Prof Ravat,
Thank you for having my issue in mind.
Thank you
Solomon
On 18 Jun 2015 20:29, "Dhananjay Ravat &lt;[email protected]&gt;" <
[email protected]> wrote:

> See references in Salem et al. (2014, Tectonophysics).
>
> See Bansal et al. (2011? Geophysics) on how to use fractal model for
> computations.  They use small windows with the previously specified
> windows.  Also, if you use centroid method, you cannot determine fractal
> parameter of the “field", you have to assume one.  The higher the fractal
> parameter, the lower the obtained depth.
>
> See Bouligand et al. (2009, JGR) to see how one may construct a fractal
> model to test whether the method is working.  Bouligand et al. also have
> another parameter search method for fractal modeling, but once again the
> fractal parameter of  “magnetization” (in this case), must be assumed.  The
> minimum RMS between observed and modeled spectra depends generally
> underestimates the depth.
>
> Carol Finn of USGS is trying to get the Geosoft’s Curie depth/magnetic GX
> make available publicly (Claire Bouligand and I gave our previous programs
> for this).  She said you need to ask Dima at Geosoft and she will request
> the permission for making the module available on a case by case basis.
> (Both Dima and Carol are going to hate me for writing this in a reply on
> the listserver since this could mean added work for it - so if anyone
> doesn’t anticipate using this in the next year or so might want to wait.
> But I would presume the rest of you will love me for it. :-)
>
> These methods cannot determine fractal parameter. The only one that does
> is the Salem et al (2014, Tectonophysics).  My model studies show that
> windows need to be about 500 km unless the magnetic bottom is on the order
> of 10 km (in which case it could be lower, like 300 km).  There is a lot of
> spectral averaging involved in getting these estimates and one needs to
> “interpret” the estimates further in complex geological situations - many
> factors come into play).  It takes me almost an hour (sometimes more)  to
> be happy with a single estimate and one also needs the knowledge of
> regional geology and geophysics to make sense of it (or “interpret” the
> result).
>
> Long wavelength anomaly fidelity is also very important in all this, which
> means if one is processing data pre-2005 IGRF, you need to strip off IGRF
> and use the Comprehensive Model of the magnetic field (CM3, and CM4, Sabaka
> et al., 2002, 2004, GJI).  Removing degree 15 main field in the CM is very
> useful.
>
> If one is not willing to do all this (including model studies to
> understand the limitations), one should avoid this problem.
>
> Cheers,
>
> tiku
>
>
> On May 19, 2015, at 5:25 AM, solomonjanjaro <[email protected]>
> wrote:
>
> Dear all.
> Can anyone help me with the procedure and steps on how to use Fractal
> method to calculate curie surface using aeromagnetic data.
> Thank you.
> Solomon Nehemiah Yusuf
> PhD student (Mautech)
> On 19 May 2015 07:21, "solomonjanjaro &lt;[email protected]&gt;" <
> [email protected]> wrote:
>
>> Thank you for your contributions and also sharing from your wealth of
>> experience.  I think I will quickly revisit my window size and also follow
>> all these suggestions on this forum to achieve the desired result.
>> Grateful
>> Solomon Nehemiah Yusuf
>> PhD student
>> Mautech, Nigeria
>> On 19 May 2015 03:55, "Dhananjay Ravat &lt;[email protected]&gt;" <
>> [email protected]> wrote:
>>
>>> Thank you, Steve, for the paper recommendation   :-)
>>>
>>> Here are a couple of really important things, I think, to keep in mind.
>>>  (There are a lot more, but these are really really important, keeping the
>>> original question in mind.)
>>>
>>> One needs to use large windows (quite a bit larger than what people have
>>> been using - otherwise one ends up looking at “some” layer in the upper
>>> crust when the true Curie depth might be deeper.  My experience with a lot
>>> of fractal and other model studies is that window size needs to at least 10
>>> times "the expected Curie depth-to-observation elevation distance" (I have
>>> applications where data are at 20-30 km elevations).  Upward continuing is
>>> not a good idea as a result with spectral methods I think - if anything one
>>> is making response of the magnetic bottom even longer wavelength and
>>> smaller in amplitude. The smaller the window size the larger the variance
>>> of the solutions; so with small windows (less than 200-300 km) one could
>>> sometimes get a close to correct result for deep magnetic bottoms, but the
>>> variance of the solutions is really large to be usable - but one doesn’t
>>> know that if one is using the centroid method.  Despite large windows, one
>>> needs to use some tapering or other spectral estimation strategies in order
>>> reduce the variance of the low-wavenumber spectral estimates.
