IPA18-477-SG
PROCEEDINGS, INDONESIAN PETROLEUM ASSOCIATION
Forty-Second Annual Convention and Exhibition, May 2018
HOURLY IMMERSED ACQUISITION AND PROCESSING OF MAGNETOTELLURIC
METHOD FOR NOISE REDUCTION
Alida Naufalia Aribah*
Ikhsan Setyawan*
Hidayat**
ABSTRACT
Magnetotelluric (MT) method is a geophysical
method that can be used to image the subsurface
using electromagnetic wave. The data result of MT
acquisition is time series data with the distance
frequency on TS3 (40 – 320 Hz), TS4 (5,6 – 33 Hz),
and TS5 (0,00034 – 4,7 Hz). On the recorded data
obtained shows the electric and magnetic field are
mixed with noise. Noise is the signal that can offend
or reduce the quality of data, so it must be limited.
On processing MT data, there is a noise reduction
process that is called time-series analysis. A
weakness of time series analysis as a noise reduction
processing technique is operator dependent. Results
may differ between two different operators. This
research goes a different acquisition technique from
conventional MT acquisition. This new technique is
referred to hourly immersed acquisition and
processing. The result of time-series analysis and
hourly immersed are compared. There are two data
point, KT01 and KT02 that will be analyzed with this
new technique. The result of the comparison of the
two technique showed that there is no significant
difference between the coherency of the data, but
hourly immersed have 1% higher coherency value.
The coherency of KT01 of hourly immersed analysis
reach 81,096% and KT02 81,22%, while the
coherency of KT01 of time-series analysis reach
80,642% and KT02 80,82%.
Keywords: Magnetotellurics, Acquisition, Time-
series, Hourly Immersed, Noise
INTRODUCTION
The Indonesian Government is intensely exploring
for energy resources both conventional and
unconventional in Indonesia. It is inherent for
explorationists who are exploring for energy to use
the most effective and efficient tools and data
processes. Pusat Survei Geologi, conducted
* UPN “Veteran” Yogyakarta
** Pusat Survei Geologi - Bandung
experiments related to acquisition techniques for
Magnetotellrics method namely hourly immersed
acquisition and processing. This new method
innovates acquisition methods and may help later
processing leading to improved data quality.
Data acquisition by MT methods is performed to
provide information about electrical conductivity
distribution. MT acquisition uses three
magnetometer sensors, two pairs of electric signal
sensors (electrodes) and one receiver unit acting as a
data recorder and signal processor. The recorded
data, exhibits electric and magnetic fields mixed with
noise signals.
Noise is unwanted data. Noise signals can obscure
and reduce data quality, so should be reduced. MT
data which is assumed as noise can be seen through
TS viewer software. This research provides a
summary of new innovations related to acquisition
and processing of MT data and also discusses a
simple way to perform noise reduction, with new
technique, namely hourly immersed acquisition and
processing.
BASIC PRINCIPLES OF
MAGNETOTELLURIC METHOD
The basic principle of MT method is derived from
Maxwell equation that stated by divergence and curl,
the common form is:
∙
∙ 0
By, : electric field (V/m)
: Magnetic Induction (W/m)
: Magnetic Field (A/m)
 : current density (A/m2)
q : displacement current (C/m3)
NOISE
The MT data obtained from acquisition was
processed by series a processing steps. With ideal
data impedance and transfer function estimation
should show smooth apparent resistivity and phase
curves and also induction vectors along the period
range. However, it is difficult to obtain smooth and
undisturbed data. Various noise signals present due
to power-lines, trains, corrosion protected pipelines
and windmills. Electromagnetic noise is more of a
problem in the dead-band because of the low energy
natural signal (e.g. Iliceto and Santrato, 1999;
Simpson and Bahr, 2005). The recorded data showed
rough trend line on rho apparent versus frequency
graphic which might be due to the EM noise.
SIGNAL COHERENCY
The quality of MT data affects continuity of the MT
data processing, particularly coherency processing.
This coherency processing is the primary focus of
this paper. Coherency is a process to compute a real
value function, i.e. a measure of the linear relation
between the processes as a function of frequency and
frequency domain. This is equivalent of cross
correlation (Chave et al., 1987). The relation is
written as,
Where, : density of electric and
magnetic field spectrum
: density of electric field spectrum
: density of magnetic field spectrum
The coherence function satisfies the limit 0
1, with indicate the processes are statistically
independent and a value of 1 indicate they are
entirely coherent at that frequency.
ROBUST PROCESSING
Robust processing is an essential process on MT data
processing. It used to eliminate bias arising from data
points (outliers) that are unrepresentative of the data
as a whole. Electromagnetic noise usually causes
outlier data. Robust processing involves a least-
square type algorithm, but one that is iteratively
weighted to account for departures from Gaussian
distribution of errors (Simpson and Bahr, 2005).
Most robust methods (Egbert and Booker, 1986;
Chave et al., 1987) do not identify or remove
individual outliers before applying their robust
methods. Their methods deal with outliers by down-
weighting entire data sections but this will fail if all
sections contain outliers. The robust method
proposed here uses an iterative procedure similar to
reweighted least squares for robust regression
analysis (Rousseeuw and Leroy, 1987). Below is the
equation of robust:
∑
by , : data weight
: Residual
There are 3 type of robust processing:
1. No weight, which is weighting of raw data as if
