Skip to content
BY 4.0 license Open Access Published by De Gruyter Open Access January 23, 2024

Theoretical magnetotelluric response of stratiform earth consisting of alternative homogeneous and transitional layers

  • Hongzhi Miao , Huifang Ming , Xuelu Xiao EMAIL logo , Bolan Dai and Xiaowei Yang
From the journal Open Geosciences

Abstract

The magnetotelluric (MT) responses are explicitly solved for a stratiform earth containing multiple transitional layers in which the conductivity varies linearly with depth. In the model under consideration, any one homogeneous layer with constant conductivity or transitional one may be absent in the geometry. The traditional one-dimensional (1D) models with sharp boundaries will be obtained if all the transitional layers are absent in the geometry, while a special 1D model consisting of a sequence of contiguous transitional layers may be obtained if all the homogeneous layers (except the basement layer) are removed from the geometry. The tangential electric and magnetic fields as well as the surface impedance are analytically expressed by Airy functions. The analytical formula is validated in three theoretical examples by comparing with the results from available codes. The apparent resistivity and impedance phase on the surface of three different transitional models are illustrated to analysis the influence of the transitional layers on MT responses. The new formula provides an alternative way to obtain the analytic MT responses for the special layered earth.

1 Introduction

The electromagnetic (EM) geophysical techniques have been widely used in probing the pipelines [1,2], exploring mineral resources [3,4], estimating soil electrical conductivity [5,6], monitoring contamination [7,8], etc. The magnetotelluric (MT) technique is one of EM geophysical methods to measure the electrical conductivity distribution inside the earth through the use of low-frequency EM induction [9,10,11]. With the rapid development of the electronic computer, the MT data are mainly inverted and interpreted assuming that the conductivity inside earth is two-dimensional (2D) [1226] or three-dimensional (3D) [2742]. Although 2D or 3D inversion schemes have been widely adopted, algorithms for one-dimensional (1D) still have a very important role in MT experiments, especially when the data are acquired in the sediment basin or marine environment.

With regard to the 1D algorithms, the model is usually assumed to be composed of a sequence of homogeneous layers with constant conductivity [4346] or a series of layers containing at least one transitional layer in the geometry [4751]. The transitional layer refers to certain layer in which the conductivity is dependent on depth, or in other words, conductivity varies with depth according to some mathematic rule (for example, linear or exponential variation). It seems that the transitional layer may better represent the conductivity variation inside earth in some geologic formation. For example, as stated by Patella [52], the conductivity in a fissured geological formation (e.g., limestone) may vary with depth. Therefore, it is still necessary to study the theoretical MT responses of the 1D earth with transitional layers [7].

The analytical theoretical MT soundings of 1D model with transitional layer had been investigated in detail by some authors. For example, the MT responses of 1D model with transitional layer was first investigated by Mallick [47]. The inductive sounding of a stratified earth with transition layer resting on dipping anisotropic beds was presented by Negi and Saraf [53]. Berdichevsky et al. investigated the deep EM sounding of the gradient media in which resistivity exponentially decreases with depth [54]. Kao and Rankin reported the MT response for a three-layer earth, formed by constant conductivity in the first and the third layer and conductivity varying linearly with depth in the second layer [49]. MT response in an inhomogeneous earth having resistivity varying linearly with depth was investigated by Kao [50]. MT response in an inhomogeneous earth having conductivity varying linearly with depth was also investigated by Kao [51]. Pal presented the MT response on a layered earth with non-monotonic resistivity distribution [55]. Fang and Luo solved the MT response on vertically inhomogeneous earth having conductivity varying linearly with depth by layers [56]. Chumchob published the mathematical modeling of EM response on a multilayered earth with a layer having exponentially varying conductivity [57]. Qin et al. investigated the MT responses of a vertical inhomogeneous and anisotropic resistivity structure with a transitional layer [58]. Qin et al. also studied the MT responses of an anisotropic 1D earth with a layer of exponentially varying conductivity [59].

However, in those publications mentioned previously, the model considered contains only one transitional layer. Obviously, it is not enough to approximate the conductivity distribution inside the earth with only one transitional layer. Recently, Qin and Yang [60] examined the MT soundings on a stratified earth with two transitional layers. However, as described by the well logging results [61], the subsurface of earth should contain many layers. Hence, it is necessary to study the MT responses of the model with many transitional layers. In this work, following the algorithm given by Qin and Yan [60], theoretical MT response for 1D layered earth with multiple transitional layers is investigated. The new formula provides an alternative way to obtain the analytic MT responses for the special layered earth.

2 Model description

In this work, we consider a plane-polarized EM wave with the time factor e i ω t propagating normally into a 1D layered earth with multiple transitional layers, as shown in Figure 1. The model is formed by constant conductivity in the odd layer and conductivity varying linearly with depth in the even layer. The odd layer is the homogeneous medium with the conductivity σ 2 l - 1 ( z ) ( l = 1 , 2 , , n ) , while the even layer is the transitional one, in which the characteristic of the conductivity is assumed to be described by the following expression [47,50,62]:

(1) σ 2 l ( z ) = σ 2 l 1 + p 2 l ( z z 2 l 1 ) z 2 l 1 z z 2 l ; l = 1 , 2 , , n ,

where p 2 l = ( σ 2 l + 1 σ 2 l 1 ) / ( z 2 l z 2 l 1 ) is the variation coefficient of the conductivity with the depth in the layer 2 l .

