Quick
Search: 
 
advanced search
 GSW Home    GeoRef Home    My GSW Alerts    Contact GSW    About GSW    Journals List    Help 
The Leading Edge Email Content Delivery
JOURNAL HOME HELP CONTACT PUBLISHER SUBSCRIBE ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS

The Leading Edge; October 2009; v. 28; no. 10; p. 1240-1247; DOI: 10.1190/1.3249781
© 2009 Society of Exploration Geophysicists
This Article
Right arrow Abstract
Right arrow Full Text
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Submit a response
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me when eLetters are posted
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow reprints & permissions
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Yaramanci, U.
Right arrow Articles by Müller-Petke, M.
GeoRef
Right arrow GeoRef Citation

Surface nuclear magnetic resonance—A unique tool for hydrogeophysics

Ugur Yaramanci

Leibniz Institute for Applied Geophysics

Mike Müller-Petke

Berlin University of Technology


Figure 1
View larger version (14K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]

 
Figure 1. (a) Single surface NMR measurement and (b) surface NMR data set.

 

Figure 2
View larger version (16K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]

 
Figure 2. Parameter dependencies in surface NMR. (Arrow thickness indicates the degree of the dependence.)

 

Figure 3
View larger version (26K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]

 
Figure 3. Simplified geology of the test field according to drilling.

 

Figure 4
View larger version (31K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]

 
Figure 4. (a) Measured MRS data and fit of the inversion. (b)–(d) Inversion results. Total water content and normalized permeability (product of total water content and mean decay time, normalized by its maximum value) are derived from the PWC distribution.

 

Figure 5
View larger version (18K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]

 
Figure 5. Results of measurements at Muravera, Sardinia. (a) Block inversion of direct current geoelectric measurements. (b) MRS inversion results including resistivity inversion.

 

Figure 6
View larger version (57K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]

 
Figure 6. Results from the combinable magnetic resonance (CMR) tool at well SWS 16. Leftmost column shows the partial water content for several decay-time classes (from pink, 0.3–30 ms to green, 80–300 ms).

 

Figure 7
View larger version (29K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]

 
Figure 7. Shwaib site. (a) Measured MRS data and fit of the inversion. (b)–(d) Inversion results.

 

Figure 8
View larger version (38K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]

 
Figure 8. Two-dimensional distribution of the total water content at the Nauen, Germany test site. A survey was conducted using four positions (P1-P4) and all useful combinations of transmitter and receiver loops at these positions. The loop diameter was 50 m. The lateral extent of the primary aquifer (blue = 25% water content) is clearly visible.

 





JOURNAL HOME HELP CONTACT PUBLISHER SUBSCRIBE ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
Copyright © 2009 by Society of Exploration Geophysicists