GEOPHYSI( .

VOL.

53. KO.

X (AIJGIIST

19X8):

P.

1096-1108.

I2

FIGS.,

I TABLE

Application in gravity

of three-dimensional and magnetics

interactive

modeling

ABSTRACT

Three-dimensional (3-D) interactive modeling permits integrated processing and interpretation of gravity and magnetic data, yielding an improved geologic interpretation. 3-D model bodies are constructed from polyhedra of suitable geometry and physical parameters (density and susceptibility). input on an interactive graphics terminal that is tied to a host computer. The method is especially designed for concurrent processing and interpretation in an interactive mode. The effect on gravity of a homogeneous polyhedron is calculated by transforming a volume integral into a sum of line integrals. Magnetic effects can be modeled by using either Poisson theorem or a slight modification s

of the formulas derived for gravity modeling. The interactive modeling program allows the user to change the geometry as well as the density and/or susceptibility of the elementary polyhedra and to observe results quickly during the course of processing. This capabi!i+v enables the interpreter to decide immediately if and where a tentative geologic structure must be changed for the modeled effect to fit that of a field survey. He is able to drive the device-dependent process by clear menu functions without any knowledge of the rather complicated data structure and the interaction between the main program and its many subroutines. In addition, application of this method requires considerably less computing time than conventional methods based on the direct evaluation of volume integrals.

INTRODUCTION

Interactive computer graphics is a field, whose time has come. J. D. Foley and A. van Dam (1982)

Until a few years ago, the field of computer graphics was a

research area reserved for specialists who required expensive

hardware and substantial computer resources. Only with the development of new computer equipment and corresponding soitware did graphic data processing begin to estabiish itseif. Interactive graphics has already become an important part of data processing, for example CAD or CAM, in several areas of the natural sciencesand in engineering. Geophysics, too, is increasingly concerned with the possibilities provided by interactive computer graphics in data interpretation, e.g., Jordan et al. (1979): Feagin (1981), or Denham and N&on (1986). Grant (1972) recognized sixteen years ago as part of an invited paper for the SEG that the continuing development of modern interpretive techniques in gravity and magnetics. especially in data processing, would be

linked to the special application of interactive computer graphics. Below, we present the development of interpretive techniques of this kind. The development of modeling techniques in gravity and magnet& can bc clearly shown by means of topographic reduction calculations. This development began with manual methods such as templates (Hammer, 1939; Sandberg, 1959) and nomographs. This type of calculation is laborious and time-consuming because it is (a) station-dependent and (b) requires considerable simplifications. Later, with the advent of larger computers. it became possible to program more elaborate formuias, e.g., the formuia for the attracTion ofa~ rectanguJar prism (Nagy. 1966a, b). Reduction techniques as a pathIinder of modeling became independent of the measured gravity stations (Ehrismann et al., 1966; Kantas and Zych, 1967; Stacey and Stephens, 1970). At present, work is in progress at the Bundesamt fur Eichund Vermessungswesen,Wien (Federal Weights and Measures Office, Vienna) on an elevation data bank for use by geophysicists and geodesists in the Eastern Alps. It will contain heights with a spacing of approximately 50 m in the central areas and 160 m at the margin. It will then be possible, for the first time

Manuscriptreceived by the Editor February 13, 1987: revised manuscript received January 19. 1988.
*Institut fuer Geophysikalische Wissenschaften, Malteserstr. 74-100, D-1000, Berlin 46, West Germany :[Institut fuer Geophysik, Arnold Sommerfeldstr. I, D-3392 Clausthal-Zellerfeld. ( 1988 Society of Exploration Geophysicists. All rights reserved.
1096

3-D Interactive to establish a precise presentation topography reduction and thereby calculations. transform modeling of the difficult mountainous of the gravity

Modeling advantages borious: which make modeling with rectangular

1097 prisms la-

increase the accuracy

In this context, it is of no consequence is used as in this paper. or whether are applied (Tsuhoi, 1983;

whether forward fast Fourier Hildenbrand. Great of 3-D method. data The calculated

(11 The formula for the attraction

extraordinarily computer awkward. memory intensive,

effect of a cube is time and large since

techniques

It is both computer especially

1983; Sideris, 1984). are also made on the data no matter base managesurveying and its of the since large amounts of data are characteristic program

demands modeling,

models can consist of prisms. (2) .4pproximating the often nean structure is time-consuming si\e. Were the Earth neither the convergence ation (3) Intcractivc modeling is, in fact. possible but it has not been achicvcd so far. complicated suhterraand input data intenmodeled, then nor that of the

ment programs,

what the geophysical

The organization

of the computer

to be spherically of its meridians

files. as well as of a user-friendly programming of mathematical

presentation

results, are the keys to the system development. s algorithms in itself relittle effort.

radii in deeper structures could be taken into consider-

quires relatively

Forward modeling Before discussing the ovcrail framework for the applied modeling. In and magshapes,

