|
|
|
| A COMPARISON BETWEEN V8 AND EH-4 SYSTEMS |
| WAN Han-ping1, CHENG Ji-xing1, ZHOU Yu-long2 |
1. Beijing Research Institude of Geology, CNNC Key Laboratory of Uranium Resource Exploration and Evaluation Technology, Beijing 100029, China;
2. No. 261 Geological Party, Nuclear Industry Geological Bureau of Jiangxi Province, Yingtan 335000, China |
|
|
|
|
Abstract Through a comparison of AMT measurement between EH-4 and V8, the authors analyzed original data and inversion results of these two sets of devices in the same area, and made a comparative study of the performance parameters and work efficiencies of these two sets of devices. The results show that both V8 and EH-4 can collect real reliable data, V8 can collect lower frequency signal than EH-4,whereas EH-4 can collect higher high-quality frequency signal than V8. In addition, the continuity of data collected by V8 is better than that of data collected by EH-4, the efficiency of V8 is higher than that of EH-4, but EH-4 has the advantage of lower cost.
|
|
Received: 06 January 2012
Published: 10 April 2013
|
|
|
|
|
|
| [1] |
WU Yan-Min, PENG Zheng-Hui, YUAN Yong-Hu, ZHU Jin-Xiang, LIU Chuang, GE Wei, LING Guo-Ping. An EMI array sensor based on differential reception[J]. Geophysical and Geochemical Exploration, 2022, 46(1): 214-220. |
| [2] |
PEI Xiao-Ming, FENG Guo-Rui, QI Ting-Ye. Physical simulation experiment for detecting water-filled goaf of coal mine under complex conditions bases on transient electromagnetic method[J]. Geophysical and Geochemical Exploration, 2021, 45(4): 1055-1063. |
|
|
|
|
