Journal of Emerging Trends in Engineering and Applied Sciences (JETEAS) 3 (4): 711-717

Scholarlink Research Institute Journals, 2012 (ISSN: 2141-7016)

jeteas.scholarlinkresearch.org
Journal of Emerging Trends in Engineering and Applied Sciences (JETEAS) 3(4) 711-717 (ISSN: 2141-7016)

Euler 3-D Deconvolution of Analytical Signal of Magnetic

Anomalies over Iron Ore deposit in Okene, Nigeria
1
J.O. Amigun, 2O. Afolabi and 2B.D. Ako
1
Department of Applied Geophysics,
Federal University of Technology, Akure, Nigeria
2
Department of Geology, Obafemi Awolowo University, Ile-Ife, Nigeria
Corresponding Author: J.O. Amigun
___________________________________________________________________________
Abstract
The Euler deconvolution of analytical signal of the magnetic field data over the iron ore deposit in Okene, North
central Nigeria has been carried out to determine the locations and depths of the iron ore bodies and other
geologic sources in the area. The methodology adopted was obtaining solutions by inverting Euler homogeneity
equation which relates the magnetic field and its gradient components to the location of the source of an
anomaly and with the degree of homogeneity expressed as structural index. The Euler deconvolution process
was carried out on the analytical grid of aeromagnetic data of the study area using a structural index of 1.0, 2.0
and 3.0 respectively. The Euler solutions for structural index of 1.0 have their depths ranges from 11 to 120m.
For the Euler solutions S.I = 2.0, cluster solutions of relatively deep depth of between 234 to 242m are obtained.
Their anomalous source location and pattern (Northeast Southwest) coincides with the outcropped iron ore
bodies at the central ore zone of the study area. The estimated depths and geometries provided by the Euler
deconvolution result will aid the mine design and the economic exploitation of the iron ore deposit in the study
area.
__________________________________________________________________________________________
Keywords: Euler deconvolution, iron ore deposit, analytic signal, magnetic field, homogeneity.
_________________________________________________________________________________________
INTRODUCTION field data (Figure1) was acquired at a mean terrain
The Euler deconvolution is an interpretation tool in clearance of 152.4 m with flight line separation of
potential field for locating anomalous sources and the about 400m along a NW SE direction.
determination of their depths by deconvolution using
Eulers homogeneity relation (Reid et al., 1990). The LOCATION AND GEOLOGIC SETTING OF
methods preference over the profile techniques such STUDY AREA
as Peters (1949) method (half slope) is that it The iron ore deposit lies between latitude 70 37' 22"
requires no prior knowledge of the source N and 70 39' 17" N and longitudes 60 15' 55" E and 60
magnetization direction, does not assume any 17' 15" E (Fig.2). This area falls within the 1:50,000
particular interpretation models and the process can standard topographic map of Kabba sheet 246 S.E of
be applied directly to large gridded data sets. Geological Survey of Nigeria (GSN). The study area
is underlain by rocks belonging to the
The Eulers homogeneity equation (Euler Metasedimentary and Metavolcanic rocks of the
deconvolution) relates the magnetic field and its Nigerian Basement Complex which falls within the
gradient components to the location of the source of Igarra Kabba Jakura metasedimentary region in
an anomaly, with the degree of homogeneity the south western part of Nigeria (Olade and
expressed as a structural index (Yaghoobian et al., Elueze, 1979). The deposit forms a prominent ridge,
1992). In interpreting magnetic survey in grid form, like the Itakpe iron ore deposit currently mined to
the preference of using the analytical signal of the feed the National Steel Complex at Ajaokuta and
magnetic anomalies over the conventional standard Aladja and its dominant lithologic units are gneisses
Euler is that with the analytical signal far fewer (which are regionally emplaced), ferruginous
solutions are generated from the Eulers homogeneity quartzites, granites and pegmatite. The ferruginous
equation, hence few extraneous depth estimates are quartzite is the source of the iron ore mineralization
retained. in the area (Fadare, 1983; Annor and Freeth, 1985).
The patterns of the iron ore mineralization in the area
In this study, we will present the results from the as shown in Figure 2 have been discussed by
application of Euler 3-D deconvolution in the Adeyemo et al (1984) and NSRMEA (1994).
interpretation of magnetic anomalies over an iron ore Structurally, the metamorphic rocks of the study area
deposit for its source locations and depths using the consists of three sets of closely related hills of
gridded magnetic map in Figure1. The total magnetic basement rocks marked as the northern, central and