With this background now present a modern and magnetic modeling. Simulation modeling

of available concept

model techniques, we shall for easy handling of gravity

analysis, we provide a short reminder netic anomalies

of forward

general, we assume that the interpretation is based on determining parameters positions. and physical broadest Basically,

of gravity

plausible

for the geologic structures of data inversion in its which models. of the into geologic of the information

Rather than the actual mathematical ing an elementary calculation parts and the interactive body s control program attraction, process, the graphic computer simulation organization,

formulas

for calculatof the

which cause these fields. This problem sense requires conversion an indirect modeling has been obtained by measurements

the organization

presentation

of the results, are the major or magthe a of userthe under

of model matching for simulation are grouped From

process is the calculation body which approximates area. followed

da

of gravity together

the efrect of a simple elementary geologic situation

netic data. heading friendly

These activities

in the investigated

by match-

modeling. simulation

the viewpoint

ing the model curve with the observed curve by trial and error or graphic-interactive tools. Within this arrangement, it is possible to distinguish between tr~lrrlyrictrl ctr/c!rlu . in which the gravitational ; simply formed models such as spheres. mass-points, etc. can be calculated calculate effects of and lines. exis

models should (1) provide

data structure

which can be stored and which contains themselves, their interrelationship,

object components

and one

or more of the process-algorithms; and include active computer munication titative between have the characteristics correlation, geometry (6) contain

(2) be computer-oriented model; (3)

graphics which improve the com-

and [or which precise mathematical models whose geometry of elementary

the user and the simulation such as with an equation; or layout;

pressions can still he given, and clrltrl~ficc~l techniques, which the fields of complicated by a greater approximated number bodies

of the system described by exact quan(4) have fixed e.g., density In order to (5) store a gating ability; to reality.

of the structure

(polygons, prisms. or polyhedrons). The above-mentioned out gravity and magnetic techniques model are suitable for carrying decalculations of varying

specific application

model parameters, comparative

or susceptibility; achieve

and (7) he adaptable

the last requirement,

values (measureimplies search are

grees ol difficulty. In correspondence with is made bodies used. a diKcrentiation dimensional and three-dimensional called 2-D when the model extends infinitely lar to the ),-axis are identical is constant. by Tnlwani (1987). For A very well-known 2-D techniques to

the elementary between twomodel is along the y-axis.

ments) must be available of all the information compromises

in the data structure. The availability The requirements through of data struc-

on the model in a data structure interaction,

processes. A

in the modeling.

ture clarity, excellent user comfort and sort algorithms, counterbalanced CPU and elaborate

Thus. all cross-sections of these bodies which are perpendicuand the density (magnetization) 2-D technique be applicable was developed and Bevis must be to situations by Won

processing algorithms

by limited computer

resources with regard to on the calculaof numbers, as of the modpro-

time and memory;

hence. by a limitation on the precision

et al. (1959) and improved

tions and often a limitation well as a limitation eled results. Below,

on the rapid graphic

display

found in nature, the length of the geologic structure approximately modeling. The program 3-D modeling siruciurc, mcntioncd developed could and by Talwani and Ewing five times that of its maximum et al for-mula given by Talwani

width. Thus, the

we discuss the design of such an application modeling. Figure

(1959) is a very effective aid in

(1960) for

gram for simulation basic structure.

I shows the program s

not establish confused. In

itself, because the model addition to the abovehave rock Figure 2 presents the simplified relationships among graphics, design, and calculation in order to differentiate between interactive graphics and passive graphics. Pussit~~ computrr RASIC l+:I.EMENTS INTERACTIVE I;OR PROGRAMMING GRAPHIC PROCESS AN

even of rciativeiy work,

simpic geologic bodies, proved to model calculations of natural

bc complicated become known (I966a.

several other 3-D

in which the approximation and Henderson

complexes was carried out with rectangular b); Cordell

prisms, e.g., Nagy

(1968). There are three dis-

1098

G&e

and Lahmeyer

yruphics comprise the creation and storage in the computer of images of certain objects (pictures). Acti~ computer graphics involve a user who, by means of interactive elements such as a keyboard, mouse, etc., can dynamically influence the form, size, and content of the image on the monitor. The calculation by the process algorithms is immediately modified. Thus the operational process is event-driven. If this event-dependent control is to be highly efficient, then a series of human factor principles must be considered. One such factor is the use of simple and logical interactive sequences. English et al. (1967) showed that processing time differences of up to 100 percent are possible for identical activities because of clumsy interactivity. Other factors demand no overloading for communication with the program and opportunities for feedback from the user. The user has either syntactic or semantic feedback at his disposal. The last of the human factors is support of the user in error search within the data structure after erroneous interaction. The corresponding program routines for error identification comprise approximately 20 percent of the total length of the application program presented here. Figure 3 shows the most important elements of the program for interactive processing of gravity and magnetic model calculations. The application program contains the mathematical formulas and the organizational structure for interactive processing. The interactive graphics are implemented with the Graphical Kernel System. The graphic system tools are the following: Seyments:serve the collection of basic primitives, thus enabling the graphic results to be printed out at specific work stations via special drivers in a post-mortem procedure ; Codinure systems a user-input coordinate system, : normalized virtual system, and driver-dependent twodimensional coordinate system; LirWtrr trarzsfiwmatiorzsfor which windowing and

viewport activities are required; input/output primitives for the interaction between the user and his program via a menu table on the graphical screen; Attrihutv.s of the input/output functions; Zooming; and Error ident$cation routines exclusively for the graphic system. flaving discussed the external frame for interactive processing above, we introduce the process algorithms, moving us toward the geophysical principles of the evaluation process.

