U.S. Geological Survey Toxic Substances Hydrology Program--Proceedings
of the Technical Meeting, Colorado Springs, Colorado, September 20-24, 1993,
Water-Resources Investigations Report 94-4015
Electromagnetic and Seismic Tomography Compared to Borehole
Acoustic Televiewer and Flowmeter Logs for Subsurface Fracture Mapping at
the Mirror Lake Site, New Hampshire
by
David L. Wright (U.S. Geological Survey, Denver, Colo.), Gary
R. Olhoeft (U.S. Geological Survey, Denver, Colo.), Paul A. Hsieh (U.S.
Geological Survey, Menlo Park, Calif.), Ernest L. Majer (Lawrence Berkeley
National Laboratory, Berkeley, Calif.), Frederick L. Paillet (U.S. Geological
Survey, Denver, Colo.), and John W. Lane Jr. (U.S. Geological Survey, Hartford,
Conn.)
Abstract
Among the techniques used in research at the Mirror Lake site, Grafton
County, New Hampshire, are electromagnetic (EM) and seismic tomography,
borehole radar, borehole acoustic televiewer, and borehole flowmeter. Of
these techniques, tomography and radar can probe several tens of meters
between or around boreholes at that site with resolutions in the order of
1 meter, whereas televiewer data provides great detail at the borehole wall
but little penetration. Flowmeter data, along with hydraulic tests and tracer
tests provide information on hydraulic connectivity, but hydraulic paths
between the wells can not be inferred from these data alone. We find from
side-by-side comparison of electromagnetic and seismic tomograms of rock
properties between wells FSE1 and FSE4 that both types of tomograms show
the presence of fractures of high hydraulic transmissivity. We present velocity
tomograms for two EM systems and one seismic system, attenuation tomograms
for the two EM systems, and projections of fractures derived from acoustic
televiewer logs. The pulsed transmitters used in the EM tomography at Mirror
Lake produced wavelengths in the granite of about 2 m. The seismic system
produced wavelengths of about 1 m. Seismic and EM tomography can detect
the presence of fractures whose aperture is much smaller than a wavelength
but can not resolve fractures whose spacing is much less than the wavelength.
Resolution-the ability to distinguish two nearby objects from one another-is
determined by a number of factors, including spatial data density, but resolution
usually can not be better than about half the wavelength used for probing
regardless of whether the method is EM or seismic. It is possible to achieve
some resolution improvement in low-attenuation environments, but a needed
step to achieve maximum benefit from tomography is correlation of the tomograms
with other hydrologic and geophysical information. Tomography is an art
that is not fully mature but can be expected to improve in the future.
|
|