Figure 1 
               The 1D layered earth with multiple transitional layers. The layer 
                     
                        
                        
                           2
                           l
                           ‒
                           1
                           
                           
                              
                                 (
                                 
                                    l
                                    =
                                    1
                                    ,
                                    2
                                    ,
                                    …
                                    ,
                                    n
                                 
                                 )
                              
                           
                        
                        2l‒1\hspace{.25em}(l=1,2,\ldots ,n)
                     
                   has a constant conductivity of 
                     
                        
                        
                           
                              
                                 σ
                              
                              
                                 2
                                 l
                                 ‒
                                 1
                              
                           
                        
                        {\sigma }_{2l‒1}
                     
                  . The layer 
                     
                        
                        
                           2
                           l
                           
                           
                              
                                 (
                                 
                                    l
                                    =
                                    1
                                    ,
                                    2
                                    ,
                                    …
                                    ,
                                    n
                                 
                                 )
                              
                           
                        
                        2l\hspace{.25em}(l=1,2,\ldots ,n)
                     
                   is a transitional layer having the conductivity 
                     
                        
                        
                           
                              
                                 σ
                              
                              
                                 2
                                 l
                              
                           
                        
                        {\sigma }_{2l}
                     
                   varying linearly with the depth. The dashed lines mean the interface between different layers. 
                     
                        
                        
                           
                              
                                 z
                              
                              
                                 l
                              
                           
                           
                           (
                           l
                           =
                           1
                           ,
                           2
                           ,
                           …
                           ,
                           2
                           n
                           )
                        
                        {z}_{l}\hspace{.25em}(l=1,2,\ldots ,2n)
                     
                   represents the depth of the bottom boundary in the layer 
                     
                        
                        
                           l
                        
                        l
                     
                   and 
                     
                        
                        
                           
                              
                                 h
                              
                              
                                 l
                              
                           
                           
                              
                                 (
                                 
                                    l
                                    =
                                    1
                                    ,
                                    2
                                    ,
                                    …
                                    ,
                                    2
                                    n
                                 
                                 )
                              
                           
                        
                        {h}_{l}(l=1,2,\ldots ,2n)
                     
                   indicates the thickness of the layer 
                     
                        
                        
                           l
                        
                        l
                     
                  .
Figure 1

The 1D layered earth with multiple transitional layers. The layer 2 l 1 ( l = 1 , 2 , , n ) has a constant conductivity of σ 2 l 1 . The layer 2 l ( l = 1 , 2 , , n ) is a transitional layer having the conductivity σ 2 l varying linearly with the depth. The dashed lines mean the interface between different layers. z l ( l = 1 , 2 , , 2 n ) represents the depth of the bottom boundary in the layer l and h l ( l = 1 , 2 , , 2 n ) indicates the thickness of the layer l .

For the problem considered in this study, the Maxwell’s equations need to be solved in different layers (regions) to obtain the MT field components.

3 Solution of the induction problem

For the model under consideration in this work, it consists of two different types of media: one medium with constant conductivity in odd layers, and one medium with conductivity varying with the depth in even layers. In the following contexts, the Maxwell’s equations will be solved in two different media, respectively.

3.1 MT fields in odd layers

For the theory of MT probing, it is convenient to ignore the effect of the displacement current from the start [63]. Therefore, the Helmholtz’s equation derived from Maxwell’s equations should be satisfied in the isotropic homogeneous media [54,64,65], that is, the following equation holds in the odd layers,

(2) d 2 E y , 2 l 1 d z 2 k 2 l 1 2 E y , 2 l 1 = 0 ,

where k 2 l 1 = i ω μ σ 2 l 1 ( l = 1 , 2 , n ) is the propagation constant, and E y , 2 l 1 represents the horizontal electric field component in the layer 2 l 1 .

A general expression for electric field may be obtained by solving equation (2) [49,66].

(3) E y , 2 l 1 = C 2 l 1 e k 2 l 1 ( z z 2 l 2 ) + D 2 l 1 e k 2 l 1 ( z z 2 l 2 ) ( z 2 l 2 z z 2 l 1 ) ,

where C 2 l 1 and D 2 l 1 are coefficients to be determined.

Then, corresponding horizontal magnetic field in the layer l may be written as follows:

(4) H x , 2 l 1 = 1 i ω μ E y , 2 l 1 z = k 2 l 1 i ω μ ( C 2 l 1 e k 2 l 1 ( z z 2 l 2 ) + D 2 l 1 e k 2 l 1 ( z z 2 l 2 ) ) .

3.2 MT fields in even layers

For the transitional layers, the Helmholtz’s equation [54,64,65] to be satisfied may be written as follows:

(5) d 2 E y , 2 l d z 2 k 2 l 2 E y , 2 l = 0 ( l = 1 , 2 , , n ) ,

where k 2 l = i ω μ σ 2 l ( z ) is the propagation constant in the layer 2 l , and E y , 2 l represents the corresponding horizontal electric field component.

Now substituting equation (1) in equation (5) immediately leads to

(6) d 2 E y , 2 l d z 2 i ω μ [ σ 2 l 1 + p 2 l ( z z 2 l 1 ) ] E y , 2 l = 0 ( l = 1 , 2 , , n ) .

Following the method presented in Qin and Yang [60], after some algebra, the general solution of equation (6) may be obtained and written as follows:

(7) E y , 2 l = C 2 l Ai ( ξ ) + D 2 l Bi ( ξ ) ,

where C 2 l and D 2 l are coefficients to be determined, Ai and Bi are the Airy Functions of the first and the second kinds, respectively, and ξ is an auxiliary variable with the definition

(8) ξ = ( i ω μ / p 2 l 2 ) 1 / 3 [ σ 2 l 1 + p 2 l ( z z 2 l 1 ) ] .

Then, the corresponding horizontal magnetic field may be obtained from the derivative of the electric field and written as follows:

(9) H x , 2 l = 1 i ω μ E y , 2 l z = λ i ω μ ( C 2 l A i ( ξ ) + D 2 l B i ( ξ ) ) ,

where λ = ( i ω μ / p 2 l 2 ) 1 / 3 p 2 l is an intermediate variable in the calculation.

