Downloaded 12/06/14 to 31.175.249.111. Redistribution subject to SEG license or copyright; see Terms of Use at http://library.seg.

org/

D EVELO PM EN T OF A H ELIC O PTER TIM E DO M AIN SYSTEM FO R

BATH Y M ETR IC M A PPIN G AND SEA FLO O R C H A RA C TERISA TIO N IN
SHALLOW W A TE R

Julian Vrbancich1*lUchard Smith2

Defence Science & Technology Organisation
ju lia n . vrbrncich@ dsto. defm ce.gov.au1
Technicrl Images P ty Ltd
^m hh@ netconnft com.auj

K ey W ords: airborne-electrom agnetic bath ym e try m a rine-seism ic in v e rsio n L ID A R ,

a ltim e try.

INTR O D U CTIO N
Time domain airborne electromagnetic (A E M ) data acquired from surveys over seawater in
Australian coastal waters can be interpreted to obtain seawater depths (Vrbancich and Fullagar
2007a; W olfgram and Vrbancich 2007; Vrbancich 2009) and to id e ntify the coarse features o f
bedrock topography (Vrbancich and Fullagar2007b; Vrbancich 2009) . A comparison o f
derived water depths in shallow areas (< 50 m) w ith known bathymetry has shown that subm ere depth accuracies can be achieved but these accuracies are not maintained over the entire
survey region. Furthermorethe quantitative interpretation o f A E M data using 1D inversion
methods may require data rescaling (Vrbancich and Fullagar2007a; Vrbancich 2009) and the
measured seawater conductivity as a known parameter. The rescaling coefficients in these
studies were obtained from the slope and intercept o f linear fits between modelled and observed
decays at representative sites (control points) w ith known water depths. These restrictions lim it
the potential o f A E M fo r accurate bathym etric mapping.
A tim e domain helicopter A E M system (SeaTEM) is currently being developed fo r the Defence
Science and Technology Organisation fo r shallow water bathym etric mapping. This system
consists o f a transm itter and receiver loop assembly mounted on a rig id structure referred to as a
b ird that is towed as a sling load below the helicopter. Instrument stab ilitycalibration
(Vrbancich and Fullagar2007a; Brodie and Samondge2006; Davis and Macnae2008) and
the a b ility to accurately track both the swaying m otion (i.e. bird swing) and the altitude o f the
A E M sensor system over seawater during survey (Davis et al.2006; Kratzer and Vrbancich
2007) are issues that need to be addressed in order to develop A E M as a reliable and accurate
bathymetry mapping technique.
System calibration self-response transm itter cu re n t
waveform and altim etry were investigated and prelim inary findings are repored in this paper.
Before going airbornethe response o f SeaTEM instrumentation over seawater was studied in a
controlled experiment designed to m inim ise the effect o f bird swing and altim etry erors. For
this purposethe A E M system was floated above seawater using a circular rn g m odified from
structures used fo r open-sea fish fa m in g as the platform . This floating A E M system is refered
to as the sea-Hng . Periodic EM measurements were made w h ilst the sea-Hng was being
towed at about 2 knots in areas o f known water depth. A marine seismic survey provided
independent estimates o f sediment thickness. Sea-Hng data was interpreted to appraise the
accuracy o f water depths and sediment thickness derived from A E M data and to identify
calibration erors.
The A E M bathymetry method also has the potential to provide water depths in the sur* zoneso
that bathymetry can be used to measure water depths on approaches to beaches (Vrbancich
2009) . The use o f L ID A R to estimate the sea sur'ace topography in sur* zone areas is under
investigation (Vrbancich unpublished) to suppor A E M bathym etric mapping. As w e ll as

Downloaded 12/06/14 to 31.175.249.111. Redistribution subject to SEG license or copyright; see Terms of Use at http://library.seg.org/

mapping the topography, the L ID A R data also provides accurate altim etry w hich may be more
reHable than using a laser altim eter over seawater.
A irborne and ground EM measurements were conducted over resistive granite to study the
system se lf response. The A E M measurements involved fly in g over a dosed loop o f known
electrical properties placed on the ground (Davis and Macnae, 2008). The response o f the
ground loop combined w ith the flig h t path can be used to predict the A E M system response.
The A E M transm itter current waveform was also measured directly and indirectly from the
ground loop data. A part from the direct measurement o f the transm itter current waveform , the
results o f these findings w ill be presented separately (Davis et al., 2009).

