Representing the geological body heterogeneous property field using the quadratic generalized tri-prism volume function model (QGTPVF)

Original Paper
First Online:
Received:
Accepted:

Abstract

3D geological modeling should be an effective tool for accurately representing the geometric structure boundary and internal property fields of geological body. However, conventional methods have rarely focused on the expression of geological heterogeneous properties, known as 4D modeling. A volume function is defined as a piecewise mathematic function that describes a parameterized geological property field and created by fitting the property functions of certain 3D voxels. The quadratic generalized tri-prism volume function (QGTPVF) model is proposed for representing geological property fields with a sedimentary strata structure based on the volume function method and generalized tri-prism (GTP) voxel model. A QGTPVF is designed for borehole sample points, and it interpolates geological properties by fitting quadratic volume functions combined with the influence of geological geometric structure constraints, including stratum interfaces and fault planes. This research mainly focuses on the QGTPVF definition and fitting method, single GTP volume function is a continuous quadratic function, and a property smoothing along directionally adjacent bedding GTPs method is also studied, so geological property field is also expressed by the smooth function. A preprocessing method of faults geological structures is given, and the general framework QGTPVF is also discussed for practical applications. The QGTPVF model could be converted to tetrahedron voxel and 3D grid models for calculation and analysis easily. An example on a porosity property field is studied to verify the method’s accuracy and reliability by comparing to Kriging and inverse distance weighted interpolation methods, and the result of accuracy and time complexity are better, so the QGTPVF provides a new solution for modeling geological property fields.

Keywords

Geological heterogeneous property field Property modeling Volume function fitting Quadratic generalized tri-prism volume function Voxel model Property field interpolation Complex geological structure 
This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.

Notes

Acknowledgments

This work was supported by the National Nature Science Foundation of China (no. 41272367) and the 863 High Technology Plan of China (no. 2013AA010308).

