Sad to hear that the Kaiserstuhl measurements didn't produced the anticipated results. :/ Was at terratec when the seismometers were installed and a few larger than usual earthquakes during that time sparked hopes of decent measurements.
Do you have a comparison between magnetotelluric resistivity models as well as 3D inversion magnetic models in areas with high resistivity and magnetic susceptibility contrast similar to that you conducted to map the gabbro intrusion contact with metamorphic rocks. I think that the AMT and or CSAMT methods are more appropriate to map such structures controlling location of ore mineralization. May be the passive seismic method can be applied in areas with lots of high power lines that prevent using the AMT and CSAMT methods.
Would the sensitivity and resolution of these techniques be suitable for archaeology? That requires cheap, high resolution of very restricted areas (compared to geological searches), mostly under 1km square, down to a few hectares. It's only needed to map a limited depth, usually a few metres. Discrimination doesn't have to more sophisticated than different kinds of soil and building foundations.
I think you might struggle. To get an idea out of what you're dealing with, look at the tomographic image at 12:18. If you're looking at only the first 5 m, you will basically be getting a tiny slice of data of value which is equivalent to the top of the grid up to ~5 m or so. If you were to slice that and look horizontally, I am not sure if you could get anything valuable as the horizontal resolution of the grid is also quite coarse. I think you'd be better off with something like GPR, but access might not allow that.
@@parrotraiser6541 Yeah you have to realise that the frequency range of the data you're dealing with is only really ~15-100 Hz maybe (and more so in the 50 Hz range). With velocities in the shallow typically in the ~500-2500 m/s range your resolution being in the wavelength / 4 range puts your resolution in the ~10 m range in each dimension approximately.
Sad to hear that the Kaiserstuhl measurements didn't produced the anticipated results. :/
Was at terratec when the seismometers were installed and a few larger than usual earthquakes during that time sparked hopes of decent measurements.
Thanks for the presentation. The technique is novel and cost-effective.
Audio quality varies between very clear and inaudibly muffled.
Do you have a comparison between magnetotelluric resistivity models as well as 3D inversion magnetic models in areas with high resistivity and magnetic susceptibility contrast similar to that you conducted to map the gabbro intrusion contact with metamorphic rocks. I think that the AMT and or CSAMT methods are more appropriate to map such structures controlling location of ore mineralization. May be the passive seismic method can be applied in areas with lots of high power lines that prevent using the AMT and CSAMT methods.
Thank you for this interesting subject.
Passive Seismic imaging earthquake data based Exploration techniques for Extractive industries Geoscience
Would the sensitivity and resolution of these techniques be suitable for archaeology?
That requires cheap, high resolution of very restricted areas (compared to geological searches), mostly under 1km square, down to a few hectares. It's only needed to map a limited depth, usually a few metres. Discrimination doesn't have to more sophisticated than different kinds of soil and building foundations.
I think you might struggle. To get an idea out of what you're dealing with, look at the tomographic image at 12:18. If you're looking at only the first 5 m, you will basically be getting a tiny slice of data of value which is equivalent to the top of the grid up to ~5 m or so. If you were to slice that and look horizontally, I am not sure if you could get anything valuable as the horizontal resolution of the grid is also quite coarse.
I think you'd be better off with something like GPR, but access might not allow that.
@@yedrellow I think other replies have also suggested that the resolution would be too coarse to be useful.
@@parrotraiser6541 Yeah you have to realise that the frequency range of the data you're dealing with is only really ~15-100 Hz maybe (and more so in the 50 Hz range). With velocities in the shallow typically in the ~500-2500 m/s range your resolution being in the wavelength / 4 range puts your resolution in the ~10 m range in each dimension approximately.