SEA R IN G (FLO ATIN G A E M SYSTEM ) EX PER IM ENT

Instrumentation
The floating platform consists o f three concentric tubular rings, approximately 20 m in
diameter, that provide a base fo r supporting four telescopic poles that in turn support the
transm itter and receiver loops. The elevation o f the poles can be adjusted to provide loop
heights ranging between 6 to 15 m above sea level, Figure 1 .Three square loops were used,
consisting o f a transm itter (T x) loop (located centrally) and inner and outer receive (Rx) loops
(Figure 2), referred to as Rx in and Rx out. The two inner loops are attached to the outer loop,
thus adjusting the height o f the outer loop autom atically adjusts the heights o f the two inner
loops.

Figure 1 :Sea-ring -ffoating A EM systemProper Bay, Port LincolnSouth A ustiaia. Several

sea-nngs used ib r fish farm ing are shown in the background.
Three different loop heights were used fo r the EM measurements. The heights at each comer o f
the outer Rx loop could be measured w h ilst under tow . The heights o f the Tx loop and the inner
Rx loop at the comers adjacent to mast D 1(Figure 3) could only be measured in very shallow
water by wading out to the area below these loops, and the vertical offsets (see inset in Figure 3)

Downloaded 12/06/14 to 31.175.249.111. Redistribution subject to SEG license or copyright; see Terms of Use at http://library.seg.org/

were assumed to apply to the other comers o f the inner Rx and T x loops fo r a ll 3 sets o f loop
heights. Forty four EM measurements were recorded on the firs t day o f sea trials and sixteen
measurements fo r the second day. The outer Rx loop heights are shown in Figure 3: { ...} refers
to records # 1 - # 2 5 , D a y l; (...)refers to records #26 - #44 D a y l, and records # 1 - # 7 Day2;
[...
refers to records #8 - #16 Day2.

F ig u re 2 : D i l show ing three loops. The ce n tra l lo o p is the tra n sm itte r lo o p , the in n e r and
o u te r lo o ps a e the receive lo o ps (R x in R x out).

F ig u re 3 : Schem atic dia gram show ing lo o p g e o m ^ry and heights. In s e t thow s re la tiv e h eights
o flo o p com es a t m ast #1.

The receiver channel times fo r the 21 windows, from start o f T x current ramp-down, are given
in Table 1 .Four turns were used fo r the inner loop, a single turn was used fo r the outer loop.

Downloaded 12/06/14 to 31.175.249.111. Redistribution subject to SEG license or copyright; see Terms of Use at http://library.seg.org/

Channel No.

Rx inner
Centre Time
Channel W idth

Centre Time

( i s)
( i s)
( i s)
1
72.5
25
92 .5
2
97.5
25
117 .5
3
122.5
25
142 .5
4
147.5
25
167 .5
5
210
100
230
6
310
100
330
7
410.625
101.25
430.625
8
511.875
101.25
531.875
9
663.75
202. 5
683.75
10
916.875
303.75
936.875
11
1271.25
405
1291.25
12
1726.875
506.25
1746.875
13
2283.75
607. 5
2303.75
14
2941.875
708.75
2961.875
15
3701.25
810
3721.25
16
4561.875
911.25
4581.875
17
5523 .75
1012 .5
5543.75
18
6586. 875
1113.75
6606.875
19
7856.719
1721.25
7876.719
20
10181.25
2632. 5
10201.25
21
13218 .75
3442. 5
13238 .75
Table 1 .C hannel tim es and w id th s fo r in n e r and o u te r re e iv e loops.

Rx outer
Channel W idth (is )
25
25
25
25
100
100
101.25
101.25
202. 5
303.75
405
506.25
607. 5
708.75
810
911.25
1012. 5
1113 .75
1721.25
2632. 5
3442. 5

Transmitter Current Waveform and Ramp-down Time

The T x current waveform comprises 5 ms bipolar pulses, transm itted at a fundamental
frequency o f 25 Hz (15 ms off-tim e). The cu re n t is supplied by a bank o f batteries. The
cu re n t pulse is quasi-trapezoidal w ith an exponential ramp-up tim e (750 is tim e constant),
approxim ately 3.5 ms constant current, and a linear tu m -o ff ramp. A measurement o f the
c u rrn t w avefom is shown in Figure 4, and a detailed section o f the ramp-down measured w ith
tw o c u rrn t transducers is shown in Figure 5. Both measurements (Figures 4, 5) were made
over resistive granite in Western Australia w ith the transm itter and receiver loops paced on the
ground.

