Abstract

Summary We modeled the step 2.5D airborne electromagnetic (AEM) response of a typical prospecting system over a number of layered-earth models, each of which, contained a t opographic feature modeling a hill on which the slope varied from 5E to 45E.We found that the AEM response due to the hill was dependant upon flight direction, with secondary field components in the flight direction being more adversely affected than vertical components. In addition, we found that topographic responses persisted to very-late times, and suggest that this may lead to inaccurate interpretations of data if those interpretations are based upon imaging, or n-layered earth inversion techniques. We conclude that it is better to interpret data flown off, rather than onto topographic highs..

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call

Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.