lat, ht, topo , time are
generally much larger than items ρ , r, V. There are various ways of correcting (reducing or
processing) gravity data for items lat, ht, topo , time and the resulting variation in gravity
are called:

Free air Anomaly

Bouguer Anomaly
Isostatic Anomaly

These anomaly types are inter-related-

3.2 Free Air Anomaly (FAA)

FAA = gobs - gth + Free air correction (FAC)

Where,

29
gobs = vertical component of gravity measured with gravity meter.

gth = theoretical or normal value of gravity at sea level at measuring site (sometimes called
latitude correction). Thiscorrection removes the major component of gravity leaving
only local effects.

FAC = corrects for height above sea level = ( 0.3086 mGals per metre)

Since gravity decreases with distance2 from centre of Earth and gobs is measured at various
heights above sea level along a profile, then there is a need to reduce the data to a common
reference surface (datum). Height Reference Datum is normally taken as mean sea level,
but can be any defined height e.g. lowest point in survey area.

FAA = gobs - gth + 0.3086 h mGals

FAA = gobs –( gth - 0.3086 h) mGals
where h is measured in metres
The free air anomaly is not normally used for land based gravity studies. Its main use is at
sea .
Gravity Reference Datum: since gravity meters are relative measuring instruments their
values need to be tied and adjusted to an international network of known gravity values
called the IGSN71.

3.3 Bouguer Anomaly (BA)

BA = gobs - gth + 0.3086h - Bouguer Correction

Thus the BA equation is simply the FAA with an additional correction called the Bouguer
Correction.
i.e. BA = FAA - Bouguer Correction(BC)

The Bouguer Correction corrects for the rock mass between the measuring site and height
datum (sea level). The correction assumes the rock to be a flat infinite slab of thickness h

30
(metres) and constant density r (g/cc). This is not strictly true since the top of the infinite
slab is the topography.
BC =2πGρh =0.04191ρh mGal
Where G = Grav. Constant = 6.672 x10-11N.m2.kg-2

The equation for the Bouguer anomaly where no terrain correction is applied is
called the Simple Bouguer Anomaly (SBA), where

SBA = gobs - gth + 0.3086h - 0.04191 ρh

SBA = gobs – (gth - 0.3086h + 0.04191 ρh)

or when terrain corrections are applied it is called the Complete Bouguer Anomaly (CBA),
where
CBA = Simple Bouguer Anomaly + Ter Cor
where Terrain Correction, TC, is the correction made to the Bouguer Correction since the
top of the flat infinite slab is not flat but has topography.

BA = gobs – gth + 0.3086h – 0.04191 ρh + Tρ

BA = gobs – (gth - 0.3086h + 0.04191 ρh - Tρ )

The Bouguer anomaly is extensively used for both land and marine studies.

3.4 Isostatic Anomaly

Classical studies of isostasy considered the depth to the Moho (base of crust) to simply
depends on the mass of the crust such that at a certain depth below the Moho the weight of
simple columns of crust and mantle are constant e.g. in mountain belts the weight of the
crust will cause the crust to subside until it is in isostatic equilibrium (similar to blocks of
wood floating on water). This implies that higher the topography the thicker the crust and
deeper the Moho (roots of mountain). In reality the crust is not a series of independent
columns (blocks) of rock but a continuous structure, which can support mass-excesses or
deficiencies on or below the crust. Thus for loads of small dimension (less than ~200 km) can

31
be out of local isostatic equilibrium. However, for loads with dimensions in excess of about
200 km (distance depends on strength of crust/lithosphere) the crustal loads will be totally
isostatically compensated by flexure.

Airy-Heiskanen Isostatic Model (fig 3.1)

For land areas the computation of Moho’ depth (i.e. base of
crust) t =hρ/Δρ +T
where
t = depth below sea level to crust /mantle boundary
h = elevation of station
ρ = crustal density of topography
Δρ = density contrast across Moho’
T = crustal thickness at sea level
(Program AIRYROOT, a USGS program, can be used to determine depths to base of the crust
using topography and then determines the 3D effect of the resulting Moho model
out to a certain radius.)

Figure 3.1 Airy-Heiskanen Model

32
The Pratt Isostatic model(fig 3.2)
where
hcρc + hmρm = constant

Figure 3.2. The Pratt Isostatic model

The Isostatic Correction can be considered to be the long wavelength Bouguer anomaly
component.

Isostatic Anomaly = Bouguer Anomaly - Isostatic Cor.

The isostatic correction for the Airy case (no crustal strength) can be determined from the
grid of topographic heights by assuming the topography reflects the relief of the Moho.
Good results can be obtained by considering topography effects out to about 400 km. The
isostatic correction at a grid node is thus the 3D gravity attraction of the regional effect of
the density contrast across the Moho based on an AIRY-HEISKANEN model out to 400 km.
What remains after applying the isostatic correction are the small wavelength anomalies
which are due to near surface geological structures such as sedimentary basins.

33
3.5 Decompensative Anomaly

The Isostatic residual anomaly is attempting to remove the gravitational effects from both
the topography (Bouguer component) and the Moho, leaving only gravity effects due to the
upper crust. The Airy model assumptions are-
• constant crustal density,
• constant lateral density within the crust,
• constant spatial density contrast across the Moho and
• an effective elastic strength Te = 0 of the crust/lithosphere

However, the simplicity in the assumptions results in the isostatic residual anomaly being
less than perfect for mapping gravity response of the upper crust. The Decompensative
anomaly partly addresses this problem.
The Decompensative Anomaly originally defined by Cordell et al (1991) attempts to remove
the anomalies associated with sources deep in the lithosphere.

Decompensative = (Isostatic Residual) – (40 km upward continued Isostatic Residual

To generate the Decompensative Anomaly, the Isostatic Residual Anomaly is upward

continued by 40km, This regional field estimates sources located deeper than 40km, The
Decompensative Anomaly is then determined by simply subtracting the upward continued
field from the Isostatic Residual Anomaly.The ambiguity inherent in potential field
interpretation means that it is impossible to guarantee that the upward continued field
contains only signal from the deeper sources. On the other hand, the anomalies displayed in
the Decompensative Anomaly map will generally result from structures located within the
upper crust and will generally better reflect upper crust geological structure. Where there is
a large sedimentary basin this will generally generate a long wavelength negative
gravity response, which will tend to be removed from the Decompensative anomaly by the
upward continuation 40 km filter. Thus in any analysis of the decompensative anomaly the
upward continued field should always be evaluated as well since it will have anomalies that
reflect sedimentary basins, flexure and anomalous deeper plate, plate edge and deeper
structures.

34
These are all important to a full understanding of a region. The examples of the
Decompensative Anomaly are shown from Lockwood (2004) for Western Australia in
Figure 3.3.

Figure 3.3. 40 km upward continued Isostatic residual anomaly for Western Australia (left) Decompensative
Anomaly (right). (after Lockwood, 2004)

35
 SECTION FOUR: PRACTICAL DETAILS ON AQUISITION AND
PROCESSING

4.1 Land gravity data

Bouguer Anomaly (BA) is defined as

BA = gobs - gth + 0.3086h - 0.04191 ρ h + T ρ

Or
BA = gobs – ( gth - 0.3086h + 0.04191 ρ h - T ρ )

Observed Gravity (gobs)

Since the gravity meter only measures differences in gravity (rather than being an absolute
instrument) gravity measurements need to be tied into places of known gravity. Up to 1971
all gravity measurements were tied via intermediate base stations to the absolute value at
Potsdam(981274 mGal) which was originally derived in 1906. Since Potsdam's value was
found to be about 14 mGal too large (1971 value at Potsdam is 981260.19 mGal) a new
world network of base stations was established in 1971 and called IGSN(71) the
International Gravity Standardisation Net 1971. One measurement was made in every
country (total number of stations 1854). National base station network since 1971 have
been tied to IGSN71. For example in the United Kingdom the National Gravity Reference Net
1973 NGRN(73) was established. Stations are located at Ordnance Survey fundamental
benchmarks. This national network of gravity base stations (see Fig 5/2) allows gravity
surveys to be tied into an absolute frame of reference.

Land Gravity Meters

The LaCoste-Romberg gravity meter was originally designed in 1934 and is currently the
main type of instrument used at present. It works on the principle of a 'zero length' spring

36
which supports a beam and mass in a horizontal position. The 'zero length' spring (fig 4.1)
has its tension proportional to the length of spring s not its change in spring length (Hooks
law).

Figure 4.1. Zero length spring

Sensitivity of meter, where spring length = s-z (z finite length of spring under zero tension)
tension = k(s-z)
Taking Moments at null position
Mga cosθ =k (s-z) b sin α
=k (s-z)b (y cos θ)/s
Using sine law,
g =(k/m)(b/a)(1-z/s)y

when g goes to g + dg spring increases by ds where

dg =(k/m)(b/a)(1-z/s)s

Fig 4.2 is a sketch of the mechanism of the LaCoste and Romberg gravity meter and Fig 4.3
shows LaCoste and Romberg gravity meters

37
Figure 4.2.Sketch of the mechanism of the LaCoste and Romberg gravity meter

Figure 4.3 .LaCoste and Romberg gravity meters

38
Survey Procedure

i. Check Instrument is in good working order (see manual for procedures to carry out
sensitivity and level checks). Are batteries in good condition and battery charge working?

ii. Instrument calibration check by measuring repeatedly at two sites of known gravity
difference

iii. Establish base station network (e.g. one station per 50 km2 normal in UK )

iv. Tie base station network into IGSN71 datum

v. Tie each survey loop of measurements into the base station network (best to use same
base station at beginning and end of loop). Check base station measurements at start and
end of loop (after applying tidal corrections--see next sub-section) are within acceptable
limits of instrument drift (i.e. 0.01 mGal/hr)

vi. At each station: record location and station number on map and in field notebook the
following:
a) Station number
b) Location - grid co-ordinates
c) Time of day to ±1 minute
d)Gravity meter measurement (repeated) to ±0.01 mGal
e) Height
f) Sketch of station location loop (after applying tidal corrections--see next sub-section) are
within acceptable limits of instrument drift (i.e. 0.01 mGal/hr)

Tidal effect on gobs

If gravity measurements are made at the same spot at hourly intervals over several days
then they will show a ± 0.2 mGal sinusoidal variation over periods of approx. 13 hours. This

39
is due to solid Earth tides ( + 1m) caused by the moon's gravitational attraction as it rotates
about Earth every 25 hours. This effect also causes ocean tides. The effect is predictable
and gobs can be corrected by computer tables for region being surveyed. Input to program
is date , time (relative to GMT) of measurement, and location . Usually a centre point of the
survey is sufficient to enable tables showing time variation of tidal correction to be
produced for survey period. 5.2 Theoretical or Normal Gravity or

Latitude Correction (gth)

The Earth is elliptical in shape with mean equatorial radius 6,378.16 km and mean polar
radius 6,356.18 km (difference of about 22 km). Thus there is a large change in gravity from
equator to pole due to:
i) Shape of Earth
ii) Spin of Earth
The Spheroid is a mathematical figure which approximates sea level Earth if all irregularities
are removed (i.e. no lateral variation in density, only vertical variations). Under such
conditions the spheroid is an equipotential surface of its gravitational field. The Spheroid is
used to provide the sea level predicted value of gravity at a station. The Spheroid has been
redefined on numerous occasions to reflect the improvements in its determination

Gravity variation with Latitude: the force due to gravity at a point on the Earth's surface is a
vector resulting from the attraction of the Earth and the centrifugal force. For simplicity lets
assume the Earth is perfectly spherical and it revolves about its axis at angular velocity ω

g2= F2 + f2 - 2F f cos θ
= (GM/R2) + (ω2R cosθ )2 - (2GM/R2) ω2Rcos2 θ
= GM/R2 (1 - ω2R/(GM/R2) cos2 θ)
to 1st approximation for Earth GM/R2 = 980 Gal
& ω2R/(GM/R2) = 1/300
so g = 980 (1 - 0.0033 cos2 θ)
or g(N.pole) = 977 (1 + 0.0032sin2 θ)

40
The centrifugal force f is a function of latitude and ω. Thus if g is measured on a moving
platform ( i.e. a ship or plane) then f will change.

Theoretical Gravity prior to Introduction of IGSN71

The 1930 International Gravity Formula originally used to describe theoretical gravity (gth)
was-
g30 = 978049 (1+ 0.0052884 sin2θ - 0.0000059 sin22θ) mGal
Where θ = latitude in degrees

The equation only attempts to correct for elliptical (2nd harmonic) shape of Earth. There is
no variation of gth with longitude only latitude.

Theoretical Gravity with the Introduction of IGSN71

The International Gravity Formula was updated in 1967 (IGF67 or GRS67), where GRS is
Geodetic Reference System, to take account of increased accuracy of the spheroid by
satellite studies. Formula keeps to but updates the 2nd harmonic shape of the Earth and
corrects for Potsdam error.

g67 = 978031.8 (1+0.0053024 sin2θ- 0.0000058 sin22θ) mGal

where gPotsdam 1971 = 981260.19 +/- 0.017 mGal
or
g67 = 978031.85 (1+0.005278895 sin2θ+0.000023462sin4θ)
mGal

Updates in theoretical gravity

WGS72: World Geodetic System 1972 (WGS72) Ellipsoidal
Gravity Formula is:
g72 = 978033.27 (1 + 0.005278992 sin2θ + 0.000023461 sin4θ)
mGal not used
WGS84 Formula ( now accepted by IUGG as the best available formula) is:

41
where θ = geodetic latitude
g84 = normal gravity at sea level

WGS84 is different to all other formula by taking into account weight of the atmosphere.
Thus if one uses WGS84 one needs to add additional height term to the Gravity Anomaly
formula.

Free air Correction (0.3086h)

This correction FAC = 0.3086h assumes there is a linear vertical gradient representing the
fall-off of gravity with height for topography/bathymetry encountered on Earth. This linear
assumption is generally accepted since nothing better has so far been international agreed
to replace it.

Bouguer Correction (0.04191ρh)

The correction 0.04191ρh used is for a flat infinite slab of thickness h metres (above sea
level) and density ρ g/cc (fig 4.4).

Figure 4.4. Infinite flat slab approximation

42
Reasons for using flat Earth- Since height datum is normally sea level then:
i) Major part of world covered by sea not land above sea level thus spherical shell would
over correct
ii) Continental size masses approximate to infinite flat Earth after Terrain Correction i.e.
spherical cap of 167 km radius is equivalent to infinite flat slab

Terrain Correction (Tρ)

Figure 4.5. Terrain corrections

Inner Zone Terrain Correction (T)- This corrects for topography relief out to 53m from
gravity station (i.e. Hammer zones A, B & C ).

Figure 4.6. Inner zone terrain corrections

Intermediate Terrain Corrections (zones D to F) -These distances are normally too far to
estimate in the field from a station so they are calculated from topographic maps
Of scale 1:10,000 and 1:25,000

43
 Figure 4.7.Intermediate terrain corrections

Outer Terrain Corrections (from zone F to 22 km or 167 km)- You could continue to use
template method but this is prone to human error of up to 20%..To minimise human error
use computer method which involves generating a digital terrain model (DTM). If you have
access to high resolution DTM then there may be no need to do D,E & F zones using
template method. Since such high resolution DTMs are not normally available then the
following method described is normal practice For a rectangular area containing survey
area, digitise the topographic heights onto a 0.5 km grid. Area of grid should be survey area
extended by 22 km on all sides.

Density Determination using Gravity Data

BA = gobs − g th + 0.3086h − 0.04191ρ. + Tρ

In the above equation gobs , g th , h & T are known. If a profile of gravity measurements is
constructed over a topographic feature within the same geology, then the bulk density of
the rocks making up the topography can be determined. Ideally a hill or a valley (the latter
without sedimentary infill) in a region of low regional gradient (i.e. where wavelength of hill
<< wavelength of regional gravity). If you have choice of hill or valley choose the hill since
valleys can be erosion features controlled by change in geology from one side of valley to

44
other. Also valleys can have sediment infill which will distort gravity field. Two methods are
available to calculate density.