Design and
Decision

FIG. 2. The relationship for the definition of computer graphics after Green (1970). The innermost part deals with interactive computer graphics.

4~

User

Program B

Metafile

---Jp

cl
User

Frc;. 1. The structure of an interactive application program and the interrelationships among the data structure, the graphic system, and the graphic display. A = building, modification, and manipulation procedures; B = traversal for display; C = traversal for analysis; D = display and interaction dialogue handler; E = organization of computer resources (not dealing with modeling). +, = data pipe-lines. Redrawn after Foley and van Dam (1982).

3-D Interactive
PROCESS ALGORITHMS

Modeling

1099

First of all, an elementary body which approximates geologic phenomena well must be found. This elementary body must fulfill the conditions of the whole range of geologic-tectonic features: compact small volume structures. such as are found in engineering problems of applied gravity, have to be just as depictable as the global forms and dimensions of a subduction zone. Any polyhedron with plane surfaces can ensure the required conformity; its physical material parameters are density and/or magnetization. Note that in the following, the term gravity will be the attraction effect of a stationary elementary body only. In general, the calculation of the attraction of homogeneous polyhedrons at a station P is based on the evaluation of the

with U(P) = potential at the station P, R = distance between P and dm, dm = p dv = p dx dy dz, and f = gravitation constant. Taking the derivative of the potential with respect to the vertical e-component leads to the gravity g(P):

su ;i- (PI = g(P) =fP jjjg

PlY.

(;) du.

(2)

Corresponding to the relevant theorems of vector analysis, one obtains l?u ,:,

(PI = g(P)=fp #
Surface

cos(4

z(i) dS,

(3)

USW Program

Graphic System

where the surface integral in equation (3) has to be calculated for the whole polyhedron surface, and the cosine term CDS(n, Z) determines the direction of the surface element dS with regard to the Cartesian coordinate system (Figure 4). Since, according to Figure 4, cos (nj, z) = constant for any polyhedron surface S, (j = 1, _, m, the number of surfaces), the attraction effect of a polyhedron by the superposition of the gravity effects of its individual surfaces Sj can be expressed as

USW Data structure n

GKS

k
2 3

Plotter

Printer fEiz

Ftc;. 3. An extension of Figure 1 shows the graphic system s communication with the available hardware resources, the data files, and the user program. Drivers are hardwaredependent computer programs which convert graphic information of the calculation process to connected work stations.

In order to maintain the simplest possible mathematical expressions in the evaluation of the surface integral in equation (4), a transformation of the coordinate system is required, whereby the new system xi, y Z should be surface-oriented , (Figure 4). Thus, the x axis runs parallel to V,V, , the L-axis runs parallel to the respective surface normals nj, and the #axis is orthogonal to the x and Z axes. The transformed coordinates are calculated for each surface S, as follows : (x Y', 2 = T(x, Y>4 , ) with

,.,i :
* ,,*:

v9&

_ n2
s2

&
St
_ ,-

VA
i

(S)

v5
!

t Z'
lo
X ;?a

fi 1

,,J.-.-._.__&
4

\ VI
\ \\, \i <\\ -ii. \ CX

/-_

\.

II

being the transformation matrix. (x, y, z) = T (x y z , where - , , ) 1 is the transpose of T. The directional cosines of T are determined from the determinants of the first three vertex coordinates (V,, V, , VJ:
x .x2 x3 1 XI

Ve

dv_.Q ;+; \ / *\ 3, \
;;.

Y
A=-

z Yy2-y1

Yl

2 -

z,

63
s3

VS

x,
x1

z* -z*
Yl 23 21

=o

Y,

FE. 4. Presentation of an arbitrarily structured polyhedron. l$ = vertices; S; = polyhedron surfaces area, j = I,~ ~. ,.m; nj = surface normal f Sj, o

and the relationship which the transformed coordinate axes have with the polyhedron surface S,. The corners v are input in the positive direction. All other

1100

G&e

and Lahmeyer Equations (6) and (IO) represent the processing algorithm for the interactive system for processing density models. For magnetic model calculations, the Poisson theorem will be applied when pole-reduced magnetic data are used. It is generally expressed as

calculations are carried out with the transformed coordinates of equation (5). The next step is the conv*ersion of the surface integral (4) into a linear integral via polygon Pj, which limits surface S, (after Gauss-Ostrogradski); the solution of the linear integral is very time-consuming and will not be described in detail here (see e.g.. Giitze 1984). As a final formula, the easily programmable formula for the gravitational effect of a polyhedron is obtained:

where I/ = magnetic potential, I! = gravity potential. I = homogeneous magnetization of body, f= gravitation constant, p = homogeneous density, 0 = direction of magnetization, and

.$= arbitrary dilferentiation direction.