;$.o

leiegyLie VHVwpicouoicen

F ig u re 4 : E xperim ental lrrn s m itte r cuuent w aveform . O n-tim e c u u m tis

2 65 A .

Downloaded 12/06/14 to 31.175.249.111. Redistribution subject to SEG license or copyright; see Terms of Use at http://library.seg.org/

The ram p-dow n tim e was measured as 34 2 is , Figure 5. The T x loop used at Port
Lincoln has a different dimension and hence a different inductance. Using the calculated
inductances o f the ground loop and the loop used in the sea-ring system, the predicted rampdown tim e fo r the sea-ring loop is 19 is fo r an on-time current o f 216 A . This is in good
agreement w ith the measured ramp-down tim e o f 20 2 is obtained from direct measurements
over seawater. Accurate ramp-down times are im portant fo r EM m odelling at early times.

v e rtic a l axis
cunvnt: (A ). The blue and re d curves re fe r to cu ue n t sensors w ith bandw idths o f
100 kH z and 500 kH z re sp ective ly. The aqua (500 kH z) )n d yeU o w (100 kH z) sym bolize these
bandw idths d e p ictin g 2 is and W is ssm plin g in te rv ls . The slope o fthe steep curve on the le f
depicts the 100 A /is sle w ra te fo r both c u rn n t sensors.

Sea Trials
The sea-ring EM system was towed at a speed o f 2 knots ( 1 m/s) w ith the tow ing vessel
separated from the sea-ring structure by about 100 m. Simultaneous Rx in and Rx out
measurements were taken approxim ately every 5 to 7 minutes over a period o f at least 1 minute.
A n algorithm was applied to the data to remove the effect o f bird-sw ing (i.e., induced voltages
caused by the swaying m otion o f the receiver loops in the Earth s magnetic fie ld ) and 1 s , 10 s
and 60 s averages were obtained from stacked data.
The geographic locations o f EM recordings are shown in Figure 6. Forty four records were
obtained during the firs t day (olack dots); the sea-ring system was tethered at a mooring
overnight and measurements resumed the next day. F ife e n records (white dots) were obtained
at the start o f the second day w ith the firs t 11 measurements recorded w h ilst the sea-ring was
tethered at several locations on the mooring. The sixteenth recording on the second day
consisted o f a continuous measurement, divided into tw enty one 60 s contiguous blocks as the
sea-ring passed through the passage between Grantham Island and the mainland (blue dots). The
red dots locate the marine seismic events.
The sea state fo r the second day was very calm. The sea state fo r the firs t day was choppy,
resulting in a relatively larger bird swing component compared to that observed fo r the second
day. W ater depths were recorded directly at each o f the 44 EM measurement locations using a
hand-held sonar instrument attached to the sea-ring. Bathym etric data was also obtained from
tw o independent sources: a m ulti-beam sonar survey that covered the area between B illy Lights

Downloaded 12/06/14 to 31.175.249.111. Redistribution subject to SEG license or copyright; see Terms of Use at http://library.seg.org/

Point and Grantham Island, and a single-beam survey that covered most o f the survey area north
o f B illy Lights Point, Figure 6. Seawater conductivity measurements were made at periodic
intervals during both days and varied from 5.09 to 5.15 S/m. A value o f 5.1 S/m was used fo r
a ll locations.

F ig u re 6 : L oca tio n o f recordings a t P o rt L in c o ln o ve rla id on a section o f ch a rt A U S 134 (see

in s e t fo r lo ca tio n on Austm Ha ?s coastline). The coloured g rid im ages show the e xte n t o fthe tw o
bathym etry datasets obtained fro m sonar soundin gsw hich overla p a t B illy L ig h ts P oint.
P redicted tid a l co m ctio n s were a p p lie d to these bathym etric soundin gs. T his ch a rt section is
n o t to be used fo r n aviga tio n purposes.

M ARINE SEISM IC REFELEC TIO N SURVEY

A marine geophysical survey was conducted by a contractor (G older Associates Pty Ltd) to map
the thickness o f unconsolidated sediment overlying marine bedrock. Images o f the subsurace
stratigraphy and top o f bedrock were acquired w ith a low frequency seismic reflection p ro filin g
system having a bandwidth o f 400 to 800 Hz. The re fe ctio n signals were received using a 10dem ent hydrophone a ra y. The assumed compressional velocity in unconsolidated sediment
was 1550 m/s.
The estimated sediment thickness was obtained at the locations shown in Figure 6 (red dots).
These locations indude several tie lines rin g in g approxim ately p e re n d icu la r to the shore in the
norhem region and redundant transects along the norh-south transects fo r data validation. The
highest data quality was obtained in the norhem area where calm weather conditions prevailed.