Parasnis’s Method- Rearranging the Bouguer Anomaly (BA) equation we get

(gobs − gth + 0.3086h) = ρ(0.04191h − T) + BA

This equation is in the form of a straight line (y = mx +C) where the slope is ρ. This assumes
that the BA is a constant subject to random error. This will be the case if the assumption on
the regional gradient is correct.

Figure 4.8.Density determination used relation between gravity variation over a topographical feature.

Figure 4.9.Regression Analysis

45
Nettleton’s Method

Figure 4.10. Nettleton’s Method

Calculate Bouguer anomaly values at each station along the gravity profile for an assumed
density, ρ. If the density is less than the bulk density of the rocks making up the topography
then the BA profile will have a positive correlation with the topography (if ρ =0 the
maximum positive correlation since now BA = Free air anomaly). The converse is true ,if ρ is
higher than bulk density then there will be a negative correlation. Thus a zero correlation
occurs when ρ = bulk density. Thus just by plotting the same profile with range of different
densities you can 'eyeball ' the approximate density. A more precise estimate of density can
be determined by calculating the Correlation Coef-

Where Δg, H are the BA and elevation at station i, and Δg, H are the average (arithmetic
mean) of BA and H of station values along the profile.

46
 Figure 4.11.Correlation coefficient

Oil company specification for high resolution land gravity surveys

Bouguer Anomaly = gobs - gth + 0.3086h - 0.04191ρh + Tρ

Location (gth): Latitude θ ±10 m for ±0.01 mGal
Height (h): ± 5 cm FAC + BC for ±0.01 mGal
Gravity Meter: LaCoste Romberg
Gravity Meter Calibration: before or after survey to check manufacturers value
Meter drift: < 3 hr survey loops with drift for any loop < 0.01 mGal per hour after tidal
correction.
Base Station Network: 1 per 50 sq. km tied to IGSN71 with error in gobs less than 0.02 mGal
Gravity Datum & Formula: specified normally by oil company
Terrain Correction: Specified by oil company
Repeat reading( ): at 5% to 10% of stations with standard deviation gobs +0.02 mGal
Station density: 2 per sq. km

This specification will enable Bouguer Anomaly to be calculated to accuracy of about 0.05
mGal. Thus permitting contours to be drawn at 0.2 mGal intervals. Often the greatest error
is in the determination of the terrain correction.

47
Land Gravity Survey Design

Land based surveys could be stand-alone and often their original purpose was to investigate
the subsurface geology by obtaining a uniform coverage of gravity measurements. The
British Geological Survey aimed at 1 gravity station per km2, while the Polish and Czech
surveys went for 7 station per km2. Generally in land oil exploration 2 station per km2 is
satisfactory for initial evaluation. Gravity surveys specifically for oil exploration are normally
undertaken along seismic reflection lines at spacing of 50 to 200 m. Figure 4.12 shows an
example of some Vibroseis. TM lines along roads and tracks and the necessity to infill
around the seismic lines to determine structural closures, so that more detailed seismic
(possible with explosives) can be designed.

Figure 4.12.Land gravity survey, initially undertaken along seismic lines then spatially to map out extent of
anticlines.

48
4.2: MARINE GRAVITY ACQUISITION & PROCESSING

Observed Marine Gravity (gobs)

To fully appreciate the recent advances in technology it is important to understand how

marine gravity data have and are conventionally collected on a moving vessel that is
subjected to a range of horizontal and vertical accelerations due to sea state and the
movement of the vessel. The vertical acceleration of gravity is the signal that we wish to
separate from the background accelerations of the vessel. The gyrostabilised mounting of
the gravity sensor minimises the effects of horizontal accelerations. The vertical
accelerations perceived by the stabilised gravity sensor are the superimposed effects of
signals resulting from :

Geology-- variations of which include the geologic signal that we wish to isolate and
measure. The geologic signal variations are small: often less than 1.0 mGal and rarely more
than 50 mGal. The shortest wavelengths of geologic anomalies at typical seismic survey boat
speeds (about 5 knots) amount to a few minutes.

Wave motion -- vertical accelerations caused by wave motion are rarely less than 10,000
mGal and in rough weather can exceed 100,000 mGal. Fortunately, vertical wave motion is
normally confined to periods shorter than about 60 seconds. At wavelengths of geological
interest (2 or 3 minutes and more), vertical wave motion is generally much less than 1 mGal.
This large difference in signal and noise amplitudes poses a substantial filter design problem
for both analogue and digital systems.

Eotvos effect -- the Eotvos effect is the change in vertical acceleration f that will act on any
moving object or ship on a spinning earth. The correction for this effect is proportional to
the ship's eastward component of velocity. Relatively small variations in velocity result in
changes of several mGal that can easily be confused with geologic signal because the
changes in ship's velocity can occur at wavelengths similar to those of geologically caused
anomalies. Relative variations in the Eotvos effect increase with rougher weather. Assuming

49
the velocity of a ship travelling west to east is v, (relate to earth), then the angular velocity
changes by dω, then,

because
f = rω2 and v = rdω
df = 2rωdω = 2ωv
since g depends on latitude
change in g = dg = df cosθ where θ is latitude
dg = 2ωv cosθ
= 7.487v cosθ sinα
where v is in knots and α is the heading of the ship w.r.t. north. Thus max change in df at
equator when travelling E-W (α = 90o).

Cross-coupling effect --although some meter designs (e.g. Bell gravity meter) minimise this
effect, all types of ship borne gravity meters can have errors caused by the interaction of the
effects of vertical and horizontal accelerations on the gravity meter or stabilised platform.
These cross-coupling errors can occur only when the accelerations have the same periods
and there are systematic phase relations between the accelerations. The variations of these
effects are more severe in rough weather and the variations typically have wavelengths and
amplitudes similar to geologically caused anomalies.

Marine Gravity Meters

Bell Aerospace BGM Gravity Meter-This is a forced feedback vertical accelerometer or

inertial navigation-grade accelerometer mounted on a gyrostabilised platform. The
accelerometer is a “proof mass” wrapped in a coil that is constrained to move vertically
between two permanent magnets. The physical principle of the sensor design is that a
balance exists between the gravitational force acting on the proof mass and the
electromagnetic force induced in the coil. This force balance maintains the proof mass in a
constant (null) position. The current in the coil varies proportionally to changes in vertical
accelerations. Changes in the position of the proof mass are detected by a second-order

50
servo loop which regulates the current in the coil and drives the proof mass back to its null
position. The output from the accelerometer is a current proportional to vertical
acceleration in the range of 0 to 200 Gal. By summing the output with a reference bias of
880 Gal, the system can respond to a range of vertical accelerations normally encountered
at sea. This current is then digitally filtered (replaces older R-C filter which had a time
constant of 4.5 s to prevent leakage of high frequencies).

Modified LaCoste & Romberg System- The design limitations of the analogue filters used in
the original LaCoste and Romberg S meters were originally overcome by a redesign by
EDCON Inc. to incorporate the use of high sampling rates and digital filtering. The system
uses the proven LaCoste and Romberg sensor. The sensor itself is unmodified, although the
design of the control and recording electronics eliminates relatively short period noise
sources that were present in the old systems. The result is a signal that is quieter at the
marginal wavelengths of the old system and retains meaningful resolution at shorter
wavelengths that the old systems missed entirely. The advantages of these design
improvements are most noticeable with the high-accuracy position and velocity
measurements that are obtainable with satellite-based navigation systems. Some of the
more effective modifications that result in a fundamentally quieter system include isolation
of critical analogue signals prior to sampling and an improved thermostat control system. To
reduce aliasing, the fundamental outputs of the sensor are filtered prior to sampling using
an analogue filter with a time constant of about 1 sec. The initial sampling rate is 100 Hz,
and antialiasing digital filters are applied prior to recording at 1 Hz i.e., 1 sample per second.
Figure 4.13 shows the modified system mounted in an instrument room near the centre of
pitch and roll of a seismic vessel. Where the instrument room is far from the optimal sensor
location at the centre of pitch and roll, cable links up to 150 feet to allow both optimal
placement of the sensor and convenient placement of the control and recording electronics.
The Control Electronics Console consists of a PC computer and the gyroscope power supply.
Between the two is a utility drawer containing the keyboard. At the rear of the unit (not
seen) is the System Junction Box. The PC monitor is mounted on top of the electronics
console or other desirable location. A continuous graphics printout of selected data traces is
provided as a QC and auxiliary data record. Data are recorded on the PC computer hard disk
and archived onto 3.5" floppy disk approximately two times per day.

51
 Figure 4.13. Modified L &R system installed in ship's instrument room

LaCoste & Romberg Air-Sea System

LaCoste & Romberg have introduced in 1999 a new meter (Air-Sea System II) which
incorporates many of the design features introduced by EDCON Inc and in addition includes
10 Hz sampling, fibre optic gyros, etc. (see Fig.4.14).

Figure 4.14. The new LaCoste Romberg Air Sea System II

52
Processing of Marine Gravity Data

Base Constant Determination and Removal

Repeat still reading in port establish base constants, provide an accurate basis for meter
drift correction and serve as a quality control check on instrument performance.

Cross-coupling Corrections
The method used to correct for cross-coupling effects is based on the cross-correlation
method published by LaCoste (1973). The basic premise of the method is that gravity should
not correlate with any variations in the motion of the ship including the interactions
between vertical and horizontal accelerations (i.e., cross coupling). Any apparent correlation
between observed gravity and one of the monitors of ship motion, such as the product of
vertical and horizontal acceleration, must be false. The objective of the crosscorrelation
method is to find a gain factor which when applied to the cross-coupling monitor will result
in minimum correlation. The correction procedure is applied to the 1 sec. sampled data.
Each line is evaluated as part of the entire set. Occasionally, subsets of lines acquired in
exceptionally bad weather and on certain headings will benefit from gain factors different
from the average. The criteria for improved crosscoupling corrections are a more coherent
representation of observed gravity and improved survey line miss-ties.

Eotvos Correction
The Eotvos correction is proportional to the eastward velocity component of the ship; the
effect, along with the related centripetal acceleration caused by the earth's rotation,
diminishes with increasing latitude. Small errors in position and time can result in
substantial errors in the corrected gravity, so proper determination of the Eotvos correction
is critical to final data accuracy. Velocities determined directly from DGPS have proven to be
the best source for Eotvos corrections on the 1-second data. The correction is refined using
a time-varying cross-correlation between the observed Eotvos and observed gravity. The
final derived Eotvos should have minimal correlation with corrected gravity. One measure of
the quality of the observed Eotvos correction is close agreement with the derived Eotvos
correction (from correlation filtering).

53
Filtering
Digital filtering parameters are selected on a line by line basis according to apparent noise
content and data quality. The processing philosophy is to make every effort at all stages of
processing to maximise the retention of geological signal. Digital filtering can achieve
attenuation of 100 to 150 DB for periods shorter than about 1 minute while minimising side-
lobe and passing signals with periods greater than 2 to 4 minutes with minimal distortion.
Such sharp cutoffs cannot be achieved with analogue filters.

Free-Air and Bouguer Corrections

These are standard corrections, sometimes specified by the client, and can include full 3D
Bouguer corrections to remove 3D variations in bathymetry over the study area.

Line Levelling
Despite the most rigorous attention to the retention of geologic signal and suppression of
identifiable noise, small differences still remain between survey lines, which cannot be
accounted for even after tie line adjustment. Figure 8.8 gives an example data from a ‘3D’
survey after tie line adjustment. Innovative and proprietary software have been designed to
minimise these differences, sometimes called “micro levelling’ so that the final Bouguer
anomaly maps contain the best possible visualisation of the short wavelength data.
Application of colour and shaded relief can help to image the subtlety of gravity features.
Figure 4.15 show the same survey after GETECH proprietary micro levelling.

54
Figure 4.15. High-resolution marine gravity survey with ship track spacing ~150 m after tie line
adjustment(left). Note the strong line orientated noise. Any filtering to remove this noise will degrade the
signal.Same survey after GETECH’s proprietary micro-levelling methods applied (right).

Sea Bed Gravity Measurements

Gravity is measured on the sea bed using a remote underwater gravity meter. This meter is
housed is a specially designed capsule and lowered to the sea bed. Once on the sea bed the
gravity meter automatically levels itself and readings are taken remotely and logged in the
boat. Since the gravity meter is stationary, as with land instruments, the complex
corrections that are necessary for a boat mounted gravity meter recording in a dynamic
mode are not made. However the data reduction is different to land based
measurements. Since the water column is now above the meter rather than below, and
special care has to be taken in calculating the Bouguer correction. The Bouguer anomaly is
now-

BA = gobs-gth + 0.3086h - 0.04191hρ +Tρ mGal

where h is below sea level and is thus negative(i.e. height in this equation is positive
upwards from sea level so measurements on the sea bed are at negative heights)
and ρ is (reduction density -water density)
e.g. reduction density = 2.20 and water density is 1.03 g/cc,
then ρ = 1.17 g/cc

55
Marine Gravity Survey Design

In marine surveys the most common way to collect gravity is on-board a seismic survey boat
during the acquisition of the seismic data. Thus survey design is very much controlled by
the seismic acquisition group. Combining surveys keeps costs to a minimum and you have
gravity along each line of the seismic survey. Stand alone surveys (other than gradiometer
surveys) are rare due to the costs involved for boat and GPS navigation hire.
However, since oil companies funding a proprietary marine gravity survey are paying for the
gravity system and operator for the duration of the survey, they can by agreement make
sure the instrument and associated navigation and bathymetry systems are kept switched
on throughout the survey period, with the possible exception when the ship is turning since
many marine systems using a feed-back system from the horizontal accelerometers located
on the gyro platform (platform for the gravity meter) to the gyros themselves. This
feedback is not used in airborne survey systems. When the boat turns the true horizontal
can be biased by this feed-back due to the velocity changes of the ship. Getting the gyro
platform truly horizontal then takes a few tens of minutes of straight-line navigation to
remove the bias.