(6)
with
6=

In the case of pole reduction. 0 = 90 and the differentiation , runs along the :-axis (s = z). Thus for reduction to the pole,

if

p*

6 ST
E L$

E =

factor.

(12)
where the expression on the right-hand side is the vertical gradient of gravity from equation (IO). When r,j; and p are given. the magnetic field of a polyhedron can be calculated using the vertical gradient of gravity, as long as pole-reduced data are used. If the field does not incline at 90, the following representation of the magnetic potential is assumed:

Correspondingly, the vertical gradient of gravity is the second derivative of the potential
f 2II

i= (P) = Vc;(P) = fi,

(7 I cos (n, 3) ii_ 70R

dS,

(7)

or corresponding to equation (4) VG(P) =$, [cos (Mj>=) jJ$ (k) ds,]. (8)

In accordance with the coordinate transformation of equation (5). the differentiation in the old coordinate system is

= -[

11

(+)I.&

jjj($V.M].
Poly

(13)

surface

When 1 = constant, V . I = 0, and From equation (8). we have: V(P) = (14)

because I . (is = In ds for the magnetic field, The equation for calculating the vertical gradient can be derived after applying Green theorem, and several other cons versions : VG(P) =.lp t cos (n,i. :) 5 (U,)jPI* In h,,

H(P) = -V,

V(P) = V,

(15)

+Fi++,
hi -

In accordance with the earlier developments, for the field of a polyhedron with planes,

i 1 @,),a* In
'j.i

1i 1 L
+

ui, j + PVj. i
PP;(YJj

V,.i-1 +
+

a ,,

c. i

arctan

Llj, i / PPY /

lh,l IPPJ*l -

or, transforming coordinates,

I hi I Fy, i
PP* I

+ 2x6&(yJi -&J--

IPf Ii T

(10)

The integral in equation (17) was already solved for equation

3-D Interactive Modeling (10). In conclusion, one obtains for the field H in P: 2-D and 3-D model calculations

1101

and

ci= hi PP* 2

arctan
aj, i I ppT

If one compares the 3-D formulas in equations (6), (lo), and (18) which were derived for polyhedrons with the formulas presented by Talwani et al. (1959) it is clear that the complexity of 3-D calculations is only minimally different from that of 2-D calculations. Thus, we know that the derived formulas are rapid and powerful, and furthermore offer a more realistic approximation to geologic-tectonic structures by gaining a third dimension. Data acquisition should also be adapted to these new opportunities, so that horizontal derivatives in all directions are measured. The formulas do not allow us to dispense with the principle of equivalency of the potential methods-that principle can be derived from theoretical considerations. However, the procedural scope in modeling is strictly limited because the total horizontal gradient has to be modeled within the measured gravitational distribution. This means that where narrow or wide isoline distances occur in the Bouguer gravity map. they must also be recognizable in the map of the modeled gravity.

lhil IPPj*l _
arctan

I hi I Fy. ;

bj.i I I ?

Ih,IPi,i-, >
Equation (18) shows that to calculate components of magnetic fields, no integrals other than those that solved foi equation (10) need to be solved. The expressions Ai, Bi, and Ci are merely multiplied by different directional cosines. Thus, the processing algorithm has also been derived for magnetic cases. Nothing more stands in the way of a simultaneous calculation of gravity and magnetic models.

THE BASIC ELEMENTS OF USER DATA STRUCTURES 4ND THE PROCESS SEQUENCE IN INTERACTIVE MODELING In creating the data structure of a model, the model structure must be comprehensible to the user and not overloaded with details. The program should also incorporate the usual geoscientific requirements, such as geologic vertical sections, seismic cross-sections. and depth contouring.

FIG. 5. Example of the presentation of a simple two-layer substructure in a data structure with S, S,, = triangles, L, = lines, and VI VI 3 = model vertices. Each vertical section is both a EB, ... EB, = vertical sections, L, cross-section and a working area on the graphical terminal.

1102

G&e

and Lahmeyer I

)
Layer

MODEL

) I
1

+
Boundary

It is. therefore, sensible to divide the whole model into vertical sections (so-called planes) as in Figure 5. All the other elements of the data structure are to be found in these planes, which are in their totality carriers of geometric and material parameters and are interactively manipulatable on the graphic monitor. The main elements of the data structure are the following:
Plunes: The planes are vertical and should be placed parallel to y = a constant. They should be oriented vertically to the main strike direction. They do not, however, necessarily have to be equidistant, but rather should be adapted by the user to the area of investigation. I,ines: Within individual planes, the substructure is marked by a series of interconnected points K (Figure 5). The series of vertices domprises a line and, as a polygon section, it marks the intersection of a layer boundary with the respective plane. There may be open and closed lines, as well as lines which have only one point V.

FIG. 6. Interrelation in model 1 for layer I. TRIANGLE is synonymous with triangle facet and RHO is synonymous with density or susceptibility. The triangles correspond to the surfazes S in Figure 5.