Downloaded 12/06/14 to 31.175.249.111. Redistribution subject to SEG license or copyright; see Terms of Use at http://library.seg.org/

Strong water currents and adverse sea conditions resulted in reduced data quality in the southern
area. In some areas, there were horizontal discontinuous reflectors and on occasions, these
shallow reflectors, or other surface conditions such as coarse-grained sediment, lim ited or
prevented acoustic penetration and therefore masked the reflection from the top o f bedrock.
The bedrock was characterized as an acoustically-hard, high amplitude, discontinuous, seismic
reflector w ith relatively high topographic relief, associated w ith onshore promontories and
peninsulas. Figure 7 depicts a schematic diagram o f sediment thickness that includes the
passage between Grantham Island and the mainland. The interpreted sediment thickness from
the marine seismic survey was gridded in the northern area and sampled at the sea-ring
locations. The resulting sediment thickness was subsequently combined w ith known water
depths to provide an estimate o f the depth to bedrock, w hich was used to appraise the accuracy
o f depth to bedrock obtained from EM measurements.

DISTANCE ALONG TRACKLINE

0

200

400

600

800

1000

1200

1400

1600

1800

F ig u re 7: sedim ent thickness (w h ite ) and bedrock topography (g re y) estim ated fro m m a n e
seism ic re fle c tio n m easurem ents adjacent to G rantham Isla nd . R efem ng to F igure 6distance
along tra ck (m ) com m ences approxim ately fro m the south-w est entrance to the passage between
G rantham Is lm d and the m ainland (sW t o f blue d o ts) m d fim shes a ap ro xim a te y where the
th ird w hite d o t is lo ca te d nooh-east o f G rantham Isla nd . (S ource: G olderA ssociates
L td )

INTERPR ETA TIO N OF SEA R IN G DATA

W ater and sediment depths were interpreted via ID inversion o f EM data using program A m ity
(Fullagar Geophysics % y Ltd). A tw o-layer model o f seawater and sediment over resistive
basement was used fo r a ll inversions. The conductivity o f the seawater, sediment layer and
resistive basement was fixed at 5.1 1.25 and 10-4 S/m respectively. The starting depth fo r the
seawater layer and sediment layer was 10 and 20 m respectively.

Inversion of Raw Data

Figure 8 shows the depths o f the firs t layer, d 1 ,w hich represents the seawater depth, and the
depth o f the second layer, d2 (relative to the surface) w hich represents the depth to bedrock,
obtained from inversion o f data averaged over 60 s fo r the inner Rx loop using a ll 21 channels
(Figure 8a, 8b) and using only channels 10 to 2 1 (Figure 8c, 8 d ) The results fo r the outer Rx
loop (not shown) show better agreement w ith known bathymetry and worse agreement w ith
estimated depths to bedrock.
Generally, the d1 and d2 depths show very poor agreement w ith known depths, and only in a
few cases, as shown in Figure 8d, is there is an improvement i f the early channels are omitted
from the inversion process. Other starting depths and sediment conductivities also gave poor
agreements w ith known depths. A significant improvement in the agreement between d1 and
known water depths was however found in a ll cases (i.e., using data averaged over 1,10 and 60
s fo r both inner and outer receiver loops) using a low er seawater conductivity o f 4.6 S/m. A
sim ilar improvement was also found in a previous study where H oistE M data was used to

determine w ater depths in Sydney Harbour - in this case, Vrbancich and Fullagar (2004) used
an unrealistically low seawater conductivity to obtain a reasonable agreement between inverted
depths and known bathymetry.

}
d

Downloaded 12/06/14 to 31.175.249.111. Redistribution subject to SEG license or copyright; see Terms of Use at http://library.seg.org/

(A) Day 1 Rx_ln [60 s ave] bathymetry

record number
(B) Day 1 Rx_ln [60 s ave] depth to bedrock

(C) Day 1 Rx In [60 s ave] bathymetry Ch 10-21

(D) Day 1 Rx_ln [60 s ave] depth to bedrock Ch 10-21

F ig u re 8 : d l and d2 using E M data averaged o ve r 60 s fro m in n e r R x lo opcom pared w ith

know n bath ym e tiy and estim ated depth to bedrock. B lu r: d l)
b)
d2 )
d ); p in k (a
b ):
m easured w ater depth; red, aqua )
b ): w ater depths fro m g rid d e d bathym etiy datasets; the three
sets o f w ater depths (p in k
red
aqua) are added to the estim ated sedim ent thickness fro m m a n e
seism ic to obtain the depths to bedrock in cd (p in k
w daqua curves).

