Euler Search Windows' direction

MehmetAliGÜNGÖR
MehmetAliGÜNGÖR Posts: 2 Fluorite Rank Badge
in Oasis montaj
Hi,
I have some questions about Euler Decon. While we are running Euler method on a gridded data as I understand - from the illustrions ont eh manual and the Theory description- the search window is always moving from right to left and from down to top( west to east and south to north).

Here is the question:

Would it be there any change on the soluotion if we chane the search windows' application direction? In theory there shouldn't be any? But is there any experiment about that or can I change the direction of the search window manually on the run.

Thanks for concern

Best regards.
Tagged:

Best Answer

  • DarrenAndrews
    DarrenAndrews Posts: 146 Diamond Rank Badge
    Answer ✓
    Greetings @MehmetAliGÜNGÖR ,

    Thank you for your question. Your statement is correct regarding the direction that the search window is moved in during Euler deconvolution.

    Euler deconvolution is run separately on each of the search windows. There is no part of that calculation that requires consideration of the results of deconvolution within the adjacent search windows, therefore there would be no change to the results if the direction that the search window moves was changed. Because of this we do not provide a means to change the "search direction" as you describe above.

    Best regards,

    Darren
    Darren Andrews
    Technical Team Manager
    Geosoft logo

Answers

  • MehmetAliGÜNGÖR
    MehmetAliGÜNGÖR Posts: 2 Fluorite Rank Badge
    Hi @DarrenAndrews ,

    Many thanks for replying. I am wondering if there is any example with the Euler Deconvolution method to examine mineralized zone in exploration. That might be a good solution for Euler method. If you know anything like that would you share?

    Thanks anyway,
    Regards.

    MAG
  • DarrenAndrews
    DarrenAndrews Posts: 146 Diamond Rank Badge
    Hi @MehmetAliGÜNGÖR,

    There are certain styles of mineralization (for example porphyry and IOCG deposits) that can have a strong correlation with gravity and/or magnetic anomalies, but in practice, even for those styles of mineralization, that correlation is not always evident. Euler deconvolution is a useful technique for quickly analyzing a large number of anomalies in a dataset, but not that useful in isolation for identifying mineralisation.

    In my experience (I worked in mineral exploration prior to joining Geosoft), I would use it as a "first pass" tool to achieve two outcomes:

    1. Provide estimates of depth to source over an area to help determine whether prospective (mineralized) geology is shallow enough to be explored for and mined "economically", which is broadly a function of the potential size of a mineral deposit versus it's depth below the Earth's surface.
    2. Identify individual anomalies of interest for further analysis (by modelling and inversion).

    If anomalies of interest were identified, I would then perform two and/or three dimensional modelling (for example using Geosoft's VOXI or GM-SYS products) to help determine whether to drill test the anomaly or not.

    Below is a reference to a paper you might find interesting. It describes the use of Euler Deconvolution, in conjunction with other interpretation tools (all available from Geosoft I might add!), to detect porphyry intrusions in Egypt:

    Mohammed Eldosouky, Ahmed. (2016). Detection of Porphyry Intrusions Using Analytic Signal (AS), Euler Deconvolution, and Center for Exploration Targeting (CET) Technique at Wadi Allaqi Area, South Eastern Desert, Egypt.. International Journal of Scientific and Engineering Research. Volume 7. 471-477.

    Best regards,
    Darren Andrews
    Technical Team Manager
    Geosoft logo
This discussion has been closed.

Categories