MAIN PROGRAM HP 1

HP 1 builds the model data structure from user input data. HP 1 tests logical links (sequences) in the data structure and tests the triangle formation within the layer boundaries. The prepared data fields are placed on an intermediate data file.

MODEL DATA FILE

The intermediate data file serves the actual interactive activities with the user data structure, i.e., modeling. The intermediate data file is permanent and can be printed out for checking or archival purposes.

,&

A ,

The interactive program contains the formulas derived in process aigorithm (for m~agnetics a&gravity); i-iP 2; -with its pick functions, has access via the menu table to the graphics package DIGRAF. It can also access long-term data files which store calculation results and graphic presentations.

DIGRAF 4

Graphic program package: complies with the American CORE-Standard.

SCREEN / DATA FILE

The input/output medium used was a Tektronix monitor 4014. For long-term storage, the graphic entities can also be printed.

FIG. 7. The interactive flow between the main programs HP1 and HP2.

3-D Interactive Layer boundaries: The basic elements thus far described were presented in the 2-D x, z coordinate system of the ,r = a constant plane. The layer boundaries stabilize the 3-D model structure by encompassing the lines of neighboring planes which are separated by identical density (susceptibility) complexes. Thus, in Figure 5 the lines L,, L,, and L, are brought together into a layer boundary surface. Each layer boundary consists of triangles which have the v as their vertices. The data structure used allows the modeling of all structures found in nature including outcrops, intrusions, folds, thin plates, steep layers, and dikes, as well as flat and uncomplicated deposits. Triangle planes: The vertices which are encompassed by the basic element layer lines are joined into triangles within a layer. The program automatically undertakes

Modeling

1103

the design of the triangle net. The basis of triangle formation can be found in the work by Akima (1978), who used Lawson algorithm (Lawson, 1972) for the optis mization of triangle networks. With the input of the point coordinates, C.Y, L E q; I J

i = number of model vertices

and the material parameters

r RHO,. LKAPPA,,

RHO, KAPPA, 1

E sj; .i = number of model surfaces,

the model is completely defined. Figure 6 shows the interrelation in the data structure. The data structure defined so far

Table 1. Program functions of the main program HP 2. These program activities may be chosen by a pick device (cross-hairs of the graphic screen) from the menu table which is permanently presented on the graphic terminal.

Program activities of HP 2 Shifting of corner points Shifting of Lines Insertion of corner points Gravity calculation of modified models Change of gravity (susceptibility) values 3-D perspective view of the model Any vertical cross-section through the model with corresponding measured and calculated field curves Termination of program run Depth contour lines of layer surfaces Contour line maps of the modelled and measured fields Calculation of the optimal material parameter by means of inversion techniques Choosing a new vertical section with special presentation of the results (differential or curve) Zooming (enlarging or reducing the model, extract presentation) Returning window to original boundaries Active (passive) setting of metafile of the GKS program Input/output of model data base of model data file of IGAS Output of intermediate models to return to HP 1 Fixed scale for all graphic pictures Scale automatically calculated by program SHIFT

Menu table

SHIFTLINE INSERT GRAVITY DENSITY 3-D PICTURE CROSS-SECTION END PROGRAM

ISOSCH ISOLINES INVERSION NEW FACE WINDOW ORIGINAL WINDOW

METON/METOFF INPUT, UTPUT O OUT2 FIXED NEW SCALE SCALE MODEL

1104

G&e

and Lahmeyer

has been implementated in two Fortran programs, both of which are linked by a permanent model data file (Figure 7). The main task of HP2 is to revise interactively the intcrmediate data file on a graphic monitor until the model results conform to the measured fields from gravity and magnetics. The model geometry or material parameter (e.g., density or magnetization) can be changed and, with interactive processing, the results are immediately visible to the user; and it is possible for the user to influence the modeling directly. In the case of gravity and magnetics, the programs offer the opportunity for calculating optimal material parameters for any given geometry and measured comparative fields by means of inversion (generalized matrix inversion). Apart from the various possibilities for the presentation of the model structures and model results (representation graphics), intermediate models can also be separated and stored to be reprocessed later. Similarly, every passive graphic can be shown on various types of printout equipment after interactive processing has ceased (e.g., on a plotter for storage in the archives). Table 1 shows the individual program activities of HP2 and the corresponding commands in the menu table. Below, we demonstrate a short application of the program package to complex subterranean conditions, whereby the high degree of user comfort in the interactive computer program will become clear.
APPLICATION EXAMPLES

netics, magnetotellurics, geothermics, and geology into a combined interpretation (Dohr, 1976; Giebeler, 1983; GiebelerDegro, 1986). Many aspects of the formation and structure of northern Germany within the tectonic frame of the northwest European Basin are still unclear. The area is one of repeated geophysical exploration for hydrocarbon deposits, whereby geologictectonic studies as well as geophysical examination have been carried out (Dohr, 1976; Bartenstein and Schmidt, 1980; Ziegler, 1981, 1982). A summary cannot be given here; rather, Figure 8 (after Bender and Hedemann, 1983) conveys an im-