References

  1. Amorim R (2012) Sketch Modeling of Seismic Horizons from Uncertainty. Proc Int Symp Sketch-based interfaces Model Eurographics Assoc 1–10. doi:  10.2312/SBM/SBM12/001-010
  2. Ariffin S, Karim A, Saaban A et al (2014) Bézier triangular patches for closed surface. Appl Math Sci 8:355–366. doi: 10.12988/ams.2014.310545 Google Scholar
  3. Benjamin S, Alexander P, Christophe S (2001) Constructive modeling of frep solids using spline volumes. In: Proceedings of the sixth ACM symposium on solid modeling and applications. ACM, pp 321–322Google Scholar
  4. Caumon G, Lepage F, Sword CH, Mallet JL (2004) Building and editing a sealed geological model. Math Geol 36:405–424. doi: 10.1023/B:MATG.0000029297.18098.8a CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Caumon G, Collon-Drouaillet P, Le Carlier de Veslud C et al (2009) Surface-based 3D modeling of geological structures. Math Geosci 41:927–945. doi: 10.1007/s11004-009-9244-2 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Caumon G, Gray GG, Antoine C, Titeux M-O (2013) Three-dimensional implicit stratigraphic model building from remote sensing data on tetrahedral meshes: theory and application to a regional model of la Popa Basin, NE Mexico. IEEE Trans Geosci Remote Sens 51:1613–1621. doi: 10.1109/TGRS.2012.2207727 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Chen J, Li C (2016) A 3D triangular prism spline element, submitted manuscriptGoogle Scholar
  8. Chen J, Li C-J, Chen W-J (2010) A family of spline finite elements. Comput Struct 88:718–727. doi: 10.1016/j.compstruc.2010.02.011 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Chen J, Li C-J, Chen W-J (2011) A 3D pyramid spline element. Acta Mech Sinica 27:986–993. doi: 10.1007/s10409-011-0513-1 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Collon P, Steckiewicz-Laurent W, Pellerin J et al (2015) 3D geomodelling combining implicit surfaces and Voronoi-based remeshing: a case study in the Lorraine Coal Basin (France). Comput Geosci 77:29–43. doi: 10.1016/j.cageo.2015.01.009 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. De Kemp EA, Sprague KB (2003) Interpretive tools for 3-D structural geological modeling part I: Bézier-based curves, ribbons and grip frames. GeoInformatica 7:55–71. doi: 10.1023/A:1022822227691 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. de Marsily G, Delay F, Gonçalvès J et al (2005) Dealing with spatial heterogeneity. Hydrogeol J 13:161–183. doi: 10.1007/s10040-004-0432-3 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Deny L, Cognot R (2006) Method, device and program for three-dimensional modeling of a geological volume by 3D parametering of the geological domain,U.S. Patent No. 7,123,258. 17 Oct. 2006Google Scholar
  14. Endrodi G (2011) Multidimensional spline integration of scattered data. Comput Phys Commun 182:1307–1314. doi: 10.1016/j.cpc.2011.03.009 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Evans R (2003) Current themes, issues and challenges concerning the prediction of subsurface conditions. In: Rosenbaum MSTA (ed) New paradigms in subsurface prediction, lecture notes in the earth sciences, number 99, chapter 32. Springer, Berlin Heidelberg, New York, pp 359–378Google Scholar
  16. Falivene O, Cabrera L, Sáez A (2007) Optimum and robust 3D facies interpolation strategies in a heterogeneous coal zone (Tertiary As Pontes basin, NW Spain). Int J Coal Geol 71:185–208. doi: 10.1016/j.coal.2006.08.008 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Farin G (1986) Triangular Bernstein-Bézier patches. Comput Aided Geom Des 3:83–127CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Frank T (2006) Geological information retrieval using tetrahedral meshes. Int Assoc Math Geol XIth Int Congr 12–15Google Scholar
  19. Frank T, Tertois A-L, Mallet J-L (2007) 3D-reconstruction of complex geological interfaces from irregularly distributed and noisy point data. Comput Geosci 33:932–943. doi: 10.1016/j.cageo.2006.11.014 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Glynn PD, Jacobsen L, Phelps G, et al (2011) 3D/4D modeling, visualization and information frameworks: current US geological survey practice and needs. Three-Dimensional Geol Mapping; Work Ext Abstr Minneapolis, Minnesota, Oct 8 2011, Geol Surv Canada, Open File 6998 33–38. doi:  10.4095/289609
  21. Gong J, Xia Z (1999) An integrated data model in three dimensional GIS. Geo-spatial Inf Sci 2:1–8. doi: 10.1007/BF02826710 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Gregorski BF, Wiley DF, Childs HR, Joy KI (2006) Adaptive contouring with quadratic Tetrahedra. In: Scientific visualization: the visual extraction of knowledge from data. Springer, Berlin Heidelberg, pp 3–15CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Guillen A, Calcagno P, Courrioux G et al (2008) Geological modelling from field data and geological knowledge. Part II. Modelling validation using gravity and magnetic data inversion. Phys Earth Planet Inter 171:158–169. doi: 10.1016/j.pepi.2008.06.014 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Han L, Zhou Z, Bollas GM (2013) Heterogeneous modeling of chemical-looping combustion. Part 1: reactor model. Chem Eng Sci 104:233–249. doi: 10.1016/j.ces.2013.09.021 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Han L, Zhou Z, Bollas GM (2014) Heterogeneous modeling of chemical-looping combustion. Part 2: particle model. Chem Eng Sci 113:116–128. doi: 10.1016/j.ces.2014.03.030 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Hans S, Roth M (2002) Bernstein–Bézier representations for facial surgery simulation. PhD thesis, ETHZGoogle Scholar