>>>
>>> Taking into account the fractal parameter of the field is very important
>>> (if the underlying magnetization is fractal - true in most cases).  Salem
>>> et al. (2014, Tectonophysics, The Defractal Method) show how to go about
>>> estimating fractal parameter by modeling the spectral peak.  But one needs
>>> to do model studies, and more model studies with 2D and 3D fractal models,
>>> to get experience on how to assess fits of fractal models - before applying
>>> the method (this is especially true because the RMS minimum of the fit is
>>> not the correct solution most times - I think this happens because it is
>>> difficult to pick perfect range of wavenumbers over the fit needs to be
>>> performed for every spectra and also because of the noise in low-wavenumber
>>> spectral estimates.
>>>
>>> Finally, for certain geologic situations there are multiple layers:
>>> e.g., magnetic, non-magnetic/less-magnetic and once again deeper magnetic
>>> layers, in these situations the answers are some sort of weighted average
>>> of depth solutions, or dipping magnetic layers, and therefore the solution
>>> may not correspond to a real interface.
>>>
>>> Despite all this, I am still using the methods, more and more with the
>>> defractal method with large windows because of the ability to estimate the
>>> fractal parameter by evaluating results with a range of fractal parameters,
>>> and selecting manually minimum/maximum solution range, and the best
>>> solution.  Then cross-checking with heat flow or whatever other geophysical
>>> models available in the area. All this is fairly time-consuming….
>>>
>>> I think I have long surpassed the length for an effective e-mail
>>> communication.
>>>
>>> I hope this helps.
>>>
>>> -tiku
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On May 18, 2015, at 3:43 PM, Steve Sheriff <[email protected]>
>>> <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>
>>>  Take a look at Ravat et al., 2007, Geophys J. Int'l v169, p 421-434 "A
>>> study of spectral methods of estimating the depth to the bottom of magnetic
>>> sources from near-surface magnetic anomaly data"
>>>
>>> On 5/18/2015 10:10 AM, solomonjanjaro <[email protected]>
>>> <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>
>>> ED CUNION,
>>> In a situation where I have only aeromagnetic data to use.....which
>>> other methods do I use? Please  suggest.
>>> Solomon
>>> On 18 May 2015 17:05, "edcunion &lt;[email protected]&gt;" <
>>> [email protected]> wrote:
>>>
>>>>  Beside longer wavelength magnetic data other available datasets that
>>>> might be tried to crosscheck the mag result depths are regional gravity,
>>>> satellite gravity datasets are freely available on the web with Grace being
>>>> just one example, seismic surface wave shear velocity models (coarse in
>>>> some areas) may also help, some of these data too are obtainable on the
>>>> web, and regional MT studies, Alan Jones and his teams have published
>>>> several papers with images from different continents, there may be some
>>>> regional depth inferences in these MT papers.
>>>>
>>>> Ed Cunion
>>>> Red Rocks Geophysical Consulting
>>>> 13224 W Utah Circle
>>>> Lakewood, CO 80228 USA
>>>> email: [email protected]
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>    On Monday, May 18, 2015 6:49 AM, "solomonjanjaro <
>>>> [email protected]>" <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>  Dear all.
>>>> Please I need help on different methods of determining crustal
>>>> thickness using aeromagnetic data.
>>>> 1. I have upward continued filter on my residual data and window a
>>>> block of 66x66 km and I have 16 blocks of this size over my study area and
>>>> I have also used this formula Zb=2Zo - Zt
>>>> Where  Zb = curie depth
>>>>           Zo = depth to  centroid
>>>>           Zt= depth to top
>>>> But want other methods to confirm result.