711
Journal of Emerging Trends in Engineering and Applied Sciences (JETEAS) 3(4) 711-717 (ISSN: 2141-7016)
southern ore zones (Figure 2) and made up mainly of
migmatite and biotite gneisses that trend in a
northeast southwest direction while the iron ore
bodies in these gneisses are thick and strike northeast
southwest.
METHOD OF STUDY
The methodology as described by Reid, (1980) and
Thompson, (1982) in obtaining solutions by inverting
Euler homogeneity equation was adopted in this
study. According to Yaghoobian et al., (1992), the
Eulers homogeneity equation relates the magnetic
field and its gradient components to the location of
the source of an anomaly, with the degree of
homogeneity expressed as a structural index. Eulers
homogeneity relationship can be written (Reid et al.,
1990) for magnetic data in the form:
(x x0) T/ x + (y y0) T/ y + (z z0)
where (x, y, z) are the coordinates of the observation
point, N=-n, where n is degree of homogeneity, and N
is a coefficient, called structural index (Thompson
1982). The structural index depends on the geometry
of the source. For a homogeneous point source N = 3,
a linear source (line of dipoles or poles, and for a
homogeneous cylinder, rod, etc.) N = 2, for extrusive
bodies (thin layer, dike, etc.) N = 1, for a contact,
vertex of a block and a pyramid with a big height N =
0. The unknown coordinates (x0, y0, z0) are estimated
by solving a determined system of linear
equations (1.0) using a prescribed value for N with
the least squares method. And a solution with a
minimum standard deviation is found through using
different tentative values for N. In equation (1.0) B
denote the base level of the observed field i.e.
background field.
The structural index is a measure of the fall-off rate
of the field with distance from the source. The choice
of a proper S.I is a function of the geometry of
causative bodies. Estimation of the correct structural
index is crucial for the successful application of the
Euler deconvolution method (Reid et al, 1990). And
this is achieved by using the index that produces the
best clustering of solutions (Reid, 1995). Incorrect
choice of structural index leads to errors in estimated
source depths (Ravart, 1996). Euler deconvolution
used the magnetic field and its three orthogonal
gradients (two horizontal and one vertical) to
compute anomaly source locations (Keating and
Pilkington, 2004). The three dimensional (3D)
analytical signal is calculated from the three
orthogonal gradients of the magnetic field (Roest et
al, 1992). For a function homogeneous of degree N,
Huang et al (1995) denotes the Eulers equation in
terms of analytic signal as:
(x x0) A/ x + (y y0) A/ y + (z z0)
where A denote the analytic signal of the magnetic
field.
In this study, the Euler deconvolution algorithm in
Oasis montajTM (geophysical package) for location
and depth determination of causative anomalous
bodies from gridded potential field data was used.
The method starts by calculating the analytic signal
grid, finds peaks in the grid, then use these peak
locations for Euler deconvolution. The Euler
deconvolution as applied at each solution involves
setting an appropriate structural index , SI value and
using least squares inversion to solve the equation
for an optimum X0, Y0, Z0, and total magnetic field
intensity (B). The window size and the respective
number of the observation points, for which the
system of linear equations is formed are also
parameters in solving the inverse magnetic problem.
Window of 10 x 10m data points prove most suitable
in this study and were used. Solutions with depths to
source above the error tolerance levels were rejected.
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
Figures 3a - 3c show the maps of the x, y and z
derivative grids of the aeromagnetic data of the study
area in Figure 1 These maps are required for the
calculation and subsequent display of the analytical
signal grids (map) shown in Figure 4 which is needed
to perform the located Euler deconvolution adopted
for this study. The analytical signal map (Fig. 5) is
also useful in the location of edges of magnetic
source bodies particularly were remanence and / or
low magnetic latitude complicates interpretation
(Thompson, 1982 and Reid et al, 1990).
In Tables 1 are some of the solutions obtained for
operating Euler deconvolution on the analytical grid
of the studied area aeromagnetic data (upward
continued to 400 m above ground) using a structural
index of 2.0. The solutions that have passed the
specified acceptable tolerance levels are presented in
plan form in Figures 5 - 7. These figures show the
estimated source positions and depths for structural
index of 1.0, 2.0 and 3.0 in the study area. Apparent
in the figures are the few solutions shown because the
Euler method adopted in this study typically produces
far fewer solutions than the conventional standard
Euler method i.e. many extraneous depth estimates
have been removed. The centre of the plotted circles
represents the plan location (x0 and y0) of the
interpreted source and the diameter is the depth
estimator that is depth is proportional to diameter.
Also, the depths are displayed using colour variation
to represent different ranges.
Based on the maximum amplitudes of the analytic
signal in Figure 4, the spatial distributions of
causative magnetic sources in the area were clearly
recognized. And the solutions from the Euler
deconvolution in Figures 5, 6 and 7 are generally
located around the maximum amplitudes of the
analytic signal.
712
Journal of Emerging Trends in Engineering and Applied Sciences (JETEAS) 3(4) 711-717 (ISSN: 2141-7016)
The Euler solutions for structural index of 1.0 of the
magnetic anomalies over the iron ore deposit as
shown in Figure 5, have their depths ranges from 11
to 120m. The clusters of solutions (circles) produced
over anomalies for S.I = 1.0 as observed are not too
sparely diffuse. The solutions for relatively deep
depths i.e. from green (45m) to red (77m) are located
in the northeastern part and coincide with the
northern ore zone in the study area in Figure 2. At
this region, the analytic signal map displays
maximum amplitudes. Another cluster of solution at
the southern part, trending in a northeast - southwest
direction relates well in orientation with the southern
ore zone where magnetic anomalies of low
intensiveness are observed in Figure 4. Here, the
depths z0 are considerably shallower i.e. from 11 to
45m. It can therefore be deduced that the clustering
pattern of S.I = 1.0 Euler solutions correlate with the
anomaly patterns interpreted as iron ore
mineralization. The value of the structural index, 1.0
is typical for a sill or dyke (Yaghoobian et al, 1992)
The Figure 6 represents the structural interpretation
for Euler solutions for S.I = 2.0. Three linear features
marked (A A1, B - B1 and C - C1) were delineated
as faults. The delineated faults A A1 and B - B1
have trend and spatial location similar to the faults
delineated on the aeromagnetic and derivative maps
of the study area (Amigun et al, 2012). Also, cluster
solutions of relatively deep depth of between 234 to
242m are obtained at the centre of the map. These
solutions both in location and pattern (Northeast
Southwest direction) coincides with the iron ore
bodies at the central ore zone in Figure 2. Again on
the S.I = 2.0 map is another cluster of solutions in the
Northeastern area with depth range of 223 to 231m.
These solutions are related to the iron ore bodies of
Northern ore zone.
The Euler solution map for the calculated structural
index of 3.0 is shown in Figure 7. This map however
does not give a satisfactory result because its
solutions are complex and unrelated in pattern to the
anomalies of the aeromagnetic map and the known
geology of the area. For further establishment, the
result of the Euler deconvolution depths was
compared with those determined by power spectrum
of the Fourier transformation of the aeromagnetic
data over the deposit. Figure 8 shows the calculated
spectral analysis of the aeromagnetic data. The radial
average power spectrum plot in Figure 8b represents
the computed amplitude spectrum of the Fourier
transformation of the study area aeromagnetic data
plotted on a logarithm scale against wave-number
(frequency). On the depth curve in Figure 8b, the
peak of the curve represents the first estimate of the
depth to the magnetic sources in the study area and
these depths ranged from 50 m to 300 m. The
solutions patterns and depths obtained for operating
Euler deconvolution on the deposits magnetic field
data using structural index of 1.0 and 2.0 agrees with
713
the ore bodies patterns and the estimated depths
determined from the spectral analysis of the
aeromagnetic data over the deposit. Therefore, the
structural index of 1.0 and 2.0 are assumed the
acceptable structural indices for the study area.
CONCLUSIONS
The Euler deconvolution of the analytical signal of
the magnetic field data over the iron ore deposit has
served as a recent improvement over techniques such
as Peters method (half slope) because the result from
its interpretation has enabled a rapid determination of
the locations and depths of the iron ore mineralization
and other geologic sources in the area without prior
knowledge of the source geometry and magnetization
direction. The method has provided insights into the
deposits ore geometry and structural setting. And the
estimated source depths and geometries provided by
the Euler deconvolution method can effectively serve
as approximation for the construction of magnetic
models of iron ore bodies in the studied area.
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
The authors are grateful to the Management of
National Iron Ore Mining Company Limited
(NIOMCO), Itakpe for granting access to the
Ajabanoko deposit for the data collection. We
acknowledge with immense gratitude the contribution
of Late Prof. S.L. Folami. Our gratitude also goes to
the Department of Geology, Obafemi Awolowo
University, for permitting the use of Oasis Montaj
work station.
REFERENCES
Adeyemo B., Williams F.O and Adegbuyi O., 1984.
Geological Exploration of Ajabanoko Hill Deposit,
Okene, Nigeria. Technical Report of National Steel
Council Explo. Div., Kaduna, Nigeria. 14pp.
Amigun J.O, Afolabi O. and Ako B.D., 2012
Application of Airborne Magnetic Data to Mineral
Exploration in the Okene Iron Ore Province of
Nigeria. International Research Journal of Geology
and Mining. Accepted for Publication, July, 2012.
Annor A.E and Freeth S.J., 1985. Thermotectonic
Evolution of the Basement Complex around Okene,
Nigeria with special reference to Deformation
Mechanism. Precamb. Res. 28, p. 269-281.
Fadare V.O., 1983. Iron Ore Formations The
Okene Ajaokuta Lokoja Areas of Kwara State. A
Potential Supply Base for the Steel Plant at
Ajaokuta. Journal of Mining and Geology, Vol. 20,
209 214
Huang D., Gubbins D., Clark R.A. and Whaler K.A.,
1995. Combined study of Eulers homogeneity
equation for gravity and magnetic field. 57th EAGE
conference, Glasgow, UK, Extended Abstracts, p144
Journal of Emerging Trends in Engineering and Applied Sciences (JETEAS) 3(4) 711-717 (ISSN: 2141-7016)