  27. Hemingway P (2002) n-Simplex interpolation. HP Lab Bristol, HPL-2002-320 1–9Google Scholar
  28. Houlding S (1994) 3D geoscience modeling: computer techniques for geological characterization. Springer-Verlag, Berlin HeidelbergCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Hua J, He Y, Qin H (2004) Multiresolution heterogeneous solid modeling and visualization using trivariate simplex splines. Proc Ninth ACM Symp Solid Model Appl 47–58Google Scholar
  30. Kaufmann O, Martin T (2008) 3D geological modelling from boreholes, cross-sections and geological maps, application over former natural gas storages in coal mines. Comput Geosci 34:278–290. doi: 10.1016/j.cageo.2007.09.005 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Khan K, Lobiyal DK, Kilicman A (2015) A de Casteljau algorithm for Bernstein type polynomials based on (p,q)-integers in CAGDGoogle Scholar
  32. Kohavi R (1995) A study of cross-validation and bootstrap for accuracy estimation and model selection. Int Jt Conf Artif Intell 14:1137–1143. doi: 10.1067/mod.2000.109031 Google Scholar
  33. Lattuada R, Raper J (1995) Applications of 3D Delaunay triangulation algorithms in geoscientific modeling. In: Proceedings of the 3rd National Conference on GIS Research UK, Newcastle, UK, pp 150–153Google Scholar
  34. Li F (2011) Interpolation and convergence of Bernstein-Bézier coefficients. Acta Math Sin Engl Ser 27:1769–1782. doi: 10.1007/s10114-011-8462-y CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Li C-J, Wang R-H (2006) A new 8-node quadrilateral spline finite element. J Comput Appl Math 195:54–65. doi: 10.1016/j.cam.2005.07.017 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Li C-J, Chen J, Chen W-J (2011a) A 3D hexahedral spline element. Comput Struct 89:2303–2308. doi: 10.1016/j.compstruc.2011.08.005 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Li Q, Liao G, Chen X, Zheng J (2011a) Approach on area coordinate, volume coordinate and their usage in true 3D GIS. J Earth Sci Eng 1:52–59Google Scholar
  38. Li Q, Zheng J, Jin Y, Wei Z (2011b) Volume function data model and application in expression of nonuniform property field inside of volume object. J Earth Sci Eng 1:98–106Google Scholar
  39. Lindsay MD, Aillères L, Jessell MW et al (2012) Locating and quantifying geological uncertainty in three-dimensional models: analysis of the Gippsland Basin, southeastern Australia. Tectonophysics 546–547:10–27. doi: 10.1016/j.tecto.2012.04.007 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Lu GY, Wong DW (2008) An adaptive inverse-distance weighting spatial interpolation technique. Comput Geosci 34:1044–1055. doi: 10.1016/j.cageo.2007.07.010 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Ma YZ, Royer JJ, Wang H et al (2014) Factorial kriging for multiscale modelling. J South African Inst Min Metall 114:651–657Google Scholar
  42. Mallet J-L (1992) Discrete smooth interpolation in geometric modelling. Comput Des 24:178–191Google Scholar
  43. Mallet J (2004) Space-time mathematical framework for sedimentary geology. Math Geol 36:1–32. doi: 10.1023/B:MATG.0000016228.75495.7c CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Mallet J-L (2014) Elements of mathematical sedimentary geology: the GeoChron model. EAGE Publications bvGoogle Scholar
  45. Matheron G (1973) The intrinsic random functions and their applications. Adv Appl Probab 5:439CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Mezger J, Straßer W (2006) Interactive soft object simulation with quadratic finite elements. Lect Notes Comput Sci (including Subser Lect Notes Artif Intell Lect Notes Bioinformatics) 4069 LNCS:434–443. doi:  10.1007/11789239_45
  47. Moyen R, Mallet J-L, Frank T, et al (2004) 3D-Parameterization of the 3D geological space—the GeoChron model. Proc Eur Conf Math Oil Recover (ECMOR IX) 8Google Scholar
  48. Nieser M, Reitebuch U, Polthier K (2014) CUBECOVER-parameterization of 3D volumes. Comput Graph Forum 30:1397–1406. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-8659.2011.02014.x CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Royer JJ, Mejia P, Caumon G, Collon P (2015) 3D, 4D and predictive modelling of major mineral belts in Europe. Miner Resour Rev:73–89. doi: 10.1007/978-3-319-17428-0
  50. Royse KR, Rutter HK, Entwisle DC (2009) Property attribution of 3D geological models in the Thames gateway, London: new ways of visualising geoscientific information. Bull Eng Geol Environ 68:1–16. doi: 10.1007/s10064-008-0171-0 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Saka B, Dag I (2005) A collocation method for the numerical solution of the RLW equation using cubic B-spline basis. Arab J Sci Eng 30:39–50Google Scholar