4.3: AIRBORNE GRAVITY

Dynamic Measurements
Taking gravity measurements in an aircraft is intrinsically more difficult but is in many
respects similar to taking gravity measurements at sea. An airborne gravimeter determines
gravity by measuring the vertical acceleration (including gravity) in the aircraft, correcting
for the effects of the rotation of the earth and the movement of the platform over the
globe, and then subtracting GPS-derived vertical accelerations of the aircraft (Argyle et
al,2000). Precise phase-processed GPS determines locations and velocities for Eötvös effects
and vertical accelerations.The vertical accelerations are the most sensitive to GPS noise.
Similarities are:
• Similar types of gravity meter used since the measurements are taken on a moving
platform then the need for
• Damped instrument

56
• Gyro stabilised platform to keep instrument vertical
• Cross coupling correction
• Eotvos correction
• Need DGPS for high accuracy 3D locations
• Major similarity is that resolution decreases with increase swell(marine) and
turbulence(air).
Differences are
• Aircraft travels at much higher speeds thus there are larger Eotvos corrections
• Need to measure height of aircraft, height clearance of topography and register this with
known datum. Height clearance can be measured by radar. The datum can be determined
from the DGPS plus knowledge of the local geoid (remember satellite DGPS heights are
measured relative to the reference ellipsoid used.
a) Aircraft has smaller cross coupling effects
• Resolution as of 2001: (½ wavelengths used by contractors)
Marine gravity surveys can measure geological signals with wavelengths equal to and
greater than 0.5 km at 0.1 to 0.2 mGal.
Airborne gravity resolution needs to be sub-divided into
a) fixed wing flying at 100 knots can be as low as 2 km at 0.2 mGal
b) Helicopter flying at ~50 knots can be down to 0.6 – 1.0 km at 0.2 - 0.3mGal

Since observing platform is more distant from the gravitational source the signal will be
attenuated (longer wavelength and small in amplitude). The resolution quoted by airborne
contractors are under ideal (stable air) conditions. Air stability is always a problem and
affects resolution. Test lines are generally undertaken within the survey area and flying
height will be controlled by safety factors and acceptable air turbulence generally the higher
you fly the more stable are the air conditions. This decreases the signal amplitude you can
observe. Although airborne gravity has been available as a technique for more than two
decades it has only been widely accepted in the oil exploration since the mid 1990’s. Since
the late 1990’s to 2001 the emergence of a number of competing contractors offering
airborne gravity services with innovative acquisition developments has had a significant
effect on improving resolution. Since airborne methods have inherent advantages over

57
ground-based acquisition in difficult terrain, particularly their ability for uniformity of
coverage, it is likely there will be significant continued growth in this acquisition method.
The accelerations measured by an airborne gravity meter are:

Am = AFAA + AAircraft + AEotvos + ATheo + AFAC

where
Am = measured acceleration,
AFAA = free air anomaly
AAircraft = aircraft vertical accelerations
AEotvos = Eotvos correction
ATheo = theoretical gravity
AFAC = free air correction

Isolating the earth’s gravity signal from the accelerations introduced from the measuring
environment is a major task in gravity surveys made from a moving platform. The task is to
extract AFAA from Am . In the marine environment the gravity sensor is on the equipotential
surface and any vertical acceleration due to waves can be filtered out since their periodicity
is smaller than the equivalent period of the geological signal (period is used rather than
wavelength since the gravity measurements are dynamic in a moving platform). In the
airborne environment, vertical accelerations are not periodic and have wavelengths that
correspond to geological features. Vertical accelerations of 600 to more than 2,500 mGal
and periods of 0.1 to 300 sec must be carefully recorded and removed from the measured
accelerations. Differential GPS measuring velocity directly is the most accurate of methods
to determine vertical acceleration. The Eotvos effect (gravity meter moving at a different
rotational angular velocity to Earth will generate changes in the vertical acceleration). These
have to be corrected , Harlan (1968,) derived the Eotvos correction

where

58
e = Eotvos correction in mGal,
φ = latitude in degrees,
Ve = the easterly component of the platform velocity
Vn = northerly component of the platform velocity

h = the height of the aircraft above the geoid,

ε = the earth’s flattening for the reference ellipsoid
a = semi-major radius of the earth
In marine surveys h = 0 and e is <+/-75 mGal. For airborne
gravity this can be 2500 mGal

4.4 Gravity Gradiometers

The US Navy has spent hundreds of millions of dollars to develop a system to measure
gravity gradients. In 1994 this technology started to be used in exploration (Robin Bell et
al.1997) . The vertical component of gravity Uz can have a vertical gradient Uzz as well as
horizontal gradients Uzx and Uzy . Thus for the horizontal components of gravity Ux and Uy
can have similar gradients, giving in total 9 tensor components.

Uxx Uxy Uxz

Uyx Uyy Uyz
Uzx Uzy Uzz

Gravity Tensor components

where Uz is the vertical component of gravity more commonly known as the free air
anomaly. Newton’s theory of gravity implies that only five of the nine components are
independent and four are redundant The gravity gradiometer (fig 4.16) is able to recover
five of these gravity gradients . Plus the Uzz component that is determined by Laplace’s
relationship from Uxx and Uyy. These gradients provide an important tool in the detection
of edges and locations of bodies. This is precisely why it was developed in the first place to
detect submarine volcanoes and topography in front of the submarine in a passive mode as

59
part of the ‘Stealth Technology’ developed by Bell Aerospace for the Navy Trident
submarine programme.

Figure 4.16. Modern rotating gravity gradiometer system made by Lockheed Martin

4.5 SATELLITE DERIVED GRAVITY (MARINE AREAS ONLY)

The mean sea surface, to a first approximation, can be considered to equal the marine
geoid, thus representing an equipotential surface of the earth’s gravity field. The gravity
response is the first vertical derivative of the equipotential surface The sea surface is only an
equipotential surface if the sea is in a static state i.e. has no spatial (lateral) changes in
water temperature and/or salinity, no currents (e.g. the Gulf Stream), no air-sea interaction
(e.g. wind causing waves), no differences in air pressure, no tidal forces, etc. The difference
between the geoid and the mean sea surface is sea surface topography (SST) and it can
reach 1 to 2 metres. Corrections are needed to remove the SST effects. Mean sea surface
(geoid) is the orthometric reference height datum that we have traditionally use to adjust
gravity measurements to (see section 6 for GPS alternative reference system). The gravity
field measured at sea level, or on the sea surface, is the Free air gravity (height = 0 m).

60
Satellite altimetry can thus be used to accurately measure and systematically map the sea
surface topography. There have been a number of satellites with this capability. The satellite
travels around the Earth on an Equipotential surface at a height of ~800 km above the
Earth’s surface. Its orbit is very smooth (due to inverse square law) and is known to high
degree of accuracy. The Equipotential surface at sea level is closer to the causative bodies
and thus its shape contains much higher frequency and amplitude. It is this equipotential
surface at sea level and not at the satellite height that is being measured. A pulse-limited
altimeter directs a short pulse of microwave radiation towards the earth, this signal fans out
in the atmosphere to illuminate a ‘footprint’ (a few km in diameter) on the ocean surface.
The altimeter detects the return signal, and hence estimates its own height above the sea
surface to a (quoted) typical precision of 10 cm (better for Topex satellite). As the satellite
orbits the Earth, it does so in exact repeat orbits thus generating repeated measurements at
different times for the same orbital path. This repeat nature of orbits benefits
oceanographers measuring continuous change in ocean processes. For Geodesist these
‘stacked data’ have orbital track spacing of 100’s km and are not good for mapping
the Earth’s surface at high resolution. To date only two satellite geodetic missions, to map
the Earth sea surface at high resolution, have so far been undertaken that by Geosat and
ERS-1. These missions when combined give an average orbital spacing of about 3 km.

TOPEX - POSEIDON (1992-99)

Launched in 1992
Latitude range +/- 660
This altimeter satellite launched was in a 10 day ERM. Onboard it had a GPS location system,
a DORIS system that measures atmospheric drag which is a dominant component in radial
orbit error and the ability to measure signal propagation through the atmosphere. For
previous satellites these drag and propagation errors have had to be modelled from ground
based measurements. As of 2002 there are a many more satellites with altimeters but
none undertaking geodetic missions.

61
Geosat and ERS-1 Data

Since these are the two satellites having Geodetic missions it is worth saying something
more about these missions. The radar pulses rate was 1000 per second. Of these 50 (ERS-1)
and 100 (Geosat) return waveforms were stacked onboard the satellite before being
transmitted to Earth. Once back on Earth they were initially released for scientific
investigation as 1 second sea surface height picks. One second sampling represents 7
km along track. Eventually the ERS-1 20 Hz data ( equates to ~300m long track spacing) and
the Geosat 10 Hz data (~600 m along track spacing ) sea height picks were released. The raw
return unpicked ERS-1 data are also available.

Conversion of Altimeter Heights to Free Air Gravity Anomalies

There are two methods available-
Slopes to Gravity Method
This method (Fig. 4.17) converts geoid gradients or deflection of the vertical grids into FAA
In this method the along- track gradients are determined after fitting each arc with a
smoothing spline. This results in vector gradient quantities using 6 or more track
orientations. These data are used to obtain north-south and west-east vector gradient grids
which can be combined using Laplace’s equation to obtain the vertical gradient (gravity).
Sandwell (1992) developed a method where north-south and west-east deflection grids
were iteratively obtained from ascending and descending along track deflection grids.

Figure 4.17.The Slopes to Geoid method used by Sandwell and Smith (1997)

62
Geoid to Gravity Method

This method (Fig. 4.18) relies on levelling of track height data. This method developed by
GETECH is found to be a more accurate method, than the gradient method above since it
provides a better interpolator of values between orbital tracks However(Fairhead et
al,2001). The method requires the ability to cross over level and micro-levelling the track
data . Using Agency picked data the resolution of 30-40km achieved by Sandwell and Smith
(1997) can be improved to 15-20 km by processing the data using geoid to gravity method.

Figure 4 18.The Geoid to Gravity method

63
To convert the geoid field (mean sea surface) into gravity a reference model is removed to
make all values oscillate about zero. The vertical gradient of the field is determined by a FFT
method. The FAA grid from the reference model is restored to obtain the final geoid gravity
grid.

4.6 MAGNETICS

4.6.1 Time variations of the geomagnetic field

Introduction

Magnetic Anomaly Due to geology = Tobs - Tth -Ttv

Where
Tobs =absolute field measured during survey
Tth = smoothed Geomagnetic field derived from mathematical model of the Geomagnetic
field
Ttv = transient variations of Geomagnetic field

Before one tries to measure Tobs it is important to understand fully Tth and Ttv since both
terms vary with time.

Smoothed Geomagnetic Field (Tth)

Assuming no transient variations (Ttv) the Earth's magnetic field (or Geomagnetic field, fig
4.19) has two components:
i) Main dynamo field which represents about 99% of Tobs. field
ii) Crustal field, which represents about 1% of Tobs. field

By removing Tth from Tobs leaves just the small crustal component (about 1 % of main field)
that we are interested in.

64
 Figure 4.19.The geomagnetic dipole field

In 1980 Magsat (satellite with 3 component Fluxgate and an Optical pumped magnetometer
onboard) was used to determine the main field Tth. A power spectrum study of MagSat data
shows a very clear division between the dynamo field located on the core/mantle boundary
and the crustal field. The main (dynamo) field is now known (via satellite observations) to be
important up to spherical harmonic of degree 13. Rocks down to the depth of the Curie
isotherm (temperature where rocks loose their ability to retain magnetism), which for most
rocks is approximately 5500C and occurs at crustal depths of less than 30 km. The Curie
isotherm has a range of depths depending on the heat flow but can be as deep as 20 km
plus below continents and as shallow as 2km at oceanic ridges. Between the Curie depth to
the core -mantle boundary (at 2,900 km) the rocks have no magnetic properties. The slope
of the Power spectrum gives the depth of magnetic source: for harmonics 1 to 13 give the
core-mantle depth and harmonics 14 and greater give crustal depths. Thus the main part of
the Geomagnetic field can be very well described using spherical harmonics up to order 13.
A mathematical model of the Earth’s magnetic field to harmonic order and degree 13 is now
available. This field was originally known as International Geomagnetic Reference Field
(IGRF). This field is however not static but changes with time. Since the Geomagnetic Field

65
changes with time, the IGRF model has to be redefined for 1965, 1975, 1980, 1985, 1990
with each model being able to predict change in the field up to 5 years due to slow regular
change in Geomagnetic field. One model to replace all these IGRF models which takes into
account all past time variations is called the Definitive Geomagnetic Reference Field (DGRF).

Transient Variations (Ttv)

The Earth's magnetic field extends into outer space and interacts with the solar wind . This
distorts the Earth's magnetic field and any changes in solar wind can cause small amplitude
(few nT) and period (few. minutes to hours) variations to large scale (100s nT and several
days) variations in the Earth’s surface measurements of the Geomagnetic field. The
spectrum of transient variations is large ranging from thousandths of a second to millions of
years. These variations can be sub-divided into internal and external causes to the Earth.

Internal Causes- Epochs/Reversals/Events Changes in the state of the Earth's dynamo gives
rise to magnetic polarity changes in the Earth's field. Such changes have occurred at
approximately 0.5 million-year intervals since the end of the Cretaceous (∼70 million years
ago). The last reversal was 0.7 million years ago (or 0.7 Ma), so we are due for another at
any time. Luckily the reversal process, as determined by Palaeomagnetic studies, takes
about 10,000 years to complete with the field decreasing in its present position and then in
its weakened state the N and S poles move in well defined longitudinal paths (one pole goes
through South America and the other through Indonesia) before increasing back to normal
strength in its reversed polarity. Studies of the strength of the Earth's central dipole since
the 1960 indicates the field is decreasing at a rate ofabout 27 nT per year, such that if
linearly extrapolated the field would go to zero in 1200 years time ! Palaeomagnetism have
given names to the long and short period of polarity change (epochs and events).

Secular Change -This is the name given to the above slow process that is measurable in
magnetic observatories. The field changes can be predicted up to about five years
in advance. There are sufficient magnetic observatories and other measurements (e.g.
MagSat and CHAMP satellites) to define secular change on a global scale to n=13 and these

66
changes are incorporated into the modern IGRF and the DGRF models. If two magnetic
surveys over the same area are undertaken years apart then they should be very similar to
one another if the processing of the surveys has been done in a similar manner and the
appropriate IGRF field has been removed.

External Causes-These transient variations are caused in the main by the interaction of the
solar wind plasma with the Earth's magnetosphere-

Plasma: Matter can be classified in four states: solid, liquid, gaseous, and plasma. The basic
distinction between solids, liquids and gases lies in the difference between the strength of
the bonds that hold their constituent particles together. The equilibrium between particle
thermal (=random kinetic) energy and the interparticle binding forces determines the
state. Heating of a solid or liquid substance leads to phase transition to a liquid or gaseous
state, respectively. This takes place at a constant temperature for a given pressure, and
requires an amount of energy known as latent heat. On the other hand, the transition from
a gas to an ionized gas, i.e., plasma, is not a phase transition, since it occurs gradually with
increasing temperature. During the process, a molecular gas dissociates first into an atomic
gas which, with increasing temperature, is ionized as the collisions between atoms are able
to free the outermost orbital electrons. Resulting plasma consists of a mixture of neutral
particles, positive ions (atoms or molecules that have lost one or more electrons), and
negative electrons. In a weakly ionized plasma the charge neutral interactions are still
important, while in strongly ionized plasma the multiple Coulomb interactions are
dominant.

Sunspot cycle and Magnetic Storms: Sun spots are cooler areas on the Sun's surface and are
sites of major solar flares throwing plasma out from the Sun. This has the effect of altering
the solar wind's density and energy, which will interact with the Earth's magnetosphere
approximately two days later, since that is the time it takes for the plasma to travel the
93,000 miles to Earth. Scientists have been counting Sunspots for centuries and in recent
times there is a very clear 11 year cycle in the Sunspot number. The interaction of the
enhanced solar wind on the Earth's magnetic field causes the magnetic field to change very

67
rapidly and results in poor short-wave radio reception. Thus the phenomenon is often
referred to as magnetic storms. The Sunspot originate in mid-latitudes on the Sun and move
with time towards the Sun's equator where they disappear and coincide with the Sunspot
minimum count. The process restarts but this time the magnetic polarity of the Sunspot is
reversed. Thus the physical phenomenon has a period of 22 years. The effect of magnetic
storms generates large changes to the magnetic field that can take days to recover.
Normally during such storms survey data cannot be accurately processed to remove the
storm's effects, thus surveys are temporarily halted. The effect of a typical storm on
magnetic records will be a very sudden onset, followed by a highly variable signal before
dying away over a period of one to three days. Since the Earth rotates every 24 hours the
maximum interaction occurs during the day time side of the Earth, the effects of the storm
will repeat itself each day at about the same time. Since the Sun rotates every
25 days then magnetic storms with have a 25 day repeat cycle.

Semi Annual Effects: The Earth's magnetic field axis is similar to its spin axis resulting in the
equatorial plan being inclined at about 23o to the solar plane. This results in the solar wind
distorting the magnetosphere on a seasonal basis. This is caused by the inability of the Sun
to ionise as many molecules in the Ionosphere during the northern hemisphere winter as it
does in the northern hemisphere summer, i.e. similar to the Sun's ability to warm the Earth.
These effects result in seasonal variations in the amplitude of the diurnal variation by a
factor of two.

