Journal of Emerging Trends in Engineering and Applied Sciences (JETEAS) 3 (4): 711-717 Scholarlink Research Institute Journals, 2012

2 (ISSN: 2141-7016) jeteas.scholarlinkresearch.org Journal of Emerging Trends in Engineering and Applied Sciences (JETEAS) 3(4) 711-717 (ISSN: 2141-7016)

Euler 3-D Deconvolution of Analytical Signal of Magnetic Anomalies over Iron Ore deposit in Okene, Nigeria
1

J.O. Amigun, 2O. Afolabi and 2B.D. Ako

1

Department of Applied Geophysics, Federal University of Technology, Akure, Nigeria 2 Department of Geology, Obafemi Awolowo University, Ile-Ife, Nigeria Corresponding Author: J.O. Amigun ___________________________________________________________________________
Abstract The Euler deconvolution of analytical signal of the magnetic field data over the iron ore deposit in Okene, North central Nigeria has been carried out to determine the locations and depths of the iron ore bodies and other geologic sources in the area. The methodology adopted was obtaining solutions by inverting Euler homogeneity equation which relates the magnetic field and its gradient components to the location of the source of an anomaly and with the degree of homogeneity expressed as structural index. The Euler deconvolution process was carried out on the analytical grid of aeromagnetic data of the study area using a structural index of 1.0, 2.0 and 3.0 respectively. The Euler solutions for structural index of 1.0 have their depths ranges from 11 to 120m. For the Euler solutions S.I = 2.0, cluster solutions of relatively deep depth of between 234 to 242m are obtained. Their anomalous source location and pattern (Northeast Southwest) coincides with the outcropped iron ore bodies at the central ore zone of the study area. The estimated depths and geometries provided by the Euler deconvolution result will aid the mine design and the economic exploitation of the iron ore deposit in the study area. __________________________________________________________________________________________ Keywords: Euler deconvolution, iron ore deposit, analytic signal, magnetic field, homogeneity. _________________________________________________________________________________________ INTRODUCTION field data (Figure1) was acquired at a mean terrain The Euler deconvolution is an interpretation tool in clearance of 152.4 m with flight line separation of potential field for locating anomalous sources and the about 400m along a NW SE direction. determination of their depths by deconvolution using Eulers homogeneity relation (Reid et al., 1990). The LOCATION AND GEOLOGIC SETTING OF methods preference over the profile techniques such STUDY AREA as Peters (1949) method (half slope) is that it The iron ore deposit lies between latitude 70 37' 22" requires no prior knowledge of the source N and 70 39' 17" N and longitudes 60 15' 55" E and 60 magnetization direction, does not assume any 17' 15" E (Fig.2). This area falls within the 1:50,000 particular interpretation models and the process can standard topographic map of Kabba sheet 246 S.E of be applied directly to large gridded data sets. Geological Survey of Nigeria (GSN). The study area is underlain by rocks belonging to the The Eulers homogeneity equation (Euler Metasedimentary and Metavolcanic rocks of the deconvolution) relates the magnetic field and its Nigerian Basement Complex which falls within the gradient components to the location of the source of Igarra Kabba Jakura metasedimentary region in an anomaly, with the degree of homogeneity the south western part of Nigeria (Olade and expressed as a structural index (Yaghoobian et al., Elueze, 1979). The deposit forms a prominent ridge, 1992). In interpreting magnetic survey in grid form, like the Itakpe iron ore deposit currently mined to the preference of using the analytical signal of the feed the National Steel Complex at Ajaokuta and magnetic anomalies over the conventional standard Aladja and its dominant lithologic units are gneisses Euler is that with the analytical signal far fewer (which are regionally emplaced), ferruginous solutions are generated from the Eulers homogeneity quartzites, granites and pegmatite. The ferruginous equation, hence few extraneous depth estimates are quartzite is the source of the iron ore mineralization retained. in the area (Fadare, 1983; Annor and Freeth, 1985). The patterns of the iron ore mineralization in the area In this study, we will present the results from the as shown in Figure 2 have been discussed by application of Euler 3-D deconvolution in the Adeyemo et al (1984) and NSRMEA (1994). interpretation of magnetic anomalies over an iron ore Structurally, the metamorphic rocks of the study area deposit for its source locations and depths using the consists of three sets of closely related hills of gridded magnetic map in Figure1. The total magnetic basement rocks marked as the northern, central and
711