3.3 Determination of coefficients

In this section, the coefficients in the expressions of the EM fields are determined by applying appropriate boundary conditions.

In the MT theory, the electric field E y and magnetic field H x are continuous across the interface, that is,

E y , 2 l 1 = E y , 2 l H x , 2 l 1 = H x , 2 l , when z = z l ( l = 1 , 2 , , n ) .

Considering the boundary conditions above and the EM fields vanish at infinite depth, we have the following system of equations:

(10) C 1 e k 1 h 1 + D 1 e k 1 h 1 = C 2 Ai ( ξ 1 ) + D 2 Bi ( ξ 1 ) k 1 ( C 1 e k 1 h 1 + D 1 e k 1 h 1 ) = λ 2 ( C 2 A i ( ξ 1 ) + D 2 B i ( ξ 1 ) ) C 2 Ai ( ξ 2 ) + D 2 Bi ( ξ 2 ) = C 3 + D 3 λ 2 ( C 2 A i ( ξ 2 ) + D 2 B i ( ξ 2 ) ) = k 3 ( C 3 + D 3 ) C 2 l 1 e k 2 l 1 h 2 l 1 + D 2 l 1 e k 2 l 1 h 2 l 1 = C 2 l Ai ( ξ 2 l 1 ) + D 2 l Bi ( ξ 2 l 1 ) k 2 l 1 ( C 2 l 1 e k 2 l 1 h 2 l 1 + D 2 l 1 e k 2 l 1 h 2 l 1 ) = λ 2 l ( C 2 l A i ( ξ 2 l 1 ) + D 2 l B i ( ξ 2 l 1 ) ) C 2 l Ai ( ξ 2 l ) + D 2 l Bi ( ξ 2 l ) = C 2 l + 1 + D 2 l + 1 λ 2 l ( C 2 l A i ( ξ 2 l ) + D 2 l B i ( ξ 2 l ) ) = k 2 l + 1 ( C 2 l + 1 + D 2 l + 1 ) C 2 n Ai ( ξ 2 n ) + D 2 n Bi ( ξ 2 n ) = C 2 n + 1 λ 2 n ( C 2 n A i ( ξ 2 n ) + D 2 n B i ( ξ 2 n ) ) = k 2 n + 1 C 2 n + 1 ,

where

λ 2 l = ( i ω μ / p 2 l 2 ) 1 / 3 p 2 l ξ 2 l 1 = ( i ω μ / p 2 l 2 ) 1 / 3 σ 2 l 1 ξ 2 l = ( i ω μ / p 2 l 2 ) 1 / 3 σ 2 l + 1 .

The system of equations is solved recursively from l = n to l = 1 to give the relationship between the unknown coefficients.

After some algebraic operations, we can obtain the recursive formulas as follows:

(11) C 2 n D 2 n = λ 2 n B i ( ξ 2 n ) + k 2 n + 1 Bi ( ξ 2 n ) λ 2 n A i ( ξ 2 n ) + k 2 n + 1 A i ( ξ 2 n ) C 2 n 1 D 2 n 1 = ( C 2 n / D 2 n ) [ λ 2 n A i ( ξ 2 n 1 ) k 2 n - 1 A i ( ξ 2 n 1 ) ] + [ λ 2 n B i ( ξ 2 n 1 ) - k 2 n - 1 B i ( ξ 2 n 1 ) ] ( C 2 n / D 2 n ) [ λ 2 n A i ( ξ 2 n 1 ) + k 2 n - 1 A i ( ξ 2 n 1 ) ] + [ λ 2 n B i ( ξ 2 n 1 ) + k 2 n - 1 B i ( ξ 2 n 1 ) ] e 2 k 2 n - 1 h 2 n - 1 C 2 l + 1 D 2 l + 1 = ( C 2 l + 2 / D 2 l + 2 ) [ λ 2 l + 2 A i ( ξ 2 l + 1 ) k 2 l +2 A i ( ξ 2 l + 1 ) ] + [ λ 2 l + 2 B i ( ξ 2 l + 1 ) - k 2 l +1 B i ( ξ 2 l + 1 ) ] ( C 2 l + 2 / D 2 l + 2 ) [ λ 2 l + 2 A i ( ξ 2 l + 1 ) + k 2 l +2 A i ( ξ 2 l + 1 ) ] + [ λ 2 l + 2 B i ( ξ 2 l + 1 ) + k 2 l +1 B i ( ξ 2 l + 1 ) ] e 2 k 2 l + 1 h 2 l + 1 C 2 l D 2 l = ( C 2 l + 1 / D 2 l + 1 ) [ λ 2 l B i ( ξ 2 l ) + k 2 l + 1 B i ( ξ 2 l ) ] + [ λ 2 l B i ( ξ 2 l ) - k 2 l + 1 B i ( ξ 2 l ) ] ( C 2 l + 1 / D 2 l + 1 ) [ λ 2 l A i ( ξ 2 l ) + k 2 l + 1 A i ( ξ 2 l ) ] + [ λ 2 l A i ( ξ 2 l ) k 2 l + 1 A i ( ξ 2 l ) ] C 2 l 1 D 2 l 1 = ( C 2 l / D 2 l ) [ λ 2 l A i ( ξ 2 l 1 ) k 2 l 1 A i ( ξ 2 l 1 ) ] + [ λ 2 l B i ( ξ 2 l 1 ) - k 2 l 1 B i ( ξ 2 l 1 ) ] ( C 2 l / D 2 l ) [ λ 2 l A i ( ξ 2 l 1 ) + k 2 l 1 A i ( ξ 2 l 1 ) ] + [ λ 2 l B i ( ξ 2 l 1 ) + k 2 l 1 B i ( ξ 2 l 1 ) ] e 2 k 2 l 1 h 2 l 1 C 1 D 1 = ( C 2 / D 2 ) [ λ 2 A i ( ξ 1 ) k 1 A i ( ξ 1 ) ] + [ λ 2 B i ( ξ 1 ) - k 1 B i ( ξ 1 ) ] ( C 2 / D 2 ) [ λ 2 A i ( ξ 1 ) + k 1 A i ( ξ 1 ) ] + [ λ 2 B i ( ξ 1 ) + k 1 B i ( ξ 1 ) ] e 2 k 1 h 1 .