Diurnal Effects -The Earth rotates once every 24 hours and thus experiences maximum
interaction between Geomagnetic field and solar wind at local mid-day. The diurnal effects
can be sub-divided as follows:
a. Solar The Sun energy ionises molecules in the ionosphere causing an electrical current to
flow in the ionosphere. This current flow generates its own magnetic field through the E-M
effect. Maximum variation normally occur at local mid-day. The variation from the quiet
night time value to midday can be ~50 nT . At dawn the field starts to decrease due to the
Sun's action on the Ionosphere and the ionosphere's current flow acts in a way to decrease
the magnetic field at the Earth's surface. Maximum effects occur at local noon before

68
decreasing. Since the current system is balanced over the whole Earth then the effect on
magnetic recording stations at different latitudes will change

b. Lunar- Gravitational attraction on the Ionosphere causes magnetic effects no larger than
±2 nT. This cannot normally been seen on records as its period is about 13 hours and
amplitude about nT. The only way it is seen is by signal processing (i.e. take about 1 month’s
period of data for quiet solar activity and do a spectral analysis on it).

c. Electrojet Phenomena- In areas close to the magnetic (dip) equator. Large magnetic
variation occurs about Solar noon. The amplitude of the variations are much greater
than the normal diurnal (solar) effects and can reach 100 to 200 nT. The magnetic equator
in NE Africa lies close to 10°N (i.e. through Ethiopia). The width of the zone that is affected
by the Electrojet is about 5.5o wide (about 600 km). The cause of the Electrojet phenomena
appears to be the convergence (pinching) of the ionosphere's current flow lines from the
northern and southern hemisphere at local (solar) noon. The rapid change of current density
at local (solar) noon generates a large magnetic field. Normally aeromagnetic field studies
are suspended during this period of the day due to the rapid change in the field i.e. it is not
possible to accurately remove the Electrojet effects from the total field measurements
unless there is an adequate set of base stations monitoring the spatial form and change of
the electrojet field. Magnetic recording stations located N-S across the path of the Electrojet
show how the phenomena builds in time and space. The H component is equivalent to the
Total field and peaks at local noon. Recording of the phenomena day after day indicates the
location of the Ionosphere current peak changes latitude by small amount thus need for
series of base stations to adequately monitor it.

d. Bays - Caused by small scale surges in the Solar wind with periods of 20 minutes to 2
hours. And amplitudes from 5 to 20 nT. It is important to be able to monitor Bays in high
accuracy surveys.
e. Polar Sub-Storms These disturbances are observed in high latitudes and decrease in
magnitude away from the poles. The amplitudes are variable and need to be recorded
to remove their effects from survey data.

69
f. Micropulsations- Micropulsations are very small amplitude variations up to ~1 nT at
frequencies of 0.001 to 1000 c/s. Caused by lightning strikes somewhere on Earth. They are
important to monitor and correctly remove from high resolution surveys. If surveys are
using less sensitive magnetometers (accuracy of instrument about 1 nT then
micropulsations are generally not seen. g. Atmospheric Effects Pressure systems will change
the height of the Ionosphere and thus generate small amplitude (>1 nT) effects on diurnal
records over a number of days.

g. Other effects These include magnetisation of observing aircraft, man made effects
e.g.power lines, direct current railways, industrial sites, drill rigs, well heads, pipelines, ships
etc.

4.7: Magnetometers

There are two basic types of magnetometers. Both measure B, the flux density

i. Relative measuring instruments

ii. Absolute measuring instruments

Relative Measuring Instruments

Schmidt Magnetometer- There are two types :a horizontal vector, ΔH, and a vertical
vector, ΔZ . These instruments are no longer used and are now museum items.

Torsion Magnetometer- This instrument (Fig 4.20) replaced, the ΔZ, Schmidt magnetometer
and still used today in mineral exploration especially in areas of high magnetic gradients
(Haalk, 1956.)

70
Figure 4.20. Torsion Magnetometer without its tripod ( after Fairhead, 2004)

Fluxgate Magnetometer
This instrument (Fig. 4.21) has been widely used for land air and marine magnetic surveys
but has now been superseded by the Absolute measuring magnetometer.
Accuracy : ground 1-10 nT;
airborne 0.1-1 nT.
Advantages : wide range and continuous reading.
Disadvantages : mechanically fragile, needs orientation and subject to thermal drift
Previous instruments (Schmidt and Torsion) used magnets which are magnetically hard
materials i.e. high coercivity (retains magnetism Hc ) and low permeability ( does not pick
up additional magnetism easily). The fluxgate uses Ferromagnetic rods (or elements) with
high permeability magnets where-
permeability μ = B/H and B is the flux density
and H is strength of external field

71
 Figure 4.21.Basic concept of Fluxgate instrument

Since the rods are of high permeability they allow the earth's magnetic field to induce a
magnetisation that is a substantial proportion of its saturated value. So if we have a
Ferromagnetic element surrounded by a coil then it is possible by passing a current through
the coil to push the element into a saturated state. If the element is parallel to the earth's
total intensity, T, then saturation will occur early (smaller current in Primary coil required to
generate additional field) when induced field is in the same direction as the earth's field. If
the inducing field is in the opposite direction then saturation will occur later and require a
larger current. The primary coils are wound identically around each element
in series (i.e. current in same direction). Thus the flux density in both elements is equal but
opposite in direction (assuming no external field). The secondary coil (red in Fig 4.21) is
wound about the two elements in opposite directions and connected to a voltmeter Vr.
When an AC current is applied to the Primary coil (black) the Earth's magnetic field is
reinforced in one element and opposed in the other.
let c = geometric factor
T = ambient field
f = current field
then Total magnetic field = T + f
Magnetic flux B = cμ(T + f)

72
Absolute Magnetometers

Proton Magnetometer
This is an absolute measuring instrument and is normally adequate for most types of
surveys (fig 4.22).
Accuracy - ground 0.1 - 1 nT
- airborne 0.01 - 0.1 nT
Advantages - self orienting and relatively simple to use and is robust
Disadvantages - intermittent readings (0.2 -1.0 sec)
- limited range without tuning
- measures total field only
- cannot measure very high gradients

Packard and Varian (1954) found that after a strong magnetic field is removed from a
sample of water an audio-frequency signal can be detected from the water for a second or
so. Reason: water ionises into HO- and H+ ions. The H+ ion is hydrogen atom less its electron
i.e. a proton. The proton has a spin momentum whose axis will align with the external
magnetic field . The proton moves into the external magnetic field direction by precessing at
an angular frequency, ω which is known as the Larmor precession frequency ( ω =2πf
where f is in Hertz) which is directly proportional to the external magnetic field strength T.
This frequency is in the audio signal range.

73
Figure 4.22.The Proton Magnetometer as either a single or gradiometer system (http://www.scintrexltd.com/)

Overhauser Magnetometer
This is a high sensitivity magnetometer/gradiometer designed to be hand held. Resolution is
0.01 nT and 0.2 nT absolute accuracy. For gradiometer work the sensors are 56 cm apart
(could be larger). In contrast to the standard proton magnetometer sensor, where only a
proton rich liquid is required to produce a precession signal, the Overhauser Effect
sensor has in addition a free radical added to the liquid. A free radical is defined as an atom
or group of atoms containing at least one unpaired electron and existing for a brief period of
time before reacting to produce a stable molecule. The free radical ensures the presence of
free, unbounded electrons that couple with protons producing a two-spin system. A strong
RF (radio frequency) magnetic field is used to disturb the electron-proton coupling. By
saturating free electron resonance lines, the polarisation of protons in the sensor liquid is
greatly increased. The Overhauser effect offers a more powerful method of proton
polarisation than standard DC polarisation, i.e. stronger signals are achieved from smaller
sensors and with less power.

74
Absolute Magnetic Gradiometers

Land Vertical Gradiometer

Fluxgates, Proton and Optical Pumped magnetometers are all used as hand held
gradiometers. The principle is they measure the total or vector (Fluxgate) component at two
points in a vertical plane separated by 2 metres. The difference in readings, measure within
a split second of each other, is divided by the separation distance dT/dz. The type of
instrument used will control the resolution of what can be measured. Normally being close
to ground level means you are close to the magnetic source and thus the magnetic vertical
gradients of total field with be large. Using Overhauser and optical sensors with their high
absolute accuracy allows the gradiometer to have the sensors close to each other. This is
why such magnetometers are used as gradiometers on aircraft . It is important to note that
the gradients being measures are those of the Total Magnetic Intensity in the horizontal or
vertical directions.

Airborne Gradiometers
In the 1960's magnetic gradients where attempted using two proton magnetometers
sensors separated by about 100 ft. This was dangerous and control on separation was poor.
The optical pumped magnetometer changed this since they can measure total magnetic
field more accurately and only need to be separated by 2 metres. Aircraft can have a range
of measuring systems on-board from single tail sensor to up to 4 sensors.

Marine Gradiometers
Major problem in marine surveys is having any form of base stations. If there is one it could
be 100's km away and not accurately monitor the corrections that should be made. This is
particularly the case in high latitudes where major transient variations of the geomagnetic
field, Ttv (or noise) are polar substorms which can cause departures in Tobs of minutes to
10's minutes and if not corrected for look like geological signal . The amplitude of these
polar sub-storms varies rapidly with latitude. The solution is to use a horizontal gradiometer.
This is easier to do on a stand alone survey but very much more difficult on a seismic survey.
The marine magnetometer system uses two total field sensors (proton magnetometers) that

75
are towed on a single cable and are separated by 150 m. The forward sensor is as far as 600
m behind the vessel to minimise the effects of the ship's magnetic field. The difference
between simultaneously measured field values at the two sensors is essentially free of the
effects of time variations in the Earth's magnetic field. By dividing this difference by the
distance between sensors, an approximation of the magnetic gradient is obtained. The
gradient of the magnetic field between the sensors should be able to be used to determine
the corrected (time-variation-free) total field anomalies by numerical integration of the
gradients along the ship's track.

4.8 Magnetic Data Processing (Ground)

All the transient variation Ttv will be recorded by the base magnetometer and so long as the
changes are normal with time (i.e. no magnetic storms) they can be removed by one
correction. Corrections are referenced to the period during the day when there is least
interaction between the Solar wind and the Geomagnetic field. This occurs between 1 am to
4 am (local time). Processing of ground observations to magnetic anomaly values is more
straight forward than for gravity.

Magnetic Anomaly = Tobs - Tth - Ttv

Tobs -since magnetometers measure absolute values of the Geomagnetic Total field there is
no need to calibrate instruments.

Tth - This is derived from public domain software. Inputs are the latitude, longitude, height,
time and date of the observation point. Full field components will then be output from the
DGRF or IGRF mathematical model.

Ttv -All the transient variations can be removed by recording their effects at base stations
using magnetometers of the same sensitivity as used to measure Tobs. Base stations
normally have some form of chart recorder for instant inspection to indicate whether the

76
system is working correctly. A base station could also have a digital output for rapid data
processing.

All measurements are relative to the Quiet Night Time Value (QNTV). This QNTV occurs at
about 1 am to 4 am when there is least interaction of the solar wind with the Geomagnetic
field. The QNTV is monitored over 3 to 4 days by the base station and the mean value is
taken to represent the base station reference field from which all variations Ttv are
measured. If there is a steady decrease or increase in the QNTV over this 3 to 4 days then a
longer period is used to determine the reference field. A base station in a different location
will have a different reference value for the QNTV but will show identical variations Ttv
relative to this QNTV value. (There may be slight changes to Ttv depending on conductivity
of crust/upper mantle in this different location). Base station records are only used to
measure Ttv i.e. the variation or departures from the QNTV and these values are added or
subtracted from Tobs to make all Tobs appear to be recorded at the time (i.e. QNTV).

4.9: Aeromagnetic surveying

The magnetic method is by far the most widely used of all geophysical survey methods both
in terms of line-kilometers surveyed annually and in total line-kilometers. Reford (1980)
reported average annual airborne survey production of approximately 2 250 000 km in the
period 1961 to 1978. Roughly 60 percent of the surveys are carried out for regional
geologic mapping and mineral exploration purposes; the remainder are mainly for
petroleum exploration. The figures do not include surveys flown within the Soviet Union and
China; nor do they include surveys flown for military, geomagnetic, or space research
applications. A further function that has become a standard option in the data reduction
phase is the removal of the International Geomagnetic Reference Field (IGRF) .The IGRF is
based on observations at permanent magnetic observations around the world and is the
best available attempt to define, on a five-year basis, the broad variations in time and space
of the main magnetic field arising from the Earth’s core. Subtraction of this “nongeologic”
(or “regional”) component from the total field measured in an aeromagnetic survey leaves
the local geologic information (“residual”) more clearly displayed for the

77
interpreter(Paterson and Reeves, 1985). Modern methods use single or twin engine aircraft
with magnetometer fixed to an extension of the tail plane-remote from magnetic noise of
aircraft or trail magnetometer from a helicopter. Old methods trailed magnetometer from
aircraft on long cable.

Data Recording

- analogue charts
- digital recording system (magnetic tape or disk)
Modern survey systems have highly sophisticated digital recording systems able to rectify,
display and store literally billions of records from a variety of sensors during a sortie of up
to 10 to 12 hours.

Survey Design

Height of Sensor
- constant height above ground
- constant barometric altitude
- loose drape

Height is maintained and recorded by radar &/or barometric altimeter &/or DGPS. Choice of
height is dictated by
a. type of terrain (e.g. in mountainous areas it is difficult to maintain an exact height above
ground) , contour flying using helicopters is sometimes done
b. purpose of the survey (for hydrocarbon surveys a constant barometric height is normally
preferred) and
c. line spacing (height should not be less than about 1/4 to 1/3 the line spacing or anomalies
will be aliased). In oil exploration the target is usually mapping depth to 'magnetic
basement' beneath sediments. To achieve this, surveys are flown at a safe constant altitude

78
above sea level. Deviations of height are recorded. Height depends on terrain but generally
flown at lowest safe flying height. In mineral exploration surveys are often over exposed
crystalline basement which have strong magnetic response. Such areas are often
mountainous. Thus surveys try to fly at constant height about ground to minimise the
magnetic response due to the topography and thus pick up signals that relate more to the
change in geology. The best results are obtained using a helicopter which can keep at
constant height above ground. This reduces ground coverage and increases cost per km. A
compromise could be a loose drape using fixed wing aircraft at a slightly higher elevation.

Line Spacing

The choice of line spacing is based on the scale of mapping the survey wishes to produce or
based on the exploration target size being investigated.
e.g
Regional scale (greater than about 1:200,000): 2 - 4 km
Semi-detailed (1:25,000-1:100,000): 0.25 - 1.0 km
Detailed (less than about 1:25,000)): 100 - 250 m
Ground surveys: usually 50 - 100 m

A useful rule of thumb is the line spacing should be roughly 1 cm at the final working map
scale. ‘Magnetic basement', which hopefully defines the base of the sedimentary basin,
needs to be in excess of 2 km generally for oil maturation processes. Anomalies generated
by magnetic basement at depths greater than 2 to 3 km will result in anomalies with
wavelengths about 4 km and greater. Thus flight line spacings of 2 km is commonly chosen.
Flight spacing of 4 km up to 30 km are sometimes used for reconnaissance surveys.
Sometimes doublets or triplets of lines are flown with 2 km spacing and with spacing
between these doublets/triplets of 10 km say.

Line Direction
Use known geology to determine trend of structures to be surveyed. Fly perpendicular to 2D
structural trend to maximise aeromagnetic information. If structural trends change in
concession area then compromise flight direction to fly as near to perpendicular to both

79
trends as possible or if trends do not overlap fly lines in two different directions or probable
better to reduce line spacing. In low latitudes (near magnetic equator) it is preferable to
have survey lines in a north south direction as this produces a better resolution of the
anomalies. If the geological formations strike north - south then a 45 degree orientation
may be preferable in some cases to east -west. Flying in the wrong direction can result in
bad sampling of the anomaly field.

