Open AccessOn the sensitivity of surface NMR in the presence of electrical conductivity anomalies
Author(s) -
LehmannHorn J. A.,
Hertrich M.,
Greenhalgh S. A.,
Green A. G.
Publication year - 2012
Publication title -
geophysical journal international
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 1.302
H-Index - 168
eISSN - 1365-246X
pISSN - 0956-540X
DOI - 10.1111/j.1365-246x.2012.05380.x
Subject(s) - conductivity , spins , electromagnetic induction , magnetization , electrical resistivity and conductivity , computational physics , nuclear magnetic resonance , dipole , groundwater , magnetic field , materials science , condensed matter physics , geophysics , physics , soil science , geology , geotechnical engineering , quantum mechanics , electromagnetic coil
SUMMARY The surface‐NMR tomography technique is based on the principles of electromagnetic induction and proton spin dynamics. Electromagnetic fields emitted by large surface current‐driven loops are employed to locate and quantify groundwater reservoirs. The oscillating magnetic fields interact with proton spins of water molecules in the electrically conductive subsurface. To study the influence of changing subsurface electrical properties on the nuclear spin response, we consider the spin magnetization as a virtual magnetic dipole receiver. The numerical solutions for the electric and magnetic fields of the transmitter and the virtual receiver in 3‐D heterogeneous ground are based on the finite‐element method. We explicitly compute the frequency‐domain electromagnetic sensitivities for separate spin magnetizations in a groundwater aquifer to study the distortion of the NMR response because of electrical heterogeneities in the medium. Analyses of entire pulse moment sequences yield the cumulative sensitivities to electrical conductivity and water‐content variations in the subsurface. We illustrate the influence of conductivity on NMR responses using a limited number of models. From these models we found that electrical conductivity anomalies in the shallow subsurface ( < 50 m) having values ≥ 0.1 S m –1 and volumes with linear dimensions in the order of our loop size (i.e. edge length 100 m) can have a strong influence on the NMR response and ought to be taken into account in the inversion of surface‐NMR data. The effect increases non‐linearly with increased body size, increased conductivity contrast and decreased anomaly depth.