The ratio of the coefficients at each interface boundary may be easily obtained through equation (11) once the model parameters are known.

3.4 MT apparent resistivity and impedance phase

In order to calculate the MT apparent resistivity and impedance phase at the surface of the model, the surface impedance needs to be determined first. According to the definition of the impedance, we can obtain

(12) Z surf = E y , 1 H x , 1 = i ω μ k 1 1 + C 1 / D 1 1 C 1 / D 1 ,

where C 1 / D 1 is recursively calculated from equation (11).

Then, the apparent resistivity and impedance phase may be easily obtained from the following equation [9]:

(13) ρ a = Z surf 2 / ω μ φ = tan 1 ( Im ( Z surf ) / Re ( Z surf ) ) ,

where ρ a and φ are the apparent resistivity and impedance phase, respectively, and Z surf is the module of the surface impedance Z surf , ω is the angular frequency, μ is the magnetic permeability, and Im ( Z surf ) and Re ( Z surf ) are the imaginary and real part of the surface impedance, respectively.

4 Ratio of the coefficients in special circumstances

In this section, we present the ratio of the coefficients in special circumstances in which any one transitional or homogeneous layer in the model is absent.

4.1 Absence of any one transitional layer

Suppose that the transitional layer having the conductivity σ 2 l ( z ) is absent in the model, then the ratio of coefficients related to this transitional layer ( C 2 l / D 2 l ) will no longer work in the recursive formulas. The relationship of coefficients related to the upper layer above this transitional layer and the lower one may be calculated from equation (10) as follows:

(14) C 2 l 1 D 2 l 1 = C 2 l + 1 D 2 l + 1 + k 2 l 1 k 2 l + 1 k 2 l 1 + k 2 l + 1 k 2 l 1 k 2 l + 1 k 2 l 1 + k 2 l + 1 C 2 l + 1 D 2 l + 1 + 1 e 2 k 2 l 1 h 2 l 1 .

The above procedure may be repeated for any transitional layer which is supposed to be absent. If all the transitional layers in Figure 1 (even layers) are removed from the model, then a traditional 1D model is obtained.

4.2 Absence of any one homogeneous layer

Suppose that the homogeneous layer having the conductivity σ 2 l + 1 is absent in the model, then ( z 2 l + 1 z 2 l ) tends to zero. The ratio of coefficients related to this transitional layer ( C 2 l + 1 / D 2 l + 1 ) will no longer work in the recursive formulas. According to the continuity of electric and magnetic fields, the following equations may be obtained:

(15) C 2 l A i ( ξ 2 l ) + D 2 l B i ( ξ 2 l ) = C 2 l + 2 A i ( ξ 2 l + 1 ) + D 2 l + 2 B i ( ξ 2 l + 1 ) λ 2 l [ C 2 l A i ( ξ 2 l ) + D 2 l B i ( ξ 2 l ) ] = λ 2 l + 2 [ C 2 l + 2 A i ( ξ 2 l + 1 ) + D 2 l + 2 B i ( ξ 2 l + 1 ) ] .

Then, the relationship of coefficients related to the upper layer above this homogeneous layer and the lower one may be easily given from equation (15) as follows:

(16) C 2 l D 2 l = ( C 2 l + 2 / D 2 l + 2 ) [ λ 2 l A i ( ξ 2 l + 1 ) B i ( ξ 2 l ) λ 2 l + 2 A i ( ξ 2 l + 1 ) B i ( ξ 2 l ) ] + [ λ 2 l B i ( ξ 2 l + 1 ) B i ( ξ 2 l ) - λ 2 l + 2 B i ( ξ 2 l 2 ) B i ( ξ 2 l ) ] ( C 2 l + 2 / D 2 l + 2 ) [ λ 2 l A i ( ξ 2 l + 1 ) A i ( ξ 2 l ) λ 2 l + 2 A i ( ξ 2 l + 1 ) A i ( ξ 2 l ) ] + [ λ 2 l B i ( ξ 2 l + 1 ) A i ( ξ 2 l ) - λ 2 l + 2 B i ( ξ 2 l + 1 ) A i ( ξ 2 l ) ] .

The procedure mentioned above may be repeated for any homogeneous layer which is supposed to be absent. When the procedure is used for all homogeneous layers except the basement, a 1D earth model consisting of contiguous transitional layers in which conductivity varies linearly with depth (Figure 2) is obtained. In other words, the model is obtained if all the layers with constant conductivity in Figure 1 (odd layers except the basement) are removed from the model.

Figure 2 
                  The approximation of 1D earth consisting of contiguous transitional layers in which conductivity varies linearly with depth.
Figure 2

The approximation of 1D earth consisting of contiguous transitional layers in which conductivity varies linearly with depth.

5 Synthetic examples

In this section, three synthetic models are considered for investigating the theoretical MT responses.