Tie Lines
Tie- or control- lines are surveyed at right angles to the main survey lines in order to provide
control on the magnetic diurnal variation which causes the magnetic field to change up and
down with time. By matching the magnetic field values at flight - line / tie - line crossings
adjustments (Cross Over Errors) are made to remove the diurnal variation effect. A better
way is always to remove diurnal from flight lines first using base station record(s) and then
carrying out residual COE adjustments. The distance between tie lines depends on the
location of the survey (diurnal effects are least near the magnetic equator (except for
Electrojet effect) and greatest near the poles), the flight line spacing and the speed of the
aircraft.
e.g. Regional surveys: 2 - 4 times the line spacing
Detail surveys 5 - 10 times the line spacing

80
SECTION FIVE : ANOMALY CHARACTERISTICS AND DEPTH RULES

5.1 Overview of anomaly characteristics and depth rules- Gravity anomalies are probably
the easiest to understand since rock density is a scalar quantity If the body under
investigation has a uniform higher density with respect to its surrounding rock, then there
tends to be a simple relation between the amplitude and shape of the resulting gravitational
anomaly to the shape and volume of the sub-surface high density body. This is not
necessarily the case with magnetic anomalies since
the magnetisation parameter of a rock which controls the shape of the anomaly field is a
vector quantity. We initially look at the vertical and horizontal vector responses. To visualise
the total magnetic field effect the magnetic inclination and declination need to be factored
in.

i. Shape of magnetic field due to an isolated magnetic pole (monopole, this is similar to
gravity case)

Figure 5.1. Vertical and horizontal components profiles across a monopole

81
In the presence of no external Geomagnetic field, the lines of magnetic force are radial to
the monopole. In the case shown above the magnetic pole is negative so the lines of force
are pointing inwards, since it is convention to consider the force acting on a proton (positive
charge).
ii. Shape of magnetic field due to vertical dyke.
Can use lines of force or electrostatics to determine anomaly field.

Figure 5.2. Magnetic response of dyke with horizontal magnetisation (close to equator)

Figure 5.3.Magnetic response of dyke with vertical down magnetisation (close to N Pole)

82
Figure 5.4.Magnetic response of dyke with inclined down magnetisation (European area/North America)

iii. Shape of dyke anomalies with latitude

a) South Pole (Total field i.e. ΔZ positive upwards)

Figure 5.5. Vertical magnetic response of dyke with vertical up magnetisation (close to S Pole).

83
b) Mid southern latitude

Figure 5.6. Magnetic response of dyke with inclined up magnetisation (Southern Africa /Australia)

5.2 Estimating depths

Magnetic depth estimation plays an important role in magnetic interpretation. A complete

quantitative interpretation of potential field data aims to estimate three types of
information about sources of geological interest: the depth, the dimension, and the contrast
in the relevant physical property. Such an interpretation suffers from inherent ambiguity. It
is impossible to obtain all three types of information simultaneously without a priori
information. In many oil applications, we are often interested in magnetic basement depth
more than either dimension or physical property contrast. Thus different quick methods
have been developed, over half a century, to estimate the magnetic depth. These methods
work for simplified source geometries (dimensions) and are independent of the
susceptibility contrast. The depths estimated by these methods can be used as the final,
quantitative solution in some ideal situations: the anomaly is well isolated and the noise is
insignificant or well removed. Estimated depths often provide a good starting point for a
genuine structural interpretation, e.g., an interactive modelling or a constrained inversion.
To understand the principles behind depth determination it is important to understand
what happens to an anomaly’s shape when viewed for increasing distance above the earth.

84
This is the same as keeping measurement height fixed and increasing the depth to the
causative body. Figure 5.7 clearly shows this.

Magnetic Example Gravity Example

i. Anomaly amp. decreases i. Anomaly remains the same
with distance above source

ii. Anomaly width increases ii. Depth to basement relief with distance
above source (density contrast kept constant)

Figure 5.7: Diverge of magnetic field with distance

Monopole
(Gravity or simple magnetic case)

m = pole strength Potential U = - m / r

r = (x2 + z2)1/2 ΔZ = dU/dz = m sin(θ)/r2
ΔZ = mz / (x2 + z2)3/2 ΔZ = m / z2( 1 +x2/z2)3/

85
 Figure 5.8: Monopole case

Dipole
(Magnetic case)

Figure 5.9: Dipoles

86
considering a vertical dipole made up of 2 monopoles.

where x0 = zero crossing point

if we know x0 we can make estimates on z2 and find z1 or visa versa

Simple and quick depth estimators

The following diagram shows some simple parameters that are taken from an anomaly to
allow the determination of depth.
Henderson and Zietz, 1948

where z= coef x W

Figure 5.10. Half Maximum Width ‘W’ ( Henderson & Zietz 1948)

87
Vaquier, et al. 1951

where z= ceof xHSD

Figure 5.11: Horizontal Slope Distance ‘H.S.D’ (Vacquier, 1951)

Sokolov, 1956

where Z = ceof x S

Figure 5.12: Sokolov ‘S’ method (1956)

88
First Order Depth Estimates (Gravity)

Many geological structures can be considered as simple symmetrically shaped structures to

enable initial (first order) estimates to be made on depth. Below are some examples

MODELS
a) Sphere

"half width" xw i.e. where Δg = Δgmax/2

xw = 0.75 z
max. depth = 0.86[ Δgmax /(dφ/dxmax)]

b) Cylinder

89
Δg/Δgmax = 1/(1 +x2/z2)
xw = z
max. depth = 0.65(Δgmax/dφ/dxmax)

Semi-automated methods

Semi-automated inverse theory methods are becoming increasingly useful in providing rapid
means of estimating the three dimensional structure of sedimentary basins from potential
field data. These methods promise rapid and reliable initial interpretation of gravity and
magnetic data sets and include:

• 3D Euler deconvolution
• Source Parameter Imaging (SPITM),
• Spectral analysis,

They utilise more fully the spectral content of the potential field data than the traditional
forward modelling methods. Moreover, unlike forward modelling, the inverse methods do
not require a priori knowledge of the geology, thus making them highly suited to evaluating
frontier exploration areas such as in the FSU (Former Soviet Union), Africa and China
where compilations of gravity and aeromagnetic data are now becoming available.

Euler deconvolution
The Euler deconvolution method uses Euler’s homogeneity equation to map out the depth,
location and nature of the causative bodies present.

Thomson (1982) expressed the Euler’s homogeneity as-

𝜕𝑇 𝜕𝑇 𝜕𝑇
(x-xo) + (y-yo) 𝜕𝑦 + (z-zo) 𝜕𝑧 = N (B-T)
𝜕𝑥

Where:

xo, yo, zo- is the position of the magnetic body

90
T-Total field measured at (x,y,z)

N- the degree of homogeneity which can also be interpreted as the structural index(SI) is the
variation of the field with distance.

B- Background value of the TMI

The data is divided into square windows within the grid and Euler’s equation solved for a
structural index and a regional value B to derive least-squares estimates for optimum source
geometry within a data window.

Model Structural index Window size Acceptance level

Sphere 3 4x4 0.4%
Vertical pipe 2 4x4 0.4%
Dike 1 4x4 0.3%
Dike 2 4x4 3.0%
Contact 0 4x4 4.0%
Sill 1 3x3 2.2%

Table 3: Examples of structural index values for several magnetic sources (after Reid et al 1990)

Local wavenumber/SPI
This method developed by Thurston and Smith (1997) also known as the Source Parameter
Imaging (SPI) technique is so called because all the parameters that make up the source
which include depth, dip and susceptibility contrast are computed from the complex
analytical signal. The technique assumes only induced magnetization and works well at all
magnetic latitude which makes it a good choice for the Anambra basin that is at low
magnetic latitude. Fairhead et al (2004) related the source depth to the local wavenumber
(k) of the magnetic field which can be derived from the calculated total horizontal and
vertical gradients of the RTP grid. The depth to the magnetic body is equal to n/k at the

91
peaks in the local wavenumber field and n is a function of the model of the magnetic body
( e.g dike, contact, sill etc) similar to the structural index, N in Euler deconvolution .

Local wavenumber can be derived using methods described by Verduzco et al (2004) and
Fairhead et al (2004) where the Tilt derivative (TDR) and local wavenumber (Total horizontal
derivative of the TDR) are written as-

𝑉𝐷𝑅
TDR= 𝑡𝑎𝑛−1 [𝑇𝐻𝐷𝑅]

and

𝜕𝑇𝐷𝑅 2 𝜕𝑇𝐷𝑅 2
TDR_THDR =√[ ] +[ ]
𝜕𝑥 𝜕𝑦

Where

VDR = 1st vertical derivative of the TMI data

THDR= Total horizontal derivative which is always positive

X and y = Cartesian coordinates

Similar to the Analytical signal, the THDR_TDR is not in any way affected by the inclination of
the magnetic field which makes it suitable for this research since the Anambra basin is at
low magnetic latitude.

Spectral Analysis Method

The spectral depth method is based on the principle that a magnetic field measured at the
surface can therefore be considered the integral of magnetic signatures from all depths. The
power spectrum of the surface field can be used to identify average depths of source
ensembles (Spector and Grant, 1970). This same technique can be used to attempt
identification of the characteristic depth of the magnetic basement, on a moving data
window basis, merely by selecting the steepest and therefore deepest straight-line segment
of the power spectrum, assuming that this part of the spectrum is sourced consistently by
basement surface magnetic contrasts. A depth solution is calculated for the power spectrum
derived from each grid sub-set, and is located at the centre of the window. Overlapping the
windows creates a regular, comprehensive set of depth estimates. This approach can be
automated, with the limitation however that the least squares best-fit straight line segment

92
is always calculated over the same points of the power spectrum, which if performed
manually would not necessarily be the case.

5.3 Gravity and magnetic effects of some simple models

Three simple structures can account for most geological structures

Figure 5.13: Simple model types

1 Step Model

This is a semi-infinite polygon

Figure 5.14: Step model

93
Gravity Step Model

Figure 5.15: Characteristic estimators for step model

Magnetic Step Model

Unlike the gravity case, where density is a scalar quantity, the magnetization is a vector
quantity and the size and nature of the magnetic anomaly of a given step structure will
change with inclination, i, of the field (if anomaly is all induced then inclination can be
considered to reflect latitude) and strike direction, λ, of the step.

Figure 5 16: Profiles of the total field anomaly across a step at magnetic latitude equivalent to i=600

The parameters measured are maximum slopes s1 and s2 on both sides of the anomaly, the
max. and min. anomaly values ΔTmax, ΔTmin and width of anomaly at

94
Ribbon Model

Figure 5 17: The Ribbon Model

95
Gravity Ribbon Model
The changing shape of the gravity case as a function of dip and depth is illustrated in Fig.
23/26 below-

Figure 5 18: Profiles of the gravity effect across a ribbon model of infinite length

The characteristic estimators are shown in below-

Figure 5.19:Gravity characteristic estimators for the ribbon model

96
Magnetic Ribbon Model
The shape of the magnetic anomaly is dependent on depth of ribbon model, its dip and the
direction of magnetization (Fig 5.20)

Figure 5.20: Magnetic vertical intensity across a two dimensional ribbon model for various dips, depths and
directions of magnetization.

The estimators are similar to the step model

Figure 5.21: Magnetic estimators for the ribbon model

97
The Prism Model

( Depth determination of sedimentary basins)

Figure 5.22: Prism model

This method uses the premise that sedimentary rocks are essentially non-magnetic so that
any magnetic anomaly must originate from the basement rocks beneath. The depth
estimator tends to yield an upper limit to total thickness after height of aircraft above the
ground has been removed. Since the depth parameter is mainly of interest and the shape
of the causative body is of little interest, then the tendency has been to use an elementary
model. This is not unrealistic since the anomaly sources are so distant from the
magnetometer that the causative body can no longer be considered 2D. Thus previous
models are out and there is a need to use a 3D model. The method used is based on
Vacquier, Steenland, Henderson and Zeitz (Interpretation of Aeromagnetic Maps.
Geol. Soc. Am. Memoir 47, 1951). The model used (see above) consists of a bottomless
vertical - sided prism of rectangular cross section. Five parameters control the prism model.
These are:
i. width a of the prism
ii. length b of the prism
iii. depth h to the top of the prism below aircraft (not the ground surface)
iv. magnetic azimuth λ (relative to side b of prism
v. magnetic inclination i of the geomagnetic field

98
 Figure 5.23: Prism model parameters

Figure 5.24: Profile across anomaly showing estimators

99
 SECTION SIX. INTERPRETATION TECHNIQUES

There are three aspects to gravity and magnetic interpretation- data enhancement,
qualitative and quantitative interpretation.

6.1 Data enhancement

Data enhancement can be undertaken on line or grid based data with the aim of making the
interpretation stage easier. This can take the form of transforming and/or filtering the data
and generating a range of derivatives. The prime objective is to enhance or isolate features
that you wish to identify better prior to qualitative and quantitative analysis.

6.1.1 Filters

Filters are devices which pass, or fail to pass, information based on some measurable
discriminator. Usually the filter discriminate is frequency and the filter alters the amplitude
and/or phase spectra of signals which pass through it. Digital filters can correct for all the
effects and provide an output that has not been distorted in any significant way.( Sheriff and
Geldart 1983). In potential field studies there is a tendency to define the parameters of the
filters by initial analysis of the data being filtered. All filters are normally Band-pass and
Band-stop types with upper and a lower cut-off wavelength.

Convolution or Space Domain Filters

Hanning Filter -A Hanning filter is defined as a 3 x 3 point operator with coefficients on the
central row and column in the ratio 1:2:1 before normalization.

010
121 divide output by 6
010

100
This is a simple smoothing filter that can have multiple passes of the filter in one operation.
Can be considered to be a very light cosmetic filter to clean up data
Gaussian Filter -The Gaussian response is a fixed bell-shaped response curve. (which also
describes the impulse response). The cut-off slope is not very steep and no ringing is
produced. Only the cut-off wavelength(s) are required to be specified in the filter.

Binomial Filter- The coefficients of the central row and column of the convolution array for
binomial filters are the coefficients of a Binomial expansion of the order selected. (The local
convention is that order 1 gives a three point filter, for compatibility with the Hanning filters
above. For order n, the coefficients of the central row or column of the operator are then
the (n+1)th row of the Pascal triangle, and a Binomial filter of order n is equivalent to n
passes of a Hanning filter).

Frequency Domain or FFT Filters

FFT filters are frequency domain filters and include Butterworth, Gaussian and Cosine and
there are four frequency pass types Low-pass, High-pass, Band-pass and Band-stopBy
convention, a filter is designated as low-pass if it passes frequencies lower than its cut-off
frequency and attenuates frequencies higher than this. Low-pass and high-pass filters
require only one-cut-off wavelength to be supplied, whilst band-pass and band-stop filters
require two. For filter specifications, wavelengths are used in preference to frequencies as
they are more convenient to work with. Filter cut-off points are defined as the wavelengths
at which the amplitude response of the filter is 0.5. The shape cut off of the frequency filter
(upper red solid line) has the spatial equivalent (lower red solid line) which generate a
ringing effect due to the oscillatory nature of the secondary lobes. To prevent this
undesirable effect the frequency cut off has to be more gradual.

Butterworth Filter- The Butterworth response is a flat response in the pass region and the
roll off is defined as an amplitude which is a function of frequency determined by the filter
order, which is a positive integer value. Larger values result in sharper cut-offs, leading to
greater 'ringing' of narrow anomalies. The order and cutoff wavelength(s) are required to
specify the filter. This filter is very popular in potential field studies.

101
Cosine Filter- Cosine filters require a parameter determining the width of the roll off region.
This is expressed as a fraction of the cut-off wavelength. Together with the cut-off
wavelength(s) this determines the filter response. With the cosine filter it is possible to
absolutely restrict the range of wavelengths in the filtered grid.