The aim of the model calculations presented here was to create a plausible density structure model for an area of northern Germany. We expected 3-D gravity model calculations to help answer questions about any possible geometry and its estimated depth. We also intended to make use of as many partial results from other geophysical measuring methods as possible in the creation of the model. Since the area under examination lies beneath the Zechstein horizon, and thus has to be considered a poor reflection area, it seemed admissible to first draw together the results obtained by gravity, mag-

FIG;. 9. Contour map of the gravity from the final model. Contour interval = 1 mGa1. S4 and SX mark the positions of the vcrtjcal model cross-sections presented in Figure 11.

ssw
wiihen gebirge Weser Aller Elbe Fehmam Belt

NE

0 * 100 km

Oil Gas

Field Field

FIG. 8. Schematic profile of the northern German Basin with some important subterranean structures. After Bender
and Hedcmann (1983). The modeled area is situated in the southwest part of this vertical section.

3-D Interactive

Modeling

1105

pression of the complicated structure of the area under examination. A contour map of gravity from the final processing (Figure 9) is presented as the result of the model calculations (also, refer to Figure 11). Two gravity highs are clearly recognizable, one caused by basic intrusions from the lower crust area (structure left) and the other resulting from the raised position of the lower crust in the modeling area (structure right). Measured gravity field and modeled gravity conform satisfactorily. The computer program which was made available for the calculations clearly shows good agreement in the modeled and measured gravity fields when the command contour map of

differences was given. In Figure 10, the differences are presented together with the positions of modeled sections S, to S, I. It is shown that the deviation at no time exceeded + 2 mGal, and, furthermore, that the adaptation was satisfactory for the total measuring area within the explored region. The terminal presentation of two central cross-sectionsof the modeled underground of the northwest German Basin is shown in Figure I I. The vertical cross-sections (S,) and (S,) show that the upper crust of Lower Saxony is structured by deep grabens and intrusions of basic composition (density of 2.75-2.95 g:cm) which arise from lower crust levels. The strike of these intrusions is tied to the generally obtained Hercynian direction. The difference from 2-D model calculations becomes clear here. With 2-D model calculations, adaptation can be obtained only because the model changes in 3-D processing always atfcct all model gravity stations. Of course, as always, the equivalency principle is still valid; however, 3-D modeling strictly limits the possibilities of free modeling.

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS h4any of ?he ideas presented in this paper wereborn during stimulating discussions with Prof. 0. Rosenbach and Dr. M. Gicbclcr-Degro. In addition, M. Giebeler-Degro spent her time with us in front of the graphic terminal during the phases of development and. sometimes, despair. MSc. Guy Moore attended to the translation and Dr. S. Schmidt prepared the manuscript. This project was hnancially supported by the German Science Foundation (Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft): the modeling of the northwest German Basin was sup-

FE. IO. Contour map of the differences of measured gravity and calculated gravity from the final model. SZ-SI 1 are the positions of vertical cross-sections. Numbers are differences in mGa1.

FK. 11. Presentation of the vertical cross-sections S, and S, of the density model. At the top, the graphic contains both the measured and modeled gravity profiles. The named extrema of the gravity field correspond with Figure 9. The intrusions (RHO = 2.75 and 2.92 g/cm3) arise from the level of the Conrad discontinuity (depth = 20 km). The surface of the crystalline basement (RHO = 2.80 gjcm3) is shaped by various horsts and grabens, separated by steep deep faults.

1106

Giitze and Lahmeyer AG. Hannover. We are very grateGrant, F. S.. 1972, Review of data processing and interpretation methods in gravity and magnetics. 1964-1971: Geophysics. 37, 647661. Green. K. E., 1970, Computer graphics: Computer aided design, 29 48. Hammer. S.. 1939. Terrain corrections for gravimetric stations: Geophypics, 4, I84- 194. Hildenbrand, T.. 1983. A filtering oroeram based on two-dimensional Fourvzr analysis: U.S.G.S. Op&&-rep. no. 83. Jordan, N. F.. Wessman, F. H., and Miller, B. K.. 1979, Interactive modeling and interpretation of two-dimensional gravity and magnetic data: Presented at the 49th Ann. Internat. Mtg., Sot. Explor. Geophys. Kanta\ and Zych. IY67, Reduction of gravity observations with digital computers: Pure Appl. Geophys.. 68, 1l-18. Lawson, C. L., 1972. Generation of a triangular grid with application to contour nlottine: Tech. Memo. 299. Sec. 914. Jet Prouulsion Lab.. California Ins?. Tech. Nagy. D., 1966a, The prism method for terrain corrections using digilal compulcra: Pure Appl. Geophys.. 63, 31-39. ~ 1966b, The gravitational attraction of a right rectangular prism : Geophysics, 31, 362-37 I Sandberg, C. H., 1959, Terrain correction charts for transition from Hammer charts to Hayford-Bowie charts: Geophysics. 24, 323-329. Sideris. M., 1984, computation of gravimetric terrain corrections using FFT techniques: M.Sc. thesis, Univ. of Calgary. Stacey. R. A.. and Stephens, L. E.. 1970. Procedures for calculating terrain corrections for gravity measurements: Publ. Dam. Obs.. 39, 34%3h8. Talwani, M., Worzel, J. L.. and Landisman, M., 1959, Rapid gravity computations for two-dimensional bodies with application to the Mend&no submarine fracture zone: J. Geophys. Res., 64.49-59. Talwani, M., and Ewing, M., 1960, Rapid computation of gravitational attraction of three-dimensional bodies of arbitrary shape: Geophysics, 25,203%225. Tsuboi, Ch.. 1983, Gravity: George Allen and Unwin. Won, I. J., and Bevis, M. G., 1987, Computing the gravitational and magnetic anomalies due to a polygon: Algorithms and Fortran subroutines: Geophysics, 52,232-238. Ziegler. P. A., 1981, Evolution of sedimentary basins in North-West Europe, in Petroleum geology of the continental shelf of NorthWest Europe, 3-39. 1982, Faulting and graben formation m Western and Central Europe: Phil. Trans. Roy. Sot. London, 305A, 113-143.

