mark jessell - next generation 3d modelling
DESCRIPTION
Developing better integration of geological constraints into 3D regional modelling Identify ways to carry geological meaning through the geophysical inversion processTRANSCRIPT
![Page 1: Mark Jessell - Next Generation 3D Modelling](https://reader033.vdocuments.us/reader033/viewer/2022052522/547e77a35906b5d8718b46a2/html5/thumbnails/1.jpg)
Mark JessellWA Fellow & Winthrop Professor
Laurent Aillères, Tom Carmichael, Monash UniEric de Kemp, Mike Hillier, Geol. Survey CanadaRoland Martin, CNRS, ToulouseMark Lindsay CET UWAStéphane Perrouty, Uni Toulouse
Next Generation 3D Modelling & Inversion
After Dante 1315
![Page 2: Mark Jessell - Next Generation 3D Modelling](https://reader033.vdocuments.us/reader033/viewer/2022052522/547e77a35906b5d8718b46a2/html5/thumbnails/2.jpg)
Aims of WA Fellowship Program
• Better integrate geological constraintsinto 3D regional modelling
• Carry geological meaning through the geophysical inversion process
![Page 3: Mark Jessell - Next Generation 3D Modelling](https://reader033.vdocuments.us/reader033/viewer/2022052522/547e77a35906b5d8718b46a2/html5/thumbnails/3.jpg)
3D Model(s) of AustraliaGautier Laurent et al 2013
ARC DP1096409 Betts, Aillères, Jessell & de Kemp
Active MinesExisting or planned 3D models
![Page 4: Mark Jessell - Next Generation 3D Modelling](https://reader033.vdocuments.us/reader033/viewer/2022052522/547e77a35906b5d8718b46a2/html5/thumbnails/4.jpg)
A good question
![Page 5: Mark Jessell - Next Generation 3D Modelling](https://reader033.vdocuments.us/reader033/viewer/2022052522/547e77a35906b5d8718b46a2/html5/thumbnails/5.jpg)
Sedimentary Basins
Mines Regional Lithosphere
3D Constraints
RICH (3D seismic, deep boreholes, gravity)
RICH (dense boreholes,magnetics, seismic, electromagnetics)
POOR (rare boreholes, surface outcrops, gravity, magnetics)
RICH(Teleseismic, seismic, gravity, MT)
Structural Complexity
SIMPLE(R) COMPLEX COMPLEX SIMPLE(R)
Dedicated Software
Gocad 1989, Geomodeller 1999…
MicroMine 1986,Leapfrog 2003...
Noddy 1981 Gocad 1989
3D geomodelling scenarios
![Page 6: Mark Jessell - Next Generation 3D Modelling](https://reader033.vdocuments.us/reader033/viewer/2022052522/547e77a35906b5d8718b46a2/html5/thumbnails/6.jpg)
Jessell, 1981
Knowledge Data Data + Knowledge Data + Knowledge + Uncertainty
Short history of 3D modelling
![Page 7: Mark Jessell - Next Generation 3D Modelling](https://reader033.vdocuments.us/reader033/viewer/2022052522/547e77a35906b5d8718b46a2/html5/thumbnails/7.jpg)
3D geology is an under-constrained problem
We do not have sufficient geological and/or geophysical data to define a unique 3D model
We should not restrict ourselves to a single 3D model
3D Modelling tools that require continualmanual intervention are a dead end
![Page 8: Mark Jessell - Next Generation 3D Modelling](https://reader033.vdocuments.us/reader033/viewer/2022052522/547e77a35906b5d8718b46a2/html5/thumbnails/8.jpg)
Ashanti Belt
3.6 - 2.5 Ga
2.3 - 2.0 Ga
after Milési et al., 2004, BRGM SIGAfrique
Gold deposits
Orogenic
Placer
______10 km
Perrouty et al., submittedEcon Geol 2013
West African Craton
3D Prospectivity Analysis
![Page 9: Mark Jessell - Next Generation 3D Modelling](https://reader033.vdocuments.us/reader033/viewer/2022052522/547e77a35906b5d8718b46a2/html5/thumbnails/9.jpg)
Tarkwa Basin
Kumasi Basin Akyem
BasinVolume : 160*160*15 kmResolution : 200 m
Model (after inversion)
0 (m)
-14000
Depth(Faults)
3D Prospectivity Analysis
Perrouty et al., submittedEcon Geol 2013
![Page 10: Mark Jessell - Next Generation 3D Modelling](https://reader033.vdocuments.us/reader033/viewer/2022052522/547e77a35906b5d8718b46a2/html5/thumbnails/10.jpg)
BVC2BV1
BVC1
xy