Journal of Emerging Trends in Engineering and Applied Sciences (JETEAS) 3(4) 711-717 (ISSN: 2141-7016) southern ore zones (Figure 2) and made up mainly of migmatite and biotite gneisses that trend in a northeast southwest direction while the iron ore bodies in these gneisses are thick and strike northeast southwest. METHOD OF STUDY The methodology as described by Reid, (1980) and Thompson, (1982) in obtaining solutions by inverting Euler homogeneity equation was adopted in this study. According to Yaghoobian et al., (1992), the Eulers homogeneity equation relates the magnetic field and its gradient components to the location of the source of an anomaly, with the degree of homogeneity expressed as a structural index. Eulers homogeneity relationship can be written (Reid et al., 1990) for magnetic data in the form: In this study, the Euler deconvolution algorithm in Oasis montajTM (geophysical package) for location and depth determination of causative anomalous bodies from gridded potential field data was used. The method starts by calculating the analytic signal grid, finds peaks in the grid, then use these peak locations for Euler deconvolution. The Euler deconvolution as applied at each solution involves setting an appropriate structural index , SI value and using least squares inversion to solve the equation for an optimum X0, Y0, Z0, and total magnetic field intensity (B). The window size and the respective number of the observation points, for which the system of linear equations is formed are also parameters in solving the inverse magnetic problem. Window of 10 x 10m data points prove most suitable in this study and were used. Solutions with depths to source above the error tolerance levels were rejected. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION Figures 3a - 3c show the maps of the x, y and z derivative grids of the aeromagnetic data of the study area in Figure 1 These maps are required for the calculation and subsequent display of the analytical signal grids (map) shown in Figure 4 which is needed to perform the located Euler deconvolution adopted for this study. The analytical signal map (Fig. 5) is also useful in the location of edges of magnetic source bodies particularly were remanence and / or low magnetic latitude complicates interpretation (Thompson, 1982 and Reid et al, 1990). In Tables 1 are some of the solutions obtained for operating Euler deconvolution on the analytical grid of the studied area aeromagnetic data (upward continued to 400 m above ground) using a structural index of 2.0. The solutions that have passed the specified acceptable tolerance levels are presented in plan form in Figures 5 - 7. These figures show the estimated source positions and depths for structural index of 1.0, 2.0 and 3.0 in the study area. Apparent in the figures are the few solutions shown because the Euler method adopted in this study typically produces far fewer solutions than the conventional standard Euler method i.e. many extraneous depth estimates have been removed. The centre of the plotted circles represents the plan location (x0 and y0) of the interpreted source and the diameter is the depth estimator that is depth is proportional to diameter. Also, the depths are displayed using colour variation to represent different ranges. Based on the maximum amplitudes of the analytic signal in Figure 4, the spatial distributions of causative magnetic sources in the area were clearly recognized. And the solutions from the Euler deconvolution in Figures 5, 6 and 7 are generally located around the maximum amplitudes of the analytic signal.