First, we consider a 1D layered earth model characterized by an alternate sequence of homogeneous and transitional layers, as displayed in Figure 3. In this layered geometry, the model is composed of four homogeneous layers and three transitional layers, and the detailed model parameters are listed at the bottom of Figure 3. The apparent resistivity and impedance phase are calculated by the algorithm in this study. In addition, the MT transfer functions of this model are also computed using the open-source code MT1D in OccamCSEM1D publicized by Key [67] (referred to as Key1dCode hereinafter). The variations in the MT responses at the surface of the model shown in Figure 3 with the periods are displayed in Figure 4. The results calculated using the present algorithn are denoted by black solid curves, while the ones from available codes are represented by the magenta dashed curve. Figure 4 shows pretty good consistency between two results. In other words, the algorithm presented in this work is validated

Figure 3 
               A 1D layered earth model characterized by an alternate sequence of homogeneous and transitional layers. The thickness values of each layer and the values of resistivity in uniform layers are given at the bottom of the figure.
Figure 3

A 1D layered earth model characterized by an alternate sequence of homogeneous and transitional layers. The thickness values of each layer and the values of resistivity in uniform layers are given at the bottom of the figure.

Figure 4 
               The variations in the MT responses at the surface of the model shown in Figure 3 with the periods. The results calculated by the algorithm in this study are represented by “this study” in the legend, while that given by the open-source code are indicated by “Key1dCode” (similarly hereinafter). (a) The variation in the apparent resistivity and (b) the variation in the impedance phase.
Figure 4

The variations in the MT responses at the surface of the model shown in Figure 3 with the periods. The results calculated by the algorithm in this study are represented by “this study” in the legend, while that given by the open-source code are indicated by “Key1dCode” (similarly hereinafter). (a) The variation in the apparent resistivity and (b) the variation in the impedance phase.

Subsequently, let us now examine a second theoretical example. The layered geometry in this example is a 1D layered earth model characterized by a sequence of contiguous transitional layers, as shown in Figure 5. In other words, all the homogeneous layers with constant conductivity (except the basement layer) are removed from the 1D model, based on the procedure described in Section 5. Then, a sequence of contiguous transitional layers is obtained, and it may be supposed to approximate a continuous variation in the conductivity with depth, from the model surface down to the basement. The detailed model parameters are given at the bottom of Figure 5. The MT responses at the surface of the model as a function of period are shown in Figure 6. The results calculated using the present algorithn are denoted by black solid curves, while the ones from available codes are represented by the magenta dashed curve. The comparisons between the apparent resitivity and impedance phases given by different algorithms show a good consistency, and the algorithm in this study is further validated.

Figure 5 
               A 1D layered earth model characterized by a sequence of contiguous transitional layers. The thickness values of each layer and the values of resistivity at the interfaces of different layers are given at the bottom of the figure.
Figure 5

A 1D layered earth model characterized by a sequence of contiguous transitional layers. The thickness values of each layer and the values of resistivity at the interfaces of different layers are given at the bottom of the figure.

Figure 6 
               The MT responses at the surface of the model shown in Figure 5 as a function of period. (a) The variation in the apparent resistivity and (b) the variation in the impedance phase.
Figure 6

The MT responses at the surface of the model shown in Figure 5 as a function of period. (a) The variation in the apparent resistivity and (b) the variation in the impedance phase.

Finally, in the third theoretical example, the model is a 1D layered earth model characterized by a random sequence of homogeneous and transitional layers (Figure 7). The 1D model is supposed to be composed of a random combination of homogeneous and transitional layers, in the sense that they do not have an alternate disposition in the layered geometry. The MT responses (apparent resistivity and impedance phase) to the model shown in Figure 7 are computed using the algorithm in this work and the open-source code Key1dCode. The MT responses at the surface of the model shown in Figure 7 as a function of period are displayed in Figure 8. The resulting MT responses given by the present algorithm are displayed by the black solid curves and the ones from available code are denoted by magenta dashed curves. It is clear from Figure 8 that the results given by the algorithm in this study are consistent with that given by the open-source code. Therefore, this is another proof to validate the correctness of the algorithm in this study.

Figure 7 
               A 1D layered earth model characterized by a random sequence of homogeneous and transitional layers. The thickness values of each layer and the values of resistivity in homogeneous layers are given at the bottom of the figure.
Figure 7

A 1D layered earth model characterized by a random sequence of homogeneous and transitional layers. The thickness values of each layer and the values of resistivity in homogeneous layers are given at the bottom of the figure.

Figure 8 
               The MT responses at the surface of the model shown in Figure 7 as a function of period. (a) The variation in the apparent resistivity and (b) the variation in the impedance phase.
Figure 8

The MT responses at the surface of the model shown in Figure 7 as a function of period. (a) The variation in the apparent resistivity and (b) the variation in the impedance phase.

6 Conclusion

The theoretical MT responses ofo a 1-D layered geometry composed of homogeneous and multiple transitional layers are investigated. The homogeneous layers have constant conductivity values while the transitional ones have conductivity varying linearly with depth. The new formula is derived to calculate the MT responses for the special 1D layered model. The new formula provides an alternative way to obtain the analytic MT responses for the special layered earth. For the model under consideration, the MT fields in the transitional layers can be explicitly expressed in term of the Airy functions.

Any of the homogeneous or transitional layers may be absent in the layered geometry in the calculation, which may be more suitable to approximate the conductivity distribution in the earth compared with traditional 1D model only having layers with constant conductivity. The conductivity in each transitional layers may be increased or decreased with the depth according to the values of the conductivity in adjacent layers. Three typical theoretical examples are presented to validate the algorithm in this study.

The algorithm and corresponding results of theoretical examples may be used to examine the propagation of the EM waves in 1D earth. However, there are still some limitations in future application since the algorithm is only related to the forward computation. The inversion technique needs to be developed for the future studies.