Data Rescaling
The raw EM data contains errors arising from system calibration (e.g. gain errors, errors in
assumed loop geometry etc.) and self-response. The system self-response cannot be separated
from the data becauseunlike A E M data, it is not possible to obtain any high altitude
measurements. Data rescaling was performed by comparing the observed (stacked raw)

Downloaded 12/06/14 to 31.175.249.111. Redistribution subject to SEG license or copyright; see Terms of Use at http://library.seg.org/

voltages w ith those obtained from forward m odelling using a 2-layer over basement model at
selected control points. The control points were carefuUy chosen where the marine seismic
event locations (red dots, Figure 6) were closely co-located w ith the sea-ring measurements
(blue, white and black dots, Figure 6). Slopes and intercepts were obtained from linear
regression analysis o f the scatter plots o f observed voltages (x-axis) and model voltages (y-axis)
fo r a ll 21 channels, separately fo r each receiver loop. The slopes are shown in Figure 9.

F ig u re 9 : Slo pe o f U near G t between observed and m odelled data using 24 selected contw J
p o in ts. P in k: o u te r re ce ive r lo o p ; blu ein n e r re ce ive r loop.
A slope o f u nity (w ith zero intercept) im plies that the observed voltage at a given channel
(Table 1 )agrees w ith the model voltage. The data rescaling process essentially serves as a firs torder correction as there is no certainty that the sediment conductivity (1.25 S/m) and depths to
bedrock used to model the EM response at the control points are accurate. As shown in Figure
9, fo r most channels, the slope is w ith in 10% o f unity, however fo r the early channels, the
difference increases, approaching 40% fo r the second channel o f the inner receiver loop. These
larger differences fo r the early channels would contribute to the discrepancies in agreement
between d1 and known water depth when a ll 21 channels are used in the inversion o f raw EM
data, e.g., Figures 8a, 8c. The observed voltages fo r a ll sea-ring measurements were rescaled
using both slope and intercept:

rescaled= slope* Vobserved + inte rcep t

Inversion Using Rescaled Data

Day 1

Figures 10 and 11 show the inverted depths d1 and d2 obtained from 10 and 60 s averaged EM
data recorded from the c u e re c e iv e r loop, during the firs t day, compared w ith the measured sea
depth and depth to bedrock obtained by adding the sediment thickness to the measured depth.
Figure 12 shows the equivalent depths obtained from 60 s averaged data recorded from the in n e r
receiver loop. The d1 and d2 profiles are in very good agreement. The inverted depths are also
independent o f the transm itter loop heights used fo r this experiment, w hich is 9.91 m fo r records
1 to 25, and 8.77 m fo r records 26 to 43. A t such low altitudes, a 1 m variation in height
significantly affects the EM response.
The inverted depths d1 in Figures 10a,11a and 12a generally show very good agreement w ith
measured water depths, typ ica lly to w ith in 0.5 to 1 m and represents a significant improvement
compared to using raw EM data (Figures 8a, 8c). This highlights the necessity to remove the
self-response and to m inim ise calibration errors. We suspect that the slope o f the line o f best f t
is related to a calibration error and that the offset is related to the self-response. The inverted
depths to bedrock (d2) also show a reasonable agreement w ith depths estimated from marine
seismic measurements (Figures 10b,11b and 12b). (Records 7 - 1 2 , 31,32 and 34 were not

sdap
050505050
1 1 2 2 f3- j > 4 4 5

)d ap

F ig u re 10: in ve rte d depths10 s averaged R x o u t E M data, D ay 1 . (a): B lue, d l; p in k

m easured depth. ( ) : B lue
d2; p in kestim ated depth to bedrock. d2(record 44)= -62m .
(A) Day 1 Rx o u t 60 s average B athym etry

) sdap

Downloaded 12/06/14 to 31.175.249.111. Redistribution subject to SEG license or copyright; see Terms of Use at http://library.seg.org/

geographically close enough to a seismic measurement to obtain a reliable estimate o f the depth
to bedrock from the seismic data.) This level o f agreement was not found w ith previous studies
that employed rescaled EM data to estimate the coarse features o f the bedrock topography
(Vrbancich and Fullagar, 2007b; Vrbancich 2009); this may arise because o f the in fe rio r quality
o f the rescaled A E M data caused by uncertainty in altitude and orientation, compared to the sea
ring system w ith a stable, fixed transm itter altitude and longer data acquisition times.