Strike Filter -The filter operates in the frequency domain to selectively remove frequencies
from a sector of the X-Y frequency diagram (and the corresponding diagonally opposite
sector). This sector is defined by its central direction and angular width. Within the sector,
the frequency operation is equivalent to a Butterworth lowpass filter operation of the
specified order and cut-off wavelength. At the edges of the sector, the filter is faded using a
cosine roll off over the roll off angle specified, which is centred on the sector edges. Outside
this range the frequency components are not modified. For example, to remove ripple from
a grid created from survey lines aligned in a NW/SE direction, you would need to specify a
filter direction of 45 degrees (across the ripple: identical to specifying to 135 degrees). For a
width of 30 degrees and angular roll off of 10 degrees, the full filter specified would then be
applied over the angular range 35 to 55 degrees, rolled off at the edges to zero effect
outside the range 25 to 65 degrees. (All directions are specified clockwise from North).
This filter is used for de-corrugation of.

A Swing-Tail filter- is an example of a filter designed to adjust the signal to enhance the
longer wavelength part of the spectrum by suppressing the response of the short
wavelength part of the spectrum. A frequency domain filter can be defined which swings
the high-frequency tail of the spectrum down such that it follows the linear trend
established by the low frequency part of the spectrum (Cordell and Grauch 1985). The
effect of this filter is to suppress high frequency signal, which will be near surface and may
lie within the noise envelope of the data. The total field data after application of the swing
tail filter can used in subsequent processing and automated interpretation methods i.e.
local wavenumber, 3D Euler, edge detection etc. This has the potential advantage of
attempting to isolate anomaly effects at different depth ranges so that there is least
interference from other overlapping anomalies. The term ‘depth slice’ or ‘pseudo depth
slice’ or ‘spectral depth slice’ have been coined.

102
Upward Continuation Filter
This calculates the potential field at an elevation higher than that at which the field was
originally measured at. The continuation involves the application of Green’s theorem and is
unique if the field is completely known over the lower surface. Since anomaly amplitudes of
shallow sources (short wavelength anomalies) decrease faster with height than anomalies
associated with deeper larger sources (longer wavelength anomalies), then upward
continuation will smooth out near surface effects. This type of filter is used to bring two
aeromagnetic surveys to a common elevation so that the two surveys can be tied/joined
accurately together. An upward continued field can be used as the regional field and
removed from the original field to produce a residual field.

Downward Continuation Filter

This process is to determine the value of the potential field at a lower elevation. This is
moving the surface of imaging closer to the source. As the depth from which an anomaly
originates is approached, its potential field expression becomes sharper and tends to outline
the mass better until the depth of the mass is reached. Beyond this point the field
computed by continuation becomes erratic. Noise in the data (short wavelength noise)
often precludes successful application of downward continuation. Thus there is need
to downward continuation in stages and at each stage apply careful filtering to minimize
noise effects. The slope of the power spectrum goes to zero as the depth is reached

Regional-Residual Separation and Filtering

Magnetic anomalies as seen on aeromagnetic data are made up of variations in the regional
field, the residual field and noise (Reeves 2005). The regional field in the case of the
Anambra basin is the Basement Complex mainly gneisses and migmatite gneiss that
underlies the sediments. The residual field are made up high frequency components that
could be intrusives or volcanics and the noise is mainly cultural noise from settlements.
It was shown by Spector and Grant (1970) that when a statistical population of magnetic or
gravity sources exists at around a specific source depth, then the expression of those
sources on a plot of the natural logarithm of energy against wavenumber is a straight line
having a slope of -4πh. It follows that where a spectrum shows a number of straight-line

103
branches, statistical populations of sources exist at a number of depths. In Figure 7.3(a)
three such branches can be recognised and the spectrum divided into parts labelled
regional component, residual component and noise. To separate the regional field, a
regional (or low pass) filter could be multiplied point-bypoint with the spectrum where low
wavenumbers are passed, high wavenumbers rejected, with an approximately Gaussian roll-
off between them to minimise ringing (also known as Gibb's phenomena) when the output
is reverse-transformed to the space domain. The complement of the low-pass regional filter
is the high pass or residual filter. The residual grid may be obtained either by applying such a
filter in the wavenumber domain, or by subtracting the regional field from the original data
grid. In practical cases, the residual filter would usually be designed to roll-off again at
wavenumbers corresponding to noise so that noise could be eliminated simultaneously.
The filter then becomes a band-pass filter retaining only information from a range of
wavenumbers considered important for the study of the residual anomalies at hand. In
general, the better the separation between straight-line branches of the radially averaged
power spectrum, the more successful the eventual separation into regional and
residual components is likely to be. However, this separation is never perfect since
sources at any depth tend to contribute to all smaller wavenumbers in the spectrum to a
greater or lesser extent.

Figure 6.1: The energy spectrum in the wavenumber domain and spectral analysis for regional-residual
separation

104
6.1.2 Reduction to the Pole (RTP) or Reduction to the Equator (RTE)

In most aeromagnetic data interpretation, the total magnetic intensity data is usually
reduced to the pole which assumes that the data was collected at the pole where the
magnetic anomaly is vertical and therefore give interpretations that resemble the actual
geology. At lower latitudes the shapes of the anomalies are not true reflections of the
structures causing them. A simple equation that does a reduction to the pole was developed
for GEOSOFT Ltd by Grant and Dodds in 1972 and is shown below (Macleod et al, 1993).

1
L(𝜃) = [𝑠𝑖𝑛(𝐼)+ 𝑖𝑐𝑜𝑠(𝐼)𝑐𝑜𝑠(𝐷−𝜃)]2

Where the wavenumber is denoted as 𝜃 and the magnetic inclination and declination as I
and D respectively. The equation approaches infinity close to the magnetic equator, where
the magnetic inclination gets to zero and (D – 𝜃 ) approaches 90 degrees which means that
the shape of an east-west trending dike changes but not its amplitude while the amplitude
and shape of a north-south trending dike changes. The problem was solved by introducing
another inclination which is greater than the true inclination to augment the true inclination
at low latitudes. Care should however be taken in choosing the value for the second
inclination because it increases the amplitude of the original signal at the same time
amplifying the noise that will appear as artefacts in the data(Hansen and Pawlowski 1989).
The amplitude of north-south trending structures are almost zero at the equator, that is, no
anomaly is produced except at the ends of the structure which makes it necessary to use
high values to increase the amplitude which also enhances the noise part of the data and
therefore makes reduction to the pole at low latitudes difficult (Baranov and Naudy, 1964).
The magnetic data can also be reduced to the equator (RTE) such that the magnetic bodies
will appear horizontal at the equator (Leu ,1982) . The structure will show the same anomaly
shape as those at the poles. His approach recalculates the total magnetic intensity assuming
the magnetic body is lying in a horizontal position and anomaly lows are converted to
magnetic highs by reversing the phase by 180 at the same location over the middle of the
bodies.
From model studies, Jain (1988) showed that even though the magnetic field is more
complex at the equator than the actual magnetic field at the pole, a RTE map is less complex

105
and more accurate than a RTP map and that reduction to the equator is preferable to
reduction to the pole, more particularly at the middle and lower latitudes.
Swain (2000) developed a method for reducing to the pole similar to the technique used in
Geosoft’s MAGMAP .This method works well for areas with different magnetic inclinations
where the area is divided into blocks with each block having a distinct magnetic field. His
method introduces a false-inclination from the true inclination so as to reduce the
amplification of noise in the north south direction.

6.1.3 Derivatives

Total horizontal derivative of the RTP and RTE data

Total horizontal derivative is a good edge detector because it computes the maxima over
the edges of the structures.

𝜕𝑇 2 𝜕𝑇 2
Full (or Total) Horizontal derivative THDR = √[𝜕𝑥 ] + [𝜕𝑦]

The horizontal gradient method measures the rate of change in magnetic susceptibility in
the x and y directions and produces a resultant grid. There is no change in the frequency
content of the TMI and the total gradient but the spectral phase of the gradient changes (
Cordell and Grauch, 1985 ). This makes it insensitive to noise and aliasing. The gradients are
all positive making this derivative easy to map. This method will show contacts that are
linear and very continuous because it requires only horizontal derivatives. Strike direction of
the contacts can be estimated accurately within small windows.

1ST Vertical Derivative

The 1st vertical derivative, dT/dz is a vertical gradient method that uses a Fast Fourier
Transform (FFT) to enhance the high frequency component of a magnetic field made up of
intrusives and volcanics while suppressing the low frequency content which is due to the
regional field (Paine 1986). The transformation takes place in the spectral phase therefore
the accuracy cannot be determined but the frequency domain can show the level of
accuracy of the method. The first vertical derivative (VDR) can be viewed as taking
measurements of the total magnetic intensity (TMI) at two locations that are a distance
106
above each other at the same time and dividing the difference in the TMI values with the
vertical distance between them (Milligan and Gunn 1997). This derivative amplifies the high
frequency components of the data relative to the low frequency components and
eliminates long wavelengths due to regional effects . The transformations in the first
vertical derivative method involves multiplication in the frequency domain with meaningful
factors and doing an inverse transformation in the space domain to get the transformed
output (Gunn, 1975).

Tilt derivative

The ratio of the vertical gradient to the total horizontal derivative which is always positive
has been defined as the tilt angle (Miller and Singh, 1994) .The Tilt derivative (TDR) is
defined as-

Tilt derivative TDR  tan 1 

VDR 

 THDR 

Because the tilt angle is always within the range of - π/2 < Tilt <π/2, the depth of the
source will not have any effect on the transform therefore magnetic sources from all depths
whether shallow or deep can be resolved by the tilt derivative which is an advantage
because sometimes there can be a deeper source that is in the midst of so many shallow
sources. The TDR shows a maximum that peaks over the anomaly. Limiting the tan-1
component of the expression between a range of + 1.57 and – 1.57 provides an automatic
gain control (AGC) that amplifies the amplitude of signals that are low which makes the Tilt
derivative a powerful method for RTE and RTP data (Verduzco et al, 2004).

Analytical Signal (AS)

Analytical signal is the complex output from the differentiation of a potential field data that
is also complex (Nabighian, 1972). The magnetic derivatives are calculated in the x,y,z
direction, and the square root of the sum of the square of the derivatives gives the

107
analytical signal (Roest et al 1992) . It is also called the total gradient method because it
involves the derivatives in all directions.

𝜕𝑇 2 𝜕𝑇 2 𝜕𝑇 2
A = A (x,y) =√(𝜕𝑥 ) + (𝜕𝑦) + ( 𝜕𝑧 )

The Analytic signal performs well at all magnetic latitudes because the direction of the
ambient field does not affect it and the maxima defines the edges of magnetic bodies.For
locating contacts and sheet like structures, the Analytical method has been found to be an
effective method irrespective of their angle of dip or the magnetic latitude (Philips 2000).

6.2 Qualitative interpretation

The qualitative element is now largely GIS-based and dominates the early stage and late
presentational stage of a study. The preliminary structural element map that results from
this qualitative study is essentially the cornerstone of the final interpretation. Qualitative
interpretation involves the use of all available geological/geophysical, well/seismic data not
only locally within the limits of the concession block but also regionally. The set of geo-
referenced images/overlays thus provides an environment within which it is now possible to
undertake Qualitative interpretation in an efficient manner. The interpretation will involve
the recognition and mapping of:
(i) the nature of discrete anomalous bodies including intrusions, faults and lenticular
intrasedimentary bodies - often aided by the running of simple test models,
(ii) disruptive cross-cutting features such as strike-slip faults,
(iii) presence of mutual interference of gravity and magnetic responses
(iv) age relationships of intersecting faults
(v) structural styles,
(vi) unifying tectonic features/events that integrate seemingly unrelated interpreted
features. Such analysis will result in a preliminary structural model/framework of mapped
features that fits all the available data

108
6.3 Quantitative Interpretation

The qualitative results can now be used as the basis for detailed quantitative 2D (profile
based) and 3D (grid based) modelling. This includes the more precise determination of the
xyz location of known and inferred geological structures. Depth estimation is a major
element of this quantitative stage, which can be determined by various methods. A
qualitative foreknowledge allows the interpreter to better discriminate between geological
solutions on the basis of likely body types. This same qualitative foreknowledge also
benefits the quantitative modelling stage when seismic control is less than clear. The
interpretation of magnetic data is theoretically more involved than the corresponding
gravity data, due to:
(i) the dipolar nature of the magnetic field in contrast with the simpler monopolar gravity
field, and, (ii) the latitude/longitude dependent nature of the magnetic response for a given
body due to the variable strength and inclination of the Geomagnetic field. Despite this,
interpretation of magnetic data is in practice often simpler than that of gravity due to the
smaller number of contributory sources. Often, though not always, there is just one source -
the magnetic crystalline basement. The gravity response, by contrast, is generated by
the entire geological section. The complexity of magnetic anomalies, conferred by the
dipolar nature of the inducing magnetic field, lends an interpretative advantage in the case
of intra-sedimentary magnetic bodies, as the dipolar response is particularly diagnostic of
the disposition (e.g. dip) of the source. It is for this reason that it is important for the
interpreter to be familiar with the wide range of induced magnetic responses produced by
simple yet geologically sensible bodies specific to the magnetic inclination of the region. It is
important to remember that the shape of a magnetic anomaly over a body (e.g. a
contact, block, or sill) is dependent on inclination of the geomagnetic field and the
orientation of the contact with the field, whereas increasing the depth of the causative body
reduces the amplitude and increases the wavelength of the anomaly (this assumes the
geomagnetic inclination and body orientation are kept fixed). Seeking mutual consistency of
both gravity and magnetic interpretations tends to ensure that results are more sensible
and ambiguities minimized. So there are often distinct advantages of being able to include
both gravity and magnetic data in the interpretation process.

109
Profile (2D) modelling
Profile 2D modelling of potential field data is an important aspect of the quantitative
interpretation process. It is often performed using a “bottom-up / outside-in / magnetics
first” approach. This tends to ensure that deep (magnetic basement related) and distal
sources, which impact regionally on the concession block, are sensibly configured before
attention is focused on the detail i.e. shorter wavelength signals, within the concession
block. In practice the interplay of deep, distal and centrally shallow crustal features
invariably requires a degree of iteration between deep and shallow source assignment. Final
modelling conclusions rely on seeking consistency between the gravity and the magnetic
data while adhering to other data constraints and using sensible geological principles. The
“magnetics first” modelling approach is favoured, recognizing that the sedimentary section
within petroleum provinces often possesses little in the way of significant magnetic
susceptibility, in which case by far the largest proportion of magnetic signal is generated at
the crystalline (igneous or metamorphic) basement level. This is useful, because unlike
gravity where the entire section contributes to the observed field leading to a potentially
confused overprinted picture, all but the shortest wavelength magnetic responses can be
ascribed to the underlying basement. Where intra-sedimentary magnetic sources exist,
these are often sufficiently discrete and of short wavelength character to be recognised for
what they are. The modelling of the magnetic data is therefore particularly important for
extending interpretation below the effective level of seismic penetration using a
combination of depth estimates and 2D modelling. Once the magnetic data have been
addressed in this way, consistency is sought with the longer wavelength gravity features. By
this means any remaining long wavelength gravity anomalies may be more properly
ascribed to broad shallow sources, rather than to deep sources. The forward modelling
interpretation process is essentially recursive, where qualitative results prime the
quantitative stage, and results from the latter require adjustment of the former and so on. A
crucial aspect of interpretation is recognising the arrival of the point of diminishing returns,
that is, beyond which disproportionate effort generates few useful results. At this stage only
the inclusion of additional data, e.g. on a more detailed scale, is likely to reinvigorate the
interpretation process. 2D interpretation within the concession block is usually done
using a series of individual profiles, which often need to extend well outside the concession
block to provide adequate control on regional structures and their responses. Having these

110
individual profiles linked together by an axial profile or a network of interconnecting profiles
is desirable particularly if 3D interpretation is to be undertaken. 2D means two dimensional
in such a way that the profile being interpreted is perpendicular to the strike (axis) of the 2D
structure being studied and the 2D structure is assumed to have a constant cross section
and infinite extent in and out of the plan of the profile.