Acknowledgements

The authors gratefully acknowledge anonymous reviewers for their thorough reading of this manuscript and for their insightful questions and constructive suggestions, which significantly improved the quality of this article.

  1. Funding information: This study is partly supported by National Key Research and Development Program of China (No. 2019YFB1600700).

  2. Conflict of interest: The authors declare that they have no competing interests.

  3. Data availability and statement: The data involved during the present study are available from the corresponding author upon reasonable request.

References

[1] Couchman MJ, Everett ME. Feasibility of a surface-based controlled source electromagnetic method for detection of buried pipelines and corrosion effects. J Infrastruct Syst. 2022;28(2):04022010.10.1061/(ASCE)IS.1943-555X.0000686Search in Google Scholar

[2] Ye Z, Zhang C, Ye Y. Principle of a low-frequency transient electromagnetic radar system and its application in the detection of underground pipelines and voids. Tunn Undergr Space Technol. 2022;122:104392.10.1016/j.tust.2022.104392Search in Google Scholar

[3] Yang D, Fournier D, Kang S, Oldenburg DW. Deep mineral exploration using multi-scale electromagnetic geophysics: the Lalor massive sulphide deposit case study. Can J Earth Sci. 2019;56(5):544–55.10.1139/cjes-2018-0069Search in Google Scholar

[4] Alarifi SS, Kellogg V, Ibrahim E. Gravity, aeromagnetic and electromagnetic study of the gold and pyrite mineralized zones in the Haile Mine area, Kershaw, South Carolina. J Appl Geophys. 2019;164:117–29.10.1016/j.jappgeo.2019.03.011Search in Google Scholar

[5] Moghadas D, Badorreck A. Machine learning to estimate soil moisture from geophysical measurements of electrical conductivity. Surf Geophys. 2019;17(2):181–95.10.1002/nsg.12036Search in Google Scholar

[6] Emmanuel ED, Lenhart CF, Weintraub MN, Doro KO. Estimating soil properties distribution at a restored wetland using electromagnetic imaging and limited soil core samples. Wetlands. 2023;43(5):39.10.1007/s13157-023-01686-3Search in Google Scholar

[7] Kanli AI, Neducz B. Electromagnetic measurements for monitoring molybdenum contamination in near-surface survey. Earth Sci Res J. 2015;19(2):107–11.10.15446/esrj.v19n2.44897Search in Google Scholar

[8] Jodeiri Shokri B, Shafaei F, Doulati Ardejani F, Mirzaghorbanali A, Entezam S. Use of time-lapse 2D and 3D geoelectrical inverse models for monitoring acid mine drainage - a case study. Soil Sediment Contam: Int J. 2023;32(4):376–99.10.1080/15320383.2022.2090895Search in Google Scholar

[9] Cagniard V. Basic Theory of the MT methods of Geophysical Propecting. Geophysics. 1953;18(3):605–35.10.1190/1.1437915Search in Google Scholar

[10] Tikhonov V. The determination of the electrical properties of the deep layers of the earth’s crust. Dokl Acad Nauk SSR. 1950;73:295–7. (in Russian).Search in Google Scholar

[11] Tikhonov AN. On determining electrical characteristics of the deep layers of the earth’s crust. In: Vozoff K, editor. Magnetotelluric Methods. Tulsa: Society of Exploration Geophysicists; 1986. p. 2–3.Search in Google Scholar

[12] Siripunvaraporn W, Egbert G. Software documentation and user manual a Reduced Basis Occam (REBOCC) Inversion for two-dimensional magnetotelluric data. Collage of Oceanic and Atmospheric Science, Oregon State University; 1999.Search in Google Scholar

[13] Reddy IK, Rankin D. Magnetotelluric response of a two-dimensional sloping contact by the finite element method. Pure Appl Geophys. 1973;105(1):847–57.10.1007/BF00875833Search in Google Scholar

[14] Sarakorn W, Vachiratienchai C. Hybrid finite difference–finite element method to incorporate topography and bathymetry for two-dimensional magnetotelluric modeling. Earth Planets Space. 2018;70(1):103–16.10.1186/s40623-018-0876-7Search in Google Scholar

[15] Rung-Arunwan T, Siripunvaraporn W. An efficient modified hierarchical domain decomposition for two-dimensional magnetotelluric forward modelling. Geophys J Int. 2010;183(2):634–44.10.1111/j.1365-246X.2010.04768.xSearch in Google Scholar

[16] Wannamaker PE, Stodt JA, Rijo L. Two-dimensional topographic responses in magnetotellurics modeled using finite-element. Geophysics. 1986;51(11):2131–44.10.1190/1.1442065Search in Google Scholar

[17] Wannamaker PE, Stodt JA, Rijo L. A stable finite-element solution for two-dimensional magnetotelluric modeling. Geophys J Roy Astr Soc. 1987;88(1):277–96.10.1111/j.1365-246X.1987.tb01380.xSearch in Google Scholar

[18] Pek J, Verner T. Finite-difference modelling of magnetotelluric fields in two-dimensional anisotropic media. Geophys J Int. 1997;128(3):505–21.10.1111/j.1365-246X.1997.tb05314.xSearch in Google Scholar

[19] Mehanee S, Zhdanov M. Two-dimensional magnetotelluric inversion of blocky geoelectrical structures. J Geophys Res. 2002;107(B4):2065.10.1029/2001JB000191Search in Google Scholar

[20] Li YG. A finite-element algorithm for electromagnetic induction in two-dimensional anisotropic conductivity structures. Geophys J Int. 2002;148(3):389–401.10.1046/j.1365-246x.2002.01570.xSearch in Google Scholar