(x x0) T/ x + (y y0) T/ y + (z z0)

where (x, y, z) are the coordinates of the observation point, N=-n, where n is degree of homogeneity, and N is a coefficient, called structural index (Thompson 1982). The structural index depends on the geometry of the source. For a homogeneous point source N = 3, a linear source (line of dipoles or poles, and for a homogeneous cylinder, rod, etc.) N = 2, for extrusive bodies (thin layer, dike, etc.) N = 1, for a contact, vertex of a block and a pyramid with a big height N = 0. The unknown coordinates (x0, y0, z0) are estimated by solving a determined system of linear equations (1.0) using a prescribed value for N with the least squares method. And a solution with a minimum standard deviation is found through using different tentative values for N. In equation (1.0) B denote the base level of the observed field i.e. background field. The structural index is a measure of the fall-off rate of the field with distance from the source. The choice of a proper S.I is a function of the geometry of causative bodies. Estimation of the correct structural index is crucial for the successful application of the Euler deconvolution method (Reid et al, 1990). And this is achieved by using the index that produces the best clustering of solutions (Reid, 1995). Incorrect choice of structural index leads to errors in estimated source depths (Ravart, 1996). Euler deconvolution used the magnetic field and its three orthogonal gradients (two horizontal and one vertical) to compute anomaly source locations (Keating and Pilkington, 2004). The three dimensional (3D) analytical signal is calculated from the three orthogonal gradients of the magnetic field (Roest et al, 1992). For a function homogeneous of degree N, Huang et al (1995) denotes the Eulers equation in terms of analytic signal as:

(x x0) A/ x + (y y0) A/ y + (z z0)

where A denote the analytic signal of the magnetic field.
712

Journal of Emerging Trends in Engineering and Applied Sciences (JETEAS) 3(4) 711-717 (ISSN: 2141-7016) The Euler solutions for structural index of 1.0 of the magnetic anomalies over the iron ore deposit as shown in Figure 5, have their depths ranges from 11 to 120m. The clusters of solutions (circles) produced over anomalies for S.I = 1.0 as observed are not too sparely diffuse. The solutions for relatively deep depths i.e. from green (45m) to red (77m) are located in the northeastern part and coincide with the northern ore zone in the study area in Figure 2. At this region, the analytic signal map displays maximum amplitudes. Another cluster of solution at the southern part, trending in a northeast - southwest direction relates well in orientation with the southern ore zone where magnetic anomalies of low intensiveness are observed in Figure 4. Here, the depths z0 are considerably shallower i.e. from 11 to 45m. It can therefore be deduced that the clustering pattern of S.I = 1.0 Euler solutions correlate with the anomaly patterns interpreted as iron ore mineralization. The value of the structural index, 1.0 is typical for a sill or dyke (Yaghoobian et al, 1992) The Figure 6 represents the structural interpretation for Euler solutions for S.I = 2.0. Three linear features marked (A A1, B - B1 and C - C1) were delineated as faults. The delineated faults A A1 and B - B1 have trend and spatial location similar to the faults delineated on the aeromagnetic and derivative maps of the study area (Amigun et al, 2012). Also, cluster solutions of relatively deep depth of between 234 to 242m are obtained at the centre of the map. These solutions both in location and pattern (Northeast Southwest direction) coincides with the iron ore bodies at the central ore zone in Figure 2. Again on the S.I = 2.0 map is another cluster of solutions in the Northeastern area with depth range of 223 to 231m. These solutions are related to the iron ore bodies of Northern ore zone. The Euler solution map for the calculated structural index of 3.0 is shown in Figure 7. This map however does not give a satisfactory result because its solutions are complex and unrelated in pattern to the anomalies of the aeromagnetic map and the known geology of the area. For further establishment, the result of the Euler deconvolution depths was compared with those determined by power spectrum of the Fourier transformation of the aeromagnetic data over the deposit. Figure 8 shows the calculated spectral analysis of the aeromagnetic data. The radial average power spectrum plot in Figure 8b represents the computed amplitude spectrum of the Fourier transformation of the study area aeromagnetic data plotted on a logarithm scale against wave-number (frequency). On the depth curve in Figure 8b, the peak of the curve represents the first estimate of the depth to the magnetic sources in the study area and these depths ranged from 50 m to 300 m. The solutions patterns and depths obtained for operating Euler deconvolution on the deposits magnetic field data using structural index of 1.0 and 2.0 agrees with
713