(B) Day 1 R x_o ut 60 s average De p th to B ed ro ck

F ig u re 1 1 :in ve rte d depths60 s averaged R x o u t E M dataD y 1 . ( ) : Blue

d l; p in k
m easured depth. (b ): B lue
d2; p in kestim ated depth to bedrock.

10

(A) Day 1 Rx in 60 s average B ath ym e try

(B) Day 1 Rx in 60 s average B athym etry

}d ap

Downloaded 12/06/14 to 31.175.249.111. Redistribution subject to SEG license or copyright; see Terms of Use at http://library.seg.org/

sdap
record number

F ig u re 12: in ve rte d depths60 s avem ged R x in E M data, D ay 1 .(a ): B lu e, d l; p in km easured

depth. ( ) : B lue
d2; p in kestim ated depth to bedrock. d 2(rm o rd 44)= -60m .

Inversion Using Rescaled Data

Day 2: Tethered

The depths d l and d2 were obtained from inversion o f EM data recorded w h ilst the sea-ring
system was tethered at tw o locations either side o f a large sea-ring m ooring.
These
measurements were made in very calm waters. Records 1,3 to 7 (a ll tethered) were made w ith
a T x altitude o f 8.77 m, the loops were then lowered to a new T x altitude o f 5.85 m which
remained fixed fo r records 8 to 16. Record 8 is ignored as the sea-ring was adrift, and records 9
- 1 1 were recorded at another tethered location. These locations can be seen as a duster o f
w hite dots in Figure 6. Records 12 to 15 were made w h ilst under tow heading fo r the passage
adjacent to Grantham Island.
Figures 13 and 14 show the inverted depths d1 and d2 obtained from 1 and 60 s averaged EM
data recorded from the inner and outer receiver loops respectively. Apart from the scatter o f the
d1 and d2 depths obtained from 1 s averaged EM data at each record location, the depths are
very sim ilar to depths obtained from 10 s and 60 s averaged EM data, fo r both inner and outer
receiver loops. These results show the consistency o f the inverted depths: d1 is essentially
constant at each o f the tw o tethered locations and a ll d1 values agree very w e ll w ith the known
bathymetry. The d2 values are also fa irly constant at the tethered locations and appear to
underestimate the depth to bedrock by about 5 to 10 m fo r records 13 -15.

(A) Day 2 Rx_in 1 s average B athym etry

10

11

(B) Day 2 Rx_in 1 s average De pth to B ed ro ck

-5

- 10
- 15
- 20
- 25

- 35

/ I
- H

- 40
- 45

- 50

F ig u re 13: in ve rte d depths1 s averaged R x in E M dataD ay 2. (a ): B lue, d l;p in k m easured

depth; aqua
tid e -co n vcte d m ulti-beam sonar (b ): B lue
d2; p in kestim ated depth to bedrock.
(R ecord 2 was aboned).

(A) Day 2 R x_o ut 60 s average B athym etry

)s
d
a
p

Downloaded 12/06/14 to 31.175.249.111. Redistribution subject to SEG license or copyright; see Terms of Use at http://library.seg.org/

- 30

(B) Day 2 R x_o ut 60 s average De p th to B ed ro ck

F ig u re 14: in ve rte d depths60 s averaged R x_o u i E M dataD ay 2. (a ): B lu e

d l;p in k m easured
depth; aqua
tid e-con e cte d m ulti-beam sonar, (b ): B lue
d 2; p in kestim ated depth to bedrock.

Inversion Using Rescaled Data

Day 2: Grantham Island

Figure 15 shows the inverted depths d l and d2 obtained from 1 s averaged EM data recorded
from the inner receiver loopw ith the T x altitude fixed at 5.85 m. A continuous recording was
made as the sea-ring system was towed through the passage between Grantham Island and the
mainland. The total recording was sp lit into 21 recordseach representing 60 s o f data. This
traverse passes through some very shallow water. V ery sim ilar d l and d2 depth profiles were
obtained from Rx out dataand from ls 10 s and 60 s averaged EM data. The d l values fo r
records 1 and 2 appear anomalous; however they merely reflect the rapid change in water depth
during the 60 s interval that spans each record. The agreement between d1 and measured
bathymetry is typ ica lly less than about 0.3 m.
The estimate o f depth to bedrock from seismic data fo r records 1 to 8 (Figure 15bpink) is
inaccurate because the locations o f the EM records are not in close pro xim ity (i.e. not w ith in
50 m) to the seismic events (red and blue dots in Figure 6). In this casethe d2 depths may be
more reliable around records 6 and 7 than the estimated depths from marine seismic data. For

12

the remainder o f the transit (records 10 - 21), there is reasonable agreement between the two
depth to bedrock profiles.