ported by the PREUSSAG

ful to all of them.

REFERENCES Akima, H.. 1978. A method of hivariate interpolation and smooth surface fitting for irregularly distributed data points: ACM Trans. on Math. Software, 4. 148-159. Bartenstein. H., and Schmidt, W. J.. 1980. Future hydrocarbon exploration. Are the geological limits for the hydrocarbon prospection in Northern Germany in sight?: Erdiil und Kohle, 33, 4255 432. Bender. F., and Hedemann, H.-A., 1983. Zwanzig Jahre crfolgreichc Rotliegend-Exploration in Nordwestdeutschland -weitere Aussichten such im Priiperm?: Erdiil-Erdgas-Zeitschrifl. Y9, 3948. Cordell. L.. and Henderson. R. G., 1968. Iterative three-dimensional solution of gravity anomaly data using a digital computer: Geophysics, 33. 596-601. Denham, J. I.. and Nelson. H. R.. Jr.. lY86, Map displays from an interactive interpretation: Geophysics. 51, 1999-2006. Dohr. G.. 1976, Die Bedeutung der seismischenTiefenexploration fiir die Erkundung prdpermischer Formationen in Nerd-deutschland: Compendium 76/77, Zeitschr. ErdBl und Kohle, Erdgas: Petrochemie. lndustrieverlag v. Herrenhausen KG? 22-35. Ehrismann. W.. Miiller. G., Rosenbach, 0.. and Sperlich, N., 1966, Topographical reduction of gravity measurements by the aid of digital computers: Boll. di Geofis. teorica ed appl., 8, l-20. English. W. K.. Englebart, D. C., and Beerman, M. L., 1967, Displayselection Techniques for text manipulation: Inst. Electr. Electron. Eng. Trans. Human Factors in Electronics, HFE-8, 21-31. l-eagin, F. J, 1981. Seismic data display and reflectmn perceptibility; Geophysics, 46, 106-120. Foley. 1. D.. and van Dam. A.. 19X2. Fundamentals of interactive computer graphics: Addison-Wesley Publ. Co. Giebelcr, M., 1983. lnteraktive Bearbcitung 3-dimension&r Dichtemodelle im Prazechsteinbereich des Norddeutschen Beckens: MSc. thesis, Univ. of Clausthol. Giebeler-Degro, M., 1986. Zur Tiefenerkundung des Niedersiichsischen Tektogens durch 3-dimensionale Simulalionsrechnungen: Ph.D. thesis, Univ. of Clausthal. Giitze, H.-J.. 1984, tiber den Einsatz interaktiver Computer graphik Im Rahmen 3-dimensionaler Interprelationstechniken in Gravimetric und Magnetik: Habil. thesis, Univ. of Clausthal.

APPENDIX
THE FORTRAN SUBROUTINE NEWTON

The Subroutine vertical Figure A-l.

NEWTON

calculates

the gravity

effect of a triangle.

That statement

means the gravity

effect of a

prism, infinite in z-direction

and with a triangle

as upper boundary.

The geometry

of this body is shown in

More complicated polyhedra may be constructed as the sum of elementary bodies like this.

IP2

FIG. A-l. Geometry of the body whose gravity effect can be calculated with subroutine NEWTON.

