Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

3D spatial domain gravity inversion with growing multiple polygonal cross-sections and exponential mass density contrast

  • Published:
Journal of Earth System Science Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

An automatic 3D spatial domain inversion technique is developed to estimate basement depths of sedimentary basins from observed gravity anomalies using a prescribed exponential mass density contrast. A collage of vertical polygonal cross-sections, each one with unit thickness, in which the density contrast differs exponentially with depth describes the model space. The proposed technique estimates the optimum depth ordinates of the vertices of polygonal cross-sections from a given set of gravity anomalies following predefined convergence criteria. Initial depths to basement interface at plurality of observations are calculated presuming that the density contrast within the Bouguer slab at each observation is also varying exponentially with depth. A previously reported algorithm that make use of both analytic and numeric approaches to compute the gravity response of such 3D model space with exponential mass density contrast is adopted for forward modelling. The proposed inversion is efficient even when the gravity anomalies are available at non-uniform spatial grid intervals. Recovery of basement depths with modest error from a set of gravity anomalies attributable to a synthetic model in the presence of pseudorandom noise and also the fact that the estimated depth structure of the Almazán Basin in NE Spain correlates reasonably well with the information derived from seismic data demonstrates the applicability of the proposed inversion method. The snags associated with other existing density models in the analysis of gravity anomalies are demonstrated on both synthetic and real field anomalies.

Research Highlights

  1. 1.

    It is a 3D inversion technique to analyse the gravity anomalies of sedimentary basins.

  2. 2.

    Density contrast variation is automatically ascribed by an exponential function in the algorithm.

  3. 3.

    The interpretation technique does not require initial model specification to start with.

  4. 4.

    The algorithm is fully automatic.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Figure 1
Figure 2
Figure 3
Figure 4
Figure 5
Figure 6
Figure 7
Figure 8
Figure 9

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Abdeslem G J 2005 The gravitational attraction of a right rectangular prism with density varying with depth following a cubic polynomial; Geophysics 70(6) J39–J42.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Avseth P, Mukerji T, Mavko G and Tyssekvam J A 2001 Rock physics and AVO analysis for lithofacies and pore fluid prediction in a North Sea oil field; Lead. Edge 20 429–434.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Barbosa V C F, Silva J B C and Medeiros W E 1997 Gravity inversion of basement relief using approximate equality constraints on depths; Geophysics 62 1745–1757.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bond J 1996 Tectono-sedimentary evolution of the Almazán Basin, NE Spain; In: Tertiary basins of Spain: The stratigraphic record of crustal kinematics (eds) Friend F and Dabro C J, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp. 203–213.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Cai H, Xiong B and Zhu Y 2018 3D Modelling and Inversion of Gravity Data in Exploration Scale. Intech Open Limited, https://www.intechopen.com/books/gravity-geoscience-applications-industrial-technology-and-quantum-aspect/3d-modelling-and-inversion-of-gravity-data-in-exploration-scale.

  • Chakravarthi V, Mallesh K and Ramamma B 2017 Basement depths estimation from gravity anomalies: Two 2.5D approaches coupled with exponential density contrast model; J. Geophys. Eng. 20 303–315.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chakravarthi V, Pramod Kumar M, Ramamma B and Sastry Rajeswara 2016 Automatic gravity modelling of sedimentary basins by means of polygonal source geometry and exponential density contrast variation: Two space domain based algorithms; J. Appl. Geophys. 124 54–61.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chakravarthi V, Rajeswara Sastry S and Ramamma B 2013 MODTOHAFSD – A GUI based JAVA code for gravity analysis of strike limited sedimentary basins by means of growing bodies with exponential density contrast – depth variation: A space domain approach; Comput. Geosci. 56 131–141.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chakravarthi V 2011 Automatic gravity optimization of 2.5D strike listric fault sources with analytically defined fault planes and depth dependent density; Geophysics 76 I21–I31.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chakravarthi V and Sundararajan N 2007 3D gravity inversion using depth dependent density; Geophysics 72 I23–I32.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chakravarthi V and Sundararajan N 2006 Discussion on ‘The gravitational attraction of a right rectangular prism with density varying with depth following a cubic polynomial’ by Juan Garcia-Abdeslem (November–December 2005, Geophysics, pp. j39–j42); Geophysics 71 X17–X19.

  • Chakravarthi V and Sundararajan N 2004 Automatic 3-D gravity modelling of sedimentary basins with density contrast varying parabolically with depth; Comput. Geosci. 30 601–607.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chakravarthi V 2003 Digitally implemented method for automatic optimization of gravity fields obtained from three-dimensional density interfaces using depth dependent density; US Patent #6,615,139.