Downloaded 12/06/14 to 31.175.249.111. Redistribution subject to SEG license or copyright; see Terms of Use at http://library.seg.org/

(A) Day 2 Rx_in 1 s average B athym etry

(B) Day 2 Rx_in 1 s average De pth to B ed ro ck

F ig u re 15: in ve rte d depths1 s averaged R x i n E M d a D ay 2, G rantham Isla n d passage. (a ):

B lue
d l; aquam easured depth. ( ) : B lu e
d2; p in kestim ated depth to bedrock.

A LTIM ETR Y O V E R SEAW ATER

Fixed-wing flig h t trials were performed using a 2D laser scanner (i.e . a L ID A R system) and
inertial navigation equipment that w ill be fitted to the SeaTEM rig fo r A E M bathymetric
mapping. The area surveyed was located at the mouth o f the M urray R iver in the Coorong
regionsouth o f AdelaideSouth Australia. These trials demonstrated that the L ID A R system
could measure reflections from seawater in the su rf zone to detect small variations in
topography (Vrbancich et a l. 2008) A fte r processing the L ID A R and inertial navigation data,
the sea surface topography is fin a lly obtained by subtracting the altitude o f the laser scanner
from the height above a reference datum fo r each point on the sea surface scanned by the laser.
However the altitude is also o f interest because the 2D altim etry surface acquired from the laser
scanner would be considered to be significantly more reliable than single beam measurements
acquired from a laser altim eter. In addition, slant range errors arising from bird swing would
overestimate the altitude i f the A E M system is not fitted w ith inertial navigation. For A E M
bathymetry applications,
he quasi-2D altim etry would be averaged over an area representative
o f the EM footprint.
A n example o f sea surface topography and associated L ID A R altim etry is given in Figure 16.
The top image shows the sea surface close to the beach w ith maximum wave heights o f lm .
The low er image shows the corresponding quasi-2D altim etry surface w hich varies by about 30
m. The furrows in the altim etry map correspond to relatively small variations in altitude caused
by the waves. These results demonstrate that L ID A R methods can provide very accurate
altim etry fo r A E M applications in a marine environment.

13

Downloaded 12/06/14 to 31.175.249.111. Redistribution subject to SEG license or copyright; see Terms of Use at http://library.seg.org/

F ig u re 16: L ID A R im ages o fsea sudace topography (to p ) and associated ^ trn ^ ry (b o tto m ) in a
s u rfzone. W id th :170 m ;le n g th :1850 m . Topography scale: p in k S 0.9 m ; blu e
-0.4 m .
A litm e try scale: p in k
190m ; blu e160 m .

C ONCLUSIONS
This report has demonstrated the usefulness o f a fo a tin g airborne EM system to provide a
stable platform where transm itter and receiver loops are positioned at a fx e d altitude. In
addition, EM data can be recorded and stacked over longer tim e intervals, compared to airborne
EM , to improve data quality. The disadvantage o f this system is that the loop geometry is not
fx e d and is susceptible to the prevailing sea state w hich causes the platform to bob up and
down. The removal o f the bird swing component combined w ith longer averages significantly
reduces this problem. Another disadvantage is that the self-response o f the EM instrumentation
cannot be measured as, unlike airborne EM , it is not possible to take recordings at high
altitudes.
W ater depths were obtained from direct measurements and from tw o overlapping sonar datasets
to provide a ground truth fo r appraising the accuracy o f water depths derived from EM data. A
marine seismic survey was undertaken to provide estimates o f sediment thickness, which
combined w ith accurate water depth gives an estimate o f the depth to bedrock. These depths
were compared w ith depths to bedrock obtained from EM data assuming a model consisting o f
seawater and sediment overlying a resistive basement.
Using raw stacked EM data, it possible to obtain accurate bathymetry and in some cases, a
reasonable depth to bedrock, however this can only be achieved by using an underestimated
value o f the measured seawater conductivity. In addition, even better bathymetry agreement
can be obtained using a one-layer model fo r inversion (i.e., ignoring a sediment layer) fo r this
dataset. The purpose o f these trials was to m inim ise the uncertainties caused by altitude errors
and id e ntify calibration errors. Rescaling the EM data based on known water depths and
estimated depths to bedrock at selected control points w ith in the survey effectively accounts fo r
calibration errors and self-response in the EM instrumentation. These errors are s till under
investigation. The water depths derived from rescaled EM data show excellent agreement w ith
known water depth, typ ica lly w itm n 0.5 m. The depths to bedrock also show good agreement in
general, w ith depths obtained from marine seismic data. These conclusions demonstrate that
' airborne EM data can be used to (i) measure water depth accurately, and (ii) measure the
topographic features o f a resistive basement, consistent w ith results obtained from marine
seismic data.
These findings also hig hligh t the need fo r accurately calibrated EM
instrum entation.
The application o f L ID A R methods fo r mapping altim etry over a sea surface was demonstrated
w ith measurements taken over a su rf zone w ith 1 m wave heights. The resulting quasi-2D
altim etry surface can be averaged over the approximate size o f the EM footprint to obtain an
altitude that is expected to be s ig n ific a tly more reHable than single-shot laser altim eter
readings, that in addition, may also be susceptible to s la t range errors caused by bird motion.