no data were cut i.e. the full data
2. Rho variance, which is weighting the data based
on the change of resistivity value.
3. Ordinary coherence, which is weighting the data
based on the best coherency of electric and
magnetic field.
The omission of noisy data should lead to an
increase in coherence, which tends to reduce the
magnitudes of the error estimates, and whether
robust processing results in transfer function with
smaller or larger errors will depend on the amount
of available data on the degree of noise
contamination (Simpson and Bahr, 2005).
TIME-SERIES ANALYSIS
Time-series analysis is a following step of MT data
processing after Robust processing. This step is
used to increase the value of data coherency by
erasing the signal on certain times that we assume
as noise. The data result of MT acquisition is time
series data with the distance frequency on TS3 (40-
320 Hz), TS4 (5,6-33 Hz), and TS5 (0,00034-4,7
Hz). TS3 is high frequency but shallow
penetration. TS4 is data that has medium
frequency, less wave energy but deeper
penetration than TS3. TS5 is data file is recorded
with low frequency. This exhibits weak wave
energy but deeper penetration depth than TS4.
From the time-series data, noise can be identified
from the amplitude data spike that is significant on
TS5 data file that coherence with TS4 and TS3.
The data is cut, so the residual data is relatively
noise-free, and the coherency value is increased
(Hidayat et al., 2016).
METHODOLOGY
This research was conducted by Pusat Survei
Geologi – Bandung, on March 2017. There was 2
MT point that use this new technic of hourly
immersed acquisition and processing, KT01 and
KT02. The result of this new technical analysis is
compared with time-series analysis to analyzing the
data noise. The data processing can be seen on figure
1.
RESULT AND ANALYSIS
As result of this research, the data coherency of
hourly immersed compared with time-series analysis
data. The comparison of the analysis is performed to
evaluate the best method to reduce noise. The data
can be seen on table 1 for KT01, and table 2 for
KT02.
The raw data is hourly-based, with 1-hour data length
and 12 time in a row. The data is processed on SSMT
2000 and the coherency value of each hourly-based
data is counted. So, each hour is known which is the
worst coherency and the best coherency and could
also indicate on what time is the most noise. Table 1
and 2, showing the coherency of each data. The
yellow-colored row shows the low coherency below
72% and it will be cut. The remain data is combined
to three part and then combine again become single
data. The coherency of each part can be seen on table
3 and 4. The coherency of KT01 is 81.096% and
KT02 is 81.22%. Figure 2 & 3 showing the
coherency graphic of KT01 and KT02 as result of
hourly immersed acquisition and processing.
The hourly-based raw data is combined to do the
time-series analysis. Time-series analysis was also
done as comparison to hourly immersed processing.
Figure 4 shows the signal of electromagnetic wave
recorded by the instrument. In time-series analysis,
signals with spike are indicative incoherent noise and
will be cut. Therefore, the result of time-series
analysis is data that is expected to be free from
incoherent noise. The coherency value of time-series
analysis of KT01 & KT02 can be seen in Tables 5
and 6. It can be seen that the coherency value
obtained as the result of the hourly immersed
processing is higher than time-series analysis.
By comparing the results of the analysis, it is fair to
say that hourly immersed acquisition and processing
can be considered as an alternative way of reducing
incoherent noise. Since the time-series analysis
depends on interpretation, it makes the analysis less
effective and efficient compared with hourly
immersed processing.
CONCLUSION
Based on the result of this research, we can conclude
that:
1. The coherency value of KT01 as result of hourly
immersed analysis is 81,096 %. While the
coherency of KT01 as result of time-series
analysis is 80,642%. From the value, we
conclude that the result of hourly immersed
analysis has higher coherency value than time-
series analysis.
2. The hourly immersed acquisition and processing
technique can be done as the alternative for
incoherent noise reduction, so the process can be
more effective and efficient without doing time-
series analysis.
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
We would like to thank to Pusat Survei Geologi –
Bandung, for the financial support on MT acquisition
and processing. Moreover, also thank Wahyu
Hidayat as Geophysics lecturer in the university, and
all colleagues who has helped in the field data
collection and processing,
REFERENCES
Cagniard, L., 1953, Basic Theory of the
Magnetotelluris Method of Geophysical Prospecting,
Geophysics, Vol. 18, p. 605-635.
Chave, A.D., Thomson, D.J, and Ander, M.E, 1987,
On The Robust Estimation of Power Spectra,
coherences, and transfer function. J. Geophys. Res.,
92, p. 633-648
Egbert, G.D. and Booker, J.R., 1986, Robust
Estimation of Geomagnetic transfer function,
Geophys. J.R. astr. Soc., 87, p.173-194.
Hidayat, A.R., Junursyah G.M.L., and Harja A.,
2016, Analisa Deret Waktu Untuk Peningkatan
Kualitas Data Magnetotellurik (Studi Kasus
Lapangan Geothermal). Proseding Seminar Nasional
Fisika dan Aplikasinya
Larsen, J.C. 1989. Transfer Function: Smooth robust
estimation by least-squares and remote reference
methods, Geophys. J., 99, 645-663.
Iliceto, V. and Santarato, G., 1999, On the
interference of man-made EM fields in the
magnetotelluric dead-band. Geophysical
Prospecting, 47, p.707-719
Rousseeuw, P.J. and Leroy, A.M., 1987, Robust
Regression and Detectzon, John Wiley Sons, New
York, p.329
Simpson, F and Bahr K, 2005, Practical
Magnetotellurics. Cambirdge: Cambridge University
Press
 TABLE 1