- Measure the minimum distance between deposits andthe different Sefwi Group units
- Count the number of deposits found less than 1500 mfrom each unit
BVC2 BV1 BVC1
Distance 0 m x y
Fault or unconformity
3D Prospectivity Analysis
Number of deposits less than 1500m from each unit
Stra
tigra
phic
Dep
th(m
)
Perrouty et al., submittedEcon Geol 2013
![Page 11: Mark Jessell - Next Generation 3D Modelling](https://reader033.vdocuments.us/reader033/viewer/2022052522/547e77a35906b5d8718b46a2/html5/thumbnails/11.jpg)
Challenges
Better Inputs
Better use of geology duringmodelling & inversion
Better analysis of results of modelling
a) Trainingb) Structural analysisc) Geophysical imaging
![Page 12: Mark Jessell - Next Generation 3D Modelling](https://reader033.vdocuments.us/reader033/viewer/2022052522/547e77a35906b5d8718b46a2/html5/thumbnails/12.jpg)
a) Training:Structural Geophysics Course
![Page 13: Mark Jessell - Next Generation 3D Modelling](https://reader033.vdocuments.us/reader033/viewer/2022052522/547e77a35906b5d8718b46a2/html5/thumbnails/13.jpg)
κ’ Kent Distribution(measure of clustering)
b) Structural analysis:Intelligent upscaling
Tom Carmichael, Monash Uni
Limousin, France
![Page 14: Mark Jessell - Next Generation 3D Modelling](https://reader033.vdocuments.us/reader033/viewer/2022052522/547e77a35906b5d8718b46a2/html5/thumbnails/14.jpg)
c) Geophysical Imaging: Full Tensor Gravity
Daniel Wedge, CET (Data from First Quantum) →ARC Linkage
![Page 15: Mark Jessell - Next Generation 3D Modelling](https://reader033.vdocuments.us/reader033/viewer/2022052522/547e77a35906b5d8718b46a2/html5/thumbnails/15.jpg)
Challenges
Better Inputs
Better use of geology duringmodelling & inversion
Better analysis of results of modelling
a) Better use of field datab) Geologically Appropriate interpolation schemesc) Integrated Inversion
![Page 16: Mark Jessell - Next Generation 3D Modelling](https://reader033.vdocuments.us/reader033/viewer/2022052522/547e77a35906b5d8718b46a2/html5/thumbnails/16.jpg)
a) Better use of field data Alsop et al., 1996(Near Moine Thrust)
![Page 17: Mark Jessell - Next Generation 3D Modelling](https://reader033.vdocuments.us/reader033/viewer/2022052522/547e77a35906b5d8718b46a2/html5/thumbnails/17.jpg)
Structural Interpolation
Geology 101
?
?GeomodellerSKUALeapfrog
Jessell, Aillères, de Kemp & 1000Structural geologists
![Page 18: Mark Jessell - Next Generation 3D Modelling](https://reader033.vdocuments.us/reader033/viewer/2022052522/547e77a35906b5d8718b46a2/html5/thumbnails/18.jpg)
a
b
bedding
d
c
?
Geology 201
Bedding Only
![Page 19: Mark Jessell - Next Generation 3D Modelling](https://reader033.vdocuments.us/reader033/viewer/2022052522/547e77a35906b5d8718b46a2/html5/thumbnails/19.jpg)
a
b
d
c
F1F2
Need vergence of minorfolds or Sn/Sn+1 to constrain fold model
F1
bedding
S2 cleavage
Geology 201
Bedding-CleavageRelationships with Relative Timing
S1 cleavage
![Page 20: Mark Jessell - Next Generation 3D Modelling](https://reader033.vdocuments.us/reader033/viewer/2022052522/547e77a35906b5d8718b46a2/html5/thumbnails/20.jpg)
Multiquadric RBF (stratigraphy, faults?)
Michael Hillier (Geol Survey Canada)
Same input data:
Geologically Appropriate
interpolation schemes
Geology 501
RBF=Radial Basis Function
![Page 21: Mark Jessell - Next Generation 3D Modelling](https://reader033.vdocuments.us/reader033/viewer/2022052522/547e77a35906b5d8718b46a2/html5/thumbnails/21.jpg)
Geologically Appropriate
interpolation schemes
Gaussian RBF (salt domes?)
Michael Hillier (Geol Survey Canada)
Same input data:
Geology 501
RBF=Radial Basis Function
![Page 22: Mark Jessell - Next Generation 3D Modelling](https://reader033.vdocuments.us/reader033/viewer/2022052522/547e77a35906b5d8718b46a2/html5/thumbnails/22.jpg)
Thin plate spline RBF (folds?)