14

Downloaded 12/06/14 to 31.175.249.111. Redistribution subject to SEG license or copyright; see Terms of Use at http://library.seg.org/

A C K NO W LEDG EM EN TS
We acknowledge G eoff H a ll (Geosolutions Pty Ltd) fo r his concept o f using a sea ring structure,
adapted from sim ilar structures used fo r fish farm ing, and fo r constructing the rigging that
supported the EM loops. We also acknowledge K eith Mattews (Kayar P y Ltd) and Graham
Boyd (Geosolutions P y Ltd) fo r supporting this project. JV also acknowledges Flinders Ports
and the Australian Hydrographic O ffice (AH O ) fo r the bathymetry datasets, and the AH O fo r
permission to use a segment o f chart AUS134. JV also acknowledges Peter Fullagar (Fullagar
Geophysics P y Ltd) fo r supporting this project and development o f specialized inversion
software. JV also acknowledges chard Graham (G older Associates P y Ltd) who undertook
the marine seismic survey and D ick Sylwester (G older Associates Pty Ltd) who interpreted the
data to provide sediment thickness.

REFER ENC ES
Brodie, R., and Sambridge, M . 2006, A holistic approach to inversion o f frequency-domain
airborne EM datt. G eophysics', G301-G312.

Davis, A.C ., Macnae, J., and Robb, T., 2006, Pendulum m otion observed in H E M systems:
Explor. Geophys. 37, 355-362.

Davis, A.C ., and Macnae, J., 2008, Quantirymg A E M system characteristics using a ground
loop: Geophys., 73, F179-F188.

Davis, A.C ., Macnae, J., Vrbancich, J., and Smith, R., 2009, M onitoring the current waveform
o f the SeaTEM system: Adelaide, Sth. Australia: 20th Intemat. Geophys. Conf. ASEG,
Extended Abstracts.

Kratzer, T., and Vrbancich, J., 2007, Real-time kinem atic tracking o f towed A E M birds: Explor.
Geophys. 38,132-143.

Vrbancich, J., and Fullagar, P.K., 2007a, Improved seawater depth determination using
corrected helicopter tim e domain electromagnetic datt: Geophys. Prosp. 55, 407-420.

Vrbancich, J., and Fullagar, P.K., 2007b, Towards remote sensing o f sediment thickness and
depth to bedrock in shallow seawater using airborne TEM : Explor. Geophys. 38, 77-88.

Vrbancich, J., 2009, A n investigation o f seawater and sediment depth using a prototype airborne
electromagnetic instrum entttion system (SeaTEM) - a case study in Broken Bay, Australia:
Geophys. Prosp. in press.

15

Vrbancich, J. and Fullagar, P. ., 2004, Towards seawater depth determination using the

Downloaded 12/06/14 to 31.175.249.111. Redistribution subject to SEG license or copyright; see Terms of Use at http://library.seg.org/

helicopter H oisTEM system: Explor. Geophys. 35, 292-296.

Vrbancich, J , L ie ff W ., and Hacker, J , 2008, unpublished.

W olfgram , P., and Vrbancich, J , 2007Layered earth inversion o f A E M data incorporating

aircraft attitude and bird offset - a case study o f Torres Strait: Explor. Geophys. 38,144-149.

16