Grid (3D) modelling

Grid (3D) modelling and inversion methods often require the initial setting of the physical
parameters, thus the reason for carrying out the 2D interpretation as the preliminary step.
Normally 3D modelling is restricted to gravity modelling using seismic well and magnetic
depth estimates as constraints to the gravity based model. In determining magnetic depth
estimates ‘good practice’ requires that two independent method (e.g. Euler & Werner; Euler
& graphical depth estimate, spectral and [Euler or Werner or Naudy], etc) be used to
provide such estimates and in so doing provides some degree of confidence. Some of the
depth estimation methods cited are based on 2D assumptions and studies using Euler 2D
and 3D methods indicate that the 3D solutions are more coherent and less prone to
spurious solutions The reason for this is, it is highly unlikely that all anomalies identified in a
profile with conform to the simple 2D assumption. 3D forward modelling and inversion will
be discussed in later sections.

111
 SECTION SEVEN: CASE STUDIES

Interpretation of high resolution aeromagnetic data of the Anambra basin, South-Eastern

Nigeria

Ogunmola et al (2010)

Location

The Anambra Basin is one of the inland sedimentary basins in Nigeria. Others include the
Bida, Benin, Bornu, Sokoto, Benue, and the Niger delta basins. The basin is so named
because it falls within Anambra state in Nigeria and is situated at the south-western
extremity of the Benue Trough (figure 7.1). The Benue Trough is itself a product of the West
and Central African Rift System in which it opened as a broad strike-slip fault system.

Figure 7.1: Map of Nigeria showing the major divisions of the Benue Trough .The Anambra basin is shown in
dark green. (after Ologun et al 2008)

112
Materials and Methods

Data available

Magnetic data
The magnetic data for the Anambra basin was acquired at a flight line spacing of 200 meters
and a terrain clearance of 80 meters. The data available for this study is in grid format only,
without the flight line data. This shortcoming made it impossible to remove artefacts that
are due to flight lines from the data through processes like cross-over analysis and micro-
levelling.

Gravity data
The gravity data available for this study was derived from the African gravity project
initiated by GETECH in 1986 and is based on the international Gravity Formula of 1967.

Where,

𝛾 = 978031.85(1+0.005278895 sin2𝜃 + 0.0000234262 sin4𝜃 ) mgal

- 𝜃 is the geodetic latitude of station

-free air correction assumed the value of 0.3086 mgal

-Bouguer correction used a reduction density of 2.67 g/cc on land and 1.64 g/cc at sea.

The main reference is to the World Relative Gravity Reference Network

The gravity measurements taken over the study area are however sparsely distributed and
are not available in most parts. Most of the values for this study are from interpolation from
the known points which limits its reliability for this study.

Landsat data
For this study Landsat ETM (Enhanced Thematic Mapper) was acquired from the global land
cover facility (GLCF). It is multispectral and has a resolution of 30 meters.

SRTM data
SRTM stands for shuttle Radar Topography mission which was flown by NASA that obtained
digital elevation models of the earth’s surface. The SRTM data of the Anambra basin was
downloaded from the NASA link. It is also useful in surface mapping especially in areas like
the Anambra basin where a detailed geological map is not available.

113
Data Validation

The magnetic data covers all of the Anambra basin extending to the Abakalilki and Afikpo
area. The IGRF has been removed from the data. It was observed that artefacts resulting
from flight lines were present in the data. These artefacts are due to changes in flight
direction when there is a shift in the zero level observed in the flight line (Huang, 2008). The
flight lines were in a north-west-southeast direction perpendicular to the major structural
trend in the basin which is northeast-southwest. The flight line data of the study area is not
available so further processing using line levelling/crossover analysis and microleveling to
remove these artefacts is not possible. Apart from these artefacts which can introduce some
errors in the depth estimates that would be derived, the data is generally of good quality.
However, to mask these artefacts just for the sake of visualisation, using the GETECH
GETgrid software, the azimuth was set at 185 degrees and elevation at 31m to give a field
devoid of the artefacts to the eye (figure 7.2).

Figure 7.2: Original TMI grid (a) and TMI grid (b) at azimuth of 185 degrees

Reduction to the Pole (RTP) or Reduction to the Equator ( RTE)

The Anambra basin is close to the magnetic equator with a declination of -2.097 degrees
and an inclination of -11.595 degrees (Derived from IGRF 11). An RTP and RTE operation was

114
carried out on the grid data of the Anambra basin (figure 7.3) using GETECH software,
GETgrid which uses an operator that is split into amplitude and phase components. An
'auxiliary' field inclination is added to the amplitude component of the operator which
should be larger than the actual inclination .The data was resampled to a grid size of 50 X 50
to improve the resolution of the data and an auxiliary field inclination of 30 degrees was
used for the RTP .

Magnetic anomalies as seen on aeromagnetic data are made up of variations in the regional
field, the residual field and noise (Reeves 2005). The regional field in the case of the
Anambra basin is the Basement Complex mainly gneisses and migmatite gneiss that
underlies the sediments. The residual field are made up high frequency components that
could be intrusives or volcanics and the noise is mainly cultural noise from settlements
within the Anambra basin. One of the objectives of this research is to derive depth to the
basement so high frequency component of the data should be removed.
A power spectrum was computed from depth slicing of the data using the GETgrid software .
The slices show variations coming from different depths mainly 6500m, 1400m, 500m and
330m. When gravity or magnetic sources occur in cluster at a certain depth, the sources will
be shown as a straight line that has a gradient of -4π in a power spectrum which is the plot
of the logarithm of the amplitude of the source against the wavenumber (Spector and
Grant, 1970). Therefore different straight-line branches in a power spectrum show the
existence of clusters of gravity or magnetic sources at the different depths. This process of
separating signals from different sources is known as spectral analysis. From the power
spectrum (figure 3), the signals coming from a depth of 6.5km are from the basement, that
from a depth of 1400m are from the residual field made of intrusives and volcanics and
those from depths of 500m and 300m are due to cultural noise.

To separate the regional field, a low pass filter was applied to the data where low
wavenumbers (long wavelengths from the regional field) are passed and high wavenumbers
(short wavelengths ) rejected. From the spectral analysis, the deepest sources are at a depth
of 6.5 km so a cut-off wavelength of 7 km was selected with a Gaussian roll-off to minimise
ringing. The choice of 5km as cut-off wavelength was also based on results of previous
studies. Onwuemesi (1997) used 1-D Spectral Analysis to show a maximum depth of 5.6km.
Fairhead and Green (1989) derived depths of 7km in east Niger. Akande & Erdtmann (1998)

115
gave a maximum depth of the sediments in the Anambra basin as 8000m. Exploration wells
were also drilled in the basin and the deepest well at about 3700m did not encounter the
basement (Onuoha 2005). This filter design was applied to the data using GETgrid which
performs the operation in the wavenumber domain and reverts it back to the space domain.
The results are shown in figure 7.4.

Total horizontal derivative of the RTP and RTE data

Total horizontal derivative is a good edge detector because it computes the maxima over
the edges of the structures.

𝜕𝑇 2 𝜕𝑇 2
Full (or Total) Horizontal derivative THDR = √[𝜕𝑥 ] + [𝜕𝑦]

The horizontal gradient method measures the rate of change in magnetic susceptibility in
the x and y directions and produces a resultant grid. There is no change in the frequency
content of the TMI and the total gradient but the spectral phase of the gradient changes (
Cordell and Grauch, 1985 ). This makes it insensitive to noise and aliasing. The gradients are
all positive making this derivative easy to map. This method will show contacts that are
linear and very continuous because it requires only horizontal derivatives. Strike direction of
the contacts can be estimated accurately within small windows. This derivative was applied
to the RTP data of the Anambra basin using GETECH’s GETgrid and the result shown in figure
7.5.

Qualitative Interpretation

To start the qualitative interpretation of the Anambra basin, all the data sets which included
all the derivatives produced in GETECH’s GETgrid software were imported into the ArcMAP
Software which is a powerful GIS software. The high resolution magnetic data acquired for
this study covers the Anambra basin itself and other adjoining sheets so as to understand
the trend of the structures well beyond the area of interest. This area coverage which is
between latitude 5˚ 30 N - 7˚30 N, and longitude 6˚30 E - 8˚00 E and an area coverage of
168km x 140 km formed the basis on which other data sets were subset to be exactly the
same dimension. It was also ensured that all the data sets have the same georeference and

116
coordinate system so that they could be overlaid on each other. The spatial reference
properties for all the data sets are-

Projection- Universal Traverse Mercator (UTM)

Coordinate system- Minna, Zone 32

Spheroid- Clarke 1880

The data sets include- (a)Gravity data and Gravity derivates (vertical derivatives, total
horizontal derivatives and the analytical signal) (b)Magnetic data and Magnetic derivatives(
Regional-Residual output, Reduced to the Pole (RTP), Reduced to the Equator (RTE) grid,
vertical derivatives, total horizontal derivatives, tilt derivative, analytical signal)
(c)Geological map (d) Landsat imagery (e)Shuttle Radar Terrain Model (SRTM) data (f)well
locations

All the data sets were displayed as layers which were overlaid on each other within the data
frame of ArcMap. This was possible because they are all of the same dimension and spatial
reference. To view the map below another map, the small box before the map name in the
display box can be unchecked. Alternatively the effects tool can be used to swipe the layer
above so as to view the map below. The zoom tool also makes it possible to zoom in or out
of any of the layers. All these interactive tools were used to study the features in all the data
sets to see their similarities or differences as the case may be.

Structural Mapping

The first stage of the structural mapping was to distinguish which of the high frequency
components of the data derived from the first vertical derivative are due to
surface/subsurface geology or due to cultural noise from the surrounding settlements. This
was carried out with the aid of Landsat ETM image and the SRTM data of the study area.
The Landsat imagery was passed through edge enhancement image processing method
using the ILWIS (Integrated Land and Water information Systems) software so as to sharpen
the surface geological features and give a good contrast between the settlements which
appear as cyan colour and the surrounding pixels due to vegetation or water. The
settlements which became more pronounced were carefully mapped out, digitized and

117
exported as a shape file . These settlements were imported into ArcMap and then overlain
on the 1st vertical derivative map of the study area made it possible to know the signals that
are cultural noise due to settlements and those that are due to geologic bodies . The VDR
map was also overlain on the geological map of the study area and it was observed that the
anomalies observed on the extreme top left of the study area are due to the granite gneiss
and metasediments that are shallow and in some places exposed as surface outcrops on the
North-Western part of the study area.

The ArcMap is powerful GIS tool that that can be used to integrate different data sets that
have the same spatial reference to extract information that may be are common or different
among the various data sets. The SRTM data is a digital elevation model which is used to
study the terrain of the study area. The relief of the area can give us an impression of the
surface geology. The Landsat imagery also shows the geomorphology of the surface.
Integrating all the data sets including the derivatives made mapping the structures easier
than looking at the data sets separately.

The second stage of structural mapping involved mapping out magnetic lineaments that
could be due to any of the following-

-the contacts between two rock types of contrasting magnetic susceptibility

- Edges of structures that could be faults or intrusives within the sediments

To achieve this, all the various data sets were displayed in ArcMap and by studying one layer
at a time and comparing with other layers in the GIS environment. The geological map was
useful because it showed the location where the basement occurs as surface exposure. The
SRTM data was able to show the outline of surface geological features such as dikes which
was also evident on the Landsat data. One of the advantages of working in a GIS
environment using several data sets is the opportunity to examine features that are spatially
referenced. A feature that is less pronounced in one data set can be more pronounced in
another data set and this can be better studied in a GIS environment. For example, the NE-
SW trending structures on the north-western tip of the study area are more pronounced in
the total horizontal derivative and the tilt derivative.

118
To start digitizing the magnetic lineaments, a shapefile was created in ArcCatalog and it was
set to the same coordinate and spatial reference as the other data sets. The digitizing tool
was then used to map out the magnetic lineaments observed from the various derivatives.

Depth to Basement Inversion from Magnetic data

Tilt-depth Method

This method is based on the concept by Salem et al (2007,2008) who showed that the tilt
angle or local phase can be used to estimate the depth to the top of a magnetic body using
the contours of the tilt angle map of the TMI data and is based on the assumption that the
magnetic contacts are vertical and the magnetization is without any remnant magnetization.
The concept of tilt-angle was first shown by Miller and Singh (1994) and has been further
improved by Verduzco et al (2004) and GETECH who defined it as-

𝜕𝑀

𝜃 = 𝐴𝑇𝐴𝑁 [ 𝜕𝑧⁄𝜕𝑀]
𝜕ℎ
(1)

where

𝜕𝑀 𝜕𝑀 2 𝜕𝑀 2
= √( ) + ( 𝜕𝑦 )
𝜕ℎ 𝜕𝑥

and

𝜕𝑀 𝜕𝑀 𝜕𝑀
, 𝑎𝑛𝑑
𝜕𝑥 𝜕𝑦 𝜕𝑧

are derivatives of the magnetic field M in the x, y and z directions of the first order.

The ARCTAN component of the expression confines and normalises the amplitude of the tilt
to values between −1.57 and +1.57 irrespective of the absolute value of the THDR or the
VDR. As seen from the tilt map of the Anambra basin, the tilt-angle was able to delineate
sources with maxima over the source.

119
Salem et al (2007) showed that when the source is a simple nearly vertical contact and the
magnetic field has been reduced to the pole, equation (1) can be represented as,

ℎ
𝜃= 𝑡𝑎𝑛−1 [𝑍 ]
𝑐

Where h is a measure of the distance in the x direction from the horizontal point of the
source and z is the vertical distance from the surface to the top of the source. It shows that
the location of the contact is at the position where the tilt is 0𝑜 i.e. h= 0 and h=z when the
tilt value is 450 and h=-z when the tilt is −450 . The depth solutions are derived from the
distance between the specified contours. Salem et al (2007) applied this method to
magnetic data from Australia and estimates of depth are similar to those from data from
areas of basement and sedimentary basins that are shallow. This method was also applied
on the RTP and 2km upward continued grid of the Anambra basin using the
ASKS_SUS_TILT.gx in geosoft’s oasis montaj . When the method was applied on the TMI, the
output showed the effect of noise in the data which makes it necessary to upward continue
the data 2km to reduce the effect of the noise. The computation requires a color angle
which is the angle over which the tilt-depth is computed. Several angles for color angle was
used (see Appendix D) but a color angle of 22 degrees was used and found to be optimum
for the tilt-depth computation to ensure minimum interference from adjacent tilt contours.
The depth solutions were adjusted by adding the 2km that was used for the upward
continuation and exported as a shapefile to ArcGIS where it was plotted.

Gravity and Magnetic Profile Modelling

This part of the study involves creating profiles across the study area from which geologic
models of the earth are created based on the response from the gravity and magnetic data.
The models were created using Geosoft’s GM-SYS programme which is based on the
methods by Talwani et al.,( 1959) and Talwani and Heirtzler, (1964). To start the process,
two profiles were created across the data in ArcGIS. The major structural trend in the Benue
trough is NE-SW so the profiles were drawn perpendicular to the structures. Profile 1 was
selected to cut across the edge of the exposed metamorphic basement in the north-western
tip of the study area while Profile 2 was selected to cut across the main area of interest.
Available Gravity data in the study area is sparse so it was ensured that the profiles cut
across a good number of the gravity stations.

120
The coordinates along each profile were extracted and exported to Geosoft where a
database was created with channels of the TMI, DEM, Bouguer and magnetic elevation from
which the profiles were created .

Two models based on the two profiles were created in GYM-SYS and the several parameters
necessary for creating the models such as the TMI, magnetic elevation, gravity channel,
gravity elevation channel and topography were supplied. The new models were opened in
GYM-SYS after supplying the information for the Earth’s magnetic field for the Anambra
basin derived from the IGRF11 model from the NOAA (National Geophysical data Centre)
website-

Magnitude, H = 32,460 nT ,Inclination, FI = -11.595 degrees, Declination, FD = -2.097

degrees. The model was divided into the following blocks-

-Sediments (density = 2.3 gm/cc) between 0 and 7000m

-Basement (density= 2.7 gm/cc) between 7000m and 15000m

-Lower continental ( density = 2.9 gm/cc) between 15000m and 31000m

-Upper mantle (density = 3.3 gm/cc) between 31000m and 50000m

The value of 2.3 gm/cc for the sediments and 2.7 gm/cc for the basement was selected
because the densities of most of the sediments in the Benue Trough range from 2.2-2.65
gm/cc while the metamorphic basement have a density of 2.48 gm/cc (Adighije, 1981).