  • Chávez R E, Lazaro-Mancilla O, Campos-Enríquez J O and Flores-Márquez E L 1999 Basement topography of the Mexicali Valley from spectral and ideal body analysis of gravity data; J. South Am. Earth Sci. 12 579–587.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chen C, Ren Z, Pan K, Tang J, Kalscheuer T, Maurer H, Sun Y and Li Y 2018 Exact solutions of the vertical gravitational anomaly for a polyhedral prism with vertical polynomial density contrast of arbitrary orders; Geophys. J. Int. 214 2115–2132.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cordell L and Henderson R G 1968 Iterative three-dimensional solution of gravity anomaly data using a digital computer; Geophysics 33(4) 596–601.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cordell L 1973 Gravity anomalies using an exponential density-depth function – San Jacinto Graben, California; Geophysics 38 684–690.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • D’Urso M G and Trotta S 2017 Gravity anomaly of polyhedral bodies having a polynomial density contrast; Surv. Geophys. 38(4) 781–832.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fukushima T 2018 Recursive computation of gravitational field of a right rectangular parallelepiped with density varying vertically by following an arbitrary degree polynomial; Geophys. J. Int. 215(2) 864–879.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Granser H 1987 Three-dimensional interpretation of gravity data from sedimentary basins using an exponential density–depth function; Geophys. Prospect. 35 1030–1041.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gerard A and Debeglia N 1975 Automatic three-dimensional modelling for the interpretation of gravity or magnetic anomalies; Geophysics 40(6) 1014–1034.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gómez-Ortiz D, Tejero-lópez R, Babón-Vich R and Rivas-Ponce A 2005 Crustal density structure in the Spanish Central System derived from gravity data analysis (Central Spain); Tectonophys. 403 131–149.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gu X, Tenzer R and Gladkikh V 2014 Empirical models of the ocean-sediment and marine sediment-bedrock density contrasts; Geosci. J. 18(4) 439–447.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hamayun Prutkin I and Tenzer R 2009 The optimum expression for the gravitational potential of polyhedral bodies having a linearly varying density distribution; J. Geodesy. 83 1163–1170.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hansen R O 1999 An analytical expression for the gravity field of a polyhedral body with linearly varying density; Geophysics 64 75–77.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hansen R O and Suciu L 2002 Multiple-source Euler deconvolution; Geophysics 67(2) 525–535.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Han D H and Batzle M 2002 Fizz water and low gas-saturated reservoirs; Lead. Edge 21(4) 395–398.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hartmann R R, Teskey D and Friedberg I 1971 A system for rapid digital aeromagnetic interpretation; Geophysics 36 891–918.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Holstein H 2003 Gravimagnetic anomaly formulas for polyhedra of spatially linear media; Geophysics 68(1) 157–167.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • ITGE 1990 Documentacin sobre la geología del subsuelo de España. Tomo V (Duero - Almazán); Internal report number 29040, Madrid.

  • Jiang L, Zhang J and Feng Z 2017a A versatile solution for the gravity anomaly of 3D prism-meshed bodies with depth-dependent density contrast; Geophysics 82(4) G77–G86.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jiang L, Liu J, Zhang J and Feng Z 2017b Analytic Expressions for the Gravity Gradient Tensor of 3D Prisms with Depth-Dependent Density; Surv. Geophys. 39(3) 337–363.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kilty K T 1983 Werner deconvolution of profile potential field data; Geophysics 48(2) 234–237.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • LaFehr T R and Nabighian M N 2012 Fundamentals of gravity exploration; Society of Exploration Geophysics.

  • Li X 2001 Vertical resolution: Gravity versus vertical gravity gradient; Lead. Edge 20 901–904.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Liu J, Zhang J, Jiang L, Lin Q and Wan L 2019 Polynomial-based density inversion of gravity anomalies for concealed iron-deposit exploration in North China; Geophysics 84(5) B325–B334.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Luo X, Wang Y, Zhang J, Deng J, Wu Z and Chen S N 2018 Applicability analysis and application of Euler deconvolution method in potential field; Comput. Techn. Geophys. Geochem. Explor. 40(6) 789–796.