[21] Lee SK, Kim HJ, Song Y, Lee CK. MT2DInvMatlab—A program in MATLAB and FORTRAN for two-dimensional magnetotelluric inversion. Comput Geosci. 2009;35(8):1722–34.10.1016/j.cageo.2008.10.010Search in Google Scholar

[22] Franke A, Börner R-U, Spitzer K. Adaptive unstructured grid finite element simulation of two-dimensional magnetotelluric fields for arbitrary surface and seafloor topography. Geophys J Int. 2007;171(1):71–86.10.1111/j.1365-246X.2007.03481.xSearch in Google Scholar

[23] Yao H, Ren Z, Chen H, Tang J, Li Y, Liu X. Two-dimensional magnetotelluric finite element modeling by a hybrid Helmholtz-curl formulae system. J Comput Phys. 2021;443(10):110533.10.1016/j.jcp.2021.110533Search in Google Scholar

[24] Groot-Hedlin Cd, Constable S. Inversion of magnetotelluric data for 2D structure with sharp resistivity contrasts. Geophysics. 2004;69(1):78–86.10.1190/1.1649377Search in Google Scholar

[25] Key K, Weiss C. Adaptive finite-element modeling using unstructured grids: The 2D magnetotelluric example. In: AGU Fall Meeting. 2006.10.1190/1.2348091Search in Google Scholar

[26] Rodi W, Mackie RL. Nonlinear conjugate gradients algorithm for 2-D magnetotelluric inversion. Geophysics. 2001;66(1):174–87.10.1190/1.1444893Search in Google Scholar

[27] Mackie RL, Madden TR, Wannamaker PE. Three-dimensional magnetotelluric modeling using difference equations-Theory and comparisons to integral equation solutions. Geophysics. 1993;58(2):215–26.10.1190/1.1443407Search in Google Scholar

[28] Jones FW, Vozoff K. The calculation of magnetotelluric quantities for three-dimensional conductivity inhomogeneities. Geophysics. 1978;43(6):1167–75.10.1190/1.1440886Search in Google Scholar

[29] Ting SC, Hohmann GW. Integral equation modeling of three-dimensional magnetotelluric response. Geophysics. 1981;46(2):182–97.10.1190/1.1441188Search in Google Scholar

[30] Madden T, Mackie RL. Three-dimensional magnetotelluric modelling and inversion. Proc IEEE. 1989;77(2):318–33.10.1109/5.18628Search in Google Scholar

[31] Mackie RL, Smith JT, Madden TR. Three-dimensional electromagnetic modeling using finite difference equations:The magnetotelluric example. Radio Sci. 1994;29(4):923–35.10.1029/94RS00326Search in Google Scholar

[32] Zyserman FI, Santos JE. Parallel finite element algorithm with domain decomposition for three-dimensional magnetotelluric modelling. J Appl Geophys. 2000;44(4):337–51.10.1016/S0926-9851(00)00012-4Search in Google Scholar

[33] Siripunvaraporn W. Three-dimensional magnetotelluric inversion: an introductory guide for developers and users. Surv Geophys. 2012;33(1):5–27.10.1007/s10712-011-9122-6Search in Google Scholar

[34] Grayver AV. Parallel three-dimensional magnetotelluric inversion using adaptive finite-element method. Part I: theory and synthetic study. Geophys J Int. 2015;202(1):584–603.10.1093/gji/ggv165Search in Google Scholar

[35] Li G, Zhang L, Hao T. Performance of preconditioned iterative and multigrid solvers in solving the three-dimensional magnetotelluric modeling problem using the staggered finite-difference method: a comparative study. J Geophys Eng. 2016;13(1):1–10.10.1088/1742-2132/13/1/1Search in Google Scholar

[36] Liu Y, Xu Z, Li Y. Adaptive finite element modelling of three-dimensional magnetotelluric fields in general anisotropic media. J Appl Geophys. 2018;151:113–24.10.1016/j.jappgeo.2018.01.012Search in Google Scholar

[37] Singh A, Dehiya R, Gupta PK, Israil M. A MATLAB based 3D modeling and inversion code for MT data. Comput Geosci. 2017;104(JUL.):1–11.10.1016/j.cageo.2017.03.019Search in Google Scholar

[38] Kruglyakov M, Kuvshinov A. 3-D inversion of MT impedances and inter-site tensors, individually and jointly. New lessons learnt. Earth Planets Space. 2019;71(1):1–9.10.1186/s40623-018-0972-8Search in Google Scholar

[39] Egbert GD, Kelbert A. Computational recipes for electromagnetic inverse problems. Geophys J Int. 2012;189(1):251–67.10.1111/j.1365-246X.2011.05347.xSearch in Google Scholar

[40] Kordy M, Wannamaker P, Maris V, Cherkaev E, Hill G. 3-D magnetotelluric inversion including topography using deformed hexahedral edge finite elements and direct solvers parallelized on SMP computers–Part I: forward problem and parameter Jacobians. Geophys J Int. 2016;204(1):74–93.10.1093/gji/ggv410Search in Google Scholar

[41] Mütschard L, Hokstad K, Wiik T, Ursin B. 3D marine magnetotelluric inversion: A hybrid impedance and direct-field approach3D magnetotelluric field inversion. Geophysics. 2017;82(6):E335–46.10.1190/geo2015-0394.1Search in Google Scholar

[42] Patro PK, Uyeshima M, Siripunvaraporn W. Three-dimensional inversion of magnetotelluric phase tensor data. Geophys J Int. 2013;192(1):58–66.10.1093/gji/ggs014Search in Google Scholar

[43] Reddy IK, Rankin D. Magnetotelluric effect of dipping anisotropies. Geophys Prospect. 1971;19(1):84–97.10.1111/j.1365-2478.1971.tb00586.xSearch in Google Scholar