Keating P. and Pilkington M., 2004. Euler
deconvolution of the analytic signal and its
application to magnetic interpretation. Geophysical
Prospecting 52, 165-182
National Iron Ore Mining Project, NIOMP Itakpe,
1994. Geological Map of Ajabanoko Iron Ore
Deposit. (Unpublished)
National Steel Raw Materials Exploration Agency,
NSRMEA, 1994. Preliminary Report on Ajabanoko
Iron Ore Deposit. (Unpublished)
Olade M.A. and Elueze A.A., 1979. Petrochemistry
of Ilesha amphibolites and Precambrian Crustal
evolution in the Pan-Africa of S.W. Nigeria.
Precambrian, 8, p. 303 310
Peters L. J., 1949. The direct approach to magnetic
interpretation and its practical application.
Geophysics, 14, 290320.
Ravart D., 1996. Analysis of the Euler method and
its applicability environmental magnetic
investigations. Journal of Environmental and
Engineering Geophysics 1, 229-238
Reid A.B., 1980. Aeromagnetic Survey design,
Geophysics, 45, 973 976
Reid A.B., 1995. Euler deconvolution: Past, present
and future a review. 65th SEG meeting, Houston,
USA, Expanded Abstract, 272-273
Reid A.B., Allsop I.M., Grsner H, Millet A.J. and
Somerton I.W., 1990. Magnetic interpretation in
three dimensions using Euler deconvolution,
Geophysics, 55, 80 91
Roest W., Verhoef J., Pilkington M., 1992.
Magnetic interpretation using the 3-D analytic
signal. Geophysics 57, 116-125.
Thompson D.T. 1982. EULDPH A new technique
for making computer assisted depth estimates from
magnetic data, Geophysics, 47, 31 37
Yaghoobian A., Boustead G.A, Dobush T.M 1992.
Object delineation using Eulers Homogeneity
Equation, Proceedings of SAGEEP 92, San Diego,
California.