The geometry of the model was adjusted using the depth estimates from the Euler, tilt-
depth, SPI and local wavenumber as control while observing the gravity and magnetic
response until a reasonable fit between the observed and calculated data for the gravity
and magnetic data was achieved. The magnetic susceptibilities for the various blocks was
varied between 0 and 0.0006 cgs ( Dobrin and Savit, 1988). The modelling process was done
carefully over and over again until the best models for the two profiles were achieved
(figure 7.10).

121
Depth to Basement Map

A depth to basement map of the Anambra basin was produced from the depth estimates
that were derived from the tilt-depth method combined with the surfaces exported from
the two models and the structures extracted from the structural mapping using the
magnetic and gravity derivatives.

A shapefile was created and using the editor tool, polylines were drawn beside and within
the structures and were given depth values based on geologically reasonable depths from
the various depth estimate methods constrained by the depths from the surfaces derived
from the two geologic models . It was ensured that polylines were drawn around most of
the structures with appropriate depths given to them without any overlaps.

The polylines were then converted to points using the ET Geowizard in ArcGIS and stored as
a point data set which contains all the attributes of the polyline. The points were then
interpolated using the Spatial Analyst extension that performed a spline with barriers on the
point data using a minimum curvature spline method. The barriers in this case are the
basement faults represented as polyline features. The interpolated output was exported to
Geosoft Oasis Montaj where it was displayed as database table and gridded using the
minimum curvature method to produce the depth to basement map of the study area. The
depth to basement map

Results

Analysis of the RTE and RTP data

The results from the reduced to the equator (RTE) operation did not have any significant
effect on the data because most of the structures were still observed to be in west-east
direction which is contrary to the general trend of structures in the Benue trough which is
the northeast- southwest direction (figure 7.3). The output from the reduced to the pole
operation (RTP) preserved the northeast-southwest structures that are typical of the Benue
trough. The structures on the north-western part of the study area are also better preserved
in the RTP than in the RTE.

122
 1030 nT
1030 nT

-450 nT
-450 nT

(a) (b)

Figure 7.3: Grid showing the output of a RTP (a) and RTE (b) from the TMI data

Analysis of results of Regional-Residual separation

The result from the regional-residual separation is shown in figure 7.4. The RTP appears to
be more stable after the regional-residual separation because it preserved the NE-SW
structures which are typical of the basin as seen in some of the dykes seen on the Landsat
imagery of the study area.

123
Figure 7.4: Regional-Residual separation of (left) RTP grid and (right) RTE grid of the magnetic data

Analysis of the results of the Total horizontal derivative

THDR is a powerful method because it brings out the edges of the structures and they
appear like rail lines. The output shows the NE-SW, N-S and W-E structures in the RTP data
clearly defined (figure 7.5).

Figure 7.5: Total horizontal derivative of the (a) RTP field and (b) RTE magnetic data.

124
Analysis of the results of the Qualitative interpretation

The magnetic anomalies observed in the study area trend in three main directions, the NE-
SW, E-W, N-S but the NE-SW trends are more dominant. The Anomalies within the
sedimentary part of the study have an average width of about 6km and less than 2km within
the North-Western part of the study area where the basement rocks are shallow or occur as
surface exposures. The anomalies could be due to intrusive within the sediments or due to
structures within the basement. A careful examination of the RTP and RTE maps showed
that the RTP is more stable because it preserved the NE-SW structural trend that is typical of
the structures in the Benue Trough (Ofoegbu, 1985).For example, on the North-western part
of the study area, a dike that may be dolerite was mapped on the satellite imagery and it
has the same orientation with the magnetic lineaments that are about 1km away from the
dike (figure 7.6 ).

Figure 7.6: The image on the left is the RTP grid which shows lineament directions in NE-SW direction similar to
the strike of the dike in the Landsat imagery (right).

Results of the structural mapping in ArcGIS

The total horizontal derivative made it easier to map the edges of the structures because
they appear like rail lines. The total horizontal derivative is a powerful method that brings
out linear anomalies where the faults are. The basement faults mapped out from the total
horizontal derivative are shown in figure 7.7.

125
Figure 7.7: Basement faults derived from the total horizontal derivative of the RTP magnetics

Some of the Faults that

controlled the formation of the
Enugu escarpment

540m

3m

Figure 7.8: SRTM data of the study area showing some of the faults that controlled the formation of the Enugu
Escarpment.

126
There is a prominent escarpment known as the Enugu escarpment that runs for several
kilometres in a north-west direction from Enugu to Orlu on the western part of the study
area which is visible on the SRTM data (figure 7.8). The NE-SW and NS faults interpreted
from this study follow the trend of the escarpment which suggests that the escarpment was
controlled by these faults.

Results from depth to basement inversion of magnetic data

The depth solutions from the tilt-depth method gave reasonable estimates and correlates
well with the geology especially in the north-western part where the basement is shallow
and in some places exposed on the surface (figure 7.9).

Figure 7.9: Depth estimates using the Tilt-depth method using a color angle of 22 degrees

Results of 2D Gravity and Magnetic Profile Modelling

The model from Profile 1 (Figure 7.10) shows series of small horst and graben structures
that correlates with the observed magnetic anomalies. On the north-western end of the
magnetic profiles, the series of anomalies correlates with the fault blocks observed in the
model. These faults are mainly within the shallow basement and metasedimentary rocks in

127
that part of the study area. The sediment thickness varies from about 500m to 6000m with
the deepest part in the Nsukka area. The horst block that is between a distance of about
44000m and 63000m along the profile corresponds with gravity high northwest of Nsukka
and has a sediment cover of about 4000m. Correlating the structures with the gravity data
was limited because the gravity data available did not cover most parts of the study data
and most of parts of the gravity data are from interpolation of the original data. The model
indicates an upwelling of the mantle and thinning of the crust to a distance of about 3km.
The numerous faults observed on the left side of the model are located near the contact
between the sediments and the basement rocks exposed on the surface.

Figure 7.10: Models derived from 2 profiles across the study area

The model from profile 2 also shows some faulting that gave rise to horst and graben
structures but with less intensity as seen in profile 1. It shows that the deepest parts are
north of Onitsha across the River Niger and North of Awka with a sedimentary cover of

128
about 7000m. The horsts blocks observed in the model correlates with the anomalies
observed in the profile. The blocks also correlate well with the gravity highs in places where
there were good data coverage.

Depth to Basement Map

A depth to basement map of the Anambra basin was produced from the depth estimates
that were derived from the tilt-depth method combined with the surfaces exported from
the two models and the structures extracted from the structural mapping using the
magnetic and gravity derivatives. The depth to basement map was displayed in ArcMap and
the faults overlaid on it (figure 7.11).

Figure 7.11: Depth to Basement Map structure map of the Anambra Basin

129
Finally, the faults derived from this study were overlain on the geological map of the study area (
figure 7.12). For consistency, the surface from the profiles were extracted from the depth to
basement map and overlaid on the models and it was observed that there was good correlation.

Figure 7.12: Geological map of the Study Area showing the faults derived from the study.

Conclusions

The conclusions drawn from the interpretation of the high resolution magnetic data and
gravity data of the Anambra basin from this study are-

130
1. The reduced-to-the pole (RTP) transform is more stable than the reduced-to-the
equator (RTE) for the Anambra basin which is at low magnetic latitude.
2. Localised volcanics are present within the eastern part of the study area.
3. The basin contains series of normal faults in the N-E, NE-SW and E-W direction that
gave rise to a horst and graben structure within the basement.
4. The prominent Enugu escarpment is controlled by a set of N-E and NE-SW trending
faults.
5. The depth to basement map shows that sediment thickness varies between 1km and
7km with the deepest areas around Onitsha, Awka and Nsukka.
6. Sediment deposition on the faulted blocks observed in the basin may be responsible
for the folding observed in the sediments.
7. The presence of localised volcanic intrusions and normal faults that resulted in horst
and graben structure are typical of rift basins.

131
References

Akande S.O, & Erdtmann B.D., 1998, Burial metamorphism (thermal maturation) in
Cretaceous sediments of the southern Benue Trough and Anambra Basin, Nigeria. -
American Assoc. Petrol. Geologists Bull. 82(6): 1191-1206.

Argyle,M., Ferguson, S., Sander, L and Sander S 2000 AIRGrav results: a comparison of
airborne gravity data with GSC test site data. The Leading Edge Oct :1134 –1138.

Baranov, V., and Naudy, H., 1964, Numerical calculation of the formula of reduction to the
magnetic pole: Geophysics, 29, 67-79.

Blakely, R.J, 1986. Potential Theory in Gravity and Magnetic Applications. Cambridge
University Press, Sep 13, 1996 - Science - 464 pages

Cordell, I and Grauch V.J.S., 1985, Mapping basement magnetisation zones from
aeromagnetic data in the San Juan basin, New Mexico, in Hinze, W.J.,Ed., The utility of
regional gravity and magnetic anomaly maps: Soc. Expl. Geophys.,181-197.

Cordell, L., Zorin, Y. and Keller, G. (1991). The decompensative gravity anomaly and deep
structure of the region of the Rio Grande Rift. Journal of Geophysical Research 96(B4): doi:
10.1029/91JB00008. issn: 0148-0227

Dunlop, David J.; Özdemir, Özden (1997). Rock Magnetism: Fundamentals and
Frontiers. Cambridge Univ. Press. ISBN 0-521-32514-5.

Haalk, 1956. Geophy. Prosp Vol. 4 p424-441

Hansen, R. O., and Pawlowski, R. S., 1989, Reduction-to-the-pole at low latitudes by Wiener
filtering: Geophysics, 54, 1607–1613.

Harlan, 1968,Eotvos correction for airborne gravimetry J. Geophys. Res., 73: 4675-4679

132
Huang, H., 2008, Airborne geophysical data levelling based on line-to-line correlations:
Geophysics, 73, no. 3, F83–F89.

Fairhead, J D, Green, C M, and Odegard, M E 2001 Satellite derived gravity having an impact
on marine exploration. The Leading Edge (SEG publication ) Aug 2001 p873-876

Fairhead, J D., Green, C .M. and Fletcher, K.M.U, 2004. Screening of the deep continental
margins using non-seismic methods. First Break 22 : 59-63.

Gunn, P.J, 1975, Linear Transformations of Gravity and Magnetic Fields, Geophysical
Prospecting 23, 300-312.

Hunt, Christopher P.; Moskowitz, Bruce P. (1995), "Magnetic properties of rocks and
minerals", in Ahrens, T. J., Rock Physics and Phase Relations: A Handbook of Physical
Constants, 3, Washington, DC: American Geophysical Union, pp. 189–204

Jain S. 1988, Total magnetic field reduction-the pole or equator? A model study. Canadian
Journal of exploration geophysics. Vol. 24. No. 2. P 185-192.

Leu, L., 1982, Use of reduction-to-the-equator process for magnetic data interpretation:
Geophysics, 47, 445.

Lockwood, A. 2004. Isostatic and Decompensative Gravity Anomalies over Western

Australia. Geophysics in the surveys

Lucien J. B., 1973, Crosscorrelation method for evaluating and correcting shipboard gravity
data geophysics, vol. 38, no. 4 (august 1973), p. 701-709.

Macleod, I.N., Veira, S., Chaves, A.C., 1993, Analytical signal and reduction-to-the-pole in the
interpretation of total magnetic field data at low magnetic latitudes, Proceedings of the
third international congress of the Brazilian society of geophysicists.

133
Merrill, Ronald T.; McElhinny, Michael W.; McFadden, Phillip L. (1996). The Magnetic Field of
the Earth: Paleomagnetism, the Core, and the Deep Mantle. International Geophysics
Series. 63.Academic Press. ISBN 0-12-49125-1.

Miller H.G and Singh V., 1994, Potential field tilt- a new concept for location of potential
field sources. Journal of Applied Geophysics 32.213-217.

Milligan P.R and Gunn P.J 1997, Enhancement and presentation of airborne geophysical
data. AGSO Journal of Australian Geology & Geophysics, 17(2),63-75.

Nabighian M.N, 1972, The analytical signal of two-dimensional magnetic bodies with
polygonal cross-section: Its properties and use for automated anomaly interpretation.
GEOPHYSICS, VOL. 37, NO. 3 P. 507-517.

Ofoegbu C.O and Onuoh K.M., 1991, Analysis of magnetic data over the Abakaliki
Anticlinorium of the Lower Benue Trough, Nigeria. Marin and Petroleum Geology , Vol 8.

Onuoha, K.M., 2005., A closer look at the Petroleum Potentials of the Anambra Basin: Inputs
from Geophysics and Geohistory, Hydrocarbon Potentials of the Anambra Basin;
Proceedings of the First Seminar Organised by the Petroleum Technology Development
Fund (PTDF) Chair in Geology, University of Nigeria, Nsukka. Pp 47-82.

Onwuemesi, A.G., 1997, One-Dimensional Spectral Analysis of Aeromagnetic Anomalies and

Curie Depth Isotherm in the Anambra Basin of Nigeria, J. Geodyn. Vol. 23, No.2, pp. 95-107.

Packard and Varian (1954) Phy. Rev. 93 : 941

Paine, J.W., 1986, A comparison of methods for approximating the vertical gradient of one-
dimensional magnetic field data, Geophysics, 51 (9), 1725-1735.

Paterson and Reeves, 1985. Applications of gravity and magnetic surveys: the state of the
art in 1985 Geophysics 50:2885

134
Phillips J.D. 2000, Locating magnetic contacts: a comparison of the horizontal gradient,
analytic signal, and local wavenumber methods. SEG 2000 Expanded Abstracts.

Reeves C., 2005, Aeromagnetic Surveys: Principles, Practice & Interpretation. Publ. Geosoft

Reford, M. S., 1980. Magnetic method: Geophysics, 45, 164@1658.

Reid, A.B., Allsop, J.M., Granser, H., Millets, A.J., and Somerton I.W., 1990, Magnetic
interpretation in three dimensions using Euler deconvolution. GEOPHYSICS, vol. 55. No. 1, p.
80-91.

Roest W.R, Verhoef J., and Pilkington M. 1992, Magnetic interpretation using the 3-D
analytic signal. GEOPHYSICS, VOL. 57, NO. 1 .P. 116-125.

Sandwell, D. T. and Smith, W.H.F., 1997, Marine gravity anomaly from GeoSat and ERS 1
satellite altimetry. J. Geophys. Res., Vol. 102:10,039-10,054

Sheriff R.E and Geldart L.P, 1983, Vol 2 185- 194 Cambridge University Press.

Spector, A., and Grant, F.S., 1970, Statistical models for interpreting aeromagnetic data.
Geophysics, vol 35 pp 293-302.

Stacey, Frank D.; Banerjee, Subir K. (1974). The Physical Principles of Rock
Magnetism. Elsevier. ISBN 0-444-41084-8

Swain, C. J., 2000, Reduction-to-the-pole of regional magnetic data with variable field
direction, and its stabilisation at low inclinations, Exploration Geophysics, 31, 78-83.

135
Thompson, D.T., 1982, EULDPH-A new technique for making computer-assisted depth
estimates from magnetic data: Geophysics, 47. 31-37.

Thurston, J. B., and Smith R. S. , 1997, Automatic conversion of magnetic data to depth, dip,
susceptibility contrast using the SPI™ method: Geophysics, 62, 807–813.

Vaquier, et al. 1951 Interpretation of aeromagnetic maps. Geol. Soc. Am Memoir 47

Verduzco, B., Fairhead, J. D., Green, C. M. and MacKenzie, C. 2004, New insights into
magnetic derivatives for structural mapping: The Leading Edge, 23, 116–119.

136