Difference in galvanic and inductive methods' results, new examples for DIP and BIEP
About authors
- 1 — Moscow State University
- 2 — Moscow State University
- 3 — Moscow State University
- 4 — Moscow State University
Abstract
Difference in apparent resistivity values determined in galvanic and inductive electrical and electromagnetic methods depends on macroanisotropy of layered cross-section and decreased penetration depth of galvanic methods without changing penetration depth of inductive methods. Joint influence of these two factors in case of high contrast of layers' resistivities results in difference in several tens of apparent resistivity values.
References
- Ваньян Л.Л. Основы электромагнитных зондирований. М., 1965. 108 с.
- Каринский А.Д. Влияние электрической анизотропии горных пород на электромагнитное поле в скважине: Автореф. дис. … д-ра физ.-мат. наук / МГРИ. М., 2008. 32 с.
- Электропрофилирование с незаземленными рабочими линиями / Сост. А.С.Нахабцев, Б.Г.Сапожников, А.И.Яблучанский. Л., 1985. 96 с.
- McNeil J.D. Technical Note TN-6. Electromag- netic terrain conductivity measurement at low induction numbers / Geonics Ltd. 1980. 13 p.
Similar articles
Forming of hydrogeochemical dispersion halos in discharge zones of thermal solutions оn the Mid-Atlantic Ridge
2013 S. M. Sudarikov
Transient electromagnetic soundings application for oil and gas investigation in Western Siberia
2013 N. N. Nevedrova, A. M. Sanchaa