Table 2: Some Results of Euler Deconvolution Analysis of S.I = 2 for the Study Area
X_Window Y_Window X_Euler Y_Euler Depth Backgrnd WndSize dZ dXY
198400 843520 198933.3 843764.7 364.11 -179.08 2000.00 10.29 56.10
198720 843520 198783.6 843775.4 374.85 -110.18 2000.00 15.60 55.21
199040 843520 198921 843788.6 356.93 -92.25 2000.00 12.68 40.19
199360 843520 199019.1 843679.9 403.67 -150.97 2000.00 16.37 41.28
199680 843520 199134.3 843618.2 239.65 -94.34 2000.00 30.29 68.01
200000 843520 199690.2 843468.7 147.48 6.89 2000.00 24.27 68.51
200320 843520 200228.5 843758.4 159.51 3.41 2000.00 33.31 95.29
200640 843520 200370.1 843603.3 171.64 17.84 2000.00 40.32 110.93
198400 843840 198540.9 843918.7 178.49 50.16 2000.00 33.63 111.33
198720 843840 198665.1 844011.8 203.09 146.85 2000.00 20.88 90.01
199040 843840 198625 843888 171.16 66.61 2000.00 16.24 73.96
199360 843840 198678.2 843643.1 288.89 -120.79 2000.00 18.43 44.97
199680 843840 198816.3 844070.6 530.42 -96.06 2000.00 32.15 39.40
200000 843840 199538.2 843993.5 277.13 -50.14 2000.00 19.51 47.10
200320 843840 199947.2 843833.8 278.29 -12.26 2000.00 7.84 30.34
200640 843840 199826.1 843719.4 261.16 0.45 2000.00 9.54 47.75
198400 844160 198539.6 844105.5 135.37 57.58 2000.00 19.79 74.56
198720 844160 198745 844121.8 146.87 131.27 2000.00 12.11 57.76
199040 844160 198696.9 844073.8 146.84 147.04 2000.00 6.64 31.34

