插值切割位场分离方法改进及其在资料处理中的应用

doi:10.11720/wtyht.2020.0078

Abstract
Figure/Table
References
Related Citation (15)

Download: PDF (5005 KB) HTML (0 KB)
Export: BibTeX | EndNote (RIS)

Abstract

Anomaly separation has always been the focus of gravity and magnetic data processing. Interpolation cutting is a spatial potential field data separation method, which has different effects on different nonlinear parts of the gravity and magnetic anomalies, so as to improve the resolution of different feature anomalies. It can be applied to denoising, anomaly separation and 3D imaging. In this paper, based on the problems encountered in the process of model and actual data processing, the interpolation algorithm is improved, and the effects before and after the improvement are compared. The improved interpolation cutting method was used to process the gravity and magnetic data of a certain exploration area in western China. Good results were obtained in the extraction of deep gravity anomalies and the three-dimensional imaging of igneous rocks.

Key words： anomaly separation gravity and magnetic prospecting 3D imaging nonlinear filtering denoising

Received: 20 February 2020 Published: 28 August 2020

P631

	Service

	E-mail this article
	Add to my bookshelf
	Add to citation manager
	E-mail Alert
	RSS
	Articles by authors
	Wen-Ju ZHAO
	Li ZHAO
	Zhan-Jun YANG
	De-Qiang TAO

Cite this article:

Wen-Ju ZHAO,Li ZHAO,Zhan-Jun YANG, et al. The improvement of the interpolation cutting potential field separation method and its application to data processing[J]. Geophysical and Geochemical Exploration, 2020, 44(4): 886-893.

URL:

https://www.wutanyuhuatan.com/EN/10.11720/wtyht.2020.0078 OR https://www.wutanyuhuatan.com/EN/Y2020/V44/I4/886

Interpolating cut method

Theoretical local, regional and superimposed magnetic anomalies
a—theoretical local magnetic anomaly;b—theoretical regional magnetic anomaly;c—theoretical superposition magnetic anomaly

Effect comparison of different separation methods for theoretical data
a—theoretical regional field (upper) and local field (lower);b—the regional field (upper) and local field (lower) separated by interpotation cutting;c—continue upward to separate the regional field (upper) and local (lower);d—regional field (upper) and partial (lower) separated by trend analysis

Effect comparison of different separation methods for measured data
a—abnormal magnetic polarization of a certain region;b—regional field (upper) and local field (lower) separated by interpolation cutting;c—regional field (upper) and local field (lower) separated by upward extension;d—trend analysis separate regional field (upper) and local field (lower)

Different magnetic superposition models of deep and shallow sources

Magnetic anomaly generated by superposition model

Comparison of effect before and after the regional field is smooth
a—smooth front regional field (upper) and local field (lower);b—smooth posterior regional field (upper) and local field (lower)

Eight-position interpolation cutting method

Comparison of cutting effect between four and eight positions
a—regional field (upper) and local field (lower) cut by the square;b—regional field (upper) and local field (lower) cut by octagonal position

Comparison before and after denoising with any real radius filtering
a—superposition magnetic anomaly with added noise;b—magnetic anomaly after 1 radius of point distance filtering;c—magnetic anomaly after 0.5 times of point distance radius filtering

Local gravity anomalies at different depths separated by interpolation cutting are compared with seismic structures
a—bouguer gravity anomaly; b—gravity anomaly at depths of 200~600 m; c—gravity anomaly at depths of 600~1 000 m; d—gravity anomaly at depths of 1 000~1 400 m; e—gravity anomaly at depths of 1 400~1 800 m; f—gravity anomaly at depths of 1 800~2 200 m; g—gravity anomaly at depths of 2 200~2 600 m