[44] Loewenthal D, Landisman M. Theory for magnetotelluric observations on the surface of a layered anisotropic half space. Geophys J Int. 1973;35(1–3):195–214.10.1111/j.1365-246X.1973.tb02422.xSearch in Google Scholar

[45] Weaver JT, Agarwal AK. Automatic 1-D Inversion of Magnetotelluric Data By the Method of Modelling. Geophys J Int. 1993;112(1):115–23.10.1111/j.1365-246X.1993.tb01441.xSearch in Google Scholar

[46] Kováciková S, Pek J. Generalized Riccati equations for 1-D magnetotelluric impedances over anisotropic conductors Part II: Non-uniform source field model. Earth Planets Space. 2002;54(5):483–92.10.1186/BF03353039Search in Google Scholar

[47] Mallick K. Magnetotelluric sounding on a layered earth with transitional boundary. Geophys Prospect. 1970;18(s1):738–57.10.1111/j.1365-2478.1970.tb02140.xSearch in Google Scholar

[48] Srivastav J, Niwas S. Magnetotellurics sounding over models of continuously varying conductivity. Proc Natl Acad Sci, India-Section A. 1976;42(4):320–7.Search in Google Scholar

[49] Kao D, Rankin D. Magnetotelluric response on inhomogeneous layered earth. Geophysics. 1980;45(12):1793–802.10.1190/1.1441066Search in Google Scholar

[50] Kao D. Magnetotelluric response on vertically inhomogeneous earth. J Geophys Res. 1981;86(B4):3027–38.10.1029/JB086iB04p03027Search in Google Scholar

[51] Kao D. Magnetotelluric response on vertically inhomogeneous earth having conductivity varying exponentially with depth. Geophysics. 1982;47(1):89–99.10.1190/1.1441285Search in Google Scholar

[52] Patella D. Resistivity sounding on a multi-layered earth with transitional layers, Part II: Theoretical and field examples. Geophys Prospect. 1978;26(1):130–56.10.1111/j.1365-2478.1978.tb01581.xSearch in Google Scholar

[53] Negi JG, Saraf PD. Inductive sounding of a stratified earth with transition layer resting on dipping anisotropic beds. Geophys Prospect. 1973;21(4):635–47.10.1111/j.1365-2478.1973.tb00049.xSearch in Google Scholar

[54] Berdichevsky M, Dmitriyev V, Mershchikova N. Investigation of gradient media in deep electromagnetic sounding. Izvestiya, Phys Solid Earth. 1974;10(6):380–6.Search in Google Scholar

[55] Pal BP. Magnetotelluric response on a layered earth with non-monotonic resistivity distribution, In: Deep Electromagnetic Exploration. New Delhi, India: Narosa Publishing House; 1998. p. 425–31.10.1007/BFb0011923Search in Google Scholar

[56] Fang S, Luo Y. Magnetotelluric response on vertically inhomogeneous earth having conductivity varying linearly with depth by layers (in Chinese). Chin J Geophys. 1991;34(2):216–27.Search in Google Scholar

[57] Chumchob N. Mathematical modelling of electromagnetic response on a multilayered earth with a layer having exponentially varying conductivity. Thai J Math. 2004;2(2):333–58.Search in Google Scholar

[58] Qin L, Yang C, Ding W, Magnetotelluric responses of a vertical inhomogeneous and anisotropic resistivity structure with a transitional layer. Acta Geod Geophys. 2022;57(1):157–76.10.1007/s40328-022-00373-9Search in Google Scholar

[59] Qin L, Ding W, Yang C. Magnetotelluric responses of an anisotropic 1-D earth with a layer of exponentially varying conductivity. Minerals. 2022;12(7):915.10.3390/min12070915Search in Google Scholar

[60] Qin L, Yang C. Magnetotelluric soundings on a stratified earth with two transitional layers. Pure Appl Geophys. 2020;177(11):5263–74.10.1007/s00024-020-02571-4Search in Google Scholar

[61] Peterson FL, Lao C. Electric well logging of hawaiian basaltic aquifers. Ground Water. 1980;8(2):11–8.10.1111/j.1745-6584.1970.tb01674.xSearch in Google Scholar

[62] Patella D. Resistivity sounding on a multi-layered earth with transitional layers. Part I: Theory Geophys Prospect. 1977;25(4):699–729.10.1111/j.1365-2478.1977.tb01198.xSearch in Google Scholar

[63] Price A. The theory of magnetotelluric methods when the source field is considered. J Geophys Res. 1962;67(5):1907–18.10.1029/JZ067i005p01907Search in Google Scholar

[64] Simpson F, Bahr K. Practical magnetotellurics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press; 2005.10.1017/CBO9780511614095Search in Google Scholar

[65] Chave AD, Jones AG. The magnetotelluric method: Theory and Practice. Cambridge, United Kingdom: Cambridge University Press; 2012.10.1017/CBO9781139020138Search in Google Scholar

[66] Boas ML. Mathematical Methods in the Physical Sciences. Hoboken: John Wiley & Sons; 2006.Search in Google Scholar

[67] Key K. OCCAM1DCSEM: An Open-Source Inversion Program for Generating Smooth 1D Models from Controlled-Source Electromagnetic and Magnetotelluric Data. Instructions. Revision. 1.4. 2010.Search in Google Scholar

Received: 2022-07-10
Revised: 2023-10-03
Accepted: 2023-10-07
Published Online: 2024-01-23

© 2024 the author(s), published by De Gruyter

This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.

Downloaded on 24.2.2024 from https://www.degruyter.com/document/doi/10.1515/geo-2022-0563/html
Scroll to top button