TABLE OF DATA COHERENCY AS RESULT OF HOURLY IMMERSED PROCESSING OF

KT01

PARTISI  Time  NW Coherency  RV Coherency  OC Coherency 

1  18:00:00  64.8138  67.0053  67.4242 
2  19:00:00  56.8012  58.1782  59.0760 
3  20:00:00  68.7528  72.7980  72.2468 
4  21:00:00  66.2170  69.1044  67.7418 
5  22:00:00  74.3439  76.9897  76.8029 
6  23:00:00  77.8228  81.1280  80.2195 
7  0:00:00  66.3853  71.8924  69.8120 
8  1:00:00  70.0153  74.4191  72.6600 
9  2:00:00  72.6323  76.4331  75.2094 
10  3:00:00  78.2734  79.1195  79.6984 
11  4:00:00  75.3615  76.6075  76.9964 
12  5:00:00  76.0997  79.0319  78.6404 

TABLE 2

TABLE OF DATA COHERENCY AS RESULT OF HOURLY IMMERSED PROCESSING OF

KT01

PARTISI  Time  NW Coherency  RV Coherency  OC Coherency   

1  18:00:00  65.22143808 67.65761082 66.84950589  RV 
2  19:00:00  58.59926758 59.99901138 61.29207325  OC 
3  20:00:00  69.66363148 72.47895178 72.22591144  RV 
4  21:00:00  67.25683337 70.4608579 70.35227987  RV 
5  22:00:00  70.72877746 74.16362135 73.64371018  RV 
6  23:00:00  72.83198992 76.35639895 75.55939258  RV 
7  0:00:00  66.27268741 70.30304488 69.74430134  RV 
8  1:00:00  73.42208272 77.87772678 76.13598671  RV 
9  2:00:00  71.68011154 76.43932832 73.98756878  RV 
10  3:00:00  74.18751754 77.58775229 76.8494436  RV 
11  4:00:00  73.08535721 75.78041459 75.77123266  RV 
12  5:00:00  68.90830199 72.33188932 71.32924444  RV 
 TABLE 3

TABLE OF DATA COHERENCY OF KT01 PARTITION

Part
Coherency value

79.107
Part 1

82.391
Part 2

82.274
Part 3

81.096
Combination Auto

TABLE 4

TABLE OF DATA COHERENCY OF KT02 PARTITION

Part
Coherency value

80.90
Part 1

80.08
Part 2

81.22
Combination

TABLE 5

TABLE OF COHERENCY DATA TIME-SERIES ANALYSIS OF KT01

Coherency
Robust Type value
NW 56.68
RV 58.08
OC 59.93
OCUP 59.13
OC-AUTO 77.03
TS 80.64
 TABLE 6

TABLE OF COHERENCY DATA TIME-SERIES ANALYSIS OF KT02

Coherency
Robust Type value

NW 64.21

RV 67.30

OC 67.43

OCUP 66.27

OC-AUTO 79.05

TS 80.82
Figure 1 - Flow diagram of the new technic. Hourly immersed acquisition and processing
Figure 2 - Coherency graphic of KT01 as result of hourly immersed analysis
Figure 3 - Coherency graphic of KT02 as result of hourly immersed analysis
Figure 4 - The display of MT signal of KT01 on TSviewer software
Figure 5 - Coherency graphic of KT01 as result of time-series analysis
Figure 6 - Coherency graphic of KT02 as result of time-series analysis