SUBROUTINE NBYTON~SXYZ,NST,NST~,TXYZ,NPH,IPI,IP2,IP3,GRAV,IFAIL~ C C SUBROUTINE "NEWTON" CALCULATES GRAVITYEFFECT IN WGAL THE THE OF C C TRIANGLEDEFINEDBY THE POINTS "IPl","IP2" AND "IP3" ANDTHE C COORDINATES "TXYZ", FOR ALL STATIONSIN SXYZ. THE ASSUMED IN DENSITY C CONTRAST 1 GR/CCH. IS
C C

IFAIL= VERGL--l.D-8 CONST=8.'ATAN(DBLE(l.)) X(l)=TXYZ(IPl,l) X(2)=TXYZ(IP2.1) X(3)=TXYZ(IP3;1) Y(l)=TXYZLIP1.2) Y(Z)=TXYZ(IPZ,?.) Y(31=TXYZ(IP3,21 211)=TXYZ(IP1,3) Z(2)=TXYZ(IP2.3) Z(3l=TXYZ(IP3,3) DXZl=X(Z)-XIli

HILF=QS(PX,P BETl-PXIHILF BET2=PY/HILF BET3=PZ/HILF

C

C AUTHORS: HANS-JIJERGEN GOETZE C INSTITUT F. GEOPHYSIKALISCHE YISSENSCHAFTEN C FU BERLIN BALTESERSTR. 74-100 c C D-1000 BERLIN 46 C C BERND LABM ER Y C INSTITUT FUER GEOPHYSIK C TU CLAUSTHAL C ARNOLD SOHHERFELDSTR. 1 D-3392 CLAUSTHAL-ZELLERFELD C
C
C (JANUARY 3988) C C C INPUT: C c X(I).Y(I),Z(Il C C C SXYZ(I,l),SXYZ(I,2),SXYZ(I,3) C C NST C C NSTI4 C C TXYZ(I,1),TXYZ~I,2),TXYZII,3) C C C NPK

C
C

DZ21=2(2)-Z(1) DZ31=Z(3)-Z(l) DZ32=2(31-Z(2) c C ALL POINTS OF TRIANGLE DIFFERENT?

OF

C 8888
C

CONTINUE R;41=X(l) Y(4)=Y(l) X(5)=X(2) Y(s)=Y(z)

COORDINATES I-TH POINT OF A TRIANGLE (IN KM1

OF COORDINATES I-TH STATION (KM1

f
l

1
NUUBER OF

STATIONS C 2

IF(~QS(DX21.DY21.DZ21).CT.VERGLJ.AND. (QS(DX31,DY31,DZ31).GT.VERGL).AND. lQS(DX32,DY32,DZ3Z).GT.'IERGL)) GOT0 2 YRITE~*.'~A)'l ' TRIANGLEHAS IDENTICAL POINTS' IFAIL=l RETURN A=DY21*DZ31- DZ21*DY31 B=DZZl*DX31 - DX21'DZ31 C=DXZl*DY31 - DY21*DX31 D=X(l)*A + Y(l)*8 + Z(l)'C 31 HILF=QSIA,B,C) COAL=A/HILF COBE=B/HILF COGA=C/RILF IF (ABS(COGA-DBLE(l.)).LT.VERGL) COGA=1.0 COGAX=COGA*6.67 32 33 11

OF UAXIUUIINUHBER STATIONS

COORDINATES I-TH POINT FOR OF TRIANGLES(KH)

OF NAXIHUKNUMBER POINTS IN TXYZ

DO 11 J=L.3 AJ=X(J+lI-X(J) BJ=YIJ+l)-YIJ) HILF=SQRTOr AST(Jl=AJ/HIL BST(J)=BJ/HIL IF (ABS(AST( IF (ABS(BSTI GOT0 33 AST(JI=DBLE( GOT0 33
BST(JI=O.

C IPl,IP2,IP3
C C
C

POINTSOF TRIANGLES BE TO CALCULATED (COORDINATES TXYZ) IN

C OUTPUT: C C GRAVII) C C C C IFAIL C

C C

C CALCULATED GRAVITYFOR DENSITYCONTRAST GR/CCHAT STATIONI 1

OfGAL) .EQ.B

P = - D/HILF C C IF (ABS(COGA).LT.(VERGL)) GOT0 9999 IF (coGA.EQ.l.0) GOT0 8888 C HILF=QSIDX21,DY21,DZ21) ALP1 = DX21/HILF ALP2 = DY21lHILF ALP3 = DZZl/HILF C C PX=DX31+BB*DXZl PY=Dy3lfBB*DYZl PZ=DZ31+BB*DZ21 12 C
C

.EQ.l

ERROR DETECTED : TRIANGLE HAS IDENTICAL POINTS

: NO

ItiPLICIT INTEGER(I-K.&N) IMPLICIT LOGICAL IL) IHPLICIT REAL*8 (A-H,O-Z) C DIMENSIONX~5~,Y~5~,2~5~,SXYZ~NSTH,3l,TXYZ~NPK,3~,GRAV~NSTBl C DIHENSIONHFAKTO),ASTI4),BST(4).HFAKT2(4).ISIG(3) C

CONTINUE CONTINUE AST(I)=AST(l) BST(4)=BST(l) DO 12 J=2,4 HILFl=X(J)-X(J HILF2=Y(J)-Y(J HILF =SQRT& ASST=HILFl/H BSST=HILF2/H HFAKTZ(J)=0. CONTINUE HFAKT2(1)=HF DO 20 I=l,NST

LOOPOVERSTATIO

GGRAV=DBLE REXS=SXYZ(I, REYS=SXYZ(I, REZS=SXYZ~I