Michael Hillier (Geol Survey Canada)
Same input data:
Geologically Appropriate
interpolation schemes
Geology 501
RBF=Radial Basis Function
![Page 23: Mark Jessell - Next Generation 3D Modelling](https://reader033.vdocuments.us/reader033/viewer/2022052522/547e77a35906b5d8718b46a2/html5/thumbnails/23.jpg)
Doesn’t explaingeophysical signal
c) Integrated Inversion • Structures• Age Relationships• Petrology• Geophysics• Petrophysics• Prior Knowledge•••
Petrophysics
• Need inversion schemes thatretain geological meaningthrough the inversion process
• So we can test the resultsagainst the original geologicalAND geophysical data
• Currently working on speedingup inversion so that in the future we can include bettergeological constraints
![Page 24: Mark Jessell - Next Generation 3D Modelling](https://reader033.vdocuments.us/reader033/viewer/2022052522/547e77a35906b5d8718b46a2/html5/thumbnails/24.jpg)
Challenges
Better Inputs
Better use of geology duringmodelling & inversion
Better analysis of results of modelling
a) Uncertaintyb) Geodiversity
![Page 25: Mark Jessell - Next Generation 3D Modelling](https://reader033.vdocuments.us/reader033/viewer/2022052522/547e77a35906b5d8718b46a2/html5/thumbnails/25.jpg)
Vary inputs:• Orientations• Position• Age
relationships
Original Inputs
Perturbed Inputs 1
Perturbed Inputs 2
Perturbed Inputs 3
Perturbed Inputs 4
Perturbed Inputs N
•••
Implicit Modelling
Engine
Wellman et al., 2010, 1011Jessell et al., 2010Lindsay et al., 2012,2013
a) Uncertainty & Simulation
![Page 26: Mark Jessell - Next Generation 3D Modelling](https://reader033.vdocuments.us/reader033/viewer/2022052522/547e77a35906b5d8718b46a2/html5/thumbnails/26.jpg)
Stratigraphic Variability = number of possible lithologies
Lindsay et al., 2012
• Where do we need to collect more data?
• Use variability to weight petrophysical inversions
1 Lithologies per voxel 6
![Page 27: Mark Jessell - Next Generation 3D Modelling](https://reader033.vdocuments.us/reader033/viewer/2022052522/547e77a35906b5d8718b46a2/html5/thumbnails/27.jpg)
0
0
0.40.30.2
0.4
-0.1-0.2-0.3-0.4
-0.3
-0.4
-0.2
-0.1
0.1
0.3
0.2
0.1
0.5
-0.5
0.5-0.5
b) Geodiversity via Principal component analysis
Original Model: 11th closest to
barycentre
Studying variation between plausible models
• Initial model NOT the most representative model
• Use diverse range of models to seed geophysical inversions
Gippsland Basin model suite
Lindsay et al., 2013
Based on multiple geologicalattributes: unit volume, unit depth, surface complexity, geophysical misfit…
Principal Component 1
Prin
cipa
l Com
pone
nt 2
![Page 28: Mark Jessell - Next Generation 3D Modelling](https://reader033.vdocuments.us/reader033/viewer/2022052522/547e77a35906b5d8718b46a2/html5/thumbnails/28.jpg)
Better Inputsa) Trainingb) Structural analysisc) Geophysical imaging
Better use of geology during modelling & inversiona) Better use of field datab) Geologically Appropriate interpolation schemesc) Integrated Inversion
Better analysis of results of modellinga) Uncertaintyb) Geodiversity
3D Modelling Challenges
![Page 29: Mark Jessell - Next Generation 3D Modelling](https://reader033.vdocuments.us/reader033/viewer/2022052522/547e77a35906b5d8718b46a2/html5/thumbnails/29.jpg)
ARC Linkage Submitted: Reducing 3D uncertainty via improved data interpretation methodsMark Jessell, Eun-Jung Holden, Mark Lindsay, Klaus Gessner, Jon Hronsky
ARC Centre of Excellence Submitted: Computational Geoscience and Earth ModellingMultiscale Analysis & Modelling
Western Australian Fellowship: WA_In3DMark Jessell
![Page 30: Mark Jessell - Next Generation 3D Modelling](https://reader033.vdocuments.us/reader033/viewer/2022052522/547e77a35906b5d8718b46a2/html5/thumbnails/30.jpg)
The problem that emerges when a model of a phenomenon is just as hard to understand as the phenomenon that it is supposed to explain.
Everything simple is false, everything complex is unusable
Paul Valéry, 1937
Bonini’s Paradox
The challenge we have set ourselves is to make our models (and modelling systems) less false, without becoming unuseable
![Page 31: Mark Jessell - Next Generation 3D Modelling](https://reader033.vdocuments.us/reader033/viewer/2022052522/547e77a35906b5d8718b46a2/html5/thumbnails/31.jpg)