2011
DOI: 10.1016/j.jappgeo.2011.04.001
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Multi-deconvolution analysis of potential field data

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1

Citation Types

0
4
0

Year Published

2013
2013
2022
2022

Publication Types

Select...
5
1

Relationship

0
6

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 7 publications
(4 citation statements)
references
References 14 publications
0
4
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Table 10 shows a comparison of the results achieved by the current method with those acquired by other published approaches 78 , 79 . Salem et al (2005) interpreted the Hamrawein anomaly as two-sheet structures with depths of z o1 = 555.7 and z o2 = 441.2 m. According to Salem (2005), the depths are z o1 = 540 m and z o2 = 447 m. Salem 80 used the local wavenumber (LW) approach with depths of z o1 = 432.6 m and z o2 = 422.8 m and the total gradient (TG) method with depths of z o1 = 486.5 m and z o2 = 440.4 m to explain the Hamrawein anomaly. Essa and Elhussein (2018) evaluate these anomalies by utilizing the particle swarm optimization (PSO) (z o1 = 623.05 m and z o2 = 494.14 m).…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Table 10 shows a comparison of the results achieved by the current method with those acquired by other published approaches 78 , 79 . Salem et al (2005) interpreted the Hamrawein anomaly as two-sheet structures with depths of z o1 = 555.7 and z o2 = 441.2 m. According to Salem (2005), the depths are z o1 = 540 m and z o2 = 447 m. Salem 80 used the local wavenumber (LW) approach with depths of z o1 = 432.6 m and z o2 = 422.8 m and the total gradient (TG) method with depths of z o1 = 486.5 m and z o2 = 440.4 m to explain the Hamrawein anomaly. Essa and Elhussein (2018) evaluate these anomalies by utilizing the particle swarm optimization (PSO) (z o1 = 623.05 m and z o2 = 494.14 m).…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…While Salem et al (2005) interpreted the two Hamrawein Field anomalies as thin sheet structures located at depth of 555.7 and 441.2 m, Salem (2005) computed a similar shaped anomaly but reported depths of 540 and 447 m respectively for the first and second anomalies. Salem (2011) interpreted the Hamrawein Magnetic anomaly using both total gradient (TG) and local wave number (LW) methods. With the LG method, the anomaly sources were interpreted to be buried at depths of 486.5 and 440.4 m, while results from the LW technique show that the causative bodies are buried at depths of 432.6 and 422.8 m for the two anomalies.…”
Section: Field Examplesmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…A general function presenting a symmetric potential field anomaly can be expressed by simple equation (Salem, 2011):…”
Section: The Anomalymentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The r is the distance from the middle point of the anomaly to the observation point on the surface. Detailed summary of q and F values for different simple geometrical bodies both for gravity and magnetic sources is given for example in Salem (2011); in short it is presented in Table 1. More complex anomaly geometry can be derived from theory presented in the .…”
Section: The Anomalymentioning
confidence: 99%