  52. Schmitt B, Kazakov M, Pasko A, Savchenko V (2000) Volume sculpting with 4D spline volumes. Cisst’2000 2:475–483Google Scholar
  53. Sklar FH, Elashvili I (1977) The pressure-volume function of brain elasticity: physiological considerations and clinical applications. J Neurosurg 47:670–679CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Soh a K, Zhifei L, Song C (2000) Development of a new quadrilateral thin plate element using area coordinates. Comput Methods Appl Mech Eng 190:979–987. doi: 10.1016/S0045-7825(99)00457-0 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. Speleers H (2011) On multivariate polynomials in Bernstein-Bézier form and tensor algebra. J Comput Appl Math 236:589–599. doi: 10.1016/j.cam.2011.04.032 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Sprague KB, de Kemp E a (2005) Interpretive tools for 3-D structural geological modelling part II: surface design from sparse spatial data. GeoInformatica 9:5–32. doi: 10.1007/s10707-004-5620-8 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. Tadepalli SC, Erdemir A, Cavanagh PR (2011) Comparison of hexahedral and tetrahedral elements in finite element analysis of the foot and footwear. J Biomech 44:2337–2343. doi: 10.1016/j.jbiomech.2011.05.006 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. Trevisani S, Fabbri P (2010) Geostatistical modeling of a heterogeneous site bordering the Venice lagoon, Italy. Ground Water 48:614–623. doi: 10.1111/j.1745-6584.2009.00632.x CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. Turner a K (2006) Challenges and trends for geological modelling and visualisation. Bull Eng Geol Environ 65:109–127. doi: 10.1007/s10064-005-0015-0 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. Wang G, Huang L (2012) 3D geological modeling for mineral resource assessment of the Tongshan Cu deposit, Heilongjiang Province, China. Geosci Front 3:483–491. doi: 10.1016/j.gsf.2011.12.012 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. Wang K, Li X, Li B et al (2012) Restricted trivariate polycube splines for volumetric data modeling. IEEE Trans Vis Comput Graph 18:703–716. doi: 10.1109/TVCG.2011.102 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. Wang Y, Zhao H, Sheng Y, Kang N (2015) Construction and application of 3D geological models for attribute-oriented information expression. J Appl Sci Eng 18:315–322. doi: 10.6180/jase.2015.18.4.01 Google Scholar
  63. Watson C, Richardson J, Wood B et al (2015) Improving geological and process model integration through TIN to 3D grid conversion. Comput Geosci 82:45–54. doi: 10.1016/j.cageo.2015.05.010 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  64. Wu L (2004) Topological relations embodied in a generalized tri-prism (GTP) model for a 3D geoscience modeling system. Comput Geosci 30:405–418. doi: 10.1016/j.cageo.2003.06.005 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  65. Wu L, Chen X, Shi W (2003) GTP-based integral real-3D spatial modeling for subsurface engineering and its surrounding geology bodies. Geogr Geo-Information Sci 19:1–6Google Scholar
  66. Wu Q, Xu H, Zou X (2005) An effective method for 3D geological modeling with multi-source data integration. Comput Geosci 31:35–43. doi: 10.1016/j.cageo.2004.09.005 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  67. Wu L, Xue L, Li C et al (2015) A geospatial information grid framework for geological survey. PLoS One. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0145312 Google Scholar
  68. Xia K, Wei G-W (2014) A Galerkin formulation of the MIB method for three dimensional elliptic interface problems. Comput Math Appl 68:719–745. doi: 10.1016/j.camwa.2014.07.022 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  69. Zhong D, Li M, Song L-G, Wang G (2006) Enhanced NURBS modeling and visualization for large 3D geoengineering applications: an example from the Jinping first-level hydropower engineering project, China. Comput Geosci 32:1270–1282. doi: 10.1016/j.cageo.2005.11.007 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  70. Zhu L, Zhang C, Li M et al (2012) Building 3D solid models of sedimentary stratigraphic systems from borehole data: an automatic method and case studies. Eng Geol 127:1–13. doi: 10.1016/j.enggeo.2011.12.001 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  71. Zhu L, Li M, Li C et al (2013) Coupled modeling between geological structure fields and property parameter fields in 3D engineering geological space. Eng Geol 167:105–116. doi: 10.1016/j.enggeo.2013.10.016 CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Saudi Society for Geosciences 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  • Wei Wang
    • 1
  • Liming Sun
    • 1
  • Qingyuan Li
    • 2
  • Lingyan Jin
    • 3
  1. 1.State Key Laboratory of Information Engineering in Surveying, Mapping and Remote SensingWuhan UniversityWuhanChina
  2. 2.Chinese Academy of Surveying and MappingBeijingChina
  3. 3.Institute of ElectricsChinese Academy of SciencesBeijingChina

Personalised recommendations