the ore bodies patterns and the estimated depths determined from the spectral analysis of the aeromagnetic data over the deposit. Therefore, the structural index of 1.0 and 2.0 are assumed the acceptable structural indices for the study area. CONCLUSIONS The Euler deconvolution of the analytical signal of the magnetic field data over the iron ore deposit has served as a recent improvement over techniques such as Peters method (half slope) because the result from its interpretation has enabled a rapid determination of the locations and depths of the iron ore mineralization and other geologic sources in the area without prior knowledge of the source geometry and magnetization direction. The method has provided insights into the deposits ore geometry and structural setting. And the estimated source depths and geometries provided by the Euler deconvolution method can effectively serve as approximation for the construction of magnetic models of iron ore bodies in the studied area. ACKNOWLEDGEMENT The authors are grateful to the Management of National Iron Ore Mining Company Limited (NIOMCO), Itakpe for granting access to the Ajabanoko deposit for the data collection. We acknowledge with immense gratitude the contribution of Late Prof. S.L. Folami. Our gratitude also goes to the Department of Geology, Obafemi Awolowo University, for permitting the use of Oasis Montaj work station. REFERENCES Adeyemo B., Williams F.O and Adegbuyi O., 1984. Geological Exploration of Ajabanoko Hill Deposit, Okene, Nigeria. Technical Report of National Steel Council Explo. Div., Kaduna, Nigeria. 14pp. Amigun J.O, Afolabi O. and Ako B.D., 2012 Application of Airborne Magnetic Data to Mineral Exploration in the Okene Iron Ore Province of Nigeria. International Research Journal of Geology and Mining. Accepted for Publication, July, 2012. Annor A.E and Freeth S.J., 1985. Thermotectonic Evolution of the Basement Complex around Okene, Nigeria with special reference to Deformation Mechanism. Precamb. Res. 28, p. 269-281. Fadare V.O., 1983. Iron Ore Formations The Okene Ajaokuta Lokoja Areas of Kwara State. A Potential Supply Base for the Steel Plant at Ajaokuta. Journal of Mining and Geology, Vol. 20, 209 214 Huang D., Gubbins D., Clark R.A. and Whaler K.A., 1995. Combined study of Eulers homogeneity equation for gravity and magnetic field. 57th EAGE conference, Glasgow, UK, Extended Abstracts, p144

Journal of Emerging Trends in Engineering and Applied Sciences (JETEAS) 3(4) 711-717 (ISSN: 2141-7016) Keating P. and Pilkington M., 2004. Euler deconvolution of the analytic signal and its application to magnetic interpretation. Geophysical Prospecting 52, 165-182 National Iron Ore Mining Project, NIOMP Itakpe, 1994. Geological Map of Ajabanoko Iron Ore Deposit. (Unpublished) National Steel Raw Materials Exploration Agency, NSRMEA, 1994. Preliminary Report on Ajabanoko Iron Ore Deposit. (Unpublished) Olade M.A. and Elueze A.A., 1979. Petrochemistry of Ilesha amphibolites and Precambrian Crustal evolution in the Pan-Africa of S.W. Nigeria. Precambrian, 8, p. 303 310 Peters L. J., 1949. The direct approach to magnetic interpretation and its practical application. Geophysics, 14, 290320. Ravart D., 1996. Analysis of the Euler method and its applicability environmental magnetic investigations. Journal of Environmental and Engineering Geophysics 1, 229-238 Reid A.B., 1980. Aeromagnetic Survey design, Geophysics, 45, 973 976 Reid A.B., 1995. Euler deconvolution: Past, present and future a review. 65th SEG meeting, Houston, USA, Expanded Abstract, 272-273 Reid A.B., Allsop I.M., Grsner H, Millet A.J. and Somerton I.W., 1990. Magnetic interpretation in three dimensions using Euler deconvolution, Geophysics, 55, 80 91 Roest W., Verhoef J., Pilkington M., 1992. Magnetic interpretation using the 3-D analytic signal. Geophysics 57, 116-125. Thompson D.T. 1982. EULDPH A new technique for making computer assisted depth estimates from magnetic data, Geophysics, 47, 31 37 Yaghoobian A., Boustead G.A, Dobush T.M 1992. Object delineation using Eulers Homogeneity Equation, Proceedings of SAGEEP 92, San Diego, California.