X_Window, Y_Window: Difference between window center and dZ: Estimated error in depth.
Euler solution.
dXY: Estimated location error in solution
X_Euler, Y_Euler : Actual location of Euler solution
Depth: Solution depth (z coordinate)
Backgrnd: Background Field
WndSize: An estimate of the peaks sizes.
714
Journal of Emerging Trends in Engineering and Applied Sciences (JETEAS) 3(4) 711-717 (ISSN: 2141-7016)

Fig 1: Digitized Aeromagnetic Map of Ajabanoko Iron Ore Deposit Area.

Fig.2: Location and the Geological Map of the Study Area

(Adapted from National Iron Ore Mining Project, Itakpe, 1994)
715
Journal of Emerging Trends in Engineering and Applied Sciences (JETEAS) 3(4) 711-717 (ISSN: 2141-7016)

Fig.3: The dx, dy and dz gradient grid of Aeromagnetic data of study area used for Euler Deconvolution

Fig.4: Analytical Signal Map of the Aeromagnetic Data

Fig.5: The Euler Deconvolution Depth Plot of the Study Area for SI of 1.0

716
Journal of Emerging Trends in Engineering and Applied Sciences (JETEAS) 3(4) 711-717 (ISSN: 2141-7016)

Fig. 6: The Euler Deconvolution Depth Plot of the Study Area for SI of 2.0

Fig.7: The Euler Deconvolution Depth Plot of the Study Area for SI of 3.0

Fig.8 (a) Spectrum of the Aeromagnetic data of the study Area (b) Its Radial Spectrum and Depth Estimate Plot

717