mini res

18
Mini Res by Rob Turner, Bridget Bliss, Scott Briscoe

Upload: yoshi-mcfarland

Post on 30-Dec-2015

21 views

Category:

Documents


0 download

DESCRIPTION

Mini Res. by Rob Turner, Bridget Bliss, Scott Briscoe. Outline. Methods Locations Characteristic curves Cumulative resistivity inversion Typical fault signature Results. Methods. 2 Primary methods Schlumberger Wenner - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

TRANSCRIPT

Page 1: Mini Res

Mini Res

byRob Turner, Bridget Bliss, Scott Briscoe

Page 2: Mini Res

Outline

• Methods

• Locations

• Characteristic curves

• Cumulative resistivity inversion

• Typical fault signature

• Results

Page 3: Mini Res

Methods

• 2 Primary methods• Schlumberger• Wenner • Differences- Schlumberger you only have to

move the voltmeter electrodes as opposed to moving all 4. The Wenner method is the most time consuming but yields the best data. In this method you move all 4 posts.

• We used the Wenner method.

Page 4: Mini Res

Fernley Locations

Page 5: Mini Res

Hazen Location

Page 6: Mini Res

Wenner Method

Page 7: Mini Res

Characteristic curves

• We created characteristic curves for the Hazen area and the Fernley area.

• The curves can be matched to the Schlumberger two-layer type curves to determine the relative resistivity of the lower layers compared to the upper layers.

Page 8: Mini Res

Fernley Characteristic Curves

Page 9: Mini Res

Hazen Characteristic Curves

Page 10: Mini Res

Schlumberger Two-layer Type Curves

Page 11: Mini Res

Fernley Inversion

Page 12: Mini Res

Hazen Inversion

Page 13: Mini Res

Typical fault signatureGouge Zone

Strike slip fault

Page 14: Mini Res

Fernley EM Profile 1 Data vs. Elevation

4100

4200

4300

4400

4500

4600

4700

4800

4900

4,380,800 4,381,300 4,381,800 4,382,300 4,382,800 4,383,300

Northing

Fee

t

0

50

100

150

200

250

300

Ap

par

ent

Res

isti

vity

(o

hm

-m)

Elevation

EM

Page 15: Mini Res

Fernley EM Profile 2 Data vs. Elevation

4100

4200

4300

4400

4500

4600

4700

4800

4380500 4381000 4381500 4382000 4382500 4383000

Northing

Ele

vati

on

0

50

100

150

200

250

Ap

par

ent

Res

isti

vity

(o

hm

-m)

Elevation

EM

Page 16: Mini Res

Hazen Flats EM vs. Elevation

4040

4060

4080

4100

4120

4140

4160

4180

4200

4220

4240

4260

4375500 4376000 4376500 4377000 4377500 4378000 4378500 4379000 4379500

Northing

feet

0

50

100

150

200

250

300

350

400

450

Ap

par

ent

Res

isti

vity

(o

hm

-m)

Elevation

EM

Page 17: Mini Res

Results

• Apparent resistivities obtained in this study are indicative of clays (1-100 ohm-m) or sands (1-1000 ohm-m)

• The Fernley data are more indicative of sands

• The Hazen data are more indicative of clays

• Anomalies may indicate groundwater, sedimentary structures or disturbed zones

Page 18: Mini Res

Conclusions

• The data do not conclusively prove or disprove the presence of a fault

• Data integration is the key to accurately analyzing this data