Table 2: Some Results of Euler Deconvolution Analysis of S.I = 2 for the Study Area
X_Window 198400 198720 199040 199360 199680 200000 200320 200640 198400 198720 199040 199360 199680 200000 200320 200640 198400 198720 199040 Y_Window 843520 843520 843520 843520 843520 843520 843520 843520 843840 843840 843840 843840 843840 843840 843840 843840 844160 844160 844160 X_Euler 198933.3 198783.6 198921 199019.1 199134.3 199690.2 200228.5 200370.1 198540.9 198665.1 198625 198678.2 198816.3 199538.2 199947.2 199826.1 198539.6 198745 198696.9 Y_Euler 843764.7 843775.4 843788.6 843679.9 843618.2 843468.7 843758.4 843603.3 843918.7 844011.8 843888 843643.1 844070.6 843993.5 843833.8 843719.4 844105.5 844121.8 844073.8 Depth 364.11 374.85 356.93 403.67 239.65 147.48 159.51 171.64 178.49 203.09 171.16 288.89 530.42 277.13 278.29 261.16 135.37 146.87 146.84 Backgrnd -179.08 -110.18 -92.25 -150.97 -94.34 6.89 3.41 17.84 50.16 146.85 66.61 -120.79 -96.06 -50.14 -12.26 0.45 57.58 131.27 147.04 WndSize 2000.00 2000.00 2000.00 2000.00 2000.00 2000.00 2000.00 2000.00 2000.00 2000.00 2000.00 2000.00 2000.00 2000.00 2000.00 2000.00 2000.00 2000.00 2000.00 dZ 10.29 15.60 12.68 16.37 30.29 24.27 33.31 40.32 33.63 20.88 16.24 18.43 32.15 19.51 7.84 9.54 19.79 12.11 6.64 dXY 56.10 55.21 40.19 41.28 68.01 68.51 95.29 110.93 111.33 90.01 73.96 44.97 39.40 47.10 30.34 47.75 74.56 57.76 31.34

X_Window, Y_Window: Difference between window center and Euler solution. X_Euler, Y_Euler : Actual location of Euler solution Depth: Solution depth (z coordinate) Backgrnd: Background Field WndSize: An estimate of the peaks sizes. 714

dZ: Estimated error in depth. dXY: Estimated location error in solution

Journal of Emerging Trends in Engineering and Applied Sciences (JETEAS) 3(4) 711-717 (ISSN: 2141-7016)

Fig 1: Digitized Aeromagnetic Map of Ajabanoko Iron Ore Deposit Area.

Fig.2: Location and the Geological Map of the Study Area (Adapted from National Iron Ore Mining Project, Itakpe, 1994)
715

Journal of Emerging Trends in Engineering and Applied Sciences (JETEAS) 3(4) 711-717 (ISSN: 2141-7016)

Fig.3: The dx, dy and dz gradient grid of Aeromagnetic data of study area used for Euler Deconvolution

Fig.4: Analytical Signal Map of the Aeromagnetic Data

Fig.5: The Euler Deconvolution Depth Plot of the Study Area for SI of 1.0
716

Journal of Emerging Trends in Engineering and Applied Sciences (JETEAS) 3(4) 711-717 (ISSN: 2141-7016)

Fig. 6: The Euler Deconvolution Depth Plot of the Study Area for SI of 2.0

Fig.7: The Euler Deconvolution Depth Plot of the Study Area for SI of 3.0

Fig.8 (a) Spectrum of the Aeromagnetic data of the study Area (b) Its Radial Spectrum and Depth Estimate Plot
717