    Google Scholar 

  • Marquardt D W 1970 Generalized inverses, ridge regression, biased linear estimation, and nonlinear estimation; Technometrics 12 591–612.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mallesh K, Chakravarthi V and Ramamma B 2019 3D Gravity analysis in spatial domain: Model simulation by multiple polygonal cross-sections coupled with exponential density contrast; Pure Appl. Geophys. 176(6) 2497–2511.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Maxant J 1980 Variation of density with rock type, depth, and formation in the Western Canada basin from density logs; Geophysics 45(6) 1061–1076.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mooney W D and Kaban M K 2010 The North American upper mantle: Density, composition, and evolution; J. Geophys. Res. 115 B12424.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Murthy I V R, Rama Rao P and Rao S J 1990 The density difference and generalized programs for two-and three-dimensional gravity modelling; Comput. Geosci. 16(3) 277–287.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Murthy I V R, Swamy K V and Rama Rao P 2000 Use and abuse of Werner deconvolution technique; J. Indian Geophys. Union 4(2) 97–102.

    Google Scholar 

  • Panzner M, Ebbing J and Jordan M 2011 3D gravity inversion constrained by stereotomography, SEG Technical Program Expanded Abstracts.

  • Pham L T, Oksu E and Do T D 2018 GCH_gravinv: A MATLAB-based program for inverting gravity anomalies over sedimentary basins; Comput. Geosci. 120 40–47.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pohanka V 1988 Optimum expression for computation of the gravity field of a polyhedral body with linearly varying density; Geophys. Prospect. 46 391–404.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rao D B, Prakash M J and Babu N R 1990 3D and 2.5D modelling of gravity anomalies with variable density contrast; Geophys. Prospect. 38 411–422.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rao P R, Swamy K V and Murthy I V R 1999 Inversion of gravity anomalies of three-dimensional density interfaces; Comput. Geosci. 25 887–896.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ren Z, Zhong Y, Chen C, Tang J and Pan K 2017 Gravity anomalies of arbitrary 3D polyhedral bodies with horizontal and vertical mass contrasts up to cubic order; Geophysics 83(1) G1–G13.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schön J 1996 Physical properties of rocks: Fundamentals and principles of petrophysics; In: Handbook Geophys. Explor. (eds) Helbig K and Teitel S, Sect. 1, 18.

  • SHELL 1983 Informe del sondeo Baides-1; Internal report.

  • Tenzer R and Gladkikh V 2014 Assessment of Density Variations of Marine Sediments with Ocean and Sediment Depths; The Scientific World Journal, https://www.hindawi.com/journals/tswj/2014/823296/.

  • Thompson D T 1982 EULDPH: A new technique for making computer-assisted depth estimates from magnetic data; Geophysics 47(1) 31–37.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Toushmalani R and Hemati M 2013 Euler deconvolution of 3D gravity data interpretation: New approach; J. Appl. Sci. Agric. 8(5) 696–700.

    Google Scholar 

  • Werner S 1953 Interpretation of magnetic anomalies at sheet like bodies; Sver. Geol. Undersok. Serv C. Arsbok. 43 6.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wu L and Chen L 2016 Fourier forward modelling of vector and tensor gravity fields due to prismatic bodies with variable density contrast; Geophysics 81(1) G13–G26.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zhang J Z and Jiang L 2017 Analytical expressions for the gravitational vector field of a 3-D rectangular prism with density varying as an arbitrary-order polynomial function; Geophys. J. Int. 210 1176–1190.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zhdanov M S and Cai H 2013 Inversion of gravity and gravity gradiometry data for density contrast surfaces using Cauchy-type integrals; SEG Expanded Abstracts, https://doi.org/10.1190/segam2013-0429.1.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

We sincerely thank anonymous reviewers and the associate editor for their critical reviews and making suggestions to improve the quality of the manuscript as presented. Ramamma Batta acknowledges DST, Government of India for granting Women Scientist Scheme.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Centre for Earth, Ocean and Atmospheric Sciences, University of Hyderabad, Gachibowli, Hyderabad, 500 046, India

    B Ramamma, K Mallesh & V Chakravarthi

Authors
  1. B Ramamma
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. K Mallesh
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. V Chakravarthi
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Contributions

Ramamma has developed the inversion methodology. Mallesh has tested the algorithm on data sets, prepared illustrations and tables and Chakravarthi has written the manuscript.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to B Ramamma.

Additional information

Communicated by Munukutla Radhakrishna

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Ramamma, B., Mallesh, K. & Chakravarthi, V. 3D spatial domain gravity inversion with growing multiple polygonal cross-sections and exponential mass density contrast. J Earth Syst Sci 130, 73 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12040-021-01576-4

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12040-021-01576-4

Keywords

Search

Navigation