Schematic location of study area

RTP magnetic anomaly

Three-dimensional magnetic imaging effect of interpolation cutting

[1]	Gijs C F, Christian F W H. Fast structural interpretation with structure-oriented filtering[J]. Geophysics, 2003,68(4):1286-1293.
[2]	Pawlowski R S, Hansen R O. Gravity anomaly separation by Wiener filtering[J]. Geophysics, 1990,55(5):539-549.
[3]	张凤旭, 张凤琴, 刘财, 等. 基于余弦变换的匹配滤波方法分离重磁异常[J]. 石油地球物理勘探, 2006,41(2):216-220,225.
[3]	Zhang F X, Zhang F Q, Liu C, et al. Using matched filtering method based on cosine transform to separate gravitational and magnetic a-nomaly[J]. OGP, 2006,41(2):216-220,225.
[4]	刘青松, 王宝仁. 应用多次匹配滤波技术进行垂向位场分离[J]. 物探化探计算技术, 1996,18(4):279-286.
[4]	Liu Q S, Wang B R. Vertical separation of potential field by using multiple matched Filter[J]. Computing Techniques for Geophysical and Geochemical Exploration, 1996,18(4):279-286.
[5]	陈励, 张华. 最佳空间线性预测的小波实现方法及应用[J]. 云南师范大学学报, 2001,21(3):1-4.
[5]	Chen L, Zhang H. Wavelets analysis on Kriging spatial pridiction[J]. Journal of Yunnan Normal University, 2001,21(3):1-4.
[6]	李健, 周云轩, 许惠平. 重力场数据处理中小波母函数的选择[J]. 物探与化探, 2001,25(6):410-417.
[6]	LI J, Zhou Y X, Xu H P. The selection of wavelet generating functions in data-processing of gravity field[J]. Geophysical and Geochemical Exploration, 2001,25(6):410-417.
[7]	管志宁, 安玉林. 区域磁异常定量解释[M]. 北京: 地质出版社, 1991.
[7]	Guan Z N, An Y L. Quantitative interpretation of regional magnetic anomalies[M]. Beijing: Geological Press, 1991.
[8]	罗孝宽, 郭绍雍. 应用地球物理教程——重力磁法[M]. 北京: 地质出版社, 1991.
[8]	Luo X K, Guo S Y. Applied geophysical courses—gravity and magnetic method[M]. Beijing: Geological Press, 1991.
[9]	文百红, 程方道. 用于划分磁异常的新方法——插值切割法[J]. 中南矿冶学院学报, 1990,21(3):229-235.
[9]	Wen B H, Cheng F D. A new interpolating cut method for identifying regional and local fields of magnetic anomaly[J]. J.Cent. Southinst. Min. Metall, 1990,21(3):229-235.
[10]	文百红. 插值切割法在消除磁异常干扰中的应用[J]. 地质与勘探, 1991,27(2):40-45.
[10]	Wen B H. Application of the Interpolation cut method to disturbance elimination for magnetic anomalies[J]. Geology and Prospecting, 1991,27(2):40-45.
[11]	汪炳柱, 徐世浙, 刘保华, 等. 多次插值切割法分场的一个实例[J]. 石油地球物理勘探, 1997,32(3):431-438.
[11]	Wang B Z, Xu S Z, Liu B H, et al. An example of aeromagnetic anomaly separation using multi-interpolation division[J]. OGP, 1997,32(3):431-438.
[12]	段本春, 徐世浙, 阎汉杰, 等. 划分磁异常场的插值切割法在研究火成岩体分布中的应用[J]. 石油地球物理勘探, 1998,33(1):125-131.
[12]	Duan B C, Xu S Z, Yan H J, et al. Application of interpolation-cut method for magnetic anomaly division to igneous mass invertigation[J]. OGP, 1998,33(1):125-131.
[13]	徐世浙, 余海龙, 李海侠, 等. 基于位场分离与延拓的视密度反演[J]. 地球物理学报, 2009,52(6):1592-1598.
[13]	Xu S Z, Yu H L, Li H X, et al. The inversion of apparent density based on the separation and continuation of potential field[J]. Chinese J. Geophys., 2009,52(6):1592-1598.
[14]	徐世浙, 余海龙, 姚敬金, 等. 新疆色尔特能地区视密度和视磁性的反演[J]. 物探化探计算技术, 2007,29(s):12-16.
[14]	Xu S Z, Yu H L, Yao J J, et al. The inversion of apparent density and apparent susceptibility in the seerteneng area, Xinjiang[J]. Computing Techniques for Geophysical and Geochemical Exploration, 2007,29(s):12-16.
[15]	徐世浙, 曹洛华, 姚敬金. 重力异常三维反演——视密度成像方法技术的应用[J]. 物探与化探, 2007,31(1):25-28,37.
[15]	Xu S Z, Cao L H, Yao J J, et al. 3D Inversion of gravity anomaly: An application of the apparent density magery technology[J]. Geophysical and Geochemical Exploration, 2007,31(1):25-28, 37.
[16]	相丽娜, 赵强, 吴燕冈, 等. 利用插值切割法确定干热岩的中心埋深[J]. 工程地球物理学报, 2018,15(1):39-43.
[16]	Xiang L N, Zhao Q, Wu Y G, et al. Detarmination of the central buried depth of hot dry rocks by the interpolation-cut method[J]. Chinese Journal of Engineering Geophysics, 2018,15(1):39-43.
[17]	徐世浙, 张研, 文百红, 等. 切割法在陆东地区磁异常解释中的应用[J]. 石油物探, 2006,45(3):316-318.
[17]	Xu S Z, Zhang Y, Wen B H, et al. The application of cutting method to interpretation of magnetic anomaly in region of Ludong[J]. GPP, 2006,45(3):316-318.