>>>> Thank you
>>>> Solomon Nehemiah Yusuf
>>>> PhD student( Mautech Nigeria)
>>>>  ---
>>>>  Forum archives can be accessed here:
>>>> http://lyris.geosoft.com/read/?forum=geonet
>>>> <http://lyris.geosoft.com/read/?fourm=geonet>
>>>>  You are currently subscribed to geonet as: [email protected].
>>>>  To subscribe or unsubscribe from any of our forums, select the User
>>>> Forum selection on the Geosoft Community page:
>>>> http://www.geosoft.com/support/community/forums/register/
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>    ---
>>>>
>>>> Forum archives can be accessed here:
>>>> http://lyris.geosoft.com/read/?forum=geonet
>>>> <http://lyris.geosoft.com/read/?fourm=geonet>
>>>>
>>>> You are currently subscribed to geonet as: [email protected].
>>>>
>>>> To subscribe or unsubscribe from any of our forums, select the User
>>>> Forum selection on the Geosoft Community page:
>>>> http://www.geosoft.com/support/community/forums/register/
>>>>
>>>  ---
>>>
>>> Forum archives can be accessed here:
>>> http://lyris.geosoft.com/read/?forum=geonet
>>> <http://lyris.geosoft.com/read/?fourm=geonet>
>>>
>>> You are currently subscribed to geonet as: [email protected].
>>>
>>> To subscribe or unsubscribe from any of our forums, select the User
>>> Forum selection on the Geosoft Community page:
>>> http://www.geosoft.com/support/community/forums/register/
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>>
>>> Steven Sheriff
>>> Professor Emeritus of Geophysics
>>> University of Montana
>>> Missoula, MT USA 59812www.umt.edu/geosciences
>>>
>>> ---
>>>
>>> Forum archives can be accessed here:
>>> http://lyris.geosoft.com/read/?forum=geonet
>>> <http://lyris.geosoft.com/read/?fourm=geonet>
>>>
>>> You are currently subscribed to geonet as: [email protected].
>>>
>>> To subscribe or unsubscribe from any of our forums, select the User
>>> Forum selection on the Geosoft Community page:
>>> http://www.geosoft.com/support/community/forums/register/
>>>
>>>
>>> ---
>>>
>>> Forum archives can be accessed here:
>>> http://lyris.geosoft.com/read/?forum=geonet
>>> <http://lyris.geosoft.com/read/?fourm=geonet>
>>>
>>> You are currently subscribed to geonet as: [email protected].
>>>
>>> To subscribe or unsubscribe from any of our forums, select the User
>>> Forum selection on the Geosoft Community page:
>>> http://www.geosoft.com/support/community/forums/register/
>>>
>> ---
>>
>> Forum archives can be accessed here:
>> http://lyris.geosoft.com/read/?forum=geonet
>> <http://lyris.geosoft.com/read/?fourm=geonet>
>>
>> You are currently subscribed to geonet as: [email protected].
>>
>> To subscribe or unsubscribe from any of our forums, select the User Forum
>> selection on the Geosoft Community page:
>> http://www.geosoft.com/support/community/forums/register/
>>
> ---
>
> Forum archives can be accessed here:
> http://lyris.geosoft.com/read/?forum=geonet
> <http://lyris.geosoft.com/read/?fourm=geonet>
>
> You are currently subscribed to geonet as: [email protected].
>
> To subscribe or unsubscribe from any of our forums, select the User Forum
> selection on the Geosoft Community page:
> http://www.geosoft.com/support/community/forums/register/
>
>
>  ---
>
> Forum archives can be accessed here:
> http://lyris.geosoft.com/read/?forum=geonet
> <http://lyris.geosoft.com/read/?fourm=geonet>
>
> You are currently subscribed to geonet as: [email protected].
>
> To subscribe or unsubscribe from any of our forums, select the User Forum
> selection on the Geosoft Community page:
> http://www.geosoft.com/support/community/forums/register/
>

---

Forum archives can be accessed here: http://lyris.geosoft.com/read/?forum=geonet
You are currently subscribed to geonet as: [email protected].
To subscribe or unsubscribe from any of our forums, select the User Forum 
selection on the Geosoft Community page: 
http://www.geosoft.com/support/community/forums/register/

Reply via email to